[Yinn]

Hi friends, would like to share a quick tip on how I have learnt to measure frameless active length. This works for both tubes and flats. I used to not be able to get it right - it was either too tight and hurt my fingers, or too loose and lack power. The issue is the extra length needed for the "frame" or hand portion. The reason why its hard to give an exact number is because everyone pre-pulls the bands to a different degree before forming the "frame" and locking in the band. This is assuming you already know what your usual "active length" is (otherwise see footnote below).

So what I did was to make marks every cm of the band at the "frame" end (picture 1), pre-pull the band and form my finger frame as usual, and see the length of band taken up by my hand after its locked onto my finger (picture 2). I noticed that I usually take up 4cm of band for my "frame" portion. So now I add 8cm (4cm x2 for both limbs) to my usual active length and get the perfect band set every time. Hope this helps!

Footnote: how to measure active length
-- My go to would be to add 10% to the active length with max elongation factor. Good example how to measure max elongation factor shown here by Mark from ATO. QUICK TIP: BAND ELONGATION
-- For example, my current 1632 has max elongation factor of 6x. My draw length is 75cm. So the max active length is 75 / 6 = 13cm. Add 10% to that would make my active length 14cm

 

[Yinn]

Good discussion of a topic that challenges many who want to start with frameless shooting!

Thanks Kawkan! Means a lot coming from a master like yourself!

 

[Yinn]

Interesting, I usually just cut my flats @14" for all my setups 14 has been my magic number as 13"active is my perfect set up for full Albatros. That gives me 1/4" loss at pouch attachment and 3/4" @ the frame which I usually only loose 1/2" with the way I have been banding (inverted flip over) I may add your method just to eee what type of elongation and difference is apparent. That is assuming this method works for flats.

Hi Sanch, yes this method works for flats as well, I personally have tested it myself. In fact, I would argue that it works even better with flats because flats "lock" onto your fingers better than tubes. Even after forming the finger frame, tubes can still shift a little bit; but flats, maybe because of its wider surface area, doesn't move at all.

I have been using flats to train my consistency in pre-pulling and frame forming.

 

[Yinn]

@Yinn do you pre-pull your flats before making the finger frame or not?

Hi Whytey! I remember you from my other post about tubes - you had that awesome frameless flat band setup!

Yup I do pre-pull my flats, exactly the same amount I do my tubes. Trying to make it muscle memory so that I can be consistent.

 

[Yinn]

I have found success following Volp's technique with flat bands.

Wow I had no idea he did it differently, thank you. It's interesting cause Volp is primarily a frameless tube shooter.

Will need to try it out. Wonder if it's ok if I don't pre-pull my tubes as well.

 

[Yinn]

Wow I had no idea he did it differently, thank you. It's interesting cause Volp is primarily a frameless tube shooter.

Will need to try it out. Wonder if it's ok if I don't pre-pull my tubes as well.

Just tested it out, nope doesn't work for tubes. Not pre-pulling tubes will cause it to stretch out of your finger, because tubes doesn't bind to the fingers as well as flats does.

Because I shoot frameless tubes more often, probably not advisable to change my technique going back and forth from tubes to flats. So will probably stick to pre-pulling for both.

Also, as I mark the points of "binding" on my flat bands, I have no problem getting consistent when pre-pulling them anyway.