If I stick the arrow in the shoulder and don't get a pass thru, there will be less blood loss. I was under the impression this is what takes a deer down. Bleed to death. Sure it will die, but where and when. I want a pass thru, period. I already tracked my first deer 400 yards with very little blood because I did not get a pass thru shot. Broad side by the way, took out one lung and the heart. Sure it died, but I am glad it wasn't raining out. I spent 2 hours on my hands and knees turning over leaves looking for tiny drops of blood. That was even after the arrow had been knock out by a tree.

It seems that this is slightly contradicting to some of the previous posts I have read. I am correct in assuming regardless of the shot offered to me, a pass thru shot with two holes is always more desirable and what I should strive for. Or am I wrong here. Is it viable to just take any shot that will put my arrow thru the vitals. If I take out both lungs it does not matter where my arrow goes? I am not being a smart ass, I really want to know. This would open up a lot more shots for me. I passed up a nice 10 or 11 point when I shot my seven point because I could not get the shot I wanted. If I would have taken the shot in this thread I could have done it 5 or 6 different times. Instead I chose to shoot the smaller deer because is was broad side with it's head in the weeds.

Or maybe I am making too much out of this and underestimating my bows capibilities. I was trying to use a spitfire mechanical with a 350 grn arrow moving at around 230 to 240 fps, which obviously was not a good combo, but I thought with the smaller cutting dia I could get away with it. Do you guys think the same bow and arrow but tipped with a Steel Force cut to tip head would make it thru a shoulder of a medium sized deer at 20 yards and in?

Paul