From: goldentrout_one
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Date: 02-Dec-18 |
|
Ok, I'm sure this topic has been covered before, unfortunately I couldn't find anything with a quick search.
Question is, what is the relative benefits of a bullet point vs. a field point? What is the design of a field point trying to accomplish? Easier to remove from a stump than a bullet point? Is there any meaningful difference between the two styles?
|
|
From: Ambleman
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Date: 02-Dec-18 |
|
I haven’t seen this addressed before and I’m interested to hear the answer. Two different designs, for sure. This’ll be interesting.
|
|
From: aromakr
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Date: 02-Dec-18 |
|
Field points are not designed for stump shooting. They were designed for shooting field targets on matts or hay bales, and I don't believe there is any real advantage of one over the other, its what ever appeals to you. I believe the bullet point is a more recent development that came out of Germany several years ago. The bullet point is certainly more aerodynamic.
Bob
|
|
From: Rick Barbee
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Date: 02-Dec-18 |
|
The only real "noticeable" difference you will ever see is - the bullet point are more prone to glance off a target, than the field points.
Rick
|
|
From: Glynn
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Date: 02-Dec-18 |
|
I like bullet points when shooting Field because our butts have 4x4 frames holding them.
Occasionally one of these timbers will collapse?..or something.. when I take a shot and my arrow will somehow hit them.
Much easier to pull the bullet point because they penetrate less.
|
|
From: George D. Stout
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Date: 02-Dec-18 |
|
Well at one time, if you wanted to match your tips to broadhead weight, especially in the higher weights, you needed field points. That's because most bullet shaped tips were designed for target archery...light arrows, small fletch for more speed to reach those very long targets. Nowadays you can buy bullet tips of very heavy weights so now it's only a design difference. At one time though, there was a reason. I doubt many here are good enough to realize an advantage from one to the other in accuracy. I know I'm not.
|
|
From: Too Many Bows Bob
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Date: 02-Dec-18 |
|
I agree with George. You would probably need a shooting machine to tell the difference. You would have to be able to EXACTLY duplicate the shots a whole bunch of times to get any accurate data. I would not be willing to invest the time and money into this research. I don't shoot either points into stumps, that's what Judo's are for.
But hey, it's winter and if you need something to keep the brain cells churning, have a good time.
TMBB
|
|
From: Grizzly
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Date: 02-Dec-18 |
|
Bullet points are designed to penetrate paper targets. Field points are designed to penetrate 3d, heshen rubber targets without falling out of the target.
|
|
From: mahantango
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Date: 02-Dec-18 |
|
Rick is spot on, much more prone to glance off 3d targets.
|
|
From: Jim Davis
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Date: 02-Dec-18 |
|
Bullet points are a resurrection, not a new arrival. They were common before 1950 or so.
The alternative was a "parallel point," the sides of which were like today's field points, but the tip was conical.
______ \ ______/
Some objection was seen in the fact a bullet point drawn to where the tip was even with the center of round or convex handle allowed the shaft to be slightly toward the center of the handle.
Here's a picture of older product.
|
|
From: George D. Stout
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Date: 02-Dec-18 |
|
Field points were around decades before any foam targets were even made.
|
|
From: Jim Davis
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Date: 02-Dec-18 |
|
diagram didn't work
|
|
From: M60gunner
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Date: 02-Dec-18 |
|
At one time it was not legal to use bullet points on 3D’s per IBO rules. Supposed target damage? In our case the bullet points will not penetrate the carpet bales once the wheel bow guys have shot out the centers. We like the Saunders field points. They are “pointy” and aerodynamic as well.
|
|
From: Bassman
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Date: 02-Dec-18 |
|
I shoot bullet points on 600 carbons only because I bought them cheap at Walmart.They were the right diameter for the arrow.They don,t seem to penetrate as well as field points.JMO
|
|
From: GLF
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Date: 02-Dec-18 |
|
I've shot nothing but easton rps hardened bullet since the early 80s. I've been lucky tho as not one ricochet. Easton brought reps bullets out for the same season as their target points were bullets. To be true going into paper targets on bails.
|
|
From: Viper
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Date: 02-Dec-18 |
|
Guys -
Wow, interesting thoughts...
Bullet points have better aerodynamics over longer distances, but the effect will only be apparent with very high level shooters. They (or at least some) are typically made to tighter tolerances than other types of points.
Field point are shouldered to lessen penetration. The initial impact of the tip begins to slow the arrow down and the shoulder provides a second level of resistance. At least the was the original theory, and exactly how much of a difference it actually makes can be debated.
Viper out.
|
|
From: Stumpkiller
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Date: 02-Dec-18 |
|
I would mention that radius curve arrow points FAR predate "bullets".
Who is copying whom?
|
|
From: Kodaman
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Date: 02-Dec-18 |
|
Bullet points penetrate less on bag type targets ....hence, target wear is reduced. That is the primary reason I shoot bullet points.
|
|
From: papadeerhtr
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Date: 03-Dec-18 |
|
When I shot 3d at first I used bullet points. While at a IBO shoot guy who I was shooting with told me to switch to field points because he said the sharp point grabbed the foam much better. He told me bullet points were more likely to glance off.
|
|
From: George D. Stout
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Date: 03-Dec-18 |
|
Most likely if you are getting glance outs, you are not hitting a scoring area anyway, but that's neither here nor there. Bullet points work fine on target faces like the field archery targets and target round faces. So does the field point, so it's a matter of choosing what you like.
I use field points because I always have for stumping and just moseying around the woods picking out targets. I will use bullet points....if I have them...on the field and target rounds. Luckily we don't have to choose just one type.
|
|
From: RonG
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Date: 03-Dec-18 |
|
I got a new opinion...........Bullet points look neater!!!!
Looks to me the field points wouldn't penetrate as far as the bullet points because of the shoulder.
|
|
From: ronnickel
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Date: 04-Dec-18 |
|
I ended up retiring field tips when the point folds over due to a hard object. So ive been a big fan of bullet points for a while now. I’ve yet to damage a single bullet point. You can’t do a quick spin test of your aluminum arrow when you have a folded over field point.
|
|
From: goldentrout_one
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Date: 04-Dec-18 |
|
ronnickel, you make a good point (pardon the pun). In fact, I keep a file in my archery tackle box to re-sharpen bent or mushroomed points.
One thing I've considered - if you strike a hard object, it can be argued that a deforming point will reduce the potential for arrow damage, as the energy used to deform the point is energy NOT going into your arrow. So, given the choice between replacing a tip and discarding an arrow, I'll take the disposable tip. Saunders field points are a good example - long, skinny, and vert prone to damage, but does that feature tend to reduce arrow damage? Possibly.... it makes sense, but I have not evaluated that theory with testing. Keep in mind, I shoot aluminum.
One thing I've thought about based on the conversation above - perhaps the original intent of the field tip was to reduce deflections when you make a marginal hit on your target? That would make sense, as a deflected arrow could easily be a lost arrow.... a long, skinny, needle-like tip would, in my mind, make deflections even less likely, but the down side would be the skinny point is more prone to damage when striking a hard object. Maybe THAT was the original intent of the 'field point', to decrease the possibility of deflections but at the same time providing a point that's relatively durable (not as durable as a 'bullet point', but still more durable than a skinny needle point like the Saunders, which for me have been one-and-done if striking a hard object).
|
|
From: Red Beastmaster
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Date: 05-Dec-18 |
|
Bullet points are easier to pull from trees.
I don't need them, but I use them in case someone has to borrow an arrow. :)
|
|
From: Jim McCann
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Date: 05-Dec-18 |
|
I just started using Ace bullet point field tips because they have the only 160 grain tips I could find. Otherwise, I see no difference in how they shoot. I was using 5-grain washers with conventional 145-grain tips to get to my desired 160, but find the Ace 160s easier to deal with.
|
|
From: DanaC
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Date: 05-Dec-18 |
|
George, I had exactly one glance-out this year. Uphill shot, hit high and that arrow took off for New Haven!
I see they make long, single-taper 'needle' points, not sure if the angle helps stick in on what would otherwise be a glancing shot. Bet they bend easy!
|
|
From: Wispershot
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Date: 05-Dec-18 |
|
I'm glad George posted what he did. I made the decision to try bullit points as I'm attending a couple indoor target shoots and I just decided I'd try them. Hadn't researched it
|
|
If you have already registered, please sign in now
For new registrations Click Here
|
|
|