MRB with Fat Arrows

[maldkelton]

Hello, can anyone give me more insight on this. I have been beginning my MRB search, and im definitely drawn towards the fatter arrows that some have, as opposed to the very splintery looking cuts. Would the larger arrows mean a bad cut?

 

[maldkelton]

Hello, can anyone give me more insight on this. I have been beginning my MRB search, and im definitely drawn towards the fatter arrows that some have, as opposed to the very splintery looking cuts. Would the larger arrows mean a bad cut?

Do anyone happen to have photos of MRBS with larger/fatter arrows?

 

[sledge]

I also like fat arrows. Within reason of course. There is a point where too skinny or too fat can negatively impact the stone. But as long as you don’t go extreme you can tip on the fat side a little and have a very well cut stone.

You will see many ideal cut stones with LGF’s in the 76-78 range. I believe some consider 77 to be a very good overall balance. Tip towards 75-76 and they get a little fatter. Go 79-80 and they thin out.

Of course, getting that precise a value means you are looking at AGS certified stones. GIA rounds to the nearest 5 so for them a report would read either 75 or 80. And with GIA, 75 can mean a range of 73-77, whereas 80 could mean 78-82.

As you begin to look at more stones you can see what your eyes like and prefer. Also you will be able to start taking a decent guess where in that range a GIA stone lands.

Also table size comes into play. I have a post here somewhere comparing some VC stones where I was able to clearly identify this. In short, someone was looking at two stones. I was trying to help them decide which was best. The arrows on one looked better (at least to my eyes as they were fatter). When I read the AGS cert I discovered the LGF’s were actually the same value but one had a smaller table.

Actually all the proportions come into play but in the case I mentioned, everything else was very similar.

 

[Dancing Fire]

My stone is 77 LGF and my wife's stone is 80 LGF. IMO, 76-77 LGF is the sweet spot.

 

[carbonfan]

I also like fat arrows. Within reason of course. There is a point where too skinny or too fat can negatively impact the stone. But as long as you don’t go extreme you can tip on the fat side a little and have a very well cut stone.

You will see many ideal cut stones with LGF’s in the 76-78 range. I believe some consider 77 to be a very good overall balance. Tip towards 75-76 and they get a little fatter. Go 79-80 and they thin out.

Of course, getting that precise a value means you are looking at AGS certified stones. GIA rounds to the nearest 5 so for them a report would read either 75 or 80. And with GIA, 75 can mean a range of 73-77, whereas 80 could mean 78-82.

As you begin to look at more stones you can see what your eyes like and prefer. Also you will be able to start taking a decent guess where in that range a GIA stone lands.

Also table size comes into play. I have a post here somewhere comparing some VC stones where I was able to clearly identify this. In short, someone was looking at two stones. I was trying to help them decide which was best. The arrows on one looked better (at least to my eyes as they were fatter). When I read the AGS cert I discovered the LGF’s were actually the same value but one had a smaller table.

Actually all the proportions come into play but in the case I mentioned, everything else was very similar.

I remember this post and had saved it as it was so helpful! Here is a link to the discussion @sledge mentioned, and be sure to scroll down to post #29!

https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/what-are-your-dream-proportions.254949/

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

I also like fat arrows.
Also table size comes into play. I have a post here somewhere comparing some VC stones where I was able to clearly identify this. In short, someone was looking at two stones. I was trying to help them decide which was best. The arrows on one looked better (at least to my eyes as they were fatter). When I read the AGS cert I discovered the LGF’s were actually the same value but one had a smaller table.

Actually all the proportions come into play but in the case I mentioned, everything else was very similar.

Correct Sledge - this graphic is 20 years old

Fine Tuning - Ideal Scope

ideal-scope.com