Trad Gang
Main Boards => PowWow => Topic started by: Silent footed on March 17, 2020, 03:51:12 AM
-
Okay guys, so I'm selecting the heaviest possible points for my new bow that is arriving in a week! :goldtooth:. And here is something that has always frustrated me: :banghead:
I am always forced to settle on a broadhead in part because it's easiest to match a set of field points and steel blunts to (in weight). The availability of heavier-grain-steel-glue-on-blunts always seems to be the limiting factor because the heaviest steel blunts I can find is 160gr.
Anyway, here's my problem. It's just everything needs to be tapered glue-on points matching in weight and diameter and HEAVY. I strongly prefer 11/32" but I realize I could actually end up needing 23/64" if the combination is so heavy that I can't find heavy enough spine in 11/32". so here goes:
1) glue on steel blunts (heaviest possible you know of): brand, and where to get them?
2)Glue on steel field points (exact same weight as blunts): brand, and where to get them?
3)glue on single bevel broadheads (same weight as blunts or field points): brand and where to get them?
If your combo needs woody weights or lead shot to yield a match, then that's fine, but only if it's a simple alternation; and only if the woody weights go on the broadheads because I can't afford the cost of breaking off woody weights on field points or blunts all summer.
-
I think Tuffhead does all you want in 300grs.
-
WOW. I'll have to say. They do everything I want in 300 gr! :thumbsup: I'm not sure I can justify their price though. Oh boy....
-
Yeah they are pricey.
-
Put some woody weights behind standard weight field points or broadheads.
-
190 grains Tusker Concordes (narrow slender and single bevel option) for $4,20 a piece at braveheart archery, 190 grain Field points and 190 grain blunts.
Pound a couple pieces of lead shot into the ferrule, may get you another 20-30 grains, depending on how long your taper on your arrow is.
Field points and blunts:
190 grain steel field points and 200 grain hex blunt at 3 rivers archery
or 200 grain ACE Super Express Broadhead for $6 a piece and ACE hex blunt with 200 grain and ACE 200 grain brass points directly through ace .
ACE is by far the most reasonable offering imho.
-
Adam;
Sent a couple PM.
:wavey:
-
200g is pretty easy, field points available, Ace makes 200g hex blunts and brass field points.
-
Tuffheads. I have to admit my bias though. My neighbor and good friend Jason Wojo (TUFFHEAD on here) owns the company and makes them right across the road from my house. You won't meet a nicer guy who is more passionate about traditional bow hunting and the quality of the product he puts out.
-
I'm still in love with the tuff heads.
After a conversation with wud through my inbox, I realized that I really may not want to go above 200gr though.
Here's why: My new bow that arrived is just about 63#. So starting with 60-65# spine, add 5# for the extra inch of arrow length (I shoot a 29" arrow), next, add 5# to get to 145 gr. Then add 5# to get up to 160gr, and add 5# to get up to 190. So that's 5+5+5+5+5=20#, [60-65]+20= [80-85]
That puts me as needing 80-85# arrow spine and most (except lost nation) offer only limited supplies of spines so high. I could shorten down the shaft lengths and go higher in point weight still, but as a split vision shooter who refuses to shoot a fixed crawl, I am honestly attached to those longer shafts for their shorter point-on distance.
So I don't know. It may be that the best forward of center I can achieve without unnecessarily lengthening my point-on distance, would be with 200 grains.
I suppose it's possible that the heavier spine and head weight would result in a heavy enough arrow with steep enough arc to cancel out the change in point-on distance.
I think a test kit and some 190 gr field points might be in order soon. Maybe even a pack of 200gr+ fp's too.
-
I know I could taper the shafts and that would help things a bit. Any of you guys have an idea of what kind of forward of center that would be, using 29" (back of point), 80-85# arrows with 190gr points? Just trying to think here.
-
About 18%-20% depending on arrow shaft weight and perhaps taper. Lighter shaft physical weight and 8-9-inch rear taper will bring it closer to 20%. Heavier arrow and no rear taper will be closer to 18%.
-
Thanks Orion. I am in a similar boat, trying to get a tad more FOC with tapered Maple shafts. My light BH are 160 gr and I'm fiddling with 200-250. Like SF, I really don't want to stray away from wood arrows.
:coffee: :archer2: :campfire: :thumbsup: :wavey: [size=78%] [/size]
-
Ok, I am right in your ballpark when it comes to draw length (25") and draw weight.
Most of my arrows are 28" B.O.P. I shoot instinctive.I would say with your new bow, that your spine expectation is probably a bit high.
Out of my 65#@26" Chastain recurve, I shoot Easton 2117 =.400 spine = with 185 grain broadheads.
Now, this is a recurve cut to center. Your new longbow will be cut probably 1/8 out of center. Together with the larger shaft diameter, that will require more paradox = weaker shaft. If your goal is 190 grain, then I would look in the 75-80 spine range. Best would be to get a test dozen wth 74-76-78-80# spine measured. Three shafts of each and shoot it out. I bet surewood shafts would have some of these shafts for you. Remember, that spine measuring accuracy for these poundages are generally low unless you measure with a modified tester. That means the difference is probably +/-1# of the measured value. Since you are not cut to cet
-
I’ve been shooting wood arrows for a long time. I think you don’t need to go as heavy a spine as your thinking. My experience has shown me less movement in spine as you go up in point weight than you think.
Another option I’ve done is drilling the shaft and putting weight in the shaft and then the point goes on. That adds FOC but doesn’t effect spine requirements nearly as much as adding heavier points.
-
if the correlation in weight to the blunt is the issue, and it sounds like you lose blunts as quick as i do, :thumbsup:
i converted to using pistol cases a long time ago.
the 38spl case or the 357mag cases fit the 11/32 shafts very nicely.
i snip off small pieces of lead off a fishing weight with the case on a grain scale, until it hits 125gr, then i wait for my wife to leave on an errand, put the lead in the case, and stand the case upright on the electric stove element, only takes a few minutes, to melt all the lead into the front of the case.
they are tough, extremely durable, and very cheap!!
but if you need more length to be able to add more weight you could consider longer cases-
38spl - 1.155"
357 mag- 1.29"
357 maximum - 1.605"
38x55 winchester - 2.085"
then again, the tuffheads have a very good rep! :thumbsup:, living up to their name!
-
Yeah, it could very well be high. I think the 5#/inch, 5#/20gr estimate exhibits a bit of error just by going up once in point weight anyway (let alone 3 times plus a length adjustment). So I wouldn't be surprised at all if you're right. Especially with my draw being 25" yet insisting on a 29" arrow. I'm not getting near the powerstroke with the same draw weight as the next guy who draws 28". That, alone, would require a weaker shaft. Thanks for pointing that out guys.
18-20% would be better then I'm getting currently with my setup on my old bow. And I've been wanting to experiment a bit with higher foc. So I think I will settle on the 200 gr and look into a test kit.
-
You could also get some footed shafts made....weight that doesnt effect spine. Bob Burton at Whispering Wind used to use Diamalux...some heavy stuff.
-
Absolutely; and I would prefer footed shafts (for reasons apart from the foc concerns).
But, I will not be shooting those until I am able to devote the time required to do the fitting, glueing, and dowl-cutting myself. (I don't want to pay someone else to have all the fun!) :goldtooth:
Trouble is this year, between work, practice, and sleep, I barely have the time to stain and fletch my own bare shafts. So we'll see.
-
westbrook, just curious to see how the weight of a heavy footing would not effect the dynamic spine. Not being sassy, just always keen to learn anything new! :) :thumbsup:
-
Well, I'm still not the expert, but I believe the footed shafts are built so that each finished shaft measures out properly when placed on a spine tester, sanding slightly if need be, and thus taking on the same dynamic spine in flight as any unfooted shaft built to the same specifications, and that's made possible due to spine being purely a function of properties extrinsic to the type of wood itself and, rather, intrinsic instead to an idealized structural cylinder of particular length: such as modulus of elasticity and length.