KE vs. Momentum
07-18-2008, 10:10 PM
#51
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 9,175
RE: KE vs. Momentum
It's not MY 400 grain limit. Bowhunters and archery professionals smarter than me have proposed it and what I've seen over the years causes me to be in complete agreement with them. I wish you and your wife continued success... for the sake of all bowhunters.
07-19-2008, 05:26 AM
#52
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 393
RE: KE vs. Momentum
400 grain minimum for what reason? To insure sufficient momentum?
Look at my pervious example again:
Aug. 06 Bowhunting World. 17 recurve bows tested. Average draw weight 59.8# Average KE 36.8#
Aug. 07 Bowhunting World 13 longbows tested. Average draw weight 60.7# Average KE 34.9#
Total of 30 traditional bows tested with an average draw weight of about 60.7# Average KE 35.8#
The average speed is 176.3 fps with a 520 gr. arrow. Momentum = .407
We know that .40 momentum is sufficient because those types of bows were used for decades to kill thousands of animals.
My bow shoots a 350 grain arrow at 311 fps which is .48 momentum
Using momentum as a basis for penetration potential you cannot prove my 350 grain arrow is too light.[:@]
How about this: my wife's arrow is 380 gr. using a 100 grain tip, with a 125 gr. tip it weighs about 405 grains. Her arrow meets the 400 grain minimum with a simple tip swap.
405 grain arrow at 206 fps = .37 momentum. (bring on the brown bears)
Her arrow would be legal, but mine would not; that is so ironic. It aslo clearly shows why mimimum arrow weights areinvalid when comparing modern equipment.
Look at my pervious example again:
Aug. 06 Bowhunting World. 17 recurve bows tested. Average draw weight 59.8# Average KE 36.8#
Aug. 07 Bowhunting World 13 longbows tested. Average draw weight 60.7# Average KE 34.9#
Total of 30 traditional bows tested with an average draw weight of about 60.7# Average KE 35.8#
The average speed is 176.3 fps with a 520 gr. arrow. Momentum = .407
We know that .40 momentum is sufficient because those types of bows were used for decades to kill thousands of animals.
My bow shoots a 350 grain arrow at 311 fps which is .48 momentum
Using momentum as a basis for penetration potential you cannot prove my 350 grain arrow is too light.[:@]
How about this: my wife's arrow is 380 gr. using a 100 grain tip, with a 125 gr. tip it weighs about 405 grains. Her arrow meets the 400 grain minimum with a simple tip swap.
405 grain arrow at 206 fps = .37 momentum. (bring on the brown bears)
Her arrow would be legal, but mine would not; that is so ironic. It aslo clearly shows why mimimum arrow weights areinvalid when comparing modern equipment.
07-19-2008, 07:52 AM
#53
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 9,175
RE: KE vs. Momentum
Like I said, I've been cussed at by better than you over this, many times, and it really gets frickin' boring. But I'll go through it once again for your benefit.
Certain individuals have enough experience, make wise choices in shot selection and make good shot placement. For them, it doesn't much matter what arrow weight they use on deer sized game.
The problem is, speed addicts tend to ignore the unfortunate fact that there are many thousands of bowhunters out there that DO NOT have much experience and/or DO NOT make wise choices in shot selection and/or DO NOT make good shot placement. They DO NOT practice with their gear during the off season. They DO NOT tune their bows sufficiently, if at all. These people have a tendency to hit and lose animals rather than making clean kills.
Wound/loss ratios have been going UP since the introduction of light arrows. I've seen official numbers averaging around some 35-38%, and some even higher! The reasoning behind light arrows is flat long range trajectory and mitigating the effect of misjudgement in yardage. That claptrap is spread around bowhunting media like manure on a garden. The people I'm concerned about read that stuff and, I feel, are encouraged to take shots well outside their effective range.
Now you can do and think what you want, but I agree with the people who believe a 400 grain minimum would reduce the tendency to take longer than prudent shots, would give those guys who make bad shots at least a slight chance at getting a little more penetration and possibly turning a lost animal into a kill, and as a result reduce the wound/loss ratios. To be honest, I think even 400 grains is too light but we can't upset the whiners even more by saying 450, now can we.
We can't force people to make good shot selections. We can't force people to tune their bows and practice with them so they can make good shot placement. We can't force people to not take shots outside their effective range. About the only things we can do are force them to attend IBEP classes where they can sit bored for a few hours and get a rubber stamped certificate, and make equipment restrictions that might give them a somewhat better chance of making a kill, or keep them at home... where they belong if they don't want to do the things that will make them effective bowhunters. The 400 gn minimum, for instance.
For bowhunting to survive the attacks from the anti's, we have got to get those wound/loss stats under control and get them started back down to a reasonable level. Wounding and losing 4 out of every 10 animals hit is NOT reasonable and I'd hope you'd agree. I'm more concerned with bowhunting's welfare than I am in getting somebody ticked off on a forum, and I've ticked off a few. So, if you don't like what I say, you can just take a number and step to the back of the line to wait your turn at me.
And please, don't try to tell me that a faster arrow will give those guys a better chance at getting a good hit. We all know how bad broadhead flight is with untuned equipment and it gets worse with every increase in arrow speed, so that argument is just an insult to my intelligence. Thanks in advance.
Certain individuals have enough experience, make wise choices in shot selection and make good shot placement. For them, it doesn't much matter what arrow weight they use on deer sized game.
The problem is, speed addicts tend to ignore the unfortunate fact that there are many thousands of bowhunters out there that DO NOT have much experience and/or DO NOT make wise choices in shot selection and/or DO NOT make good shot placement. They DO NOT practice with their gear during the off season. They DO NOT tune their bows sufficiently, if at all. These people have a tendency to hit and lose animals rather than making clean kills.
Wound/loss ratios have been going UP since the introduction of light arrows. I've seen official numbers averaging around some 35-38%, and some even higher! The reasoning behind light arrows is flat long range trajectory and mitigating the effect of misjudgement in yardage. That claptrap is spread around bowhunting media like manure on a garden. The people I'm concerned about read that stuff and, I feel, are encouraged to take shots well outside their effective range.
Now you can do and think what you want, but I agree with the people who believe a 400 grain minimum would reduce the tendency to take longer than prudent shots, would give those guys who make bad shots at least a slight chance at getting a little more penetration and possibly turning a lost animal into a kill, and as a result reduce the wound/loss ratios. To be honest, I think even 400 grains is too light but we can't upset the whiners even more by saying 450, now can we.
We can't force people to make good shot selections. We can't force people to tune their bows and practice with them so they can make good shot placement. We can't force people to not take shots outside their effective range. About the only things we can do are force them to attend IBEP classes where they can sit bored for a few hours and get a rubber stamped certificate, and make equipment restrictions that might give them a somewhat better chance of making a kill, or keep them at home... where they belong if they don't want to do the things that will make them effective bowhunters. The 400 gn minimum, for instance.
For bowhunting to survive the attacks from the anti's, we have got to get those wound/loss stats under control and get them started back down to a reasonable level. Wounding and losing 4 out of every 10 animals hit is NOT reasonable and I'd hope you'd agree. I'm more concerned with bowhunting's welfare than I am in getting somebody ticked off on a forum, and I've ticked off a few. So, if you don't like what I say, you can just take a number and step to the back of the line to wait your turn at me.
And please, don't try to tell me that a faster arrow will give those guys a better chance at getting a good hit. We all know how bad broadhead flight is with untuned equipment and it gets worse with every increase in arrow speed, so that argument is just an insult to my intelligence. Thanks in advance.
07-19-2008, 08:07 AM
#54
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Southern MD
Posts: 2,520
RE: KE vs. Momentum
Arthur P - You have written that quite a few times in my short time on these forums and each time I have read it, itonly makes more sense. I think the guys that get upset by it don't understand that limits such as these would benefit the 80% of bowhunters that are clueless about bows and arrows and really doesn't apply to the 20% that understand their bows and arrows.
I hope you never get tired of writing it, I'll never get tired of reading it.
I hope you never get tired of writing it, I'll never get tired of reading it.
07-19-2008, 08:10 AM
#55
Nontypical Buck
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Texas
Posts: 2,363
RE: KE vs. Momentum
WOW....this thread is still going HUH?????Ya'll have fun and play nice!!!!
For the record, I have always taken my hunting set-ups to the heavy side and peaked them out with KE, I kept hearing about momentum, which now I know I was maximizing that at the same time too. I have learned a little more how it all works together, I will continue to run my arrows on the heavy side.......
Bob, that was a good read on the penetration and it made several things clear for me....
Seriously, you guys play nice!!!
For the record, I have always taken my hunting set-ups to the heavy side and peaked them out with KE, I kept hearing about momentum, which now I know I was maximizing that at the same time too. I have learned a little more how it all works together, I will continue to run my arrows on the heavy side.......
Bob, that was a good read on the penetration and it made several things clear for me....
Seriously, you guys play nice!!!
07-19-2008, 08:47 AM
#56
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Burleson TX USA
Posts: 6,455
RE: KE vs. Momentum
I'm more concerned with bowhunting's welfare than I am in getting somebody ticked off on a forum, and I've ticked off a few
You tick off people nahhhhhhh, enlightened a few Yeahhhhhh.
For the records a few months back I done some testing shooting 2 different arrow weights (300gr and 490gr)at various distances through a crono and posted my results in the bowhunting forum if you care to do a search you'll find it and will more than likely be surprised at the result.
Edit for the link.
http://huntingnet.com/forum/tm.aspx?m=2706534&mpage=1&key=&#270679 8
07-19-2008, 09:09 AM
#57
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Balt, MD (orig: J-town,PA) The bowels of Hell!!!
Posts: 2,188
RE: KE vs. Momentum
This goes on and on and on and on.
Arrow weight should be based on the type of bow and the DW of the bow.
Slow recurves need heavy arrows because they lack the speed for good penetration if a lighter arrow is used.
Low poundage bows should use a heavier arrow for the same reason.
I get vilified for using a 70# bow on here. Yet, using a heavy poundage bow allows me to use an arrow that carries enough momentum to take downany animal without the need of making sure it weights 500 grains.
It used to be that a hunter shot the heaviest compound he/she could shoot and there was no talk about KE and momentum. Now, it seems like momentum has become a bigger issue because you have more and more hunters saying that a 50# bow is plenty for any animal. Usually this is coming from the same guys who 20 yrs ago shot 70# or 80# bows and have bad shoulders so they think shooting that heavy now is dangerous.
The bottom line is that you can not just saying that arrow weight is all that matters. Everything in an archer's set-up should be used to gage if the set-up is good or bad.
Arrow weight should be based on the type of bow and the DW of the bow.
Slow recurves need heavy arrows because they lack the speed for good penetration if a lighter arrow is used.
Low poundage bows should use a heavier arrow for the same reason.
I get vilified for using a 70# bow on here. Yet, using a heavy poundage bow allows me to use an arrow that carries enough momentum to take downany animal without the need of making sure it weights 500 grains.
It used to be that a hunter shot the heaviest compound he/she could shoot and there was no talk about KE and momentum. Now, it seems like momentum has become a bigger issue because you have more and more hunters saying that a 50# bow is plenty for any animal. Usually this is coming from the same guys who 20 yrs ago shot 70# or 80# bows and have bad shoulders so they think shooting that heavy now is dangerous.
The bottom line is that you can not just saying that arrow weight is all that matters. Everything in an archer's set-up should be used to gage if the set-up is good or bad.
