Slick Trick broadhead deflection tests completed
 

As many of you know their was or is some talk about slick trick broadheads and the steeper blade angles cuasing the broadhead to "skip" or slide across deer on hard quartering shots. I should say that I have realy only heard of two people having this problem, all the other reports on this head have been positive for the most part.
What I did was to take a golden key deadhead 100 grn, and a slick trick 100 grn. I shot them on 2219 arrows out of my Hoyt stryker II bow. The bow was setup and tuned to these arrows and 100 grn broadheads.
I then hung a fresh deer hide over a 1/4" piece of luon board and stood it up against a 3D target. The Shot distance was 25 yards. I shot several shots with each head at differnt angles. One thing I will say up front is that this target material is very slippery, the hide is soft and slippery, and the luon board is like on huge solid rib. I really found no differnce in how the heads preformed, except in the most extreme angle. Both heads pretty much "stuck" where they hit. The only exception was the most severe angle, which in my opinion is on the edge of what is aceptable for ethical shot placement, and most hunters would probably not take a shot like this, but it is still possible to get both lungs with the angle, but arrow placement has to be perfect.
On this severe angle the deadhead slid across the hide about an inch before "sticking" and penetrating. The slick trick slid about 2 inches before "sticking". On both heads you could see the hide ripped and the blade marks where the head slid across the board before the tip penetrated. In both cases the shots would have been a kill. The slick tricks did slide along the hide/luon combination longer than the three bladed deadhead, but not by all that much. I could see where it could be worse with both heads if the bow and arrow combination was not tuned properly, or if the shooter were to hit a small branch, or their clothing , cuasing arrow flight to be less than perfect. To sum all of this all up, yes the Slick Tricks can defelct, as can any broadhead. The angle at which this happens is pretty severe, so severe in fact that one should really think hard about taking that kind of shot with any broadhead. I would rate the deflection of the Slick tricks just behind most "conventional broadheads" and ahead of most mechanical heads. I would feel comfortable taking reasonable quartering shots with my bow and the slick tricks, and don't think it is really a problem for most hunters. Those using super lite arrows, say under 400 grns, may have more deflection, but that would apply to any broadhead. That is one of those tradeoff's you have to live with by giving up arrow weight for speed. I am not sure what I really proved or disproved here, but the test was intresting, if not very scientific.

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

RE: Slick Trick broadhead deflection tests completed
 

Thanks for the info. ,now I know not to get the "Slck Trick"

RE: Slick Trick broadhead deflection tests completed
 

As always, thanks for the fine work that you do and share with us.

RE: Slick Trick broadhead deflection tests completed
 

Thanks for taking all the time and trouble to conduct the test. Sounds to me like Slick Tricks perform as well as any other broadhead in relation to deflections. And if they fly as well as was documented in the other thread, I might just have to try them.

KEEP IT LEGAL. KEEP IT SAFE. OR WE MAY NOT GET TO KEEP IT AT ALL.

RE: Slick Trick broadhead deflection tests completed
 

bayonets, I wouldn't rule out the Slick tricks, they actually did well in the tests, and they are still the most accurate fixed blade head I have tested. buck, your welcome. Budbowhunter I also am looking forward to the 125 grn head.

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

RE: Slick Trick broadhead deflection tests completed
 

Thanks for the test, 5-Shot.



MOCraig

[Deleted]
 

[Deleted by Admins]

RE: Slick Trick broadhead deflection tests completed
 

5Shot

With all due respect, I cannot support your findings regarding your "deflection" test of the particular broadheads. Without relating a long story, I have a "hands on" forensic related background regarding wounds and wound paths (channels) caused by projectiles.

Based on my knowledge and my personal experiences, I can confidently state that the medium (dry hide and a medium solid and smooth board) you used to perform the tests in an attempt to determine "real life" deflection results was unsuitable for comparison with actual events. In fact, the medium you used would have had a coefficient of friction that could have assisted an angled penetration.

The numerous variables that exist and the control groups that are required to perform such a test are too extensive and too scientific to detail. Therefore, I will summarize in lay terms by saying that sustained energy and coefficient of friction (drag and snag) are two that must be considered regarding your test.

First, let us examine some the rudimentary differences in the two mediums:

Deer: Moving entity with a lubricated, supple and flexible surface, having a greater depth from exterior surface to rib cage, with various types of blood-lubricated sinew situated between the outer surface and the ribcage. The ribcage is also covered with strong and blood lubricated connective tissue. The rib cage is not flat, but has valleys and apexes.

Dry hide and Luan board (Luan board is a very thin and fairly light-weight wood product): Stationary, dry medium, no material to cause unbalanced internal forces is located between the hide and the board. The drag and snag friction of the dry hide and the board would be extremely high.

When a projectile enters a body, animal or human; due to the mass of connective tissues, muscle, bone, and the lubricating factor of blood and other fluids, internal unbalanced forces exist that can cause an arrow to deviate from its original path.

A dry hide laid flatly on a flat board having no give and no flexibility would allow an arrow to better maintain a uniform path. Additionally, the drag and snag affect of the dry medium could create a force (friction) that could assist pulling the arrow inward on an angled entry. If the large and steeply angled blades dug into the board and grabbed, the sudden clutching of the blade by the wood could cause the point of the broadhead to dive towards the board, thus assisting penetration.

On a deer, the instant the arrow penetrated a moving, flexible and, lubricated mass, the various internal forces could easily deflect the path of the arrow. Internal deflection of a projectile is more common than uncommon.

Should a large blade, especially one with a steep angle, dive into the valley between ribs and then impact against the extremely hard and lubricated bone, it is not unreasonable to theorize that the broadhead would be deflected upwards and along the rib cage, taking the shaft with it. Additionally, if the point of the ferrule or a blade edge was to impact (angled) on the apex of a rib, the shaft will most likely be deflect upwards.

In both cases of supposed upward deflection, the arrow has begun to loose most of its energy and will follow a path of the least resistance. This would mean that the arrow would most likely travel through the interior of the deer as is shown in the photos provided by huntmup.

Unless many controlled and scientific tests are performed, the best evaluation lies with consolidated results obtained under actual conditions.








Edited by - c903 on 11/26/2002 10:21:58

Edited by - c903 on 11/26/2002 15:33:38

RE: Slick Trick broadhead deflection tests completed
 

Thanks for the test and info 5shot!:)

RE: Slick Trick broadhead deflection tests completed
 

5shot, I appreciate all the trouble you go to, to conduct your unscientific evaluations of broadheads and related stuff. Does c903 refute all your findings or just this one? Has he been shooting cadavers or dead deer. What are the results of his scientific tests? Please don't let this guy deter you from conducting tests the way you do it. Just tell it like it is and forget all the tehnical crap.<img src=icon_smile_clown.gif border=0 align=middle>

LIVE FREE OR DIE

RE: Slick Trick broadhead deflection tests completed
 

lawnfarmer

Re: <BLOCKQUOTE id=quote<font size=1 face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>....and forget all the tehnical crap <hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' size=2 id=quote>

If you choose to base your choice of what is quality and what will perform well in the field, on a test that uses an improper medium and model, a test void of &quot;technical crap,&quot; that, indeed, is your choice. Others may be more selective.

I am sure 5shot's effort is appreciated and his intent is well-meant. However, possibly hurting someone's ego must always take last place behind facts and validity.

RE: Slick Trick broadhead deflection tests completed
 

c903 HAs a point. I don't think he is trying to refute 5shots other tests, just this one. He IS right on many parts, and it would take a LOT of research to find very accurate numbers.
That said, I think if we are worried about it, we should take some time and look at the design of our broadheads. Looking at 4 VERY different heads, we can see that while there is SOME differances, they are NOT all that great.
I have posted some (REALLY BAD webcam style) pics showing some ROUGH measurments. Logic would indicate that heads with higher angles should deflect more easily. That is, if the blade hits before the tip, it is likely to deflect dramaticly.
While the slick tricks were high (32 degrees) they were not THAT far from the Muzzy (22 blades with a 26 degree angle on the tip) and better than the shockwave (35/41 as it opens)
The question is: Does 10 degrees make THAT much of a differance? I'll leave that for discussion.
BTW....the web page to see the ROUGH measurmentsis
http://webpages.charter.net/acerf1000r


Edited by - Stealth_Force on 11/26/2002 02:24:58

RE: Slick Trick broadhead deflection tests completed
 

Oh boy! I am in over my head now<img src=icon_smile_clown.gif border=0 align=middle>:) c903, I agree with you that deer hide and luon board are not a deer. It does not react to the shot, it is not lubricated throughout, and it doens't have the bumbs and &quot;holes&quot; a real deer would. My test was not meant to actually say what would happen in a deer. I have been around way to long and seen some very strange things in animals. The test does however show how two differnt broadheads compare in the identical material, shot at the same angle, from the same distance at the same time. The deer hide was fresh, and very slippery( it had been rained on). My point with these tests is that I feel with good shot choices the Slick Trick heads should preform well. I can see any head deflecting on to steep and angle, in fact I once had a shot gun slug &quot;ride&quot; along the ribcage on steep quartering shot. Broke every rib going up and lodging in the shoulder. I cut an artery runing down the front leg and recoverd the deer. If a shot gun slug can do that, I know a broadhead tipped arrow will! My point to all of this was to see if their was some kind of major defect in the slick trick's that made quartering shots impossible, or not recomended. I think I showed that to some degree any way, that they work pretty well. Yes they did skip a little more than a more &quot;conventional&quot; head, but only an 1&quot;, which in my mind is not all that great considering the steep angle. I don't dispute any of what you say really, but like in my broadhead tests, the materials and information provided only show how the heads do compared to one another in identical materials. Take this knowledge, based on what I know from the deer I have killed with a bow amd similer broadheads, and I will make a semi-educated guess that the Slick Trick heads will work fine with a properly tuned bow and arrow combination and eithical shot placement. Now, thier will always be the exception, and like I said before, a lot of strange things can happen in living animals once and arrow strikes.

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

RE: Slick Trick broadhead deflection tests completed
 

Stealth Force is exactly right on this one- blade angle and the distance from the blades to the tip of the head will determine how much an arrow *might* plane (I say might because weird s**t happens, as we all know). Some of you will recall that over the last several years, quite a few people have posted about having Spitfires planing inside of deer just like the Slick Trick did. I had it happen twice with Spitfires- once having the arrow come out the same side it went in on a quartering away shot. Like the ST's, Spitfires have a steep blade angle.

The steeper a blade is, the more force that is needed for it to cut. If only one blade is cutting- and one blade always hits first on an angled shot- the arrow will veer away from that blade UNLESS THE TIP IS EMBEDDED deeply enough to prevent this from happening. When you have a short tip, like the Slick Tricks, the blade may hit the deer before the tip does. Viola- it planes. Think about it this way- if the broadhead blades were halfway up the arrow, it would be impossible for it to plane because so much arrow would be in the deer before the blades made contact.

5 shot- your tests are always appreciated. You are the reason I switched to Snypers, which I should add might have the lowest angle of any broadhead out there- which should mean less of a chance of planing.

RE: Slick Trick broadhead deflection tests completed
 

5-shot what type of steep angle are we talking about in your tests? Was it greater then 45 degrees.

In general, I would only recommend up to a 45 degree on deer anyway.

Again, thanks for your tests. And thank you to C903 also.

[Deleted]
 

[Deleted by Admins]

RE: Slick Trick broadhead deflection tests completed
 

One last thing to consider on this issue is the fact that the orientation of the blades when the arrow contacts the deer (or the test target). A 3 blade broadhead is (effectively) triangular if you look at it straight on- a 4 blade head is square. On a quartering shot, exactly how the broadhead is rotated when it hits the deer could affect how much it planes.

Using Stealth's pictures- if he rotated the heads a bit, the angle would decrease between the blades. On a 3 blade head- there are only 3 spots on the broadhead where a single blade would contact the rib cage. On a 4 blade head there is a greater chance that one blade will happen to be oriented on the &quot;short&quot; side- causing planing. I'm picking nits here, but it's interesting to think about. At the very least, you would have to take several shots so that you would have the broadhead strike at each angle in order to know all the planing possibilities. It's impossible, of course.

So, in theory, a two bladed head would have the least chance of having a single projecting blade strike a rib and begin to plane....

RE: Slick Trick broadhead deflection tests completed
 

Well I think I will throw in my 4 cents worth, the first 2 cents are that I concur with what PatapscoMike said in regards to number of blades increasing the probability of planing, now for the second 2 cents worth, it seems to me a mechanical with a long distance between the tip of the tip and the blades would be the least likely to plane of them all.

5shot keep up the good work, the real bummer is that there is no way to replicate every possible scenario of a broadhead striking/penetrating a deer.

The Tazman aka Martin Price
Founder and President of
Virginia Disabled Outdoorsmen Club

RE: Slick Trick broadhead deflection tests completed
 

Yeah Taz- except most mech's have blades that need to swing open from front to back before they get to that good angle. On a perpendicular shot the design functions flawlessly. But on a sharp angle shot, , they are being forced into flesh on the short side (at 200+ fps) as they open, and keep in mind that the leading edges of these blades are dull (the part that grabs and opens the head)... I think they start to plane as that short-side blade swings open.

Again, this is why I like the rearward opening blades of the Snyper. The tip bites first, then the blades just slide out backwards without having to pivot around 180 degrees.

RE: Slick Trick broadhead deflection tests completed
 

Thanks for the tests.

You got to love this board where else can you get these kind of scientific results.

c903 thanks for taking me back to coefficient of friction:) (yes I had to look down to his post to see how to spell it)
I would have to agree with you that this was not a very scientific test.

At the same time I agree with 5 shot that it was a good way to compare two broadheads on the same type of material. I think the results proved that these two part. heads are very simular.

I just feel like agreeing with everyone today. Maybe it was that coyote I shot on the way to work today.<img src=icon_smile_big.gif border=0 align=middle>

&quot; Anyone can be a father, but it takes a real man to be a Dad&quot;

RE: Slick Trick broadhead deflection tests completed
 

I am pleased to find that there are readers who do seek the other sides of the stories, and clearly understand that debates arising from challenges are not always meant to be (just) argumentative and confrontational.

I never said that 5Shot should discontinue his testing of broadheads. However, in my opinion, many of the tests performed and the results obtained are good for entertainment but are not comparable or compatible with real life events. When design, performance, and quality control is the issue, the best information is information obtained from many sources and opinions; especially, information obtained from actual performance under actual conditions.

5Shot, I understand what you are saying. However, the performance of broadhead shot into a hide, green or dry, draped across a lightweight board, cannot possibly simulate the body of a live animal, nor the varied forces, external and internal, a live animal's body will impart upon the broadhead and shaft.

The one important action that would be difficult to reproduce, almost impossible, when using your model, it that when the broadhead was shot into the deer by huntmup, the shaft also entered the deer's body. The external/internal forces imparted upon the shaft would directly affect the action of the broadhead.

How different brands and designs of broadheads perform in a side-by-side test on a medium they were not designed for, does not mean that the results will be the same under actual conditions. The results under real conditions could greatly differ, even be reversed.

I have never used a &quot;Slick Trick&quot; broadhead and cannot testify that the head is good, bad, or somewhere in between. However, I would not be surprised to find that the large and steeply angled blades could cause a deflection problem if the penetration is angled.

Additionally, I would venture to assume that the short ferrule and large blades would decrease the KE rather quickly. Once the KE is drastically reduced, the cutting/penetration ability will suffer and can cause the broadhead to stop or to deflect into and through a path of lesser resistance.

Last, I have always been leery of large blades having large windows, designed to reduce planing. When penetrating hair, tissue, and tallow, blades having large windows have a greater tendency to gather body material and can immensely impede penetration and cutting.


Edited by - c903 on 11/26/2002 10:18:48

RE: Slick Trick broadhead deflection tests completed
 

PatapscoMike I had not thought of that, I will have to check out the Snyper's for next year, I had my first bowkill this year using spitfires, they did one heck of a job, put it was a perfect broadside shot.

c903 I totally concur that it would be very difficult without spending thousands of dollars to emulate an actual deer, money that I am sure 5 shot can not afford, I am also in total agreement that 5 shot's test are not gospel in regards to simulating broadhead performance on a live deer.

5 shot the test you do on broadheads are very informative and do have an effect on my choice of broadhead, do I shoot the same you do hunting? No, but I have used your data to decide between one broadhead versus another.

Oh yea, BTW I am enjoying this thread a lot of good info, let me throw a question out there for some more knowledgeable than I, would the planing chances be greatly reduced by moving the blades further back from the tip? It seems to me it would, but that brings up another potential issue, how great of an effect would this have on arrow aerodynamics?

The Tazman aka Martin Price
Founder and President of
Virginia Disabled Outdoorsmen Club

RE: Slick Trick broadhead deflection tests completed
 

Tazman, and PatapscoMike,
You will note that the mech head I have on the webpage shows the angle from the tip to the tips of the blades in different stages of opening.
Starting out, the mech head was at a maximum angle of 32 degrees (similar to the S/T) but growing to 41, then dropping back to 21.
IMHO, the problem with the deflection issue is when the head hits bone. On deployment, the skin will give as the head opens (blade opens about 1/8&quot; before dropping back to a shallow angle).
Another benefit of the mech head, was that when shot through bone, the aluminum ring that stops the blades would get hit hard enough to make grooves when the blades hit it. this allowed the blades to extend further rearwards (more shallow angle...smaller hole). ON the head I tested, that was worth a few more degrees taken off (NOT the one in the pic).
That said, the Muzzy was at almost the SAME angle as the mech head, and the cutting edge head was better still.
Oddly enough, in my tests the mech head and the slick trick did best in penetration through bone. Most likely due to the large tip on the mech head allowing the rest of the head, and arrow to follow unrestricted, and the short didtance from the tip to the blades on the slick trick allowing the hole to be made large very quickly as well.
Gimme a Muzzy with the point from the shockwave, and you'll have a nearly perfect head (In MY book anyway :-) )

RE: Slick Trick broadhead deflection tests completed
 

c903, I should not have included the &quot;technical crap&quot; in my reply. I read the post at 1 o'clock in the morning and it appeared that you were attacking a friend. Am curious to know what you do. I am a welder in an 820 meg. power plant and deal with -------- engineers all the time. This is a very interesting subject. terry<img src=icon_smile_clown.gif border=0 align=middle>

LIVE FREE OR DIE

RE: Slick Trick broadhead deflection tests completed
 

I am retired. Although my professional duties covered a wide spectrum of applicable functions, of which analysis and theorem were crucial and often performed on a daily basis, criminal investigations -investigator and command, crime scene processing and forensics, and evidence technician were the primary roles I fulfilled.

I am conditioned to look at all six sides of a cube and try to find a seventh. Additionally, unless what I see or read is registered in my brain as an indisputable fact, I rarely take anything at face value. I am helpless in avoiding picking at something that raises a question until the question is satisfactorily answered and the facts, or near facts, are established.

However, in the end, common sense and awareness of what is realistic and what is practical is my usual guide.

Now you know why I can be a PITA (pain in the ass). I cannot help it.:) Also, hunting with two nephews, one a mechanical engineer and one an engineer and pilot, and having a long-time large animal vet for a close friend, is not good for my problem. :)

PS: Speaking of a cube having six sides, should not the edges also be considered. :)

RE: Slick Trick broadhead deflection tests completed
 

I'm sitting here, thinking about the responses that I've read.

5 shot, thanks for the testing. Although I admit (along with you and c903) that the materials used in the test were not indicative and/or duplicate of real life conditions of a live animal, what you've done is side by side comparison uner CONTROLLED conditions (something that would be almost impossible to perform in real life).

My question is more geared towards c903. You've stated &quot;In fact, the medium you used would have had a coefficient of friction that could have assisted an angled penetration.&quot; In laymans terms, what 5 shot did would have increased the penetration??? How do you figure that? Stretch a blanket out over a board and try to make it deflect under pressure from your finger. Now take that same blanket and lay it on grass (with natural peaks/valleys) as you've described a live animals rib cage has, and try the same thing with your finger. Which method would indicate easier deflection of the blanket?

What 5 shot did was prove that both of these BH's will perform well under conditions that will almost certanly never occur in the wild (I've seen no deer with boards as rib cages), and that under real life conditions, both BH's 'should' perform OK.

*Just a quick note, I don't personally shoot either BH, but am very grateful to the testing that is performed here by others to inform all of us.

JMHO

Jim.

RE: Slick Trick broadhead deflection tests completed
 

b]jcray[/b]

I am not positive, but I believe I understand what your point is when you say:

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote<font size=1 face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>Stretch a blanket out over a board and try to make it deflect under pressure from your finger. Now take that same blanket and lay it on grass (with natural peaks/valleys) as you've described a live animals rib cage has, and try the same thing with your finger. Which method would indicate easier deflection of the blanket?<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' size=2 id=quote>

If I do understand your point, you must have misunderstood my analysis. What you stated in the above quote is not relevant. I was not talking about the hide (blanket) deflecting. Additionally, in no way could the lumps and bumps in grass simulate a ribcage.

You will have to explain this statement further. I would like to respond but I cannot pin down your point.

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=1 face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>What 5 shot did was prove that both of these BH's will perform well under conditions that will almost certanly never occur in the wild (I've seen no deer with boards as rib cages), and that under real life conditions, both BH's 'should' perform OK.<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' size=2 id=quote>

RE: Slick Trick broadhead deflection tests completed
 

&quot;However, in the end, common sense and awareness of what is realistic and what is practical is my usual guide.&quot;

c903,

With that in mind what are your thoughts regarding deflection tendencies of the Slick Trick versus a more conventional head like the muzzy or a thunderhead? TIA

RE: Slick Trick broadhead deflection tests completed
 

OK, I am very tight, but I have saved up and I have another 2 cents on this topic, which is still generating interest. First, in response to the other thread where it was said I took it personally. You're dang right I took it personally. Anybody who doesn't take a lost animal personally doesn't need to be in the broadhead business, and the day I don't I will get out. If my heads prove to be responsible I will take responsibility and take action. But I won't have a knee jerk reaction to one instance. One thing I like about John and Michelle Muz is they take it personally also. I was killing some time and cruising the web in the last couple weeks or so, and there was some guy posting that he had shot a couple deer broadside with Muzzies and he didn't penetrate, so he switched heads because Muzzy wouldn't penetrate. I figure either the guy had bad arrow flight, or the animal moved, or he was just one really unlucky dude, or all of the above. Other rational posts agreed. I doubt Muz jumped off a cliff about it. One thing that will never change is if somebody loses an animal, they blame something. I understand, I do it too. Nobody wants to think they are responsible for losing an animal. And sometimes, like if an animal moves just right, there is nothing to blame, stuff happens. Thats why its fair chase and we don't use poison arrows. One study reports 80% of wounded animals with a bow recover. Thats good news. And like somebody said, the scavengers that feed on a carcass have to eat too. Speaking of Muzzy, I remember when I first saw their very first ads in Western Bowhunter in 84 or 85 I suppose. They were really weird looking at the time with the large snout. People looked at them and said you could see that with a tip that large they wouldn't penetrate. And I suppose somebody tried some and had a fluke hit. I remember Muz saying at the shows he would have to trip people to try to slow them down at his booth. It seems they didn't start selling much until the 90s, he must have tripped enough people to get enough using them so the penetration myth was stopped. The point is what people perceive as logical is not always so. Reminds me of the test I still see people refer to when comparing a &quot;cut on contact&quot; head with a tip like mine. The reason I put cut on contact like that is when I push my head through paper I see the tip make a neat &quot;X&quot;. Seems like it is cutting to me. With four edges it cuts an X whereas a 2 edge tip cuts a - . Anyway, the test I refer to is where a traditional 2 blade is pushed through a hide and the force is measured, and then a chisel tip is pushed through and the force is measured. The 2 blade wins and it takes a lot of force to get the chisel tip through. Problem is it is a static test instead of dynamic, and that makes a big difference. The next time you hear somebody mention that test, ask them if they will put a hide on and let you shoot at them with the chisel tip with less force than was required to push it through the hide. If somebody ever takes you up on that, call me, I want to watch. But back to the subject at hand. As far as 5shots test, it is true that the test medium wasn't an animal. Unless everybody chips in for a test herd of goats I doubt that will change. One way to look at it, Quincy, is there are 3 possibilities of the tests validity. The test is easier than a live animal, the same as a live animal, or harder than a live animal. All there is, is speculation both ways. Call me biased, but at first glance it seems like a reasonable try 5shot. I would be curious how a Rocky TI would test, which is a bit similar to mine, and how a Steelhead 100 would fare, with the blade tips. Frankly I think if deflection was very easy on an animal you would hear of a good number of reports with those heads. The reason I mentioned the email on the other thread was, while we are theorizing, to raise the possibility of bad arrow flight at short range. I believe, however, that Shane said he had fixed it. I can tell you I was so amazed when he emailed me that info that I quizzed him then and later I sent another email wondering about it and he said it was the same and his bow was tuned. So you can understand when the only guy who has ever had arrow flight like that comes up as the only guy that had mentioned deflection. Shane, I hope you are not one of those &quot;really unlucky dudes&quot;. But I still don't see evidence of more than one deer where an arrow looked like it MIGHT have deflected, and if the animal turned it just went where it was pointed. The first doe, for instance, in the email sounded like a perfectly performing broadhead. Read the email again. If I remember correctly, on a quartering shot, the arrow nicked the ham and came out behind the front shoulder. How does an arrow deflect on a quartering shot and come out exactly where it should?? I think there may also be a reference to a severe or extreme angle or something. At any rate, what was later posted about the first doe was different, after, as Shane put it, he got to thinking. Reminds me of shooting pool, think long and think wrong. LOL Memories of a misspent youth. Just kidding, pool is a great teacher of physics. Anyway, I still don't see on the last deer evidence of deflection. Anybody who has seen the results of my head will tell you there is plenty of evidence of where they go, even if they were deflecting. An outfitter in Colorado called me yesterday to say some hunters from Vegas took a couple of big mule deer and he had never seen such holes. He wanted to know about them and gave me the number of a big shop by him so they could get some. Thats mostly how I sold heads this year, word of mouth. The guys in Vegas got their heads from a shop that learned about them from some Jersey guys, who I suspect were there gambling and stopped in. My heads are also doing great everywhere, including Canada, where distributors tried them this year and are itching to get them next year. And I just spoke to Center Sports in Columbia Ct, who sold hundreds of packs this year. I asked him about reports and deflection. He said no deflection problem reported, just field point flight and dead animals with big holes in them. Thats been the standard response. So will I change my heads? Maybe. But I have had people tell me in a threatening manner not to change a thing. If I do change them I hope they were kidding, but they seemed rather serious. But the good thing is my design is the best because my blade locking system allows me to make a head as long or short, skinny or fat or whatever shape I want, and my blades as thick as I please. Other designs have inherent limits. If I want I can easily put a gooseneck on my head, and I might, not saying I will, but I might even if there is absolutely no deflection problem. If people fancy the looks for whatever imagined reason. Kind of like a woman with a nightie, nothing is really different but it seems better. Well, I think I ended up giving you all a nickels worth, hope you don't get eyestrain, and have a nice Thanksgiving, the Owl.

RE: Slick Trick broadhead deflection tests completed
 

Oldhootowl,
Thanx for the post. That really helped me. Now that we have more feedback (concider the source...yeah, but I trust you) we can can look at a larger sampling.
MY fear was that I heard VERY little about these heads from people that actually USED them. Then the only reports were the same as mine. I honestly beleive that my animal could have, or was turning AS the head hit him...a no win for ANY head.
Like I said, your heads have outpenetrated ANY head I have tried (including steel force, and Shockwave and Muzzy).
To be honest though, I am looking at going to a slightly heavier head next year (going from CX 200 to 300, and from 60-65 lbs...need a little more head weight for proper spine). I would LOVE to see a SLIGHTLY longer Slick Trick....but then again, 32 degrees IS a pretty steep shot.
I can't say a slick trick is LESS likely to deflect....but can say ALL heads CAN deflect. making it a TOUCH longer would make me feel better. And if you have read many of my posts, you know that I think CONFIDENCE is more important than anything else when it comes to accuracy.
Thanx for making an inovative head!!!
I have re-concidered, and WILL try the head again for our late Wisconsin bow season...wish me luck!

RE: Slick Trick broadhead deflection tests completed
 

I've been gone (hunting) for 4 days and there's just WAY too much here to reply to but I have to seeing as how I'm the troublemaker<img src=icon_smile_blackeye.gif border=0 align=middle>

Gary - what you read (and re-read) was exactly right - and I didn't change my mind on what happened with the doe - and I evidently didn't make myself clear enough. I shot a Doe early in the season in SD, 1/4ing away STEEPER than any other shot this year and the arrow nicked the ham & PASSED THRU behind the front shoulder - 40 yards and it was over. (I never even checked her for a 'slide' because she was dead and there was no reason for concern & I didn't notice anything abnormal)

Several weeks later I was off on a week+ hunt in MN - the first deer I took there was a Doe 1/4ing (not as steep as the SD Doe) at a dozen or so yards. This doe (again) went 40 yards.

The next morning I shot the Y/Spike I lost (and photo'd)

That day I checked out the doe & WITNESSED THE SLIDE (again - about 3 or 4 inches past a couple ribs THEN into the cavity & complete passthru).

The next day I X'd a spike/Y THRU THE HEART at 43 yards (yep - perfect shot - deer calm/relaxed, perfect broadside, range certainty 100% - and the only reason I could TAKE that shot at THAT range was the ACCURACY of the head)

The next day I recovered and photo'd the spike/Y that the wolves munched (yep, they gotta eat too but I'd prefer they dine on housecats<img src=icon_smile_evil.gif border=0 align=middle>

A few weeks later I fill my SD Buck tag & after skinning the deer I realize how lucky I was. (maybe I am that darn unlucky!)

So - there's a re-cap of what I've taken THIS YEAR with the heads - there is no 'imagination' or 'putting it to thinking' my facts as stated haven't changed - the doe I witnessed the 'slide' on wasn't the doe that I e-mailed you about earlier.

Also - just to re-iterate my bow is tuned well and I am MORE than willing to take responsibility for a lost animal. I lost a deer my first year hunting and I lost a deer last year. Last year was a JUNK shot and I swore that would never happen again - that's why I've taken over 30,000 shots this year and that's why I was so impressed with the ST's - my broadhead scores didn't DECREASE from fielpoints.

C903 & 5 Shot I thank you for your input - I had to stop reading C903's post about 10 times to re-focus - YOWZA!!! Must be a relative of Einstein or something - you'd think a guy that darn smart would know better than to hang out of a tree chasing critters!<img src=icon_smile_wink.gif border=0 align=middle> Thanks for taking the time to get all of us smarter!

PatapscoMike's post struck home - with the deer I lost and the buck I recoverd you could PLAINLY see the ribs 'cut' as the head slid between the hide and the ribs - meaning there was a single blade perpendicular to the ribs, at the maximum (worst) angle.

Maybe I am that unlucky <img src=icon_smile_sad.gif border=0 align=middle>

I'm leaving for the woods again tomorrow at noon - have a good thanksgiving folks & I expect this thread to be on page 1 when I get back to a PC on the 2nd.




Aim small miss small

RE: Slick Trick broadhead deflection tests completed
 

buckfvr

Re:

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote<font size=1 face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>With that in mind what are your thoughts regarding deflection tendencies of the Slick Trick versus a more conventional head like the muzzy or a thunderhead? TIA<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' size=2 id=quote>

I have never used a Slick Trick or Thunderhead, but I did shoot Muzzys for a couple of years. Personally, I am not comfortable with the high profile and steep angle of the Slick Trick blades. However, without proper testing I cannot say that the design of the Slick Trick blades could definately cause the head to deflect, or to deflect at a greater rate than any other head might/would under the right conditions.

Being that it would be too expensive to purchase a herd of goats for live testing, and would cause an uprising, I will evaluate the head by reports of performance under actual field conditions such as was provided by &quot;huntmup.&quot;

RE: Slick Trick broadhead deflection tests completed
 

I think the only true way to test the heads is in the field or as some other have said purchasing goats for that purpose which would most likely not be a popular idea. The only other reasonable thing I could think of would be to take a recently deceased roadkill and hang it and use it for testing. Granted the blood will most likely have settled and coagulated but you would still be using flesh and bone. I have considered trying this myself, but have no place to do it and I'd probably be divorced before I'm even married.<img src=icon_smile_blush.gif border=0 align=middle>

5shot, thanks for the tests. The thing that I like about your tests is that while they are not very close to a real life scenario (I don't hunt many tires or steel drums<img src=icon_smile_wink.gif border=0 align=middle>) they are comparitive of other heads on the market. That is valuable information to see how a head stacks up to its competition and again I thank you for it.

c903, my thoughts were echoed in your initial post (although you said it much more eloquently than I could have hoped to). I kind of figured that you had a background in forensic science. It is a subject that is of great interest to me and I have researched the scientific side of it quite a bit. Unfortunately, I am unable to detach the human emotion side thus not allowing me to pursue it as a career. If you could, please shoot me an email. There are some things regarding the subject I would like to discuss with you.

jcrayford, I think I know what c903 was referring to when he said the medium would assist in penetration (c903, please correct me if I'm wrong). The board that was used was a dry wood particle board. If you have some at home, try pushing a broadhead tipped arrow almost parallel to the board with a slight angle toward it. Once the blades catch in the dry wood the force of you pushing will cause the tip of the head to go into the board as well. Now if this were to occur with the force of an arrow leaving a bow the arrow would penetrate the wood. Now imagine what happens when you are butchering a deer. When your knife hits a slick rounded bone it does not catch as the broadhead blades did in the wood, but conversely it skips and deflects in the direction the force takes it. The same thing would happen with a broadhead unless there is a reduced angle and enough force for it to smash or penetrate through the bone. I hope this makes sense.

Gary, any word on when the 125 grain heads will be available? I'd be interested in giving them a shot, but I need to beef up my arrows and need the extra weight to get my FOC right.

RE: Slick Trick broadhead deflection tests completed
 

Huntingbry

I am definitely not an &quot;Einstein&quot; type as insinuated by &quot;huntmup,&quot; nor do I have a degree in any orf the forensic sciences. I am trained in the field and application of crime/death related forensics and have 27 years of exposure and &quot;hands on&quot; experience.

Unless technical and in-depth science is required to detect, hypothesize, or solve (answer), common sense is a solid and proven system of knowledge. It does not always require a degree and a &quot;papered&quot; scientist to conclude or to hypothesize.

You have just confirmed what I have just said, Huntingbry. Using common sense, based on your knowledge and experience of personal past events and experiences, you have commendably and clearly articulated a theory that is valid and, yes, was what I was describing.

Keep in mind though, without scientific facts our theory remains just that, a theory. Now it is up to others to challenge and try to discredit our theory. That is one way the best probability of an unknown is determined.

Reminds me of a story:

A college professor was driving on a back-road, and was passing by a state mental institution when a tire on his vehicle went flat.

He pulled over and began to change the tire. While doing so, he tipped the hubcap that was holding the lug nuts and all of the nuts rolled into a sewer opening that was situated at the very spot he was changing the tire.

Perplexed, the professor walked up and down the road trying to determine a solution to his problem. While doing so, the professor noticed that there was a gentleman leaning against a tree on the institution's property whom was quietly observing him. The professor noticed that the man was attired in pajamas and a robe, and, therefore, correctly concluded the man was a patient in the institution.

After several minutes had passed, the patient approached the professor and advised him that he (patient) was aware of the professor's dilemma and had a solution. The professor was slightly agitated but decided to humor the patient to avoid a confrontation and to get rid of him. The professor, with a tone of intellect arrogance, asked the patient what he (patient) thought the solution was.

The patient told the professor to remove one lug nut from the other three tires and use them to mount the tire that the professor was installing. Then the professor could slowly drive into town and purchase a new set of lug nuts. The professor was amazed but did as the patient advised.

As the professor was about leave, he saw that the patient was still leaning against the tree. The professor asked him, &quot;Are you a patient in this institution?&quot; The patient replied, &quot;Yes, I am.&quot; The professor then said, &quot;How is it that you are a patient in a mental institution when you were able to solve a problem that I could not?&quot; The patient replied, &quot;I am in here because I am nuts, not because I am stupid!&quot;

RE: Slick Trick broadhead deflection tests completed
 

c903 I love that professor story, it has never ceased to amaze me how some of the smartest people I know are also the craziest!!!

The Tazman aka Martin Price
Founder and President of
Virginia Disabled Outdoorsmen Club

RE: Slick Trick broadhead deflection tests completed
 

Ditto, Taz!

RE: Slick Trick broadhead deflection tests completed
 

c903, It's 1 o'clock again. Have finally figured out what is going on here. I think I understand and it isn't as complex today. You seem to have lightened up a little. I would bet that you are a pretty eloquent speaker. I think huntingbry did a pretty good job of enlightening me on the subject too. Still very interesting. terry<img src=icon_smile_clown.gif border=0 align=middle>

LIVE FREE OR DIE

RE: Slick Trick broadhead deflection tests completed
 

lawnfarmer

I could not have lightened up, for I was never heavy. :) The absence of tone of voice is the one great defect of text-only forums. Too often, the reader mistakenly hears sarcasm, hostility, and ridicule.

No, I do not consider myself an eloquent speaker. However, my profession required I be articulate in speech and in writing. In my personal life I prefer to remain &quot;earthy.&quot;

PS: Do not pardoned me yet, I may not be finished. :)


Edited by - c903 on 11/28/2002 01:08:58

RE: Slick Trick broadhead deflection tests completed
 

The Slick Trick and the Rocky Ti have similar tip and blade geometry. If one deflects the other should too, neither have a deflection reputation.

RE: Slick Trick broadhead deflection tests completed
 

Thanks for your time and effort 5shot . I allways value your oppinion . I shot 2 deer last year both broadside shoots both down within 30 yards . These heads do some serious damage , they are not the sharpests heads I' ve ever seen , and that may be why some have had troubles . They need sharpening . They are very accurate . Oldhootowl maybe the guy who complained about muzzies penitration was useing the same heads for 3d targets and did' nt replace the blades before hunting . I cant see how there would be a penitration problem with a muzzy head with brand new blades in it , that is unless hes shooting armidilos they are allmost bullet proof . My friend shot one with a vortex minimax and it just ricoched off of his back , I later nailed him with a magnus .