mobow

The angle of the blade is completely irrelevant as it relates to cutting surface. Blade LENGTH, on the other hand, is exactly what defines it. If a broadhead has a 2" cutting diameter, and has 2 blades, it only stands to reason that each blade accounts for half the cutting diameter, in this case, 1" each.

In the case of the slick trick mag, it has a CD of 1 1/8", but a total cutting area of 2 1/4". Measure tip to tip of two opposing blades, and you'll get 1 1/8"....Think of this symbol....+ Tip to tip of the horizontal line is 1 1/8, and tip to tip of the vertical is 1 1/8.......1 1/8 x 2= 2.25.....

BowHuntingFool

What happens if you don't get a pass thru, would you want a big entry hole then?? The deer is going to bleed from both holes if the shot is placed correctly! Plus a bigger hole has less of a chance of getting plugged up by something! I have both heads in my quiver, both are deadly.

Wiaxle

When you measure cutting diameter that is at the base of the blade, the max OD (outer diameter) of the broadhead. Which assuming the shaft is about 1/4" then the part of the blade (perpendicular to the arrow shaft) would have to be about 7/16" (.25 + .4375 + .4375 = 1.125)
which would be 4 x .4375 = 1.75 + .25 = 2" cutting surface? (.25 being the assumed shaft diameter)

But if you look at the length of the sharpened part of the blade it looks to be almost twice the length of the bottom of the blade (the part that gives you the cutting diameter)

So, what I am asking is the cutting diameter what gives you the cutting surface measurement, or is it the actual measurement of the sharpened surface, which if the simple visible (assumed of course) ratio of 2:1

assuming a sharpened blade length of .875" x 4 = 3.5" of actual cutting surface.

Which gives you a cutting surface of 3.75" (when adding the .25" of the shaft diameter)





Now assuming any of that made sense up above, following the same logic, a 1 1/8" diameter Montec, if you look at the sharpened edge of this blade it looks to be almost 3 times the radius of diameter...so would the cutting surface on something like this be in the neighborhood of (assuming .25" shaft diameter)

7/16 x 3 x 3 = 3 15/16" + shaft diameter = 4 3/16" cutting surface......
7/16 = original blade radius
1st 3 is blade looks to be 3x the original blade radius
2nd 3 is for the 3 blade design.

Ya, I know this makes absolutely no difference in the scheme of anything, but I am just curious on how the math works, just wait until I get some time to question how or even why range finders are needed to compensate for elevation.......

Wiaxle

got the above to work, disregard this blathering

blax1142

I really like the slick tricks and will probably not change to anything else. First had muzzys and couldnt get them to hit anywhere near my field points so I bought some of the tricks. To check em shot a field point then shot a trick and cut the feathers off my first arrow. Got my first bow kill on a doe about 30 yards, complete pass through, double lung and ran less than 20 yards.

Bowhunter1591

Rage 2-blade love them...Had Slick Trick mags but couldent get themto fly good with my bow

Roskoe

Going afield with a couple of Rage's and a couple of Slick Tricks in your quiver . . . you would be set for just about any situation. I like the Rage, and got a chance to use them on a couple of bucks this season. Huge hole and very short recovery. But they won't go through the mesh of a ground blind without issues, and can be subject to early deployment in brushy environments. The Slick Trick flys equally well and has no moving parts.

whitetailbowhunter

I'm thinking of trying the new Grizztricks This year!

MeanV2

We will stock all the Slick Tricks including the new ones

Dan

solocam79

If the slick tricks didnt fly rightit probably wasnt tuned right.