The other day I bought a new dell laptop. It came in a really dense cardboard box with several hardshell layers inside to protect the unit. It was all cardboard but really thick an compressed. I used 3 different arrows for the test.

The bow I used for the test was my 47# 66" acs cx

1. 2413 near full length with 175 grain magnus 1 broadhead. Total weight about 650 grain. Results were about half of a shafts length of penitration

2. GT 3555 with same broadhead. Total weight around 430 grain. Results were penitration to the fletchings.

3. Axis 400's cut to 30" with same broadhead. Total arrow weight unknown 500gn?

Results were pass through and stuck with several inches of penitration into the bag target behind the box.

Conclusion: Weight aside, I think the skinny shaft of the axis is what sealed the deal. It was a far better performer than the other two arrows and I will definately be using axis or some other form of skinny shaft for hunting in the future. I even tried sharpening the broadhead on the aluminum and dulling it for the axis with no different results. Skinny shaft has my vote.

I would have thought the heavier arrow would have penetrated more than light and skinny. Interesting experiment.

seen it at my place too. lighter 5/16 carbons cut into a straw bale deeper than heavier fatter woodies. i'd say 50% deeper. not just a couple times, i mean thousands of shots.

Shooting thru material that holds tightly onto the shaft friction is always greater in larger diameter shafts. On live game theres no such friction to stop the larger shafts. I personally don't care for the fat light weight shafts but stick to the smaller diameter heavier 2219's. Alot of clubs didn't allow carbon for that reason when they first came out. The smaller diameter didn't leave enough surface for the foam to stop em.

I would think that a deer would be dense enough to cause drag on a shaft. I wouldnt call a hay bail dense by any means. Charley experienced the same thing with hay.

Im telling you guys you had to be there. That skinny axis made butter out of that box. I know a box is no deer but I would bet money any 55 pound bow would not be able to penitrate with that 2413 fat shaft in that box as well as my 47# with the axis. In fact I have a 60# dream catcher that I will test it with to prove it.

Different media changes results dramatically. A broadside deer through the lungs is much like shooting through a water balloon. But if there is considerable friction, the smaller diameter shaft is the winner. The question that comes to mind is this, is diameter a factor worth consiering for penetration through the typical whitetail? Have results on deer shown that smaller diameter has as dramatic an effect on penetration in game animals as additional arrow mass? From everything I have read and witnessed I say the answers to these two questions are no and no. In dense cardboard or a lot of other materials the answer may differ.

Here is an article written by Jack Howard on this subject.

Heavy Arrows vs. Light Arrows By Jack Howard

As far back as I can remember there has always been a controversy on which would penetrate further, a slower heavy moving arrow or a fast light moving arrow. Way back in those days I never really had a strong opinion either one way or the other, I did though favor an arrow on the light side for other reasons. I have always been a long distance shooter, and only with a light arrow can you reach out with a good degree of accuracy. My practice sessions have always been a 75 or 80 yards. My reasoning was if I learned to do well here I would even do better for any close shots that might come along. This has worked out well for me as most of my kills have been in the range of 50 to 60 yards, with a few Deer, Elk and Antelope kills ranging from 75 to 85 yards. I have always tested everything I possibly could because without some type of actual test you never have any real true answers. I had delayed though on penetration testing as I had been perfectly satisfied with my hunting results and have always been pressed for time. Back in 1967 Bow & Arrow Magazine asked me if I would do a penetration test article for their magazine. I said I would, this was a good excuse for me to break from the usual grind and find the answer for my own satisfaction, the age old question about penetration. I find that I have some spare room in this catalog issue and think some of you may be interested in my findings. What follows is a condensed version of my 1967 article.

All bow hunters know how important penetration is, yet I have seen and heard of cases where there has been no penetration at all. Cases where the ar¬row has hit squarely in the rib cage and bounced back. Still other instances where penetration was only as deep as the broadhead point. Even though these are rare happenings, for the sake of our bow hunting sport, it is best they do not happen at all. There are an assortment of reasons why such things can oc¬cur. A few hunters in their excitement forget to come to a full draw, thus los¬ing considerable speed and power. Or a combination of shortened draw and a poorly designed or rounded over broadhead point. Broadheads such as a reverse barb (sawtooth) can cut penetration in half in soft tissue and stop the arrow abruptly if gristle is hit. It's not possible for all bow hunters to have the same efficiency in their equipment, but it is important that each of us try to obtain as much penetration as possible. Some of the things that influence the ability to penetrate are bow weight, arrow weight, broad head point design, arrow speed, draw length. A hunter shooting a bow weight, arrow combination that is 60# at 31" will have considerably more power than a hunter shooting a combination that is 60# at 28". When a bow hunter invests large sums into his equipment and costly hunting trips, it is wise to choose equipment carefully so the hunt will be a gratifying success. Because there are certain arrow-bow weight combinations that are more efficient than others if the wrong choice is made, in certain cases a slight gain in bow weight could cause a loss in penetration.

In setting up for a penetration test, the material used that is to be shot into must be as consistent as possible. For this type of test there is nothing I know of that is more consistent than compressed cardboard. I can shoot 6 matched arrows into cardboard and they will penetrate to exactly the same depth. I made up a strong wood frame to hold and compress the cardboard. What would be the best kind of point to use was the next question. Broadhead points were out, not only would they be difficult to work with, but there would be too many misleading results. Things such as alignment, sharpness, size and type of hole opened, etc. would give a varied effect on penetration. You would only use broad head points for a test if you were testing the penetrating ability of one type of brcadhead over another. My test though was not a test on broad head points. I was only concerned on how shaft weight effects penetration, an an¬swer to which could best overcome the binding effect of the carboard against the shaft. Would a shaft on the light side which travels faster, or a shaft on the heavy side at a slower speed have the most penetration. To make this test as accurate as possible, all points had to be exactly the same shape and dia¬meter and remain the same throughout the test. I chose standard steel target points as they are absolutely consistent. Shaft diameters, arrow length, fletch¬ing, all had to be exactly the same, identical in every respect except for what I was testing, weight. As I had no method of making up such arrows, Easton Aluminum made these especially for my test. The arrow weights made were 325 grains for the lightest arrow, 480 grains for the middle weight and 650 grains in the heavy arrow which is just twice the weight of the lightest one.

The bow weights used in my test were 40, 50 and 60 Ibs. Out of a bow of a given weight, I think we all realize that as arrow weight is increased, the speed of the arrow decreases. Also as arrow weight is lessened, then the speed of the arrow increases. How though does all this effect arrow penetration, this was the whole point of my test. As for the figures on how the test came out, I won't give all of the many figures as this would only be confusing. With each bow weight shot, the lightest arrow penetrated the deepest, the mid weight ar¬row had the second most penetration and the heavy arrow had the least pene¬tration. For a comparison with just the light arrow and the heavy arrow. From the 40# bow, the light arrow penetrated 3 ½” further than the heavy arrow. From the 50# bow, the light arrow penetrated 4" further than the heavy arrow. From the 60# bow, the light arrow penetrated 5 ¼” further than the heavy ar¬row. The penetration range of the mid weight arrow was half way between the light and heavy arrow. In the actual depth of penetration, there are some fig¬ures that may surprise a few, in the heavy vs. light division. Just comparing what the light bow with the light arrow versus the heavy bow with the heavy arrow penetrated is somewhat astounding. From the 40# bow, the average depth of penetration of the light 325 grain arrow was 12". From the 60# bow the average depth the heavy arrow penetrated was 11 ½”. If you take a close look at these figures you will note the light bow and arrow penetrated on the average of 1 ½”" further than the heavy arrow with a bow that was 20 lbs heav¬ier. Of course none of us can use a 325 grain arrow for hunting, but I feel the figures still tell us something. For one thing, speed is an important factor that should definitely be considered. Also if you choose the proper arrow-bow com¬bination for your bow, you won't go wrong. In my opinion it is best not to make a decided effort to go real heavy on arrow weight as a few hunters do.

Many have been mislead by a few manufacturers advertisements, especially when they talk about heavy arrows and heavy broad heads giving shock type knock over power. There is no such thing as knock down power when it comes to killing game with a bow and arrow. Knock down power means shock from being hit by a projectile, this does not happen with an arrow. On rare occasions one might catch an animal off balance, but this has nothing to do with shock or knock down power. The fact that the broad head is sharp and pointed in itself takes what little striking shock that might be generated out of the arrow. If striking shock was the name of the game, we would be using blunt points. In conclusion I would like to mention that I made this penetration test because of a request from Bow & Arrow Magazine, plus my own information. I have given the results here as I feel some may be interested. I have no ax to grind on this subject and will be pleased to make a customers arrows any weight he wishes them to be.

Ok,

One more time. No critter, except for something akin to a jellyfish, is made up of a material of consistent resistance. Hide, muscle, bone, lung matter...all different.

There is no test media completely capable of replicating the variable resistance to penetration of hitting a critter one place versus another. Even Ashby's tests can't completely eliminate this inconsistency.

The consequence, when matched with the truth that we can be a stubborn bunch: "I know what I know, don't confuse me with facts." is that in a test such as Jack's the heavy arrow advocates can find something to discredit. In a test that seems to confirm that mass penetrates better than speed, the light-faster guys can find the same.

In a previous thread a Waller painted the word image of cavemen around the fire having this same argument 20,000 years ago.

Mass works. Speed works. There are advantages and disadvantages to each. Pick whichever suits you, your bow and your circumstances, or mix a little of both, tune the arrows to fly true and be happy.

R.

Oh the joy of creating tests based on assumptions and then considering the results to be "proven" facts.

There are so many variables to consider:

Mass, speed, target density and composition. whether the target density and composition has anything to do with the real world, friction and drag, arrow flight, feathers and vanes, whether the particular setup is tuned properly and is consistent with the other setups, etc. and etc.

ALL variables need to be carefully controlled to achieve valid results. We keep seeing these half-baked tests done with questionable results and then everyone argues over them.

How fun.

Love the axis shafts,they are tough as dogs nail's

the jack howard article misses the point about shaft diameter. i know in my post i only mention wheight to note the wider shaft had a weight advantage and still failed to penetrate as deep as the skinny shaft. i can't speak for deerdander, but, my feeling reading his posts was that he was saying the same thing. skinnier shaft goes deeper, even when they have lower mass. at my place if i front load them carbons, or load the shafts with cord to match the wood weight the results are even more dramatic. i'm not sure why test media matters. friction is friction. as long as the test media is consistant from one spot to the next it is fair. any minor inconsistancies in my bales is overcome by the huge volume of arrows i've shot with consistant results wherever i hit them. if a deer is less dense or more dense you get the same results,...i think.

JELLO TEST!!!!

Don't consider a 500 grain arrow a lightweight arrow out of 47lb bow. Think it would be interesting to compare a 2216 or 2018 (or 2016) to the carbon. Would bet the skinnier aluminums would penetrate better....

Also think one could kill just about anything (including dangerous game like a buff or t-rex) with a 55lb recurve and 500 grain arrow if mojo adequate on that particular day...just read an article about a Dude who used to kill elephants with 7mm mauser in the old days....

It's a shame boarding upon criminal that Jack Howard is remembered for that article. Especially since some of his other ideas, using a steel rod to stiffen a bow riser, and his design and craftsmanship in general were so darned good. If I'm not mistaken, he also advocated the pre-cursor to B50 string material, a polyester of some kind no doubt, for it's wonderful elastic properties. Dang shame, but alas we are all victims of our successes. I'm embarassed for this criticism of such a fine bowyer, so save your breath. I'm sorry, but I'm also obliged to, from my pov.

It shouldn't surprise anyone that it's easier to shove a skinny stick into the mud than a fat one. What I find astonding is the willingness for so many to accept that penetration of a whitetail deer is most accurately modeled by using compressed cardboard.

Fact is the whole premise of the test is flawed. A whitetail thorax simply will not stop an arrow, even one from the lowest standard of a hunting bow and arrow combo. It offers little more in resistance literally than two layers of deer leather, slathered with snot on the inside and separated by 12" of air between. Rather, it's the dirt on the other side, or a bone, or a gut full of liquid grass clippings, or some mechanical phenomenon (like the animal's body literally deflects the power vector of the arrow by movement) that actually stops the arrow.

A 2413 shaft is bigger than the ferule on a magnus head.Ashbys tests show a huge loss in penatration with this setup.

2216 or 2018 penetrate better than 2413, may not pentrate better than carbon...

Here is one thing I know for certain that has worked consistently in my experience. Arrow weight alone is one variable. I believe and have seen for myself two varialbles that have helped my penetration on game immeasurable. One is the skinny shaft. Axis and Beman MFX shafts in particular. The old pultruded shafts, which are hard to come by, also fall into this catagory. The second variable is point weight,or EFOC. Since I have been shooting the skinny shafts and putting 200-250 grains up front I always get a pass thru. I am currently shooting 55# @ 28" and for the previous 5 years have been shooting 60#. My wife, on the other hand, shoots 45# @26" and I make her arrows from skinny carbons and add 200 grains to the point. I've killed 3 animals this year...all pass thrus. My wife shot a deer last week, an adult whitetail, that she hit in front of the hip and the arrow exited the rib cage on the opposite side. We shoot 3 blade Razorcap broadheads.

My own conclusion, after 59 years at this, is that regardless of your arrow weight where the weight is and the diameter of the shaft are important variables in achieving the best penetration you can attain with your equipment.

Yes there are real world variables in the deer such as bone that can affect penetration. However given that arrow A penetrates further in a consistent test medium than arrow B does, I would bet money that arrow A will out penetrate arrow B on a deer more often than not. Is the concept of extrapolation so foreign as to be beyond consideration?

Well, the first problem is a 2413 has a spine of 0.365. Shooting that arrow out of a 47 lb bow you'd have to have a bow window cut 6 inches past center, a 34 inch draw length, and a 600 gr point.

Bowmania

to me the box test seemed like a good idea. a firm out side and less firm inside. next time you buy a computer fill the box with guts and maybe every one will have an easier time excepting your results. I agree with you on the skinny arrow. when the beeman arrow came out that needed the oversert to to screw in a point. we had to change targets in order to stop them. they would out penatrate a 2216 by at least double. I do not know they weight of these arrows but the were awsome anyways. I have heard that Dale Dye still shoots them. I still have a few but i save them for archery golf. will out shoot a goldtip bby 100 yards or so. Eric

Were the nature of the test medium not relevant, if whitetail thorax, air, water, compressed cardboard, styrofoam, jello, apple butter, bone, leather are all the same, then the law of conservation of momentum would dictate the heavier arrow would always penetrate farther. What is, evidently, thought to be extrapolation might be more accurately be labeled fabrication.

I think the word you want is deduction though, given how you used it. But in order for deduction to work (if a = b and b = c then a = c), then one must assume compressed cardboard and whitetail thorax demonstrate the same mechanism of resistance to penetration by an arrow. Or that a field point offers the same resistance to penetration in a whitetail as does a broadhead. Or that a solid behaves like liquid, in terms of it's resistance to penetration of an arrow.

Extrapolation is different. Extrapolation is when one assumes, given a = 2, b = 3, that c is = 4. Other than the assumption part, I'm not sure how that concept relates to this question.

DCM, I'm not sure where you saw criticism of Jack Howard. I think that his testing was as subjective as possible. Yes there are other variables that he could have considered but his goal was to look only at arrow weight.

I refer to my criticism of Jack's premise, his method and his conclusion in my first post Phil, perhaps more thoroughly revealed in my second post. Perhaps Freudian, but the "subjective" nature of Jack's test and conclusion are precisely my criticism. The "other variables" are relevant. Regardless of his goal, the result was to contradict 300 years of proven human knowledge in math and physics. Again, we are all victims of our experience. What keeps us all straight, honest if you will, is peer review. As such, I feel obliged to point this out, unfortunately.

I should not get involved in this argument. I spent so much time with OSB. I have spinach to clean and squirrel arrows to make. Joni, is making spinach peta. DCM, the momentum equation lends equal weight to mass and velocity. momentum= mass x velocity. The trouble is there is only so much stored (potential) energy in a bow so as mass increases so does velocity. There is a point of diminishing returns where too much increase in mass will ultimately decrease penetration. My experience is 9-10 ggp pound is about right. 11 grains if I have to. That's about it. Jawge

DCM you said, "Regardless of his goal, the result was to contradict 300 years of proven human knowledge in math and physics." I pretty much agree. These days the attitude is test everything. Forget about past practice and forget about research. Most seem to think the old ways are inadequate. We know better than our predecessors . Rather than building upon preexisting knowledge. We must reinvent everything. Testing is fine but testing without preexisting knowledge is no so fine. Look at the research a PhD candidate does before working on a dissertation.

For years 8-10 grains for most game has been the norm. It represents a balance between mass and velocity. That's it. I'm done. Going to clean the spinach. :) Jawge

Jawge, I have found with my modern recurves you are right , when I get to 12grs. per pound, Kinetic Energy and Kinetic Pulse starts to decline.

I saw that show, Robo. The Grecian technology was fantastic. The ancient Greeks were smart guys and gals. Ravenhood, your experience mirrors mine regarding arrow weight. Thanks for the affirmation. My friends, Joni is working on the spanakopeta now. Awesome stuff! Joni is a great cook! Her mother died when Joni was 15. Ma taught Joni how to cook. God rest them both. My wife is Greek too. I am thinking about a hot buttered rum shortly. I am eating some oatmeal for lunch. It's a cold, windy and rainy day here in NH, the "Live Free or Die" state. I don't hunt in the rain. It's a take it easy day. I'm about to fletch up a wild rose shaft. It will get a homemade squirrel point. I need some shots at game. Nothing going on deer-wise around here for me. Jawge

Rick Welch says that the optimum arrow weight that he has found is 425 gr. It gives him the best speed/penetration weight ratio. We compared my 550 gr arrow to a 425 gr. arrow. We shot both through the cronograph and then did the KE numbers. We found that they were almost exactly the same, but I was 20 fps. faster.

LBB

I shot a 1/4" steel plate with a .243, 30-30 and 444. The .243 would penetrate the plate every time and 30-30 and 444 would just dent it. Same thing with a 1 oz 12 gauge slug. The .243 had a 80gr or so bullet if I remember correctly. The 444 was a 240gr i think and the 30-30 was probably a 170gr.

I skipped all the engineering classes at Purdue back in the 70's -- too busy learning my trees. However, this thread has helped me understand why my Beeman MFX Classic 600's at 424 grains trigger extreme allergic reactions among the local whitetail deer herd! Thanks guys.

So, arrow A consistently penetrates further than arrow B so when we go out to take a deer we use arrow B because......? It just don't make sense. We can't come to the conclusion that odds are, more often than not, arrow A will still out penetrate arrow B when shooting at a deer? Extrapolate: to infer (an unknown) from something that is known; conjecture. 2. Statistics . to estimate (the value of a variable) outside the tabulated or observed range. 3. Mathematics . to estimate (a function that is known over a range of values of its independent variable) to values outside the known range.

Isn't that cardboard kind of dry? Arrows in target medium are stopped mostly by friction. soak that cardboard a little and see what happens. Blood and body fluids aid in lubricating the shaft.

I used to have a glendale buck. Layers of foam that stop arrows by friction. Leave it out in the rain and shoot it. I could kill critters on the opposite side of it while shooting through it. Wouldn't hardly even slow it down! I used to like the skinny shafts. Too big of a pain for me. Pain for insert installation, pain in the wallet, and I felt I had to look for them much longer when I lost them due to the price. I look at my clock and when it hits 2 min. I quit looking.

BigJim

You know whats funny. Chuck Adams haveing used Easton XX78's for all of his career haveing complete pass throughs on many of his game never thought that he needed a skinny shaft to help him get the First Super Slam. This is something that I think he said b/c I don't want to quote him saying, "No one thinks about the Blood. Its a lubricant". I really don't think it matters until you hit bone. Ribs are somewhat soft can move to one side or the other "braodside shot" and "quartering away" shots you can get behined the ribs and go to the shoulder/ribs on the way out. I hate this test. I have had many a "talks" with guys saying that they can out penitrate a big fat arrow with there skinny arrow on the 3D range all day and that its exactly the same on Game and they Know b/c they took "Physics" in High School. Who freakin cares... and I mean this should be the end-all for the whole bunch no more debating for me....Put a Tuned Heavy arrow in the Vitals and be done with it. Uh-Oh I said Heavy arrow.... And a Sharp Cut-on-Contact braodhead in the heart/lungs.... Oh wait I said Cut-on-Contact...Ok I'm still in, if so than I'm right and your wrong... ONE More Time "Blood is a Lubricant". I have never seen a cardboared box or 3D foam deer bleed.

Bender, forgive my sarcasm. But semantics aside, what I didn't say was Jack's test did not adequately test the hypothesis. The results happened, absolutely, but are falsely attributed to arrow mass difference. There are many variables in his test mechanism which could account for the results other than the arrow weight. This is a great example of how a man with a good reputation, with much credibility, can dam up the natural flow of common knowledge. People don't want to question it, and I regret it honestly.

We had this discussion a month ago, where I posted in that context:

The two scenarios generate momentum as follows:

a) 350 grain arrow at 210 fps generates .328 lbs./sec. momentum - (350/7000)*(210) / 32 = 0.328125

b) 500 grain arrow at 175 fps generates .391 lbs./sec. momentum - (500/7000)*(175) / 32 = 0.390625

Kinetic energy (http://www.bowsite.com/bowsite/features/practical_bowhunter/penetration/index.cfm) is the same for both scenarios at 34 ft./lbs.

By raising arrow weight we add momentum, but not at the expense of kinetic energy. That's the nature of how traditional bows work. The extra arrow weight leverages the momentum stored in the bow limbs. Since they can only go so fast, they can't get out of their own way so to speak (bowyers call this "dry fire speed"), at some point in lowering arrow mass, it ain't gonna go any faster! So we use heavier arrows, and that extra momentum has got to go somewhere. Heavier stuff sinks deeper is a lesson is as old as time and were it not for the circustances, men sitting around on the internet looking for trouble, this discussion wouldn't last 2 seconds.

If you have already registered, please

sign in now

For new registrations

Click Here