![[Deleted]](https://www.huntingnet.com/forum/iconimages/bowhunting/deleted_ltr.gif)
[Deleted]
03-10-2003 | 07:49 PM
#151
Giant Nontypical
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 6,634
Likes: 0
From: HENDERSON KY USA
RE: Speed is all you need! (?)
Well here it goes again.The age old debate and it keeps going on and on.I have been a member of this debate before and I am a middle of the road proponent.
There is one thing about the martin' s picture that I don' t like.It is a bit misleading,first it is most likely comparing thin walled aluminum against a thick walled aluminum and that will affect the outcome as well as the foc.I have tested these points and have found them to be true.I also would like to point out that they are using friction to stop the arrows and speed is what fights friction.Momentum is what will bust bone out of the way to let the arrow continue forward,or hide or whatever you may encounter in an animal but as long as all is being done is cutting then speed is a huge help.This is imo why when you look at traditional setups that are building huge momentum numbers they are also using 2 blade cut to tip heads.This is to eliminate as much friction as possible.
I have always hated the statements that heavier is better.There are just too many variables to make such a blanket statement.Or the one I always really hated is that a heavy arrow has more ke energy downrange than a lighter arrow.On paper this is true but when that lighter arrow is smaller in diameter and has 3" vanes and the heavy arrow has 5" helical fletching,drag will offset this and the lighter arrow will now have more downrange ke.I have never actually figured how much momentum is lossed but I would guess that it would be the same percentage loss as ke.Would most likely be a little more momentum but you can see how variables change things.
There are a couple things that bother me about your setup Krisken but i don' t have to use your bow to hunt with and I wouldn' t.If you like it then the choice is yours to make.I don' t even like that much speed for 3-d.I like to stay in the 270-280 range.
The biggest thing that would concern me is the durability of the the light arrow.Have you encountered a shoulder hit and did the arrow hold together?Also a lighter arrow will be knocked off course much easier by a limb or other object regardless of how much ke or momentum it posseses.Now don' t get me wrong,I use a light arrow,360 gr but I also have some over 420gr that I also use out of the same rig with the same pins.Or atleast I did,I just sold my hunting bow.
I actually considered going with a heavy arrow because of a point you made earlier.Hard to find your arrow when it travels 40 plus yards past your animal.A slower arrow isn' t going to travel as far after it passes thru an animal.
Use what you are comfortable with and be competent with it.
There is one thing about the martin' s picture that I don' t like.It is a bit misleading,first it is most likely comparing thin walled aluminum against a thick walled aluminum and that will affect the outcome as well as the foc.I have tested these points and have found them to be true.I also would like to point out that they are using friction to stop the arrows and speed is what fights friction.Momentum is what will bust bone out of the way to let the arrow continue forward,or hide or whatever you may encounter in an animal but as long as all is being done is cutting then speed is a huge help.This is imo why when you look at traditional setups that are building huge momentum numbers they are also using 2 blade cut to tip heads.This is to eliminate as much friction as possible.
I have always hated the statements that heavier is better.There are just too many variables to make such a blanket statement.Or the one I always really hated is that a heavy arrow has more ke energy downrange than a lighter arrow.On paper this is true but when that lighter arrow is smaller in diameter and has 3" vanes and the heavy arrow has 5" helical fletching,drag will offset this and the lighter arrow will now have more downrange ke.I have never actually figured how much momentum is lossed but I would guess that it would be the same percentage loss as ke.Would most likely be a little more momentum but you can see how variables change things.
There are a couple things that bother me about your setup Krisken but i don' t have to use your bow to hunt with and I wouldn' t.If you like it then the choice is yours to make.I don' t even like that much speed for 3-d.I like to stay in the 270-280 range.
The biggest thing that would concern me is the durability of the the light arrow.Have you encountered a shoulder hit and did the arrow hold together?Also a lighter arrow will be knocked off course much easier by a limb or other object regardless of how much ke or momentum it posseses.Now don' t get me wrong,I use a light arrow,360 gr but I also have some over 420gr that I also use out of the same rig with the same pins.Or atleast I did,I just sold my hunting bow.
I actually considered going with a heavy arrow because of a point you made earlier.Hard to find your arrow when it travels 40 plus yards past your animal.A slower arrow isn' t going to travel as far after it passes thru an animal.
Use what you are comfortable with and be competent with it.
03-10-2003 | 07:57 PM
#152
Typical Buck
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 718
Likes: 0
From: Arlington WA USA
RE: Speed is all you need! (?)
Philosophically there are great argumentson each side of the fence on this one; I for one thank Krisken for geting it kicked off it has been a terrific debate and I don' t know about others but I learned from it and I' ve bowhunted since 1963.
I think each of us has a responsibility to develop an equipment package that performs well and does what we intend it to do then have the ethics not to push that equipment beyond those limitations.
I can' t think of a better way to pass the time while I wait for hunting season to roll around.
Thanks to all for the debate we' ve all won!
I think each of us has a responsibility to develop an equipment package that performs well and does what we intend it to do then have the ethics not to push that equipment beyond those limitations.
I can' t think of a better way to pass the time while I wait for hunting season to roll around.
Thanks to all for the debate we' ve all won!
03-10-2003 | 08:10 PM
#153
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 233
Likes: 0
From: wi USA
RE: Speed is all you need! (?)
TFOX friction is what stops the arrow or bone head on impact thats why i said try a 2by 6 and see what happens 2 arrows same diamater same bow same poundage the light one will be faster and heavy arrow will be slower. thr results will be simuler to the martin target the heavier arrow will penatrate about 5% deeper or less. there goes pingpong golf ball idea
03-10-2003 | 08:25 PM
#154
Giant Nontypical
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 6,634
Likes: 0
From: HENDERSON KY USA
RE: Speed is all you need! (?)
selway,I have done the test with wood behind a piece of foam and the heavy arrow in most cases would explode the board where as the lighter one would just leave a small hole.Now if you lower the foc way down on the heavy arrow then the lighter arrow always won out.I have shot at different distances and that plays a role.12% foc always yielded better results untill I tried a traditional stinger and it performed best at 18% but that is most likely due to the amount of foc that is already built into the shaft.
Yes all Of my arrows diameters were the same.I used weight tubes and points that were identical.
It always came down to how I put the arrow together and not the overall weight.When all things were equall,the light arrows would win out on foam and the heavy would win out on wood.Carbon would win out over aluminum and so forth.
Yes all Of my arrows diameters were the same.I used weight tubes and points that were identical.
It always came down to how I put the arrow together and not the overall weight.When all things were equall,the light arrows would win out on foam and the heavy would win out on wood.Carbon would win out over aluminum and so forth.
03-11-2003 | 06:34 AM
#155
Nontypical Buck
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 1,097
Likes: 0
From: Goose Creek SC
RE: Speed is all you need! (?)
The following is a cut and paste of a response that Dr. Ed Ashby, as in PHD not MD, gave to a question regarding testing of penetration testing he conducted. It may surprise some people what he has to say.
Hi Mike,
Sorry, but this will have to be a real ' rambling' answer.
When we did the broadhead portion of the study we used only two bows - trying for some degree of ' uniformity' - eliminating any possible " inadequate" bow weight' s from the results of the broadhead' s capabilities. They were an 85# Martin Warthog compound and a 94# longbow (straight end longbow, for what it' s worth).
I didn' t get to chose the parimeters of the testing - it was a Park' s Board run test. In the new project I' m starting, I' ll be using measured launch momentum and calculated impact momentum (and Kinetic Energy, too, ' cause some folks just can' t yet accept that KE is not a valid formula for indicating penetration, by it' s very definition, and has proven in all my test so far to have no correlation when graphed against actual measured penetration in real animals).
I have done a little ' off the cuff' testing though, and found that I could push an 790 - 810 grain arrow (an original Forgewood), with a Grizzly broadhead, through the shoulder and scapula of a fresh killed zebra with a 55# HH longbow (but it WOULDN" T break the ball joint or humerus bone - and not one of the scapular hits landed right on the scapular ridge, either!). Those ' casual' tests were not part of our data base findings. I don' t have my notes handy to refer to at the moment, but I took about five or six whacks at it, from both ten and twenty yards, and the penetration averaged around 10" THROUGH the scapula. The shots taken from 20 yards penetrated slightly farther than the close ones, on the average - less arrow flex, straighter line force vector, I think.
As to what I would recommend - that' s simple. All the bow one can handle. The object is to kill as quickly, efficiently, and humanely as possible. With a bow, there simply is no such thing as " over gunned" - AS LONG AS ONE CAN HANDLE IT. And I' m not saying one should ever be over bowed for their strength - ' gotta be able to shoot it ' fore you can hit with it!
I' ve killed a lot of game with the combination of lighter draw bows (42# to 55#), heavy for bow weight arrows, and tough, low resistance to penetration, broadheads. Unfortunately, I' ve wacked a few heavy bones that they wouldn' t take out too - thus the ' decidedly overkill' I prefer to hunt with.
Using any of my bows of from about 80# up, I haven' t encountered any problem at all whan using my 900 grain Forgewoods and 190 grain Grizzlies. Seem to be able to take any ' standard' big game animal (that excludes the REAL heavy duty stuff) from most any reasonable shot angle and have a lethal hit. If I were really nailed down, I' d say that I prefer at least 70# for a trad. bow for the bigger ' standard' animals, and I' d try to avoid some of the poorer shot angles I usually do take (just for the data' s sake).
I think I' ll be able to give you a much better answer after the next test is finished - and I can reference the arrow' s momentum at impact to the field-measured results. That' s the data we really need to be refering to for true ' indicators' . Then one can chrongraph their own bow/arrow combo' s velocity, do the calculations and have some idea what it SHOULD do - if the arrow system is tough enough for the job. You' ll just have to wait a few years for that one!
Dr. Ed Ashby
Sorry, but this will have to be a real ' rambling' answer.
When we did the broadhead portion of the study we used only two bows - trying for some degree of ' uniformity' - eliminating any possible " inadequate" bow weight' s from the results of the broadhead' s capabilities. They were an 85# Martin Warthog compound and a 94# longbow (straight end longbow, for what it' s worth).
I didn' t get to chose the parimeters of the testing - it was a Park' s Board run test. In the new project I' m starting, I' ll be using measured launch momentum and calculated impact momentum (and Kinetic Energy, too, ' cause some folks just can' t yet accept that KE is not a valid formula for indicating penetration, by it' s very definition, and has proven in all my test so far to have no correlation when graphed against actual measured penetration in real animals).
I have done a little ' off the cuff' testing though, and found that I could push an 790 - 810 grain arrow (an original Forgewood), with a Grizzly broadhead, through the shoulder and scapula of a fresh killed zebra with a 55# HH longbow (but it WOULDN" T break the ball joint or humerus bone - and not one of the scapular hits landed right on the scapular ridge, either!). Those ' casual' tests were not part of our data base findings. I don' t have my notes handy to refer to at the moment, but I took about five or six whacks at it, from both ten and twenty yards, and the penetration averaged around 10" THROUGH the scapula. The shots taken from 20 yards penetrated slightly farther than the close ones, on the average - less arrow flex, straighter line force vector, I think.
As to what I would recommend - that' s simple. All the bow one can handle. The object is to kill as quickly, efficiently, and humanely as possible. With a bow, there simply is no such thing as " over gunned" - AS LONG AS ONE CAN HANDLE IT. And I' m not saying one should ever be over bowed for their strength - ' gotta be able to shoot it ' fore you can hit with it!
I' ve killed a lot of game with the combination of lighter draw bows (42# to 55#), heavy for bow weight arrows, and tough, low resistance to penetration, broadheads. Unfortunately, I' ve wacked a few heavy bones that they wouldn' t take out too - thus the ' decidedly overkill' I prefer to hunt with.
Using any of my bows of from about 80# up, I haven' t encountered any problem at all whan using my 900 grain Forgewoods and 190 grain Grizzlies. Seem to be able to take any ' standard' big game animal (that excludes the REAL heavy duty stuff) from most any reasonable shot angle and have a lethal hit. If I were really nailed down, I' d say that I prefer at least 70# for a trad. bow for the bigger ' standard' animals, and I' d try to avoid some of the poorer shot angles I usually do take (just for the data' s sake).
I think I' ll be able to give you a much better answer after the next test is finished - and I can reference the arrow' s momentum at impact to the field-measured results. That' s the data we really need to be refering to for true ' indicators' . Then one can chrongraph their own bow/arrow combo' s velocity, do the calculations and have some idea what it SHOULD do - if the arrow system is tough enough for the job. You' ll just have to wait a few years for that one!
Dr. Ed Ashby
03-11-2003 | 08:43 AM
#157
Nontypical Buck
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 1,097
Likes: 0
From: Goose Creek SC
RE: Speed is all you need! (?)
Krisken,
I shoot a longbow. Believe me friend I am not concerned with speed, albeit the longbow I have now is probably the quickest traditional bow I have owned to date and it is 4# lighter in draw weight than one recurve I owned, and which are supposed to be faster than longbows.
Two years ago I killed a buck which I hit a bit high and a bit back of point of aim. I thought the buck had stopped, and apparently he was continuing to walk up the power line I was sitting on.
The arrow hit him in the onside legbone, shattered it, went through the bottom half of the spinal column and lodged in the offside legbone. The impact, and the shock of his spinal column being hit I' m sure, knocked the buck off of his feet. He got up and headed back across the power line. He fell down three times before he got to the other side. Each time he got back up and continued on.
I didn' t see it because I was hunting from ground level, but my son was 35 ft up a tree about 50 yards behind me, and he saw the buck fall as it dropped down off the level of the power line to the forest floor on the other side. The deer never got back up after that, even though it did take another finishing shot an hour or so later when we gave him time to lay and calm down before we checked out the blood trail, which was massive, and trailed him to the end of it.
And what' s my point? Glad you asked! The point is my slow traditiona bow with a heavy wood arrow penetrated through two heavy bones and lodged in a third. The razor sharp SteelForce broadhead caused significant damage and did so without high speed to help it.
Insofar as the post above, the key element to which I would draw your attention is Dr. Ashby' s conclusion/postulation that Kinetic Energy has no correlation to penetration on a live animal. It is momentum that is the key measure that his tests have revealed to be the element to be directly relatable to penetration on live animals.
To be sure, there are lots of factors that come into play. A sharp/dull broadhead will have a significant influence, too. There are many a traditional hunter that routinely get complete passthroughs with their " slow" , i.e., sub 200 ft/sec, bows and heavy arrows. The real question is how far do you want to bury the arrow in the ground after it has passed through the animal?
A shooter wants to see how far away he can shoot an animal with his high speed equipment. A hunter wants to see how close he can get an animal so he can get a quick, clean and humane kill no matter what the speed is of his equipment.
Bil
I shoot a longbow. Believe me friend I am not concerned with speed, albeit the longbow I have now is probably the quickest traditional bow I have owned to date and it is 4# lighter in draw weight than one recurve I owned, and which are supposed to be faster than longbows.
Two years ago I killed a buck which I hit a bit high and a bit back of point of aim. I thought the buck had stopped, and apparently he was continuing to walk up the power line I was sitting on.
The arrow hit him in the onside legbone, shattered it, went through the bottom half of the spinal column and lodged in the offside legbone. The impact, and the shock of his spinal column being hit I' m sure, knocked the buck off of his feet. He got up and headed back across the power line. He fell down three times before he got to the other side. Each time he got back up and continued on.
I didn' t see it because I was hunting from ground level, but my son was 35 ft up a tree about 50 yards behind me, and he saw the buck fall as it dropped down off the level of the power line to the forest floor on the other side. The deer never got back up after that, even though it did take another finishing shot an hour or so later when we gave him time to lay and calm down before we checked out the blood trail, which was massive, and trailed him to the end of it.
And what' s my point? Glad you asked! The point is my slow traditiona bow with a heavy wood arrow penetrated through two heavy bones and lodged in a third. The razor sharp SteelForce broadhead caused significant damage and did so without high speed to help it.
Insofar as the post above, the key element to which I would draw your attention is Dr. Ashby' s conclusion/postulation that Kinetic Energy has no correlation to penetration on a live animal. It is momentum that is the key measure that his tests have revealed to be the element to be directly relatable to penetration on live animals.
To be sure, there are lots of factors that come into play. A sharp/dull broadhead will have a significant influence, too. There are many a traditional hunter that routinely get complete passthroughs with their " slow" , i.e., sub 200 ft/sec, bows and heavy arrows. The real question is how far do you want to bury the arrow in the ground after it has passed through the animal?
A shooter wants to see how far away he can shoot an animal with his high speed equipment. A hunter wants to see how close he can get an animal so he can get a quick, clean and humane kill no matter what the speed is of his equipment.
Bil
