FOC does it matter

[enewman]

Sorry bud I was talking wind drift on that post, not penetration.

Enewman, I didn't do a good job replying to your ke post. I was referring to just adding weight to the front making the arrow week, negatively effecting ke due to not in tune.

Never lost one to overkill, but they sure don't ride in the back of the truck if you shoot under them.

I have the same problem not writing what I'm thinking. I'm not very good at writing. Rat does a good job. Muddy does to.

But yes your right. You just can't add weight. Tuning efoc arrows is not easy. I see lots of post where people say that tuning efoc is easier. It is as long as you have the correct spine. But most people don't. And yes if that arrow is not flying true you will lose energy in flight faster.

There is a lot to building arrows. And almost no one takes the time. I know I've never spent the time to see what fletchings work the best, or see if i have the right size, or even the right amount of offset or helical. When building efoc arrows you have more drag due to the tip. This is why when people shot them they claim they drop like a rock. That is why you are suposed to work your vanes to get less drag on that end and it will all equal back out. When I started building efoc arrows I was still shooting 4 inch vanes with lots of helical. At long distance that arrow would look like it put on its breaks and just drop.

[Bill]

You're right on correcting what I said about KE and lighter arrow.

I stand corrected.


..... the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

[tradtiger]

First got onto the idea of heavy arrows from shooting with a long-time TBH member Moe Monserrat in some club 3D shoots a couple or three years ago. He's lobbing these 700-grain logs with a 40- or maybe 45-lb longbow. I mean, they put the "arch" in archery. Anyway, the whole setup is very quiet, and he tells me about shooting a doe across a stream once from about 15 yards. She never even knew he shot and just dropped in her tracks.

This intrigued me, so I read up on Dr. Ashby's studies over 30 years, involving thousands of shots on freshly killed animals. Convinced, I built 680-grain arrows, with 28 % FOC to shoot out of my 50-lb. recurve. They're not fast, but they are quiet. Drop is noticeable after 20 yards. The arrows, by the way, are carbon 400s at 8.2 gpi and 32-inches from nock valley to back of head, which is 300 grains, with a 100 grain brass insert. Tuned them bareshaft, cutting from the nock end (with a fine file) about a 1/4" at first, then 1/8" increments to get good flight and straight penetration.

Recently, I decided that I wanted a little less "arch" in that 18- to 25-yard range, which I would consider the limit that I would shoot an animal. So I just skipped the 100-grain brass insert, going with the stock aluminum one. Didn't need to change a thing tuning-wise, and now have arrows that are 618 grains with 26% FOC. Also, got a 55-lb recurve, which provides a much quicker (haven't chrono'ed, though) set-up that should be fine for hunting with my single-bevel Tuffhead broadheads (225-grain, with a 75-grain adapter).

Bear in mind, the arching trajectory in a 50- or 55-lb bow, using these heavy arrows and shooting instinctively, should be a piece of cake to overcome with, say, a 70-lb. compound with adjustable SIGHTS that can just be dialed in to match any trajectory. Remember, the first graph in this thread represents the results that a mere 40-lb trad bow achieved. Think what an 80-lb compound could do with those same arrows! (properly tuned, of course)

[tradslam]

Enewman, that's where my first comment came from on "being abused". Kinda bad wording, it was more directed towards lazy people just adding weight to their current arrow.

Compounds these days have plenty of power where some of this your kinda robbing your effective distance, if your off a yew yards. With a trad setup most of my responses would of been different. The benniffits are more one sided, big 5 aside.

[Rat]

Ashby has a lot of good info, just a little overkill for the average guy.

A lot of people are looking at this thread so I want to say this; and I am not directing my comments at you tradslam, I am just using your comment as a springboard.

I watch hundreds of YouTube videos every year made by "average" bow hunters and I see over and over again an arrow that doesn't get very good penetration. IOW, on our deer and hog sized game we should be able to get full penetration every time; but we don't.

Why is that? Mostly because the average bow hunter doesn't understand arrow dynamics. Ashby may be overkill on his recommendations for our sized game, but if we were to read and understand the science behind his findings we could all benefit from the research.

I think the "average" bow hunter could be much more than average just by reading and applying the findings in Dr. Ashby's research. It does take some brain juggling to get around the math sometimes, but the overall summary of his work is that no matter what game you pursue, there is a better way than what most are doing.

That doesn't mean you need to build a 650 gr arrow with 31% FOC, but at least learn what it does take for our game; then build, and use, that arrow.

If you look at the historical wounding rate you will see that the wounding rate has jumped considerably since the inception, wide acceptance and use of high speed compound bows. Why? If all else were equal the wounding rate should drop (higher poundage, greater efficiency, etc.), not increase (when compared to traditional equipment). But all wasn't the same, we started using lighter, faster arrows with lower FOC; and this has resulted in the higher wounding rate. It is my firm belief that IF we had stayed the course and used the same arrow dynamics as the traditional guys, but with our new compounds, the wounding rate would have dropped. But we didn't, we changed the arrow.

So, it is my contention that the "average" bow hunter can gain more from Dr. Ashby's research than an "above average" bow hunter who, in all likelihood, already understands (or at least applies) these dynamics.

Maybe we could use Dr. Ashby's research and come up with an "Arrow Building 101 for Whitetail and Hog Hunters" for the average bow hunter. I don't know if people would read it or use it though. Given some of the responses just on this thread, and how vehemently people defend their set ups, I would venture to say it wouldn't be well received.

My goal is to be an above average bow hunter and to kill the animal I hunt as quickly and efficiently as possible. I also believe it is my duty to teach that to others who will listen (and there are a few).

The fact is, we have the research and technology to build an arrow that will do it's job every single time; why are we so afraid to use it?

[Rat]

First got onto the idea of heavy arrows from shooting with a long-time TBH member Moe Monserrat in some club 3D shoots a couple or three years ago. He's lobbing these 700-grain logs with a 40- or maybe 45-lb longbow. I mean, they put the "arch" in archery. Anyway, the whole setup is very quiet, and he tells me about shooting a doe across a stream once from about 15 yards. She never even knew he shot and just dropped in her tracks.

This intrigued me, so I read up on Dr. Ashby's studies over 30 years, involving thousands of shots on freshly killed animals. Convinced, I built 680-grain arrows, with 28 % FOC to shoot out of my 50-lb. recurve. They're not fast, but they are quiet. Drop is noticeable after 20 yards. The arrows, by the way, are carbon 400s at 8.2 gpi and 32-inches from nock valley to back of head, which is 300 grains, with a 100 grain brass insert. Tuned them bareshaft, cutting from the nock end (with a fine file) about a 1/4" at first, then 1/8" increments to get good flight and straight penetration.

Recently, I decided that I wanted a little less "arch" in that 18- to 25-yard range, which I would consider the limit that I would shoot an animal. So I just skipped the 100-grain brass insert, going with the stock aluminum one. Didn't need to change a thing tuning-wise, and now have arrows that are 618 grains with 26% FOC. Also, got a 55-lb recurve, which provides a much quicker (haven't chrono'ed, though) set-up that should be fine for hunting with my single-bevel Tuffhead broadheads (225-grain, with a 75-grain adapter).

Bear in mind, the arching trajectory in a 50- or 55-lb bow, using these heavy arrows and shooting instinctively, should be a piece of cake to overcome with, say, a 70-lb. compound with adjustable SIGHTS that can just be dialed in to match any trajectory. Remember, the first graph in this thread represents the results that a mere 40-lb trad bow achieved. Think what an 80-lb compound could do with those same arrows! (properly tuned, of course)

This is exactly what I am talking about. You have taken the research and used it to build a perfect arrow for your set up and game.

There is no reason every bow hunter couldn't do this; except, IMO, they are so closed minded that what they shoot is the best, they will not look at anything else.

[enewman]

All very wright rat

[tradslam]

Rat, for the most part I agree. Building a 300 grain speed arrow and putting a 2.5 inch mechanical on it, is the other extreme of shooting a front loaded 700 grain arrow on deer.

As far as wounding rates I've never run the data comparing it to the amount of hunters as a total.

Building the perfect deer arrow 101, is exactly my point. The ashby info, goes way to far to the extreme. Which is my problem with it, in our continent. I see guys every year shooting logs, sacrificing accuracy. Yes if they happen to hit one in shoulder is when your getting the gain, and really only then. Now on elk, your still not getting through. Again I'm speaking of real hunting weighing all senario's, assuming shots are getting past 20 yards or so.

[muddyfuzzy]

Rat, for the most part I agree. Building a 300 grain speed arrow and putting a 2.5 inch mechanical on it, is the other extreme of shooting a front loaded 700 grain arrow on deer.

As far as wounding rates I've never run the data comparing it to the amount of hunters as a total.

Building the perfect deer arrow 101, is exactly my point. The ashby info, goes way to far to the extreme. Which is my problem with it, in our continent. I see guys every year shooting logs, sacrificing accuracy. Yes if they happen to hit one in shoulder is when your getting the gain, and really only then. Now on elk, your still not getting through. Again I'm speaking of real hunting weighing all senario's, assuming shots are getting past 20 yards or so.

I just don't understand your angle. I'm building some right now that are 464 @ 20.5%. YOU DONT HAVE TO SHOOT A LOG TO BENEFIT FROM HIGH/EXTREME FOC. Out of 80 dozen arrows last year I had an average mass weight of 447 with and average FOC of 16.8%. That's a large sample pool and indicative of what can be done. Think outside the box.

[Rat]

I agree that there are thousands of animals killed every year with light weight, low foc arrows, but the argument for foc is all about when things don't go exactly as planned. It's for when you hit the shoulder or leg or direct side of a rib. This is not my video and I have no claim to it, and far from my favorite hunting video on the internet, but it is what convinced me of the need of that extra comfort of a foc arrow:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=So6sg3FJ7vg

That first shot is the thing of nightmares for any bowhunter and the second shot, when everything went right, was lethal. Same setup, but one has to wonder that if he had a foc setup, would the hunt have ended alot sooner?

Just some more food for thought

This is a great video! it shows exactly what happens when the wrong arrow is used and things don't go as planned.

At the end of the video you can see that not only did the arrow not get penetration but it didn't even break the shoulder.

The second shot, though lethal, had poor penetration as well. With the correct arrow the first shot would have been lethal and the second shot would have had an exit hole if not a complete pass through (through and through). I don't know the length of his arrow, but it looks like about two thirds was still sticking out and that was on a PERFECT shot.

[tradslam]

Muddyfuzzy, what arrow you running? Out of a compound, I've never got that high with out getting over weighted.

[muddyfuzzy]

FOC does it matter

I build using Black Eagles exclusively. They have a lighter GPI across all spine ratings vs many of the other shafts on the market which is a big bonus in building FOC.

Personally I shoot a 300 spine Deep Impact running 207 up front. With Blazers and wrap they finish @ 555 @ 18.5%. If I lose the wrap and swap feathers out for the Blazers then it's an easy 20% EFOC build.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Rat]

Rat, for the most part I agree. Building a 300 grain speed arrow and putting a 2.5 inch mechanical on it, is the other extreme of shooting a front loaded 700 grain arrow on deer.

As far as wounding rates I've never run the data comparing it to the amount of hunters as a total.

Building the perfect deer arrow 101, is exactly my point. The ashby info, goes way to far to the extreme. Which is my problem with it, in our continent. I see guys every year shooting logs, sacrificing accuracy. Yes if they happen to hit one in shoulder is when your getting the gain, and really only then. Now on elk, your still not getting through. Again I'm speaking of real hunting weighing all senario's, assuming shots are getting past 20 yards or so.

And that is my point, there is no need for a 650 gr arrow with 31% FOC for our critters (unless it's elk, then I would build to this spec). But using the data we can build the perfect arrow for our critters; it's not overkill, it's called scaling and we do it all the time in building arrows.

As far as wounding rates go, it is a percentage, so the actual numbers don't matter; it's a percentage of the whole. From 1979 to 1984 the average wounding rate went from approx. 25% to 55%.

Accuracy is a function of so many other factors, not just weight.

Again, FOC is for penetration after the bone breaks; broadhead design is the number one factor in breaking/breaching bone, NOT FOC. So, there is a massive gain in penetration with high FOC, not, as you say, just when a shoulder is hit.

IOW, you can have a high FOC arrow and not get good penetration through bone because you use a three blade broadhead; FOC doesn't break bones, broadhead design does.

[tradslam]

550 is about 100 grains heavier then I shoot. From all the animals I shoot, I'm getting all the penetration I need, with a trajectory I need when hunting western terrain.

I understand percentage but if the "percentage" isn't factoring more hunters just the number of wounded animals it doesn't mean much....

[haas0311]

Y'all see these!!

http://bishoparchery.com/dicing-drill-100-150-grain-gateway-weights/

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk