Is there an argument for banning carbons for hunting?
 

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.

RE: Is there an argument for banning carbons for hunting?
 

Well lead going by the way side so I guess carbon could some day if they find out something objectional about it.

As far as them not breaking, you did say you don't shoot them. There's no worrys there let me tell ya.

The arrow being the problem? I don't think so, and I don't think it occurs very often, butof course it would as more and more people use archery to hunt. I know Ohio has grown in numbers of archers.

RE: Is there an argument for banning carbons for hunting?
 

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.

RE: Is there an argument for banning carbons for hunting?
 

I never have any trouble breaking a carbon arrow.:D

RE: Is there an argument for banning carbons for hunting?
 

Really? Your going to have to do some serious explaining with some science and proof to back that one up. Carbons are popular because they are light and people believe they don't bend and/or are straighter than aluminum arrows, neither of which is true. And being lighter really doesn't help make them anymore efficient.

Carbons are not going anywhere, take my word for it, as a matter of fact aluminum arrows will go by the wayside before carbons. It has nothing to do with which works better or what one has the potential to wound more game. It has to do with what people will and won't buy. Carbon arrows are way to popular now for them to go anywhere.

I'm not huge carbon fan either, but I don't feel they are responsible for wounded game. That is completely on the archer, if you make a bad shot you make a bad shot. Heavy aluminum arrows are just as tough as some carbons. As a matter of fact I have had more carbons break on me than I have aluminum ones.

Paul

RE: Is there an argument for banning carbons for hunting?
 

Carbon arrows will take a tremendous amount of abuse head on.........laterally I don't think that they are any more durable than an aluminum arrow.
You wanna test that if it's bothering you go buy a 2315 aluminum shaft and a comparably spined carbon shaft and whip them sideways into a tree. See which one breaks first and how much force it takes to break one vs the other.
IMO (no offense) worrying about a deer being able to reach and "break off" a non lethal arrow is an extremely trivial notion.Think about just where an arrow has to be located to be a concern? Where can an arrow be lodged that it won't come out or break of through contact and movement that will also NOT kill the deer at the same time.
A shoulder hit that doesn't reach vitals is only going to penetrate an inch or so, the general movement and contact with brush is gonna break or dislodge that arrow in short order.
Where exactly are you picturing an arrow STUCK in a deer that except for rare cases is a concern for the non hunting general public? I have been bowhunting for 23 years and in my circle of friends I can tell you that NONE of us has ever seen or heard of a deer running around with an arrow stuck in it. That's ALOT of bowhunting experience.
I'm sure it can happen but you really need to find something else to worry about..........this one is of extremely little significance and relevance from my experience.

RE: Is there an argument for banning carbons for hunting?
 

I don't know where you get this info from, but I thinkyou mighthear more chatter about this thanthe initial thread!:D:D

RE: Is there an argument for banning carbons for hunting?
 

I agree early in that statement should have never, ever been made because it's simply inaccurate.

As far as carbon arrows, In the line of thinking of the original post, lead should be banned too then as it can stay in the body and cause infection etc. Sure carbon is tougher than wood or aluminum and when you (thread starter) say:

where in the hell are you seeing this and please for the life me, explain what is a "non-lethal" carbon arrow? Are you refering to all carbons as non lethal or are you refering to the shot placement as non letahl. IF it's the later, there in lies the problem. I've also found some broadheads and even a green plastic vane lodged in a does neck.

The material of the arrow is not the route of the problem. Carbon arrows, (I feel the heavier the better) have way too many pros than cons.

RE: Is there an argument for banning carbons for hunting?
 

100% correct Paul! Good post once again.:D

RE: Is there an argument for banning carbons for hunting?
 

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....

RE: Is there an argument for banning carbons for hunting?
 

I absolutely cringed when I read this statement. Aluminums are just as efficient. I'll go so far to say that if aluminums didn't bend easier then most shooters would still be shooting aluminum.

RE: Is there an argument for banning carbons for hunting?
 

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.

RE: Is there an argument for banning carbons for hunting?
 

Hmmm, I wondered how tough they were.

[Deleted]
 

[Deleted by Admins]

RE: Is there an argument for banning carbons for hunting?
 

X2, Last time I checked aluminums are quite a bit more heavy than carbons. On the KE chart, a heavy arrow will beat out pure speed all the time. What I like is to have both a heavy arrow moving fast,its the best of both worlds and the KE numbers are off the chart.

RE: Is there an argument for banning carbons for hunting?
 

I've had more carbons break and alumuim is very dangerous product. I would say that alumin could go before carbons. I really don't think someone has his facts right. Very good post Paul

RE: Is there an argument for banning carbons for hunting?
 

Are you for real?:eek:

RE: Is there an argument for banning carbons for hunting?
 

Goin back to what was originally said, I don't think you thought about what you were posting before you posted it. Looking around at what is popular right now, I'd say that Aluminum arrows are going to go away, probably pretty soon, since its getting more difficult to find them than the stacks of carbons.
As for durability, One may want to remember that our founding fathers and historical archers killed deer with lighter bows and wooden arrows.... The guy who taught me killed hundreds of deer with aluminum arrows.
Infections and wounded animals are more the byproduct of poor/ carelessshots than it is the quality of the arrow.
Think about what you say before you say it, all you did was stir a pot that coulda spoke for itself.... with some common sense.

RE: Is there an argument for banning carbons for hunting?
 

Bump

RE: Is there an argument for banning carbons for hunting?
 

Rob:
Last fall my cousin took a poor shot head on. He put the arrow through the sternum. Asa th edeer ran off he could see the arrow half protruding under the deer's chin. I helped him track it till the blood trail ran out 3/4 of a mile away. He never found it. Weeks later ther nieghbor reported seeing a deer with an arrow protruding from it's neck. From the description, it was a different deer entirely. Recently in the paper, there was a report of a deer running around with an arrow protruding from it. Wildlife officials recommended leaving it alone. Those are incidents I know about personally. Deer seem to be able to recover from a non-lethal arrow embedded in it. My concern is that carbons that won't allow the deer to break off the arrow will reduce the recovery from non-lethal hits.

RE: Is there an argument for banning carbons for hunting?
 

Maybe we should outlaw guys who take stupid shot's on deer! What was he thinking shooting a deer head on with a bow![:@]

RE: Is there an argument for banning carbons for hunting?
 

[quote]ORIGINAL: idahoelkinstructor

I'll try this again.:DI couldn't agree more with this. I shoot a 501gr arrow (XX75) at 250fps (slow by todays standards) out of my 50#/60# (maxed at 63#) Vectrix XL 30", and get 69 1/2 ft/lbs of KE. That's what kills, big time!!;):DNuff said.

RE: Is there an argument for banning carbons for hunting?
 

your cousins fault, not the arrows he was shooting

RE: Is there an argument for banning carbons for hunting?
 

There is not a forum around where you can't find an argument from someoneabout anything.

I even saw one thread on HNI debating if a shaving sharp broadhead was needed to kill an animal:eek:Needed?? Desired??

I have both Aluminums and Carbons and like things about both of them, but if I had to make a choice it would be carbons or A/C for me hands down;)

Dan

RE: Is there an argument for banning carbons for hunting?
 

Amen to that!!

RE: Is there an argument for banning carbons for hunting?
 

I can'r believe this is even a discussion.

I've seen one arrow in 20+ years of hunting that was stuck in a deer. It was an aluminum and it was back along the deers spine as if it was shot facing striaght away. again....HORRIBLE shot choice, nothing to do with arrow material.

RE: Is there an argument for banning carbons for hunting?
 

I can't believe people worry about such things as a deer not recovering from a non-lethal shot with a carbon,or any arrow for that matter.Does it happens? Yea i'm sure it does,but the numbers must be pretty darn low because in my whole life I have never seen a deer walking around with an arrow sticking out of it.What about all the deer killed in car accidents or deer die offs in winter in some areas,as far as some of you guys beating up on other hunters who make a bad shot it happens too sometimes,we all have to learn when to shoot and not to shoot when I was a young hunter I made some not so smart shots but I have learned from my mistakes as I'm sure most others will too.This is a silly thread.I guess I'm silly to reply too.

RE: Is there an argument for banning carbons for hunting?
 

I just don't think that aluminum arrows fly as true as carbons do and like a few are saying on here, I do not really see the problem that the thread starter is initiating. 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.

Sorry if I ruffled the feathers of some of the more experienced hunters on here. :(

RE: Is there an argument for banning carbons for hunting?
 

I was kind of hoping your statement was sarcasm.

There isn't a single thing from any angle you want to take where a statement can be made that aluminum is less lethal than carbon or vice versa. Aluminum tolerences for straightness are extremely tight. Thier spine is dead consistent. Carbons exploded on the market cause many guys are speed freaks and hoping for that imagined edge that will help them get a deer. Plus they are a bit more durable in some respects. I've seen guys pull arrows where thye'd have bent every one if it was an aluminum.

RE: Is there an argument for banning carbons for hunting?
 

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.

RE: Is there an argument for banning carbons for hunting?
 

I beg to differ on that, if you go to Vegas at the indoor shoot you will mostly find pure aluminum arrows being shot. Aluminum is great because it is the same from arrow to arrow in weight and spine, also overall they are much more staight out of the box compared to carbon. The down side is they can bend, that is why I like the mixed carbon and aluminum arrows. I have tried A/C Supeslims, Axis Full Metal Jackets, and recently ACC's. IMO these are the best of the best arrows on the market. Its the best of both worlds, the durability of the carbon and the straightness and consistancy of the aluminums.

RE: Is there an argument for banning carbons for hunting?
 

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...

RE: Is there an argument for banning carbons for hunting?
 

Your learning more about Aluminums and I'm learning more stuff on Carbons. I'm still not switching though Swift!!;)

RE: Is there an argument for banning carbons for hunting?
 

Umm, in most cases an aluminum will fly better because like we have said they usually have better tolerances and quality control. You have to spend quite a bit of money to get really good carbons that would compare to some of the cheapest aluminums as far as quality control and consistency goes. That is one of the reasons I use them, they are just a great value. I have had Jazz youth arrows that performed better than midgrade target Goldtips. Really pissed some guys off too when we put them on the arrow spinner and my kiddy arrows were straighter than their target arrows were;). Carbons get better every year though, I will give them that.



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

RE: Is there an argument for banning carbons for hunting?
 

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.

RE: Is there an argument for banning carbons for hunting?
 

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

RE: Is there an argument for banning carbons for hunting?
 

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.

RE: Is there an argument for banning carbons for hunting?
 

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.

RE: Is there an argument for banning carbons for hunting?
 

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?

RE: Is there an argument for banning carbons for hunting?
 

You are right, that is what this forum is for. MaybeI should have re-phrased that, my bad. I was just trying to make a point that the thread had no substance if you took that factor out of it. Didn't mean it in a rude way by no means. Some of the other postings were headed in another direction than what you first intended (which was better carbon or alluminum) and I was trying to steer it back to your original post.