RockSlinger, this article brings out an issue that bothers me. It quotes KE figures as if there is a study demonstrating that KE is important when shooting animals. Well, the only study that addresses KE on live animals shows no correlation between KE and penetration.

I've noticed that a lot of people openly don't believe Ashby's study, but I have to wonder why. I look at his methods for conducting the study. I see the results, the charts and the conclusions and I just don't see how anyone can say it's flawed. But the real point is, no one else has done this. There are no other studies on this. How can people promote KE as important for penetration, when there is no study on live animals that supports their view.

Another point - poor penetration out of a recurve is extremely common - even with heavy arrows. The reason is quite obvious to those who have tuned a lot of traditional bows. Spine is critical on these bows - and I mean absolutely critical. Proper arrow flight is difficult for many to acheive and most don't even know the proper way to go about it. Add in the fact that even if you got it right, you could overdraw in a hunting situation, and cause less than ideal arrow flight. When an arrow that is not flying straight, hits an animal, the energy is easily deflected and adsorbed by the side of the arrow instead of the tip. This is also why really high FOCs work so well. Years ago, almost no one shot anything over 15%.

Anyway, my opinion is that articles like this are at best, completely misleading.