Chrono numbers are irrelevant when only trying to make a comparison from the same bow with different arrows, but the 640 grain arrow averages a bit over 200 fps. Don't know the speed of the 1415gr arrow, but it's obviously much slower.
That second shot was the one I was waiting on Rick. Guess the law of diminishing returns comes into play. As common sense says- 1415 gains is a HEAVY arrow. I also was curious at the drop at 20 yards, thanks for the write up in the end.
Heavy Arrows Rock but?...the tipping point for me and mine has been somewhere around 14gpp-16gpp (pending bow) where any heavier than that?...and the uptrend in Momentum/KE starts taking a nosedive and the arrow goes from frieght train too slug.
You were pumping well beyond that at 20+gpp so I for one was not shocked by the dismal results of such.
How does that heavy shaft do in bare-shaft testing?
And would you be able to come up with two arrows of similar/identical weight that are equally well (and correctly) spined for that bow and with comparable difference in the FOC???
One possibility with that 20 GPP ICBM you’re launching....
If the broadhead penetrates slowly, the barrel can start moving in response to the impact. If the BH penetrates slowly enough, that allows time for the barrel to get up to a high enough rate of travel to really take the edge off of the penetration.
Same principle applies to being able to get a pass-through on a deer but not a squirrel, or the fact that 405 grain slugs coming out of my .45/70 at 1300 FPS will print higher at 60m than the 300-grainers coming out at 1800; barrel time allows the muzzle to rise higher before the bullet is airborne, resulting in a higher POI DESPITE the 30% lower muzzle velocity.
So for that reason, I’d love to see comparable mass & velocity between the normal and high/extreme FOC projectiles...
Not disagreeing, just asking the next logical question!!
What I found interesting was it gave a good indication of the amount of rotation of a single bevel broadhead going through solid material. The incoming side was roughly parallel to the ground. I doubt it rotated through the center of the barrel since you had to knock it out with a rubber mallot. It exited the barrel with roughly 45 degrees of rotation. The initial rotation would have finished when the broadhead exited the first side and finished when it exited the out going side. That I found interesting with how much it rotated going through only two layers of solid matter. Makes me wonder how much it really rotates going through the tissue matter of a deer or other animal. 360 degrees? More maybe a little less? DANNY
Sounded like a fun thing to do. Ran home after work, fighting daylight so I couldn't video. Specs: 60# string follow longbow, 590 gr. 23/64 cedar arrow, 27 1/4" bop 9.8 gpi, 34.4 % foc (balance point at 23"), file sharpened 145 gr. Hunters Head Shot several times, consistent results. Heads penetrated the barrel and could see the back of the head usually. I think it's a 55 gal. drum, definitely more than 30 gal so don't know if the plastic is the same thickness. But this combo gives me complete penetration on hogs, deer, and moose. Don't have a clue on arrow speed.
I would think that the wider Bishop head would open up the slit a little more to better allow the shaft to pass through. Can you put that Grizzly head on the same shaft as the first test and see how how it compares to the Bishop?
I know that broadhead switch doesn't much change the arrow weight or FOC but might explain a little about how the plastic might be affecting the penetration.
Sorry Rick, I don't get it??? What are you comparing, you've got two different variables. Light arrow and a bad broadhead for penetration vs a heavy arrow and a good broadhead. What are you trying to prove? I admit I'm confuse with the results.
Shoot the same arrow with two different BH's or shoot the same Bh with two different arrows.
It's really like your three blade test vs two blade. Don't know how the 3 beat the 2.
I'm beginning to think you shot one with a bow at 69.5 and the other with a compound at 69.5. What gives LOL?
Rick, great test. Bowmania, his test showed that no matter how sharp a broadhead and how heavy an arrow is, if it doesn't have oomph will not be able to get through a blue barrel. To make it through you need a balance of 3 factors: broadhead sharpness, arrow weight and speed.
Fascinating. The law of diminishing returns only makes sense. I consider myself throwing three different objects at a person. The first a ping pong ball, the second a baseball, and the third a 50lbs bowling ball. The ping pong ball would bounce off the person, the baseball would hurt like a mofo, and the bowling ball, well i'm not strong enough to throw it. With adequate force the bowling ball would become the more devastating object.
Back to the test, at some point a heavier poundage bow would cause the 1415gr arrow to penetrate more. I would bet that a 100# bow shooting the the 1415gr arrow (14.15gpp) would be close to the sweet spot that would penetrate the most.
So, the key is finding the sweet spot from your bow. Would that bring us back to the highest achievable kinetic energy from your bow and draw length? Kinetic energy calculator - https://www.realtree.com/kinetic-energy- and-momentum-calculator
So basically I got the same penetration as Rick also with a skinny broadhead,but a lighter bow, and arrow less than 1/2 the weight of his heavyweight. I guess it proves that keying only on heavy arrows isn't the entire answer... arrow speed along with broadhead design is also very important in the penetration equation. Just like we've always known ??
Todd, I'm not trying to prove anything. Just thought about it, and thought it would be interesting to do, so I did, and shared it, and thought it would be even more interesting to get others to do it, and share also.
If it winds up proving something, then all the better.
Same 69# recurve both shots. LOL, I don't own a compound.
As far as the bad broadhead for penetration thing is concerned, these little Bishop 175gr single bevel penetrate really well. Definitely nothing bad about them.
I'll try to do the test again soon with the same 640gr arrow, and a 175gr Grizzly single bevel. The Grizzly has closer to the 3:1 ratio said to be the best for penetration, so we'll see. I'll also do it with a 175gr 3 blade.
In order to compare apples to apples you should be using a product that is consistent throughout and you must hit it in the EXACT same spot. That 2nd shot was below the first ring and it is thicker in that spot on these barrels. That also didn`t appear to be a dead on hit.
There is a diminished point of weight over speed...the mathematical formula is....FPS x FPS x total arrow weight in grains Divided by 450,240. This gives you Foot pounds of Kinetic Energy which is what drives penetration.
I just came across this thread, as I scrolled down over the post and video I knew pretty well what the results were going to be.
Good test Rick, although its not really scientific its good enough to prove once again the age old advice of arrows around 10 gr per pound of draw weight as day in day out your best bet.
The thing that has me scratching my head is all the advice out there...
I notice that generally the guys that are pre- compound and have been doing this all their life usually are pretty uniform in their thinking. And line up pretty well with my own 40 years of shooting stuff with stickbows.
then you have all this "new" super fast, super light, or extra heavy extra slow advice , and things just get kinda clouded.
Not sure why we think we need to re-invent the wheel?
I have internet...I watch the videos. I see pretty many compound shooters that fail to get as good a penetration as I do? some do, some don't.
Then I watched a elk hunting video of a guy that had switched from a wheelbow to a recurve and he was using a really heavy arrow for his draw weight. His advice was pro heavy arrow and FOC.
I was skeptical....
He shot his elk and it ran off with half the arrow sticking out. He had made a good shot, and it didn't go far. He once again praised his choice of extra heavy arrow.
I hate to rain on the guys parade but my 55# recurve with a 525 gr grain arrow would have buried itself.
most of this advice on extremes I've come to ignore. I've simply shot through to many deer not to.
I know the formula, and I wasn't trying to "compare" to anything.
I had no plans to shoot any other arrow, than that of my hunting rig, but shot the heavy & high foc arrow due to a request.
I simply wanted to see what my hunting setup would do on the barrel, and wanted to see what other's hunting setups would do also.
The barrel thickness at the spots for both arrows is exactly the same, and the second arrow hit square. It just buckled & whipped because there was so much of it still sticking out when it came to the sudden stop.
In all honesty I really believe a lot of penetration problems are due to poor arrow flight at the time....or extreme light or extreme heavy for the bow poundage.
As far as deer? it is fairly easy to shoot clean through them.
not sure how many years ago it was maybe 5 now? don't know. But i used arrows lighter than I normally use. The bow was a r/d longbow draw weight was between just under 54# I was using a 2016 aluminum and 100 gr muzzys, with no other weight I can't remember the exact weight but the were under 500 gr I know.
Anyway I shot 5 deer that year with that setup in MD and PA....not a single arrow stayed in the deer. 4 blew clean through in and out, and 1 went through but stayed in the deer but was only held by the fletch and fell out when she turned and ran.
I also shot a doe last year that the arrow hit on the point of the shoulder and angled back and came out the off side. I didn't get in and out penetration but that 500 gr carbon muscled through some pretty tough stuff to penetrate as far as it did. I'm fairly certain I posted a pic of it on here. she dropped in sight. as did all the other 5 with the 2016's.
So I kinda go by what I see....And what I see are a lot of folks not getting the penetration they should or could.
I am not sure what this test proves or disproves. And Rick admitted it was more of a curiosity test than a penetration test. For sure the fish arrow is an extreme and still lots of variables involved.
But you have to admit that Rick's hunting arrow performance was pretty impressive. No wonder he has little difficulty killing hogs and whatever else. Was it the broadhead, the arrow weight, the arrow FOC, or the bow weight? Yes.
This will be a good learning thread, especially for those of us that already know everything.
Just looking at Shade’s post right there and scratching my head a bit…
If you are properly tuned to begin with, an inch shouldn’t matter much, should it?
Plenty of our By God Experts here have stated that we need only match our arrow spine to within about #5 of “correct” for the bow in question, and that we can get satisfactory flight despite the discrepancy. But if you have selected an arrow that’s too stiff to begin with (as I fully expect that most people do), THEN I’d agree that short-drawing would compound the issue...
And this is of interest to me because I’ve been working on that prone shot, which I know costs me some DL. As does a hard cant as we often practice on the FS threads.... These are great hunting shots to be able to make, but if you’re #10 overspined to begin with.....
And I’m going to guess that 90% of poor penetration is spine-related.... short of mechanical broadheads anyway.
Guys, this proves nothing, and Rick wasn't trying to prove anything, the one take away from this is that 20gpp is too much, at least for modern traditional bows today.
It would be interesting to see results from 40-50# bows comparing 8-12 or so GPP to see where diminished returns begin. I think bow designs will vary this number somewhat but I think we will all be within a point or two.
GF...my post was speculation, and not fact. All I know is....I've seen all the video's. ..And like you I'm scratching my head?
I'm thinking what is the difference that enables me to blow right through a deer, not just 1 deer, but most deer, while someone else is only getting a half an arrow penetration?
is it bow poundage? is it short drawing your bow, depriving it of some efficiency? and changing the bows tuning? if short drawing a bow is ok then why preach form? why not just use any old anchor within an inch?
I'm not taking away from what you say, but I'm not convinced short drawing your bow wouldn't rob you of some penetration.
I mean in doing so you have dropped your bow poundage by a couple pounds, you have changed the required spine of your bow , at least a little, if your already border line to stiff, now you got issues with your arrow fishtailing possibly, and due to the fact that your an inch short of your proper anchor its very likely you didn't get off a clean release? dunno but my country boy common sense logic tells me not reaching your anchor properly and short drawing your bow is going to hurt penetration rather than help it.
I think the barrel is kinda like a turkey. Penetration is not always good due to the relative light weight and physical reaction of the turkey whereas the same setup can whiz through a deer because the impact of the arrow does not physically change the position or reaction of the animal being hit.
So, although I can't view the video, I'm suggesting that the described whipping of the arrow that moved the drum had a major effect on penetration. The movement of the barrel began immediately upon impact (it's not physically possible to be otherwise). The reaction of the barrel created a condition similar to striking a target with an arrow that is flying far from straight.
A do-over with the barrel anchored very firmly with something backing it to prevent movement might have different results!
I don't really see much questioning. One could question the tune of the 1400 grainer as GF did, nothing wrong with that but I'm betting Rick was shooting tuned arrows just because I feel Rick knows what he's doing.
I don't see this as any real comparison either, it proved nothing other than 20gpp is too much. Would be more interesting to see 30% FOC at the same weight but I doubt it's going to be much different in this barrel. It will be more interesting to see the results from arrows that don't fully penetrate both sides.
I'm not sure why some see it as reinventing the wheel here, it's simply learning what a setup or setups are capable of and how they can be improved or not.
That was a good reasonable post tradmt....I agree.
I guess what gets me scratching my head is the subject of penetration is so often discussed. I like the fact that some of you guys actually take the time to test things like this.
Sometimes I just need to sit back and realize I really don't know, or should even be adding to penetration subjects, simply because I haven't really ever tried the extremes in anything.
I mentioned the deer shot with 2016's the other year but that was hardly an extreme.
I have never shot a deer with a bow under 50# or with an arrow weighing less than I'm guessing 425 gr or more than 650ish or so gr (74# draw weight).
And my broadheads are ALWAYS! shaving sharp. So I've never really tested the limits of anything.
But there are many on here that use lighter poundage bows or way heavy, or way light arrows...and such discussions would be beneficial to them. My apologies if I'm out of line with my rather average assumptions.
I'll tell you what really gets me scratching my head though.....and that's that the compound bow guys sometimes have the same discussions! I for the life of me can't understand why on earth you'd ever have to worry about penetration at the speeds of modern compound bows.
Is it any wonder then that so many struggle with penetration out of a stickbow?
Nice video Rick, I enjoyed it! When I was younger I tried shooting several things with my bow setups also. Heck, I even shot 55 gal. steel drums just to see if my broadhead would penetrate it. The things we shot and the results were always enlightening and fun to me and my best friend. Did your video prove anything? Yes! Those plastic blue barrels aren't near as likely to charge you if you wound one!!!! Have Fun Brother and thanks for the video!
I wonder if the single bevel would actually work against it on such a medium, I'd sure like to see single bevel compared to double bevel on this barrel. Maybe it wouldn't make any difference? would be fun to see either way.
Shot a couple times at the blue drum, and was surprised with the results. Centaur Chimera 62" 47@29, Easton axis trad 500, footed, Grizzly rh bevel 150gn. Total arrow wt 520gns, 15.5% FOC. When I hit the drum head on I had a 11" of shaft inside. When I hit at an angle to one side, the arrow went through and stuck halfway into the back side.. big blue is tough.. thanks Rick, fun idea.
Yes, I think they do drag in every medium, although bone is certainly different than that plastic or even foam and single bevels tend to split them open. But how much do they drag? Does it matter? Personally, I don't think it does, in fact I remember when you did that first foam test with a Grizz and VPA 3 blade, I really thought due to the single bevel torque in that tight foam that slick VPA might have the edge, I was wrong by a mile. I think both of us were surprised Rick.
Think the testers so far have proven that the plastic barrels are tough (to penetrate) regardless of the arrow/broadhead used.
Would like to see some tests with the barrel stabilized vs not stabilized, i.e., one with a couple of concrete blocks in the bottom, the other without. If the barrel moves when hit, the movement will greatly reduce penetration.
Too, to me, in this medium, it seems broadhead shape plays a substantial role. Whether it's more important than arrow weight or speed, I don't know.
Just finished uploading videos for two more test shots.
One shot with a 175gr Grizzly Right Single Bevel, and one with a 175gr VPA 3 Blade.
I used the same 640gr arrow that I used for the 175gr Bishop Archery Right Single Bevel.
Everything about this arrow is the same, except for the changing of the broadheads.
What does this all prove? Probably nothing to a lot of folks.
What did I learn from it? I learned I can have full confidence in my hunting rig for most animals, and I learned, that the only real significant difference the broadheads make are the shape of the holes they cut.
I shot again tonight. Same setup, same cedar shafts except put the Hunter Head on an 11/32 shaft. Left to right....Zwickey eskimo 4 blade, Ace standard 135 gr., Hunter, Grizzly el Grande 150 gr. Seems head design is important in dense mediums, splitting a bigger/wider hole for the shaft and a smooth ferrule helps penetration more than arrow speed or weight. The last pic notice how wide the grizzly split the plastic...much wider than, the 1 3/16 wide head. And the arrow shaft was corkscrewed through the plastic, ruining the shaft.
Rick i could totally be missing it here, BUT to me the first head had the biggest in and exit hole. Obviously plastic is not comparable to hide and bone, but it is interesting. The last 3rd set looks the thinnest slit. Are you suggesting the in hole lets out more blood than the exit? When work cooperates I will have to do this plastic test myself. if the results are not embarrassing I will post them. :D
Cody - Yes. The Bishop head made a clean hole like a bullet hole, or a drilled hole, that did not close up at all. The slits of the blades on it stayed open wider than the other two also, AND it had the best penetration.
It was followed by the VPA which had the holes close up quite a bit but both the hole, and the blade slit stayed open pretty some.
The Grizzly came in dead last in penetration, although it wasn't by a lot, but the holes, and blade slits on it closed up almost completely.
The entry holes on the VPA, and the Grizzly look open, but they are closed on the inside. The VPA slightly open inside the barrel, and the Grizzly completely closed.
I can almost stick my pinky finger through both the entry, and the exit holes made by the Bishop. They are wide open.
Great videos Rick! Once again you prove to my surprise that the 3 blade head penetrates as good if not better than the two blade. Who woulda thunk. Can't thanks you enough for sharing these experiments with us. All the best!! Tom
What's with all the FOC questions? My understanding from the Ashby study was that the weight is what breaks the bone. FOC helps soft tissue penetration and continued penetration AFTER the bone is broke? Shooting hard rubber is a whole different thing, maybe a 4 blade would work best for this since it might open the biggest hole.
When I shoot truck tire sidewalls at close range, the Hill head has always penetrated much better than any other head for me. I think it's the concave blade gradually widening the slot. Arrow pinch is horrible with the tire rubber and steel belts. Any narrow head always goes through more rubber for me than a wider head, but with the plastic barrel it seems busting a quick hole/slot larger than the shaft really helps. I think tbis testing info is good for people considering how our arrows bust through shoulder blades and big ribs. Not as important on soft tissue.
Surprisingly, the Eskimo 4 blade went as deep as it did. Those little bleeders did good to open up a hole in the plastic instead of pushing it aside. It wasn't even sharp as it is an off temper head that I didn't send back but am using it for practice.
Not sure what to make of the different sizes among the permanent holes left in the plastic.... seems like that would be an effect of stretching and even melting (or let’s say heating and stretching), rather than cutting.... and of course (with the possible exception of the thinner part of a scapula) bone doesn’t stretch; it just breaks.
What I did notice about those holes, though.... In the first two, there is clearly some rotation that continued for as long as the arrow was moving; the third one, the orientation of those blades hardly changes at all. Either that or it rotated almost 180°.... I would think that would mean that there was quite a bit of difference in the amount of friction between the shaft and the drum as that arrow is passing through, which (again) could have something to do with the permanent holes in the barrels.
One other thing that throws me off a little bit here is the fact that not all of these arrows it’s right down the middle of the drum. And in the case of two blade striking in a pretty near horizontal orientation, that could have a quite an impact ( :p ) on penetration. One side of the head meets higher resistance,and you can get the shaft whipping out to one side (as in Take II), and that screws up EVERYTHING!
Almost makes me wonder if you’re better off entering a large bone than putting your point right near the edge...
Of course, Ishi had the answer for that - he mounted his heads vertically to slip between the ribs! Doesn’t quite work out that way, but it shows you he was thinking about it....
Anyway, it would be good if you guys could try to put all of your shots right down the middle to reduce another variable. Pics are good, but measured depth of penetration would be better, as would more shots with each arrow.
Nope, this isn't scientific at all. I never intended it to be. It's just good old country fun, and that's how I wanted it.
One thing to consider is the barrel is not weighted down, and is free standing.
If it were weighted in the bottom, and/or braced to keep it from moving at impact, penetration would likely be better on every shot.
I thought about all that prior to doing the test. Since animals almost always move, I decided to just let the barrel stand there on it's own.
I agree, that the shots closer to the outer sides of the barrel will impede penetration some, but I bet it isn't much, and another thing to consider to go along with that is - the shots closer to the outer sides have a shorter distance to the back side exit, thus suffering less time of resistance applied from the entry.
Last, but not least:
There are some scratches on the barrel, that look like cracks, but they are just that. Scratches, that were there prior to the shots.
So far, NONE of these shots have produced "cracks" in the barrel. Every shot from every broadhead has produced only nice clean cuts/slits.
I remember doing similar "test" with some friends of mine when I was a kid with my Crossman Pellet Gun and my moms Sears catalog, just some country fun. Interesting results. Compared to this plastic bones are porous in the center. Thanks for your time guys.
Plastic doesn't really have any grain, and though this plastic is very tough, it's still more maleable than brittle. Too, in most instances, there's square feet of plastic/space around the entry hole. Nothing like an inch or so around an arrow hitting a bone. For all of these reasons, I wouldn't expect any head to split it.
Agreed, as I stated earlier, that stabilizing the barrels would increase penetration with most of the heads. Have somewhat the equivalent of an arrow turkey penetration test here. Because of their relatively small size, at least compared to deer, and because the tough feathers act as semi permeable barrier, turkeys do move somewhat when impacted by an arrow, which in turn reduces penetration. Regardless, I still usually get pass throughs on turkeys.
Unfortunately, the only blue plastic barrel like yours that I have to join in this test is 300 miles north at my cabin, frozen into the ground under my one-hole outhouse. :>)
[[[ Orion said: "I dunno, Rick. In that medium, 2.5 inches may be a lot. That's very tough stuff." ]]]
You're probably right about that. I just kind of expected more.
The important thing is - even though all got better, the differences between them stayed the same, so the results were the same.
Now I know a lot of you guys live within a reasonable distance from a farm coop, and I know most of these coops give these barrels away. They are more than happy to give them away, because it keeps them from having to dispose of them. which they can't do at no cost.
There's no excuse to not do this other than you just don't want to.
OK, here are my results. This was a 55 gal barrel.
Hard plastic deformed both wood shafts that penetrated in as it squeezed them. Made them ovals. The hunter where the blade connects with the ferrule was bent on both sides as it caught and peeled back....this explains the lack of penetration there. I think all would have been fine with any large North American animal in flesh and bone. That barrel is tough!
Bow was a string follow HIll Style %2 pounds at my Draw length
James (Andy Man), I agree, but bone will also pinch the shaft.
It's really a moot point though, since all we are doing here is seeing how much energy it takes to overcome that friction & resistance. The more energy you deliver, the more it overcomes that resistance.
We can pretty much rest assured, that if you can reasonably penetrate just one side of these barrels, you can easily kill any animal on the North American continent, and lots of the African game also.
I still want to see what a reliable cape buffalo rig will do on one of these barrels, and again I'm not trying to prove, or disprove anything. I'm just curious, and think it's a great way to see how our equipment stacks up against such rigs.
Matt, I have been thinking about doing it with that bow.
I don't currently have any arrows that really tune to it well, but I'll figure something out (maybe), and if so I will definitely be punching some holes in that barrel with it.
The 55gal barrels have the same wall thickness as the 30gal, and are made from the same plastic. The only difference is going to be the travel distance from one side to the other, but even that isn't going to matter if you aren't making it 30" on the inside.
No way bone is going to pinch and seal up with as much force as that poly drum. The force was such that to extract the broadheads I had to remove the points on the wood arrows and they literally crushed the round shaft on 2 sides. Talk about arrow pinch!
Fun experiment anyway. Showed me why I still like those Ace Standards, One tough head and it out penetrated the grizzly Kodiak in my test.
The drums will probably be similar if the DOT packing group numbers are the same.
Just saw this video. I've shot arrows in penetration test from 10 gpp to 25 gpp, not at a plastic barrel, but at plywood, 2X lumber, at loose hanging carpet, and also fight shooting.
First, on paper there is no dramatic variation in energy of arrows from light to heavy when shot from the same bow at the same draw length. It is merely a few foot pounds with a heavy bow. At most it is no more than 10% from the lightest to the heaviest arrow.
The barrel hit with the heavier arrow in the vid has essentially the same energy as the lighter arrow. What ISN'T measured in these two barrel strikes is the length of time from contact to stop, how much the barrel moves during the hit, or how much energy is being absorbed by the barrel during the hit.
This is why heavy fish arrows at 25gpp penetrate water better then arrows at 10gpp. They both have 'about' the same energy coming from the same bow, but the fish arrow delivers it longer in the water medium. You can't see the energy being transfered to the water with any arrow. But water allow the heavier arrow to shed it's energy over a longer period of time so the arrow penetrates deeper. On a heavy plastic barrel the slowere arrow has the same energy but at low velocity it makes the barrel move where the lighter arrow penetrates.
In the barrel test the barrel is assuredly being hit with about the same amount of energy. The paper calc isn't lying. But that's paper. How that energy effects the target isn't just in the holes, but also in barrel movement, and the sound of the hit. You can tell the barrel is absorbing a similar amount of energy.
Flight shoot two arrows one a very lite fluflu and one a very heavy hickory, from the same bow. The flu flu has about the same energy at launch as the heavy arrow. But it falls way short because the energy is rapidly dissipated. The heavy arrow carries down range because the energy carries up, and is released more slowly penetrating air.
Oh, and yes, I spent a lot of time making sure this puppy flew good. Spent all day building, changing, and rebuiling until I got it to this weight & FOC, then spent about 1.5 hours shooting, tuning, and getting used to the drop.
Something note worthy is - this big old broadhead made a hole, that the shaft had very little drag resistance as it penetrated. It was almost an easy two finger removal from the barrel. ALL of the other shots were very hard to remove the arrow from the barrel.
No videos but figured photos would be ok. #44 Zipper Zipstick carbon/foam limbs, clicker set at 28", 29" 2016 arrows with glue in/on adapters. One had Original woodsman weight 509 grains, one with Grizzly bruin 125 came in at 523. Both were just shy of 160 fps over my chronograph, neither were remotely sharp. Shot at about 20 yards.
Same 55 gal barrel, this time with Zipper Zipstick, #54 Carbon/foam limbs, drawn to 28, arrow 29" 2117, 200 grain Grizzly Instinct 3 blade, arrow weight about 645, chrono says it is also 160 fps. This combo has zipped through a bear and several hogs. Just the tip stuck in the off side.
David, they sell them around here for the same thing (game feeders too), but those who are selling them are getting them for free from the farm coops.
I guess the coops could sell them too, but then they would have to go to the expense of cleaning them up first, and since it cost them to dispose of them properly, they just give them away.
A side note to that is - if /when you get a fresh barrel, wash it out good, in a well ventilated area, and wear rubber gloves. Some of those herbicides like roundup are pretty toxic, but I don't want to breath or get any of it on me no matter what it is.
Very noticeably faster than the 640 gr arrow that has got the betst penetration so far.
The 640 is chronographing and average of 207 fps, and the 535 (at 105 gr lighter) is moving on even faster.
With the 640 I held point on at center of the barrel, and hit in the upper 1/3rd ring. With the 535 I held point on at center of the bottom 1/3rd ring, and hit at the same height as the 640, so there's a considerable difference in trajectory & speed.
Out of the 3 shots I did with the 535, this is the only one that got the broadhead all the way through just the front side of the barrel. The other two stuck the broadhead in only about 1/2 to 3/4 the length of the head.
Interesting that a 535 grain arrow had poor penetration travelling 210+ fps. Maybe it's the overall weight of the 640 grain arrow regardless of the gpp for an individual bow. No, I'm not saying a 35# bow should shoot an 18gpp arrow. I'm just wondering if a 640 grain arrow is the optimum weight for a great penetrating arrow out of "hunting" weight bows. It would be interesting to see how a 640 grain arrow performs out of a 50# bow because it appears a 535 grain arrow wouldn't penetrate well. Just another consideration.
PA Steve, I shoot about the same arrow as Rick as far as total weight, gpp and horsepower driving it, I can also use that same arrow on a Schafer with a set of 50# limbs and it shoots well and hits like a sledge hammer at close range, but at almost 13gpp the trajectory and velocity limits it to a 20 yard arrow at best as after that the bottom falls out.
It don't look like any of the traditional shooter "African Dangerous Game" folk are going to contribute to this with their "Big Rigs".
That being the case, I decided to pull out my Old Girl, dust her off, and build a dangerous game tank of an arrow for her.
Here's the result.
If you are getting your broadhead all the way through just one side of these barrels with your normal hunting rigs, then you should be happy, because they'll do a fine job on "ANY" North American game animals, and most likely any of the African game, that are not classified as the larger dangerous game variety.
I've been all over the board with these tests.
All the way from 7.75 GPP to over 20 GPP
All the way from 14.4% FOC to 32% Foc
The results are pretty conclusive, and the bottom line of reality is:
(Assuming you achieve a well tuned / good flying arrow with just about any reasonable percentage of forward of center balance)
If you think you need, or just want more penetrating horsepower there's only two ways to get it at it's optimum level:
(1) Make sure your arrow weight is between 9 & 10 grains per pound of draw weight.
(2) If (1) isn't enough for you - Go up in draw weight, while still maintaining between 9 & 10 grains per pound of draw weight.
I may do some different testing down the road, but this pretty much covered it. If any of you want to see something else, then give it a go, and do some testing of your own. I for one will definitely be interested in seeing what you have to show.
In my tests 830 grain arrows embed deeper in 2x4 then 590 grain 2117s. This was with #55 bow. I used to just pull errant arrows out of my 2x4 target frame by hand. Some wiggling and the target points would pull out.
However once I started making and shooting hickory arrows I had to keep pliers at my target frame to pull errant shots. n fact some embedded deep enough I'd have to drill a hole next to the embedded point in order to free it. Thems the facts for me.
Fish arrows are twice the weigh of standard arrows. Why? The reason is because fish arrows at twice the weight penetrate water better than do the standard '10 gpp' variety. Somehow the medium of water absorbs the lighter arrow energy where it doesn't absorb the heavier arrow energy as fast.
Lastly, I've tried this test. Shoot a standard '10gpp' weight arrow equipped with normal three fletch, and a heavy hickory arrow with three fletch for cast. Note the distance.
Now, add flu flu fletch to each and shoot both arrows for cast. Compare the cast distance of each of the two arrows TO ITSELF and note the ratio of cast distance.
In my testing the hickory fluflu flew mere yards short of standard fletch. The lighter fluflu arrow fell well short of the distance it flew with standard fletch. Result? Atmpospheric drag will significantly slow up a fluflu fletched arrow, but it doesn't slow up a heavy hickory. The energy carried in the heavier arrow allows it to cast near the same distane even with flufly fletching. The ratio of cast distance is radically different. To me this proves heavy arrows carry up more energy down range.
Rick you already did that test and your results are evident. Why should I repeat it? My testing is as stated and it is a different result. Why beats me I'm no physicist but I relayed my results.
I haven't mentioned other tests I have done here, but they are similar. Shooting plywood. Shooting carpet. Shooting a sand pile. All with target points and blunts. All with my same #55 bow.
I've evaluated the results of my tests and come to conclusion just as you have with yours. It's no big deal. I'm not saying your test isn't valid, it certainly IS valid. It is what it is. Thanks for taking all the time and effort to start the thread and post your results.
Sooo 9 to 10 gpp is best on a plastic barrel, I see that is true. Shooting through bone it's not.... Rick has enough power from his draw weight and length that it is plenty to do the job on any critter. Get some 3/4" plywood or some cow bones and 12 to 14gpp will win. I've tested it, many times. I don't have any way to post videos or I would have done the barrel test, just because it looked like fun.
Will do it but you're going to have to shoot some 3/4" plywood for me also! I'm going to have to get a blue barrel though, all I have is the white ones and I think they are even thicker than the blue. I know where some blue ones are but it will be two weeks before I am able to go get one.
Well there aren't too many guys that have posted here over the last fifteen years that shoot 100# bows, let alone done a videoed penetration test. Marlon, Pat, Rick, and maybe a handful of others shoot dreadnaught weight artillery, but only Rick has put his tests on video. I don't care what weight arrow you are shooting with a 100# bow, it's gonna hit like a mofo.
A 100# bow needs a substantial target to actually stop an arrow, regardless of the arrow's weight. An ideal medium for the bow hunter looking to see just how various arrow weights penetrate would be an immense block of ballistic gel. There was a guy here called osb that did such a test and as I recall he had results not unlike Ricks where the lighter arrow penetrated the gelatin deepest in comparison to a medium weight arrow. No heavy arrow in the 15gpp range was shot. I really don't remember the details.
Bob, OSB's claims were drastically different than mine.
He was actually trying to prove a case for very light weight arrows, and even those arrows using Low KE mechanical/expandable broadheads.
I tried it down to 7.75 gpp, and the results were poor (very poor), so I'm not even gonna go there, but I'd love to see him shoot one of these barrels with such setups. The arrow would probably bounce off.
P.S. - If you watch the videos, you will see I only did one test with the Big Bow. All the rest were done with the same 69# bow, and a wide variety of arrow weight, and foc ranges.
After reading this I did some tests. Shooting a Black Rock Hunter with bamboo limbs at 43lbs. @ 28 with the "fast flight" string that comes with the bow. I have a 27 inch draw. Shooting 11/32 douglas fir arrows (50-55 lb. spine) that weigh approx. 500 grains. First target I was shooting into was a thick plastic water drain (maybe a culvert?) that was approx. 1/2 inch thick. The next target was an old box target with a thick Styrofoam center that has been "repaired" by gluing carboard on both sides as needed. Three different broadheads were used in my very unscientific tests. First was a Zwickey Delta 2 edge glue on, second was a Zwickey Eskimo 2 edge glue on and last was a Zwickey Eskimo 4 edge glue on. Guess which one was the clear winner? (it wasn't even close).
Well, Tihbow, I guess nobody wants to join in. You are right, the four blade did the best by a wide margin. I know my targets aren't deer, but considering how well the Eskimo 4 blade did, I'm wondering why more hunters don't use them?
Rick's tests have had the same results as Jack Howard's, Fred Bears, and a few other big names test. Because of the speed 9 to 10 gpp usually outpenned heavier and lighter arrow with foc meaning very little. As for the plastic grabbing the shaft, it does on all the arrows he shot. Solid fiberglass only pens better in deeper water because other shaft are hollow and full of air. Oh btw I left out osb and his tests he did a video of. His tests showed the lighter shafts winning as well.
Shooting in plywood the three and four blade both travel further than a two blade. My take is there breaking the hole open thus less drag on the arrow . It's nice to see and here of different ways guys shoot thru stuff.
If you're asking about Rick's bow being a compound, the answer there would be a great big bag o' NO.
That boy is so big and so tough that he once killed a beef bull with a Howatt Hunter recurve and a rubber blunt.
I would expect 3 and/or 4-blade designs to out-penetrate 2-blades (provided they don't get torn apart) in the plastic barrel medium simply because it's got to be easier to bend the tip of a triangle than the side of a line, resulting in a lot more grab on the shaft.
But head design being equal, it's interesting to know that 9 GPP is generally the better bet than going lighter & faster. At least if you want two holes or better yet, a clean pass-through that leaves the animal wondering how a horse-fly ever got that big!
I think the 9-10 gpp is actually meaningless to penetration (kinda), but is a big factor in bow/arrow performance. Penetration has only to do with broadhead design, arrow velocity, and arrow weight. i.e. momentum.
Let me explain, a 600 grain arrow at 180 FPS will penetrate the same regardless of whether it is coming out of a very inefficient 80 pound bow or a very efficient 55 pound bow, cause the velocity and arrow weight is the same.
However, i believe, most bows seem to strike their best performance efficiency at 9-10 gpp.
In other words a 40 pound bow with a 9-10 gpp arrow, will never equal the penetration of an equally designed 60 pound bow shooting an arrow of 9-10 gpp, because the 60 pound bow's arrow will carry more momentum. Even though the gpp is identical, the only thing that really matters is momentum, and broadhead performance.
Hopefully i made that a little clearer than mud haha
Some while back I ran a thread about “why there’s no such thing as an all-around draw weight” that was based on the same premise. Momentum and KE are like certain kinds of trouble - doesn’t matter how you got there; what’s important is that you’re in Deep S#!+!!! And when a 500 grain arrow is headed your way at 180 feeps, that’s where you are.
Interesting to think about, though... I think it was Gary Fulk who used to test just about every bow he could get his hands on and found that the law of diminishing returns kicks in at around #65; any more than that and the sheer mass of the limb (required in order to make weight) tends to become a hindrance.
So it’s likely that lighter bows are more efficient (in terms of ballistic output) at slightly higher GPP and heavier bows with somewhat lower, even given the same design.
"If you're asking about Rick's bow being a compound, the answer there would be a great big bag o' NO."'''''''''''''''''''''Dahhhhhhh Gooofy,,try a 70 compound? Or, maybe this is selling a broadhead deal?
I saw this has been pulled back up, so here are a few things to reflect on about this particular test.
(1) Target medium selection:
I chose these style barrels due to their consistency of wall thickness, and also due to the flexibility of the type plastic used in them. They don't split, and/or crack.
Plastic that cracks, and/or breaks on impact creates a "blowout hole" which makes it easy for the arrow to pass on through, therefore drastically skewing the results of the test.
The plastic in these barrels only allows for a hole to be punched/cut in them, and the plastic will actually almost immediately start closing after the initial hole/cut is made. Much like living tissue. Therefore, the distance/depth of penetration is reliant not only on initial impact, but also on carried through momentum of the arrow.
(2) Draw weight comparisons:
Yes, obviously a 60# bow will shoot an arrow of a specific weight with much more energy than a 40# bow with the same weight arrow.
BUT, the "combined efficiency" of kinetic energy/momentum in delivered energy of that arrow to the intended target will be greater from the bow (any bow) when the arrow weights are in the 9 to 10 gpp window.
Just because you may not get the penetration I, or others may be getting, does not mean you are not getting the best penetration possible for your bow, arrow, and broadhead combination.
So, you are not looking for better penetration, than others are getting. You are looking for the best penetration "you" get with "your" hunting setup, and I am suggesting that 9 to 10 gpp window for some serious consideration.
I've tried penetration tests many times (Many Times) on many different target mediums, with many different draw weights, and with many different arrow weight.
9 to 10 gpp has "always" come out on top for me.
The bottom line here is - If you aren't happy with your results, the only real way to achieve better is to go up in horsepower/draw weight, but even then that heavier draw weight is going to give you the best results when following the 9 - 10 gpp guideline.
"You'll" never know, until you try it for "yourself", and shooting these specific type plastic barrels are a real eye opener when/if you are honest with yourself about it.
(4) No, I did not use a compound. Blasphemy !!! 8^)
Mmmmm ‘kay, Sarge - guess I still don’t know what your question was.
But last I checked, Rick's not really selling ANYTHING anymore, ‘cept maybe snake decals....
@Rick - I get your point on the plastic not breaking, but I think it closes down on the shaft a lot tighter than flesh ever could.
One thing about 3 or 4 -blade designs, though....
The only types of flesh that will apply real drag on an arrow shaft are muscle and thin bone such as the blade of the scapula.
The barrel is probably the best approximation of the scapula, assuming you hit where it’s thin enough that it doesn’t fracture across a much longer line than the head itself.
But muscle has a grain to it. If you hit with a 2-blade oriented along the grain, the ability of the muscle to contract and squeeze down on the shaft will be virtually unaffected.
If you hit perpendicular to the grain, any muscular contraction will open the wound wide.
A 3 or 4-blade can’t help but cut across SOME of the grain, so if you hit through the meaty part of a shoulder, there’s probably a penetration advantage to more blades for the same reasons that there is probably an advantage in plastic or thin bone.
But then if you hit with one blade sliding against bone, a 3 or 4-blade design will resist lateral movement like a sunfish turned on its side, which forces the one blade deeper into the bone, increasing the likelihood of taking the shaft off of its initial line of impact, which (along with friction against bone) will really take a hunk out of your penetration. Or it may break the bone, which is likely to get the critter’s attention and may result in a harder run just from the YOUCH! factor. I got clipped by a puck on the side of the knee the other night at hockey practice, and I swear it hurt worse than when I dislocated my shoulder. Not for as long, but it seems to me that there’s a big difference between pain in flesh vs. bone..
You’re not going to shoot muscle that is going to grab the arrow and inhibit penetration. I’m going to guess most if not all forward motion of the arrow is all but stopped by the time it would even begin to effect it. Even if it did, a 1” wide slit is plenty for arrow passage. A large rib that isn’t completely cut, a lower scapula hit, or humerus can put a real bind on the shaft and that’s about it.
All this penetration testing is fun and interesting but if you really want to know what works, listen to those guys that take hunters out for buffalo and such year in and year out. Most any one of them will have 10x more experience than all of us combined.
GF point being, there have been all kinds of tests for penetration and whole reports on arrows and broadheads shot into dead animals and plywood and now plastic buckets.
I see a lot of stuff tested on but very few dead animals people have shot because they are hunters OBVIOUSLY, if they are testing broadheads?
Not knockin Rick, I know the peer pressure here and the gang mentality can kick in because I have been on the receiving end of it many times, even by individuals I once respected so I understand your need to support shooting plastic barrels too.
I see it all the time, especially here, "I have killed this, or mountain Bucks, or shoot this way or that to be in the kill zone" but I have a hard time figuring out when they take the time to shut the lid and actually do some hunting because they are always here handing out advice.
Where is all the dead stuff?
If this or that is the latest greatest, How did the real hunters actually kill stuff? Maybe that is why Howard and Fred were real hunters BECAUSE there was no internet hunting going on then? Blaaa
Seems to me that if you try Ricks test out you will find that Broadhead A combo out performs Broadhead B combo. I really cant believe that if you move over to live animals, that the Broadhead B combo will now out perform Broadhead A.
I guess I'm not surprised though, every time a penetration test come up, it ends up with people arguing over the validity of the test, and usually someone will declare something along the lines of the test not being a real world test.
I just do these things, and lay them out there for folks to think about, and discuss. Then, maybe give it a go, and post their results.
I love the discussion both for, and against any idea, but I dearly love it when folks actually try it for themselves before offering their concluded opinions.
Of course, what I am laying out is also only my opinion, but it is opinion backed up with some pretty conclusive evidence derived from experience of shooting both the barrels (among a few other things), and shooting "through" some pretty tough animals as well.
Knowing how much resistance these barrels place on the arrow, and it's a lot:
(1) The resistance of the initial penetration of the barrel by the broadhead.
(2) The resistance of the barrel pinching the shaft after the initial broadhead penetration
(3) The resistance of the offside penetration of the barrel by the broadhead. (if you reach the offside).
(4) The resistance of the barrel pinching the shaft after the off side penetration (if you get it through the off side).
Add them all up, and the arrow has it's work cut out for it.
I am fairly certain, that the one that penetrates the barrel best from my bow, will also be the one to penetrate an animal (any animal) best.
Well, Sarge, I’m not saying that you haven’t caught any unwarranted crap around here, but I don’t know what that has to do with your question about a compound or really anything else in this thread.
Pretty sure Rick has killed his share of stuff. Pictures don’t mean anything - you’ll never see a pic of anything that Larry has ever killed, but that doesn’t exactly mean he's some kind of amateur.
The point of THIS thread is simply to show some results of a project that Rick took on during the Off Season. That’s all. If you’re not interested, just move on. No need to redistribute whatever grief you’ve been handed.
And FWIW - dead animals are a totally unsatisfactory testing medium because they have all of the inconsistency issues of Live ones but dead tissue doesn’t react the same as Live.
If you want to get the most out of any one particular set-up, it doesn’t matter what you shoot into as long as it’s consistent. But - as soon as you change the number of blades, you’re no longer testing ONE set-up.
“All this penetration testing is fun and interesting but if you really want to know what works, listen to those guys that take hunters out for buffalo and such year in and year out. Most any one of them will have 10x more experience than all of us combined.”
Just curious: Have any of the guys with “Buffalo Rigs” actually given the “barrel test” a go?
JMO, it’d be interesting to see if their results were any different/better than Rick’s.
My comment above was on superks shooting at a plastic drain pipe. A totally different plastic than the original op post on a plastic barrel. I get what Rick is saying about arrow weights and front of center. And for my opinion for what I do with an arrow it's +/-1 @10 gpp and less than 15%foc.
Sorry for the crappy pictures, but here was my buffalo setup. Dryad Orion Longbow 76lbs@28" 906gr total arrow weight setup as follows: Easton FMJ Dangerous Game 250 with 50gr brass HIIT insert and 300gr Tuffhead. The only change I made to the setup was the addition of a lighted nock which bumped my weight up to 912gr.
This was the biggest test I put my setup against. Concrete cinder block at 12 yards. Arrow and broadhead were 100% complete and fine after the test and had to chisel head out of block. got just over 5/8" penetration.