PABowhunter:
An ax is designed to be capable to split a 2X4. That is the primary purpose of the ax. However, if you take an ax and start chopping metal pipe, steel barrels, concrete blocks, etc; some axes might fare well and do so for varied periods of time, some may not fare as well as others. Does that mean that the axes that held their edge longer are the better axes? No it does not. Temper and type of edge differ for the purpose the ax was designed for. A fine-edged ax might not do as well on pipes, steel barrels, and concrete as a cheap blunt-edged ax.
As for your statement, which seems to be the thought pattern of many:
I honestly believe that a little common sense needs to be applied here. If a broadhead cuts through steel, wood, rubber or any other type of material that it is shot through then I think we can deduce that it will effectively penetrate a deer' s body. Don' t you think?
What you have said was never the point. However, you do confirm that too many cannot see the forest for the trees.
Here is a point: Many of the broadheads that are not doing as well as others or are alleged to be poor performers (regardless of comparative aspects) in " 5 shot' s" experiments, are being used by many bowhunters who are reporting great performance and success; in total contradiction of the test results as reported by " 5 shot." What does that type of information tell you?
Or, for the purpose of loyalty and/or not wanting to stand on your own two feet, some of you would readily dismiss the facts obtained from actual field performance obtained by many individuals who provide independent reports obtained from more than one shot; and not shot into plywood, steel, and rubber, but into what the broadhead was actually designed for. [:@]