HuntingNet.com Forums - broadhead scoring system changes

HuntingNet.com Forums (https://www.huntingnet.com/forum/)

- Bowhunting (https://www.huntingnet.com/forum/bowhunting-18/)

- - broadhead scoring system changes (https://www.huntingnet.com/forum/bowhunting/133594-broadhead-scoring-system-changes.html)

RE: broadhead scoring system changes

Quote:

ORIGINAL: 5 shot

To figure the cutting surface I take the cutting diameter and divide it by two, then multiply the number of blades by that figure. I then add in any cut on contact tips or blades that are not full size. The blade thickness issue generaly comes out in the testing. thicker blades tend to hold up better and not break in the plywood, tire and drum.

For arguments sake:
Would it be more meaningful to include the length of the blade's cutting surface (i.e. blade's length) into the calculation of the total cutting surface? This to me would be logical since this has an effect on penetration due to friction of a longer blade versus a shorter blade.

A steeply angled short blade such as the nitron or the slick trick might have the same cutting diameter as say a less steep thunderhead, but the thunderhead has a longer blade and therefore technically a greater "cutting surface." One would theorize, if ferrule diameter and weight were the same for each, that a thunderhead would penetrate less and we could perhaps prove it mathematically.

Mabe have two factors: Cutting surface and Cutting area? Or something like that?

Great stuff btw 5-shot!

RE: broadhead scoring system changes

As always 5shot, keep up the great work and thanks.

RE: broadhead scoring system changes

Quote:

To figure the cutting surface I take the cutting diameter and divide it by two, then multiply the number of blades by that figure. I then add in any cut on contact tips or blades that are not full size. The blade thickness issue generaly comes out in the testing. thicker blades tend to hold up better and not break in the plywood, tire and drum.

[/quote]

Quote:

ORIGINAL: 5 shot

Great stuff btw 5-shot!

The way I look at it, blade surface area and total cutting surface are different. What I was looking for was the size of the wound channel. While I agree that longer blades do have more "surface area" they don't always have more cutting ability or larger wound channels. I could include both, but I think that the actual penetration testing kind of "proves out" how the heads penetrate, so it works out in the end. Of course I know it's still not an exact science, but at least I think it makes for better more accurate comparisons between heads.

Quote:

This is hardly a "cutting surfacee" figure you come up with at the end. It's simply a different way to give it some arbitrary figure. I guess it's OK if you do the all the same, but it's hardly CUTTING SURFACE. The major contributor to this total is number of blades. I guess it works, but I can see it giving false hope. For example, the old Rocky Mountain Razorbacs with the 5 blades. Through it all it's a ho hum broadhead.... but 5 blades really boost the number in a misleading way. In fact, it's really a crappy broadhead. Too small a cutting diameter that leaves terrible blood trails.

Well, I don't know how else to figure total cut, each blade has 1/2 the cutting diameter, so you have to divide the cutting diameter by 2 then multiply by the number of blades. I agree that some heads like the old NAP razorback, ( the rocky mtn razor was actually a pretty good head) can get a boost, but when the fragile head hit's a steel drum or plywood those blades breat off pretty quick. The razorbacks did fly well though.