Aerovane is the first ever vane that employs Airfoil Technology for archery arrows. Thus Aerovane does not look like traditional vanes. Aerovane is not flat, it is shaped like an airplane wing and it works like an airplane wing. Aerovane does not work like traditional vanes which use drag to induce arrow rotation. Aerovane utilizes its Airfoil Technology to initiate arrow rotation and flies quieter than other traditional vanes as Aerovane is modeled after an owl's wing. Aerovane can make your archery projectile flatter and straighter and your shots will be more accurate and quieter. You can shoot Aerovane with confidence.
What make the Aerovane flies so quiet compared to the traditional vanes?
There are 3 main contributing factors that make Aerovane flies quiet:
Aerovane™ II features:
Specification of Aerovane II
Aerovane II 18/100-pack
Aerovane II for 12 arrows (up to 3 colors)
Aerovane II Testing III, February 2009 By Jeffrey S. Bailey: e-mail
Upon completion of the Aerovane II Testing in January, I was eager to hit the range again for additional testing of this awesome vane. This time I increased the testing requirements by a step or two. The first step I added was to actually measure the spine of each arrow I was using; which will be discussed in a following paragraph. The next step was to add a testing requirement of Group Testing at a distance of 40 yards. The final step was to use a Full Capture rest vice a drop away as I did in the last testing. By using the NAP Quicktune 360, I am forcing the arrow to keep on track all the way until it leaves the bow; this is necessary since the bow I am using, 2009 PSE X-Force Dream Season set at 67 pounds, has uneven nock travel.
In order to measure the actual spine of the arrows I am testing, I used the RAM QC Arrow Spine Tester. I also checked to see if there were any weak or thinner spine areas of each arrow. If there were, I would use this location to place my cock vane. In other words, I would place the thickest part of the each arrow against my rest for testing consistency. Just to note, the Trophy Ridge Crush arrows did not have any noticeable change in spine when placed on the tester.
After weighing and computing the Front of Center for each arrow, I proceeded to the shooting portion of the test. As with the testing I completed in January, chronograph testing at three different yardages was next on the list. As expected, the lightest (High Country Speed Pro Max) arrow came off the blocks the fastest, whereas the heaviest arrow (A/C Super Slim 340) was the slowest. However, the interesting point is each arrow fletched with the Aerovane II only slowed an average of 9 fps over the 20 yard distance. The arrows with the Blazer vane attached slowed down an average of 11 fps.
Shooting the arrows at a vertical line 40 yards away, then with a 100 grain G5 Striker Broadhead 30 yards away were the same tests I conducted in January. The new test this time around was Group Testing at 40 yards. In this test, I shot both arrows at the same target 40 yards away, then measured the distance between the two arrows. Surprisingly, the lightest arrow was one of the arrows with the greatest distance; whereas the heaviest arrow was close to the top in this test.
At the end of the testing, three arrows stood out from all of the others. The first two were from Trophy Ridge, and the third was Gold Tip CAA 350. All of these arrows flew like darts. Even though Gold Tip’s hit to the right on both the vertical line and broadhead test, with minor adjustments to the sight, they will be hitting the mark.
The benefit of the Aerovane II is plain to see no matter which arrow type you prefer. Through the use of a full capture rest on a bow with uneven nock travel, and fletched with Aerovane II will make your arrows shoot like darts.
Aerovane II Testing IV, March 16 2009 By Jeffrey S. Bailey
I wanted to let you know the results from my testing of the Aerovane II placement this past weekend.
I first started off placing the Aerovane II as far forward on the fletching clamp as possible. This equated to a distance of 3 inches from the center of the nock to the back end of the vane. Unfortunately, since I have adjusted my bow, placing the vane this far forward on the arrow actually places the vanes in front of the cables before I even start to draw the bow. Every time I shot, the arrows would contact the cables and the arrow would be deflected way off target.
I then decided to try again this time moving the vanes forward 0.25 inches at a time. I set up three arrows; 1 with a distance of 1.25 inches between the center of the nock and the back of the vane (this is my normal set up); 1 with a distance of 1.50 inches; and 1 with a distance of 1.75 inches between the center of the nock and the back of the vane. Even at only 1.75 inches, the vanes still made contact with the cables (even through it was very slight). The 1.25 and 1.50 arrows flew exactly the same when it came to broadheads and the vertical line test. The strange part was with the chronograph test. It seems the further forward the vane is, the slower the arrow became with distance. The only explanation I could think of would be the vortices coming off the back of the vane would hit the remaining part of the shaft slowing down the arrow.