Traditional Archery Discussions on the Leatherwall


Ashby at K'zoo

Messages posted to thread:
Bob@ Ace 06-Feb-12
Bowlim 06-Feb-12
George D. Stout 06-Feb-12
Glunt@work 06-Feb-12
JRW 06-Feb-12
swampwalker 06-Feb-12
Curtiss Cardinal 06-Feb-12
paradocs 06-Feb-12
Bowlim 06-Feb-12
Sapcut 06-Feb-12
Jim 06-Feb-12
Harleywriter 06-Feb-12
Tradbh/on droid 06-Feb-12
JRW 06-Feb-12
Sapcut 06-Feb-12
Tradbh/on droid 06-Feb-12
Bob@ Ace 06-Feb-12
Curtiss Cardinal 06-Feb-12
TradbowBob 06-Feb-12
Sapcut 06-Feb-12
TDB 06-Feb-12
JRW 06-Feb-12
JRW 06-Feb-12
swampwalker 07-Feb-12
Sapcut 07-Feb-12
Gaur 07-Feb-12
swampwalker 07-Feb-12
Penny Banks 07-Feb-12
Sapcut 07-Feb-12
Stan 07-Feb-12
Stan 07-Feb-12
swampwalker 07-Feb-12
Elkhuntr 07-Feb-12
Hal9000 07-Feb-12
SteveBNY 07-Feb-12
swampwalker 07-Feb-12
Bob@ Ace 07-Feb-12
Bob@ Ace 07-Feb-12
swampwalker 07-Feb-12
Ron LaClair 07-Feb-12
Elkhuntr 07-Feb-12
Elkhuntr 07-Feb-12
Jim Davis 07-Feb-12
Elkhuntr 07-Feb-12
Hal9000 07-Feb-12
Sapcut 07-Feb-12
Bowlim 07-Feb-12
AWPForester 07-Feb-12
Bob 07-Feb-12
AWPForester 07-Feb-12
Sapcut 07-Feb-12
Jim Davis 07-Feb-12
AWPForester 07-Feb-12
zebra733 07-Feb-12
Sipsey River 07-Feb-12
Skeet 07-Feb-12
stavechoker 07-Feb-12
TDB 07-Feb-12
Sapcut 07-Feb-12
Elkhuntr 07-Feb-12
Hal9000 07-Feb-12
AWPForester 07-Feb-12
Sapcut 07-Feb-12
Hal9000 07-Feb-12
roger 07-Feb-12
Oldbow 07-Feb-12
swampwalker 07-Feb-12
TDB 07-Feb-12
Sapcut 07-Feb-12
Roger Norris 07-Feb-12
AWPForester 07-Feb-12
JRW 07-Feb-12
xtrema312 07-Feb-12
TDB 07-Feb-12
AWPForester 07-Feb-12
TDB 07-Feb-12
Oldbow 08-Feb-12
AWPForester 08-Feb-12
Penny Banks 08-Feb-12
Oldbow 08-Feb-12
Sapcut 08-Feb-12
Ollie 08-Feb-12
Linecutter 08-Feb-12
Sapcut 08-Feb-12
swampwalker 08-Feb-12
Phil Magistro 08-Feb-12
Linecutter 08-Feb-12
Sapcut 08-Feb-12
Phil Magistro 08-Feb-12
swampwalker 09-Feb-12
Linecutter 09-Feb-12
Bowlim 09-Feb-12
Sapcut 09-Feb-12
Stan 09-Feb-12
Linecutter 09-Feb-12
Phil Magistro 09-Feb-12
Sapcut 09-Feb-12
Sapcut 09-Feb-12
Phil Magistro 09-Feb-12
Sapcut 09-Feb-12
Phil Magistro 09-Feb-12
Sapcut 09-Feb-12
roger 09-Feb-12
Phil Magistro 09-Feb-12
Linecutter 09-Feb-12
Sapcut 09-Feb-12
roger 09-Feb-12
Phil Magistro 09-Feb-12
Greg 09-Feb-12
Sapcut 09-Feb-12
Phil Magistro 09-Feb-12
Gaur 09-Feb-12
MQQSE 09-Feb-12
Michael Schwister 10-Feb-12
Sapcut 10-Feb-12
LINECUTTER 10-Feb-12
Sapcut 10-Feb-12
Linecutter 10-Feb-12
Sapcut 10-Feb-12
TDB 10-Feb-12
Sapcut 10-Feb-12
TDB 11-Feb-12
Phil Magistro 11-Feb-12
TDB 11-Feb-12
Phil Magistro 11-Feb-12
Doug SC 11-Feb-12
Bowlim 11-Feb-12
Oldbow 11-Feb-12
Linecutter 11-Feb-12
JRW 11-Feb-12
Thumper-tx 11-Feb-12
Sapcut 11-Feb-12
roger 11-Feb-12
Phil Magistro 11-Feb-12
Sapcut 11-Feb-12
Oldbow 11-Feb-12
Sapcut 11-Feb-12
JRW 11-Feb-12
Phil Magistro 11-Feb-12
SteveBNY 11-Feb-12
Sapcut 11-Feb-12
roger 11-Feb-12
Oldbow 11-Feb-12
Phil Magistro 11-Feb-12
Sapcut 11-Feb-12
Sapcut 11-Feb-12
roger 12-Feb-12
tradmt 12-Feb-12
Elkhuntr 12-Feb-12
Sapcut 12-Feb-12
Sapcut 12-Feb-12
roger 12-Feb-12
Sapcut 12-Feb-12
PaPa Doc 13-Feb-12
swampwalker 13-Feb-12
From: Bob@ Ace Compton's Traditional Bowhunters
Date: 06-Feb-12
Bob@ Ace is a Stickbow.com Sponsor - Website




I was at the Kalamazoo expo recently, and saw a portion of Mr. Ashby’s seminar. He showed a picture of two broadheads that he tested. One was an Ace Standard 125 grain, and the other we will call a brand X. He said that the Ace didn’t penetrate as far because of the tabs on the ferrule. That same picture can be seen at Tradgang.com at http://www.tradgang.com/ashby/2007update7.pdf

You can plainly see that the brand X broadhead has been modified and sharpened, while the Ace has not even been sharpened. No, on closer examination by zooming in on the photo it is obvious that it was filed at such a steep angle that the edge was taken off on one side. Ashby claims it was a honed edge, but clearly it was not.

Well he proved that a dull broadhead won’t penetrate as far as a sharp broadhead. Was the rest of his study and seminar as biased, and agenda driven as that? I believe much of it was, and will explain more a little later.

Bob Mayo, Ace Archery Tackle

From: Bowlim
Date: 06-Feb-12




Since you were there, did you ask him about your issue?

I'm not sure I see the same thing on the edge as you do. Below the yellow arrow the bevel does appear short. However, all that is claimed for the photo is that the impact mark on the ferule is a significant source of drag. That would actually be reduced if the edge was not sharp since the edge would slow the arrow coming in for impact. The photo does not specifically say that this head is the 24% less penetrative one.

I see several important features to the ace, not present on other heads. The convex edge profile makes for a better wound channel, and the tabs are reassuringly strong looking. Dubbing these tab edges would not be a difficult task for those wanting to improve the head , whether at the factory or home. Perhaps one should consider the points made as free R&D. Dub the tabs, call it the Ashby model, or model with Ashby modifications (no trade mark infringement?) and drive on.

From: George D. Stout Compton's Traditional Bowhunters
Date: 06-Feb-12




Bob...I will look forward to your later information. I don't use Ace or Ashby style heads so I can keep an open mind. I like to hear all sides since those who push a certain type of head, may not give all proper due to those of different design.

Anyway Mr. Mayo, Ace has nothing to prove to the bowhunting public. The head has shown superior performance decades before the new kids moved to town. And the newest Ace heads look as durable as one would ever need for any game animal.

From: Glunt@work
Date: 06-Feb-12




I can't make out much in the photo other than I can see they have both been worked on. I use Ace and many other 2 blade heads with no penetration issues. I have always guessed that the ferrule tabs or vents (on other brands) create a tiny amount of additional drag during penetration, but for deer and elk size game its a non-issue, or at least I've never seen it show up.

Ace have proven very strong for me and when you balance cost and effectiveness, I can't imagine finding a better value. Plus, convex blades look great :^)

Dr Ashby's testing has always struck me as being done honestly and without bias. I think most of it is proving stuff that common sense tells us anyway. That said, his name is on a broadhead now so that can give pause to how folks look at his research. I don't know if he profits from that head or his involvement, but research done on Fords gets read differently if the test was done at Chevy instead of a third party, regardless of unbiasedly it was done.

From: JRW
Date: 06-Feb-12




Hi Bob. I trust all is well with you and Jan.

George summed up much of my opinion in his second paragraph. The interlocking tapered ferrule has been around since the 50s. It's stood the test of time for one reason: it works, and works well.

As you know, the 125-grain Standard is a head with which I have some experience (much more than 7 shots into a dead carcass). I'll take the dozens and dozens of animals I've sent them through (including a mature bull moose) over a quickie write up on the internet where the author misidentified straight and convex blades. Ace Standards are convex; Magnus IIs are straight.

From: swampwalker
Date: 06-Feb-12




Curious how these "discussions" about Dr. Ashby always seem to be a broadside. Why didn't you confront the man as opposed to "keyboard attacks". It sounds like you have your supporters and that's well deserved. Probably would have been farther ahead to stifle and make use of free R&D. Grandpa always said if someone directs criticism, look to see whether there is any truth to it. Then respond. Emotional responses are not productive. With all due respect. Find it hard to believe that you would accuse Dr. Asbby of lying and intentional bias.

From: Curtiss Cardinal
Date: 06-Feb-12




All I'll say about this is, I'd like to see all arrows paper tested for tune before tested for penetration. It could be that the arrows used are simply thrown together and then shot for penetration. A wobbly arrow is robbed of penetration energy. As Ashby shoots what he promotes. So he probably spent time tuning those arrows. I am not saying that he didn't tune the others I'm saying he doesn't say he did. Arrow tune is probably as important as any other consideration in a penetration test. In fact I'd go so far as to say if the arrow isn't properly tuned that FOC, Arrow mass, and broadhead configuration are all render useless information. When I wanted to front load my arrows I went from 175 grains up front to 200 then I added 10 grains at a time until I got a neat, clean hole in the paper. Then I fletch the shaft and tried again and then I added 5 grains at a time until the hole started to get a little ragged and backed up 5 grains and retested. So I had a range of 35 grains before arrow filght was compromised. My finshed arrows were carbons 300s with 410 grains up front on 30 inch arrows fired out of a 67@29" longbow. They hit a 3D target so hard it is rocked back and forth. I have no doubts that they would shoot through anything with whatever broadhead I used as long as I put it in the right place. I say that because I have shot this arrow configuration through a 300+ pound boar quartering away and it went in behind the rib and exited out the gristle shield just behind the off side shoulder. If the fletching hadn't gotten taggled in the gristle shield the arrow would have probably kept going a second or two more. Oh and that was with a 3 blade head.. Which Ashby says are capable of that kind(30+ inches) of penetration.

From: paradocs Professional Bowhunters Society - Associate Member
Date: 06-Feb-12




So I guess if the 125 standard can't penetrate too good, these 200 gr Super Express I shoot will just bounce off. I want my money back ;)

From: Bowlim
Date: 06-Feb-12




Ashby does not profit from the heads with his name on them. According to him, that was a condition of the use of his name. I am not really sure why he let them use his name since his life's work on broadheads points to those factors in the name head being important, but that the Grizz head is the best, not some new head which at this point has a very short track record. The head he "promoted" (identified as ideal), was the El Grande (?)

Neither of the heads shown is one of his, or fits all his rules.

The point made in the photo was simple. There is according to Ashby, a pooch on the tab. Something made that mark, and the idea is that it took great force, and was typical of results. Draw your own conclusions. He said he got 24ish% less penetration. I doubt that pooch is the result of an out of balance arrow.

I think Ashby proved lethality of various heads generally, but identified factors that lead to good penetration primarily, along with decent durability. Proving differences in lethality is difficult because one does not know why exactly an animal dies. I think the ACE blade has some features that are not identified in the tests because they do not dwell on cutitng power, though single bevel blades are superior.

From: Sapcut
Date: 06-Feb-12




Bob, what agenda does Ashby have, in your opinion?

From: Jim
Date: 06-Feb-12




Hey what do you want him to do. He has to sell those $30.00 apiece broadheads to someone! Long before Asbey was around they were killing dangerous game in Africa.

From: Harleywriter
Date: 06-Feb-12




And I was killing deer and elk with left wing helical fletch on a 29 1/2 inch cedar shaft pusing a right bevel grizzly!

From: Tradbh/on droid
Date: 06-Feb-12




I have a card of Ace Hi-Speeds made in St Paul in the late fortys. Awsome broadheads that take a razor edge easily. Mounted one on a primitive arrow and took a big doe with my first selfbow! Is the Hi-speed still available? I believe mine are 5/16 ferrule. That Ashyby stuff is so much blah-de blah-de blah-de blah!!!

From: JRW
Date: 06-Feb-12




The Hi-Speed is still being made, but it's a slightly different head than the ones made in the 40s. It's now 100 grains with an interlocking tapered ferrule. The Standards was more closely match the weight of the late-40s Hi-Speeds.

From: Sapcut
Date: 06-Feb-12




Now..now...you guys..play fair. Whatever you do or say make sure it is not a biased statement based on your personal preferences. I'm sure you wouldn't do that now would you?

How about a totally unbiased conversation about broadheads...think its possible? Ah...Negative

Ha larry us!!!

From: Tradbh/on droid
Date: 06-Feb-12




Mine DO have the interlocking ferrules,but ARE Hi-Speeds. Does that make them 50's then? What was the weight of The old 5/16 high speed? All my stuff is in storage or I wouldn't ask.

From: Bob@ Ace Compton's Traditional Bowhunters
Date: 06-Feb-12
Bob@ Ace is a Stickbow.com Sponsor - Website




Thanks to all who have responded so far. Let me try to answer some of your concerns.

I was at the K’zoo expo Saturday afternoon, when two of our customers came to our booth and told us that Ashby had singled out the Ace Standard for criticism, and showed the photo from his already published study http://www.tradgang.com/ashby/2007update7.pdf

That was the first time I learned that an Ace broadhead was even mentioned in his study. I was blindsided. He had already begun the “keyboard attack”, and I didn’t even know it. I went back to the motel that evening, got on the internet with my laptop computer, and found the photo and the portion of the study dealing with Ace broadheads. When I saw the photo, the first thing I said was, “He didn’t even sharpen it”. I also saw that the other broadhead was modified and sharpened.

The other thing that got my attention immediately, was his “test series 2” with a 1019 grain arrow. He shot the Ace Standard 3 times into the dead buffalo. On one shot the arrow shaft broke and his insert bent, resulting in poor penetration. To me that is a hint that the arrow may not have been flying straight when it hit (see Curtiss Cardinal’s post above). He only included the other 2 shots in his average for the study. He based his criticism on 2 shots, into an inconsistent media, with a dull broadhead.

After I learned what I could Saturday evening, I discussed it with him Sunday morning at the expo, and he still showed the photo at his Sunday seminar that I attended.

So this isn’t a “keyboard attack”, but a “keyboard defense”.

Bob Mayo, Ace Archery Tackle

From: Curtiss Cardinal
Date: 06-Feb-12




"Which Ashby says are capable of that kind(30+ inches) of penetration." in my post should have read, "Which Ashby says are NOT capable of that kind (30+ inches) of penetration." Sorry for the typo.

From: TradbowBob
Date: 06-Feb-12




Bob,

My son and I met you and your lovely wife at a shoot at Warriors Mark in PA. You impressed me then with your honesty and I would sure take your word on your evaluation of this situation.

I agree that there needs to be an up front everything equal test of these things. All arrows need to weigh the same, be tuned, and be shot from the same weight bow into the same material. That's the only way that any of this is ever rally going to mean anything that will help folks figure out the truth.

TBB

From: Sapcut
Date: 06-Feb-12




Bob,

What do you think Ashby's intentions were to purposely criticize Ace broadheads? Surely he wasn't trying to make his semi homemade modified Grizzly look good. What could be his motives behind this?

Tell us more of what Ashby actually said to you.

From: TDB
Date: 06-Feb-12




Bob,

I too would like to know what you think Ed' intentions were. In the siminar he did give your head the thumbs up in several catagories over the Magnus (you called brand x). If you remember he stated that he had to re direct the point on the other head from having seen them curl in previous test, but that your heads had shown outstanding results in point strength and saw on reason to alter them. He also stated that had bone not caught on the lug the penetration would have been equal to if not better than the other head due to the outstanding strength of your heads.

Give the man credit that he may have found the one tiny drawback when heavy bone is impacted and use it as free R&D.

TDB aka Troy D. Breeding aka Arrowman from years past

From: JRW
Date: 06-Feb-12




"Mine DO have the interlocking ferrules,but ARE Hi-Speeds. Does that make them 50's then? What was the weight of The old 5/16 high speed? All my stuff is in storage or I wouldn't ask."

If I recall, those would be 50s to early 60s. I think they weighed around 140 grains. They're great heads; I have some of them mounted on arrows since I occasionally like to hunt with vintage broadheads. Probably the closest thing weight wise would be the 135-grain Standards.

From: JRW
Date: 06-Feb-12




TBB,

"My son and I met you and your lovely wife at a shoot at Warriors Mark in PA. You impressed me then with your honesty and I would sure take your word on your evaluation of this situation."

I completely agree with your impressions of Bob and Jan. Two nicer and more honest people in this industry you'd be hard pressed to find. The first time I met them was at the Pekin shoot in 2001. I'd never seen their heads in person, so I stopped by their booth for a look. After some introductions, Bob asked me what kind of heads I used. I responded that I shot three- and four-blade heads and wasn't looking to switch, but his products looked great. A lot of folks would have seen "no sale" and brushed me off. A half hour later we were still talking about bowhunting and stuff, but he never tried to sell me anything.

The next day I bought two packages of his heads with the intention of using them out of a selfbow that fall. Long and short of it: I neer hunted with that selfbow so I ended up giving the heads away one and two at a time to people who wanted to give them a try.

The more I got to know Bob and Jan the more I realized how much they give back to bowhunting every year by their generous donations of both time and products to bowhunting organizations. So for the next three years every time I saw Bob and Jan at a show I'd buy a package of heads and give them away to people, one or two at a time whenever someone told me they were looking at switching from whatever head they were using. I also spent a lot of time trying to get Bob and Jan to make a four-blade head. I think I almost pulled it off at one point.

It wasn't until I booked an elk hunt in 2004, and subsequently read Ed's first report, that I opted to switch to a two blade head. Of course, I decided to finally send one of Bob and Jan's heads through an animal of my own. That was the last broadhead switch I made. I was so impressed with the performance I saw on my elk that Ace Standards have been on my arrows ever since. I've also long since stopped bugging Bob and Jan about re-introducing a four-blade head.

With respect to the ITF (interlocking tapered ferrule), I've put dozens and dozens of big game animals in my freezer with them over the years. I've never once seen the tabs catch on anything, and have never seen the type of mark in Ed's photo from his 2007 update. As a matter of fact, the friction points on the broadhead (and I suspect any two-blade head) are the cutting edges and the sides of the ferrule perpendicular to the blades. If you look at the design of the heads, both of those surfaces are long, lean, and designed for minimal friction. That's probably why I put one (two actually) completely through a mature bull moose in 2006 with arrows that tipped my digital scale at 499 grains.

My apologies if this has been long winded, but I have enormous respect for Bob and Jan as people, innovators, and excellent examples of the best this industry has to offer. Their great people who make great products, and it's been my pleasure to know them.

From: swampwalker
Date: 07-Feb-12




Then why this type of attack on someone with similar credentials? I will always have the back of someone who's attack from the backside. I question why you came here in this fashion. Smells.

From: Sapcut
Date: 07-Feb-12




As Mr. Stout wrote....."I like to hear all sides since those who push a certain type of head, may not give all proper due to those of different design."

Isn't that precisely what Bob of Ace Broadheads is presently doing?

It appears to me that Bob of Ace Broadheads has the agenda to push HIS brand of broadheads, and RIGHTLY SO. But I can't find anyone else in this situation that is pushing another product.

From: Gaur
Date: 07-Feb-12




Its his business and he has a lot invested in it. If he feels like he was unjustly singled out and the broadhead of his that was used was not sharpened for the trial he has all the right in the world to let the archery community know about it and defend his product.

Sounds like from others who posted that know him and his wife that they are real stand up people.

From: swampwalker
Date: 07-Feb-12




And that is proper. Seems like Ace has stood the test of time. Mr. Mayo's response seems a little strong for someone who's product has such a loyal following. A little out of proportion. Perhaps up until now, Mr. Mayo has even given credibility to Dr. Ashby and his research. Now his product seems to be the victim of it. Any truth to the good doctor's research? Maybe that's where Mr. Mayo should be spending his time. Prove Dr. Ashby wrong. Makes sense to me. The messenger always seems to lose his head. Mr. Mayo, in my opinion, you went about this all wrong. You can make it better. Words and attacks really haven't the weight you're looking for.

From: Penny Banks
Date: 07-Feb-12




We Leatherwallers are a fickle crowd. Seems like on any given day you can find a bash Dr. Ashby thread going strong, or at the least one making light of the single bevel broadhead he advocates.

Now we get a man who believes his ox has been gored, and I tend to agree with him, and we pile on him and defend Dr. Ashby.

I am not as eloquent as Jason but just one heck of a lot of blood has gone on the ground because of them. And Mr. Mayo has been a true gentleman to deal with.

From: Sapcut
Date: 07-Feb-12




Doing our best to throw out all biased opinions......let's look at this through common sense lenses.

Doesn't it make sense that the smoother, slicker profile of a broadhead would create LESS resistance traveling through an animal than one that was not as smooth? Is Dr. Ashby saying anything other than that?

He also tested many other broadheads documenting what HE found in HIS tests. From everything I can tell, it seems unbiased and in- agenda oriented to me. But I am open to any tangible information to show otherwise

Is it blasphemy to suggest a three blade broadhead creates more friction and resistance than a two blade?

Bob, please understand that I mean zero disrespect to you or your produoct. However, it would be interesting to know what Dr. Ashby actually said to you.

From: Stan
Date: 07-Feb-12




I would think if Ashby wants his studies to carry any weight he should present said broadhead at it's best.. Sharp and with a tuned arrow..

From: Stan
Date: 07-Feb-12




I would think if Ashby wants his studies to carry any weight he should present said broadhead at it's best.. Sharp and with a tuned arrow..

From: swampwalker
Date: 07-Feb-12




I wonder if Mr. Mayo is being completely open about what was said between himself and the good doctor. You might call this piling on. But who stareted this thread without being fully illuminating. At least Dr. Ashby does his research. And his reputation is beyond reproach. Say what you wish about his testing and their results. You are now attacking his good name. Really? Come on Mr. Mayo, this is your platform. You opened up the curtain and turned on the microphone. What say you. Ashby gets nothing for his research( that I know of). Kind of wonder how many packs of broadheads may be in the mail this week.

From: Elkhuntr
Date: 07-Feb-12




thanks for the posts Bob. i appreciate your insight, and explanation. i also appreciate your product, what you have done for bowhunting, and what you continue to do.

i do not see you attacking anyone, or being disrespectful.

in towards world, standing up for yourself and using the truth, is often attacked.

From: Hal9000
Date: 07-Feb-12




I shoot nothing but Ace broadheads and see no reason to change.

From: SteveBNY
Date: 07-Feb-12




Bob - good to hear the other side of the story. Thanks.

From: swampwalker
Date: 07-Feb-12




Would love to hear the other side. Love candor.

From: Bob@ Ace Compton's Traditional Bowhunters
Date: 07-Feb-12
Bob@ Ace is a Stickbow.com Sponsor - Website




TradbowBob said (in his above post) “All arrows need to weigh the same, be tuned, and be shot from the same weight bow into the same material. That's the only way that any of this is ever really going to mean anything that will help folks figure out the truth.” Does anyone disagree with that?

I happen to think that Ashby shortchanged a lot of the really good broadheads in his studies. He did very limited, superficial testing of some broadheads. While others he tested extensively, modified when they failed, and tested some more. Then he consulted with the manufacturer, and dismissed the failures as unimportant. He published charts in his study comparing modified broadheads of one brand, against unmodified broadheads of other brands. This is in his study, published on tradgang.com and tradbow.com, for all to read and praise or criticize.

Bob Mayo, Ace Archery Tackle

From: Bob@ Ace Compton's Traditional Bowhunters
Date: 07-Feb-12
Bob@ Ace is a Stickbow.com Sponsor - Website




Swampwalker asked above, “I wonder if Mr. Mayo is being completely open about what was said between himself and the good doctor.”

My best recollection of the conversation goes like this:

When I asked Mr. Ashby about the photo in question http://www.tradgang.com/ashby/2007update7.pdf He said that both broadheads had been honed to the shaving an edge. It was obvious to me that at least one edge of the Ace had not been sharpened.

He admitted that none of the Ace broadheads had been damaged in his testing.

I called his attention to the fact that in his study he refers to some broadheads is being made from “good steel”. He responded that he had no way to test them, and that some were sent out for hardness testing, but others were not tested at all. So if he is going to give the coveted “good steel” award to some broadheads that were damaged in his study, but not to some broadheads that went undamaged, he should have just left the “good steel” comments out of his “scientific study”.

He also stated, referring to a particular brand of broadhead, rated highly in his study, “All of the lighter _____’s failed.”

I told him that I thought he unfairly criticized some good broadheads like Magnus, Zwickey, Woodsman and Cheetah, based on very minimal and incomplete testing. While he seems to promote some that had higher failure rates in his study, and we’re in some cases Chinese made. He said “I don’t care about that”.

I’m sure that some of the things he said were just blurted out on the spur of the moment. Because, just like he had blindsided me with his seminar, I had blindsided him as he walked past our booth.

Bob Mayo, Ace Archery Tackle

From: swampwalker
Date: 07-Feb-12




I know both parties discussed here are respected members of our community. Perhaps a conversation of length would profit both. Conversations on the fly don't work well. Mr. Mayo, I am sure, was chagrined at the comments by Dr. Ashby. If given the chance to reword his comments at the start, I wonder if he would have been a little more diplomatic. I know I've said things in the past I know were emotionally charged. And regret them. Ask LPN-1. It would be a good thing if Ashby could participate in some sort of conference to demonstrate his concerns. I'm sure he (Ashby) is operating from a sense of well doing. Curious if he even knows of this conversation.

From: Ron LaClair Compton's Traditional Bowhunters
Date: 07-Feb-12




Bob and Jan are very good folks and I don't think it's Bobs nature to attack anyone. I see it as him defending himself against an unfair depiction of his product

I've been throwing broadheads at critters since 1955 (56 years) I've used just about everything that's been on the market since that time. The broadhead I've been using for a number of years is the Ace Super Express.

This is what I look for in a head

#1 it flys good

#2 it's easy to sharpen and takes a hair poppin edge

#3 it's strong

#4 cuts a big hole

The Ace Super Express has all of the above. All plus's no minus's. There's other good heads on the market, I just happen to like the Ace.

From: Elkhuntr
Date: 07-Feb-12

Elkhuntr's embedded Photo



Here are three broadheads I recently "tested". I have a Ph.D. in redneck, so you dummies try and stay wif me. :)

All arrows tuned the same, weigh the same plus or minus a few grains, and shot from the same bow with my poor finger release. I shot them into the butt of my Bear target, about a half dozen times each. I am proud to say the kill zone of this target is more worn then the butt. LOL.

Zwickey, Ace and Eclipse.......

From: Elkhuntr
Date: 07-Feb-12

Elkhuntr's embedded Photo



All broadheads sharpened by me, to hunting sharpness per my specifications.

Ace is the green fletch white nock, zwickey is the other in this photo. The difference is minimal, to say the least, but the Ace is slightly better by about 3/16" even though the pic may not clearly show that.

From: Jim Davis
Date: 07-Feb-12




Comparing the relative penetration of broadheads into a carcase is the scientific equivalant of casting a handful of dice and attributing the results to something about each die.

Jim

From: Elkhuntr
Date: 07-Feb-12

Elkhuntr's embedded Photo



Ace vs. Eclipse, once again essentially identical penetration.

FWIW, those are my un-scientific results. I know you braniacs can shoot a hole in these results...the media is right, i didn't record the relative humidity, blah, blah, blah.

Enjoy! And, btw way this testing was not done in Africa nor did I consult with my dentist on the testing parameters.

From: Hal9000
Date: 07-Feb-12




So who was the single bevel headed person that invited Ashby to speak at the Expo? lol

From: Sapcut
Date: 07-Feb-12




If you guys just had any merit to your arguments OTHER than your personal preferences, this could be a very good and credible conversation.

From: Bowlim
Date: 07-Feb-12




- One can get a really good read on steel by bend testing, and filling/sharpening, that is pretty much where you are with the ABS Master smith type tests.

- So far I haven't heard any rebuttal of Ashby's contention that the ferulle got dinged. I don't see what difference any of the explanations about dullness etc... make.

- I also don't think we know that all the statements and pictures are for sure cross referenced to all the points being made. Is the head in the pic unsharpened, and was it one of the heads used that failed to penetrate; was it sharpened before the penetration test was done; Where the tests for penetration the same as the tests that yielded dings; There are other tests that yielded dings in the past, and penetration results, etc...

- The real issue here is that Ashby has made negative comments on heads. Makers understandably don't like it. It was a lot easier back in the day when one could just read the report, and nobody new about it, but now they are having a significant impact, and it is tough for anyone who isn't in line. Fair or not. But the same thing happens with bows and arrows, and famous shooters.

From: AWPForester
Date: 07-Feb-12




Ritchie,

Ashby took a broadhead that in all likely hood has killed more animals than any other and put some hog wash to it as to why it wasn't as good as the other, which no doubt was his. Why do you think the broadhead was sharpened so differently than a guy would sharpen one when hunting? And lets face it, the ace will sharpen easier than any other head out there, so it wasn't by accident.

So why do you Ashby lovers think that is so? How is it that the great Ashby doesn't know how to sharpen the easiest head in the world? How is it that the he choose the ACE in the first place? This could be a good discusion if you guys that are so star gazed over Ashby would answer that? I know you aren't him, but you have asked Don to do the same thing and even stated he may be misleading. Personal preferences aside, why to all above?

And here is the kicker I just love: this broadhead that he choose to "compare" too can be bought by the 6 pack for less than 1 of his endoresed kind. Explain why he has picked the proven killer, cheapest to buy head that most seem to use, and compare it to his over priced stuff that one in 1000 use?

Keep in mind, this could be a good conversation if we will take this seriously. And BTW, tell the hundreds of thousands, probably millions, of animals that the "non penetrating ACE heads" have put in the freezers that they don't work as well as Brand "X".

Ashby has made a living off of guys that say "what if". The problem now is he has made it personal too. This maybe the dumbest single handed series of statements one human being has ever made. Are you kidding me? Whether he makes one dime or ten bucks per head, the idea that people are buying into this hog wash makes me laugh. To each his own. Just glad I got alot better things to do than spend my hard earned mnoney on over priced garb, or waste my time worrying about "what if". I'll take the ACE evryday and be happy. Matter of fact, going to orger me some this week.

God Bless

From: Bob Compton's Traditional Bowhunters
Date: 07-Feb-12




This whole thing doesn't make any sense to me. I don't hunt dead water buffalo.

But, if I start hunting dead water buffalo, I'll re-read Ashby.. Well, actually not. He's too verbose for me. Plus, I don't think I will hunt dead buffalo anytime soon.

From: AWPForester
Date: 07-Feb-12




That last post sounds a little harsh. i didn't mean it at the tone it sounded, ecspecially towards Sapcut. I do and did however want to hear the answers to that above questions from you Ashby fans that have in my opinion went way to far in trying to give reasons as to why the great Ashby did what he did, but then had the gall to question the man who called his actios into light.

I think Ashby is at this point operating from a sense of $$$$$$. It is the only way to sell his endorsed stuff. MARKETING. i usually give a feller the benefit of the doubt and realize that it is part of the scheme of things, but this is beyond my comprehension.

God Bless

From: Sapcut
Date: 07-Feb-12




Justin, you know not of what you speak.

An individual does broadhead testing by shooting into tougher animals than we hunt to determine which one does the best. He compared all the heads to each other. He did not compare anything to the "Ashby" broadhead because it did not exist.

One of the broadheads that don't do as well as another happen to be the one you particularly prefer to use. And apparently you get your feelings hurt because your broadhead gets criticized. It erks you to no end that someone that has done so much research doesn't particularly suggest what you personally like. You are so adamant about it you make up accusations that you know nothing about.

If you have so much confidence in the Ace, then why are you acting so insecure about your decisions you have made. Enough to say the great Ashby doesn't know how to sharpen a broadhead.

Your defensive insecurities are blinding you from common sense.

I say it all on wholesome trad love.

From: Jim Davis
Date: 07-Feb-12




Any broadhead that makes it past the ribs is going to kill. Any broadhead that hits a major bone is going to produce random results.

Testing with a buffalo carcase is, as no one noticed above, just like tossing a handful of dice and attributing the outcome to some attribute of each die.

Shooting a carcase or a living animal cannot produce scientific evidence because every shot hits tissue that has a different set of friction, toughness and other conditions.

From: AWPForester
Date: 07-Feb-12




I do know of what I speak. He makes no heads I am certain but looking at the example of the Tuffheads he endorses, it is pretty clear what his intent is. If it isn't single beveled, long and slender, tonto tipped, and cost $30 apiece, it isn't worth it. Pretty mcuh what you and he have been preaching since I been a member here.

I have never shot a deer with the ACE head. I do however like the way they sharpen up and plan to do so in the future. I see them as one of my favorites because they are proven to work and I don't have to sell something to buy them. They fly well and have yet to show me any reason as to why I shouldn't feel this way.

Ritchie, it appears that as always when this subject comes up you are the one that gets very defensive of your beliefs. I have yet to get defensive, I have however told everybody how ridiculious I think it is that a person selling something for the price of 6 other things, makes refernce to how poorly those products are, regardlesss of what history says. With thinking like this the trad bow would have died about 25 years ago. It is in my opinion so self motivated that anyone who can't see that is beyond my reasoning.

If the ACE or any other head he had tested against not been proven from untold millions of succesful kills, he might have a valid point. We all see that this as nothing more than a fellow that believes in his work but he and his endorsed products charges the _ _ _ _ outta everybody else that wants to play along and be like Mike. It simply is the best example of "convincing your product" I have ever seen. In equal reference, it is to the bowhunting world what over priced name brand clothes are to the average American kid. Kinda ironic.

And for the record get online and check the cost of quality steel. It is now where in the ball park to make "his" desired head that expensive. That quality steel comments are not lost in his marketing plan. You can choose to believe as you, or you can choose to believe as me. I choose me. No sense in my world of common sense to believe any different.

I am pretty certain that the Africian tribes that has killed untold millions and millions of those animals over time got it done with what you and he would most certainly describe as inadequate gear. As my whole arguement goes with this kind of nonsense, kinda hard to argue with results.

Your choice, but as with any other novelity item, the ones who are spending their money on them are often the ones that are the defensive one's. So quick to assume because someone speaks out against their beloved choice that they muct be under educated in this subject or just jealous. I see it as a way that the novelty spenders justify the extra $ they spend on it. They are so quick to tell you to mind your own business or make condescending statements about how you are jealous with their choices, while in reality we are bascially telling you why we don't buy into the "crap".

So really Ritchie, I mean no disrespect as I said above, i just do not buy into the bull you or Ashby are pushing. Like I told you before, i haven't killed as much game as Ashby or you with a trad bow, but I am certain tha same can't be said for all the game I have harvested with a bow. And I put my pants on in the morning just like Ashby. I don't need a fella telling me how good something is and than trying to charge a second mortage for it. While he may not be the one charging you for it, he is the one endorsing it with his "Scientific" studies. In my book it is just a little bit on the ironic side of things.

God Bless

From: zebra733
Date: 07-Feb-12




That's it. I'm buying Ace. What a joke this thread is! I like that Bob expressed his concerns over the testing and defended his proven product. I think he was honest and forthcoming about the conversation he had with Ashby. One of the I can't stand about this site is how everyone can't wait to jump on their soapbox.

From: Sipsey River
Date: 07-Feb-12




If anyone believes that Bob of Ace ever misleads his customers or in any way distorts the truth, I say you are wrong. I have met and talked to Bob several times. I have also met Dr Ed Ashby and read many of Dr Ashby's reports and stories. I have no dog in this fight, but it seems to me that all Bob is doing is defending his product from a distorted point of view and a possible misleading demonstration. Just my opinion.

From: Skeet Compton's Traditional Bowhunters
Date: 07-Feb-12




Forget about the broadhead type. He did say something that was interesting. He said, "Have you ever heard anyone say they lost a deer because of too much penetration?". I do agree with a weight forward arrow. How much I don't know. Mine seem too work pretty good with about 17-18% FOC with Zwickey Delta's or Zwickey No Mercy's. I never checked my Eskimo's or Magnus II's but they worked and I'm guessing they were about the same.

From: stavechoker
Date: 07-Feb-12




i got a bunch of ace broadheads at a garage sale enough to last me a long time.i guess if i was going to africa for rhino id pay closer attention.then again it would be cool to take the big 5 w 1 ace broadhead .

From: TDB
Date: 07-Feb-12




OK everyone,,,, First off lets get a few facts straight before this gets too heated.....

1.) Dr Ashby gets a big "0" as for $$$ from the sale of the "Ashby" namesake broadhead, not one red cent goes to him.

2.) Bobs heads weren't the only heads that had less than superior testing results during the study. If you have ever been to one of the siminars you have seen the pics of the piles of heads that didn't make it.

3.) During the test the head that Dr. Ashby most likely considered the best was the Grizzly. Of all the different weight heads from the Grizzly line even several of them failed.

4.) Dr. Ashby's study was self funded. He took no money or indorements from anyone to do it.

Now, for a statement of my own opinion....

It's been several years since Dr. Ashby put his study out for everyone to read (latest release 2008). It seem kinda strange that someone in the archery broadhead business would wait so long in finding out what the study had to show.

I'm going to give Bob the benefit of a doubt and say maybe he felt his product was beyond the test. If so, it still seems that when anykind of testing was done he would atleast be checking it out. I know I read each artical I found about arrows when I was in the business. Your never too knowledgeable or old to learn something new.

I personally agree with most of the study. May not ever hunt dangerous game, but I still want to take full advantage of anything I find fundamental to the way I believe. The points that I speak of are ones that I've tested myself and found to advance my hunting.

I could gone deeper into this with statements that would do nothing to help my cause, but feel it best to say "to each his own".

TDB

From: Sapcut
Date: 07-Feb-12




Justin,

"I am pretty certain that the Africian tribes that has killed untold millions and millions of those animals over time got it done with what you and he would most certainly describe as inadequate gear."

Although not exactly Africa....

http://www.alaskabowhunting.com/PR/Ashby_Papua_New_Guinea_Bows_and_Arrows.pdf

"As my whole arguement goes with this kind of nonsense, kinda hard to argue with results."

That has been my point to all these type discussions for the last 5 years.

From: Elkhuntr
Date: 07-Feb-12




"So far I haven't heard any rebuttal of Ashby's contention that the ferulle got dinged."

It wasn't the ferrule, it was the side of the blade as I understand. Seems odd that bone would be able to do this, doesn't it? I could understand if part of the edge broke off. I can't tell from the picture, is it dinged or gouged, or is the paint just rubbed off?

Maybe ACE needs to put better paint on their broadhead. Or, maybe I just gave Ashby an idea?

From: Hal9000
Date: 07-Feb-12




Jim Davis, that is the most accurate description of Ashby's research I have ever read.

Besides the inconsistent medium impacts, I would also like to SEE (not read) the tuning parameters and shot execution by Ashby to get the full story.

From: AWPForester
Date: 07-Feb-12




Funny the extreme people will go to when it justifies their beliefs.

Swampwalker, you have proved to me that you are not nearly as smart as the "kind Doctor". He has really got you hooked.

Ritchie, what in the wrold does that have to do with the discussion. Do you think this proves anything? The author of that article is ...... Never mind.

Unbelievable. Do what you want. But questioning the fellow who called Ashby's intent into question is pretty ridiculous.

To each his own. God Bless

From: Sapcut
Date: 07-Feb-12




All you Ashby bashers are leaving out one tiny, but rather important bit of information.....his evil motive behind his lies.

What could possibly be his motive over the last 25+ years of field research that would result in such intentional fraudulent behavior.... as you seem to infer.

What say you.... so as to put the credible icing on your bash cake.

From: Hal9000
Date: 07-Feb-12




A while back I read a thread on another message board where Ashby posted an experience he had with a Champion 3D wheel shooter. The 3D Champ said he was not getting penetration on GA whitetails.

So what does Ashby do with this guy? He sets him up with EFOC 700 grains arrows. Brilliant.

Wouldn't you want to check out his setup and tuning first to diagnose the problem? Kinda like rebuilding a motor from the ground up (with oversized pistions), when all it needed was a tune up.

He said the 3D champ was so thrilled about his setup, he was intentionally going aim for the deer's shoulder. Awsome!

Now all the serious hunters in my club hunting midwest whitetails shooting wheels have no penetration problems and are mostly using mechanicals. They know how to shoot and they know how to tune. They absolutely do not want to just wound a deer.

After reading that, I kind a figured Ashby believed what he did and would do or go to extremes to prove his point.

.

From: roger
Date: 07-Feb-12




Sorry, folks.....but, Ashby, his diciples, or my neighbor "Bob" for that matter, can shoot any arrow/broadhead combo they want in to carcasses and it won't impress me in the least. What can I derive from that?. It's not a test - no parameters, no controls, no mediums, no nothing. Every single head in these situations are on their own playing field, every time they are shot in to the same animal, or a different one. It makes absolutely no difference whatsoever, as it is anything but scientific, therefore I can conclude NOTHING from it. He 'tests' different heads differently every single time he, or anyone else launches the arrow.

If YOU want conclusive results that are non debateable, then perform tests in accordance to the scientific principle. Otherwise, your merely buying in to the same he said/she said gossip, conjecture, and inuendo laden rhetoric available all over the internet, the range, or your local bow shop, and other places.

Furthermore, ANYONE, or any company, group, organization, etc., that is testing a product; IS BIASED whether or not they are testing their product or a(product they endorse)in ANY FASHION against any other in the same field, or just others against one another. We should all be smart enough to know this by now. If they do, then it is a marketing ploy an absolutely nothing else.

From: Oldbow Compton's Traditional Bowhunters
Date: 07-Feb-12




I do know of what I speak. He makes no heads I am certain but (looking at the example of the Tuffheads he endorses, it is pretty clear what his intent is. If it isn't single beveled, long and slender, tonto tipped, and cost $30 apiece, it isn't worth it. Pretty mcuh what you and he have been preaching since I been a member here. QUOTE OF AWPForester)

Justin . My name is Joe Furlong I am the sole owner of The TuffHead broadhead. Like Bob Mayo, who I consider a personal friend , a person becomes motivated or forced for one reason or another to defend themselves or their product.

I designed the Tuffhead and worked on it over a four year period before it was brought to market.I did not consult or have any contact with Dr Ashby I actually never even had any contact with him until the broadhead was on the market and then our introduction was through a third party . Our first meeting ever was at Kazzo

I had read and practically memorized his findings before I decided to build a broadhead. I am a true believer in Dr Ashby findings but not without testing all of his principals. I decide to build this broadhead for my own satisfaction .One might say I was fanatical in the endeavor it became the top priority on my bucket list I started the venture when I was 68 I will be 73 in just several days. I met my goal that is building a broadhead that included all of Ashby’s 12 principals . My wife of 52 years says” no one can say you don’t put your money where your mouth is”

To say one endorses a product indicates there might be a commercial or monetary connection I assure you that that is absolute not the case. Maybe it it’s the choice of words. I have heard recently that Dr Ashby has made positive comments about the TuffHead. If he has, or if he were to make comments, they would have to be mostly positive as this is truly a prototype of his own ideas.

I believe Dr Ashby to be a stand up person A person who became interested in a subject and like me may be became more phonetical in his testing than most would understand . Dr Ashby has made a great contribution to archery. Without his studies we would not even be discussing different options for broadhead design .This is a good thing for all of us, as to many of us have become complacent in our equipment use. It may be hard for some to believe that a person would do anything if there was not monetary gain. This is sad !

Justin ,if I read more into the post than was intended please except a apology .It is hard to express true feelings in the written word. For some reason this post struck me wrong

From: swampwalker
Date: 07-Feb-12




Yes, and God bless you, too, AWP. I forgive you.

From: TDB
Date: 07-Feb-12




AWP,

You have finally shown everyone how bad off you are. The commits you have made here have no merrit. Just like the one you made on another thread about shooters with longer draws.

Please grow up....

TDB

From: Sapcut
Date: 07-Feb-12




Justin (AWP),

Do you also post on the Lexus forum ranting of your disgust of how someone could pay $70K for a Lexus SUV?

Can you believe you are actually saying that about how someone can pay a particular price of anything? Just because you don't prefer to.

BTW, TuffHeads are not $30 a pop...more like $20, quite a bargain. Joe Furlong, owner of TuffHeads is also a stand up guy just like Bob and Jan with Ace Broadheads.

BTW again, I endorse Lexus and TuffHeads. Because they are the best products I have seen for what I plan to do with them....Navigate in tough terrain every day and bust through bone to kill deer where other broadheads have less of a chance....according to past experiences and some good research I heard about.

But seriously, the bottom line, IMO, is....its just a broadhead, its just people's preferences that may or may not be the same. It really isn't worth loosing sleep or more importantly traditional Leatherwall friendships.

From: Roger Norris Professional Bowhunters Society - Associate Member Compton's Traditional Bowhunters
Date: 07-Feb-12




I have punched a bunch of deer thru and thru with Ace broadheads. I love that they are an old time American company, and thier products do exactly what they are supposed to do.

Too bad Ashby mentioned them.

I can tell you for sure I won't be spending $100 on 3 broadheads.

From: AWPForester
Date: 07-Feb-12




TDB, not sure what you are referring to where I stated that long darw was bad. But, whatever you are referring to I am certain after hearing which side of this debate you are on, you should just save your breath because it will go wasted on my ears. Pretty sure not a lot you can tell me that is going to make much sense. You showed some real class you there.

Sapcut, what point of my discussion has brought the lexus analogy on. I am not questioning your choices or motives which I have made plainly clear. I have as however told you my reasoning, which the last time I checked has the same merit with me as your's does with you. Buy your lexus or tuffheads, it is your right. For me there are better choices. You guys are making this about something it isn't.

The point of this whole thing is that you Ashby guys have jumped on the originator of the thread like he has some hidden agenda. You acted as if there is no way he was the one that had been wronged by the "kind Doctor". All because Ashby said so. I think the fellow has done a great job just being cordual, while you guys continue to throw insinuating questions his way. Who in the world gives you fellas the final say so in whether he was telling the truth or not. Do you honestly believe that he is lieing?

And yeah I am irritated. I was irritated when I read the first posts about how "you" doubted Bob's intent. You are still basing all this doubt on some guy that makes a living from guys like you. The only problem for me is as I have addressed, his products are 3-4 times more expensive. But more than that, it quite possibly has something to do with the expierence I have that makes me not agree with it too. Which is WHY I do not buy into it.

Once again because a cheaper alternative has voiced their opinion against Ashby, I am beign accussed of bashing the more expensive item just because it is more expensive. I have said it about 5 times now. BUY WHAT YOU WANT!!!!!!! Just don't be suprised everybody doesn't agree with you. Bob, hasn't got anything to gain by being dishonest. What do you have to gain by suggesting that?

God Bless

From: JRW
Date: 07-Feb-12




I agree with Ritchie about Joe Furlong. I've known him for over a decade through our state's bowhunting organization and consider both he and his wife very stand up people. I remember at every banquet there were two donations you could always count on: Ace Archery Tackle and Black Rhino Bows (now operated by Chuck Jones, another great guy and highly talented bowyer). Joe and his wife are top notch people and a tremendous wealth of knowledge.

From: xtrema312
Date: 07-Feb-12




I attend the seminar. I got that there are things you can do to greatly improve your arrow penetration for heavy bone game as well as big stuff in general. Also that most stuff works on most animals most of the time. However, what happens when things don’t go right? He also said you do not have to do everything, but doing some things will help you.

His comments are based on years of testing on actual animal tissue with side-by-side comparisons. I didn’t catch where he did unequal comparisons.

He has put a lot of effort into his work and on his own time and dollar. I have yet to hear or read anything indicating he is motivated to be untruthful. Even if he got a kickback on broad head sales, I cannot believe it would begin to pay a Dr. for all his time and expense.

Shooting animal tissue makes scene to me. The only thing better is live animals, and I understood that was part of it also. I do not see where shooting anything not animal tissue and bone would be more scientific. I am not a scientist, but I fail to see a the lack of science in his testing.

I am sure he did testing with arrows not tuned, dull heads and all sorts of things so he could quantify how much these issues impact penetration. His data appeared to be based on individual variables to determine the effect of each on penetration. It sounds like that was part of his methodology. However, I understood when he tested effectiveness of broadheads, it was equal tune, arrow weight and sharpness. The only variable was head designs, and strength.

Hpointed out the down side of week components, soft steel, needlepoints, two blade double bevel, three blades, dull heads, light arrows and other factors. Just about everyone making archery tackle could probably say he in some way put down some of their products if they believe his testing to determine ultimate bone penetration arrows indicates that everything but the top of the line item is not capable of good performance in general. He only pointed out what factors can have less than ideal results on worst-case heavy bone hits.

I took most of his photos as examples of points he was trying to convey. I did not take the photo of the ace head as a dismissal of the head. I saw nothing that indicated it was a head used for sharp head penetration testing. I only got that anything on a head that can catch bone as it goes through bone would slow down the arrow. It is unfortunate if that was not clearly presented and cast doubt on obviously well respected product.

I have not followed all his work. I do not plan to go to Africa. I will not build the ultimate arrow for breaking bone. I will not shoot $30 + broadheads. I will make a couple changes to make a better penetrating arrow for what I hunt.

The basic logic of his findings was too convincing to ignore for me. I did not need the data to prove to me that the basic issues were valid. The data just quantified to some extent. How many people would argue that the following will not be better for penetration in general and particularly on bone hits?

Well tuned arrow

Heavy arrow

Sharp broadhead

A slick surface braodhead

A single bevel head that naturally splits bone due to rotation and wedging as it pushes forward.

A head that has a point that does not curl when it hits something hard

A broadhead that holds a great edge so it is not dulled before it can pass through a critter even after cutting through a bone.

An arrow shaft, insert, adaptor….. that don’t break when it hits a bone

An arrow that is smaller than the base of the head or tapered to reduce friction in tissue and bone.

I think those things are reasonably obvious. I also agree with the FOC to some extent based on my experiences after going to carbon arrows and having to have HFOC to tune arrow and get the arrow weight I wanted. The flight and penetration benefits are there for me. Now some may argue with this.

I understand someone wanting to defend his or her product if it has been misrepresented on purpose or unintentionally. I do not get all the bashing. Much of it looks to be baseless among other things. .

In addition, for those who dismiss all his finding, you can kill a grizzly bear with a .22, but I do not mind having something with a little more punch just in case I do not hit the right spot.

From: TDB
Date: 07-Feb-12




I doubt you will find anyone that drives the heavy arrow, bone splitting broadhead road that would say Bob and his heads are bad for business.

I've known Bob and his wife for several years (maybe not as friends, but as a brother business) and no one has said anything bad about them. If so, I would be the first to step in and correct the other person.

The test just happen to show a minor flaw in design when it came to penetration on super heavy bone. There is no doubt they work fine on average size game when heavy bone is not impacted.

Even in Dr. Ashbys study the only problem he talked about was with the lugs that attach the ferrel to the blade.

The point of two men not agreeing has been made. I say let them work it out.

TDB

From: AWPForester
Date: 07-Feb-12




Oldbow, I just noticed your post. I am not real sure about what I said that would have struck you wrong or was hard to understand. I know not Doctor Ashby,nor you, nor Bob Mayo. And I have to admit that the example I used was one that I pulled from what I have seen in advertising he does with the broadhead. One I am certain that you are aware of. I care not to know the finical reasons or agenda's or lack of him backing this product.

As stated above, the point I was making and am making and will forever make is that I have an extreme problem with these Ashby guys acting like his word is better than Bob's to the extent they are basically calling this guy a liar because he addressed something Ashby had in his reports. And quite frankly Joe, that has irritated me.

So while the example of your broadhead was one I pulled out of thin air based on advertising that we all see, I made some references to the 2 that obviuosly isn't the situation. For that I apologize about dragging your research and develoment into this to be used as an xample. Whether or not he is gaining monetary value from your broadhead design is not even realitive to the point I was trying to make. Which is if Ashby say's it's raining, it's raiing so to speak. To the point these guys are willing to question a very repsected business man?

Oldbow, Your right, this is sad. Sad to the point that men will get on here and call others liars based on a piece of paper. Like I said, if I offended you I apologize. I never meant that unless you feel the way these guys have acted, which i am sure you don't by your post. I am not questioning the intergrity or the honesty of Ashby or anyone else here. I do think the people that seem to think it is ok to question another based on the gopsel of Ashby need to take a break and catch their breath.

I am done.

From: TDB
Date: 07-Feb-12




AWP quotes:

If it helps you tune your arrow then fine. I for one never pick and arrow that is so grossly over spined in the first place to have to put 300 grains on to tune out, which is how these guys are getting there FOC % so high. If they didn't shoot such long draws they would see better performance in a stock setup.

I have never shot a deer with the ACE head.

Funny the extreme people will go to when it justifies their beliefs

AWP,,,Need I post more....... or can we say your quotes are like the pot calling the kettle black.

TDB

From: Oldbow Compton's Traditional Bowhunters
Date: 08-Feb-12




AWPForester Thanks for your reply.

Actually I am not familiar with the advertisement that you are referring to. I know of no advertisement that DR. Ed Ashby and Tuffhead are mentioned together. Maybe you can be more specific and shed more light on this ? Joe Furlong

From: AWPForester
Date: 08-Feb-12




Oldbow, I just checked the add and see that it was the ABS head and not the tuffhead. Not real sure how they made that one without paying royalties to you, But none the less I was wrong and I apologize about mixing you and yours into this discussion as an example. Point well made and taken. You showed some real class there and I appreciate that.

TDB, not sure why you thought I wasn't refering to myself also. I just set and typed in front of this computer for 3 hours last night, so I never denied what I said and include me in it. I still don't know what the long draw is about and how that is supposedly a wrong or dumb statement. I won't address it here though.

God Bless

From: Penny Banks
Date: 08-Feb-12




The post by Extrema312 is clear, concise, well thought out and presented. The fact that I agree with it is just the cherry on top.

Like I alluded to in my post of yesterday the topic of Dr. Ed Ashby is polariszing to say the least. And I am sure nothing I have to say will change anyone's mind in the least.

It does serve to get a good dust up going on the Leatherwall and that increases usage so I am sure Pat loves to see the topic come up.

One thing I have gotten out of all this is that I am going to try the Tuffhead. Any product that is the result of the efforts of such a gentleman is worthy of a try on my part.

From: Oldbow Compton's Traditional Bowhunters
Date: 08-Feb-12




AWPForester

Thanks for the respose.Things like that happen Of couare I never have made a mistake LOL

Joe Furlong

From: Sapcut
Date: 08-Feb-12




I told ya Old Bow Joe was a good guy, but so is AWPForester. Just passionate about archery.

From: Ollie Professional Bowhunters Society - Qualified Member Compton's Traditional Bowhunters
Date: 08-Feb-12




I think all broadhead and arrow testing should be banned because if the test does not conclude that your broadhead/arrow is not the best performing one out there those people are going to get mad about it.

From: Linecutter
Date: 08-Feb-12




Okay I am going to play stupid here. I have read all of this and I have YET TO SEE what the difference in penetration is in the ACE broadhead or Brand X's broadhead. Is it a half inch, 2 inches, 6 inches or are we just spliting hairs here. I have read Ashby's first report but haven't seen the second report. Is there in the real world, any REAL difference in the depth of penetration. Or is it like Elkhunters photos A VERY SMALL difference in penetration.

Sapcut, Someone can have a agenda if they are trying to prove they are right and sku the statistics. Globel Warming sound familure. I have no bones with Ashby, but IF Bob is right and the ACE broadhead wasn't sharpened and Brand X's was and it was modified while sharpening to impove penetration it maybe he is trying to reinforce the premise that single edges penetrate better, because of the first testing. Think about it, for years because of the first report alot of people have thought single beveled blades penetrated better (I was one of them). Now all of a sudden in the second testing a double beveled broadhead penetrates better. What would that say? HMMMM maybe single beveled blades don't REALLY penetrate any better than double beveled ones? This would contradict the previous testing that so many came to believe. So to maintain the premis that single beveled heads do penetrate better, he doesn't sharpen, or does't sharpen as well the the double beveled heads so they get less penetration, he wouldn't have to explain the differeces in his findings between the two reports. Now this has me questioning his testing methods. DANNY

From: Sapcut
Date: 08-Feb-12




No doubt about it.

From: swampwalker
Date: 08-Feb-12




Banned by who tho'? Here's the problem. Anyone can test all they want. They can even publish their results. Who would care? The only way a broadhead maker is going to complain is if the party doing the testing has some credibility. And the results don't come out in their favor. Voila! You have a thread.

From: Phil Magistro
Date: 08-Feb-12




It is very hard to do a realistic comparison of broadhead penetration because of the variables involved. Does a convex blade penetrate better than a straight edge blade? How important is the angle of the blade? How important is ferrule size? Never mind the variables introduced by shaft materials, weight, spine, fletching. And then there's trying to assure good flight while minimizing all the other variables.

I cannot see anyone ever doing a valid test on broadhead penetration. I can see people doing experiments or gathering anecdotal data and compiling that into some type of guideline.

From: Linecutter
Date: 08-Feb-12




Phil,

"I THINK" that is what Ashby intended the first time around to use the info as a guideline, but then it turned into a Monster of sorts. Now, it is possible, he may feel the needs to protect it, "IF" Bob's observations are correct. DANNY

From: Sapcut
Date: 08-Feb-12




Danny, I just read your longer post above.

I totally agree with the 2nd paragraph. Questions to think about.....who did the first two testings and where can I read them? Also, what would be a reason for a person to spend so much time and money trying to prove a single bevel is better...by MAKING the single bevel look better. He has no stake in any broadhead manufacturer.

From: Phil Magistro
Date: 08-Feb-12




I think it's great that he did that testing because it does give food for thought. It seems though that some folks believe that to be the definitive word. I hope (and believe) that he never intended to begin a cult. For what I read in his writings he continually put in disclaimers and comments that seem to be overlooked by his strongest followers.

From: swampwalker
Date: 09-Feb-12




I agree with that. I hope I haven't come across as a mind numbed robot. Too much of it just makes sense. Putting that aside, my original leap into foray had to do with someone being( in my mind) blindsided when it could have man to man. And then cry foul to the masses. I'd back anyone in that situation. Parts of Ashby's testing may be flawed. I'm not smart enough to know either way. I sincerely hope for the best for every manufacturer out there. We're in tough tomes getting tougher.

From: Linecutter
Date: 09-Feb-12




Sapcut, He did the original testing. I believe it was back in the late 80's or early 90's. The one that is out now is as I understand it, the 2nd one he did, that Bob has a problem with. The earlier one was where he said the Grizzly was the better head for strength and penetration. Which started the whole thing with single bevel penetrating better becasue of his report. To anwer your question: "If" he said a double bevel would penetrate better in these testings, it would invalidate his the finding on his first report. It has nothing to do with a manufacture, but for him validating his original findings. DANNY

From: Bowlim
Date: 09-Feb-12




Phil it is a good thing some game departments took his testing seriously, otherwise we would not have some of the opportunities that we do have for African hunting (not that I am taking advantage, :)).

Hunters in Africa in the past, and in many jurisdiction in places like Europe today don't have the luxury of just tossing their hands up in despair over the difficulties of perfect tests. And I think it is a good thing that people like Doctor Ashby have made and effort to advance the spread of bowhunting.

Here is a site that has some tracking info on the ongoing fight to get seasons in Europe:

http://www.europeanbowhunting.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=55&Itemid=49

From: Sapcut
Date: 09-Feb-12




Danny, the way I understand it is that he has many tests and batches of tests. He has concluded from the test shots that were taken that the single bevel was better. There were many double bevel broadheads tested as well. As any research of any kind, most the readers were not present at the time the broadheads were sharpened or shot into the animals. As with any research, you read it and assume the author isn't being untruthful or fraudulent. If you think the author is untruthful or fraudulent and want to make such an allegation then, to have any credibility, you need some serious evidence to show it OTHER than a different personal preference. As of today I personally haven't seen anything that would make me think the Ashby reports are invalid. Nor have I seen or heard any credible reason or motive for Ashby to NOT be totally above board. However, I am totally open to it. And remember, I am probably one of the few here that did not have an agenda or personal preference before l started looking for a better more lethal bow and arrow. I did not know enough to already get entrenched in my ways to think that I already new the ropes.

Phil,

Do you think I would be considered a follower of the Ashby cult if I were to say....create a website for myself and post all the Ashby research for everyone to see?

From: Stan
Date: 09-Feb-12




I have always followed Fred Bears advice on arrow weight.. Common sense and 40 plus years of hands on.. If I always worried about " what ifs" I would never leave the house... But I guess some folks just need something to argue about..

From: Linecutter
Date: 09-Feb-12




Sapcut, I understand what you are saying but, with his first report it created the belief that single bevel broadheads penetrated better, partially because, alot of other broadheads were poorly made, which they may have been. Back then Grizzly was about the only broadhead that had, for lack of better dicription, reinforcing out to the tip which helped it hold together and therefore penetrate better, in the type of animals he was using as a test medium. Because of the report I believe made manufactures impove the quality of the broadheads they produced. Again it created the hype that single bevel broadheads penetrated better. In what I read it wasn't so much single bevel broadhead penetrated better as much as broadhead construction design, improved the penetration because it held together. You put a double bevel on that broadhead design I will bet you it WILL penetrate as deep as a single bevel design. Broadhead metalurgy and design for strength has come quite a ways since then. BUT ther ARE some bad one out there still. If Ashby uses the phrase good metal and bad metal to descibe what is used in broadheads he needs to discribe in detail what metal hardness and compisition was used for the broadhead and how he deterimine it was good or bad. Or was it more broadhead design using that metal. Back to what Bob has said earlier, he saw that the broadhead in the picture that Ashby showed had not been sharpened. If anyone knows their broadheads IT IS the manufacture. If he says the broadhead HAD NOT been sharpened I have to believe him, HE makes them, he knows the factory edge (I never did understand why manufactures do not put a hunting edge on their broadheads but that is another thread.). He should know if one of his broadheads have been sharpened. We all know that a sharpened head WILL out penetrate a unsharpened head in almost any medium. You asked what motive Ashby has to maintain a single bevel penetrates better, mainly becasue he doesn't have to back track on his orginal claim. It would dispell the arguements IF there were another tester to comfirm or dispell his findings, as it is HE is the only one doing them. It needs to be repeatable by someone other than him or someone associated with him. DANNY

From: Phil Magistro
Date: 09-Feb-12




Sapcut, It wouldn't take a website. Based on what you've shown here and your unrelenting support of Ashby's work you definitely qualify as a cult member. :) I'm not being judgemental, I don't believe it's necessarily good or bad that you bought into his findings. But I do believe that you have, through your writing here, shown an unwillingness to acknowledge that Ashby's findings aren't a law of physics and many people that don't subscribe to hid guidelines have had success.

From: Sapcut
Date: 09-Feb-12




Phil, respectfully, how could you utter that towards me when you have a personal website with many links to Jack Howard's research. And nothing wrong with that until you throw stones at someone else for preferring another way that doesn't match yours or the author you follow.

That's is unbelievable.

From: Sapcut
Date: 09-Feb-12




Danny, I agree... the structural integrity was one part of the testing. Then the next thing he found was that when the broadheads did not fail, the single bevel did better when bone was hit.

It was all about what was the best setup when hitting big bone.

Yes, there have been improvements since then.

From: Phil Magistro
Date: 09-Feb-12




Sapcut, you misunderstand. Yes I have links to Jack's work but I don't follow what his findings show. I don't totally agree that it is as simple as finding the shaft weight that penetrates best because, just as I argue against blindly accepting Ashby's work, there are too many variables involved and nobody has done a test that removes all variables.

I put those documents up years ago when Jack and I were friends and I was helping him try to sell his business. I've never told anyone that they should shoot a light arrow because it penetrates further, even though Jack's work proves that beyond a doubt. But it only proves the influence of the weight of the shaft, nothing more.

To set the record straight, unlike you, I am not solidly in either camp. I shoot average weight arrows - 9 to 10 gpp, just like the vast majority of hunters. I did a lot of experimentation with both light and super heavy arrows (even going back to before Ashby did his research) and found what I prefer. I have 190 grain Grizzlys mounted on weighted shafts and I have unweighted Goldtip 3555s with a 125 grain head and I settled on the middle road.

So don't assume that just because I don't blindly accept Ashby's work that I am the exact opposite. I have a more open mind than that.

From: Sapcut
Date: 09-Feb-12




I was researching for the best and then some. Read extensive research on shooting arrows into large beasts. Applied that information as I built my arrows. Without a doubt the result is....I have a more indestructible and bone breaker of an arrow than I did before.

What a terrible thing to do

From: Phil Magistro
Date: 09-Feb-12




Researching for the best and then some? Be honest, you read Ashby's report and stopped there. If you had read more you wouldn't be so zealous about his recommendations because there are decades of work out there of research that both support and go against what he said. You may still use high FOC arrows but you'd be more accepting that there isn't really any scientific or anecdotal proof that says anything else is inferior.

I am not saying that you should change anything that you do. Whatever makes you happy and confident is the way to go. As for me, I'm just not drinking that or any kool-aid.

From: Sapcut
Date: 09-Feb-12




Researching "for the best and then some" meant bow and arrow setup".

If you will, steer me towards any information I haven't seen that studies the shooting of hunting arrows into animals. Because that is what I'm interested in, shooting hunting arrows into animals, and what I want my bow and arrow to do as well as possible.

If you can explain to me how my setup, mostly based on Ashby's reports, is inferior or lacking and you know of something better, then I will be glad to listen. Until then, I will feel very good about my chances when it comes to maximizing penetration through any part of an animal I may shoot. And others can obviously do the same.

From: roger
Date: 09-Feb-12




Sapcut, having "a more indestructable arrow" is mutually exclusive to the supposed or assumed 'benefits' of UFOC, and you keep interchanging the two theories. It's at a point with this where you don't know what you don't know, and don't want to admit it.

No one told you what you use is a bad idea. Those heavy broadheads are a good idea due to their structural integrity. But, to make statements supportive of them magically out flying lighter ones is utterly ridiculous.

From: Phil Magistro
Date: 09-Feb-12




You know that Ashby's work is the most extensive of its kind. That doesn't mean it's all accurate or relevant but it's the most extensive. So if the criteria for being correct is the volume of the work then you are on the right track. On the other hand, the number of pages is never a true barometer on validity of the work.

By asking me to steer you to any work on shooting into live animals tells me that you haven't looked far beyond Ashby.

Like I said, everyone should shoot whatever they are confident with.

From: Linecutter
Date: 09-Feb-12




Sapcut,

It is kinda like hunting deer with a 308 and a 300 Win Mag. Both are 30cal one flies faster and hit harder. If both hit the deer in the spinal area the deer drops like a rock, bullet hits the deer in the chest with either caliber, deer dies. Compared to the 308 the 300 Win Mag is over kill. Nothing wrong with over kill. But basically that is what you have/are striving for and arguing for is Over kill in the deer woods and again NOTHING wrong with that.

I was impressed with Ashby's first report years ago and believe the single bevel head was the best at that time. But I really started looking at the head. Make it a double bevel and because of the design with the reinforcing to the point and it to will split bone and penetrate just as well. That thicker center opens the bone more causing less drag on the outer edges allowing for better penetration through bone. Plus that larger opening caused by the thicker blade, it creates less drag on the feral and shaft as it passes through the bones opening, has nothing to do with the single bevel. Also the Grizzly is along the lines of what Howard Hill recommended long and narrow, again reducing drag through bone unlike most double bevel heads that seem to be wider causing increased drag through bone and of coarse tissue. All in all Sapcut it has absolutely nothing to do with single bevel it has to do with broad head design. DANNY

From: Sapcut
Date: 09-Feb-12




Boy are you searching hard. Ok Roger....a more indestructible arrow INCLUDING 32+% FOC because, so far, the higher the FOC in the arrows I build the better they fly. Sooooo....... I don't mind shooting a 850-1000 grain arrow within 20 yards because it flys almost, if not, identical to a lower FOC, lighter arrow that I was previously shooting. Due to that fact, the now heavier arrow will be better a bit stouter at impact.

"Don't know what you don't know". ??

Although I can't scientifically explain it, it is crystal clear to me who don't know what they don't know. The same ones trying to convince me of something they will not do for themselves and yet imply negatively towards something they obviously don't know about.

You should try it Roger then talk.

From: roger
Date: 09-Feb-12




I have tried it. You assume too much - something I don't do. If Ashby could prove anything by now, he would.

From: Phil Magistro
Date: 09-Feb-12




Sapcut, now you're searching hard. I told you that I tried heavy arrows with a high FOC.

The fact is that there is no way for you to scientifically explain it. So let's get past that and just say that you're doing it that way because you want to. And you cold be as right or as wrong as the rest of us.

From: Greg Professional Bowhunters Society - Associate Member
Date: 09-Feb-12




I think Xtrema312 said it better than anyone, and I agree with his general conclusions.

It has been awhile since I read through all of the Ashby material, but it seems to me as though Ashby noted that he made an effort to "level the playing field" so to speak in testing different broadheads in regard to sharpness, tuning of arrows, etc. so as to be comparing apples to apples insofar as possible, but I might be remembering incorrectly. Whenever I have read anything from Ashby, including recent posts from other forums, he always comes across to me as being very fair-minded and non-judgmental in his overall attitude, offering his findings as an option that anyone can use if he so chooses, but not trying to enforce an agenda.

I personally have seen some benefit from building and shooting arrows which follow his recommendations, although I like to use flexibility where necessary. The largest animal I will ever hunt will be an elk, but since I don't shoot bows much over 55# I like to maximize the equipment I am using, including arrows and broadheads, so I'm appreciative of anyone whose experience can help me in that endeavor.

I have rather limited experience when it comes to penetration comparison of various broadheads in animals, but I have shot a number of different broadheads while practicing, stumpshooting, etc., so I have somes opinions on what makes up a tough, easy to sharpen head. I shoot into sand banks quite a bit and there are occasionally rocks hidden beneath the sand surface. I will say that of the heads I have tried (Grizzly, Ace Standard and the big 200 grain Express, Magnus, Tusker, Snuffer, Woodsman, Stos) the Ace Standard 160 is by far the toughest, and Stos is right along side of it.

All the others mentioned have bent or failed in one way or another. The Ace Standard has the triple thickness all the way out to the tip and that resists bending better than all of the others, in my experience, even including the El Grande by Grizzly. It is also very easy to sharpen. I like the El Grande because it flies extremely well, but I don't find it quite as easy to sharpen as the Ace 160.

I'm not so sure that throwing rocks at one another as so often happens in these threads serves much real purpose, because most of us still go right on doing as we always have, regardless of what anyone else says. But sometimes we can glean a bit of new information in spite of it all. Personally, I like to try different things with my trad archery. If I try something and it doesn't work the way someone else said it should, I leave it and try something else, but if it's not broke I don't try to fix it. Part of the fun, though, is trying new things.

From: Sapcut
Date: 09-Feb-12




Danny,

"But basically that is what you have/are striving for and arguing for is Over kill in the deer woods and again NOTHING wrong with that."

I hope it is. Because if it is then I will never have to worry about not recovering a deer and hopefully anything else I shoot.

"your second paragraph".....I agree with you and if not mistaken, that is what Ashby reported about the Ace broadhead except that he noted the non smooth lugs created more friction in his test medium (a big rib), which makes perfect sense to me.

What also makes perfect sense to me is that the rotating of the single bevel, especially the wider bevel of the TuffHead 300, will aid in splitting and moving the bone creating less friction for the following arrow.

Roger,

I apologize for assuming. I thought you hadn't tried it. Tell me more about what you actually did...arrow weight, FOC % and what happened.

"If Ashby could prove anything by now, he would." I would say if anyone can prove him wrong they would.

Also, regarding FOC, Ashby posted on one of the sites a couple years ago about a demonstration he conducted at a public seminar/hunting show/whatever. (Trying to paraphrase here) ...He used a wooden dowel with a rubber washer on the dowel. The washer could slide up and down the shaft when forced to. He would put the washer in the middle of the arrow creating low FOC. Slide it down toward the end creating more FOC and then farther down creating bunches of FOC.

He shot the dowel each time the washer was moved. I think he used a shooting machine but not sure. The arrow went farther and farther each time he created more FOC with the washer.

I wish I could find that post, maybe someone will remember it as well.

Phil,

"I told you that I tried heavy arrows with a high FOC."

Tell me what you did and what happened....%FOC, arrow weight?

"The fact is that there is no way for you to scientifically explain it."

You are correct sir and I have said that numerous times. So why don't you and Roger scientifically explain what happens for me. Seriously, if what I say is happening with my arrows when I shoot my arrows IS NOT happening, then what IS happening?

"So let's get past that and just say that you're doing it that way because you want to."

I have been past it for quite awhile because I am in no need of a scientifically explaining it to myself. It appears others can't get past me getting past it. :)

And..."I am doing it that way because I want to"... because my arrow flys better, more accurately and I get benefits, other than high FOC %, from building my arrow with as much FOC I can muster. However, as stated before, I didn't begin shooting the UEFOC arrow because it flew flatter at my hunting distances. I began trying to build my arrows that way because the Ashby research had hard data that suggested the more FOC, above 19%, the better penetration, even with light weight bows. I didn't know any better, so that is the route I decided to take. The result of deciding to take that route is explained in a post not far north of here.

From: Phil Magistro
Date: 09-Feb-12




Heavy arrows, high FOC - lousy trajectory.

Several folks here did scientifically explain what happens but you didn't accept it.

I'm glad things work well for you. And I seriously mean that. It was never my intent to talk you into changing.

I'm done. This horse was dead a long, long time ago but I needed the diversion.

From: Gaur
Date: 09-Feb-12




Sapcut you are like a dog on a bone about these threads

From: MQQSE
Date: 09-Feb-12




So let's all shake hands and agree to disagree and move on to the next topic. Shall we???

From: Michael Schwister Professional Bowhunters Society - Associate Member
Date: 10-Feb-12




Bob

I have bent and or broke several of the brand x heads, have never damaged an ace standard 160. Have had great luck with ACE!

From: Sapcut
Date: 10-Feb-12




MQQSE,

We shall.

From: LINECUTTER
Date: 10-Feb-12




Sapcut, Ashby says that but, can't prove it. The broadhead is moving under tissue where its actual cutting and what is going on can't be seen. If he was using balistic gelatin with the bones and a high speed camera and show the drag created with the tabs though bone, then I could believe it, but right now he is guessing/assuming. Again if Bob is correct and the broadhead was not sharpened, that unsharpened broadhead would increase the drag through tissue. "IF" the broadhead was not sharpened, that would also explain the decrease in penetration more so, than blaming it on something, he can not see happening, but is willing to blame for the decreased penetration. DANNY

From: Sapcut
Date: 10-Feb-12




Danny, I think you're correct. Ashby can't "prove" the lugs on the side of the broadhead impeded penetration compared to a smooth sided broadhead. I also think you're very correct that if Bob is right and the broadhead was not sharpened, then the test results are very skewed.

But just like Ashby can't prove the lugs on the side impede penetration, you can't "prove" an UNsharpened broadhead impedes penetration.

And yes....I know full well that it is very much common sense to both of us that a dull surface will not cut like a sharp surface.

It's the same common sense that tells me that the dull bumpy surface of the side of the broadhead worhwuld also impede penetration......compared to a "sharper" smoother surface.

To be clearer, have nothing against Bob or Ace broadheads and I really do like the triple layer tip of the Ace.

From: Linecutter
Date: 10-Feb-12




Sapcut,

UH yes you can prove that a unsharpend broadhead impedes penetration, by the difference in the amount of force needed to push a sharpened one through a medium compared to the force needed for a unsharpened one. Using the same model of broadhead, using the same medium, and same thickness of that medium. (Also the denser the medium the more force needed for that penetration, which increases more if something is unsharpened, compared to something that has been sharpened.) For that matter I do it every year when I sharpen broadheads. Using only the weight of a arrow with the broadhead I use. Holding a slack rubber band and allowing only weight of the arrow and broadhead to cut through the rubber band by pushing the broadhead forward across the rubber band. If the broadhead is sharp it will slice right through the rubber band using only that weight. If it is not sharp it will either not cut it, or I will have to add pressure on the arrow and broadhead combo to cut through it. Or you can just use a sharpened knife compared to a unsharpened one cutting through meat. Needless to say it takes more force to cut through meat with a unsharpened one. So yes you can prove sharpened penetrates better than unsharpened.

You are right a smoother surface will slide through a medium better than a ruff surface. The thing is though going through a live animal things change a bit. That broadhead (and arrow for that matter) becomes lubricated with blood and that almost negates what little resistance there might be with all the more those tabs rise above the actual blade. I assume you have shot the white flat ethofoam targets and you know they stop arrows by friction. You want to see how little effect those targets have at stopping a arrow when it is lubricated, place a tomato in front of a new ethofoam target shoot through the tomato and see if that ethofoam target stops that arrow, I don't care if you use a field point or broadhead. I found it out when a buddy of mine put a small cucumber in front of his and said see if you can hit it years ago. Took us 10 minutes to find that arrow. Point is those itty bitty tabs make very little difference once they become lubricated.

Okay back to sharp and unsharpened, so the broadhead is now lubricated in the body the broadhead has still got to cut its way through tissue. The sharpened one will have less resistance because of being sharp and lubricated, allowing easier cutting through the tissue, taking less energy for cutting, it allows the arrow and broadhead to penetrate deeper, because it will maintain a higher degree of energy for a longer period. A unsharpened broadhead even though lubricated uses more energy to push (not cut) its way through the tissue, using up a greater percentage of the arrow and broadhead energy, and not allow the arrow to penetrate as deep.

Now if Ashby said that the ACE broadhead did not penetrate as well as the Brand X blade because Brand X was narrower allowing for less resistance passing through tissue and bone with a longer cutting surface, If the feral height is the same on both broadheads, the narrower but thicker blade will have less drag through bone because initial impact whole was deeper (due to the thicker blade) the feral was causing the bone to lift away more from the broadhead edges (splitting the bone more like a wedge) as it was passing through the broadhead impact whole in the bone, causing less resistance/pressure on the broadhead as a whole (it is a matter of geometry narrower would pass through that whole better than wider),and if both broadheads were sharpened. I could accept this. That is not what Ashby said, and it doesn't sound as if both broadheads were both sharpened. He blamed the thin tabs along the mid line of the ACE that are soldered in place, for the reason the broadhead didn't penetrate as well. Now you maybe able to accept Ashby reasoning but experience with sharp things for many years tells me his methods are flawed. DANNY

From: Sapcut
Date: 10-Feb-12




Troy,

Have you seen Ashby do this at a show?

"Also, regarding FOC, Ashby posted on one of the sites a couple years ago about a demonstration he conducted at a public seminar/hunting show/whatever. (Trying to paraphrase here) ...He used a wooden dowel with a rubber washer on the dowel. The washer could slide up and down the shaft when forced to. He would put the washer in the middle of the arrow creating low FOC. Slide it down toward the end creating more FOC and then farther down creating bunches of FOC."

From: TDB
Date: 10-Feb-12




Sapcut,

I did the "tuning the EFOC/UEFOC shaft" part for Ed at the K'Zoo expo. I also did the mini shaft test for him on Sunday.

Only difference to the mini test this time was we used a soda straw that had the weights glued in place at different intervals. We even had a mini shooting machine (if that is what you want to call it) to shot the straws with.

The futher forwards the weight the better the straw flew. When the straw with the slightly forward weight was shot it drifTed to the side, did a heavy tail draft downward and fell to the floor. When I shot the weight forward soda straw it shot clean and straight.

TDB

From: Sapcut
Date: 10-Feb-12




What's ironically ironic is that....that is exactly what naturally I would think would happen. The more you isolate the steering, the more efficient the steering.

Kind of like shrinking the 30 arrow into a 5 inch dart. It makes total sense as well as visual and physical sense.

I bet it shot flatter as well...may even lifted a bit.

From: TDB
Date: 11-Feb-12




Couldn't really tell. I know the mid weight straw started out straight, then about 3' out it started ducking off to the left and did the tail down thing. At that point it drifted off course and went off the stage. The weight froward straw never did anything but go straight and all the way to the far wall of the stage.

TDB

From: Phil Magistro
Date: 11-Feb-12




You're relying on a soda straw to support your claims? That is a laughable comparison.

A key ingredient to tuning a bow is having correctly spined arrows. With the correct spine an arrow will fly well without having an extreme FOC. Without having the proper spine the arrow won't fly well no matter what the FOC is. What is the spine of the soda straw?

From: TDB
Date: 11-Feb-12




Phil,

I expected to have someone bring up this when I told of it. As I understand it the test wasn't used to show how proper spine works. It was used to show how increasing the FOC will help in flight.

TDB

From: Phil Magistro
Date: 11-Feb-12




But if you're propelling the straw, then spine does matter a lot to how the straw (arrow) flies. Otherwise the result is misleading.

From: Doug SC
Date: 11-Feb-12




I came from the light fast arrow and 3 blade school of thought. I was into perfect arrow flight and paper testing as long ago as the late 70's.

Dan Quillian first introduced me to Dr Ashby's African broadhead report when I was in his shop around 1991 or 92. My first reaction to the report was the heads I shoot now work fine, I don't hunt Africa, and a double bevel is good. I fully believed my evaluation was right too. Does this sound familiar to you if you have read these threads in the past?

Over the years after several (shoulder/leg/spine) bone stopping hits that resulted in lost game my thoughts were...hunting is my primary use of the bow (3d was a secondary thing for me) perhaps I should setup my arrows for better penetration. Yes accuracy is important. I know the argument “if you hit it where you are supposed to you’ll kill it”. I have taken that to heart, and those that know me know I can hit the mark better than the majority. I was a Boy Scout and believe the motto of “Be Prepared”.

By this time it was the early 2000s. I revisited the old African study, and by now Dr Ashby had done more work on penetration in Australia which I also read. Without a doubt by applying many of the concepts he found which improved penetration in his studies I also found they did the same for me. The single bevel grizzly was about the last thing I added to the equation after finding the rest to work well. I own some 160g ACE heads, but haven’t used them as much as the NAP 125 thunderhead, Bear razorhead, Zwicky Delta and Eskimo, 160g snuffer (original), and 125g woodsman broadheads.

To date every deer I have taken with my penetration enhanced arrows go completely through the deer sticking or laying on the ground (this was not the case before the change). I have yet to hit heavy bone so can not attest to superior performance in that regard.

As for “cult follower” all I can say is if I am one for finding agreement with the Ashby reports after my own in the field experience then I was won over from the other “cult followers” that dismiss the Ashby findings as irrelevant or worse. Actually the use of the term “cult follower” is used to devalue the other person and therefore their argument. A common practice in school yard quibbles and politics!

As an aside: It has been shown that if you have a vested interest or strong belief in something that valid info counter to it well not be assessed with reason, but rather one finds themselves disgusted by the info and the brain uses the area paired with conflict resolution to resolve the situation in favor of one’s interest or belief. this is followed by a release of endorphins to reward the decision in favor of your belief or interest. Very intelligent and good people do this not just the ignorant or bullheaded. Now I may be both ignorant and bullheaded and there is even truth to my initial resolutions (note my resolutions on first reading the African report “the heads I shoot now work fine, I don't hunt Africa, and a double bevel is good”), but the point is they did not invalidate in anyway Ashby’s findings. I now have taken a different approach (applying Ashby’s results), and that for me has shown demonstratable advantages and merit. Your mileage my vary, and what you use is find by me.

From: Bowlim
Date: 11-Feb-12




"He blamed the thin tabs along the mid line of the ACE that are soldered in place, for the reason the broadhead didn't penetrate as well."

He pointed out they sustained damage that was not possible without some loss of penetrating potential.

And the counter argument to this is?

"UH yes you can prove that a unsharpend broadhead impedes penetration"

Dull is dull. In essence he is saying Ace/users should sharpen not only the edges of the head, but also the edges of the tabs.

The industry claim for FOC is that the FOC forward arrow will retain it's aspect in relation to the curvature of the trajectory over long distances. Never really understood this claim since there isn't a fulcrum and all parts of the arrow fall equally fast, whether heavy or not. But that is the claim investigated by Easton etc..., and of interests with slower end bows, over 50+ meter distances.

From: Oldbow Compton's Traditional Bowhunters
Date: 11-Feb-12




I would "guess" that a all the straws would have the basic ingedients ,are the same length, same diameter, and if one could say a straw had a spine they would all be the same.

I don't know why people would say that preparing for the "crap shot" or the "oops shot" is silly. I personally want my equiment to be prepared to handle any situation that could arise as I know sooner or later it is going to.

We all do things every day to cover the things that could happen .We wear a seat belt in "case "we have a accident.We carry a compass (may be two) just in "case". One might carry a extra pair of socks in ther pack just in "case". they might carry a extra candy bar in their pack just in "case" they would get hungry. We prepare for the unusual every day in our life and do not enven consider it. We do it naturally as we know there will be negative results if we dont.

The same can be applied to the hunting set up.

Just my thought and my coice! I know there are some who do not wear seat belts but most carry the eatra snack in their pack.LOL

Joe Furlong

From: Linecutter
Date: 11-Feb-12




Bowjim,

In essence HE/I IS/AM SAYINING a sharpen broadhead will out penetrate a dull one through muscle and bone. A long narrow reinforce broadhead will out penetrate a wider broadhead especially going through bone due to less drag because of the design, ALSO THAT SAME BROADHEAD dull will not penetrate as well through bone or tissue, as the one that is sharpend. The tabs of the ACE may have sustained damage, but if that broadhead was not sharpened, it was a losing battle for it to begin with. Whether through tissue or bone (just like a sharpen ax splits wood better than a dull one) it would be the same for that broadhead going through bone and "COULD" explain the damage to the tabs. It may not have split the bone but just crashed through it becuase of being unsharpened. Again decreased speed, because it was pushing through tissue not cutting, single or double bevel wide or narrow changes NOTHING on that aspect.

A wider broadhead cuts more tissue than than a narrow one because of its width for any given distance. Nobody has said yet what the differences are in the penetration depth of the narrow single bevel compared to the double bevel. If the difference is/was the double bevel penetrated to the off side, didn't exit or penetrate the off side skin, it did as much damage or more than the narrower head internally, the only difference would be it didn't leave a exit hole. DANNY

From: JRW
Date: 11-Feb-12




"I don't know why people would say that preparing for the "crap shot" or the "oops shot" is silly. I personally want my equiment to be prepared to handle any situation that could arise as I know sooner or later it is going to."

Joe,

You make a very valid point, but what I've always found inconsistent is how some folks condemn those of us who use normal arrows, and with that same vigor they defend their use of recurves and longbows. Pound for pound of peak draw weight, compounds will deliver the same arrow with more momentum than a stickbow. So it seems a glaring double standard to only look at the arrow while ignoring the very thing that propels it.

The very same arguments I've read folks use to question the ethics of normal arrows can be easily applied to their choice of bows.

From: Thumper-tx
Date: 11-Feb-12




JRW..

Well said! You are spot on.

From: Sapcut
Date: 11-Feb-12




JRW,

Only look at the arrow? You're kidding. Looking at the arrow is what only a few trad people do. Just take a look at all these threads where the "normal" arrow guys criticize anyone who efforts toward improving their arrows. Where have you been? Most people don't look at their arrow OR bows when preparing for the "what if" shots. They do nothing. That is what most trad guys do. Ignoring the very thing that propels it? They don't do that either.

The good thing about ALL of this which so many of you guys ignore is that when you get older, weaker, injured, etc. you can use a lower weight bow and still have a very confident setup with a more viable arrow. What do you not get about that?

From: roger
Date: 11-Feb-12




Here's some food for thought. I've heard some claim that the long, narrow, all steel, single bevel, tanto'd, 200-300gr broadhead is "the best" choice for whenever a misplaced shot happens. And, I'll go so far as to agree with those statements and thoughts, however, that ONLY applies when a heavy bone structure is impacted by the broadhead. Of course, we're all talking about undulates and other big to dangerous game, just for argument sake.

Now ponder this. Let's say your quarry is something from a Whitetail up to an Elk(typical North American we're likely to encounter) and the shot is 20 yards broadside(again, typical). Your point of aim is just behind the shoulder 1/3 tp 1/2 way up the animal. Now, you can miss your mark in 4 directions: high, low, foreward, and back. In only one of those directions - foreward, is my arrow going to encounter "heavy bone". So, 75% of the time(or thereabout) when we miss, we're not taking advantage of "more indestructible" two blade 'bomb-proof' heads. And, of course, if we hit our mark, which we mostly do, then the "indestructibility" of the head becomes more irrelevant yet.

I don't know about some of you, but should I happen to hit very high lung, or guts, or any other *potentially* vital area, but not necessarily immediately lethal, then I DON'T WANT A 2 BLADE HEAD ON THOSE SHOTS! In any of these circumstances, I'll opt for a multi blade head with more cutting surface, and likely a larger cutting diameter. This will OBVIOUSLY increase my chances of killing the animal "....when something goes wrong", because as stated previously, odds are when something goes wrong, that arrow most of the time isn't going contact the scapula anyway. Make sense?

Yeah, the Cape Buff and similar animals require Sapcut's bomb-proof 2 bladers. Afterall, you may need them just to break a rib. But, let's face it, most of us are not ever going to shoot that animal, and if we do, we're going to need an entirely different arrow/bow combo than what 95%+ of us DON'T use here in the states.

So, there you go Sapcut, this is another example of how you don't look at things completely objectively, therefore overlooking some things that are very apparent and reasonable.....jes sayin', Richie. :)

From: Phil Magistro
Date: 11-Feb-12




What would be the "right" setup for a lower weight bow and what makes you think the results would be the same as using a heavy weight bow? Because on another thread you argued with me that 11 gpp was not the same.

From: Sapcut
Date: 11-Feb-12




Phil,

"Right" could be more than one thing but there are significant improvements that can be done to an arrow that research has shown improves penetration. Of course, you didn't do the research so you MAY not buy into it. If you don't, or anyone doesn't then the other option is to use the "normal" arrows JRW speaks of and criticize others for trying to improve theirs.

11 gpp means nothing when you're saying a 770 grain arrow is efficient as a 550 gr. arrow. It's not the same. It matters none what bow it was shot out of..or IF it was shot out of a cannon.

The heavier arrow basically flying at the same speed as the lighter arrow is better. Do you agree?

This gpp thing means nothing. If it did, then you are saying that a 330 arrow from a 30# bow is just as efficient.

They all may fly just a pretty at the same gpp but...we know that is not the nitty gritty we're discussing.

From: Oldbow Compton's Traditional Bowhunters
Date: 11-Feb-12




“ Joe You make a very valid point, but what I've always found inconsistent is how some folks condemn those of us who use normal arrows, and with that same vigor they defend their use of recurves and longbows. Pound for pound of peak draw weight, compounds will deliver the same arrow with more momentum than a stickbow. So it seems a glaring double standard to only look at the arrow while ignoring the very thing that propels it. The very same arguments I've read folks use to question the ethics of normal arrows can be easily applied to their choice of bows.” QUOTE JRW

JRW Actually I will agree with you about bows. The compound has advantages over the stickbow as far as KE. If you would check out my web site www.tuffhead .com and visit the section on momentum vs kinetic energy I actually state basically what you say. Heavy arrows , FOC, single bevel. tanto tip, ect,ect all become important to the stick bow shooter to make up for cams and every thing that goes along with mechanical archery. Not that these things are not important to mechanical bow shooters it does not take on the immediate importance it does to the traditionalist. The traditionalist can’t change cams to get more speed they work with a bow that is pretty much fixed .If the traditionalist has to move down in bow weight, for what ever reason ,he has to compensate in other ways like heavy arrows. FOC, high MA broadheads .

I assume everyone is talking traditional here and what is best for the longbow , recurve, and the selfbow. However , lot of compound shooters are coming to believe light arrows and speed are not the answer .

Momentum is what kills. Speed only is part of the momentum formula. The traditionalist can only change or vary the the arrow weight or broadhead to compensate fo lack of speed.

THIS IS WHY SO MUCH EMPHIS ON ARROWS AND BROADHEADS We are traditional bow hunters because we choose to be and live with the limitations. That does not mean that we should not do everything in our power to improve killing power. MOMENTIUM

From: Sapcut
Date: 11-Feb-12




Roger,

Good post.

All three bow kills I made this year were shot in front of the heart waaaayyy away from any type of guts. The gut is the LAST place I want my arrow to hit a deer, regardless of broadhead. There is one reason I shot those deer in front of the heart. Because I am extremely confident that there is nothing that is on the front end of a deer I can't blow through to get a kill and recovery. Because of that, the objective with my setup is to stay away from the gut end.

Regarding broadheads, a three blade will cut a bigger hole than a two blade through the guts. However, both animals are going to die slow leaving some type of blood trail that hopefully leads to a recovery.

But why would I want to use a big three blade when I have only a "25%" chance of hitting an area that I feel comfortable getting good penetration with said 3 blade broadhead?

See Roj....there ya go. You may need to think this thing out a bit more. Your at 75%, I'm at 100%. :))

From: JRW
Date: 11-Feb-12




Joe,

I agree with most of what you say, but I find it odd when some folks (not yourself) claim the ethical high ground because they take one path with respect to their arrows, yet they preach the virtues of an opposite approach when it comes to their bows -- the very thing that propels the arrow. It seems a touch hypocritical to use "because it works" as an acceptable reason for one's choice of bows, yet question the ethics of someone who uses the same logic for hunting with normal arrows.

From: Phil Magistro
Date: 11-Feb-12




Oldbow, "Momentum is what kills. Speed only is part of the momentum formula." Part of that is true. Speed is part of the momentum formula. Momentum has a lot to do with penetration but momentum doesn't kill. Arrows kill by cutting and it doesn't take pass-through penetration to cut vital organs and cause death.

Sapcut, maybe we need to have some type of glossary so that we can communicate because you are mixing and matching terms and causing a lot of confusion. Better yet, perhaps you should go look words like efficiency and momentum. Plus you make a lot of assumptions that are totally incorrect.

I'll give you some tips for a start. Arrows aren't efficient. Bows are. It matters a whole lot what bow the arrow is shot out of. Which do you think is better - a 700 grain arrow shot from a 30# bow or a 700 grain arrow shot from a 70# bow?

A 300 grain arrow shot from a 30# bow, in theory, would have the same trajectory as 500 grain arrow shot from a 50# bow or a 770 grain arrow shot from a 70# bow. That's nor efficiency, that's distance and trajectory. The reality is that 30# bow may send a 300 grain arrow just a bit farther than the other two.

In thinking about this I guess my biggest problem with this is the fact that, based on a couple of penetration problems that you had in the past you picked up on Ashby's work and now are totally smitten. I don't care about that. More power to you. But to continue to push and push that it is the only way is what I find bothersome. I find it hard to understand why you feel a need to have 35%FOC to kill a whitetail deer with a super heavy arrow out of a 70# bow. I am sure that with the right broadhead a 10 grains per pound arrow would be just as lethal from that a bow even if you had an "oh crap" shot. And if a 700 grain arrow out of a 70# bow cannot kill a deer it's time to pick up a gun or run.

From: SteveBNY
Date: 11-Feb-12




Roger has a point. A while back there was a survey on another large trad site asking where where hunters tended to hit with their less then perfect shots. The overwhelming majority said back from center of the kill zone. Other then high back (spine) no heavy bones. Strong case can be made for the multiple cutting of a 3/4 blade head.

From: Sapcut
Date: 11-Feb-12




Phil,

You're making this much more complicated than it is.

"Efficiency" as in an arrow from a 30# bow or an arrow from a 50# bow (not referring to super efficient bows as was recently discussed in another thread) IS NOT going do the same damage to the bones (we were referring to penetration of bones) as an arrow from a 70# bow....when all arrows are 11 gpp. Not referring at all to the flight beauty, distance or speed of any of those arrows.

I AM NOT "pushing" anyone to do any changes to what they WANT to do. I defending what I like to do because of what you and others like to say about overkill setups like mine.

"Only way"? To do what? kill a deer. You know I'm not saying that.

I don't feel the "need" to get 35% FOC to "kill a whitetail deer". Why do you continue to make those statements that YOU KNOW I'm not implying? Lots of times I WANT to get as high FOC as I can because I WANT to. That began when I read the results from Ashby's research on penetration benefits of UEFOC arrows. I like what I saw and I'm doing it. You don't like it and you aren't doing it. Apparently you don't like it when others do it either. That's weird.

You say you don't care about that but other words seem to say different. It sure sounds like it bothers you for some reason that I tend to like overkill equipment just in case I hit a big bone.

From: roger
Date: 11-Feb-12




Richie, if you are intentially shooting deer "far foreward" of the heart, intentially into heavy bone structure, you are eventually going to become sorry you did so. Bones are angular and round, and your arrow will soon enough glance/deflect around one, leaving you with a very wounded animal. You HAVE NOT shot enough deer to prove out your theory and are going to end up sorry.

"Guts" aren't 25% of the equation. It has been proven through necropsies and other studies that in certain areas of lungs(primarily high lung) that there are very real benefits to three and four blade heads. And, if a person happens to hunt from trees and only hits ONE LUNG, obviously he can not achieve a bi-lateral pnuemothorax. In this instance, given my druthers, I will every single time, take the 3 and 4 bld heads. They cut more tissue over a larger surface area, and provide a hole that is far less likey to 'close up', as they do with the 2 bld slit.

Likewise, on the gut shot I mentioned, I will still take multi-bld heads every single time. Why?.....I've been there both ways and have seen FIRST HAND the benefits of the multi blade on softer tissue hits verses 2 blades. Yes, through the guts with either the two blade or multi blade, dead is dead. Problem being how far will the animal travel, one verses the other, and likewise in comparison, how long will it take to die, and which head would also enable you to actaully find your deer dead. Look at a cut away of an anatomically correct undulate and compare the ratio of soft tissue verses total bone structure, and you will find 'bone' as the overwhelming MINORITY in the ratio.

You are so freakin' obsessed.......check that, I mean "POSESSED" with heavy bone, your tripping over dollars to pick up nickels. The skeletal structure of any mamal is a fraction compared to everything that lies behind AND AROUND it that needs to be cut to die.

Your arrow is "100%", Sapcut?......it ain't even close.

Again, your a prime example of someone who doesn't know what they don't know, and likely never will.

From: Oldbow Compton's Traditional Bowhunters
Date: 11-Feb-12




Phil, You are right about the broadhead cuting is what really does the killing. My statement about momentum was a over siplification under stating the whole process.

Joe Furlong

From: Phil Magistro
Date: 11-Feb-12




Oldbow, I was kind of nitpicking, momentum is important.

Sapcut,You are still using the wrong words. There is no efficiency in an arrow. Efficiency is in the launching device. The word you probably mean is effective.

And you absolutely do feel the need to have high FOC to kill adeer. You said it many times. You want to to be sure you have enough oomph in case you make a bad hit on bone.

I could care less what you shoot. I do care about the thousands of people that lurk here and may read what you write. For deer (I'm not talking about big African game or our moose) there is no need for them to believe they need a 70# bow shooting 800 grain arrows. If they want that or chooose and can handle it more power to them. But any reasonable weight bow with matched arrows using a sharp broad head is all they need. If they do their best and happen to hit a bone, well stuff happens and they'll learn from it. But I'd venture a guess that there are far more bad hits that may miss vitals or just catch one lung not because bone was hit but because of shooter error or some other happenstance. And in those cases a 1000 grain arrow won't make a difference.

And I'm not just talking about killing a deer but I am talking about killing it as quickly and humanely as possible.

From: Sapcut
Date: 11-Feb-12




..."well stuff happens and they'll learn from it".

Phil, that is precisely what I am doing that you and others arena too fond off.

For the record, all new trad guys, I have never said or implied that you new guys NEED a 70# bow with an 800 grain arrow to kill a deer. I have said that I personally like to use that type of setup because it is a more powerful trad weapon and it will give me a better chance of breaking through anything I shoot. I personally do not feel the need to shoot a 50# bow and a 500 gr. arrow when I don't have to. I may have to one day. But not today.

From: Sapcut
Date: 11-Feb-12




Roger, thanks for the heads up on my shot choices. BTW, I haven't hit any bones.

From: roger
Date: 12-Feb-12




.......keeping aiming where you do and you will. that is entirely my point.

From: tradmt
Date: 12-Feb-12




Wow, i just read this whole thing and now my head hurts! I dont know if i should just use my truck bumper to hunt with or design a six, eight or ten blade broadhead! And yes after some thorough testing that bumper is efficient and effective, even more so than the guy propelling it.

From: Elkhuntr
Date: 12-Feb-12




to go along with the above testing photos, i shot an ACE, Zwickey and Woodsman Elite into a piece of 1/2" CDX plywood this morning. they all penetrated the same, and stopped just shy of passing through. there were no marks on the leading edge of the ACE lugs. it appears the triple tip is as wide or wider then the lugs, and opened up the slit wide enough for the broadhead to penetrate without catching on the lugs.

i know, i know, you do not hunt plywood or, animal flesh acts differently on the broadhead. i agree, and was just sharing FWIW.

From: Sapcut
Date: 12-Feb-12




Thanks for sharing Elkhuntr...and your explanation of the thick tip makes sense to me.

From: Sapcut
Date: 12-Feb-12




Roger,

"Richie, if you are intentially shooting deer "far foreward" of the heart, intentially into heavy bone structure, you are eventually going to become sorry you did so. Bones are angular and round, and your arrow will soon enough glance/deflect around one, leaving you with a very wounded animal. You HAVE NOT shot enough deer to prove out your theory and are going to end up sorry."

You do say "IF" But just to let you know...I am not intentionally shooting deer "far forward" of the heart, intentionally into heavy bone structure. I intentionally try to get as far as possible from the guts. I shoot for the heart and not afraid at all if it hits the shoulder area. I think I can get a kill easier if that is my plan with my equipment. And that happens to be different than your plan.

If my setup will not bust through the angular and round bones maybe I need to bump up my arrow weight, FOC and maybe my bow weight. I'm always open for ways to improve.

From: roger
Date: 12-Feb-12




No Richie,......NO.

More speed, more weight, more poundage, higher foc, don't necessarily do anything for deflection, especially considering the weight your already shooting.

.....you REALLY are not comprehending this stuff.

From: Sapcut
Date: 12-Feb-12




LOL

From: PaPa Doc
Date: 13-Feb-12

PaPa Doc's embedded Photo



53#@28 bow Boo/Osage 125 grain ace head arrow went right threw best blood trail I have seen in a while.

From: swampwalker
Date: 13-Feb-12




PaPa Doc, that was a Rage broadhead. IMO,:^) !





If you have already registered, please

sign in now

For new registrations

Click Here




Visit Bowsite.com A Traditional Archery Community Become a Sponsor
Stickbow.com © 2003. By using this site you agree to our Terms and Conditions and our Privacy Policy