RE: Penetration Target Lies
 

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote<font size=1 face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>For a deer, on the other hand, the broadhead cuts a hole for the shaft. The forces slowing down the arrow traveling through the deer are viscous forces - like a boat plowing through water - and cutting forces. For both of these the forces are proportional to velocity and the penetration is directly proportional to momentum.

<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' size=2 id=quote>

Well that being said a narrower boat that is the same length, weighs exactly the same, with the exact same motor will run faster than a wider boat! So why wouldn't the arrow with less surface area do the same?

Protect your hunting rights, &quot;Spay or neuter a liberal.&quot;

RE: Penetration Target Lies
 

Beprepn why dont you shoot a carbon and then an aluminum and come
back and report your findings. It seems you have your head in the
sand on this issue. Oh. before you shoot the carbon put a secondary
foam backstop behind your target. <img src=icon_smile_wink.gif border=0 align=middle>

RE: Penetration Target Lies
 

You know I sit back and snicker when I read these debates, the only way to ever prove which broadhead is better or which arrow is better is to clone about 5-6 thousand goats or sheep, this is to ensure they all are the same, shoot them in the exact same spot with the same bow from the exact same distance every time and you will have some true results to compare, until then we will argue! I do not care what you shoot into it will not accuratley emulate a living animal.

Up until the end of this season I shot a 20 year old bow with 20 year old aluminum arrows, with new broadheads and killed my first deer with one shot. I now have a bow that is far faster than my old one, it has not drawn first blood yet, I may switch to a heavier arrow if the old ones do not group well enough for me, but for now I will stick with aluminum simply because they do fine and are far less expensive.

The Tazman aka Martin Price
Proud father of a Devil Dog

RE: Penetration Target Lies
 

Personally I shoot fairly heavy aluminums. Carbons are fine too, if that's what you like. IMO, it doesn't matter which I'm shooting.....the broadhead is cutting a good sized hole, and the shaft just follows through. Live animals aren't made of foam.
It becomes a point of how far in the ground do you want your arrow to stick, after the passthrough.

Taz is right....it's a never ending arguement, just like the fixed vs. mechanical debate....(fixed of course <img src=icon_smile_wink.gif border=0 align=middle><img src=icon_smile_big.gif border=0 align=middle>)

RE: Penetration Target Lies
 

beprepen, If you don't mind me asking what is your set up and how much KE are you getting?

RE: Penetration Target Lies
 

beprepen,

Where did the lies come in? You seemed to supoort those so called lies by your own admission. Let me recap for you:

You implied that it was a lie that carbons pentrate further into a target and then you explained to us why carbons pentrate into a target better?<img src=icon_smile_question.gif border=0 align=middle><img src=icon_smile_question.gif border=0 align=middle><img src=icon_smile_question.gif border=0 align=middle><img src=icon_smile_question.gif border=0 align=middle>

Break Down

Your initail satement: Penetration Target Lies

Your Supporting Evidence that it is infact not a lie:
<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote<font size=1 face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>He shows that targets slow arrows primarily by grabbing the shaft. For this kind of a force, penetration does relate to KE - not momentum. Plus carbon arrows have a smaller diameter such that the force slowing them down is less than the force slowing down an aluminum arrow. So, for most commercial targets, extra momentum is little advantage and larger diameter is a big disadvantage.

<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' size=2 id=quote>

Am I missing something?


Protect your hunting rights, &quot;Spay or neuter a liberal.&quot;

RE: Penetration Target Lies
 

Answering all the questions:

I am pretty certain that going to a lighter arrow is almost always a small penalty in down range KE, a somewhat larger penalty in penetration, and a benefit in trajectory.

With modern compounds most of us have enough penetration that we can afford to trade some for a flatter trajectory - and we all do, nobody shoots 1200 grain arrows.

IMHO, carbons are a little better than aluminum. For equal weight, equal spine arrows, the smaller O.D. of carbon arrows is an advantage - how big, I don't know.

For penetrating targets, the smaller O.D. of carbons is usually a big advantage. That's the lie that the target is telling - carbons will not have the same advantage on a deer.

I shoot 602 grain arrows out of a 60# bow and have about 53.5 ft-lbs initial KE, or I did until a couple of weeks ago when I twisted a limb. I plan to replace my bow with a 70# bow and shoot heavy enough arrows that I get good flight out of fixed broadheads - probably about 560 grains to keep the speed below 250fps.

beprepn

RE: Penetration Target Lies
 

I don`t have a preference between carbons and aluminum....they both have their strong points.

I do have a question concerning beprepn`s last statement though.

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote<font size=1 face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote> I plan to replace my bow with a 70# bow and shoot heavy enough arrows that I get good flight out of fixed broadheads - probably about 560 grains to keep the speed below 250fps.

beprepn
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' size=2 id=quote>

Does this mean that fixed blade heads such as my thunderhead 125gr. will not fly accurately at much higher speeds than 250fps?

NRA,UBP,BASS Member
New Stanton,PA

RE: Penetration Target Lies
 

I know my Magnus Stingers flying at 270 are deadly accurate. Maybe a little less forgiving to form flaws than field points, but right there when I am.

Phil.
&quot;Could you guys be quiet, my dad's trying to shoot.&quot;<img src=icon_smile_shock.gif border=0 align=middle>

RE: Penetration Target Lies
 

I prefer using carbons due to the fact they can take more abuse.And also I'd like to ask a ? to Beprepn.You said that a carbon will not pass thru a deer.Do you mean all carbons in general? Because my beman400 ics hunters Have passed thru deer,bear,and elk.at distances of 20 to 40 yards away.