I've read most of the Good Doctor's work, over the past year & I have a question.
I know that penetration is vital, as is shot placement. However, on most Game animals unless a large area of solid bone is hit any well sharpened 2, 3 or 4 bladed head will penetrate well enough to give a passthrough, regardless of grind or profile.
My question is this; Out of all the heads tested, which created the largest wound channel or, to put it another way, which head did the most damage?
The reason I'm interested is to try & ascertain which head would give the best results on either perfectly hit, or marginally hit animals where impact with the scapula/ribs does not occur.
I've got it into my head that an arrow with a very large wound track would allow an animal to bleed out far quicker than a narrow head would. Getting a passthrough isn't that important compared to the trackability of a shot animal & the speed the animal will bleed out. It seems to me that a complete passthrough leaving a narrow wound channel is a waste of prcious KE. Would it not be better directed over a larger surface area? Enough to produce an entrance & exit wound of much larger proportions?
I do not wsh to try and argue with Dr. Ed in anyway, but there are regular posts here reporting of complete passthroughs, using heads that Dr. Ed rates as terrible penetrators. This being the case, what would be the advantage of using a head that penetrates better? Is there a tradeoff, a 'sweetspot' if you will, between penetration & actual tissue damage?
Please disscuss :readit:
Please don't flame me for this, I'm genuinely interested & I respect the work done so far by the Good Doctor.
A large wound channel doesn't do you any good if you don't get past the ribs or scapula! Dr. Ashby's tests were on thick tissue and bone of water buffalo which test penetration to the max. Little penetration= pissed off fully alive buffalo!
For thin skinned and ribbed deer sized game, or even elk or moose it is not as critical to have the best performing head out there to get adequate penetration(i.e. passthrough). In this case yes, it would be better to have a larger head to get a bigger wound channel as long as penetration remains adequate even in a suboptimal hit. But can you really be certain you won't hit the scapula?
One must not shoot as if everything will go right, but have equipment(broadheads and poundage) adequate enough for when everything goes wrong...especially with the dangerous animals. Matt
Robatoo,
Ed's original African report included animals of all sizes. From very small Impala and Bushbuck up to Wildebeest and Zebras.
The African report doesn't get as much publicity as the more recent Asian Buff tests do but, there is some very important info in it. If you haven't already, check out the report entitled "Broadhead Performance". This is the report in which Ed lists the three most important factors for influencing the blood trail "quality". They are, in order of importance:
1)Shot placement
2)The presence or absence of an exit wound
3)The level of sharpness of the broadhead
(I love that last one!) :D
Note that Ed's findings indicate that neither the size of the broadhead nor the number of blades has much impact on the bloodtrail.
I hear lots of stories from the compound guys that the new mechanicals which, may open to over 2" wide, don't always leave great bloodtrails because they rarely get pass throughs.
There is a tendancy among some archers to think that Ed's research doesn't realy apply to us deer and elk hunters but it certainly does.
Matt is right on the money when he states-
"One must not shoot as if everything will go right, but have equipment(broadheads and poundage) adequate enough for when everything goes wrong".
Just one more note- Ed shot a 94# longbow for this study! Better him than me!
-Sharps
It would seem to me that a broadhead that continued to rotate while it passed through the vitals would do considerably more damage than one that did not rotate. The L shaped exit hole of the 2 blade beveled head shows that it does indeed tear things up! But people have been killing animals for a long time with great results with a variety of heads...
Rob,
Years ago when I was a member of PBS, there was a common sentiment that often made the pages of their publicaton... "heavy bows and big broadheads".
I don't know if that claim still stands with them, but it does with me.
My favorite broadhead is the Magnus I w/bleeder. That's a 1 1/2" main blade and 1 1/4" bleeder. On a 600 +/- arrow from a 65 (ish) recurve of efficient design I'm confident in short liberal blood trails on whatever I shoot, wherever I shoot them.
I've maintained for a long time that there's a lot more ways to shoot an animal badly than hitting heavy bone and in those cases I'll take a large wound channel every time.
Penetration has never been an issue for me even with scapula hits... the ridge on the scapula is a very narrow area that can certainly stop an arrow, but the flats present little problem for my setup.
I believe in those "sucking chest wounds" like Dave2old mentioned , but have noticed a distinct tendency for the multiblade heads to leave a wound that "gaps" open more than a narrow single blade, hence opening the chest cavity to lung collapse and subsequent copious blood trail.
I'll continue to excersise my opinion and go the wound channel route over sheer penetration... and it's just that! Opinion!! :thumbsup:
(http://www.tradgang.com/upload/charlie/orebloodtrail2.jpg)
(http://www.tradgang.com/upload/charlie/orebloodtrail4.jpg)
I sure am glad I didn't have to crawl on my hands and knees to find that deer Charlie. :scared:
I hate that white stuff even when you candy stripe it. That was a great trip! CK
One of the best buddy!!! Even the hours we spent weathered in in the tent were primo. :campfire:
Rob
I think you can see, at least I can. Everyones point is sound, but most of all they have faith in. And feels works best for them :thumbsup: And it does most times, thats whats most important.
I also agree with Matts statement above
One must not shoot as if everything will go right, but have equipment(broadheads and poundage) adequate enough for when everything goes wrong...especially with the dangerous animals. Matt
That one pretty will sums it up.
Brent
The only thing better than an entrance, is a EXIT.
QuoteThere is a tendancy among some archers to think that Ed's research doesn't realy apply to us deer and elk hunters
That would be my opinion - and I am far from being the only one sharing it.
Steve
I think the good doctor's advise summed up in a nut shell would be "plan for the best and prepare for the worst". No matter what size game you go after you want the largest wound weather it be in diameter or length. I have always felt that 2 holes are better than 1 when it comes to leaking fluids on the ground.
Rob i recon with the poundage your shooting and your long draw, stick something big on the end of that arrow! :D
This is an interesting science/math question. Let's do some geometry (hopefully no trig) to analyze this:
Let's assume a broadhead damages all the tissue between the blades as it cuts, such that a cylinder is effectively damaged as it passes into/through an animal. This is fairly reasonable considering a "bloodshot" area around a cut often occurs.
A 1" diameter broadhead cuts a circle with an area of .785 sq. inches.
A 1.5" diameter broadhead cuts a circle with an area of 1.776 sq. inches.
If the 1" broadhead does a full pass-through of 14", the cylinder of damage is about 10.99 cubic inches (we'll round to 11").
If the 1.5" broadhead does a full pass-through as well (14"), it would leave a 24.73 cubic inch cylinder of damage.
This is more than 2 times the volume of damaged tissue.
Through some quick math, it appears that the 1.5" broadhead only has to penetrate approx. 6.2" to damage the same volume of tissue.
What does all this mean?
Very little, IMO.
There are other factors at work here, like collpased lungs, breaking bones, and the speed that a typical deer can run.
Most notably for me: two holes is far superior to one when it comes to blood trailing!
-Brett
If your hunting from a treestand penetration becomes more important IMO. The entrance wound tends to be high and not as good for leaving a blood trail where the lower exit wound comes into play because of the angles involved.
For those with long draws and heavier bows certainly large broadheads do the job. I have blown through the shoulder of 220 lb. deer with a large Magnus, filed sharpened and file serrated with a 64lb. longbow @26''. I do not believe the outcome would not have been so good with my 42lb. Turkey hunting bow with the same head. For those with short draws and light bows the ideas of Dr. Ashby by relative comparison make a lot of sense.
I do not understand mmgrodes point, have ya ever seen a moose rib. It is very important to get by or thru them. They are not like a deer at all. I once saw a 54cal. ball shot at about 1700fps. bounce off a moose as a result of a square hit on a moose rib. I myself still like the 3 to 1 ratio for a broadhead. I want an exit hole every time if possibl and to help insure that I would not shoot an overly wide head but also not a 1"er either. Shawn
What Charlie Lamb said....and I'll add.
KE is NEVER waisted when an arrow passes through an animal. When an arrow passes completely through an animal, it has cut everything it can, done the most damage on the route you gave it, causes less panic that one sticking out, and given you TWO wounds,....one to let air in, and one to let blood out.....OH, ...and I'd rather have 3 inches in the dirt than 1 inch....I don't like any of my set ups to be boarder line for the game I'm chasing.
Terry Green
Administrator
Member # 3
posted November 29, 2007 07:46 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"I don't like any of my set ups to be boarder line for the game I'm chasing."
_______________________________
would you mind telling what arrow weight and arrow speed you use for whitetail deer please?[ and what draw weight you use ]?
thank you
Shawn- I was using the moose example as a point of comparison to buff skeletal and tissue structure that was done in the tests, not as a stand alone.
Though the database information does have a 'theoretical' cut-volumn calculated field for each shot, cut volumn becomes difficult to accurately calculate, or even estimate, especially with the single-bevel broadheads. If you read through the 'Why Single-Bevel Broadheads' article you will see why. The wound channel they cut is often much wider than the blade width, because of the tissue 'wind-up' effect. In highly mobile tissues, such as intestines, there are often the 'star burst' cuts, with multiple minute areas of laceration located as far as 2 1/2" to the side of the arrow's epicenter of passage. How does one calculate that, to factor it into the 'cut volumn'?
Even on a straight-course penetration, the rotating single-bevel BH (at approximately one complete revolution in just under 16 inches of penetration through 'pure meat'), the BH's rear edge subscribes a tissue-cut path that is much longer than the straight-line length of the wound channel. That means the 'cut volumn' is not simply the total cut-width multiplied by the total tissue-penetration depth.
There are also other 'lethality factors' that are difficult, if not impossible, to calculate. Single-bevel bone breaks often creat secondary bone-fragment missiles. Then there is the 'mushing effect' they often show in soft lung tissues; "scrambled lungs", as Ray Hammond so aptly described the effect in one of his post.
Yes, it stands to reason that, on any given hit, the BH which reaches the most vital areas, and does the most damage to them, will be the most lethal. It's easy to ascertain which penetrates the most deeply, but how does one measure the degree of damage done? As noted in the above examples, the differences in the nature of the wound created by the single-bevel BH's (as opposed to that caused by a non-rotating BH wound channel) makes it very difficult to accurately quantify the amount of 'tissue damage' that that have done.
With a wound-loss rate of less than 1% across the last 600 plus big game bowkills I've made since starting to keep records, it's hard for me to see how use of a wider cut BH would offer much improvement in my animal recovery rate, and none I've tested offer the heavy bone hit lethality potential of the long-narrow single-bevel BH's.
There's an old saying amoung gun hunters, "An animal lives between the shoulders". On the lighter big game, the increased bone penetration potential offers a great advantage in that it allows me to crowd the shoulder on my shots, with a high degree of certainty that I'll penetrate ANY of the shoulder bones I might inadvertently hit; be the cause a poor shot, deflected shot or animal movement. Aiming on the shoulder also reduces, to a large degree, the likelyhood of a gut hit. Additionally, though there have not been many, so far I've lost not a single gut-hit animal with the long-narrow single-bevel BH's. What advantage would increasing BH width give me on a gut hit?
Blood trail difference? I can't give anything conclusive until I've gathered enough data, but the data to date shows no indication that the degree of blood trail correlates with the number of BH blades, or the 'total cut width'. Hopefully, with the help of Ray, and the Urban Deer Management Program of North Georgia, there may someday be definitive data about the correlation of the degree of blood trail and the BH type or cut width used.
Ed
I've killed big game with multlple blades (3 and 4) and with 2 blades, wide ones and narrow ones. The blood trails with the 2 blades, regardless of width, were equal....there was little if any blood trail at all. I shot one deer in snow that was a pass thru with a two blade Mag I and if it were not for the snow I do not believe I would have had a "blood trail" to follow. Using multiblade heads blood trails have always been present....not all copious but there, nevertheless. My latest kill was a 600 # cow moose. Shot her at 20 yards. The arrow took out the "elbow" joint that covers the heart area, took out a chuck of rib, centered the heart, made jello of her lungs and she lived long enough to take 3 strides. The broadhead stopped on the opposite leg... it was a 125 grain Razorcap...about 16" of penetration and the moose was dead in 10 seconds. I think what I am saying is that. for me, a narrow multiblade head like the RC or Muzzy Phantom, has given me much better results than any two blade I have ever used. My hunting bows have been between 60-70# and arrows a minimum of 600 grains. Shoulder hits, for me, using any broadhead have been futile in regards to finding or even killing animals. I have a number of them that have been taken latter in the season by gun hunters with the bhs right where they hit. Despite Dr. Ashby's success and reports, they simply have not correlatd positively to my experience. I'm inclined to side with Mr. Lamb on this one.
Dr. Ashby,
I appreciate you chiming in on this thread. I appreciate and respect your analysis.
You make excellent points.
I was using this as an opportunity to keep the brain cells I have that are dedicated to math busy while quantifying something that admittedly cannot easily be reduced to a single number.
-Brett
Ed....I haven't killed 600 big game animals...but believe me when I say I've bow killed my share of whitetails.
"There's an old saying amoung gun hunters, "An animal lives between the shoulders"."
There's also an old saying among bowhunters "An animal dies behind the shoulder" This is especially true with whitetails.....
(http://www.tradgang.com/upload/terry/deervitals.jpg)
So, I see NO reason for anyone to advocate aiming at the shoulder of a whitetail as you can see.....the largest leathal vital area of a white tail is behind and below the shoulder.
Also, a one inch cut width produces damage and trama...and a two inch width passing through the exact same channel will produce twice as much damage and more trama...just like a 300 mag will produce more trama and damage than a 22. A 2 inch width will also offer more chance to cut vitals and arteries on a less than perfect shot, or animal movement. And, there is NO written guarantee that a narrow two blade will penetrate the shoulder, especially on moving, rolling, wheeling on the shot deer.....and depending on the position of that shoulder will also determine whether the vitals are even hit.
Also, its provable that a slit can seal back up with a 2 blade much more so that same exact channel with a multi blade head....and that more blood will flow from more of a 'hole' than a slit. The bigger the entrance hole, the more air can get in to let more blood out of the exit hole. Again, I'm talking about shots passing through the exact same wound channel.
Not looking for an argument...just stating what I have found, and that I have a pretty good recovery rate on whitetails, and very short yardage tracking average with wide 4 blades.....and I never try to 'crowd the shoulder'.
I love big snuffers big hole lots of blood short trail very big smile. :campfire:
Doc, Nothing but respect bud,but my findings have also been that a big multi bl. head will certainly inflict more damage, cut everything possible within it's path, and leave a lot more blood on the ground than a narrow 2 bl. bh. We're not talking shoulder hits here.....I'm talking about a wound channel thru the vitals....
I talked with someone yesterday about this and he used a very good analogy: If you drill 2 holes in a full 55gal. drum with a 3/4" bit, then drilled 2 holes in another drum with a 1 1/2" bit...which one will empty out quicker?
I don't see the need to crowd the shoulder...no need to try to hit that far forward on any animal in NA...with the exception of hogs maybe. Low between the shoulders is best for the piggies.
This is a very good thread Rob :thumbsup:
My experience (limited to around 50 big game animals myself and maybe 1.5X that bloodtrailing for others) agrees with Charlie, Terry and Curt. I've always thought that guys worry too much about penetration on N.A. game (mostly the less experienced guys).....frankly most of our critters are not very hard to shoot through. If you are not getting holes on both sides of a whitetail, and you are shooting 50lbs or better, you have a serious problem OTHER THAN your broadhead size/blades. I've had only a very limited number of animals with only one arrow hole..and these were specific bone hits. Pass through shots (meaning 2 holes) have been the norm up to and including Canada moose for my setups (generally 60-65 lbs, 600-700 gr arrows) with 160 grain Snuffers. Ditto for whitetails and black bears with 50-55 lbs and 530-600 gr arrows when I was younger. Interestingly the "hardest" animal I've ever shot in the U.S. was a muskox, 2 chest shots on him from approx 20 yards only reached the offside ribs. Some tip rollover and impressive rib bones, tougher than a moose IMO.
I truly believe that there are WAY MORE animals lost that die from gut shots (penetration not an issue...you'll shoot virtually any arrow through this area) than on bone hits due to lack of penetration (these animals often recover as noted above). In most areas we don't have the luxury of native trackers so the more sign you can get on the ground from a hit "a little too far back" will vastly increase the odds of finding your animal.....this is where the big multiblade heads shine.
Ryan
I love 2-blade heads, and have shot them exclusively for the past few years, but I still have to mostly agree with Charlie, Terry, Curt, Ryan and the like.
I've killed a bunch of critters with 2-blade heads (whietails, elk, a big S. Texas boar hog, a bull moose and a pile of small game). Penetration's never been an issue, including blowing through my moose after splitting a rib vertically. Out of all those animals, I've only had two bloodtrail problems.
One was with my hog, and quite honestly, had I remembered Curtis' advise about not shooting hogs like deer, I wouldn't have hit it through the liver in the first place. Mea culpla. Charlie, Curtis and I were able to find it the next day after a lot of careful tracking.
The other was a small whitetail buck that decided to take a step and turn toward me just as I dropped the string. I ended up hitting him in through the liver and out through the intestines...which clogged the exit wound. The deer ended up running into a few dozen acres of waist-high prairie grass. Some friends and I found him the next morning after a little grid searching and a lot of luck.
In hindsight, I've also had a few deer over the years that left very sparce trails. One that comes to mind was a double-lung pass through with a small 4-blade head. Another was a slightly quartering away doe I took through both lungs with a small 3-blade model. The first deer I heard expire, so trailing was a moot point. The second involved a lot of hands-and-knees crawling and looking for pinhead spots of blood.
That notwithstanding, all one has to do is look at Terry's diagram to see that there's a heck of a lot more room to go wrong on a deer away from bone than through it. And as much as I'm a big fan of 2-blade heads, if I screw up and hit something behind the diaphragm, I'd rather have a broadhead that resembles a meat cleaver than a pocket knife.
I'm new to the sport, been shooting in the back yard for about a year. My sister asked me what I wanted for Xmas and I told her I wanted a block style broadhead target.....Next step, get some broadheads. I was going to post a BH question and get a few suggestions, then make a decision. then I started reading this post and thought cool this should give me all the info need. Boy did I get info. my simple mind is going in 10 diferent directions.2 BLADE,3 BLADE,4BLADE,WIDE,NARROW,SERRATED,SINGLE BEVEL,BLEEDERS,SNUFFERS...........MY HEADS GONNA EXPLODE! :scared: But I love it! Y'all keep talking and I'll keep reading.
here are a few observation iv made
i think the bigger the wound channel the better.
but there are so many variables that i dont think there is a definate answer, but with an open mind constructive view everyone can benefit for different points of view.
say you shoot a deer and get a pass through with a 4blade compared to getting a pass through with a 2blade(in the same place), the 4 blade would cause more damage due to the lager cutting serface and extra blades, so you would expect the deer that is shot with the 4blade to bleed more and die faster.
then say you shoot a deer but you do not get a pass through, but you accept that a 2 blade penetrates better than a 4blade. So say with the same set up the 4 blade penetrates 8" and the 2blade penetrates 12". well even through the 4blade have penetrated 4" less than the 2blade it have it has caused more damage over the first 8" then the 2blade would, however the 2blade has penetrated an extra 4" therefore making up for the smaller cut because its traveled further allowing it to cut more.
and on, and on it could go.....101 ways to skin a cat!
Joshua, These threads are as old as old as the invention of the internet. I love to read them but I very seldom take part any more. I was just like you not so long ago and because I had very limited knowledge and noone to ask for help I was constantly searching for the "correct" arrow, broadhead and longbow. The fact remains the same all these years later. We participate in a very individualistit sport/lifestyle. As you can clearly see by the caliber of the Archers here who after many big game kills and many years in the woods still cannot agree on something so simple as a broadhead. Well, maybe it isn't so simple afterall. The one thing that is the most simple of all is to go out and purchase a good brand name broadhead and simply shoot it. If it's in the vidals the animal will die. If it's a bad hit or not where you intended it to hit then it's up to you and God to find the animal. Fact is you won;t ever truly know if a different broadhead would have done better or worse. There is no EXACT duplication in real hunting situations. It's best to get a little experience shooting a brand name and then experiment as the years go by.
If you ever watch the kill pics I post you'll see one common denominator. I use lots of different broadheads. Know why? I don't know which one is best either. The one thing I do know is that if the head I'm shooting is rasor sharp and through the heart or lungs the critter is very dead. I try and avoid guts and bone. When I miss, I miss. I just hope when that does occur that I was using the "right" broadhead and God is guiding my efforts to find my wounded quary.
Read the threads. Enjoy the argument and speculation, value all input by those guys who've shot lots of game, and most of all develop your own style starting now. There isn't a wrong broadhead or wrong arrow, etc. There is simply a starting point to your future education in this sport/lifestyle. You'll find your way just fine if you just don't take all this "which one" business to heart.
Thanks for all you do Ed. Thanks to the rest of you guys too for shooting all those different broadheads. I love all the input! CK
I don't hunt the big stuff; deer only for me, exclusively from the ground. Broadhead choice always seems to be contentious, and I doubt that'll ever change. It's a series of trade-offs, and the variables will boggle the mind...equipment, shot angle, structures hit, etc., etc. Ultimately, on the classic "double-lung" shot, it matters little. Hypoxia, or lack of oxygen, puts them down fast, and with that particular shot, the resulting pneumothorax is, imo, at least as responsible as hemorrhage for achieving this; maybe more so. So I'm looking for that complete pass-through. On the other hand, I shoot relatively moderate poundage, have a short draw, and am a dedicated back quiver user (ever tried to extract a Snuffer from a proper back quiver? :scared: ), so a 2-blade is my choice. My compromise is a large 2-blade, specifically the Ace Super Express...like Jason said, it's practically a flying cleaver. On a heavy arrow, penetration is a non-issue on deer, and in the event of a non-chest hit, I can still count on that head to do alot of damage; pretty good wound channel, good penetration through an acorn-filled paunch to deeper structures, decent bone-busting ability. That's my compromise, and I'm stickin' to it.....though I realize that others' mileage will almost certainly vary :campfire:
Tradtusker...yeah, I hear ya.
What if you could have a complete pass through on EVERY deer(bunches and bunches) you ever shot with a big 4 blade, except for those where the off shoulder or off leg was hit???
I have.
So, I know for a fact my head has done more damage than a narrow two blade would have on the deer I shot....and it also makes for short order recovery in these thick n nasty thickets we have he and the lack of native trackers :D
.........
Yeah Curtis....these threads are always fun....and Ed's Studies are very interesting to read.
There is no magic head for all game...b'heads are tools, and you gotta choose the right one for the job at hand. My set ups allows me to shoot 4 blades through deer like they are made of paper. Different game and I choose a different head.
And, arrows aren't bullets.....gotta keep that in mind.
I like this analogy.
QuoteThere is no magic head for all game...b'heads are tools, and you gotta choose the right one for the job at hand. My set ups allows me to shoot 4 blades through deer like they are made of paper. Different game and I choose a different head.
And, arrows aren't bullets.....gotta keep that in mind
yip your dead right Terry! :thumbsup:
and yes most of the native trackers i'v worked with and hunted with sure do make short work of making you feel like and idiot and how little you know tracking alongside them :rolleyes:
----------------------
CK
"There is no EXACT duplication in real hunting situations."
i definately agree with that!