Some of the posts on the “wood versus carbon debate“ thread have suggested that woodies may not penetrate as well as more “modern“ shafting.

What say ye?

I suppose it’s inevitable that this is going to go down a FOC rabbit hole, which is not really what I’m interested in…I am prepared to accept the notion that a nose- heavy carbon arrow could in fact out-penetrate a more conventional arrow, at least under certain, challenging circumstances

So perhaps for the sake of avoiding argument, I’d be interested in hearing about whether you think that wood shafts are less likely than a comparably balanced aluminum arrow to provide a clean pass-through under normal conditions and on critters such as larger deer and Elk of all sizes.

What it comes down to for me, I guess, is that I would much rather have an animal be spooked by a thump in the side and bounce off a bit wondering what happened than have it take off like a scalded cat, absolutely terrified of some strange “thing” which is clawing away at its rib cage. The LAST thing any of us would possibly want is for an animal to act like it just got hit with a big mechanical, right?

So.... I am assuming a well-tuned arrow, good flight, sharp head, proper placement (within normal parameters), etc.. Not concerned with championship target-grade accuracy or durability or a flatter trajectory or any of the supposed advantages of modern materials. Just want to know if clean pass-throughs are not as reasonably to be expected with wood as with aluminum or carbon.

Thank you, gents!

Just comes down to KE and diameter. Little skinny shaft, same weight, will go in further.

Wooden arrows flex more on release and impact than aluminum arrows which flex more than carbon arrows, so to answer your question, carbon will out penetrate aluminum which will out penetrate wood, assuming the normal parameters that you listed.

Eliminate the variables - same weight, same diameter, same speed, same head, flying equally well, why would one penetrate further?

When you add variables you affect outcomes.

Absolutely no reason for not using EFOC on wood arrows. Penetration has more to do with shafting diameter than anything else, IMO.

I am shooting 190 grain points on my woods and soon will be trying 250 grain. Am liking how my arrows are flying with the higher point weight.

Regarding shaft flex that is governed more from spine/diameter than type of shafting.

@Kelly - what kind of all-up weight are you shooting?? I have no desire to exceed about 550 for my heaviest bow.

And I’m kinda curious about the purported advantages in penetration of s kinky shaft when we’re trying to slide it through a lubricated wound channel over 1” wide...

Some days I can imagine that, and others.....? Not so much!

"Just want to know if clean pass-throughs are not as reasonably to be expected with wood as with aluminum or carbon"

A reasonable person will not ask this question. If someone has a really thinks that wood arrow will be at disadvantage against aluminum or carbons, please volunteer as target for 3 shots with same arrow weight from wood, aluminum and carbon. Broadhead of his choice.

"Just want to know if clean pass-throughs are not as reasonably to be expected with wood as with aluminum or carbon" A reasonable person will not ask this question. If someone thinks that wood arrow will be at disadvantage against aluminum or carbons, please volunteer as target for 3 shots with same arrow weight from wood, aluminum and carbon. Broadhead of his choice.

Unless I hit a bone all of my shots pass thru with wood arrows. Deer ,elk,bear....have had clean pass thrus on all when not hiiti g bone. Can't say that for carbon the one year I tried them.

Ramin, hickory, smaller diameter. Asbhy counted diameter as important.

Southernilinois it’s the single way to stop debates based on “my opinion is better than yours”. Put your mouth where the wallet is. There are so many pics on here with animals killed with wood arrows that I don’t believe it was a genuine question. For real, I shoot all 3 types and even if I know small diameter goes dipper, when the shot is where it is supposed to be with the right arrow for the bow the single question is who’s passing through quicker not who’s not passing. But this is me.

A big boar hog in the 250#+ range is as tough to penetrate as any game animal I can imagine. I have shot many, many, many pigs. I have shot several boars that were upwards of 200#. I've shot them with wood, carbon and aluminum. I shoot 45-50 pound bows and all my arrows are over 550gr., I make sure of that. Carbon arrows usually blow through pigs, all pigs, even big ones- if I can manage to stay off the shoulder. Aluminum arrows do alright but do not penetrate as well as carbon. WOOD ARROWS, even though they are my favorite, DO NOT PENETRATE AS WELL AS CARBON UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES. I have proven that to myself over and over and over. The fact is wood arrows work, no disputing that. So does aluminum, but wood comes up way short in the penetration department.

If the picture will post- take a look. That boar is at least two hundred pounds. His shield was over 1.5 inches thick. he was a big, stinky, tough hog. I got 3/4 of a carbon arrow in him with a bear razorhead. If I had been shooting wood that day, and hit him in the same spot- I'm not sure I would have ever seen him again.

Deeper not dipper , typo and cell autocorrect bad mix

I always assumed that when I pulled my cedar shaft out of the dirt after a pass through that would be sufficient. Am I missing something ? Of course I'm still shooting shafts I over paid for in the early 90's. A rascal that went by the name Kelly sold me cedars for over $90 a hundred.

Draven - it was a serious question.

Not “will they work?”, but “do they give up anything worth thinking about?”

Based on that other thread, you might guess some people think so...

It depnds to a certain degree on how you have them set up. One of the main reasons that carbon will potentially out penetrate other materials has to with the fact that the arrow shaft is smaller than the furrule of the broadhead.

If you use for instance 23/64" broadheads on 11/32" shafts (and yes, they mount just fine and spin just peachy) you have made the playing filed more level.

That's what Ashby was talking about (and he actually mkaes that statement) in his penetration test works.

GF, if we would always think to improve something that works we all be shooting Compounds and Carbon arrows by now. If the question would have been:

What's your opinion, who's penetrating better? 1 Aluminum Gamegetter xxt5 or 11/32 wood? 2 Carbon small diameters arrows like Widowmakers or Easton Axis small diameter aluminum? 3 5/16 wood vs normal dia aluminum vs normal dia carbon?

maybe the answers would have been quite different.

Gamegetter xx75 not t5

These discussions are like trying to herd cats. You tend to argue over which is best....for the arrow to be two feet past the deer, or three...during a pass through shot. For all intents and purposes, any arrow material is more than capable to take any game efficiently when set up and tuned well. And lets add that the archer is the final answer to penetration...by getting to form during the shot so the arrow is flying at it's best flight trajectory and power...and heading for the vital area.

Penetration has a lot to do with angles and sharpness of head.

And what I do is wax my arrows with a automotive wax and that helps arrows slid through the meat. Now many times dependent on way animal runs with legs forward or back you may hit a joint or opposite leg and stop the pass through or the leg breaks the arrow while animal is running or a arrow rouchetts off a rib stopping full penetrate.

There are many variables to be considered in the death bush!

Most incredible shot I had ever made I watched was a heart shot on antelope that jumped up in the air at the impact and the arrow went through and leg broke arrow and it flew into pieces and animal fell to ground now that was neat.

I wonder if Rosetta Stone has a program to help me learn to speak R. Cat. :)

Sawtooth, I think they offered it but it was very niche market and profit margins were too low.

If you have already registered, please

sign in now

For new registrations

Click Here