Mike West

Been doing a lot surfing and reading trying to catch up on what's gone on in the last 20 years. Ok the free spinning broadheads caught my attention. The marketing hype made sense untill I stopped and thought
about it. I'm not the sharpest tool in the shed but it seems to me you would get less penatration with a broadhead that can spin on it's shaft than one that is solid. Wouldn't some of the energy that is usually applied to the broadhead be lost do to the broadhead spinning
instead of going forward? Does this design really work better over standard broadheads?

I saw Razorback was coming out with one next month that looked pretty good.

5 shot

I honestly don't know yet, if the "free spinning" heads penetrate better or not. Their is only one now on the market to my knowledge, which is the new Razorback. I plan on getting a pack and testing them out.

TAKE YOUR KIDS HUNTING AND YOU WON'T BE HUNTING FOR YOUR KIDS

Mike West

I'll look forward to your findings.

Big Country

Mike, I used razorback 5 broadheads probably 15 years ago, maybe longer. They worked fine on the deer I shot with them. When bows started to get faster, I could not get them to fly straight. If I recall correctly, at around 240fps, I could not control them. It may have just been me, don`t know.

BGfisher

OK guys, here's the scoop on the Razorbacks. They been around for years. Originals came with five blads and weighed 142 grains. Later they came out with a four blade package.
You have it a little backwards about penetration loss though. The blades are molded into a plastic cartridge that slips over the ferrule and is held on by the screw-in tip. It's not that the blades spin on the shaft. They freewheel so to speak. There is less energy lost to getting the blades to spin against the air, and when they hit an animal there is less energy lost getting them to stop rotating. The arrow shaft spins but the blades freewheel. You get what I'm saying?
The other thing about them is that the five blades are lower profile than other fixed heads of that era so less chance of windplaning. And because there were five blades they maintained a decent amount of cutting surface.
I recently sold some to a guy who was looking for them. I had some around here for I'll bet 15 years that I never used, simply because I went to lighter heads.
One downside to them is that the blades were thin, .020 if I recall right. Bone could chip one fairly easy. The other upside is that there were a lot of other blades to finish the job. They killed what I shot with them. That much I know.
I still have a couple around just for old-time sake.
Hope this answers some questions