Is there an argument for banning carbons for hunting?
#31

ORIGINAL: Swift Arrow
Well it must be more of a coincidence than anything then, because of all the times that I have been to the range, I have noticed that none of the aluminum shooters were shooting too accurately and had noticabley wider and sparadic groups than did my carbons.
Well it must be more of a coincidence than anything then, because of all the times that I have been to the range, I have noticed that none of the aluminum shooters were shooting too accurately and had noticabley wider and sparadic groups than did my carbons.
#32

Efficient?????? You mean cost wise or the killing aspect. If youre talking about cost I understand, if youre talking killing efficiency, I have to disagree with you. Ive recovered 98% of the deer I have shot with aluminums with great blood trails, my cousin has recovered about 90% since he switched to carbons....Hes a damned good archer and has quite a few trophies for 3d shooting and whats on his walls...
ORIGINAL: Swift Arrow
aluminums just aren't as efficient for killing game as carbons are. I've never seen a deer running around with an arrow sticking out from it. I have seen plenty of missed shots with rifles and shotguns that have caused infections.
aluminums just aren't as efficient for killing game as carbons are. I've never seen a deer running around with an arrow sticking out from it. I have seen plenty of missed shots with rifles and shotguns that have caused infections.
#33

ORIGINAL: Swift Arrow
Well it must be more of a coincidence than anything then, because of all the times that I have been to the range, I have noticed that none of the aluminum shooters were shooting too accurately and had noticabley wider and sporadic groups than did my carbons.
Well it must be more of a coincidence than anything then, because of all the times that I have been to the range, I have noticed that none of the aluminum shooters were shooting too accurately and had noticabley wider and sporadic groups than did my carbons.

#34
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Blissfield MI USA
Posts: 5,293

ORIGINAL: Swift Arrow
I just don't think that aluminum arrows fly as true as carbons do ......
I just don't think that aluminum arrows fly as true as carbons do ......

Is aluminum a heavier arrow? Sure. Does it necessarily mean that it hits with more KE? I cannot make that statement. Just because it is heavier does it hit harder than a more durable material like carbon? I do not know.
Well, I do. Of course the heavier aluminum arrow will hit harder and have more KE out of the same bow, it will have more momentum as well which is even more important. It is simple science a heavier object propelled with the same amount of energy will retain that energy longer and have more resistance to slowing down or stopping than a ligther object will. The material really doesn't matter a whole lot. It does to a point, but if the arrows are of the same spine it shouldn't be a big factor. Now if one arrow had a much weaker spine than the other it might effect penetration depending on what it hits. Spine determines how the arrow flexes, if one arrow flexes less than the other than it has a different spine, I don't care what it's made out of. When you see pictures of aluminum arrows hitting a target and whipping around, then a carbon arrow hitting the same target but not doing it chances are the spine was diffrerent. If it doesn't flex the same when it hits something, it's not going to flex the same coming out of your bow either.
Paul
#35

I don't mean to stir the pot, Paul. But, you are not exactly correct in your statement regarding the aluminum arrow being heavercausing it to have more energy and hit harder than a carbon arrow. When arrows are shot out of the same bow at the same poundage, the difference in kinetic energy will be around 1 footpound more with the heavier arrow, not a significant difference. What you gain in weight, you lose in speed and vice versa. However, you are correct that the heavier arrow retains energy more efficiently down range than it's lighter brother. However, the significance again is minor. I have taken game with both aluminum and carbon arrows and still shoot both for different applications. Ifwe test our equipment and are shooting enough kinetic energy toget the job done, either product will give satisfactory results if we do out part.
#36

There is no real argument for banning carbon...if so...then next as bowhunters will be looking at, reasoning and thought, of banning something else....Carbons are here to stay
#37

ORIGINAL: TexasBowHunter
I too will start by saying I don't have any preference of carbon over aluminum or vice versa...
I have shot both arrows over th last 10-12 years, I am not sure who told you that a carbon arrow "can't break off" but they probably have no experience with them either. I have experience with carbon and everytime that I did not make a pass through shot my arrows got broke. I don't think you will ever have to worry about the carbon's being banned b/c of it either. You need to check with who ever told you that carbons can't break and find out if they have ever shot them b/c it doesn't sound to me like your source has much experience with them. Again, I don't think aluminum's are bad arrows nor do I think carbon's are bad arrows...I think this is a option for the archer....
ORIGINAL: Wingbone
Ok, I suspect this is going to generate some dialog, so I'll preface this by saying up front that I have no antipathy toward carbon arrows personally. While I'm an aluminum shooter, I have no problem with archers choosing carbon arrows. It is not my policy to malign another's choice of archery technology. To each his own. Frankly I'm hoping that the discussion will put my mind to ease on the subject.
The problem I have is that in the last couple of years I've seen, and/or heard of, too many deer carrying non-lethal carbon arrows in places that they can't get at andthat they can't break off. With aluminum or wood, the deer seem to be able to break them off. the shaft inside the body is isolated by scar tissue and the deer goes on living. My concern is that the unbreakable carbon arrows will alwaysleave an open pathway for infection and the deer with die a slow death.If nothing else, the non-hunting public is seeing and reporting these animals which is not good press for bowhunting. Like I said, this has been bothering me for a while. I'm hoping someone can shed some light on it for me.
Ok, I suspect this is going to generate some dialog, so I'll preface this by saying up front that I have no antipathy toward carbon arrows personally. While I'm an aluminum shooter, I have no problem with archers choosing carbon arrows. It is not my policy to malign another's choice of archery technology. To each his own. Frankly I'm hoping that the discussion will put my mind to ease on the subject.
The problem I have is that in the last couple of years I've seen, and/or heard of, too many deer carrying non-lethal carbon arrows in places that they can't get at andthat they can't break off. With aluminum or wood, the deer seem to be able to break them off. the shaft inside the body is isolated by scar tissue and the deer goes on living. My concern is that the unbreakable carbon arrows will alwaysleave an open pathway for infection and the deer with die a slow death.If nothing else, the non-hunting public is seeing and reporting these animals which is not good press for bowhunting. Like I said, this has been bothering me for a while. I'm hoping someone can shed some light on it for me.
I have shot both arrows over th last 10-12 years, I am not sure who told you that a carbon arrow "can't break off" but they probably have no experience with them either. I have experience with carbon and everytime that I did not make a pass through shot my arrows got broke. I don't think you will ever have to worry about the carbon's being banned b/c of it either. You need to check with who ever told you that carbons can't break and find out if they have ever shot them b/c it doesn't sound to me like your source has much experience with them. Again, I don't think aluminum's are bad arrows nor do I think carbon's are bad arrows...I think this is a option for the archer....
Ok, let's go over this again....You say that a carbon arrow will not break when a aluminum will....I say NO WAYa carbon arrow given the same amount of side force will snap in a minute, I will even say that a carbon (with side force) will break easier than an alluminum arrow. Carbon only has so much of a bending property, once you bend it so far it snaps where as an alluminum shaft is bent. With that being said you have no case for this argument, the whole thread should be deleted. This is not a which is better question, I am not bashing alluminum's I have them....The pointI am making is that you don't have have your information correct,CARBON ARROWS BREAKAND ARE BRITTLE GIVEN SIDE FORCE.
#38

ORIGINAL: Roskoe
I shot a wild turkey in April with an Easton FMJ - one of the toughest arrows out there. With about 2/3 of the arrow sticking out his backside, the bird was able to thrash around and break it off. It did not, however, splinter like a carbon arrow tends to do.
I shot a wild turkey in April with an Easton FMJ - one of the toughest arrows out there. With about 2/3 of the arrow sticking out his backside, the bird was able to thrash around and break it off. It did not, however, splinter like a carbon arrow tends to do.
Thats the beauty of them... and ACCs. You won't get one through the arm. However I personally think the FMJs aren't exactly as tough as they sound... I had an experience. Its not really a relative archery experience (I dropped a rubber boot on one accidentally and collapsed it like a drink straw in a thick milkshake). They aren't designed for it... but I was suprised how little it took to break one.
#39
Nontypical Buck
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: west central wi USA
Posts: 2,224

Great!
You guys have put my concerns to rest. If carbons are not as unbreakable as they are touted to be, then my premise was based on erroneous information.
But, Texasbowhunter, as far as having thisthread deleted... I thought that is what this forum is for; to bring up subjects and discuss them. I am now better informed because of it. I had a concern. Rather than stew about it, I brought it to the forum. I am not sure why it should be deleted?
You guys have put my concerns to rest. If carbons are not as unbreakable as they are touted to be, then my premise was based on erroneous information.
But, Texasbowhunter, as far as having thisthread deleted... I thought that is what this forum is for; to bring up subjects and discuss them. I am now better informed because of it. I had a concern. Rather than stew about it, I brought it to the forum. I am not sure why it should be deleted?
#40

ORIGINAL: Wingbone
Great!
You guys have put my concerns to rest. If carbons are not as unbreakable as they are touted to be, then my premise was based on erroneous information.
But, Texasbowhunter, as far as having thisthread deleted... I thought that is what this forum is for; to bring up subjects and discuss them. I am now better informed because of it. I had a concern. Rather than stew about it, I brought it to the forum. I am not sure why it should be deleted?
Great!
You guys have put my concerns to rest. If carbons are not as unbreakable as they are touted to be, then my premise was based on erroneous information.
But, Texasbowhunter, as far as having thisthread deleted... I thought that is what this forum is for; to bring up subjects and discuss them. I am now better informed because of it. I had a concern. Rather than stew about it, I brought it to the forum. I am not sure why it should be deleted?
