I might as well post it here too.........LOL

That thinking Scott isn't quite "real life" accurate when you really get to analyzing it:

If you take a 2 blade mechanical with an absolutely crazy cutting diameter of say 12"........yep 1 foot.[:-]and then compared that to an 1 1/4" fixed head with 10 blades on it for a total cutting SURFACE of 12.5" , I'm gonna argue that the 2 blade with a 12" cutting diameter is going to inflict MORE damage than a head with a smaller cutting diameter but with even more cutting surface as shown in my example. I don't think anyone visualizing that scenario would argue the point even though that 10 blade head is cutting more actual tissue.

You could put 20 blades on that 1 1/4" head and it's still only cutting an area 1 1/4" in any direction affecting a smaller area and potentially affectingless vessels and possibly combined organs and vital tissue.

I truly believe that it is the ability of some of these heads to reach way out laterally that makes them so effective. The big cutting diameters combined with more completely compromising organs and vessels really does make them potentially faster more effective killers. I know it's easy to say 'dead is dead" but an extra 1" of cutting width can mean the difference in real life of hitting an artery, or taking out 2 organs instead of one etc.

I will never buy the cutting surface being just as effective as cutting diameter explanation, because as soon as you extrapolate it out as far as you want it becomes clear that you can reach a point where you have a 2 blade head that could cut a deer in half, while you've simply added 10 more 1 1/4" blades to a fixed head to equal the cutting surface and are affecting an area that is already as affected as it's gonna get probably with 4.