## Overview

Picking vanes for a build is always a tradeoff between three things that
don't cleanly agree with each other: how much drag the vane adds, how well
it steers, and how loud the arrow is in flight.

For the prior round of vane testing, see the
[2025 Vane Performance Overview](/research/arrow-study-2025/results/vane-performance-overview/).

Every vane in this article was tested on the same standard-speed rig:
28″ draw length, 70# draw weight, ~450gr arrows, ~290 fps out of
a Hoyt AX3 33. Each build was measured on three axes:

- **Aerodynamic Drag:** calculated drag constant from synced chronograph
  readings at 0.5, 30, and 60 yards. Lower drag means less drop, less wind
  drift, and more energy carried downrange. Lower is better.
- **Restorative Lift:** how well the vane steers a fixed-blade broadhead
  back to where a field point would have hit. We torqued the bow
  laterally to simulate a bad shot, then shot a group of Iron Will Wide
  fixed-blade broadheads and a group of Gold Tip field points under the
  same torque, and measured the lateral distance between the two groups
  at 70 yards. The smaller that distance, the more restorative lift the
  vane provided. Lower is better.
- **Vane Noise:** overall peak loudness in flight, weighted two ways
  (A-weighting for humans, deer-weighting for whitetails). A 10dB
  increase is roughly a doubling of perceived loudness. Lower is better.

## Test Methods

For full details on the test methods, group capture, and analysis
processes, check out the
[Methods](/research/arrow-study-2026/methods/) page.

## Quick Tips

Hover over the dots in any plot to see the build configuration and results
details.

We lead with group size plots because they are intuitive and relatable,
but statistically speaking, mean radius is the better metric to compare.

For any plots referencing group sizes, restorative lift, etc., you can
click on the dots to see the group photos annotated with mean radius and
95% confidence intervals.

## The Big Picture

The chart below is the one to start with. Each dot is one of the{" "}
{stdVanes.length} builds in the test, with drag on Y, restorative lift on
X, and deer-weighted loudness as color. Bottom-left and yellow is the
corner you want.

If you only check out one chart on this page, make it this one.

[Figure: PlotSections]

## Aerodynamic Drag

The chart below shows the drag constant for every vane build in the test,
with 95% confidence intervals.

Drag is the cost of every vane. More drag means more drop, more wind
drift, and less retained kinetic energy at distance. Even small
differences in drag constant compound at long range.

[Figure: PlotSections]

## Restorative Lift

Restorative lift is what we call the vane's ability to steer an arrow
given imperfect launch conditions.

To measure it, we induced a repeatable lateral torque at full draw
(roughly equivalent to a 1in paper tear at 15ft) and shot two groups under
that same torque: one with Iron Will Wide fixed-blade broadheads, one
with Gold Tip field points. The chart below is the lateral distance
between those two groups at 70 yards.

A smaller distance means more restorative lift: the vane is doing more
work to keep the broadhead steering with the field point under bad-shot
conditions. Lower is better.

[Figure: PlotSections]

## Fixed-Blade Groups

Restorative lift is our primary measure of a vane's performance, but we
also looked at the group size and mean radius of those fixed-blade groups
under torque.

The first plot below is group size (extreme spread): the easy-to-picture
metric. The second is mean radius: the more statistically honest one.
Both are lower-is-better, both have 95% confidence intervals, and both
are computed from the same shots.

[Figure: PlotSections]

## Group Tightness vs. Restorative Lift

One question worth asking: are the builds with less restorative lift also
the builds that group looser?

The scatter below puts mean radius on Y and restorative lift on X, one
dot per build.

The correlation is weak due to the small sample sizes and insignificant
differences in group sizes overall, but there is a slight trend.

[Figure: PlotSections]

## Vane Noise

Two listeners care how loud your arrow is in flight: you, and the deer.
They don't hear the same things, so we weight the same peak SPL recording
two ways.

A-weighting reflects what your ears are most sensitive to (mostly
mid-range frequencies). Deer-weighting reflects what whitetails are most
sensitive to (more weight on the higher frequencies a spinning vane is
loudest at). A 10dB increase is roughly a doubling of perceived loudness.

The deer chart is first, since that's the listener you actually care
about in the field. The human chart is right behind it for context.

[Figure: PlotSections]

## Frequency Response

Overall peak loudness is the headline number, but it can hide a lot. Two
builds can share the same A-weighted SPL while being loud at different
frequencies, and a deer won't hear them the same way.

The plot below is the deeper-dive view: pick any subset of builds and
overlay their full 1/3-octave SPL spectra. Switch the weighting between Z
(raw), A (human), and Deer to see how each listener experiences the same
signal.

[Figure: PlotSections]

## Takeaway

No vane is best on every axis. Every build is a compromise; the right
compromise depends on what you're trying to optimize for.

The big-picture chart at the top is the easiest place to find a build
that lands close to your priority profile. The per-axis charts give you
the per-build numbers and confidence intervals when you're narrowing down
a short list.

A caveat:

- All vane testing was done on the standard-speed rig (~290 fps) on
  one type of arrow shaft. Builds that look great here may shift on a
  faster setup or different arrow shaft.