straight cut better than tapered

Discussion in 'General Slingshot Discussions' started by meeeee!, Dec 10, 2012.

  1. meeeee!

    meeeee! New Member

    131
    0
    0
    when using tapered bands (1.5 to .5 inch) compared to straight cut (1 inch) that are fully stretched ( the point when they will not stretch anymore) i think the straight cut would be better. <br><br>lets say the maximum draw weight you can handle is two tapered bands, you would be able to use three straight cut bands for an equal draw weight. since the straight cut bands would contain a lot more rubber than the tapered bands they would be more powerful.<br><br> i saw a test( dont remember where) where somebody tried tapered vs. straight cut, i dont remember the dimensions but both bands were the same width at the widest part and had the same amount of layers and the straight cut were able to shoot faster because of the greater mass of rubber. all the other tests that i have seen use tapered bands that are wider than the straight cut in order to get the same amount of rubber, but they are not stretched to full width (as far as i know) and if they are the draw weights are not equal because they use the same amount of layers.<br><br>i would test this myself but i dont have a chrony or any other way to test it. does someone else want to try?<br><br>use 2 layers of bands tapered from 1.5 inch to .5 inch vs. 3 layers of 1 inch wide straight cut stretched to their max. the tapered bands should be straight cut at their ends so that the tapering starts after pouch and fork attachment. use a variety of ammo sizes. <br><br>if i am right the tapered bands should shoot light ammo faster, but as you increase ammo weight the straight cut should be superior. i am very interested in seeing the results as this is something i have been thinking about for a while.
     
  2. CEZ

    CEZ New Member

    934
    0
    0
    That doesn't make sense, tapered bands are easier to pull than straight. 3 layers of 1.5"x0.5" have closely the same draw weight as 3 layers of 1" straight TBG.<br>Check Joergs calculator.
     

  3. meeeee!

    meeeee! New Member

    131
    0
    0
    <table width="90%" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="0" border="0" align="center">
    <tr><td><span class="genmed"><b>CEZ wrote:</b></span></td></tr>
    <tr><td class="quote">That doesn't make sense, tapered bands are easier to pull than straight. 3 layers of 1.5"x0.5" have closely the same draw weight as 3 layers of 1" straight TBG.<br>Check Joergs calculator.</td></tr>
    </table>
    <span class="postbody"><br><br>not when stretched to the max. if a 1.5-.5 inch tapered bands is stretched to its max it should have the same draw as a 1.5 inch straight cut.</span>
     
  4. poudreverte

    poudreverte New Member

    72
    0
    0
    <div>
    <table width="90%" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="0" border="0" align="center">
    <tr><td><span class="genmed"><b>meeeee! wrote:</b></span></td></tr>
    <tr><td class="quote">
    <table width="90%" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="0" border="0" align="center">
    <tr><td><span class="genmed"><b>CEZ wrote:</b></span></td></tr>
    <tr><td class="quote">That doesn't make sense, tapered bands are easier to pull than straight. 3 layers of 1.5"x0.5" have closely the same draw weight as 3 layers of 1" straight TBG.<br>Check Joergs calculator.</td></tr>
    </table>
    <span class="postbody"><br><br>not when stretched to the max. if a 1.5-.5 inch tapered bands is stretched to its max it should have the same draw as a 1.5 inch straight cut.</span>
    </td></tr>
    </table>
    <span class="postbody"><br><br>NOT AT ALL. Because 1.5 - 0.5 inch tapered band must be compared to 1 inch straight cut. Why do you only take the wider part for your approximation ?</span>
    </div><div class="clear"></div><div class="signature_div">
    <br>Love shooting <img src="http://illiweb.com/fa/i/smiles/icon_tongue.png" alt="tongue" longdesc="24">
    </div>
     
  5. tapered bands exist for speed I thought, not draw weight. They lighten the draw while increasing acceleration right?
     
  6. meeeee!

    meeeee! New Member

    131
    0
    0
    <table width="90%" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="0" border="0" align="center">
    <tr><td><span class="genmed"><b>poudreverte wrote:</b></span></td></tr>
    <tr><td class="quote">
    <table width="90%" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="0" border="0" align="center">
    <tr><td><span class="genmed"><b>meeeee! wrote:</b></span></td></tr>
    <tr><td class="quote">
    <table width="90%" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="0" border="0" align="center">
    <tr><td><span class="genmed"><b>CEZ wrote:</b></span></td></tr>
    <tr><td class="quote">That doesn't make sense, tapered bands are easier to pull than straight. 3 layers of 1.5"x0.5" have closely the same draw weight as 3 layers of 1" straight TBG.<br>Check Joergs calculator.</td></tr>
    </table>
    <span class="postbody"><br><br>not when stretched to the max. if a 1.5-.5 inch tapered bands is stretched to its max it should have the same draw as a 1.5 inch straight cut.</span>
    </td></tr>
    </table>
    <span class="postbody"><br><br>NOT AT ALL. Because 1.5 - 0.5 inch tapered band must be compared to 1 inch straight cut. Why do you only take the wider part for your approximation ?</span>
    </td></tr>
    </table>
    <span class="postbody"><br><br>because the wider part has the highest draw weight. if stretched to the max the band will have the draw weight of its widest part. if stretched less the draw weight will start to average out.</span>
     
  7. poudreverte

    poudreverte New Member

    72
    0
    0
    <div>
    <table width="90%" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="0" border="0" align="center">
    <tr><td><span class="genmed"><b>meeeee! wrote:</b></span></td></tr>
    <tr><td class="quote">
    <table width="90%" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="0" border="0" align="center">
    <tr><td><span class="genmed"><b>poudreverte wrote:</b></span></td></tr>
    <tr><td class="quote">
    <table width="90%" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="0" border="0" align="center">
    <tr><td><span class="genmed"><b>meeeee! wrote:</b></span></td></tr>
    <tr><td class="quote">
    <table width="90%" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="0" border="0" align="center">
    <tr><td><span class="genmed"><b>CEZ wrote:</b></span></td></tr>
    <tr><td class="quote">That doesn't make sense, tapered bands are easier to pull than straight. 3 layers of 1.5"x0.5" have closely the same draw weight as 3 layers of 1" straight TBG.<br>Check Joergs calculator.</td></tr>
    </table>
    <span class="postbody"><br><br>not when stretched to the max. if a 1.5-.5 inch tapered bands is stretched to its max it should have the same draw as a 1.5 inch straight cut.</span>
    </td></tr>
    </table>
    <span class="postbody"><br><br>NOT AT ALL. Because 1.5 - 0.5 inch tapered band must be compared to 1 inch straight cut. Why do you only take the wider part for your approximation ?</span>
    </td></tr>
    </table>
    <span class="postbody"><br><br>because the wider part has the highest draw weight. if stretched to the max the band will have the draw weight of its widest part. if stretched less the draw weight will start to average out.</span>
    </td></tr>
    </table>
    <span class="postbody"><br><br>- The widest part has no lenght because the cut is not straight. 1mm after the fork it is no more 1.5 inch wide...<br><br>- The max of srenght is not an exact value. You must compare the draw weight for a given lenght.</span>
    </div><div class="clear"></div><div class="signature_div">
    <br>Love shooting <img src="http://illiweb.com/fa/i/smiles/icon_tongue.png" alt="tongue" longdesc="24">
    </div>
     
  8. meeeee!

    meeeee! New Member

    131
    0
    0
    <table width="90%" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="0" border="0" align="center">
    <tr><td><span class="genmed"><b>Quote:</b></span></td></tr>
    <tr><td class="quote">- The widest part has no lenght because the cut is not straight. 1mm after the fork it is no more 1.5 inch wide...</td></tr>
    </table>
    <span class="postbody"> it still has draw weight. <br><br></span><table width="90%" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="0" border="0" align="center">
    <tr><td><span class="genmed"><b>Quote:</b></span></td></tr>
    <tr><td class="quote">- The max of srenght is not an exact value. You must compare the draw weight for a given lenght.</td></tr>
    </table>
    <span class="postbody"> the given length is the entire band.</span>
     
  9. poudreverte

    poudreverte New Member

    72
    0
    0
    <div>Look at a tree, and ask yourself why the branches have that shape <img src="http://illiweb.com/fa/i/smiles/icon_rolleyes.gif" alt="Rolling Eyes" longdesc="14">
    </div><div class="clear"></div><div class="signature_div">
    <br>Love shooting <img src="http://illiweb.com/fa/i/smiles/icon_tongue.png" alt="tongue" longdesc="24">
    </div>
     
  10. Arturo Borquez

    Arturo Borquez Administrator

    3,609
    0
    0
    It's tricky to do comparisons tapered vs untapered bands ... you'll will never be able to match same band weight and same draw force for a given draw length ... usually for a given ammo shooting with the same anchor point (same draw length) you will always find a tapered set of bands that performs better than straight ones ... the contrary it seems me that isn't reported yet ...
     
  11. tokSick

    tokSick Senior Member

    3,951
    1
    0
    Tapered bands gave me great results with small ammo. I never chony it but the penetration in the cans proves there is more penetration with 9 or 10 mm than a 15 or even a 12 mm steel ball. Is it power, is it speed,... is it Superman??? I don' t know! Again, physics and me are not friends
     
  12. Arturo Borquez

    Arturo Borquez Administrator

    3,609
    0
    0
    Tapering also works with heavier ammo ... only you need to put an additional set of bands ... what worth is the relation band weight / ammo weight ... when the band weight is several times greater than ammo weight you are reaching the dry fire limit (and a heavy hand slap <img src="http://illiweb.com/fa/i/smiles/icon_cry.gif" alt="Crying or Very sad" longdesc="11"> ) which depends mostly on temperature and the intrinsic retraction speed of the rubber (quality) ...
     
  13. meeeee!

    meeeee! New Member

    131
    0
    0
    <table width="90%" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="0" border="0" align="center">
    <tr><td><span class="genmed"><b>poudreverte wrote:</b></span></td></tr>
    <tr><td class="quote">Look at a tree, and ask yourself why the branches have that shape <img src="http://illiweb.com/fa/i/smiles/icon_rolleyes.gif" alt="Rolling Eyes" longdesc="14">
    </td></tr>
    </table>
    <span class="postbody"><br><br>photosynthesis.</span>
     
  14. onnod

    onnod Im from Holland, isnt that weird?

    6,001
    18
    38
    Has to with leaves, not branch shape
     
  15. meeeee!

    meeeee! New Member

    131
    0
    0
    the branches increase the area that comes in contact with light..... for photosynthesis.
     
  16. Arturo Borquez

    Arturo Borquez Administrator

    3,609
    0
    0
    <table width="90%" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="0" border="0" align="center">
    <tr><td><span class="genmed"><b>tokSick wrote:</b></span></td></tr>
    <tr><td class="quote">Tapered bands gave me great results with small ammo. I never chony it but the penetration in the cans proves there is more penetration with 9 or 10 mm than a 15 or even a 12 mm steel ball. Is it power, is it speed,... is it Superman??? I don' t know! Again, physics and me are not friends</td></tr>
    </table>
    <span class="postbody"><br>Small ball are more speedy, but less momentum (for the same energy transfer), the key is that small balls has less impact area (frontal area) = more pressure in that point and more chances to produce a hole starting a cut which weakens the can allowing penetration in that point ... rods which has more frontal area also have good penetration at lower speed because both sides are sharp enough to start a "weakening cut" and start a violent spin during the impact ... that's why are very destructive ... </span>
     
  17. tokSick

    tokSick Senior Member

    3,951
    1
    0
    <table width="90%" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="0" border="0" align="center">
    <tr><td><span class="genmed"><b>Arturo Borquez wrote:</b></span></td></tr>
    <tr><td class="quote">Tapering also works with heavier ammo ... only you need to put an additional set of bands ...</td></tr>
    </table>
    <span class="postbody"><br>I meant if i shoot small ammo with tapered and straight bands i got better out of the tapered.<br>Same thing for bigger ammo( with additional layers) but the difference is i don' t have the same penetration results for the bigger ones than for the small ones.</span>
     
  18. poudreverte

    poudreverte New Member

    72
    0
    0
    <div>
    <table width="90%" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="0" border="0" align="center">
    <tr><td><span class="genmed"><b>meeeee! wrote:</b></span></td></tr>
    <tr><td class="quote">the branches increase the area that comes in contact with light..... for photosynthesis.</td></tr>
    </table>
    <span class="postbody"><br>I spoke about the shape of the branch. They are tapered, not wood cylinders. Because their own weight decrease to the end. Same for the bands</span>
    </div><div class="clear"></div><div class="signature_div">
    <br>Love shooting <img src="http://illiweb.com/fa/i/smiles/icon_tongue.png" alt="tongue" longdesc="24">
    </div>
     
  19. tokSick

    tokSick Senior Member

    3,951
    1
    0
    @ Arturo:<br>I' ve seen you post after posting mine... I got the answer i didn't ask for... <img src="http://illiweb.com/fa/i/smiles/icon_wink.gif" alt="Wink" longdesc="15"> . That' s because of my training... I can get answers without asking any question <img src="http://illiweb.com/fa/i/smiles/icon_twisted.gif" alt="Twisted Evil" longdesc="13"> .<br>Anyway, it is clear to me now. Thanks.
     
  20. Arturo Borquez

    Arturo Borquez Administrator

    3,609
    0
    0
    <table width="90%" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="0" border="0" align="center">
    <tr><td><span class="genmed"><b>tokSick wrote:</b></span></td></tr>
    <tr><td class="quote">
    <table width="90%" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="0" border="0" align="center">
    <tr><td><span class="genmed"><b>Arturo Borquez wrote:</b></span></td></tr>
    <tr><td class="quote">Tapering also works with heavier ammo ... only you need to put an additional set of bands ...</td></tr>
    </table>
    <span class="postbody"><br>I meant if i shoot small ammo with tapered and straight bands i got better out of the tapered.<br>Same thing for bigger ammo( with additional layers) but the difference is i don' t have the same penetration results for the bigger ones than for the small ones.</span>
    </td></tr>
    </table>
    <span class="postbody"><br>That is expected for spherical ammo ... more pressure "spike" in a smaller area and smaller diameter to pass through the "hole", more density the better penetration ...</span>