davepjr71

From IBO webpage:

III. EQUIPMENT

A. GRAINS PER POUND AND ARROW SPEED

1.Arrows must weigh at least five grains per pound of the bow’s maximum
shooting weight unless the archer’s equipment qualifies for the exception set[/align] out in paragraph 2 below. Shooting weight is defined as the bow’s maximum[/align] draw or thrust weight, whichever is greater. A variance of 2 pounds of draw [/align] weight shall be allowed for bow scale variation. Equipment qualifying in this [/align] paragraph (A)(1) shall have no limit on arrow speed.[/align][/align] 2.In the case where an archer’s equipment, when shot at five grains per pound, [/align] does not generate 280 fps, that archer may shoot arrows weighing less than [/align] 5 grains per pound. However, equipment qualifying under this paragraph (A)(2)[/align] shall not exceed an arrow speed of 280 fps. A variance of 3% will be allowed for[/align]chronograph variation.[/align]
If you bow is below 280 fps you can go below 5 gpi!!! As for myself. I never stated that you should go below and I'm not below. They never once state that the arrow is too light to shoot a target. Even yourself said the weight was established for safety. It has nothing to do with the ability of the arrow to penetrate anything. Even a target.

I'm not 10 years old. I've been shooting since I was 7-8 yr old and was born in 71 due the math. Futhermore, you do not know me and do haven't the slightest clue what I do ro do not know. So far from what I've heard from you you basically invented archery and know more about it than anbody on the planet. You remind me of a guy I went to college with. He thought he knew everyhing too and usually he was wrong.

I never said I disrespect anyone. I simply stated that a good experiment is done with a wide range of data. My comment about a light bow was from seeing such low numbers for kinetic energy for an arrow heavier than mine. Yes, modern recureves are better than they used to be. However,I'd liek to see it done with the type of equipment I use. I thinklongbows are cool and wish I'd spend more time shooting one. However, my time only permits me to shoot 1weapon at a time and I want to spend that time being the best shot with the equipment I plan on hunting with.

And as I keep stating. There is more to what makes up a good arrow than 1 value. A smaller surface area on an arrow allows for deeper penetration. I'd just like to see an experiment done with more samples. That's all. It's rare I will ever take the results from 1 person's experiment as the gospil and as I've stated I see the need for a heavier arrow for a lower poundage bow. And, even Arthur Hill admits that he is treating the arrow like it flies in a straight line.

Another note. I've never directly insulted anyone in this thread. However, I can go back thru many replies to a post I made and see some sort of derogatory comment or even pathetic name calling.

A guy says he doesn't want to be told what to think and then says he's the only person that's right and we should all listen to him.

nodog,

So far you've entered the best replythat is worth listening to. I'm not taking anything anyone says personal. Especially when they have to stoop to a sarcastic reply.

TFOX

We all know the ibo rules.Arthur just told you how the 5 gr rule came about.The 280 speed thing was just added a few years ago so the short draw people could shoot some of the same speeds as the other guys.Shorter draw shooters have less to worry about when it comes to equipment breaking so the rule can be relaxed for them,couple that with the newer equipment being stronger,some changes were warranted.



Passthru,I assure you that Arthur has tried it your way.He does get passionate about this because he knows what he is talking about and loves this sport.


He doesn't need me to take up for him but some of us have been here along time and have had the EXACT SAME ARGUMENTS with him and I will promise you that you can not win it against him.


I personally don't think his way is the only way and maybe not even the best but I assure you that under the current regs that his way will help the average guy out.



Now,Arthur,maybe you can go take a pill and relax.[8D]

davepjr71

Well said TFOX

I know why the rule came about. I was defending what I said, or rather didn't say. I never said you should go below. I was stating that the rule does not say it was established because the arrow was too light to shoot at a target let alone a deer.

There's nothing wrong with passion. But just because someone is new to a website does not mean they are new to the world of archery.

Here is an experiment I can get behind. This is pretty cool. As set-up like mine went 6" thru a 1/4" of polycarbonate bullet resitant glass. How does that relate to a bone or a peice of hide? If it can do that I'm sure it will go thru a deer cleanly.

http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=480044

passthru79

I have nothing against anyone or anyones believes for that matter. I understand that Arthur has probaly tried other ways and has found them less proficient than what he is trying to push people to use now. I just dont like people who come across arrogant and cocky, acting like they know everything there is to know about the sport of archery. There are many of us with years of experience and mass amounts of knowledge on this subject. I am open to anything, and try not to judge someone on there believes. If he believes his 500 grain arrow will penetrate better than my 365 grain arrow good for him. All Ive tried to say this whole time was both arrows do the job, and its pointless trying to judge which one killed the deer better when both arrows are stuck in the dirt behind the deer. I respect his believes, but he needs to not be so judgmental on others.

passthru79

Personal experiment.


Bow: Bowtech allegiance 70lbs 29inch draw
arrow: super carbon magnum 75grain wasp boss bullet broadhead total weight 351grains
arrow speed: 312fps
target: 55 gallon steel drum
target distance: 25 yards

Arrow blew through both sides and was held by the vanes on the back side of the barrel. My point is that light arrows do penetrate. I have yet to see a steel plated deer. If the arrow can go through that Im sure any animal in North America is in trouble.

Arthur P

Thanks for watching my back, TFOX.

Passthru and Dave, both of you have missed the point. So, AGAIN, and for the last time in this thread, here's what I'm saying. Four main points.

1) Light arrows work. Heavier arrows work better.
2) I have no problem with ultralight arrows, as long as: the person using them is knowledgeable enough to properly match and tuneall his equipment to make best use of them; if he knows enough about deer anatomy to know where to hit them; if he is skilled enough to properly place his shot; and if he's able to remain calm enough to properly execute the shot in real hunting conditions.
3) From my long term observations, the average bowhunter meets few, if any, of the criteria listed in #2.
4) Since education requires at least SOME effort on the part of the uneducated, and since trying to force additional education on them would result in a serious drop in numbers of bowhunters, then regulating minimum arrow weight would be the most practical way of giving the average bowhunter the best chance of making clean kills and reducing the overall wound/loss ratio.

That's it. Y'all have a nice Easter.

Straightarrow

Arthur, I wish I could add something useful to your last post, but it really says it all. In fact we've been saying the same thing throughtout this whole thread, yet it get interpreted completely wrong.

We are not "forcing" anyone to follow the "heavy" arrow concept. We are encouraging it. When we support a 400 grain minimum, we're not forcing heavy arrows on people, we're trying to prevent the use of extraordinarily light arrows. There's a huge difference between the two. 400 grains is a light weight arrow. Out of a 70 lb bow, it's a very light weight arrow.

Believe it or not, there is a best way. For some reason, we get vilified for saying that going "heavy" truely is best for most hunting purposes. We back it up, not only with experience of using both, but with the only thorough study I'm aware of on arrow penetration in live animals. Penetration on hide, blood, flesh and bone is very unique. What works best on live animals in hunting situations is completely different from what works best on foam or steel.

I'm sure that we haven't changed the minds of those who crave speed. I'm just hoping that those who haven't decided the best way to go, give the heavy arrows a try and see for yourself if they don't prove more stable and effective.

passthru79

Straightarrow, how can you say enforcing a 400grain minimum arrow weight no forcing us to go with a heavier arrow. That makes no sense. I understand why all of you prefer a heavier arrow and thats fine, but your still trying to force those of us that prefer a lighter arrow to shoot a heavier one. In my opinion thats just wrong.

Straightarrow

passthru,

I don't know how else to put it so you can understand. I didn't say you wouldn't have to use a heavier arrow. I said you wouldn't have to use a heavy arrow. 400 grains is not heavy. It may be heavier, but it is still very light. Many hunting regulations stipulate minimums and for good reason. I happen to think Arthur's idea for a minimum arrow weight is a good idea. Kind of like regulations saying you should use a minimum of 35 lb draw weight, or must be capable of propelling an arrow 300', or broadheads must be a minimum of 7/8" at the widest point.

We are saying that a minimum arrow weight for hunting big game would be a good idea. Overall, it would benefit hunters in that those without the best tuning skills or experience, would have an overall better performing arrow.

Like I said earlier, it's an idea that I support, but not one that I expect to be enacted. The resistance to restricting speed is so overwhelming that I'm sure it won't be. I still support the idea.

davepjr71

Why didn't you just say this in the first place? This was very well said and mostly makes sense.Unfortunetly, I'm still not sure dictating a minimum weight will actually cure the problem. Most people are not willing to admit that they need topractice. And I'm not talking about people that shoot all the time and take a month off before the season. I quit huntingarchery for 2 years becasue I did not have confidence in my old bow and did not shoot enoughto have confidence in myself. Ifwe could somehow teach everyarchery hunter (or any otherweapon hunter) to follow that rule then the problem would be solved.As for arrow eight?

I did an experiment today with my bow set at 66 lbs. I shot 20-391 gr arrows from 20 yds and 20-520 gr arrows from 20 yds. This may surprise you and the others here. But the 391 gr arrow's averaged penetration was 18.75 inches. The 520 gr arrow? 16.75 inches. That's 2 more inches. If people would like I'll keep track of this each time I shoot until I reach 100 shots with each and post. All shot at compressed sawdust particle board sheets.

Ihope you also have a nice Easter Arthur.