The only question I have, and the only one that makes all the math invalid IMO, is how is FPS at various distances acquired?
Who cares how much punch you have when the arrow starts, when we all know the penetration and everything else only matters she the arrow makes impact. And there are so many unobtainable variables at that point, it renders all other formulas moot.
Bone density of shoulder blade vs. rib bone or leg bone. Angle of impact at 17 yards vs. 32 yards which changes the blade angle upon entry which could affect mechanical advantage.
Things like that, in real world applications make all the book math somewhat just a bunch of confusing numbers that have no real meaning. Heavy is better for a whole lot of reasons, but fast and light have their advantages also.
And all this is predicated on the assumption that the bow is perfectly tuned where the maximum amount of energy is transferred from the string to the arrow.
Far too many unknown variables for any of the math to work.
Who cares how much punch you have when the arrow starts, when we all know the penetration and everything else only matters she the arrow makes impact. And there are so many unobtainable variables at that point, it renders all other formulas moot.
Bone density of shoulder blade vs. rib bone or leg bone. Angle of impact at 17 yards vs. 32 yards which changes the blade angle upon entry which could affect mechanical advantage.
Things like that, in real world applications make all the book math somewhat just a bunch of confusing numbers that have no real meaning. Heavy is better for a whole lot of reasons, but fast and light have their advantages also.
And all this is predicated on the assumption that the bow is perfectly tuned where the maximum amount of energy is transferred from the string to the arrow.
Far too many unknown variables for any of the math to work.
Comment