You raise very good points, doublelungingem. Finding the most efficientarrowfor your bow - while maintaininga decent level of'shootability' -does not equate to shooting the heaviest arrow you can find.

Some people think new technology has changed archery and, in many ways, it has. However, one basicprecept remains. Archery is, has been and always will be, ablending of tradeoffs and balances. You can'tlevel up one area without a corresponding loss in another area.

You can't add arrow weight to gain energy and momentumwithout a loss in speed. You can't cut arrow weight to gain speedwithout a loss in energy and momentum.

You describe a bell chart. I would be more likely to make a double linegraph, speed and KE on one leg, arrow weight on the other. (I would even add a third line. Momentum. ) We know as arrow weight increases, speed decreases and KE increases. So the speed line and KE line will intersect at some point. That intersection would mark the exactbalance point, the arrow weight where your bow delivers the very best arrow speed at the very best level of KE, within it's capability.

You can shoot that arrow at pretty much everything. Or, you can choose to go somewhat lighter or heavier, depending on what particular purposes you have in mind.

3D? Much lighter to maximize speed for the flattest trajectory and higher score. Thin skinned medium game with smaller broadheads with 2-3 blades? A good bit lighter. Thin skinned medium game with fairly largebroadheads and 4 or more blades? You don't want to go much lighter.Large, tough game at short range with a huge, nasty broadheads, like bear from a treestand? Since trajectory won't be an issue, you'll want to go heavier, maybe quite a bit heavier,to maximize KE.

Once you've got that chart in hand, you can do all kinds of things with arrow weight,and knowwhy.