I have shot 125gr tips, bheads, etc. since I began in archery, years ago. So, help me understand - in simple terms - how the extra weight up front is advantageous. I see some folks shooting 200gr bheads. Besides the obvious drop in trajectory, which I would think makes shooting more difficult, how or why is the trend shifting to a heavy up front tip?

Thanks

Read the Ashby reports.

If you're hunting Cape Buffalo, then it may make a difference, and even Fred Ashby will tell you his test/adventure was not a scientific one. Some will swear that it's the only way, some of use believe that what has worked for eons, will still work just fine. Frankly, for most of us who are mere mortals and now and then taking North American game, the old ways still work just great and will continue. It's simply a choice, nothing more.

Actually the trend shifted to heavier heads several years ago, kind of died off to a certain extent, and now it is being made new again.

Kind of like shooting 3 under and several other things in archery.

I think Frank hit the nail on the head so to speak. If you have convinced yourself, it works it does in your mind. There is a very old saying, "There is more than one way to skin a cat". Is it necessary, NO. Bob

It makes no difference. That’s all I have ever shot 125 grain heads and I have killed everything with them. I’d say the weight of the arrow matters but not the head nut I am no physicist

It makes no difference. That’s all I have ever shot 125 grain heads and I have killed everything with them. I’d say the weight of the arrow matters but not the head nut I am no physicist

It's something to argue about, like DAS vs. ILF or are Black Widows worth it.

The only reason I've gone a bit heavier in point weight over the years is as I've dropped bow weight I've increased head weight to keep the same arrows tuned to the lighter weight bows.

Other than that how many million deer have been killed with 2117 aluminum and 125 grain heads back in the good old days.

I shoot 125 and arrow wt. Of 525gr total, 50# bow. Works fine. But do the test yourself and Find out. But just don't worry about penetration up close. shoot it at longer distance also.

The principles behind more weight toward the front are based in aerodynamics. Basically, a higher percentage of the weight toward the front aids in 'pulling' the shaft, rather than the shaft 'pushing' the head. It is purported/demonstrated to aid in penetration, as well, by more mass weight pulling the shaft through the animal as opposed to the mass weight of the shaft needing to push the cutting head through.

Hope that helps some, that's about as much as I can condense a semi-explanation but, that is not a complete explanation by any stretch.

One reason is carbon arrows can not get enough wt in shaft without more stiffness. so to get the wt up they had to add it somewhere. The head are screw in wt.to insert.

"pulling' the shaft, rather than the shaft 'pushing' the head." That can never happen. The arrow is always pushed from behind it is never "pulled" from the front.

The reason I have a heavy head is to weaken my shaft to tune my setup, has nothing to do with Ashby report.

Carbon shafting.

Tip weight adjusts the shaft to the correct deflection/ oscillations for perfect arrow flight.

Perfect arrow flight is the numero uno here….everything else follows that.

I shoot 100gr heads, no other weight up front.

My arrows are around 10.5% foc and 10gpp (at my draw length). They are tuned just about perfect and fly like a dream. I’d never change it.

Pulling the shaft. That's a new one on me. I better go back to physics 101.

for deer it does not matter but for bigger critter like elk it does. My set up is 11 gr per pound at 610grs with a 200 grn vpa and 75 grain brass insert. Only time I got full penetration was using that set up.

Carbons needed heavier heads to keep the overall weight up & in a lot of cases to weaken the spine. Carbon doesn't have near the spine selection of wood or aluminium. Then there is the Ashby reports also. >>>----> Ken

I trust Easton archery they have recommended foc. Easy to Google and see And it's explained. They don't recommend over 18%

For me the heavier heads are sturdier. This may not be important for deer but for big boned animal like elk and hogs it can make a difference. They tend to be made with thicker metal which tend not to bend as easily. I can't pass judgement on weight forward but I have stood to the side of people shooting targets and the weight forward seems to be flying straighter into the target. This should help penetration. But that is just my opium .

grouchy 62,

If an arrow of proper spine is tuned properly it will fly straight no matter the shaft material and how much weight is put up front. Now I will admit from what I have seen on Slow Motion video a Carbon shaft will correct quicker, that will only make a difference at shorter distances. Proper arrow flight is the balance of the arrow's spine, shaft length and point weight in relationship to the draw weight (at the shooter draw) being shot, no matter the shaft material. You are right though an arrow flying on its axis WILL penetrate better then one fishtailing, porpoising, or both. So if you are seeing what you think is a carbon flying straighter into the target, maybe the other arrows aren't tuned as well. As mentioned earlier for carbon it is a stiffer material so to weaken it people have gone to heavier point weights then have been to traditionally used, and/or use brass inserts to weaken the shaft's spine so the shaft will tune out of their bow. Many an elk, moose, or Brown Bear have fallen to a 125gr glue on broadheads on just a wooden shaft. Many also have fallen to a 125gr screw in broadhead on an aluminium shaft. Broadhead design as well as materials used is what makes or breaks a broadhead. Zwickey, Ace, Grizzly, Muzzy, and some others in the 125gr weight have been used a long time for a reason, they work killing animals of any size. You mentioned heavy bone. You shouldn't be "trying: to shoot through heavy bone to begin with. The sheild on a hog is caked mud in its hair that can have small rocks in it. Watched one video where when the broadhead hit the shield it threw sparks from small gravel pieces packed in the mud. That can be damaging to any broadhead. In a situation like that over all arrow weight, perfect arrow tune, and speed has more to do with penetration than just the broadhead weight. The ribs on any animal on the North or South American Continents have ribs that are not considered heavy bone. If you are hunting any of the African Big Five especially Cape Buffalo, Hippopotamus, Lion, or Elephant that is a different story and heavier gear will be needed. Such as draw weight, arrow weight, and broadhead weight. You can increase the weight of a 175gr or 200gr Ace glue on broadhead ($40/6), a well proven design, with a with a 45gr long aluminum adapter, 50gr or 100gr steel adapter, they will give you more than enough weight and strength cheaper,then buying the more expensive modern heavy broadheads. BUT it IS your money if you buy the more expensive broadheads, but don't down play the older 125gr glue on broadheads, they have shown over time they work on just about any size animal. DANNY

Yup, its all about momentum, ie. penetration!

If your choice is a heavy single bevel broad head with more foc, so be it. It is your little world. Many on here won't shoot full length carbon shafts with a heavier broad head, but that happens to be my little world, and it works fine. Bottom line if it works for you so be it.

X2 Bassmaster

I recently got heavier on the point side. Shot 125gn starting out. A few years back was shooting 175gn. When I went to 175gn it didn't effect the range too much and was manageable. This year went up to 250gn and a much heavier aluminum arrow. The difference in range is significant. Out to 15 yards is very manageable but pushing 20 there's quite a drop. Bow is super quiet and the penetration on target is superb. It took me a while longer to get tuned as well. That's been my experience so far, need to get in front of a deer soon.

When I went from 5% FOC to 11% FOC my arrow flight improved, slight speed loss, 207

fps to 187 fps, 8 gpp to 9 gpp and what I like to call " more forgiving ".

Carbons do not need heavier heads to make them heavier. You can easily fill them with limp material, like a rope in different configurations. Carbons come in wider spine ranges and therefore you may needs heavier heads to adjust spine. The penetration advantages are real and especially helpful for people who have to drop draw weight and don't want to shoot super heavy gpp. As soon as the arrow is out of the initial dampened paradox, the higher mass of the head retains energy better and starts "pulling" the lighter tail. Together with certain broadhead designs, higher FOC yields better bone breaking ability than lower FOC arrows.

Energy retention is a product of total arrow weight and speed. A 650gr. arrow retains the same amount of energy whether it has a 90gr. broadhead or a 300gr. broadhead.

Heavy front “ pulls “ the arrow to target, makes a big difference in windy conditions and when feathers get wet and matted down. That’s why I like heavy up front.

fdp's post is dead on...but some will never get it.

Whats front heavy? My arrow is 560. 300 is up front making the rest of the arrow 260. Thats a 40 grain difference. Is that enough to be front heavy?

If your arrows have steel points and plastic nocks you already have FOC balance. Nobody is shooting an arrow that is heavier on the nock end.

MP

I don’t try to convince strangers that one way is superior.

Momentum is definitely one very important measurement. You must have enough momentum. That’s the first box that MUST be checked. No getting around that one.

Once that box is checked then to maximize on that momentum. Having a small diameter, stiff staff with a lot of the total weight in the front of a perfect flying arrow, that doesn’t take 20 yards to quit flexing back and forth at the release (paradox if you like) and still flopping around as it contact the skin. Penetration is maximized.

Only half of those details are required to kill a whitetail. And if shooting a heavy weight bow or heavy arrow, and or a long draw length you most likely have enough extra horse power to not sweat the minutiae.

I have a dozen different bow and arrow combos. Most are what I would call normal weight and FOC. That modern hunters have used for decades.

But I also have some heavy weight setups that out penetrate my others on both the target and every animal I’ve killed with them. Is it a must to kill ? obviously not. people have been doing it for ever.

I would compare it to a 30-30 and todays modern high BC bullets. 30-30s have killed a lot of game too. And I love my old Winchester and Marlin lever guns too.

But they can not hang with killing efficiency of my precision set ups.

With all that rambling. My lever guns would be the last to go. Those more modern precision setups don’t have the soul of those old rifles.

I use 125 to 145 , works for me.

Look at the game of Darts. I acknowledge you don't need a 300 gr head. I generally shoot 50 woodsman or 175 gr.Sharks with a 50/75 gr insert.

Bluesman...the statement that I was responding to was that a high FOC configuration retains more energy than a more standard configuration shaft of equal weight. That is incorrect. 2 650gr. arrows traveling 180fps. will retain the same amount of energy regardless of FOC if they are both started at the same velocity, and are being acted on by the same amount of drag due to diameter, fletching, etc.

There are reasons why some hunters use HFOC configurations and there are reasons why flight shooters don't.

I don't think that anyone is debating the practice of matching arrows regardless of their use. And I don't think that anyone is debating the fact that some folks like HFOC and so forth, and that's fine. The HFOC thing has been around a long time,ots of folks have tried it, some continue to use it, some don't.

What is being debated are some of the claims being made such as the heavier head "pulling" the arrow, that doesn't happen, and the HFOC arrow retains g more energy, that doesn't happen either.

Folks need to try it themselves and see what they decide. For lots of us it's a "been there done that" kind of thing.

More weight gets me around the fact carbon doesn't come in 5lb spine groups. I can't vouch for improving penatration, but know it stabilizes broadheads faster. I can see that.

fdp you are correct. A 700gr arrow travelling at 186fps no matter its configuration as long as the arrows are tuned, an flying and rotating on its axis (this is the part that is being ignored), using a cut on contact broadhead, will have more than enough energy to blow through a deer and more that likely other animals. As for the part about high FOC, I have seen (because I have stood behind the shooter and watched) more than one with a high FOC carbon arrow fishtailing to the target. I mean if the high FOC is pulling the shaft, there should be no fishtailing, the high FOC should compensate for that as the front is pulling the rear, right? Now how can that be if high FOC is the answer. It was not a well tuned arrow, due to poor shaft selection, arrow cut to short or left to long, or poor point weight choice. I have seen (again because I have stood behind the shooter) many and arrow rotate on its axis, because it was tuned, flying to the target, that did not have a high FOC. I guarantee you the arrow of normal FOC flying on its axis will out penetrate an arrow with high FOC fishtailing. To add to that a light to moderate weight arrow that is tuned and flying on its axis will out penetrate a heavy arrow fishtailing on an animal. It is more about arrow tune, with it flying on its axis, when that shaft with a cut on contact broadhead hits an animal then anything else, as to how far it penetrates or over penetrates. Read that as blows completely through the animal. Because all that arrow's weight (no matter its FOC) is flying in line with the point/tip on that broadhead on impact. All that arrows kinetic energy and momentum concentrated on that tiny little point being pushed through the animals body. DANNY

Good Lord, Danny…. If it takes 700 grains at 186 fps to kill a deer, I guess I had better hang up my big game aspirations and just stick with mice!

Good thing about high FOC is that because the arrows center of mass is close to the point and because the shaft is going to be stiffer, there’s just less chance of the CM getting out of line

Corax...the shaft ISN'T dynamically stiffer, it has to be dynamically the same as a properly tuned standard FOC arrow or arrow tune and flight will be compromised.

You are (of course) correct about that WRT getting an arrow off the string/shelf cleanly.

But On Impact….

Just for example…. One of my bows shoots reasonably well, bare-shaft (to about 25 yards) with a 1916 (spines #43 on my tester) and a 125 point OR a 600 spine carbon (#52 on my tester) and a 175 point OR a 500 spine carbon (#65) with 200 up front. So for the sake of minimizing argument, let’s assume that all three have approximately the same dynamic spine when I loose the string. And let’s say that since they all came off of the same bow, KE is a constant even though mass will vary a bit.

If you were to take high speed film of all three of those arrows hitting a brick wall, I’m going to guess that the 1916 would register the highest deflection/lowest dynamic spine. By a mile. Because it’s the lightest static spine of the bunch to begin with and it has the greatest mass farthest from the point, which is where (on impact) the acceleration is happening, so its mass has the most leverage to flex the shaft.

I can see how that could compromise penetration….

Except that it’s pretty much a moot point unless you hit something really hard, which is something that we all strive to avoid in the first place. And if you do hit a big bone, then it really doesn’t matter what arrow you hit it with if you don’t have enough KE available to break the bone and keep on penetrating until you hit something vital (or as close to vital as you can get under the circumstances).

So no, I am not inclined to dismiss the Ashby studies as pure bunkum, but I really don’t think it makes much difference here in North America, or South, for that matter, unless you’re in Colombia after one of those escaped hippos, maybe…

That said, when Todd shot his B&C moose with that #38 SR, he used a high-FOC arrow… and why wouldn’t you?

Brad

The big difference on this board is we are now often down in the 40 pound range. Whereas 20 years ago people used to laugh at compound guys shooting 400 grain arrows at 80 pounds, at 300+ fps. People here were all about shooting 180 fps and with say 600 grain arrows. And it was supposed to be better. And the heads were mostly likely 140.

At this point the arrows are in the 400 grain range with the velocities little better than half what you can get in an IBO compound or Xgun set-up. So yeah, things have changed, and they probably won't let you shoot much in Africa with that light set-up.

Basically the heavy heads with light fletches, and tiny graphite shafts have an advantage because when they hit the head steers the shaft not the shaft the head. So if you hit something firm at an angle the shafts won't try to torque the arrow over.

A lot of things work, but more head weight on the same grain budget, made possible by lighter shafts is preferred. But whatever worked for you before will probably still work for you now.

Corax_latrans,

No it doesn't. It's just, I have a 62" 55#@28" Assenheimer with my 30" draw (62#'s) is quieter shooting a 31" 2219 with a 225gr point (700gr) than it is shooting my usual 31" 2117 with a 175gr point (600gr). Both arrow combo's spin on their axis out of that bow. I never have chrono'd the 2117 to see how fast it shoots. I was just using it as an example. I can tell you when that 2219 hits a 3D target it rocks it pretty good. My buddies hate pulling those arrows when I shoot that bow. I have split 1.5 inch saplings (more than once), being center punched, with about 2-4 inches coming out the off side when I have hit them accidentally. We pick some pretty narrow shooting lanes at times, when we are out just having fun at our club. Point being that arrow is spinning on its axis where all the energy is impacting on the tip of the field point or broadhead. It sure isn't high FOC. DANNY

The dynamic reaction of the arrow is the same as long as it is in motion. It doesn't change once the arrow makes impact. Again, if it did arrow flight, or at that point penetration would be hindered.

The front half of the arrow is nearly ALWAYS heavier than the rear half regardless of HFOC configuration or not. Again....some of the things that are claimed about HFOC configurations just don't happen.

My micro diameter carbons (.256") weigh 12.2 gpi, so no problem with them being heavy.

I like to be in the 14 to 15 percent FOC area.

I have tested the snot out of that 14 - 15 against HFOC, and EHFOC (all the way up to 34%), and never achieved any penetration increase. It always stayed the same on average.

Now, I'm not poo pooing the HFOC/EHFOC. I know it works well for some.

Maybe it makes no difference for me due to the heavier draw weight I use, and the already relatively heavy arrows.

Rick

Doesn't matter....it's STILL the dynamic reaction of the shaft related to what is required to accurately shoot the weight on the front. It is essentially the string being released in reverse. I'm not convinced, and there has never been enough research done to show there is significantly less "tail wag" occurring with one arrow configuration over the other.

It all makes for interesting conversation there is no doubt. But in the long run the it's best for folks to try the concept and see what they think.

This isn't new, this isn't special...it's just something different. My advice is that everybody interested in the Ashby studies approach the information with both eyes wide open..and then decide.

Well, let’s hold on a second there, Frank…

We are all agreed that a heavier point decreases dynamic spine on a given shaft right? That’s why we use point weight to tune sometimes. There’s more force (inertia) countering the acceleration by the string, so the arrow flexes more to get out of the way of the opposing forces.

So let’s make it as easy as possible: let’s assume that we are going to hit a target which somehow miraculously decelerates the arrow over the exact same time and distance that the bow accelerates the arrow at launch. Yes we are ignoring loss of velocity in flight, so we will have to imagine that we’re conducting the test in a vacuum. May as well just do it out in space, so that there’s no gravitational effect to contend with.

So the push on the string at launch and the push on the point on impact are now equal. May as well have two arrows of equal total mass, identical shaft, and opposite weight distribution, such that on one, the fletched end is much heavier, resulting in EAOC (extreme aft of center). You can’t tell me that the EAOC arrow isn’t going to shoot “too stiff” for that bow, no matter how perfectly the EFOC arrow is tuned. I suppose technically a “neutral” FOC arrow as is used in flight shooting will be fine/comparable either way.

Granted, nobody in their right mind is going to try that experiment except perhaps on a shooting machine.

But for what it’s worth, I got interested in this many years ago when I saw some high- speed photography of a particular mechanical broadhead being shot into heavy beef bones to show how tough they are. The weird thing was that in the high-speed film, you can see that upon impact, the tail end of the arrow would continue to travel forward until the shaft was bent to such a degree that it would shatter. That takes some doing.

And you have to recognize that the entire portion of the arrow which is being bent presents a drain on the momentum that would otherwise be stacked behind the point; it takes force to bend an arrow into a U-shape, and all of that force is off of the line of initial impact.

Many years ago our test medium for broadhead integrity an penetration was a the body of a carvsitting in dad's pasture. I/we shot 100's ofcarrow into it and NEVER broke an arrow.

The EFOC arrow has to effectively act the same dynamically at the shot as the standard FOC arrow to achieve prope arrow flight. Why would it not act the same dynamically on impact as it pertains to flexing?

I'm not trying to convince anybody of anything. I'm just saying that everyone who is interested in the concept should give it an honest test and decide for themselves.

Natives in Africa put lead weight on the back of the spear to drive it through. This makes more sense than more weight up front. A heavier arrow and lighter tip (150)(125) Maybe a lead nock would get the best penetration. :)

You half to weigh out the good and bad. I have been shooting 450gr the 550gr for over 45 years with 125 to 145 up front and never a problems with pass threw are killing shot. So I half to ask if you need more penetration. What are you trying to kill?

Corax_latrans,

"The weird thing Was in that high speed film, you can see upon impact, the tail end of the arrow would continue to travel forward until the shaft was bent to such a degree that it would shatter."

That is pretty weird, since I have seen a number of carbon shafts shot from compound bows (60#'s-70#'s) stuck into tree trunks (dead trees and live ones) and NEVER have seen one shattered. They do get stuck so deep, to the point you have to try and carve them out, or so deep you can't even do that, and have to leave them, but never shatter. There is very little give in a tree trunk. Where as you mentioned the beef bone shattered at impact, that would still allow for forward movement of the arrow. All of this leads me to believe that the shaft used when this was filmed was well under spined OR very poor shaft construction from the manufacture. To have it to flex that much and crushed as to have it shatter with the impact, yet still shatter bone. Even with the nock end moving forward, you basically have the Accordion Effect going on with the shaft. Everything folds in the middle from end to end, but not the ends. This would happen with any shaft with a sudden stop but not to the degree of this one. With the shaft you watched I assume the middle is collapsing/folding and being crushed under all the energy of the shaft moving forward towards the impact point. The arrow nock is still moves forward because of the bending wave is stopping when the arrow shaft shatters, before the wave can reach the nock end, to cause it to move form side to side. My guess is this all happened in under 2 seconds. A shaft would normally straighten out from flexing by either continuing to move forward after it shattered the bone under momentum, or it would straighten out and vibrate till it quit (as in hitting a tree), if the shaft was of proper spine or construction. To me also it sounds like they set this video up for dramatic effect, to sell their product. Just my opinion. DANNY

If you can pull up this video up off of YouTube these guys are shooting in to a concrete round doing a torture test on carbon shafts, using compounds. These arrows do not shatter, the the tips do break off. The arrows do flex's on impact all the way through the arrow nock with the sudden impact. They show this in Slow Motion after each shot. This is how I would expect an arrow shaft to flex with a sudden stop no matter what the impact media. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OcKlnu47I4Q&t=36s

Hey, Danny! Nice to hear from you, as always!

Just to clarify… The video I saw showed the arrow shattering, but not the beef bones, so the bones were essentially the immovable object. Immovable AND Impenetrable for practical purposes.

And FWiW, this was a long time ago, and carbon arrows are probably a whole lot better now than they were then.

Point being… If you have a shaft with a heavy end and light end, and you launch it with the heavy end up front and the light end up front, it’s going to flex a hell of a lot more when you launch it with the heavy end up front. That means it’s going to launch a hell of a lot less when it hits an impenetrable object.

If we are willing to accept that a heavy head up front decreases dynamic spine (for any given shaft) then we have to accept that a light end up front will increase dynamic spine, and the opposite is true upon impact.

If you are willing to buy into the proposition that shaft flex upon impact is likely to decrease your penetration potential, then high FOC is the way to go.

But centuries of history indicate that it’s not all that critical unless you are using minimally sufficient equipment to begin with.

So I’m going to go way out there on a wild-ass limb and suggest that it’s a lot more important to get an arrow that is well tuned than it is to get an arrow that tunes at some arbitrary level of FOC. Pick a weight that you like and figure out how to make it work for you. 12% FOC or more should be ample.

And if it isn’t, don’t blame me… Blame Easton!!!

When I first started hunting with a compound 125 gr was the standard. Then speed and flat trajectory took over and some started shooting 85 gr. heads. I witnessed several deer that were not recovered because of poor penetration. Arrow weight, speed and broadhead weight are all important. You just have to find the combination for your set up.

I like wood and aluminum and the broadheads I have used since 1970's, the rest is great if it works for you.

If you have already registered, please

sign in now

For new registrations

Click Here