A broadhead that "mangles" the game and a bow that shoots over 300 fps and scent lock clothing and 30 ft. high stands and on and on and on....are not neccessary and may not possess any advantage and if not utilized properly may be a disavantage. What does matter first and foremost is a knowledge of the animal and learning how to get close enough (<20 yards) to that animal in order to kill it with a well tuned bow that shoots straight arrows tipped with a broadhead.

as long as its sharp and it meets state regs I don't a prob with it. Heck, Indians used broadheads made from rocks and they didn't starve to death, at least most of them didn't, and I am sure they didn't mind the hole in the hide since they used the hide for clothing.

No matter what head you use? or how fast or slow your bow is, If it`s compound or a "stick and string" what ever! If your worried about an animal servival then don`t shoot! If your worried about a bad hit don`t shoot! Go back and practice![:@] untill your confident enuff to take the shot! When i pull the string on an animal within my confedent range i don`t` give a crap about his servival! I wan`t to kill him as quickly as possable and use ever advantage to do it with my equipment that i can! Weather it a big sharp broadhead or a fast bow! It would seem to me that if someone calls them self an "ethical hunter" that they would want this to be? a bad hit is the result in something going wrong. Taking a bad shot your falt or not! Wounding an animal is something no one`s want`s to do! thats why the technology today is desighed to give the hunter the ability to shot straighter, See the the sights better in low light condition`s hunters today are taking more game than ever before with the confidence that they can take and make the shot! resulting in an ethical kill! quick and clean!

Relieved to see that there are a few that can see the forest, regardless of the trees.

RTA47:

Would you mind repeating what you just said, a little slower this time.

Are you saying that you would prefer all broadheads to be a maximum size to better the chances of survival of a errant shot?
I can respect that. It brings all sorts of "what ifs" to mind but I can still respect the thought.

I'm not even sure of what type of head started this issue or exactly how much of a cutting diameter we're talking about here but I'll throw my 2 cents in on some of the replies I've read.
It seems to me that an important issue has been overlooked as far as the "big head -vs- small head , 30-30 -vs- 7mm mag etc..." and thats shock trauma. A 30-30 will kill a deer just as dead as a 300 mag but the larger and more energy producing projectile will cause much more shock trauma which kills faster providing both examples hit the intended target. Use the same scenario in bowhunting and it's my understanding that a low profile broadhead attached to a light weight arrow producing 55lbs of kinetic energy will produce much less shock trauma compared to a large profile broadhead attached to a heavy arrow producing 70lbs of kinetic energy. Yes...both have to hit the boiler room! In my experience , I've shot deer with the light weight setup that weren't sure what happened after being drilled through both lungs and ended up walking or trotting off which exumed less oxygen in their lungs thus extending their distance from impact to death. On the flip side I've been using the heavier (larger profile head and heavier arrows) setup which has never left a deer trotting off or looking around to see what happened.
Thats the advantage I see in the larger profile heads and heavier setups shot out of a bow that produces enough energy to greatly increase the shock trauma effect.

Is it necessary? Nope!

Bob McNally is a big fan of the 'big heads'. I have an article he wrote praising the use...... he mentioned everything from deer to hogs killed very quickly as he wrote...

Anyway - I see no problem - in fact - if you read that article it made ya think - BUT, here is my personal take. As said above less is more in my opinion, and you may ask why ? It takes less to push a 1.125" head and achieve a pass through than it does a BIG head. A pass through with BOTH heads will show the larger creating more blood etc.... but it takes a better placed shot, perhaps a lil luck and a LOT more bow to push the Vortex 2.25" blades (as Bob liked) in a pass through... so personally Id rather shoot a 1 or 1.125" head with less bow, and shoot better in the cold and still get that pass through.... Bob said a lot of good points in the article - it was worth reading.....and opened my eyes some but Id still be a lil worried about those huge blades getting through..... thats a LOT of blade to push.......

I used a Montec G5 last year - a small head but a REALLY nice one. I also used a Steelforce - a real nice head also. BOTH heads passed through and kept going - one into a tree a good bit.... so Ill stick with my well built 1" fixed blades......

LOL- I didn`t have much time. But i think i made my point!

To clarify further; when I say large heads in the context of my post, I am specifically referring to the large "winged" versions found mostly on the mechanical heads.

If in the hands of a shooter who is a reasonably skilled shooter and who will still put the emphasis on accuracy and best shot placement, I do not hold the same aversion as I do knowing that such type of broadhead is being used by those who do not care to put the time in to become very skilled shooters, and believe the size of the head and the large hole they make is all that is needed to kill a deer.

I am unswaying convinced that some shooters are of the mentality that all the he or she has to do is just hit the deer somewhere with a large winged blade, and because of the massive wound, the deer will surely die quickly or in close proximity. They are out there. Just read between the lines of some of the people who use the heads or intend to use the heads.

Such false belief is stoked when someone using a large winged head shoots a deer intentionally or unintentionally in an area of the animal that is universally not a shot anyone should take, and the deer just happens to be killed.

How many threads and posts have we read where some shooters have stated that they went to to such a large winged head for the primary purpose of a better blood trail, as though the head will now eliminate the need to develop and refine post-hit tracking skills? A better blood trail is not guaranteed, and following a blood trail is not the only way to track a wounded deer.

Too much of today's technology is diminishing the overall skills that all bowhunters should develop. Sort of like: how many kids can add or subtract theses days without a calculator, or know how much change you have coming if the computerized register glitches.

I've seen old bowhunting movies with the likes of the great Fred Bear and Howard Hill that showed some of the most unethical shots at big game animals I've ever seen. More than 100 yards with just a poke and hope attitude???? Come on, you can't be serious when you blast modern equipment as being unethical or too destructive!!! We have the most accurate means of delivering a few small slivers of razorblade to a vital organ today. We also have a much more informed group of bowhunters than 50 years ago. If you don't like the change, just stay right where you're at if you're happy. You shoot your deer and I'll shoot mine

How the heck do you think our modern ideas of bowhunting ethics were developed, anyway?? They were out there doing the hunting and the shooting, learning what worked and what didn't, laying the ground rules and getting bow seasons established.

Don't go making the foolish mistake of blasting the sport's pioneers and applying today's ethical standards to what they did, way back when.

If you really want to corrode your sensibilities, read Maurice Thompson's book, "The Witchery of Archery." See what the attitudes of bowhunters were like in the last quarter of the 19th Century.

It is interesting to know that Howard Hill killed an elk with an arrow at over 200 yards with a longbow. Makes one wonder just how much energy that arrow had left when it got there. Assuming he was using a bow in his usual draw weight range of 80-100 pounds and the size broadheads he recommends for different bow weights in his book, the 2-blade head on that arrow was 1 1/4" wide and 3 3/4" long.