Cut on Contact?
#52
RE: Cut on Contact?
I've always used COC, except one season. But certainly not opposed to new ideas.
I use what I use (Muzzy's) for one reason. When I look at what's making the way for the business side of those razors......I like what I see with them. Sure....if you're a perfect shot......and you can positively be assured of placing your broadhead tip between two ribs......or positively know you're not going to hit a shoulder.......then that sharp point is great.
If you're like me....and only wish you were that good....."I" like the fact that I've got the MASS (and I also use 125gr) to get through bone when I'm not perfect (and I was glad I had it, last year).
Would I have taken as many deer last year with a COC head? Maybe. I just look at it like this........
If I were going to try to bust through an animal's ribcage......what would I rather utilize?? If Ionly hit flesh......it's a moot point.
I'm also not trying to say thatCOC heads won't cut through bone. Not at all. I just look at the tools that are available to do the job.....and the chisel point I utilizeappears better suited for the job of going through bone. Also....like I said earlier.....my setup may be different from yours. My arrow's packing a pretty goodwallop.
Good luck.
#53
RE: Cut on Contact?
"Easton 2215s GGII with Old Satellite Titans, whichare pretty heavy. (I want to say 150-175 gr.?) All-in-All, pretty heavy set-up which equals SLOW. This is all from memory....Plenty ofKE for it's day."
I have read quite a few posts about bow and arrow performance, virtually all of which reference Kinetic Energy and the criteria for judgement. Certainly that is an important consideration. However, when discussing penetration, as in this post, kinetic enerty is not the appropriate criteria for consideration - momentum is! To use an anology, suppose you are sitting at an intersection in your truck, when you are hit, head on, by a Volkswagen traveling at 75 mph. Certainly a bad deal, however consider you are at the same intersection in the same truck and are involved in, yet another, accident. Only this time you are hit head on by a train traveling at the same 75 mph. You have a chance of survival in the wreck with the VW, on the other hand, the wreck with the train and - hello St. Peter. The difference in the argument is the momentum of the two objects. One take home argument in that analogy for the bowhunter is that there is a price to pay in trading mass for speed. The reason you had good luck with your old set-up is the great momentunof your projectile.All that said (yes it is a mouthful),don't just get an 85 grain broadhead simply because they go faster without being aware of the fact that in so doing one pays the price of loss of momentum.Momentum= penetration. Penetration= dead critter!!
I have read quite a few posts about bow and arrow performance, virtually all of which reference Kinetic Energy and the criteria for judgement. Certainly that is an important consideration. However, when discussing penetration, as in this post, kinetic enerty is not the appropriate criteria for consideration - momentum is! To use an anology, suppose you are sitting at an intersection in your truck, when you are hit, head on, by a Volkswagen traveling at 75 mph. Certainly a bad deal, however consider you are at the same intersection in the same truck and are involved in, yet another, accident. Only this time you are hit head on by a train traveling at the same 75 mph. You have a chance of survival in the wreck with the VW, on the other hand, the wreck with the train and - hello St. Peter. The difference in the argument is the momentum of the two objects. One take home argument in that analogy for the bowhunter is that there is a price to pay in trading mass for speed. The reason you had good luck with your old set-up is the great momentunof your projectile.All that said (yes it is a mouthful),don't just get an 85 grain broadhead simply because they go faster without being aware of the fact that in so doing one pays the price of loss of momentum.Momentum= penetration. Penetration= dead critter!!
#54
RE: Cut on Contact?
Sure....if you're a perfect shot......and you can positively be assured of placing your broadhead tip between two ribs......or positively know you're not going to hit a shoulder.......then that sharp point is great.
I'm also not trying to say thatCOC heads won't cut through bone. Not at all.
#55
RE: Cut on Contact?
OK, I'm confused.
#57
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location:
Posts: 1,394
RE: Cut on Contact?
Dude,
They'll argue about anything!
The chisel was created because the COC's fail (when they hit bone, often, but not always).
You're basically going to hit one of two things or both; soft tissue or bone. One arrow head is really good at hitting one of the two, the other is really good at hitting both. You pick!
They'll argue about anything!
The chisel was created because the COC's fail (when they hit bone, often, but not always).
You're basically going to hit one of two things or both; soft tissue or bone. One arrow head is really good at hitting one of the two, the other is really good at hitting both. You pick!
#58
RE: Cut on Contact?
I understand clearly what you are saying here:
I'm also not trying to say thatCOC heads won't cut through bone. Not at all.
Not so clear here.
Sure....if you're a perfect shot......and you can positively be assured of placing your broadhead tip between two ribs......or positively know you're not going to hit a shoulder.......then that sharp point is great.
#60
RE: Cut on Contact?
Sure....if you're a perfect shot......and you can positively be assured of placing your broadhead tip between two ribs......or positively know you're not going to hit a shoulder.......then that sharp point is great.
I've stated that "I" have more confidence in a chisel point (or its' equivalent) when it comes to direct contact with something other than flesh. That is ALL.