Broker

Chad,
Since you usually shoot wood arrows anyway, I believe I would just stay with them. A wood arrow that spines enough will probably be around eight grain per pound anyway. I also remember an article a while back about soaking wood arrows in oil (linseed, maybe?), to add varying amounts of weight to make them more uniform. It added quite a bit of weight, waterproofed ' em too. Of course they added a finish over them also. You didn' t say what kind of bow it will be, but I assume you' re talking about a Crusader. The Crusader having a longbow riser, it will take a lower spine than say, a Hunter ll would. What are you huntin' anyhow?

Darrel

Arthur P

Chad, I don' t think there will be a point where you lose penetration with more weight, but there definitely will be a point of diminishing returns where you don' t gain as much penetration as you lose trajectory. I wouldn' t even consider anything over 12 grains per pound, and that might even be pushing things. At the draw weight you' re talking about, anywhere from 8-10 grains should be plenty.

Something I have never talked about on the forums before, because of the flamethrowers, is the time I shot through 2 hogs, one 275 pounds and the other 220 pounds, on the same shot. We were more interested in killing the things off than anything else because of the damage they were doing to the fields. Yes, it was an unethical shot, but ethics don' t come into the discussion when you' re talking extermination. Anyway, I was shooting a 90 pound recurve and full length 2419 arrow tipped with a Bear Razorhead. They were standing right next to each other, maybe a foot or so apart and the arrow zipped through both of them.

I don' t have a clue how fast the arrow was going because I' d never heard of shooting arrows over a chronograph back then, but I do remember it seemed awful fast and flat. The arrow weighed around 700 grains, I guess. Somewhere just under 8 grains per pound. Kinda light on grains per pound for a trad arrow, but still pretty darn heavy.

By the way, both hogs were guests of honor at the farmer' s church barbeque the next day.

LBR

My POC' s weigh around 620-640 grains (finished) with 125 grain points, but I' m concerned about the diameter. My hope it to hunt water buffalo in Australia in the next few years (before I am 40). It' s a bit expensive to say the least, so I want to at least get the equipment together and get familiar with it before the big expense hits. Yep, it will be a Crusader (is there anything else?).

Arthur, you said what I meant--although I think a fast arrow will go deeper than a spear[X(].

Maybe I am being a bit too apprehensive, but I want to be sure everything is just right for this one--not only do I not want to screw up an once in a lifetime hunt, I want to be sure I ain' t the one that goes toes-up on the deal! (them Aussie buffs are supposed to be very similar to Cape Buffalo--average a hair bigger, with the same temperment).

Chad

IrishLad32

Chad, to get an arrow to penetrate you need inertia. An object gets its inertia from its mass, making speed somewhat irrelavent. Obviously you don' t want a dog of an arrow that has to flag a snail down, but regardless of how fast the arrow is, if it' s easy to get it in motion it' s also easy to get it out of motion. That' s not something that sounds good when talking about big Aussie Water Buffalo. 85@30 with 31" bop and 160gr broadheads you' ll obviously have enough weight and thump to handle a lot of animal. If you' re using a large broadhead it should cut flesh and such to make way for the shaft. You could try to contact some Aussie guides and people who' ve bowhunted Waterbuffalo and see what they say about it. I reckon they' d know more about it anyways.

Brandan

LBR

Understood Brandan--I just have to figure out where the happy medium is. I know that more mass is better, but only to a point--you have to get that bugger moving for it to do the job!

As for broadheads, the few people that I have found so far that have experience with these critters used narrow ones--Grizzly heads have been the choice so far. Wider ones have too much drag, or that is the theory at least. From what I have seen so far, a large hole is not a priority, getting to the vitals is. Some have talked about taking a 190 grain and narrowing it down and making it a 160 grain. Small diameter shafting has also been named as being very important for better penetration. I do know a lady who shot a very large Gemsbok with a light bow using Grizzly heads and got complete penetration with the head.

Maybe I am jumping the gun--I don' t even have the bow yet--but I' m gonna' do my best to get it all together well ahead of time.

Chad

Lilhunter

You should get with 5shot on his broadhead testing!

K_N

I have been thinking about trying some of these battleshafts. They say they are 5/16 diameter and 20gr per inch.

http://www.alaskafrontierarchery.com...20Pricing.html

Rangeball

LBR, I' m not a traditionalist, I frequent the tech forum. However, I' m bored and poking around to pass the time...

Here' s a link you might find interesting assuming you haven' t seen it already. Real world results and testing on real live big game. Although these are from Africa, I assume a cape buff is big, mean and resistent to penetration wherever he roams...

Hope it helps-

http://forum.hunting.net/asppg/tm.as...mode=1&smode=1

LBR

Saw it--but thanks! I' m still trying to gather all the info. I can--hearing lots of different things from different folks, but I don' t think I' ll have anything to worry about as long as I do my part.

Chad