i have this fear of using a two bladed head due to the fact i was told, when i was shooting compounds, that it is possible for a slit would to close and therefore, not leave a trail. Is this true? there are so many sweet looking two bladers on the market that i want to try but i am afraid i will lose a deer do to the fact that it wont bleed. is this a stupid myth or is there some truth? also, i remenber some talk about a new silver flame two blade head that had a really wide cutting path. what are the specs of this head and where can i get them? thanks for any help!
No worries on shooting 2 blade heads. They penetrate, cut good holes and fly great when tuned properly. Just put them tight to the shoulder and follow the red path to your animal.
They are really the only way (in my opinion) to go on bigger/tougher animals.
Deermaster 1, do a search here for Treeshark wound/bloodtrail pictures. May change your mind :thumbsup:
IMO
I think much of the fear is atleast for compound shoters who have the need for speed have been shootIng broadheads that are so small and light the deer probably feels as much pain as when you give blood. 75, 85 or 100 gr.
Not that there bad, but mosT I know who shoot trad use a much larger heavier blade thAt is most likely felt and I doubt with most NA game would close up.
Here's a steel force 140 glue-on
The hellfire 150 gr two baldes with two bleeders are awesome screw-in blades. Both cut on impact. No need to sharpen.
(http://i134.photobucket.com/albums/q93/Kingtaken/P1010020-1.jpg)
Many great 2 blades many by many different companies. Everyone has their personal choice.
Some like Trans Am others a Camaro.
My last buck went 30 yards after being hit with a sharp two blade. There was ample evidence of his departure via blood trail.
I shoot mainly two blades but I also use a 4 blade Bear razor head on a ocassion as well. The only thing I can say is if your shot hits back in the gut area and your shooting out of a tree stand the chance of the exit hole cloging up might be a little quicker with a two balde.
However I have seen huge holes made by big 3 blade broad heads clog up when you hit them to much in the stomach area just as quickly. Since it is not my goal or intension to gut shoot animals I don't prepare to miss, I prepare to hit what I am aiming for and I think the two blade gives me a little better chance of doing that. I know the 200 grain Ace two blades leave a big hole.
If you hit them in the boiler room they will bleed just fine and die as quickly. A high hit with a multiblade doesn't bleed any better than a 2 blade, the cavity has to fill first. If you get a marginal hit with a 2 blade the animal is more likely to recover. A very responsible choice in my opinion.
I have never hade a problem. I switched 5 years ago and have used 3 different 2 blade heads to kill 12 whitetails. If they are kept razor sharp(or sharper)They will do the job, ya still got to hit them in the good stuff.
Blood trails and game recovery are much more heavilly influenced by shot placement and the level of sharpness of the broadhead, than by the broadhead's size or blade count.
A razor sharp 2 blade will always leave a better bloodtrail than a dull multi-blade head, just as a razor sharp multi-blade will leave a better blood trail than a dull two blade.
Shot placement kills the animal, sharp broadheads make game recovery much easier.
Shot placement is the most critical factor. You can kill a deer with a well placed target point but, good luck finding him. Well placed, razor sharp broadheads will always leave good blood trails but, the sharpest broadhead in the world won't make up for poor shot placement.
-Ron
It would stand to reason that a 3" hole is going to let more liquid flow than a 2". If penetration was not an issue, I would have to say that the multi head would leave a better blood trail.
But seeing that penetration is always a concern with me I opt for the double bladed knowing that an exit hole from a tree stand is always desirable.
Bowdude is exactly right about the high hit. But, if you hit right behind the shoulder and at the right height then you'll get plenty of blood to follow.
QuoteOriginally posted by Sharpster:
Blood trails and game recovery are much more heavilly influenced by shot placement and the level of sharpness of the broadhead, than by the broadhead's size or blade count.
AND
Shot placement kills the animal, sharp broadheads make game recovery much easier.
-Ron
Excellent post Ron! :thumbsup:
I would love to use two blade heads but in all the years I have hunted I have always been disappointed with the bloodtrails I get with two blade heads. I wish it was otherwise.
To paraphrase a line from the movie "Urban Cowboy"... "depends on what you think a real blood trail is."
Seriously. There are too many factors involved to say which one leaves the best blood trail in every situation.
Can you lose a deer because of a poor blood trail from a two bladed broadhead.... absolutely!
Can you lose a deer because of a poor blood trail from a multiblade.... absolutely.
Best thing to do is get some of your most adored two blade and give it a shot.
:thumbsup:
QuoteIf you get a marginal hit with a 2 blade the animal is more likely to recover. A very responsible choice in my opinion.
Man, I've got to disagree with both of those statements.
The one can't be proved.
As far as the second one is concerned, I believe that the best choice is the one that's most likely to kill the animal anyway with a marginal hit.
If I was worried about their survival, I'd stay home.
.................................................
And as Bill Carlsen knows, I'm in full agreement with his statement.
since I switched to traditional the only negative issue I've personally encountered was the poor results of using 2-blade heads. our deer really put on a good layer of fat and a thick winter coat which (on many occasions) will allow that little slit to close up. a big ol' multi-blade head leaves a big enough hole that the fat and thick coat dosen't come into play.
NOW' this is based on my own personal experiences. I'll not knock what another hunter chooses to shoot. I'm sure they're just as many (maybe even more) hunters using 2-blade heads with good results BUT, I'll never be one of them.
good luck with whichever head you choose. :thumbsup:
My experience: I shot a doe this (07)that was quartering slightly towards me. I shot her right behind the shoulder with a razor sharp Grizzly. The arrow traveled downward angling back through one lung and exited out of the guts and stuck in the ground. Not the best shot angle but she turned as I released. I started to follow the trail and was only following small drops. I was worried I made a bad shot but after about hundred yards the blood really started to flow and I found her dead a short distance away. What happened was the exit wound plugged up with gut material and the blood did not start to flow until the body cavity filled up. This was my first "bad experience"(if you want to call it that) with a two blade. I have killed severl deer with two blades and had excellent results. Like someone said before shot placement is the key.
i agree 100% with sswv. here in massachusetts the deer really get fat, and depending on the winter, that can cause a problem. i have only killed 3 deer with 2 blade magnus heads. the first deer dropped within 30 yds, and a could have ran and slid to the deer with all the blood on the ground!! :eek:
2nd deer went about 60 yds, and left a respectable amount on the ground.
the 3rd deer i hit perfect left and right, but a bit high. the deer cashed maybe 100 yds away.
i found 1 or 2 tiny specs of blood, but luckily i heard the deer fall. so i just walked to the deer.
what im tryin to say is if ya want to use a 2 blade, go ahead. it all depends on the specific deer, and where ya hit um... :thumbsup:
jamie
:archer:
Much of the blood from a lung hit animal comes from the mouth and nose anyway. Hit one someplace besides that and you missed your target.
Look @ the pic in my review
http://www.3riversarchery.com/Product.asp?show=rate&c=57&s=42&p=69&i=5232#full
I have had good bloodtrails with 2,3, and 4-blade bhs and little or no bloodtrails at all with 2,3,and 4-blade bhs. I do seem to get an adaquate bloodtrail IF the arrow (or at least the broadhead) is a passthru in a vital area. I try to shoot the biggest broadhead that I can consistantly get thru the other side. The folks that are shooting lower poundage bows and/or from treestands don't have as much "wiggle room" in their bh choices as the higher poundage folks do. So whats the best bh for you? A wide 2-blade, a narrow 3-blade or maybe a 4-blade with small or breakable bleeders? I Don't know...I'm still trying to answer that one for myself!
Ooops..Sorry 'bout that. Hit the wrong buttons.
Not true.
Two blades fed your ancestors just fine. if you decide to stick with a multi-blade, there are some pros here that can point out the cream of the crop.
Heres all I got: this came from a less than desireable hit last fall. On the other hand,I've had super hits that weren't this good of blood.
(http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d34/kennym/101_1313.jpg)
Regardless of the head type,every shot is different and so is every blood trail.
I have to agree with super sharp and good placement along with knowing the quarries anatomy.
Lets go huntin!! :bigsmyl:
Oops,Zwickey 2 blade Delta.
I have always been told that my file sharpened single chamfer two blade heads will pull hair and the hole will close up. Never happened, they don't pull hair through and that jagged hole is usually bigger than the broadhead. i have found a four blade head that was still razor sharp on a 2419 arrow. it had a puff ball of dry hair and under that was a a razor sharp broadhead completely covered in bloody hair.
I've never seen a need for 2 blades on deer out of the bows I shoot.
I think Kenny summed it up really well: "Regardless of the head type, every shot is different and so is every blood trail."
Personally, I use 190 grain grizzly's and 200 grain trade points with two blades, 145-155grain Eclipse's with 2 & 4 blades, and Woodsmen's with 3 blades, out of 55-60# selfbows for deer without much consideration for penetration or blood trails; if the arrow hits where I want it (the result of properly tuned bow, matched arrow, proper form, ect...) good penetration and short blood trails are the result. My use of four different types of blades is to get different arrows to fly correctly out of a specific bow (I like to make bows, not arrows.). On larger animals, like bison, I opt for the two bladed Grizzly or trade point for deeper penetration. Usually, I have at least two types of broadheads in my quiver that hit fairly close to the same spot within in my effective range.
The blood trail is going to come from a hole in the bag all things being equal. The multi bladed with more cutting surface would have to leave a bigger hole for more liquid to spill.
Things are never equal when it comes to broadheads or hunting.
Back in 80's when I was shooting a compound I shot 145g snuffers on 2219XX75s which was a pretty lethal combination even on marginal hits the damage that head caused was tremendous.When I started shooting trad I had a bad experience with a quartering away buck that didnt get a pass thru and that same year I shot down on a buck that didnt get a pass thru(this deer was killed a wk later by my bro-inlaw still carrying the arrow).That made me switch to the magnus.Im not making excuses as both these shots were less than desirable,I just think that out of my 60#longbow I get better penetration with a 2blade bh,and I agree you can killem with a field tip if you getem in the goodies.
To me it is simple..the largest blade with the most cut you can push out the other side is always best.For some that will be multi-blade heads.For others or in cases where contacting a lot of bone is likely that will be the two blade.Regaudless of your choice two holes will always leak better than one. :) I shoot lighter bow weights so my choice is the larger two blades.I get two holes and lots of blood.If I shot higher weight bows like some do I would be shooting the biggest 3 or 4 blade I could.The bloodtrail in most cases is very dependant on the hit.Hit them right with the smallest head and you will have a trail to follow.Hit them wrong and bigger is generally better.As far as a deer recovering after a hit better from one to the other goes..to be honest I really don't care.I am there trying my best to kill them anyway.Learn to shoot well and follow up when they are hit and you won't loose many. jmo
Like what everyone else says, shot placement is the key. The only experience I have had is with 2 blade stingers. Its not a big head, I have shot 5 deer with them and I was not very impressed with the blood trails, and all 5 were lung hits. I now shoot 4 blade stingers, but I would not hesitate to shoot a 2 blade, I just wish magnus made wound about 1.5 inches wide.
Charlie with statements like that it makes me think there might be some old pods laying in your drawers some where.
I agree with Charlie, and think the pod comment was out of line.
QuoteI just wish magnus made wound about 1.5 inches wide.
They do. From their website:
Magnus 2-blade #MA160
2 1/2 x 1 1/2 inches
160 grains - 11/32" ferrule
Magnus 2-blade #MA135
2 1/2 x 1 1/2 inches
135 grains - 11/32" ferrule
Magnus 4-blade #MA150
2 1/2 x 1 1/2 inches
150 grains - 11/32" ferrule
I must say that I have had problems with blood trails from 2 bladed heads even with double lunged deer (not that recovery was a problem). But I have also had penetration problems through bone with multiblade heads. But I think that I'm going to try some single beveled 2 bladed heads this year. The spinning motion which has been shown through tissue and bone intrigues me.
QuoteOriginally posted by bowdude:
Charlie with statements like that it makes me think there might be some old pods laying in your drawers some where.
Oooooof....you need to add a couple a smileys or something to that statement, cause I'm sure it's some kind of joke.
As far as broadheads: I like 2 blades, I like 2 blades with bleeders, I like 3 blades...I hunt with all of them. There are probably 50 great broadheads on today's trad market that will all perform wonderfully in anything but the most extreme scenario.
I used to be a die hard proponent of 2 blades only...and still prefer them in some situations, but now that I can get a woodsman as sharp or sharper than my preferred 2 blade models, I often find myself reaching for an arrow with it on the business end. I also find myself asking myself more and more frequently, "If you've got the horsepower, why not use it to push more blades?" Same with 2 blades + bleeders....
I have used 2 bladed and 4 blade heads (zwickeys and grizzlys) with good results. When results in penetration or blood trail was less than optimal, I can't really blame that on the head being used. When you make bad hits, recovery will be more difficult, and it ussually is not going to matter whether you are using a 2 blade or multiple blade head. Achieve accuracy and your results will be optimized if you are using any good quality sharp braodhead.
Ah,I think you pretty much summed it up right there Blaine.I have a question on magnus 2bladesw/bleeders JC do they fly pretty well?What about noise?I remember when I shot snuffers they whistled.
QuoteIf you hit them in the boiler room they will bleed just fine and die as quickly. A high hit with a multiblade doesn't bleed any better than a 2 blade, the cavity has to fill first. If you get a marginal hit with a 2 blade the animal is more likely to recover. A very responsible choice in my opinion.
Perhaps I came off a little harsh in my statements, but it was only in the retoric used and not the content that needs changing.
In my own personal experience (so as not to lump everyone else in with my statements) I agree that a two blade or multiblade put through the lungs will kill equally quickly.
A "high hit" can and often DOES bleed better from a multiblade than a two blade. The cavity does NOT have to fill up with blood before there is external "spillage".
The chest cavity is a pressurized chamber and any loose blood can be expelled from pressure alone if the hole is big enough to allow it.... I've seen it many times.
And I stand by my statement alluding to my preference of a broadhead that stands the best chance for killing the animal if the worst happens and not chosing a broadhead because it offers the animal the best chance of survival.
I'm sorry, but that makes no sense to me.
No doubt animals survive horrific wounds from guns and broadheads as well as what the natural world deals up to them.
The number of blades a broahead has has little if any bearing on that.
I apologize if I offended you by my remarks previously. They were not intended personally.
In conclusion, don't worry about what I've got in my drawers I know what's there. Be more concerned with what you've got in yours.
:thumbsup:
LOL :thumbsup:
I shoot several hundred 2 and 3 blade heads at paper gun targets then determine which is the most accurate head for my set up and use that one.
If I shot below 50# with average FOC I would only use 2 blade heads for the penetration. Shooting 600 grain arrows with high FOC I shoot whichever is more accurate for my set ups.
In self defence the "experts" say choose the caliber you are most accurate with over the one with the greatest stopping power. Not sure if that applies here but I thought I would throw that out for pondering...
My experince has been primarly with 2 blade and there always seems to be a considerable amount of blood left inside the cavity. Blood that would have certainly aided in tracking had it spilled out.
Somewhere around 30 years ago I started bowhunting. No one else in my family had ever bowhunted so what I learned was by trial and error or 'word of mouth' then trial and error. I latched on and listened to the guy's who were sucessful, sorted thru that, then more trial and error..A lot of what I now know was passed to me from Jerry Simmons and Jerry is a strong advocate for "multi-blade" heads. He has taken around 500 big game animals with archery equipment and I respect him and his ability. Multi blade heads have worked for me for a lot of years. I tend to have better blood trails, in my opinion, and they help out when a shot is a little off the intended mark....If he had shot 2 blades and I had started shooting them in the beginning, I might feel different but I don't think so....Just my opinion and I respect EVERYONE elses..I agree 110% with Charlie. Don
QuoteOriginally posted by Terry Green:
I've never seen a need for 2 blades on deer out of the bows I shoot.
Even thought I'm a huge fan of the particular 2-blade heads I use, I'll readily admit that, for my setup, they're beyond overkill for whitetails. Heck, I've shot through enough whitetails with Delta 4-blades to know I certainly don't need a skinny 2-blade head to kill a deer.
I'm just stubborn. :D
I only shoot sround 50lbs now but when I shot heavy bows I was a die hard Simmons man with bleeders installed.Penatration was never an issue. I dropped in bow weight and the last ten years or so I have shot a multitude of broadheads.2 blade,3blade and 4blades. they all work good through the lungs but I have settled on MagnusI`s and Simmons. they work for me great as 2 blades.
If you gonna shoot a 2 blade shoot a biggun.
I don`t take iffy shots and honestly blood trail maybe 1 in 10 of the critters I shoot. Most I hear or see fall.I sometimes will trail just for the sport but usually not.I think shot placement and shot distance are more important than how many blades.Just a rednecks opinion.RC
I am another that does not need a two edge head because of penetration.
I like the look of them, they are easy to sharpen, and I have never had issues with poor blood trails.
As we all know, make sure they are sharp, and get as close as we need to so we can put them where they will do the most good, regardless of what head it is.
QuoteOriginally posted by Bonebuster:
As we all know, make sure they are sharp, and get as close as we need to so we can put them where they will do the most good, regardless of what head it is.
Exactly....that's what we all strive for....BUT!
That's why I shoot 4 blades at deer cause they aint alway in the same place when the arrow gets there......and I want a head that is going to cause more trauma in those situations...and have a wider cut width to get more of the goodies on those shots. Any sharp head will work when all is perfect, again we all know that, but which one will work best when all isn't? On deer, I'll take 4 blades all day long, cause I have complete pass troughs on all hits where the off leg/shoulder isn't contacted.....and IF they are....well, its too late.
I don't shoot real heavy bows but do shoot pretty heavy arrows and can honestly say that penetration has not been an issue for me on any animal that i have shot so far. I've shot deer, hogs and elk with around 60# and heads have varied from WWs to Simmons Interceptors (w/bleeders) to Phantoms to Montecs to Zwicks. I did shoot the Zwickeys early on in a two-blade configuration and the old Bears w/o the bleeders and must say the bloodtrails didn't SEEM to be as good---either in quantity or in how soon the bloodtrail started. Started using multis and have never looked back, long as I do my part they give me good blood
Okay, I'm fairly new to traditional archery but I'll add my 2 cents. I've probably shot 50-60 deer total and about 1/2-1/3 of those were with a compound bow. I've had deer with heart/lung shots bleed like crazy, and others that sealed up. I've had pass through on all of my deer. Unless you are using a very light bow or hit the shoulder square on you should have a pass through. This doesn't always translate into a good blood trail. High shots will bleed, not because of positive pressure (Sorry Charlie, just not true), but because blood vessels that feed the intercostal muscles and other small vessels are cut. Sometimes that is all you get. I shot a deer with a 7mm mag through the heart that had a little blood at the site of impact and then nothing, I mean nothing, between it and the carcass that was 45 yards away. It's not an exact science. Alot of it depends on how fast the animal is moving after the shot. The more surface area of the blade you use the more likely it is to cut vessels and vital organs, the more the animal bleeds. Usually this will translate into a better blood trail, but not always. Obviously if the arow doesn't completely penetrate it will not cut as much tissue so having more blades in this circumstance will not help. Usually this is not the case with deer. Since I am new to the game I plan on using 2-blades for hunting because eventually I want to hunt hogs. 3 blade or 4 blade setups would probably work better as far as blood trails go, but when I eventually go hog hunting I want to give myself the best opportunity for penetration. As far as deer hunting goes I will probably use the two blades as well, but that is really without any good justification other that that is what I have and I think it will do the job just fine.
Good Stuff
I'm one of the people who had consistent poor blood on the ground when using 2 blades. I personally won't shoot anything but the woodsman head anymore. I still get good penetration out of my setup and adequate blood is the norm. Don't get me wrong, they still die the same, but that extra blood is always helpful. I don't have any desire for exciting blood trails full of ups and downs, I like to walk upright and directly to the dead. ;) Just my experience.
As you can see, my picture I posted today on my New Zealand hunt, even though the fallow deer are small the two blade head has given me a good blood trail on most all game I've shot. I only had one mule deer that I hit good that did not leave a good blood trail. Nothing wrong with a two blade head. Although I wouldn't mind trying one of those woodsmen, do they make them with threads ?
Everyone on here that has killed much of anything has an opinion on this. They may agree with you or me but most probably no one's mind is gonna be changed. This has been argued many times and there are legitimate arguements for both heads. Several have suggested using the head with the most blades you are capable of getting an exit hole from. These fellows are the ones that should be listened to.
What Charlie said. Right on the money.(nut)
i'm with sharpster,shot placement,and a sharp head are the main conserns.don't take the shot if in doubt,if you do take it,play all the angles,straght arrow,good fletching,and super sharp broadhead,good anchor,smooth release,equal sucess.ps,i'm a 2 blade man.
The slit won't close up. I think it's all a matter of where you hit an animal as to the blood trial it leaves with any kind of head. I do truly believe that a sharp edge bleeds better whether it's two or four blades. Have you ever cut your finger with a really sharp knife. The blood doesn't clot nearly as quickly as it does with a dull jagged cut. Having said this the two blade heads as a whole are very apt to get sharper.
Go for it, that's the beauty of our sport we can all have different opinions. Also I would never listen to anyone that's never used a two blade head. I've used both and there are benefits to both. I had a situation a few years ago on a whitetail while using a two blade head. Right before the arrow hit the deer it whirled and the arrow went in it right at the right side of it's neck and penetrated the shoulder. Once I opened the deer up I saw the two blade head had just barely penetrated one lung. If that would have been a three or four blade head I never would have found that deer.
If you do decide to go two blade check out the KME sharpener.
www.kmesharp.com (http://www.kmesharp.com)
JMHO, shot placement matters more than blade type. I find 2-blades fly and penetrate better. Clipped the heart passing through on my last pig at 24 yards. Stevie could have followed the trail.
this thread appears about once every month or two and everyone has a different opinion so i will give mine.
it tends to reason that a multi blade head will cut more blood vessels than a 2 blade that just cuts on a single plane or 1 slice. but then if you use a single bevel you have to add in the rotation of the broadhead so who knows.
i do know that a buddy of mine shot a buck with a 4 blade muzzy phantom. it looked like he shot this buck with a 7 mag. it had a perfect hole the size of a quarter on both sides and cut the arteries going to the heart and am pretty sure got both lungs. the "perfect shot" for the first 100 yards there was almost no blood, actually only few specks the deer went 120- 150 yards and only in the last 20 or so yards did we begin to see blood. so the huge " hole " didn't guarrentee a great blood trail on a perfect shot so what would.
i believe that the sharpness of the blades and the path of the arrow, wether the arrow stays in the animal or exits has more to do with the blood trail than the number of blades. i shoot a 2 blade to make sure the arrow is in the dirt on the other side.