Would you say that less string drag might result in better accuracy as well? If KI were to send you a second Fatal, could be tested side by side.
Do you think that the average crossbow shooter could use a shim to relieve the pressure without having the equipment to machine the riser like they were doing on the Barnetts?I remember years back when member Bunny Rabbit suggested shimming the riser on Barnett bows to reduce the down pressure. Although it worked to reduce string pressure, I elected to machine the riser to raise it parallel rather tilting the riser with a shim. Why did I elect to machine the riser rather shimming? Because I have the precision equipment to do so and can.
You mean like this?Would you say that less string drag might result in better accuracy as well? If KI were to send you a second Fatal, could be tested side by side.
Not possible due to how narrow the limbs/cams are on the Fatal. The bow is only 6.25" cocked. The Barnett's are almost double. One must be careful of the cable angles when things get that narrow. I would NOT suggest shimming any bow.Do you think that the average crossbow shooter could use a shim to relieve the pressure without having the equipment to machine the riser like they were doing on the Barnetts?
Zackly!😋You mean like this?
View attachment 206407
Let me say something right now. When the CEO contacts me and discusses findings and talks about my experience out of concern of my experience, that goes a long way with me. He decided to send me a second bow IN ONE DAY for me to verify what I had experienced. I just finished testing Fatal X 2 to find the serving is different then that of the first Fatal. Different in a way that it is much tighter and the fit and finish is different. As I said previously, could I have received a Monday or Friday string? I have not a clue. All I can say is out of the box this serving is different and it shows no sign of separation or wear after 35 shots where the prior showed almost immediately AND it is just as accurate as Fatal 1 hybrid.
Now, on a engineering perspective my stance is still that any bow with excessive string pressure reduces serving life. I don't think anyone with any amount of time with bows will argue that fact. However I am convinced by what I have seen that the original Fatal's serving was different than that of #2 AND shows no sign of wear on #2 as it did in short order on the original. Could I have received a "one off"? Maybe, can't say for sure. What I can say is Fatal #2 serving is different in a positive manner.
I have worked with several bow manufactures to find some are like talking to a wall. They ask you test bows but when you do share observations that may not be liked, they ignore the person and continue on. Jason at KI is serious as a heart attack to insure the products he produces are the very best possible. I'm not a KI Cheerleader but one that respects KI's commitment to produce quality bows and the fact they listen to any perceived concerns, accurate or inaccurate.
I know of issues with bows costing > than 2,000.00 and inherent issues discovered are still to this day present and being produced. This serving discussion is nothing in comparison to the issues other companies are experiencing.
All that being said, If you increase the lube frequency, say 8-10 shots, then I would say you are just fine with a stock bow. If you fail to do so then that is on you! I know of no bow company that will cover string and or cables under warranted claims. It would be impossible to do so due to the owners responsibility to lube the components.
Too many great features of this bow to let the need for increased lube frequency keep one from owning on this bow.
Point is....shouldnt have to shim or mill a BRAND NEW bow...
Not sure how many different brand bows you have tested Randy. I've tested a great many and some of the issues with others is much more major than this is and costs 3 times as much. This just may be a case of a poor serving and if it is and the lube frequency proves to be the only requirement then that is child's play in comparison to what I have seen with others.Point is....shouldnt have to shim or mill a BRAND NEW bow...
Staying tunedNot sure how many different brand bows you have tested Randy. I've tested a great many and some of the issues with others is much more major than this is and costs 3 times as much. This just may be a case of a poor serving and if it is and the lube frequency proves to be the only requirement then that is child's play in comparison to what I have seen with others.
I'm shooting #2 today, following a lube frequency of 10, rail only, to see what life testing proves or disproves. Now have 53 shots and no sign of serving wear. Back to the range.......
Jcat, I agree that the serving appears to be slightly smaller but it definitely is tighter and of different material. my perception.After the pro shop replaced my original string i noticed it didn't seemed as humped on the rail as the original one did, maybe a smaller diameter center serving.
I think you should continue reporting what you see. Gives the consumer a better chance to make a better purchase. It doesnt make a difference what brand it is it appears the consumers are getting ripped off.nYou pay their price and expect a good product and we are not getting it in a lot of cases. You need a limb shop, know how to build strings and cables, 3 bow presses, a machine shop and now with KI a brush and a 5 gal. bucket of bear grease and a back up bow. I can see why Yelpy was yelling on another thread . Its expensive and getting old.Well Brian, good luck with the caffeine withdrawals. I have one of the holy grail bows and the factory serving is horrible. I have rope on my boat smaller than the serving material on the bow. Glad you had better luck with your serving then I. Maybe I had a Monday or Friday serving. All I can say is it went away fast even with trident lathered on the serving and rail. I remember years back when member Bunny Rabbit suggested shimming the riser on Barnett bows to reduce the down pressure. Although it worked to reduce string pressure, I elected to machine the riser to raise it parallel rather tilting the riser with a shim. Why did I elect to machine the riser rather shimming? Because I have the precision equipment to do so and can.
There is not a bow on the planet that is "perfect". Some are closer than others but all bows produced have some type of issue. The Fatal X is a very well built bow as is the X1 and I have clearly stated that fact. Has KI raised the bar and produced some very high quality and high performing bows? Yes, but on a personal perspective the down pressure on the Fatal X is more than I believe it should be. So, if someone takes what I have completed on the bow is a knock then I cannot control what people may think.
I'll "cheer lead" for items on bows that are positive in performance or reliability for any bow manufacture. Inversely I have the ability to correct issues when I see them. I think what may be missed here is the fact some complain about bow issues here on CBN and do nothing about it. I'm fortunate to be able to correct something I believe can be improved and it appears to be perceived as I'm condemning the bow. Maybe I'll just keep my ideas to myself next time.
Maybe sharing my idea was a "Fatal" mistake.
have a great night
Great info BR. It's just a bit of science. Test and verify.Farm Deer: Thanks for sharing.
You have just backed me up in regards to what I have been doing in regards to lubrication.
As a rule I was shooting 12 arrows before retrieving them. One got damaged from losing
an insert and field point combination from a previously shot arrow in the target. I then took
three arrows and installed broad heads. This left me with 8 arrows without adding replacements.
I now lubricate the bow string, servings and cables with a light coat on the rail lubricated every
16 shots with the Trident Silicone Grease. When shooting 12 arrows, everything got lubricated
every 12 shots.
Some of the original bow strings have over 15,000 shots with over 5,000 on the last reserve in
the arrow-latch area. I found on a new bow string is to remove the serving and install serving as
tight as possible. I then add a second layer of serving using the BCY .030 as tight as possible but
about 1/2" narrower on each side than the base serving. All my serving ends get a wee dab of
Gorilla Glue as added insurance against serving separation.
Double layer serving for me will only work on crossbows using 1/2 moon nocks and that is the only
models of crossbow I will purchase. No proprietory nocks for me as: 1) those arrows are too hard
to come by and 2)those arrows are much too expensive.
As further notes: 1)all my crossbows have shims added to illiminate the downward bow string
pressure which results in no more nock wear or if not corrected soon enough wear going into
the arrow shaft. 2)none of the crossbows now have the Teflon strip or cable slides. All the cables
are served in that area with the BCY .030 serving. Hundreds of shots now with no formally chewed
If the manufactures had made the arrow groove a bit wider on the rail type crossbows, there would
be none of these problems of nock wear, excessive serving wear in the arrow-latch area due to
excessive downward bowstring pressure and there fore having to shim the riser.
Wishing you all the best.