Any opinions on performance difference of two 600 grain arrows; one 200 gr arrow w/400 grain head vs one 400 grain arrow w/200 grain head. All else equal. I know this is extreme but trying to decide where weight is most important
all else equal and the important fact of making very sure its tuned correctly the the arrow with the heavier head weight would penetrate more.
weight is defiantly better up front.
I know lots of people will disagree, but I don't think it matters, AS LONG AS THE ARROW IS FLYING PERFECTLY!
A perfectly flying arrow I believe is very important. The arrow still should have that up front weight for best penatration.
Do some reading here and then decide what works best for you.
http://tradgang.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=forum;f=24
As long as your heads are heavier than your nock and feathers, you have weight forward. That's all it takes to stabilize an arrow. I guess I'm kind of traditional in my thinking...
I'm with Don. 600 gr. is 600 gr. If the arrow is tuned properly, the entire weight is directed to the tip. It can't possibly matter if it's weighted fore or aft.
I guess it depends on what you read or who you listen to. :) I don't care as long as it tunes best how an arrow comes out.They all work.
My thought at this time is more foc in a tuned arrow will penetrate better all else being equal, especially after reading the 2007 update from Dr. Ashby on the 54# bow. Makes sense to me if the arrow is statically stiffer to handle the higher foc it would flex less on impact and recover quicker thus penetrate better, more force pushing forward less side to side. But do not sacrifice a well tuned arrow for extreme foc.
BUT, once the weighted front is past the point of impact, the lack of even weight distribution thru-out the entire length would allow the rest of the shaft to flex more easily.
Man this one is making my brain tired.....
Having too much weight towards the rear is not ballistically sound as this can induce yaw. The tail end will then attempt to pass the front end when meeting resistance.
The arrow is STIFFER (statically but equal dynamically in a tuned arrow) in a EFOC vs normal FOC arrow so it will flex less, plus since the majority of mass is thru already the lighter end follows more easily.
Got to love those legs in your avatar biggie.
It is better to have most of the weight up front as the arrow will buckle lees on impact. I wish I had of got onto heavier FOC when I first started bowhunting. I was always told the 9-10% foc was perfect but since I have gone to 25-30% penetration has gone way up. It's like shooting a heavier bow without the extra effort...Glenn...
Are you suggesting that coconuts migrate?
Coconuts migrate from the tree to the ground when they are ripe enough. But the real question is whether they penetrate the dirt better if the heavier end hits first! :bigsmyl:
Allan
Only with the help of swallows, George.
QuoteOriginally posted by Biggie Hoffman:
I'm with Don. 600 gr. is 600 gr. If the arrow is tuned properly, the entire weight is directed to the tip. It can't possibly matter if it's weighted fore or aft.
i think i understand what biggie is trying to say. that is if the arrow stays perfectly straight all 600 grains of arrow goes in the same direction and should matter where it is distributed.
where i think he is wrong is that no matter if you have a perfectly tuned arrow when it strikes something especially something solid like bone the wood and carbon flexes and the less weight you have in the back to less weight that is wasted trying to flex, and the more weight that is still "moving forward", also the more weight in the back the easier it is to make the arrow flex. just take and arrow and swing it around the more weight on the tip the more the arrow bends.
i take a really stiff arrow and cut is short then load the tip up until the arrow will spine correctly. the arrow itself is still really stiff and really hard to bends so when i hit something hard the arrow is less likely to flex or bend and should penetrate better than a normal arrow with a light tip.
jmo take it for what its worth.
Well......Maybe! :saywhat:
I try so hard not to let facts interfere with what I already am comfortable with. :knothead:
I am totally comfortable in my little corner of the world that says, "the best indicator of future performance, is past performance." Now I know some of you have worked hard to convince many of us, that there is always a better way, and no doubt there may be. However, I consider bullheadedness a gift and treasure it immensely.
I am, however, leaning toward a little more weight on the front end; unfortunately, most of that is on me and not my arrows. But I digress.
I do have a little more arrow front of center this year, more or less to see if it works any better than what I have used in the past. I probably won't know that though, since I can only shoot deer with one arrow at a time, and won't know whether the other would have done the same thing.
So....you see all of this talk is still very subjective, since you didn't shoot that deer with two arrows of different fronts of center, so you can only say it did well or it did not do well. There is no comparison unless it is in another animal, and then you still don't know because you may not have done any better on it with a different FOC.
Now for the cerebral crowd, you already know that any really scientific project has more than one model and understand; to the rest of you...like me...ignorance can be bliss.
Enjoy your hunting season, whatever your front-of-center may be, and don't worry too much about the ratios/X-squared/divided by the mass of a Big Mac. Life is too short by golly.
I think that if both arrows are tuned to the bow and flying true i would pick the 400gr. up front.I look at it this way. Say you have a .500 carbon shaft with the 200gr. up front and maybe a .340 carbon shaft with 400gr. up front to fly good out of your recurve or longbow. I would think the stiffer shaft would flex less on impact and aid in penetration.Chad
I havnt done a real experiment, because the two broadheads I used were different in size and weight. BUT, I made some woodies, and everything else the same except the broadheads, the heavier ones FAR outpenetrated the lighter ones. They were around 280-300 grains versus 130 grains, but I still think it has some validity.
Imagine you are just shooting a broadhead, and the arrow shaft and fletching is there to help the broadhead get to the target straight. All that matters is that the broadhead gets through, not the shaft.
"Imagine you are just shooting a broadhead, and the arrow shaft and fletching is there to help the broadhead get to the target straight. All that matters is that the broadhead gets through, not the shaft."
Well...yeah, but the broadhead won't get there, nor will it go through, without the rest of the arrow 8^). It's weight distribution we're talking about here, and how much goes where within the confines of the arrow itself.
What we are really dealing with here is, "degrees of better." I have no doubt that there is substance to the heavy front of center, and that it would even be more conspicuous when hunting very large game...maybe 8^). But when we are deer hunting, what has worked very well, will still work very well.
So...he said...it is all a matter of personal choice at this juncture. I have some 2314 aluminums with standard aluminum inserts, 125 grain broadhead adaptors, and Bear Razorheads attached. They fly very well and I still have a decent point on with my bow. I expect that they will penetrate very well on a relatively, narrow bodied whitetail, and I must say they pack a good whallop with a steel blunt on the end 8^).
The real test will come on squirrels with a steel blunt. Now those critters are really tough.
:biglaugh:
I love the trad gang. Superb posts, George.
Oh yeah, give me an heavy arrow everytime with a bit more weight up front...
JDS III
Let's not forget the higher foc arrow will be more stable in flight due to the longer lever arm of the fletching, thus aiding penetration with less wobble on a poor release.
"But when we are deer hunting, what has worked very well, will still work very well." But I have had times when penetration was not what I expected on whitetail with normal foc, would efoc worked? No way to know since we can not turn back time. So I switched to efoc. Time will tell if it meets my expectations over the long haul, but you are correct that the only proof would be repeatable scientific studies. Who has the time and $ for that? It is just that some of us wish to maximize our setup using current info available, that does not mean that normal foc won't work, but back to the original post the efoc would work better imo.
A couple of points to consider:
When you select a stiffer shaft, and then add extra point weight to make it shoot properly, what you are really doing is making the stiff shaft bend more to overcome the inertia of the heavy point. The end result is that the stiffer shaft bends as much as the lighter spined shaft. Otherwise, it wouldn't tune properly. I'm not sure that everybody understands that.
The most extreme case of FOC can be illustrated by a broadhead with a string tied to it. If you could somehow propel it at arrow speed, penetration would be questionable, since the broadhead would not be stable as it penetrated an animal, because of the considerable variability in the density of the tissue it was penetrating. The function of the shaft is to guide the head, whether it is in the air or inside an animal. Differences in the flexibility of the shaft at the point of impact are immaterial to the reality of pushing a sharp head through skin, muscle, organs, etc. There's so much variability in this equation that the influence of a single variable (FOC) is not likely to be detectable in reality.
Penetration is more likely to be determined by the alignment of the arrow shaft with the point when it hits the target, than the distribution of weight between the head and the shaft. An arrow that's wobbling when it hits won't penetrate well, regardless of FOC. One that's flying straight WILL penetrate well, also regardless of FOC. There may be some degree of difference, but I just can't believe that it's enough to matter significantly in the big picture. It's easy to get balled up in theoretical details.
As long as the arrow is flying right, the best way to increase penetration is to increase total arrow weight. Whether this is accomplished by a heavier shaft or a heavier head or both, the end result is the same. That much we know to be fact, based on real world evidence.
I'm not sure I followed your post correctly. But, be it a bullet or be it an arrow, if you have too much weight distributed to the rear, this extra rear weight will induce yaw as soon as the forward head meets resistance. The tail end will then attempt to pass the head end. With a bullet, it would tumble. With an arrow, you'll have wasted momentum and energy behind the head because some of the forces will be directed in the direction of the yaw. Having weight distributed FOC reduces this tendancy to yaw and therefore maximizes the momentum and energy directly behind the head going straight forward.
Any degree of weight %FOC is intended for this purpose so that the arrow is stable in flight and maintains straight penetration when meeting resistance. Having an arrow manufactured from tapered carbon allows one to maximize this weight %FOC which makes it difficult for a tuned arrow to do anything BUT straighten out and fly straight. This makes it very difficult for the tail end of the shaft to yaw when the head meets resistance which results in maximizing the momentum and energy in a straight line directly behind the head.
There is nothing new to this logic as Badminton has been played since early times in ancient Greece:^) What is new is that current tapered carbon shafts make it rather simple to obtain higher %FOC without all the work required as when using wood.
Dang it George, that "degrees of better" line killed the whole thread for me :-(
QuoteOriginally posted by George D. Stout:
Are you suggesting that coconuts migrate?
Not at all. They could be carried. ;)
Daddy Bear, I agree with you, but in the case of an arrow with more or less FOC, you don't really have the rear weighted in the arrow with less FOC. The weight of the shaft is equally distributed from the nock to the point, with the insignificant exception of the feathers, which weigh only a few grains. It's not like you have weights on both ends of a weightless shaft.
The yaw you refer to becomes evident only if lateral forces come into play, which may not happen at all if the arrow is flying straight when it hits. If the weight is all perfectly aligned with the shaft at impact, it will go straight in. One could conceivably argue that a heavier shaft in alignment would have better resistance to lateral forces during penetration due to higher momentum, and lead to improved penetration.
Like I said, it's easy to get balled up in the details. :)
Don from my point of view, the stiffer spine / heavier tip vs lighter spine / lighter tip theory is right on when you shoot, however when the arrow hits, the weight forward is taken out of the equation and we simply have stiff and stiffer to deal with.
Most of my arrows pass right thru a deer. (or, right past them.. over, under, around). as was stated already What has worked well in the past will probably continue to work quite well.
I truly understand the theory of planning for what goes wrong, but that can be extended ad nauseum. A compound is better, a gun is better yet, where do we stop. I use a long bow for a reason, what ever that reason may be.
I intentionally stack the odds against me. Its just what is.
Chuck
Hmmmm! All I know is that my arrows with high FOC out penetrate the ones with lower FOC. This has been particularly true for my wife who shoots a bow in the mid forties at her draw length and shoots a 500 grain arrow with 200-225 grains up front. She gets great penetration with that set up...and as I indicated, after shooting for over 50 years I have never had the penetration I get with high FOC than before I tried it. Hunting from treestands, in particular, is where I see the biggest difference. If I went with a lower FOC I would be shooting a lighter spined shaft which would seem to me to be more "flexible" at impact resulting in less penetration than I would otherwise get with the stiffer shaft carrying a heavier head. I'm not trying to argue, I don't think...my experience is what it is and high FOC works better for me and for my wife.
"If the weight is all perfectly aligned with the shaft at impact"
How often is perfect alignment achieved? I would guess not very often (poor release, wind, hitting a rib etc) so the arrow will bend on impact, the higher foc arrow being 'statically' stiffer will resist the bend more and waste less energy causing deeper penetration.
Bill, if it works better, that's the important thing. Theories are fun, but reality is what counts. I've learned to never say always or never. :)
katman, I do all this tuning and practicing to be pretty darned sure that my arrow will be flying straight when it hits. :) If it's not, I know it won't penetrate well, no matter how much it weighs or how the weight is distributed. That's the bottom line for me.
Thanks everyone. Don Stokes analogy of 600 gr BH on a string traveling at 180 fps would not have much penetration, therefore it seems that arrow weight is very important. Seems that 500 gr shaft @ 180 fps would push 100 gr head deeper into ground. Try shooting 600 gr arrows straight up (wearing bullet-proof hardhat), one 150 head/450 shaft vs 250 head/350 shaft. Each arrow would have stabilized to its maximum and the heavier shaft should win???????
Don, you explain things quite nicely and I totally agree.
Reading this post I kept thinking about the old demo's they used to show in some magazines where a hi velocity bullet was fired into a bucket full of sand and didn't exit the other side then an arrow was shot into it and it either went clear through or if it stopped, it still penetrated out the far side.
Now part of that is due to a bullet expanding but a lot of it has to do with the arrow shaft pushing from behind. The bullet would be close to Don's example of a broadhead with a string behind it only it's even more extreme like a broadhead flying by itself.
In my mind, balance and moderation take the day. It's like speed versus forgiveness. Sure moderation may not give you the "most" but it is consistent and predictable. If a balance of weight between head and shaft is sufficient, why push the envelope at all? How far through a deer do you need to shoot to kill it? tune what you got to it's optimum performance and go hunting.
Bowdog, you might want an arrow-proof hardhat- remember that bucket of sand?? :)
QuoteOriginally posted by bowdog1:
Don Stokes analogy of 600 gr BH on a string traveling at 180 fps would not have much penetration
That's just 'cuz it would be awfully hard to get a string arrow tuned to any of our bows. :biglaugh:
Seriously, the more weight you have to the rear of an arrow, the more the shaft will flex on impact, decreasing penetration.
Somebody get me a bucket of sand!!!
It irritates people when they find out they may not have the final solution 8^).
Hey Mom....you're not gonna put that sand in your arrows are ya? :saywhat:
Hey George! You might be on to something there!
:notworthy: :archer:
why are people comparing what a bullet does in sand and what an arrow does?
the arrow will out penetrate the bullet because of momentum, the arrow weighs a lot compare to a bullet. yes the bullet has a lot more "kinetic energy" but that just goes to show you how bad kinetic energy is in relation to predicting penetration. momentum is how you predict penetration.
why would a 600 grain broad head with a string attached to it have anything to do with how it penetrates. tie a 20 foot string to one of your arrows and shoot it. it still fly's and it still penetrates. no difference. if you could somehow propel the broadhead 180fps it would out penetrate any cedar shaft of the same weight.
if you want to talk about bullets a bullet doesn't need any weighted shaft behind it to penetrate. it is basically a light broadhead flying really fast.
indians have been killing animals with stone points for thousands of years. you should be fine with any "normal" foc, to steal a line efoc is just a higher degree of better.
"if you want to talk about bullets a bullet doesn't need any weighted shaft behind it to penetrate. it is basically a light broadhead flying really fast."
Well, I guess that's why I compared it eh? :bigsmyl:
I must say that these front of center discussions are interesting for old pharts like me. They actually make me try new things (shhhuuuudddder). I had an opportunity to buy some aluminum arrows at a very cheap price...$19.95 for the dozen, already fletched with 5" feathers. They are 2314 which would normally be too stiff for my bows at a 28 1/2" arrow length.
So....I bought some 125 grain steel broadhead adaptors and mounted my old Bear Razorheads on them. The total arrow weight is about 565'ish and they fly great....out of both my recurve (52#) and longbow (57#). I wouldn't call these extreme front of center, but they are more than I usually shoot and I certainly can't complain about the result.
I'll post some more about them when I see how well they do on game. I have no doubt they will be very good.