Extreme f.o.c or heavy arrow

[c3products20]

Thanks for the breakdown. My theory....a wild guess. Is 75% of bowhunters would benefit from a 470 to 525 grain arrow. I think the shorter the draw length, the more benefits for going heavier unless shooting pronghorns. Those with 29 in and longer draw lengths produce enough KE with their 400 gr set up to not matter as much.

I would like to see some studies comparing a sharp fixed broadhead from a well tuned bow versus mechanicals. I know that there was a study done a few years ago showing mechanicals led to more recoveries but I would like to more tests.

90% of all the deer I've ever lost were mechanical so I'm going to have to disagree with that study!! [emoji51][emoji51][emoji51]

[enewman]

Thanks for the breakdown. My theory....a wild guess. Is 75% of bowhunters would benefit from a 470 to 525 grain arrow. I think the shorter the draw length, the more benefits for going heavier unless shooting pronghorns. Those with 29 in and longer draw lengths produce enough KE with their 400 gr set up to not matter as much.

I would like to see some studies comparing a sharp fixed broadhead from a well tuned bow versus mechanicals. I know that there was a study done a few years ago showing mechanicals led to more recoveries but I would like to more tests.

I think the ranch fairy is going to be doing some testing. Going to shoot different and show set ups and what the loss is going through a pig. This will be some good data.

Now, I saw a test around 2010 where he was showing velocity loss shooting through a milk jug. That test showed what we know that the heavy arrow out performed the lighter arrow. But it was with field tips. I don’t think we would see same results with dread heads. I think some would cut a hole while others would bust a hole.

As far as your commemt about shorter draws. I agree 100%.

[lovemylegacy]

enewman, I find it interesting that you think FOC is important for Trad, but not compound bows. Can you elaborate?

[enewman]

enewman, I find it interesting that you think FOC is important for Trad, but not compound bows. Can you elaborate?

If you look at Ashby’s testing, you will see where his comparisons are not good. He didn’t always keep things very equal. But there is something to it.

But he didn’t test compound bows, if he did he didn’t show the data.

I have seen several test that show FOC dosent increase Penetrate for compound bow. Now all test are in target. But Dr ashby in 2008 part 7 talks about how to prove that flex is what hinders penetration and he tells you how to test using a target.

With a compound most people are shooting arrows that are less bend (stiff) in the first place. So there will be less bend on impact.

I think it all has to do with how the arrow is flexing at impact. We know by watching slow motion video that trad set ups have more flex than compounds.

I hope that since the ranch fairy is doing testing now with compounds that he will do the test in pigs. I just hope they test better than how ashby did it.

[enewman]

enewman, I find it interesting that you think FOC is important for Trad, but not compound bows. Can you elaborate?

Here is the last paper I did looking at the FOC by Dr. Ashby. I stopped because I saw there was no reason for continually breaking the work down. Most people do not care and I felt I was wasting my time. Most testing is a waste of time.

[lovemylegacy]

I would think testing arrow physics, would have more accurate results if different arrows were shot out of the same bow. Just my thinking.

It is odd how some data was left out.

[enewman]

I would think testing arrow physics, would have more accurate results if different arrows were shot out of the same bow. Just my thinking.

It is odd how some data was left out.

Depends on the test.

To look at ke or momentum it takes different settings to test. That is why I’m using two bows.

To test just to look at how a heavy retains velocity, same bow is good.

To test for FOC, one bow, two arrows , same broadhead.

There is a lot to testing. I even broke down and bought a LabRadar. I would say it’s about 50% to much on cost. When I’m using it I take 10 shot sample rate. Then get average. That is one thing I hope the range fairy is doing. My labradar has a spot that for some reason just floats around.

I will post some data from my labradar.

[enewman]

I would think testing arrow physics, would have more accurate results if different arrows were shot out of the same bow. Just my thinking.

It is odd how some data was left out.

I will say testing penetration sucks.

People say you cannot use targets (block target) even though Ashby states yes, and some of the smart people I’m dealing with say yes, I still have a hard time with it. I had a test sent to me from a guy that states ballistic gel is good. He sent me links from the FBI saying why they use gel. But when he sent me his test I put it into a table. It’s funny when doing that you can see trends. Well, it showed gel is not good for testing penetration with arrows.

I’m trying sand. Found lots of testing by the Military on sand. The problem is I can’t get the **** arrow to stop. It goes straight through a 24” box with 150lbs of sand in it. Now I’m looking for a taller box that maybe I can add another 150lbs and shoot at the bottom. I’m also looking at building a frame so I can use all thread to compress the sand.

Now I did add cardboard in front of the box and stoped the arrow better, but the shots were not repeatable. Repeatability is a must or the test means absolutely nothing.

I also have a design to add hard impact before hitting the sand. But that is part 2. And I may not do that test. Two reasons, it’s hard as hell on arrows. Haha, second is why bother.

[enewman]

I would think testing arrow physics, would have more accurate results if different arrows were shot out of the same bow. Just my thinking.

It is odd how some data was left out.

Here is the ballistic gel test sent to me. There are a few typos in this paper. I have never released this paper. Was not planning on it. This will probably be the only time releasing this one.

[lovemylegacy]

You better quit posting stuff like that, them heavy arrow boys are gonna be mad at you.

I think that test says a lot. The mediums you can use for a penetration test is very limited. Think about this. Instead of a solid bar of gel, use layers, say 6x1.5" thick, spaced equal distance apart, hopefully simulating an animal body cavity a little better. Its just a thought.

I would never have guessed that one. Hmmm

[enewman]

You better quit posting stuff like that, them heavy arrow boys are gonna be mad at you.

I think that test says a lot. The mediums you can use for a penetration test is very limited. Think about this. Instead of a solid bar of gel, use layers, say 6x1.5" thick, spaced equal distance apart, hopefully simulating an animal body cavity a little better. Its just a thought.

I would never have guessed that one. Hmmm

If gel wasn't so expensive I would still like to test. Doing it how you just stated is a good thought. Thank you.

[lovemylegacy]

If gel wasn't so expensive I would still like to test. Doing it how you just stated is a good thought. Thank you.

Sure, youre welcome.

Don't overlook or cast aside test results, if they don't produce the results you want or expect. The one thing you didn't post was the speed or decreased speed as the arrow weight went up. Speed does matter.

[SkipShot76]

It’s amazing any of us kill anything, not understanding the “ math”. I have shot very light to very very heavy arrows and killed a lot of animals with all of them. And I nor the animals cared if it was KE or momentum. I have hit animals poorly with very heavy set ups and it didn’t work out any better then the lightest arrows. I have killed many with light and heavy arrows placed in the correct spot, and it works great, but I guess there is no mathematical equation on shot placement to try and act superior or teach us all something. You were just as persistent a short time ago, on the Ashby theory as you are now. So were you wrong then ? I remember arguing with you over it, and placed you on my ignore list. In fact I am not sure why I can read your posts now, as I didn’t change it.

agreed. shot placement is king.

[enewman]

Sure, youre welcome.

Don't overlook or cast aside test results, if they don't produce the results you want or expect. The one thing you didn't post was the speed or decreased speed as the arrow weight went up. Speed does matter.

Here are my numbers when I was looking at what is going to take to match momentum. so the 610gr arrow is slower than it would be if shot from the same bow. I will get some of that data later. I want to do some testing shooting bare shaft vs vanes.

But we still can look at losses from 0 to 20 yards.

[enewman]

agreed. shot placement is king.

This ^^^^^ 100%