HuntingNet.com Forums - View Single Post - Addressing the "small" broadhead comments
Old 08-04-2005 | 10:46 PM
  #16  
bigbulls's Avatar
bigbulls
Boone & Crockett
 
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 10,679
Likes: 0
Default RE: Addressing the "small" broadhead comments

Just wanted to say that the purpose of this thread was not to promote one head over the other but rather to clear up a misconception avout the so called "small" or "little bitty" or "tiny" broadheads. Do not look at the over all size when judging how big a hole it will make. You MUST look at the cutting diameter and the number of blades to get a true representation of how much slicing a given broadhead will inflict on an animal.

A broadhead could be 30 inches long but if it has only two blades and a cutting diamater of only one inch then it will only cut a one inch, two bladed hole regardless of how "big" it may be.

Anyone can figure out how much cut a specific broadhead has. Simply take the cutting diameter and divide it in half then multiply that number times the number of blades. This number is your total cutting ability of the broadhead.

Take the slick trick for example. It has a total cut of 2.25 inches. If it were a two blade head it would be 2.25 inches wide. So for every inch it cuts foward it makes a cut 2.25 inches wide. Or another way of saying it is that for every inch it moves foward it cuts 2.25 square inches of flesh.


Oh, I almost forgot.
Look guys Buckeye and bigbulls says they are one of the best heads out there... So itmust be true!
Dang right!!!!!!!
bigbulls is offline  
Reply