Guests - If You want access to member only forums on HSO. You will gain access only when you sign-in or Sign-Up on HotSpotOutdoors.

It's easy - LOOK UPPER right menu.

Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
BuckKiller

Whats your opinion

14 posts in this topic

I really like them. I feel that they have helped tighten my groups more than the blazers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I bet they get ate up real quick in a whisker biscuit? I really need to invest in a different rest because the one I have eats fletchings like they are candy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

there the only way to go if you flech your own arrows other wise there like 5 bucks to have someone else do them for you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that they also helped to tighten up my groups a bit.

I pay to have mine fletched. I have always wanted to fletch my own but I go through so few, it really doesn't cost me that much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I shoot a heavier (125 gr) fixed blade broadhead and used to have problems getting them to fly good. Now I shoot Quickspins and have no problems with arrow flight at all. As mentioned shooting them through a whisker biscuit may give you some issues.

They don't hold up real well for target shooting because they seem to be a little soft, but for shooting broadheads they work really good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do they seem noisier to anyone or is it just me? It seems to me that they are louder when flying, will that cause problems when used for hunting. I was not impressed with them at all I didn't shoot any better with these then a regular blazer vane, did I do something wrong?

Thanks for the replies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There may be a slight hiss while the arrow is in flight. It doesn't seem to me that it is any louder than any other vane. The noise is probably mostly from the arrow anyway.

IMO the blazer is more hype than anything. It functions the same as any other vane. The only difference with quik spins is that they impart a bit more spin. I think that would help with accuracy at longer distances. Inside 30 yards it probably doesn't make a difference which vane you shoot. They just seemed to shoot a little better for me. Of course, it's like anything else. Confidence goes a long ways.

I'M NOT SLAMMING BLAZERS! So lets not go to war on which vane is best. I shot blazers the last two years and they performed well. I just feel I shoot better with quik spins. The price for them is a little out of line though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

did you put then on with a right hand spin if you didn't they wont help any

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Blazers were actually designed for the wisker biscut rest that is why they are made stiffer then any other vane, then we relized how well they will make a fixed broadhead fly out to some very long ranges and still keeping perfect arrow flight with such short fletching instead of the normal 4" or 5" fletch that is were all the hype came from,and for me until they come up with something different that is what I am shooting. And now most prefletched arrows at the shop are now fletched with the blazers also. They still don't make my groups smaller with the recurve but I think thats just me. laugh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

KOONIE you said it best confidence its all that matters when it comes to equipment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've have tested the quick spins (2" and 4") and they really don't make much of a different if your shooting within 25 yards. The 4" vane shoots tighter groups anything beyond 30 yards and the 2" vanes are probably just for looks. Maybe the 2" might work better on smaller and lighter arrows.

I fletch my own arrows all with a right degree spin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

did you put then on with a right hand spin if you didn't they wont help any

Yes I did

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've have tested the quick spins (2" and 4") and they really don't make much of a different if your shooting within 25 yards. The 4" vane shoots tighter groups anything beyond 30 yards and the 2" vanes are probably just for looks. Maybe the 2" might work better on smaller and lighter arrows.

I fletch my own arrows all with a right degree spin.

Thats a good point I never considered arrow weight and speed into any of this. I shot with blazers all summer so far so Ill switch back to regular blazers and see if anything changes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0



  • Posts

    •     I believe you said it was "libertarian" drivel, actually, so you dismissed it out of hand...          
    •   You posted about neither.     But if you would read the article, my commentary and TJ's commentary you would know that's not really what the article is about.     You have to be kidding, right? Just about everyone who has an opinion on politics at all is this sort of person. Do you look at social media at all?
    •     Ok, now getting back to whether Trump will win the War on Drugs, do you think he will take any steps at all to decriminalize drugs, such as reclassifying marijuana, and recognizing state laws and programs designed to move towards the decriminalization of drugs?   Or do you think he will take steps to protect vested interests, such as prisons and the pharmaceutical. industry?   Just going off his rhetoric and his choice for a drug czar, I'm guessing he much prefers the latter, and will end up spending a bunch of taxpayer's money, and actually lose ground by continuing on with the brute force/criminalization approach.        
    • Because at the time, I don't have anything better to do.   I posted about the article, and you wanted to talk about the topic.  I posted about the topic and you want to discuss the article.    Which is it?     I support a particular candidate because their positions, taken as a whole, are preferable to me as compared to the other candidate(s).   In a few years I get to do it over.     I don't think there are really that many ardent "rah rah for my party" type folks out there, in spite of what we see on TV, or the occasional people we meet.     So the article is basically drivel, as I said before, based on a false premise.   
    • Borch I just signed up Ryan, Morgan, and me but I only see my name listed in the summary. Do my kids not show up because they don't have hso usernames?  Or did I not enter it right?     Please let me know how to fix it and I'll do so.  Thanks!
    •   Because I think self reflection is good for all of us from time to time.   If you don't wan't to discuss this article, why do you persist in posting here?           No one is disputing that at all. The premise of the author's article is in regards to the hypocrisy of then justifying everything your chosen candidate or party does blindly while vilifying the other candidates or party. It's the "all in" sports like mentality that is being discussed here.  
    • There is a really excellent book called "The Righteous Mind" that approaches this tribalist mindset from an evolutionary psychology standpoint. The author, Jonathan Haidt, does a remarkable job of unpacking why people persist in truly irrational defense of the indefensible - when it's their team doing the stupid stuff. I highly highly highly recommend it to anyone who is interested in lessening the hyperpartisan idiocy we have today.

      The trouble is that the closed-off mindset that lends itself to reflexive support for Obama/Hillary/Trump/whomever also tends to preclude any serious engagement in self-examination that the book is designed to provoke. Really good read, though.
    •   I get what your saying here but I think what Dave is talking about is the willingness of some to blindly follow, without question, their party or candidate. I saw this first hand during the primary with some of my own relatives, for example. I had a SIL who was a huge Bernie backer. The things she said about Hillary were worse than anything said here. As far as she was concerned, Hillary should be tarred and feathered and ran out on a rail. Then Bernie loses the nomination. She then became Hillary's biggest defender. Everything she said about her during the primary was instantly washed away. Even her own husband called her out. She wasn't simply voting for her because she found Trump worse. That's understandable. She defended or at least tried to deflect the issues with Hillary when just a few months prior, she said things that would make even Cooter or Bill say, "man you're harsh on her."   I don't think this is a new phenomenon. I also don't think it's widespread. Like everything else, access to more and diverse information just makes it possible to hear more about it than before. I think human nature causes people to internalize candidates and/.or elected officials. It's a "if you're critical of my candidate, you're critical of me," kind of thinking.   I don't fault anyone for voting for a candidate that one feels best represents their line of thinking. Or even defending their candidate from detractors. I don't think that is what Dave is talking about here. It's also the flipping of political opinions just because the candidate you voted for or support is supporting certain positions. For example, many conservatives opposed BHO's stimulus, including myself. It didn't work  as promised and we just added more on to the debt. So on the campaign trail, Trump also spoke of a stimulus plan that was even more expensive than BHO's and  those same people not only supported it but are justifying it. In summary, one can vote for a candidate without defending everything that person does        
    •  Come on.   The world, life is a bit more complicated then that.          Quit passing the blame. Your whole thesis is on choice and owning it.   Let me guess, you hate big banking also since they made it easy to refinance and purchase.   It just proves that general society is incapable of making the right decisions as a whole.   Sorry, you go down with the ship.    
  • Our Sponsors