Trad Gang

I am so tired of hearing about single bevels, and how they are a magic cure all because they twist through bone!

Before you get your panties in a wad, hear me out! I'm a millennial with a propensity for click bait titles, all right? :biglaugh:

Okay, let me be more reasonable now. I have read Ashby's work. I understand the benefit of being able to split heavy bone, and of an S-channel wound on a bad shot through guts. I get it. I realize some animals we hunt are big, tough creatures, and it takes a lot of tuning and effort to get two holes. I understand that, all things considered, a long, narrow broadhead will penetrate better than a short wide one. But the hype has gone too far! I consistently hear proponents of XYZ brand single bevel saying that "it gives better blood trails". That fallacy is rampant across social media and it needs to stop!

Every archer I personally know who uses narrower two blades, single OR double bevel, will tell you that some (or most) blood trails are pretty non existent, even on solid double lung hits. Heck, a lot of archers who uses big three blades or four blades could probably tell you a similar story about a critter that went forever on no lungs!

So, I propose we acknowledge that single bevels have a purpose, and they are good at it! That purpose is achieving deep penetration on tough animals, through heavy bone. Or doing the same on delicate animals, with a very low poundage setup. But it is not to give you a Ray Charles blood trail!

Let's use common sense here! It is plain difficult  for blood to leak out of a 1" wide slit! Wider broadheads, three blade broadheads, two blade broadheads with bleeders, and mechanical broadheads were all invented because narrow heads didn't yield satisfactory blood trails with consistency. I should point out that shot placement CAN yield great blood trails with more consistency. Low holes in the chest cavity tend to bleed better!

Anyways, I don't want to detract from single bevel broadheads themselves. Just don't kid yourself into thinking they are magic. Perfect practice, razor sharp broadheads, and good shot selection will yield much more consistent blood trails. And you will find that a lot of archers on this site use much bigger broadheads, even out of 40-50 lb bows, and have no problem with penetration on deer.  :thumbsup:

Lol yeah me too. 

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

Well said and couldn't agree more.

Low exit wounds are nice.  Not everyone shoots from 20' up in a tree. 
I have some single bevel heads.  I like em okay. 
I like Rage heads better.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

I have only shot 2 hogs with single bevel heads and neither had stellar blood trails although both died within sight. In a tree right now with one on my arrow to try out ( prob going to shoot them for elk this year ). I think for me it's just trying new stuff and I do like the benefits they offer in penitration. If it works out in the next few days I will post some blood trail pics. I shoot big 2 blade heads for 99% of my hunting and the TreeShark is my favorite, I guess I need a single bevel one of those..

,,Sam,,

Quote from: SAM E. STEPHENS on August 03, 2018, 07:52:45 PM
I have only shot 2 hogs with single bevel heads and neither had stellar blood trails although both died within sight. In a tree right now with one on my arrow to try out ( prob going to shoot them for elk this year ). I think for me it's just trying new stuff and I do like the benefits they offer in penitration. If it works out in the next few days I will post some blood trail pics. I shoot big 2 blade heads for 99% of my hunting and the TreeShark is my favorite, I guess I need a single bevel one of those..

,,Sam,,

Hey Sam! What poundage are you shooting? I use the Treesharks for elk, but I shoot a long draw, heavy arrows, and a heavy bow. I do get the wanting to try something new. I just can't bring myself to give up the big slashes offered by Deltas/Simmons/Snuffers, etc.

I'll agree with you on this.  I shot a bear this spring with a single bevel broad head, pass thru shot, double lung.  I saw blood spray out of the impact wound.  But I didn't find blood past that.  I did however see the bear go down within 25 yards.  That was nice.  The broad head shattered the ribs going in and coming out.  I will also admit my shot was centerline regarding top to bottom.

My son has shot 3 deer with his compound using Magnus broad heads, 2 blade, double bevel.  He doesn't hunt that high and his shots were high.  His deer died in short order.  But the tracking job was difficult all three times.  I've tried encouraging him to shoot lower and I'm sure that will come with time.  His bear he shot with a 3 blade this spring.  That left him a nice blood trail.  But he also had a low exit wound.

I too feel that the low exit wound is the key to all this.  However I also like knowing the science behind my choice and that it gives me some insurance for when I make a bad shot (which will happen someday).

-Jeremy

My bows range from 50-65 pounds at my 30in draw , I lean to the lighter bows for most everything nowadays. I just can't shoot a TreeShark at elk , my buddy killed a bull with one though. I have killed several elk and for me the Shark is too big for elk size critters. My favorite shot is quartered away so I want to get deep as I can in em. Also I shoot from 600-750gr arrows so I love a heavy arrow also..

,,Sam,,

   Snuffers and VPA for me. Never had a problem finding a blood trail yet with a 3 blade.

With my age in the mid 60's and my bow weight in the low 40s, penetration is a primary concern, esp. from tree stands.  With that in mind, last year I used Grizzly broad heads for most of my deer kills.  On some deer the penetration was better than expected while on others less.  Blood trails on some we're good while others less than expected.  I guess that is to be expected with just about any broadhead.  One thing I did experience that I wasn't expecting was the edge damage on nearly 1/3 of my broad heads I recovered.  I'm talking about a very pronounced rolled edge, wavy edge and the likes.  I have never witnessed that with a Zwickey.  Yes, I got the deer but I find that disturbing.  Anybody else have this problem? 

If I could shoot higher poundage, I'd shoot 3 blades...but at 72 and shooting 40#@28 I still get great penetration with most being pass throughs.  Three blades just won't give me the penetration or blood trail.  I mainly hunt hogs now...tippit

I'm trying to warm up to the single bevel heads, but at my low 50s draw weight at 28" draw and 550-640 grain arrows I've had a hard time finding an animal that can stop my favorite Grizzly Instinct 3 blade.  Probably have to drop down to mid 40s this fall due to shoulder surgery, and may go 2 blade, but will have a hard time going out without my instincts.

I started using single bevels the first year the original Grizzlies came out.  File sharpened them exactly like the directions said on the package, it works.  I used them with both left and right wing arrows, the originals were only right wing heads.  We got good blood trails with either feather , but I was told early on to match the spin.  It did seem to make some sense, but on deer it was difficult to tell.  I wanted to shoot left wing feathers, so I ordered a bunch of pieces and parts to make Hill broad heads, with heat treated and unground blades and grind them with left single bevel edges.  We found that we got a bit more blood on the ground quicker with the single bevel Hill, plus, I could get them sharper.  As time went on I changed to a serrated edge on my single bevel heads.  I get them shaving sharp and then using a file with with the round safety edges that expose a single row of file teeth.  Pulling the reversed file from back to front on the beveled side of the blade, then gently cleaning up that edge.  I believe that works better yet.  Have never once seen a single bevel head not give a good blood trail.  Makes me wonder what folks are calling sharp.  If it is just a burr cutting hair, that edge will breakdown and not cut what it needs to on the inside where the real work is done.

Single bevel, double bevel, lw, rw, whatever.  They all kill the same for me.

I have been using160 grain  two blade Stos, double bevel but was planning on using three blade this year, partially for better blood trail but also I seem to be shooting marginally better with them.

So at what weight is a bow too light for three blade heads?  I am going to use a 55# Stickflinger with Surewoods at about 600 grains total weight.

I was thinking about Delta four blades as well but have not bought any yet.

I wonder if native Americans spent as much time debating broad heads as we do?! I bet they did.
  The single or double bevel doesn't have anything to do with it. It's the width. I've been saying that Grizzly needs a wider "whitetail" version of their head. 1 3/8" would be good. Some of my grizzlies don't measure the full advertised 1 1/8 wide. The first deer I killed with an 1 1/8" single bevel had a great blood trail, so I signed up. Probably a dozen later I'd say they have a fair blood trail most of the time. And very poor a few times. But I often don't need it as the deer is laying there dead in sight. Arrows whistle through with little resistance, deer have some tendancy to run less panicked if at all.
  I am probably using 200 gr 3 blade VPAs this year because of the blood trail. I take a trip to Wyoming each year, blood is very hard to see in the dry grass. Though last year I made a horrible shot on a nice buck as he wheeled away. Hit him in the lower ham, it angled forward through the body and out between the neck and shoulder on the opposite side. Not a great blood trail but a very dead deer. I'm thinking that the narrow grizzly saved me on that deer.
  I have lost deer because of a narrow single bevel and i have recovered deer because of a narrow single bevel.
  Last fall I got 3 Centaur Big Game Heads to try, but I never got them at the right weight to match my target points at the time. I am surprised the Centaurs don't have more of a following. They are wide, they fly good, tough as heck, they are single bevel and the really do penetrate in targets of all types better than a two blade and better than a 3 blade VPA, better penetration while cutting a larger hole. The rotation seems more obvious than other single bevels. Amazing penetration. I never shot a deer with one but I have to think they would make hellish blood trail. I just need to make them weigh 200 (screw on) grains.
http://www.centaurarchery.com/broadheadinfo.htm

Some of the best blood trails I have had where with 1.5" 2 blade Magnus and Swicky Delta. The worst with 1" 2 blade. Either put where they should be will make for a short trailing job.

That's one of my bigger issues with the Grizzlies is width.  I get it that the thickness makes the wedge effect that breaks the bone but dang.  Spread that steel out to 1.5" and put some vent holes to keep the thickness and weight. 
If I were gonna hunt cape buffalo maybe . . . but . . .
I won't buy them again.  I just think there are heads that will work as well in a price range that doesn't make me sick when they do pass through and hit a rock.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

Not a big fan of vented BH, They seem to fill up with hair and fat.. Heavy wide 2 blade BH will break bone, penetrate and leave a great blood trail.

Yep.  Not the bevel, just the width IMO.  This soft metal single bevel Vandieman head put blood on the ground, but it can be hit or miss with hogs no matter what use.

[attachment=1,msg2811617]

Heresy, absolute heresy

You have to have a single bevel and 30% FOC or you will only wound a critter.
Anyone could have told you that! 

I've never tried a single bevel , just never really saw a need when my double bevel zwickey and  magnus heads did fine in the penetration department and I never believed in the more blood from what would be a narrower head even though the spin is supposed to create a bigger wound channel but how much spin will a head do in a 14" wide deer ? I'll probably never hunt anything bigger than elk and I shoot mid to upper 50's in bow weight with a 600 grain arrow..

With one exception, all the deer I have killed has been with a zwickey eskimo or a grizzly head.  I have used the zwikeys since the late 70's and the grizzlys since the late 80's.  Both work great and may have both in my quiver at any time.  In my experience, the zwickeys are much easier to sharpen while the grizzlys penetrate better and are more forgiving of tune and bad form, i.e., they always fly like field points.  Both produce great blood trails when properly placed.  Both produce poor blood trails when improperly placed.  I never used the zwickey deltas because I had difficulty sharpening the concave edge.

The one exception is I used some Abower brown bears for a season about 7-8 years ago.  It is a good head too.  A little wider and thicker, and definitely easier to resharpen than the grizzly, but otherwise very similar.  I would probably use these or the grizzly if I went elk hunting for the penetration benifits.

This year I plan to use zwickey no mercy heads with a single bevel that I picked up at the Kalamazoo show.  Not because I feel I need to change, but just to try the wider head.  It is about 1/4 inch wider than the grizzlys and hopefully they will be easier to file sharpen.  I have been shooting them for about a month and so far I like how they fly.   The only negative I have found is they are difficult to weight match to field points at 225 grains.

This year the old Magnus the 1.5" cant remember if they are the 1 or 2. Anyway they are weighted to 300Gr. I know they work, taken lots of deer with them in the past. Over the years have played with all kinds of BHs. And they will all do the job if they are sharp and put where they need to be.

Thanks for starting this thread, Trumpkin. I agree with your original post.

I've noticed no difference in blood trails between single and double bevel broadheads on whitetails. Any two blade placed high has resulted in a poor blood trail (any fixed blade really—I had a really poor blood trail from a 3 blade placed high, too) while those that were lower bled better. The only reason to shoot single bevel over double bevel is bone breaking ability, not blood trails.

If blood trail is the primary consideration, shoot a Rage. (No hate mail, please.  I don't shoot them anymore, but they do leave a blood trail a blind man could follow). However, if penetration is key (and it usually is for Trad shooters), a two blade is best.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I've always been a big proponent of a big wide broadhead. And a super-sharp broadhead. Put those two combinations together and you've usually got blood on the ground and a dead critter. Snuffers and Zwickey Delta heads come to mind. I'd rather hit one with a hatchet than a needle. But if you cant get them sharper than sharp, there is alternatives too. There are some wide replaceable blade heads on the market too...look at a G5 Striker Magnum. 1.5" cut that's got a decent reputation for a tough head, wicked-sharp replaceable blades. If you're a deer hunter, they are not thick-skinned, big-boned game.

I really like the results that I have been having with 1 1/4" VPA 3 blades.  They usually give a very good blood trail.  That being said, I had to pass through shots on boars in Texas using Big Jim Big 3 broadheads, with pretty good shot placement, and scant blood on the ground.    It doesn't always work out, but in general a big 3 broadhead has done a better job in regards to blood trail compared to 2 blades, although on a big boar I will still opt for a two blade given the choice.  With the amount of energy my bows generate, penetration is usually not an issue.  I think the 3 blades help keep the wound from closing up as much, especially if you only get one hole. Even a big 3 blade won't put more blood on the ground than a treeshark will.

[attachment=1,msg2811644]

Well if you're gonna put a stop to everyone pontificating that "my way is the best way" with little or no empirical evidence, other than they once went to a sorority mixer and spoke to Fred Bear's great niece once removed then you're going to put at least four traditional archery sites that I can think of out of business, lol!

I get great blood trails with Tuff Heads, mainly because they are soooo sharp.

Hit em in the right place and you can track them by "feel".

Here is a blood trail from a tough old boar I shot this spring with a 45# Black Rhino longbow, wood arrows with 220gr.  Tuff Heads. The blood trail was spectacular! It looked like someone ran through the cactus pouring blood from a milk jug. Most importantly; the arrow penetrated completely through both sides of the chest, and 1"+ shields. I just don't see a 3 blade doing that out of a 45# bow.

They all work and they all sometimes don't give the blood trail that you want. I base my opinions on past experience and have taken a ton of game with all types of heads over the years and all of them if well made and sharp as well as put in the right place kill and sometimes they just don't always bleed. I took a whitetail once from a stand, at the shot the three blade Woodsman thumped through the deer like a watermelon. Hitting mid lung on one side exiting out the bottom right at the elbow of the shoulder. With this shot and exit hole location the razor sharp three blade head sticking three inches into the ground, there wasn't a drop of blood at the shot other than on the arrow.
I called my wife on the phone to come with help and a camera because we were in for a short blood trail. I watched the deer run about twenty yards and jump a fence into a bedding area. I thought I would follow the blood trail to the fence where it crossed and wait on Lisa to get there. Well there wasn't a blood trail either, not a drop. I couldn't believe it.
We began searching in the direction it ran and soon found it about another thirty yards away. When we found it I told Lisa to wait for me at the deer while I went back and follow the blood trail from the body that I had obviously missed. I looked and looked but there wasn't a blood trail, not a drop.
Once field dressing the deer the autopsy revealed that the shot was exactly like I had thought and all the blood was in the body cavity, all of it. I would have bet that you would have been able to follow that blood trail from fifty yards away, but not the case.

(https://i.imgur.com/PFTN3wn.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/ZrMbGFd.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/1sk21tJ.jpg)

(https://i.imgur.com/dm61S57.jpg)


On defense of single bevel two blade heads, I have been using them for the last three years. Taking elk, several wild hogs and a hand full of big game animals in Africa with them. Almost all animals were taken with sinew backed osage bows and a few were with glass backed longbows all 60 lb bows. Almost all including the elk and African animals were complete pass trough's. All also resulted in either a very short descent blood trail or falling dead in sight. In every case except one, the Gemsbok in Africa the animals were hit with perfect shot placement. So the head really didn't come into play in my thoughts. The Gemsbok however, the shot placement was perfect. Tight behind the shoulder, mid lung. BUT it centered a rib. At the shot I saw that I only got about half an arrow penetration and it was getting dark. We went back the next morning finding the animal less than eighty yards from the hit. Once skinning began we found that the arrow exactly centered one of the heavy rib bones. The heavy 850 grain arrow still had enough energy to punch through the other side, just cutting the hide on the off side and leaving a bloodshot bruise the size of a base ball on the hide. This arrow tipped with a 185 grizzly and a 200 grain woodyweight shot from a 60 lb bow was the only reason that I had enough energy to recover this animal.

I think the main thing is to match the head to the animal you are hunting and hope for the best but prepare for the worst. SHARP and as heavy as you can shoot, both bow as well as arrow wise is the key.

The rest is just all advertising and there is no magical broadhead that will make you kill everything that you shoot!

But also in defense of single bevel heads I have been bumping up all my arrows weight forward with the Woodyweights and will tell you that they do perform better. I even shoot my arrows with field points with them and you will notice better arrow penetration on targets, quitter bows and arrows flying like darts to the target. In Africa I went extremely heavy on arrow weight. In testing out of my 60 lb longbows, I find that there seems to be a sweet spot at around 700 to750 out to 830 grains without sacrificing speed and trajectory. For me the best mix of weight and speed with performance seemed to be 750. I only went with the extremely heavy in Africa because I knew the shots would be limited to close range and I expected big heavy boned animals. 

I am off to Africa in a week and taking my usual Zwikee double bevel heads that I have shot for years.  I am also going to try the single bevel Rocky Mountain Cutthroat 200 gr.  They fly just as good as my Zwikee's.  Will be interesting to see the results.  I plan on using both heads on different animals.  Both are very sharp, but I think the biggest concern will be the operator behind the bow and placing the shots where they need to be.

Everything varies from occasion to occasion. I've killed deer and elk with Eskimos and Delta's with virtually zero blood on the ground. Generally speaking, I have gotten better blood trails with a single bevel head. But I whacked a blacktail last fall with a tuff head and the arrow exited through the sternum. Almost zero blood and a marathon tracking job!

Quote from: olddogrib on August 04, 2018, 12:40:19 PM
Well if you're gonna put a stop to everyone pontificating that "my way is the best way" with little or no empirical evidence, other than they once went to a sorority mixer and spoke to Fred Bear's great niece once removed then you're going to put at least four traditional archery sites that I can think of out of business, lol!

LOL :)

I've shot animals with a big three blades, big two blades, and smaller single bevels. I've had great blood trails with all, and not so great with all but one. The big two blade (Tree shark) has always performed pretty well. I've had instances where the penetration wasn't the best, and I blame that on me not getting it sharp enough. The big 3 blades are great, but again can't get them shaving sharp. So I just don't have the confidence in them. That brings me to the single beveled Cutthroat. I get these hair popping sharp every time. So that's the head of choice for me. I have total confidence that if I do my part, I will have a good blood trail and short recovery.

Totally agree!

The most important factor, I think is that the Arrow broadhead combo shoots well and you have confidence in it. And that your arrow is as sharp as can be.
I remember trying the new super duper single bevel everyone in nz was recommending on a big boar, then putting an Aztec through next to it and getting a bit more penetration. After that I just use the arrow that flies the best.

The last thing I'd ever do is tell someone their broadhead of choice should be x brand with x characteristics. Choose your own and use it.

I shoot single bevel heads and have for many years. The last 6 whitetails I've killed never made it out of sight. Neither did my last black bear. Every one of the Alaska-Yukon bulls (moose) I've killed dropped within easy sight. I like to say that blood trails don't matter if you don't need them, but of course I understand many animals will need to be trailed after the shot. Accuracy trumps everything else in a killing shot. Do I think single bevels are 'better' than doubles? I can't say for sure, but I can tell you I always will be found shooting the head I think will do the best possible job for me on the game I'm hunting. I always have said, let results speak for themselves and don't sweat what others think. Hunt hard.

Olddog X 2  :clapper:

i agree with all of the above posts, i mainly hunt whitetails so normal i opt for a wider head. I will say this about razor sharp Grizzlies, the animals seem to react less at impact versus a wider 2 or 3 blade and i think that is one of the reasons some animals die in sight.i like most have witnessed all kinds of blood trails and lack of.  i currently shoot Wensel woodsmans and sharks. if i try anything else it will be a 200gr. cut throat.

Trumpkin great thread Ive been waiting for someone to come up with this . Lots of good replies but no one has said if you shoot an animal with a 4 blade you are shooting them twice compared to a 2 blade or one and a half times with a 3 blade . I decided in the 90s that I wouldn't use 2 blade heads anymore and started using Snuffers or Woodsmens and I still use the old Razorhead on occasion , the end results were less animals lost especially on marginal hits and lots better blood trails.

Trouble is the woodsman  and vpa heads have no width either.  May as well shoot a Montec.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

Get you a MA3 and glue razor blades on them just like Jack Howard did and you will see blood on the ground.  Nothing cuts like a razor.

From my own experience, I tried Grizzly single beveled broadheads about 3 years ago. I even practice with them on a daily basis. I will admit that they was truly accurate as well as easy to sharpen. Come opening day, in the evening, I had a mature large doe approached and presented a broadside shot at 15 yards. I put the broadhead directly in the crease of the front shoulder. The doe did the normal, took off like a shot from a gun. So after 30 minutes I got down from my tree, found my blood covered arrow and a few drops of blood at the point of impact but absolutely nothing after that. So, I backed out until the next morning. Me as well as two other people could not find a drop of blood so we started a grid pattern search to where we found the doe about 80 yards from where she was shot. After finding her my friends and I did a investigation to find blood, "nothing", not a drop. There was very little blood under the doe where she expired. We truly looked for about an hour. Then we aimed are investigation towards the doe. The arrow entered the doe 1/3 down and exited through the lower front chest on the opposite side. There was absolutely no "S" channel wound pattern. The broadhead exited the body the very same way it entered the body. Needless to say I went back to Zwickey Deltas. For me, single beveled broadheads are not suited for hunting whitetails. I know, there are countless deer harvested with single beveled broadheads but lack the key element of what I'm looking for in a broadhead which is putting blood on the ground.

Zwickey fever that makes perfect sense I just don't understand how a s cut can be created in a 14" wide deer meaning I don't think it would have enough rotation in that short of a span.. and there will be a difference in a 1 3/8 delta hole and a 1" grizzly hole . In 40 plus years and maybe 100 something whitetails and misc other stuff I've only shot 2 blade  deltas or larger 2 blades some with bleeders  with the exception of one doe taken with a bear razor head which is basically a zwickey Eskimo . With that said I'm going to try a wider cut 3 blade this year just to see if there is any difference in recovery

I use 3 blade heads on everything up to moose.  With the deep chest cavity on an Alaska/Yukon moose I feel I need more penetration and switch to a high quality two blade  like the tuffhead.  Bloodtrails with two blade heads are not as good as 3 blade is you have the HP to get an exit wound.

Mike

Looking at the differing experiences of those who have posted above, it seems that selecting a broadhead based on the expected blood trail might be an exercise in futility.  Some have opposite experiences with the same broadhead.  My own scant personal observations are that it depends more on the location of the hit than anything  My two blade experiences range from not a drop of blood on the ground to a path of blood.  It seems to depend a lot on what the alternate avenues of "escape" are for the blood. 

For me, a complete pass through from a level ground shot with a very sharp Ace produced no blood.  It all stayed in the chest cavity where there was plenty of room for it with both lungs completely collapsed.  that deer traveled about 100 yards at an all out run.  OTOH, a magnus two blade that took out a femoral artery resulted in a huge amount of blood and a deer that walked slowly away about 30 yards and layed down and died within three minutes.

I think juxtaposing the concept of two blade single bevel broadheads against the liklihood of a blood trail is a false dichotomy.  The comparison of blood trails created by two, three and four blade heads is probably a more a more productive comparison if blood trail is the most important aspect of your broadhead selection.

But, the positive aspects of the single bevel broadhead as well as the other aspects of the Ashby findings are not necessarily related to blood trails, but rather to penetration and the ability to break bone.

Well said, Monterey. Well said.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 :)

Quote from: fujimo on August 05, 2018, 01:35:16 PM
However, i am originally from South Africa, and we would follow the tracks, whether they were a blood trail, or just the spoor, but that was a lot easier in the dry South African winters.

I think you win! I know I'm not very good at tracking without snow or a recent rain.

In Colorado deer and elk country you are hard pressed to track a single animal without fresh rain or snow.  Supposedly there are extraordinary trackers who can track in any conditions but I'm certainly not one!

 :)

I know this is blasphemy but I'm not as hung up on Dr. Ashbey's conclusions as many are.  Does some of it have merit?  Sure.  But real world application of arrows, broadheads and dead animals through the decades leave some glaring questions for me on those conclusions.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

Dr. Ed Ashby' s work has never been about the amount of blood, unless you consider a exit hole. All of his work is show casing what type of head he has found through thousands of animals ( dead and alive) to penetrate and break heavy bone the best. the majority of his research was based on heavy skinned and boned animals. I think that there is a whole lot of merit to what he is saying, how many people on this planet have killed white Rhinos with traditional bows in resent times.  i personally like wider heads for whitetails, but I believe his point is very valid .

Makes me wonder what folks are calling sharp.   This was said in one of the posts. I am constantly refining my sharpening skills. And gradually getting better so that now I can get my ace standards to easily shave hair off my arm with little pressure. With that said I believe that it is the level of sharpness and shot placement that determines how much blood you get on the ground (NOT DESIGN!) Also touch the skin on your forearm and move it around. If you put a hole in your arm, moving the skin can at times block the hole. This happens at times with the animals we shoot.  So many thing determine - blood on the ground -  That are more important than brands. Keep them scary sharp, hit them right, use as big dia. as you can and get 2 holes. And get good at tracking.   P.S. I believe a lot of times the blood on the ground is coming out of the mouth.   Greg

When I found the doe, most of the blood remained in the chest cavity as stated. Every shot taken on a deer is different as well as every recovery, (tracking),. My issue was the fact that there was absolutely no 'S' shaped wound channel as was stated in several single beveled descriptions. I never tracked in south Africa nor in Colorado but have tracked numerous deer in my life but tracking deer though the CRP here in southern Iowa will have you thinking that your blind. I seen deer hit with a Simmons Treeshark that the blood trail looked like a horror show until he hit the CRP.  Finding prints in the CRP is virtually impossible. I have tracked deer on the Eastern Shore of Maryland that just vanish after they reach the phragmites.
From my experience, every broadhead has its pros and cons, I just have less cons with Zwickey Deltas than I do with others. Zwickeys been around since 1938 for good reason, because they work. I'm not saying that single broadheads don't work because they do. I'm just not a fan of single beveled broadheads due to my experience with them. But to each his own,

Yeah.  Most of us won't shoot a cape buff or moose or white Rhino.  Whitetails, thim skin, light boned exotics and pigs are what I'm tackling and none of them require a .416 Rigby to put them down.
A blood trail is of paramount importance in most hunting venues.  I doubt the average American hunter has a tracking dog or a venerable African native tracker on staff to find his buck of a lifetime.  Or even that doe for the freezer.
Yes, a sharp head is necessary.  If you don't know how there are places that will sharpen heads and knives.  But there are tools and devices to make it easier for most.
Just shooting a heavier arrow and heavier head isn't going to solve everyone's penetration issues. 
Neither are single bevel heads.
I like the bone breaking factor of single bevel heads and should I hunt Nilgai or elk I may lean that way. 
But shoot a big boar through the shield with it and you'd get no better penetration than you'd get with any other tough, sharp head.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

I think a lot of good points have been made from every quarter. The pros and cons of narrow blades have been explained/verified by those with experience. And the same for wider broadheads. I think we all can take away a renewed emphasis and/or commitment to getting those broadheads sharp, and flying straight! An unexpected topic from the discussion has captured my interest now. Tracking! How many of us practice it? If I were confident in my tracking abilities, I might shoot a smaller broadhead just for the exceptional accuracy they tend to bring.

So... I think it's time to go looking through the archives for threads on tracking. Then I need to make time to go practice it. Heck, that almost sounds like scouting!

Oh, and just one more comment on wide broad heads from personal experience... I have shot three animals with the big TreeSharks now. A bull elk, a whitetail buck, and a hog. I've never felt like penetration was an issue, but I shoot heavy bows. In the case of the hog, I hit a little higher than I'd like, and a little back. I never had a drop of blood, other than what was on the arrow. Take from it what you will. I learned that I need to work on shot placement for hogs. The other critters dropped in sight. :goldtooth:

There's no "hype" regarding single bevel broadheads.  Some people have a closed mind and refuse to consider that there may actually be something better than what they currently use.  It's interesting how some people consider themselves experts on equipment that they don't use.

I have killed close to 50 big game animals with single bevel heads and about the same number with double bevel two blades.  The single bevel heads penetrate better.  They leave bigger wound channels.  And in general, the blood trails are better, probably because I almost always get a good exit hole.  I just came back from a hunting trip to Namibia where I shot 5 arrows and had 5 clean kills.  All done with single bevel heads.  Good blood trails.  My Professional Hunter was very impressed with the performance of my arrows and asked a lot of questions regarding my single bevel heads.

Go ahead and pooh pooh single bevel heads all you want.  I have dead animals on the ground that say single bevel heads work just fine.

"So... I think it's time to go looking through the archives for threads on tracking. Then I need to make time to go practice it."

Trumpkin, How would you propose to practice outside of hunting and shooting animals?  Have a buddy drip red paint through the woods? 

 :)

I believe that an animal's reaction to the shot has something to do with blood trails also. I shot a dall sheep with a four blade muzzy and I  honestly thought I had missed the sheep. I watched it through binoculars while it slowly walked off..... Until it fell over dead. A white animal with no external bleeding and an "X" dead center through both lungs. I've had deer do the same and one elk. No jump and run, just a slow walk and zero blood trail.

Good respectful discussion! :clapper:

I'm consistently surprised that people occasionally don't understand one principle of lung wounds: You can inflict a fully penetrating wound to the lungs without severing a major blood vessel. There will still be bleeding internally but nothing like if a larger pulmonary vessel or branch is cut. Absent a cut vessel pouring blood into the wound channel (and outside the body) there can be very little blood. There have been many documented instances of shots penetrating both lungs and still not yielding a kill....and definitely not a fast kill. It can come down to something as innocent as which way a blade happens to line up as it passes near a vessel.

I used to advocate for big devastating heads and wounds (theoretically) but have long since tempered that with the primary desire to achieve an exit wound. Penetration wins every time when I select a broadhead and shaft. The S-cut produced by a single bevel is a documented fact, but I personally don't shoot them for an S-cut. I shoot them because they may have an advantage against bone, and because I've noted them to penetrate extremely well. It only helps that they (mine) are built heavy, durable and I can get them blindingly sharp with very little effort.

Excellent point Kevin

Mike Bolin, I agree with you. Good, informative discussion, and above all, respectful. One of the things I like most about this forum!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I've not had a lot of kills with 2 blades, but the ones I have definitely put blood on the ground.... I use Simmons Tigershark and Treesharks. I've noticed that I have had the "S" cut with double bevels and have noted that there was blood from  entrance, exit, as well as blood coughed up from nose and mouth.

No right answer here.... just what oaks are comfortable with.

Good luck, shoot straight and God bless,

Rodd

Quote from: Hermon on August 06, 2018, 10:00:02 AM
Trumpkin, How would you propose to practice outside of hunting and shooting animals?  Have a buddy drip red paint through the woods?

In theory we shouldn't need blood to practice tracking. I figure going into the woods, cutting a track, and following it ought to work. I'll try to figure out the why, as much as the where.

I've used Kustom King Trailmaker three blades, Zwickey Delta 2blade and Grizzly two blade heads for the majority of my 75 plus whitetail kills. Blood trails have varied with all three heads. The quickest deer to go down other than spine shot was with a Grizzly head-literally 15 yards. Every deer I hit well was found just out of sight, mostly by walking to the last landmark I saw the deer pass and it was found shortly after.  I agree with the above statement about a bottom exit wound being the key no matter what head.  If you're taking out both lungs you should find your deer just out of sight or in compass line of where you last heard it in thick cover.  Don't over think this.  Accuracy and sharpness (both equally important) trump all else.

Quote from: Kevin Dill on August 06, 2018, 05:54:48 PM
I used to advocate for big devastating heads and wounds (theoretically) but have long since tempered that with the primary desire to achieve an exit wound. Penetration wins every time when I select a broadhead and shaft. The S-cut produced by a single bevel is a documented fact, but I personally don't shoot them for an S-cut. I shoot them because they may have an advantage against bone, and because I've noted them to penetrate extremely well. It only helps that they (mine) are built heavy, durable and I can get them blindingly sharp with very little effort.

this brings into focus a different perspective on BH choice. i like kevin, aim to achieve 2 holes with the widest head possible. width of cut is certainly one factor to consider but so is length of cut and length of cut is directly related to penetration. 2 holes with the widest cut possible is my goal, the choice of BH to achieve this depends on a great amount of variables, not least being the tackle used and the target animal. i consider all these and chose the appropriate BH. lately my quiver carries up to 3 types and styles of BH. this gives me greater choice for the right tool for the job that presents itself.

A few thoughts:

I think some people misunderstand how things work in the real world.  Even if single bevels created better blood trails on average, an individual hunter may yet kill a dozen animals in a row with hardly any blood trail at all.  The mechanical advantage, S-wounds, etc. are all based on the scientific laws of Newtonian physics.  But outside the lab, those same laws are more like guidelines.  Small sample sizes often skew the results we see.

A well-respected elk hunter and author I enjoy reading is a single bevel enthusiast -- even for whitetails.  He shoots low 50# bows, 750+ grain arrows and wants as much penetration as possible.  I recall one story of hitting a whitetail in the spine (tree stand) and still having enough penetration to hit the vitals.

I haven't killed any deer with my bow yet.  But for now, I use Zwickey double bevels.  They're easier for me to sharpen, seem to work for all sorts of animals and have been around a long time.  Anything that can survive that much real-world testing and still have a ready market of buyers is reason enough to keep it at the top of the list.  For the one turkey I've gotten with the bow, it was about as clean a kill as it gets.  I may consider something like a grizzly in double bevel if I ever chase hogs or elk with my bow.  But I may just grab an eskimo or no mercy & call it good.

I totally agree with Kevin Dills statement.

This is why I use s/b grizzlies.

http://www.tradgang.com/tgsmf/index.php?topic=94824.0

When I started deer hunting the local Hi-precision plant was still operating.  Everyone except me was using them, I didn't have the right connections to get free heads.  The worst broadhead ever made.  some were stamped way crooked, some were uneven at the laminate, some were missing welding, one day word got around that they needed to be sharper than what guys were getting them.  Most used those little grey stones.  One cheep bugger just used a file on his and only sharpdnedone side of the blade because the other side, needed someone left handed to sharpen it.  He could have sharpened both sides at once like the guys with the bigger stones tried to do, but then he would need a bigger file.   He should me how they were welded and told me he was just trying to stay on just side to miss the joint.  Everyone else said that would make the head twist off the arrow.  The problem was his deer were easy to find, and he shot more deer than he was supposed to, while the other guys lost deer consistently.  I had to buy my own, I got the cheap ones with plastic ferrules and later the 135 Deadheads.  A man down the street that sharpened saws and knives for a living kept mine sharp for free.  My deer bled very well.

I shoot singles and doubles but I base my broadhead choice on flight and which ones I can get sharp as heck ---yeah forget those tuskers!!!!   

anyway if I'm really after a huge blood trail and short track I reach for the undisputed king of the short blood trails and that's the big ole 160 snuffer,,, okay maybe Big Jims 1 1/2 if he has any but the snuff as been around a lot longer and killed a lot more, easy to sharpen and always flys true huge blood trails are rewarded to all who can actually find any these days :biglaugh: 

SO any broadhead for me that actually hits "the spot" is the best broadhead hands down until the next random head hits the spot then that one is the Best and so on,,,,, NOW if any of my broadheads ever miss or I lose an animal then that broadhead gets shunned until the day I die and I'll just tell people not to buy it  :laughing:

Great discussion.

My experiences parallel close to Kevin's, though I put arrow flight right up there with the broadhead for penetration.  For me, a straight flying arrow comes first, then choose the broadhead.  With so many well made, quality broadheads out there, use the one you can sharpen and hits where you want to.  For the last 10 or 12 years the Eclipse 145 grain has been that broadhead for me.  Mostly because you can use the bleeder blades when hunting anything smaller then an elk, then take them out when hunting elk or anything larger, without having to mess too much with your arrows.

Before the Eclipse I didn't have a favorite broadhead but killed critters with the Grizzly 190 (second favorite), Magnus II, Woodsman, Snuffer, and Doug Campbell Damascus trade points.  Unlike many, I am not a fan of Zwickey's.  I had several fail (welds blew out when they hit wood/trees) and just can't make myself trust them.

With Alaskan Moose, Montana Elk, and Montana Bison (yes I hit the lottery an got one the 40 tags) scheduled for this fall the bleeder blades might not make it into the quiver this year.

Quote from: Kevin Dill on August 06, 2018, 05:54:48 PM
I'm consistently surprised that people occasionally don't understand one principle of lung wounds: You can inflict a fully penetrating wound to the lungs without severing a major blood vessel. There will still be bleeding internally but nothing like if a larger pulmonary vessel or branch is cut.

I fully understand "one principle of lung wounds" Mr. Dill. For fourteen years out of my life I was a 68-Whiskey in the United States Army and seen, as well as received more than my far share lung wounds. I'm consistently surprised that there's always someone that has tunnel vision and thinks in the nature of which this post was written.
As for me, what I look for in a broadhead is putting blood on the ground which the single beveled broadhead did not. It also lacked the "S" shaped wound channel in which I heard so much about. That's a fact in the case of the doe that I shot. 
Not everyone will have the same experience with any given broadheads. That's a fact as well.
Take care TG

Quote from: Zwickey-Fever on August 08, 2018, 05:34:59 AM

Quote from: Kevin Dill on August 06, 2018, 05:54:48 PM
I'm consistently surprised that people occasionally don't understand one principle of lung wounds: You can inflict a fully penetrating wound to the lungs without severing a major blood vessel. There will still be bleeding internally but nothing like if a larger pulmonary vessel or branch is cut.

I fully understand "one principle of lung wounds" Mr. Dill. For fourteen years out of my life I was a 68-Whiskey in the United States Army and seen, as well as received more than my far share lung wounds. I'm consistently surprised that there's always someone that has tunnel vision and thinks in the nature of which this post was written.
As for me, what I look for in a broadhead is putting blood on the ground which the single beveled broadhead did not. It also lacked the "S" shaped wound channel in which I heard so much about. That's a fact in the case of the doe that I shot. 
Not everyone will have the same experience with any given broadheads. That's a fact as well.
Take care TG

Well....geez!  :laugh: I sense some irritation in your post. You should know my post was in NO way directed at you personally, nor was it intended to impugn what you wrote. I put the lung issue out there because there's a wide assumption that penetrating lung wounds mean big blood and certain death which isn't always the case. My goal is to add meaningful knowledge and respectful dialogue to this topic...and certainly part of doing that is not accusing others of being "someone that has tunnel vision and thinks in the nature of which this post was written". Actually, I have an open mind toward learning, and I don't go negative toward others. I've enjoyed the experiences shared in this thread...including yours...and haven't felt any irritation toward anyone's post.

And by the way Zwickey...thank you sincerely for your service to our nation.

Quote from: Zwickey-Fever on August 08, 2018, 05:34:59 AM
For fourteen years out of my life I was a 68-Whiskey in the United States Army and seen, as well as received more than my far share lung wounds.

Thank you for your service! And thank you for sharing your experiences here. I don't think that Kevin was aiming any comments at you in particular.

In fact, if I exclude my own original post, I haven't seen anyone here take a particularly obnoxious or belligerent stance on the topic. It has been a refreshing discussion, so thank you everyone!

Quote from: Kevin Dill on August 08, 2018, 06:13:27 AMthere's a wide assumption that penetrating lung wounds mean big blood and certain death which isn't always the case.

Kevin, this little nugget was something I did not know, and I really appreciated learning about! I almost think that should go into a thread on shot placement/tracking tips, or something like that... there's that word again, tracking. :biglaugh:

I think some are missing a key point with single bevel heads. That is they were designed for heavy hide and heavy boned animals. Like Dangerous game. To increase penetration on those animals to get into the vitals.

Now I think it can be beneficial to those shooting very low poundage and trying to purse larger North America game. So they can get away with the lower poundage.

I have no idea why some disparage single bevel heads by insisting that they are not hunting cape buffalo, elephant, etc.  Have you never hit a whitetail or hog and failed to get adequate penetration?  While I am not hunting a rino, If my shot is a bit off and I hit the scapula I want a broadhead/arrow combination that maximizes the ability to bust through the bone and get to the vitals.

The point was with blood trails. Poor to non existent.
That's is why. The heads are narrow to increase that penetration on the large game the Ed was hunting. Not so much for external blood loss. But to get that head in to cut the vitals.
They have very good trackers in those areas of the world.

Huh.  I never realized the blood trails that I typically get using single bevel heads was that poor!  Of course, if you are hitting animals in the guts and intestines you are not going to get a good blood trail regardless of what you are using.

I don't think single bevel heads are hype as much as some people's expectations of what they'll do are unrealistic. To me it's all about choosing the right tool for the job.  I don't have a favorite broadhead that I shoot for everything.

I know with the poundage I shoot and my arrow weight there's really only one bone in a whitetail's body that I may not penetrate and get two holes with a large 3 blade broadhead.  Compare the surface area of that one bone to all the other surface area outside that bone and my odds of recovery are just better if the poo poo hits the fan with a big 3 blade.   On elk, I know I have to get through much thicker hair and hide then break two much larger ribs and get through about 20 inches of body cavity to get 2 holes....so I'm more confident with either a narrow 3 blade or a stout single bevel 2 blade.  Each person should choose based on their own personal bow / arrow setup, the animal they're hunting and their experience.         

I'll hazard a guess that the average width of 'traditional' broadheads being used today falls between 1-1/8 and 1-3/8 inches. Obviously a number of people shoot 1-1/2" and larger widths, but I'm certain a majority do not. I'll also wager the vast majority are using conventional 2-bevel broadheads, no matter how many blades they have. There is nothing wrong with any of this, as it's worked well for many decades.

Keep in mind that today's single-bevel heads are available in widths up to 1.5" and maybe beyond. I own and do hunt with 1.5" single-bevel heads...a couple different models. There is no need to think 'single bevel head' is synonymous with 'narrow, skinny head'. Narrow heads in double-bevel configuration have been around forever, too. If you shoot a typical width broadhead, you've got plenty of choices in both single and double bevel heads.

Blood trails: I don't see a difference in single versus double bevel wounds, assuming identical hits and penetration. I've seen magnificent blood trails from both head types, and I've seen nonexistent trails too. The best blood trail is the one I don't need: the animal is down in sight. Next best is the shortest possible trail because every extra yard I need to follow blood means more chances to lose it.

Incidentally, the widest Zwickey available (Delta) is 1-3/8" which is more than enough to kill anything walking that bleeds. My preferred 'big' game head is also 1-3/8", but it's thicker and heavier in weight. Definitely not a skinny head.

I believe that the type of metal and the size and shape of a head can have an effect on what sharpening method works best for a blood trail with that particular head.  some heads get a nice edge with a RADA others they seem to get to much edge shatter.  Some heads like my single bevel from a blank take on a a terrific Tom Mussato style edge or a buffed edge.  I think Zwickeys hold more of a cutting edge after going through a deer with a filed edge, even though they can be easily honed to shaving sharpness.   Not sure if there is one method that is the one and only method for all heads and all people. 

I don't have a lot of experience with single bevels. That said, I've been shooting Grizzly SB's for a year now, killed one whitetail with them last season. Clean pass thru, tons of blood. Very simple for me to sharpen, I just clean up the bevels with a fine grit belt grinder and strop, scary sharp in about a minute a broad head. The edge holds well in the quiver. They fly perfect. Personally, i'll give up a quarter inch of hole for an arrow that flies like I expect it to every time.

Also, for what it's worth, I target practice with broadheads year round, and I feel there's a lot to be said for durable broadheads. A year into them I'm still using the original 3 broadheads I designated for target use. No damage other than small nicks in the edges where they've hit each other. I don't think I've used any other broadhead that lasted more than a month on the targets, and I've had a few fail miserably in deer.

I've often wondered upon the small diameter of many popular single bevel broad heads, for example grizzlies, Cutthroats, etc...which have a cut diameter of 1"-1 1/8". Seems like an awful small slit to me. I use single bevels for the main reason that the animals that I shoot at have bones. That is the beauty of single bevels, when you hit nothing but flesh they'll penetrate very similarly to a double bevel; but when you hit bone, well, that's when we separate the men from the boys. Also, I think that the rotation of a single bevel is dependent on the density of the medium. So, if you hit nothing but skin you may not even see rotation. But when that head encounters resistance, meat, gristle, bone, the good stuff, it will rotate. IMHO, the ideal broadhead for North American big game will be a single bevel, two blade, with a 1 1/4"-1 1/2" cut diameter. Which, btw, are not real numerous...the majority seem to be below 1 1/4" cut diameter. Now all that I just said is presupposing a 50#+ bow....and a 500+ grain arrow :)

...oh, and a straight flying arrow...

This is a good discussion. Like golfers choose different clubs for different shots, I like to choose heads based on game. I've had good luck with the narrow Tuffhead for moose (penetration on a big animal that tends not to jump the string), but like the three blades for deer or bear (they can react to the shot sound or have heavy fat and fur). I am brobably at a disadvantage pairing the 1 inch broadhead to a large diameter shaft like 2219 aluminum. I guess its just confidence and preference. Mike

[attachment=1]

Speaking of keeping them sharp in the quiver.  Does anyone know of a hip quiver that has double arrow grips instead of having to stick your heads in foam?  I'm thinking of buying a regular bow quiver set up that way and crafting a mount for hip carry to get what I want.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

Quote from: Herdbull on August 08, 2018, 10:27:22 PM
This is a good discussion. Like golfers choose different clubs for different shots, I like to choose heads based on game. I've had good luck with the narrow Tuffhead for moose (penetration on a big animal that tends not to jump the string), but like the three blades for deer or bear (they can react to the shot sound or have heavy fat and fur). I am brobably at a disadvantage pairing the 1 inch broadhead to a large diameter shaft like 2219 aluminum. I guess its just confidence and preference. Mike

[attachment=1,msg2812471]

I would venture to say that any animal you are hunting is the one at the disadvantage!!!!

Bisch

This has been very educational, and informative to me.  Just before this thread started I was thinking about which, or what type of broadhead to shoot out of my 42# Java Man Elkheart.  I'm still not exactly sure since everyone has raised many pros, and cons as to which one works best.  The two main things that keep coming up is sharpness, and placement, both of which I try to achieve, (unfortunately my towards sometimes is a little off  :biglaugh:).  Thanks to all who have passed along their experiences, and knowledge.

Jason

Grizzly also has the double bevel.  Just for a comparison of the long narrow heads.  I have never had any trouble finding a hit deer shot with file sharpened Schulz Hunter's Heads, some of them as well were barely an inch wide when they did their work.  I have lost a number of them due to pass throughs, but i was surprised every time how deadly they can be on deer.   I would like to say that is an obvious huge difference between those, my single bevel Hills to single bevel Grizzlies to the wide Deadheads, but the differences seem to be more related to hit location than anything when it comes to blood on the ground and the distance the deer covered after the hit.  As for penetration, through the animal is through the animal when deer is the medium.  A buffalo would would certainly show different results, I think, maybe.

Quote from: pavan on August 09, 2018, 06:38:24 PM
but the differences seem to be more related to hit location than anything when it comes to blood on the ground and the distance the deer covered after the hit. 

While I will agree with you that shot location has a LOT to do with distance covered after the hit, I have to disagree with you that it has a lot to do with blood on the ground!

This deer only went 40yds, and there was not a drop of blood on the ground between where I shot her, and where she died!

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180810/ac43dd58f4efaafff4fe33e9cae97f1a.jpg)

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180810/8e8aaf9c35d37ca0781b66bc8629ee83.jpg)

I thought for a while I was not going to find her because it was so thick!

After using many different broadheads over the years, I am convinced it is narrow 2-blade broadheads that consistently have poorer blood trails on the ground than wider 2-blades or 3 or 4 blade heads.

Bisch



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Quote from: Bisch on August 10, 2018, 10:55:07 AM
After using many different broadheads over the years, I am convinced it is narrow 2-blade broadheads that consistently have poorer blood trails on the ground than wider 2-blades or 3 or 4 blade heads.

Bisch

What is your definition of the line between narrow and wide?  Just curious.

Dang Bisch, thats pretty amazing!

As is Mike Yancey's..with a 3 blade!

2 money shots with no blood!

This has been a really good thread and some eye-opening experiences for sure...things that make a guy scratch is head for sure. Thanks to everyone for their info and contributions.

A couple years ago, when Grizzly was talking about a new head, I was hoping it would be a nice wide 1 3/8"+ single bevel...but alas...it wasnt.

I'm not a single bevel devotee...I like them and believe they offer benefits over the same size double bevel and they are they easiest thing in the world to sharpen plus they get insanely sharp.

Probably stick with my Grizzly 3 bld or woodsmans...its just a harder hole to plug up.

Quote from: Hermon on August 10, 2018, 11:44:25 AM

Quote from: Bisch on August 10, 2018, 10:55:07 AM
After using many different broadheads over the years, I am convinced it is narrow 2-blade broadheads that consistently have poorer blood trails on the ground than wider 2-blades or 3 or 4 blade heads.

Bisch

What is your definition of the line between narrow and wide?  Just curious.

All I know is 1 1/8" 2-blades consistently yield much poorer blood trails than 1 1/2" 2-blades. Those are the ones I have the most experience with.

Bisch

I agree.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

(http://i1180.photobucket.com/albums/x409/manehonkie/20180810_133650.jpg) (http://s1180.photobucket.com/user/manehonkie/media/20180810_133650.jpg.html)

I don't necassarily believe that penetration has to come at the expense of cutting diameter, but tip integrity has become a high priority for me. This Simmons was shot at a doe at about 12 yards quartering away. The arrow hit her opposing shoulder blade and bounced all the way back out of the deer. There was blood on the ground where the shot hit but not a drop for the 60 yards she traveled. I luckily saw her drop but without a pass through combined with a high angle no blood hit the ground.

Crap.  That it the first Simmons head that I have ever seen bent like that.  Guessing you found the arrow much later?

I seem to recall leaving it by my treestand and my Uncle retrieved it a little later when he hunted there. It looks all rusty because I never cleaned the blood off. It sits on my shelf as a conversation piece. Simmons discontinued this model so I'm guessing it had similar failures elsewhere.

There are no magic bullets/broadheads - seems we chase our tails looking for one all the time. When I go fishing I carry a myriad of lures with me yet I only use a certain five!? why I have confidence in them. Same goes with all equipment - Use what you have confidence in and you will hunt better/harder - maybe confidence IS the magic bullet???

J

Okay, several of our online experts have established that a 1 1/8" diameter broadhead is too "skinny" to result in good bloodtrails.  Last time I checked the Zwickey Eskimo double bevel broadhead was 1 1/8" in diameter.  I think the Bear Razorhead was the same width but am not 100% certain on that.  Those two broadheads have probably caused the death or more animals than all other broadheads combined!  Yes, given a choice I would prefer the widest broadhead that will achieve complete penetration but to insist that 1 1/8" is too "skinny" is to ignore 50+ years of bowhunting history.

Quote from: JohnV on August 14, 2018, 10:01:40 AM
Okay, several of our online experts have established that a 1 1/8" diameter broadhead is too "skinny" to result in good bloodtrails.  Last time I checked the Zwickey Eskimo double bevel broadhead was 1 1/8" in diameter.  I think the Bear Razorhead was the same width but am not 100% certain on that.  Those two broadheads have probably caused the death or more animals than all other broadheads combined!  Yes, given a choice I would prefer the widest broadhead that will achieve complete penetration but to insist that 1 1/8" is too "skinny" is to ignore 50+ years of bowhunting history.

If that was aimed at me, I have a response!!! I am certainly no expert, but I do have lots of years of first hand experience doing this. And my post above was just my observations using many different broadheads over the years. I never "insisted" anything. And, yes, I know there have been a bazillion critters killed with 1 1/8" broadheads; I killed a fair share myself. I just have had waaaay better, and more consistent blood trails with wider heads!

Bisch

Quote from: JohnV on August 14, 2018, 10:01:40 AM
Okay, several of our online experts have established that a 1 1/8" diameter broadhead is too "skinny" to result in good bloodtrails.  Last time I checked the Zwickey Eskimo double bevel broadhead was 1 1/8" in diameter.  I think the Bear Razorhead was the same width but am not 100% certain on that.  Those two broadheads have probably caused the death or more animals than all other broadheads combined!  Yes, given a choice I would prefer the widest broadhead that will achieve complete penetration but to insist that 1 1/8" is too "skinny" is to ignore 50+ years of bowhunting history.

I dont think any one said they're too skinny, just that they leave consistently less blood on the ground than a wider head...makes sense.

As far as archery history goes, its just that, history...should we ignore improvement that have been made?

Quote from: WESTBROOK on August 14, 2018, 03:09:24 PM

Quote from: JohnV on August 14, 2018, 10:01:40 AM
Okay, several of our online experts have established that a 1 1/8" diameter broadhead is too "skinny" to result in good bloodtrails.  Last time I checked the Zwickey Eskimo double bevel broadhead was 1 1/8" in diameter.  I think the Bear Razorhead was the same width but am not 100% certain on that.  Those two broadheads have probably caused the death or more animals than all other broadheads combined!  Yes, given a choice I would prefer the widest broadhead that will achieve complete penetration but to insist that 1 1/8" is too "skinny" is to ignore 50+ years of bowhunting history.

I dont think any one said they're too skinny, just that they leave consistently less blood on the ground than a wider head...makes sense.

As far as archery history goes, its just that, history...should we ignore improvement that have been made?

Absolutely.

Considering the no blood doe that B posted, compared to the heavy blood trails that i have had with similar hits, I am not going to change how i sharpen my skinny broad heads. 

Quote from: JohnV on August 08, 2018, 10:55:31 AM
I have no idea why some disparage single bevel heads by insisting that they are not hunting cape buffalo, elephant, etc.  Have you never hit a whitetail or hog and failed to get adequate penetration?  While I am not hunting a rino, If my shot is a bit off and I hit the scapula I want a broadhead/arrow combination that maximizes the ability to bust through the bone and get to the vitals.

Not busting your chops in any way.....just curious....

What poundage is your bow, and how many scapulas have you busted through.?

Thanks.... :campfire:

My wife put a Grizzly through the scapula on the exit on a doe, on the low end of it.  The arrow was not quite a complete pass through, the feather end broke off inside the deer when it bolted.   It ran hard for about 70 yards and went down, up hill heart shot.  In another case a kid put an aluminum arrow with a Bear head through both scapulas, the bent up arrow was still in the deer when we found it.  They had trouble finding the start of the blood trail, it was light at times but steady, the deer ran into a standing corn field, the blood drops were hard to see on the dirt, but they were there.  The hit was in front of the lungs but an artery was nicked, it was enough to find the 6 pointer.  Perhaps the scapula on a smallish whitetail in no way resembles the medium Dr. A tested, but when someone is shooting a light bow with a shorter draw, his logic may be relevant to a whitetail deer hunter.

I shoot a hybrid longbow with carbon arrows that weigh about 600-650 grains.  I prefer the Abowyer Wapiti single bevel head which is 1 1/4" in width.  My longbows range from about 52-57# in draw weight.  I normally get complete penetration or passthroughs with this setup.  Blood trails tend to be very heavy.  While it is subjective, I do think I get much better blood trails than when I used Zwickey Delta 2 blades.

Several previous posters emphatically stated that 1 1/8" wide broadheads did not, in their opinion, give adequate blood trails.  Say what you want but you are basically stating that you think the broadhead is "too skinny" because then you go on to say that a wider 2 blade works just fine.  Myself and quite a few other experienced hunters disagree with that assessment.  While the wider broadhead will cut more tissue, the 1 1/8" wide broadhead will do just fine if you place a properly sharpened arrow in the right spot.  And the blood trail will be good as well.  That is all I am trying to say.

I agree with everything you said, except the "and the blood trails will be good as well" part! 1 1/8" heads work just fine. They are very efficient at killing critters when they are put in the correct place. They just don't consistently leave as good blood trails as wider heads do!

Although I have no scientific proof, here's what I think happens:

A 2-blade head cuts a slit, first thru the skin, then thru the muscle, then thru the vitals, then thru muscle, and then thru the skin on the opposite side as it exits. As the animal moves, sometimes the slit in the skin is misaligned with the underlying slits, which basically shuts off the flow. That would explain why sometimes the blood trail is awesome, and sometimes it is nearly nonexistent!

It only stands to reason, that with a wider slit there is less chance of the slits getting misaligned and shutting off the flow of blood, resulting in a higher percentage of good blood trails.

I am a firm believer that a guy should use what works for him, and that he has confidence in. Through experience, I have seen that a 1 1/2" wide head leaves more consistently better blood trails for me, so that is what I will use for certain animals like deer and small hogs. If I am hunting a tougher critter like a big hog, I will still use the 1 1/8" heads to get the extra penetration.

Bisch

For me the bigger the hole the more blood. (Not Always)

I've killed a hundred animals with Satellites and Thunderheads.  When I was young the blood trails seemed adequate and they did well for me.  Went to a G5 Montec and they did fantastic at killing but left spotty blood trails. 
Personally I like wide cut heads.   I've done some hunting with heads that apparently we can't name on here but seem to be effective out of my recurve.
I'm not the blood trailer I used to be.  I don't own a blood tracking dog.
The more blood on the ground the better off I am.   

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

I'm a whitetail deer hunter (soon black bear) and I shoot the biggest cut on contact, proven design broadhead my rig will handle. Snuffers and Zwickey Delta, and this will be my first year shooting a Simmons Shark. They are not heavy boned, thick-skinned animals and I wanna punch the biggest hole in one I have decided to take that I possibly can. Why not put every odd I can in my favor for a heavy blood trail and quick kill?

From Terry:

Administrator
Trad Bowhunter
****

TRADGANG POSTING FINE TUNING
« on: August 08, 2018, 02:21:02 PM »
QuoteModifyRemoveSplit Topic
Hello TGers!!!!!!!!

I need to make a post....no one get out of wack .....no one take this personal....its just me keeping the site 'on target'.

Lately there have been a few posts that are causing us to drift and causing a bit more confusion and doubt than need be.....I'll give and exception or two......

OK, there was a thread recently where a guy wanted to know whether a 630 grain arrow would work better than a 565 grain arrow as both shot accurate from his bow.  There were folks chiming in and all was well......of course my thoughts are either would work for MOST applications as both were over 10 grains per pound.

However, here is where the problem arose......

Not one, not 2, but THREE people started relating to their COMPOUND BOW experiences....and one guy even mentioned his experience of witnessing experiences of MECHANICAL HEADS....

Again, don't take this personal......that is NOT what this is about....

We just don't need outside 'static' causing strife and confusion to SIMPLE answers by dragging in compound comparisons......I have a 72 Toyota Landcruiser FJ40 with 14.50 x 36 Super Swampers, and IF I had a question, a reply comparing it to a Ferrari Daytona Spider would have NO relevance.....and only ADD to the confusion.... Therefore, we don't need compound bow comparison info confusing ANY questions about TRAD BOWHUNTING......as they are NOT the same and have NO relevance on the answer to TradBow concerns.

Then there came a comparison to MECHANICAL HEADS....we don't ever want ANY discussion of those type heads period.....

So there....I said what I needed to say....

All is well in the Trad Bowhunting Community HERE on TradGang.......just some minor adjustments need to be made.....and anyone seeing such confusional correspondence please hit/click moderator alert so we can handle it ASAP.

I hope you all understand and continue to enjoy the site.....

:campfire:

.

And overall, this issue gets people way more stirred up than it should.  For the exact same shot placement, the only way a smaller diameter head will put more blood on the ground is if that broadhead penetrates further or gets a second hole, and the other setup would not have.  There are instances when that will be the case, although that is most likely the minority.  And yes, it could be the difference in recovering an animal, especially if it means the difference in getting to the vitals, but if you have to go through heavy bone, your odds of success just went down no matter what equipment you use.  Whatever anyone choooses to use is up to them. Bigger wider broadhead, usually more tissue cut, smaller head ( single or double bevel) usually less tissue cut but in some cases better penetration.  Chose what you want, have fun, and don't take it personally if someone chooses to use equipment that you wouldn't chose.  Whether that means heavy versus light bows,  heavy versus light arrows, or choosing among the many great broadhead options available.  The same truth always exist.  If you put the arrow in the right spot, you will recover your game the vast majority of your time.  I would, however, encourage anyone who has a chance to use a dog for tracking if legal in your area.  It can sure make he difference of recovering a difficult animal, and more hours in bed, lol.

Quote from: pdk25 on August 15, 2018, 03:42:01 PM

Quote from: GCook on August 15, 2018, 02:48:18 PM
I've killed a hundred animals with Satellites and Thunderheads.  When I was young the blood trails seemed adequate and they did well for me.  Went to a G5 Montec and they did fantastic at killing but left spotty blood trails. 
Personally I like wide cut heads.   I've done some hunting with heads that apparently we can't name on here but seem to be effective out of my recurve.
I'm not the blood trailer I used to be.  I don't own a blood tracking dog.
The more blood on the ground the better off I am.   

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

No offense, but kills made with non trad equipment don't really equate to some of the issues faced with trad bows, where penetration can be more of an issue.  Particularly those faced by those using relatively low energy setups.  Personally, I only occasionally use single bevel heads because I have only had one animal where the choice of broadhead may have made a difference in the outcome.  That was a large boar hit in the shield with a short 3 blade.  I usually will opt for a 3 blade or slightly wider 2 blade,  as penetration isn't usually an issue for me because I shoot a higher energy setup with a longer draw weight, and typically fairly heavy arrows.    I prefer the opportunity for an improved blood trail, but there are so many variables in place that affect how good a blood trail is.  Especially on hogs.  Then again, I only have a little under 100 trad kills in the last couple years, so anything could happen in the future.

I've shot deer with a Thunderhead out of a Samick Sage and got pass through.  It's not that different. 
Hogs are tough and any head can fail you. 

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

A lot of deer and elk have been killed with Bear, Zwickey, Ace, and Journeyman heads, among others, long before the "single bevel" fad was a thing. And EFOC too. The old standards of a sharp head, well tuned arrow and good shot placement is what kills critters. Not because they are single bevel or EFOC or whatever. Someone WANTS to use that, be my guest. Doesn't mean you can forget the first three.

.

Y'all crack me up.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

Quote from: NY Yankee on August 15, 2018, 04:52:07 PM
A lot of deer and elk have been killed with Bear, Zwickey, Ace, and Journeyman heads, among others, long before the "single bevel" fad was a thing. And EFOC too. The old standards of a sharp head, well tuned arrow and good shot placement is what kills critters. Not because they are single bevel or EFOC or whatever. Someone WANTS to use that, be my guest. Doesn't mean you can forget the first three.

The single bevel "fad" has been around for about 7000 years, at least. I have several single bevel flint points found over the years.I guess they had the same discussions back then. :)
(https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1837/43339372454_67f81dcf67_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/292KBvy)Points (https://flic.kr/p/292KBvy) by okawbow (https://www.flickr.com/photos/20524843@N03/), on Flickr

(https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1794/44009590232_446efcb2e2_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2a3YDUu)Points (https://flic.kr/p/2a3YDUu) by okawbow (https://www.flickr.com/photos/20524843@N03/), on Flickr

Chuck Jones! That's a cool arrowhead! Might I posit that the single bevel was easier to form with sticks and stones on those old arrowheads? :bigsmyl:

Overall I think some fellows on here are getting too worked up about this, without reading what I actually posted to kick this thread off. I want to reiterate my intentions, and then I'm done with this thread. It is probably about time for it to die before someone gets offended.

My intended message was pretty dang simple,

Narrow single bevel heads work well at certain things. They are actually great at certain jobs!

However, they will never cut as much tissue, or spill as much blood as a big broadhead placed in the same spot if they both make 2 holes.

So please don't insist they are the ONLY ethical option, when a newcomer to the sport asks for a broadhead recommendation. Guys who intend to hunt whitetail, and are shooting 50-60 pounds with heavy arrows, need to know that other options exist. Options that CAN yield better, shorter blood trails, assuming they shoot the deer where they should.

Interesting discussion. I started with Zwickey 2 blade and recently switched to Simmons Tiger Sharks.

I had pretty good success with the former but really do like the latter better. Busted out the calipers to check the width. The sharks are 1 5/8"... which is wider than I thought. The zwicks ranged from 1 3/16 to 1 3/8. The main difference being from how much I had to file.

In the short time I have used the sharks... I will say I have had one great blood trail and one so/so on hogs. On Javis... the blood trails were terrible, but you dont always need a dog or an awesome blood trail to find a critter. Obviously it helps though. Jury is still out, but I am feeling more optimistic about thier durability.

As for double vs single bevel. I dont have much experience with single... but I don't see how it slices better... split yes, slice same.

What would be an interesting topic is serrated (ie buzzcuts).

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

Quote from: JohnV on August 15, 2018, 09:30:17 AM
I shoot a hybrid longbow with carbon arrows that weigh about 600-650 grains.  I prefer the Abowyer Wapiti single bevel head which is 1 1/4" in width.  My longbows range from about 52-57# in draw weight.  I normally get complete penetration or passthroughs with this setup.  Blood trails tend to be very heavy.  While it is subjective, I do think I get much better blood trails than when I used Zwickey Delta 2 blades.

Several previous posters emphatically stated that 1 1/8" wide broadheads did not, in their opinion, give adequate blood trails.  Say what you want but you are basically stating that you think the broadhead is "too skinny" because then you go on to say that a wider 2 blade works just fine.  Myself and quite a few other experienced hunters disagree with that assessment.  While the wider broadhead will cut more tissue, the 1 1/8" wide broadhead will do just fine if you place a properly sharpened arrow in the right spot.  And the blood trail will be good as well.  That is all I am trying to say.

John, can you answer the 2nd question I asked, and now I ask this as well....do you have any pics?....and I hope that 2nd paragraph was't directed at me. cause I think that was my 1st post on this thread.

Thanks..... :campfire:

Lol...   Come on October!!   :banghead:

Hi Terry, none of my comments were directed at you or because of anything that you said.  My comments reflect my frustrations with how many bowhunters want to dismiss single bevel broadheads, EFOC, and some other stuff as gimmics and advertising hype.  Double bevel heads work just fine...I just happen to think single bevel heads perform better based on my own personal observations.

I assume you are asking if I have any good pictures of single bevel heads busting through a scapula.  Answer is no.  I only take the typical hero pictures which are cleaned up with arrow removed and excess blood cleaned up.  I don't have an exact count but would estimate that I have killed somewhere around 5 deer where my arrow caught the back half of the scapula and managed to break through.

A scapula hit on level ground with a right angle deer is not exactly in the bread box.  In the case with my wife it was an uphill shot going away.  She was convinced that she hit way forward.  I have had similar bone contact on deer going away, but my bows were on the heavy side and never gave it much thought other than the shoulder meat that got mess up.  I have been around the public woods when tree stand hunters had high shoulder hits bad penetration hits and could not find their deer. I always asked if the deer was angling toward them.   I may be wrong, but I have not given much thought to how hard a scapula is to penetrate on a white deer, it has not seemed to be an issue with our group. It does not happen very often.

Quote from: Trumpkin the Dwarf on August 15, 2018, 07:46:08 PM
Chuck Jones! That's a cool arrowhead! Might I posit that the single bevel was easier to form with sticks and stones on those old arrowheads? :bigsmyl:

Overall I think some fellows on here are getting too worked up about this, without reading what I actually posted to kick this thread off. I want to reiterate my intentions, and then I'm done with this thread. It is probably about time for it to die before someone gets offended.

My intended message was pretty dang simple,

Narrow single bevel heads work well at certain things. They are actually great at certain jobs!

However, they will never cut as much tissue, or spill as much blood as a big broadhead placed in the same spot if they both make 2 holes.

So please don't insist they are the ONLY ethical option, when a newcomer to the sport asks for a broadhead recommendation. Guys who intend to hunt whitetail, and are shooting 50-60 pounds with heavy arrows, need to know that other options exist. Options that CAN yield better, shorter blood trails, assuming they shoot the deer where they should.

Nobody has insisted that s/b are the only ethical option. You made that up. Might want to tell somebody like Mike Mitten what other better options are out there than what he is using.

The fact is that s/b broad heads are a very lethal/deadly broad head in all hunting situations. I use single bevel grizzlys in all my hunts and have been doing so for years. I use them because I like them. They cause major internal damage and most important I can get them very sharp. I ve seen and experienced what they can do to a shoulder socket and to bone. I posted pics in and earlier post. No broad head will guarantee a good blood trail, that's a fact. Even gun shot animals may not produce a good blood trail. If you have hunted long enough you would know that. Use what you like and as long as u put them where they should go you will get a kill.

It must be August 🤓

My thoughts regarding the importance of arrow flight were expressed earlier.  My thoughts regarding broadheads, as stated by others, is to use the one you are most confident in.....You will place it where it needs to go more often. 

"Dead is dead, the critter don't much care what made him that way"

Tim Ott

The last deer I shot with a worn down Schulz HH.  My first shot went off of a dead hanging branch, I cannot believe that I didn't see it as I moved with the deer.  The arrow made a weird, 'vooink' sound as it skidded off of the stick.  The buck took a couple of big quick jumps and then said, "Wait, I am a horny young buck, time to do horny young buck stuff."  The arrow went catty corner through like he wasn't there.  There must have been blood on the ground, but i never checked. He went down in a second or two.  The arrow got ate up by switch grass never to be seen again.  The old 'what if' questions come up with threads like this.  How many of your hits are marginal and how many are perfect?  Then the question is, what works better on the marginal hits?

Quote from: amicus on August 16, 2018, 03:43:31 PM
Nobody has insisted that s/b are the only ethical option. You made that up. Might want to tell somebody like Mike Mitten what other better options are out there than what he is using.

The fact is that s/b broad heads are a very lethal/deadly broad head in all hunting situations. I use single bevel grizzlys in all my hunts and have been doing so for years. I use them because I like them. They cause major internal damage and most important I can get them very sharp. I ve seen and experienced what they can do to a shoulder socket and to bone. I posted pics in and earlier post. No broad head will guarantee a good blood trail, that's a fact. Even gun shot animals may not produce a good blood trail. If you have hunted long enough you would know that. Use what you like and as long as u put them where they should go you will get a kill.

Hey Amicus, it sounds as though you've misheard me. You will never hear me say that single bevel heads are not deadly. You are even partially correct in saying "Nobody has insisted that s/b are the only ethical option". No one in this thread has done that. However, the initial post stated that I am seeing this particular troubling trend across many social media groups discussing traditional archery. I have literally heard people say that single bevel heads cause MORE bleeding than double bevel heads. Full stop. No qualifications. There is hype around single bevels right now. With hype comes half truths and unintended falsehoods.

Please, don't take this thread as a personal attack. I was addressing a group mentality, not pointing fingers at people who make a well informed decision to use a certain broadhead. In fact, that's the entirety of my case. Trad folks with experience need to give newcomers the tools to make an informed choice on equipment.

:campfire:

Your last 3 paragraphs of the post I quoted was pretty clear. You seem to think s/b are only good for certain hunting situations. You also implied that someone was insisting that s/b was the only ethical broadhed. Not true on this thread. If your not using s/b broad heads than why even start this thread?

Relax.  Nothing in his last 3 paragraphs wasmhm incorrect.  No point in taking it personally.

Amicus, I see you're in Texas. Close to Austin perchance? Maybe we should get a beer and work this out over a good brew?

I don't think you understand what I'm saying. But I don't really want to go round in endless circles online, and get all of our hunting deprived companions up in arms in the process.

I haven't meant to insult or offend anyone, and if anyone is miffed at me (and close enough to do so) I will buy them a beer and hash it out in person.

Malachi

I would be glad to have a beer with u. I'm not taking anything personal. Just felt that there was things that needed to be addressed. If I misunderstood, I apologize.

Have a great hunting season.

Amicus, we're all good then! Good luck to you as well this season. And PM me if you're ever my way and want that beer.

I've used most every type of broadhead, and it's obvious to me that sharpness and where the animal is hit are the only consistent factors in blood trails and recovery. A deer's body is going to affect the arrow differently from every angle because it's not homogeneous, so it's a poor medium for making meaningful comparisons. I've had good and bad blood trails from Grizzlys to inch-and-a-half three blades. I've been away from this forum for several years, and it's amazing that this discussion is still going. :) They all work, and you just gotta hit 'em in the right place with enough moxie to punch through. I shot a 43# high-energy recurve for much of the last 3 seasons, using a 1" 3 blade, and it did just fine on several deer. For several years before that I shot a 51# recurve or my 60# Torges longbow with big Snuffers, my favorite head. I believe I get more blood with the 3 blade heads, and being a bit colorblind I need as much as possible! I can't say that the deer have gone down faster than the ones I've shot with Grizzlys and Zwickeys and MA2s and such, though. My wood arrows for the lighter bow are around 575 grains, and the heavier bows are 625-725 grains. I think arrow weight is every bit as important as broadhead type in getting that blood out. Six weeks until the season opens here, and I got a good buck on the camera in the woods behind my house today!

No worries about offending someone I haven't seen any of that really at all. I've seen so far is good clean discussion of respectful men.   This Thread is a testimony to the countenance of Tradgang and the members.

I had a post written and I thought I hit post but evidently I didn't.  I will check my computer in the morning to see what happened and I'll get it posted.

Many thanks guys for keeping it respectable and not letting this thread get broadside.

I have a set of Acme cedars with those really cheap 190 grain Ribtecs on them.  They take a beautiful edge.  Will they work with a 55@26" longbow for a really big Iowa buck?  He's back, all 12 points of him.  I have given out some of the 140 Ribtecs to other guys and those did a marvelous job for them, but it worked out, as i suspected, that due to the Ribtec design that they will try to rotate a little in the deer, so I gave those arrows out with right wing fletching.  I wonder how much can be gained if the edge is leaning into their natural partial rotation when going through a deer.

I'm going to show you how those 190 ribteks work on Idaho elk here in a few months..  Have them mounted on 460 grain boo arrows for a total weight of 650.  Shooting 50@26.5.  I am confident they will do the job...rotation be damned.

I have killed a bunch of deer with Tuff Heads. Great heads, durable, easy to sharpen. They penetrate awesome, fly great. I haven't noticed any less blood trail than with my other favorite, Ace.

You certainly don't NEED them, but they are great heads.

Quote from: JohnV on August 08, 2018, 05:07:12 PM
Huh.  I never realized the blood trails that I typically get using single bevel heads was that poor!  Of course, if you are hitting animals in the guts and intestines you are not going to get a good blood trail regardless of what you are using.

John....here's my take on that....there is a thread on here started  by Guru...'Do you shoot too far forward or too far back?....I want to think it was above 80% for too far back...what ever the %age was it was OVERWHELMING.  Too far back is way more likely to be the 'worst case' scenario than too far forward.

Here is what I have found, from tracking not just my animals but my friends, Camp buddies on multiple leases, and dozen and dozens of 'group' hunts, most of which occurred right here on TG  ....

I want to shoot the BEST broad head for the most occurring by far 'worst case scenario' as this has been my experiences .....

Gut shot....yes, you can argue all you want but a 4 blade or a Snuffer will leak more blood on a gut shot, and more than once I've seen multi blades pull out intestines that get caught on brush and leave a trail...and the end of the intestine trail the blood was better.  The multi blades will cut more surface and just about every pass through I've seen, the broad the non-same entrance and exit wound shot blade rotation, I can't remember a time when it didn't show.  Also, the multi blade will cut more surface through the guts and release more toxins putting the animal down faster cause it makes him sicker quicker....and no need to worry about bone on a accidental most frequent worst case scenario of shooting too far back. Putting them down with more toxins of an unfortunate gut shot again, not only happens much more frequent than too far forward, is best for both you AND the game as a most frequent worst case scenario is going to kill the animal.  So, I want every advantage I can get, and the animal is going to go down and die anyway, so it better for the animal as well.

Now, that being said, I am NOT knocking 2 blades, they certainly have a place in some folks quiver, and I have had great blood trails the times I have used wide 2 blades....and one deer I killed with a narrow Badger head(story is a thread called 'from top to bottom' or 'the upside down shot...and that doe only made two hops and killed over.....I'm very proud of that shot I had to 'manufacture' and the results of such.

Again...I'm not busting anyone's chops....just relating some facts and experiences I've had in over 3 decades.

:campfire:

The circle continues. Some continue to insist that single bevel is the only way to go and others insist that is not necessarily the case. Has anybody's mind actually been changed by all this rhetoric?

Quote from: Sam McMichael on August 17, 2018, 10:21:28 AM
The circle continues. Some continue to insist that single bevel is the only way to go and others insist that is not necessarily the case. Has anybody's mind actually been changed by all this rhetoric?

I don't know if changing minds is the point. Education, I would say. I enjoy reading others experiences with different broadheads,different tracking situations. I have been at this a long time, and I still learn something new, something to consider, every day. I can completely disagree with someone, yet learn from thier experience.

Quote from: Sam McMichael on August 17, 2018, 10:21:28 AM
The circle continues. Some continue to insist that single bevel is the only way to go and others insist that is not necessarily the case. Has anybody's mind actually been changed by all this rhetoric?

Not sure Sam, but it has some people thinking for sure....and I"m sure there are some new comers finding out what they think they should use....and THAT is a good thing.  Like I said, I am not knocking SB 2 blades.

Oh, and John, thanks for the reply on the scapulas. Do you think that a 45 to 48# bow would have done the same?...thanks.

OK, you make a valid point. I agree with you.

I've enjoyed the info exchanged and the different broadheads discussed.  Some I had not heard of.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

Since '74 I've used Razorheads, Satellite's ( anyone remember them?) which were very disappointing. Then went to Z's Black Diamonds and used them and Eskimos since.
Recently read the good Dr's single bevel report and picked up Z's No- Mercy's in left SB. 
Great debate here and hopefully by the end of the season and a few deer harvested I too will have my own opinions.
Thanks guys, good forum

The forward/back misses argument, I must admit, has me thinking...

If you divide the deer/hog up into three zones... back, middle, and forward... combine that with what your hit rates are, and then match it against which broadhead performs best in those zones, and factor in your arrow momentum... it does paint a interesting picture.

Almost like playing the shift in baseball...

Single bevel and narrow is optimal forward. Multiblade and wide is optimal back. And right in the middle..... well lots work.

But you only get to chose 1 head when you let it fly... so whats it gonna be? Seems a wider 2 blade covers your feild, although not optimal for any of the 3... it covers you pretty well.

I do think however, what really aids in recovery is making good decisions and executing good shots. I know lots of proven, effecient trad hinters... and neither thier choice of bow, arrow, or broadhead are the common denominator.

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

Yes sir Swamp I hear you I will say that you can execute the perfect shot but the animal can take a step and and they are going to take a step forward many many many more times than a step backwards.

I also believe and if folks would spend more time really practicing there shot rather than tinkering.  there would be a lot more consistent, and their Harvest due to the consistency in there execution of a shot.

Good stuff guys.... :campfire:

12 Grizzlies SB, 155 grain,  and 200 target points, 160 grain, were dropped off at my house today, so I am in the SB camp.  I like the three "circle" zones on deer, and I want to have a chance of stopping a deer with a marginal towards the shoulder hit. Note: most of the "155" grains are 150.something grains...

Analyzing my arrow kills, I would have benefitted from the SB, assuming it does penetrate and work the bone apart. Btw, been analyzing about three years now, while using 125 gr. Z Eskimos.   

I worked a 53-55 pound primitive bow that has killed down to around 44 today.  That means I need effective ammo.

These threads are golden as many have harvested way more than me.  Thanks for sharing your insights.  I am a good tracker, so I will suffer the poorer blood trail for a possibility of better chances with a bone hit.

However, Mr Green's logic is also sound. 

Quote from: Terry Green on August 17, 2018, 10:29:19 PM
Yes sir Swamp I hear you I will say that you can execute the perfect shot but the animal can take a step and and they are going to take a step forward many many many more times than a step backwards.

I also believe and if folks would spend more time really practicing there shot rather than tinkering.  there would be a lot more consistent, and their Harvest due to the consistency in there execution of a shot.

Good stuff guys.... :campfire:

Here is something else to consider. I agree an animal is more likely to take a step forward. But I have also seen that shooters tend to miss to a certain side more than others. For instance, I tend to miss left more than I am to the right. And so, the direction an animal faces plays a role in if they get hit front/back on a "missed shot".

That being said, I personally try not to account for that, as I dont want to setup a shot thinking I will miss, but in hindsight, after reflecting on poor shots, I tend to notice my forward shots have been on critters facing to the left...



Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

I don't think many would disagree that, on average, a narrow 2 blade will penetrate better , and a wide or multi blade head will put more blood on the ground, assuming full penetration. I think the more useful discussion is about single vs double bevel performance. Personally, I've killed a bunch of animals with SB Grizzlys and with the vary similar DB Ribteks, and I've noticed no difference in either penetration or blood trails. Does anyone have different experience, comparing similar SB vs DB heads?

Over the past nearly 50 years I can't blame the loss of a single animal on the broad head I was using. I can blame EXTREME difficulty to tune with some of the early heads.

I've tinkered a lot over the years.  When I returned to recurves in 2010 I was introduced to a single bevel (Helix). I wasn't completely sold. However, I watched a video where this broad head was used. The video wasn't shot for the broad head, it was just part of a TV show. But, the deer leaving was gushing blood. Impressed me (but I'm quite impressionable).

Of the last 6 deer I'v killed and a bear, I have needed a blood trail only once, the others dropped in sight. I will say my blood trail, or ability to find it, was pretty tough on that one. I can't say a multiple blade head would have yielded differently.

I could go back to other broad heads without missing a beat. Sharp, tuned, and placement (in reverse order) is key.

I'm not a millennial.  That's why I waited days to post this reply. I pretended it was snail-mail. :goldtooth:

Personally I have seen great blood trails from double bevel heads and single bevel heads. Likewise I have seen both good an bad from single bevel heads. I still shoot both today. I love STOS and Magnus double bevel heads and I love Magnus and Grizzly single bevel heads. Sometimes things can't be easily explained.

All that said, I have no doubt in my mind that I have recovered animals because of the effect of single bevel heads that would have been lost with double bevel. The most vivid was my antelope from 2016. Not sure if it was the sound coming from inside the blind or what but he spun into the arrow resulting in a forward shot and that single bevel broke both shoulders and stopped just short of exit. Was the shot perfectly placed? No, but when it left the bow it was headed to the right place.

I see a lot of these types of discussions on forums and social media and here are a few thoughts I will throw out..

1) Proper shot placement should always be assumed when discussing broadhead effectiveness.
2) With #1 said, I am a firm believer that the best arrow setup is the one that performs well when things go less than perfect. Not much will make up for a really bad shot but the right arrow can make a huge difference when the shot is marginal.
3) I want to shoot the arrow setup that gives me the best opportunity for a pass through on any ethical angle. (I will not shoot head on or quartering too) I want to know I can shoot steep quartering and still get an exit through the off shoulder. 2 holes are just always better than 1 for leaving a blood trail.