I fully understand the pro's and con's of carbon arrows with high FOC. Done that, Single bevel, that too, but when I started 125gr Field point/Broadhead was the standard. I shot my first critter with it, forward 20 years now I hear you need more BH weight.
While making up some Cedar arrows with good old Zwickey's Delta's or Eskimo's I remember when this set up was the norm. I don't know, maybe I'm just getting tired trying to keep up with the ever changing world of Trad Archery.
I love all the new ideas, new bows, arrows, BH, and all the new gear. I know this new stuff works, but the Old norm still works also.
DD.....
Funny you mention it, as I was just thinking the same thing. Just last week I pulled out some Cedars and some Aluminums with 125 grain points and broadheads. Shot well. I've had good luck with heavier set ups, but as you said, the old set ups seemed to work just fine on animals I killed back in the day.
I'm hunting this year with some old bear arrows with 125 grain broadheads I got fom Pappa Frank,shoot realy good for me out of my bows.
Those arrows are still around. Just look in my bow quiver.
Ross
I shoot 125 up front no matter the material. My woodies for hunting have No Mercy 4 blades, and my Alums I shoot Bear Razorheads w/o the bleeders and 125 thunderheads. I do not like the EFOC setups.
Still work for me!
i think going with heavier points started about the time guys started trying to get carbon shafts flying decent.
Not a thing wrong with 125 grain heads in my book.
Realistically they probably shoot a lot flatter trajectory too.
I've come full circle with my arrows, started with aluminum and 125 gr. Bears, to woodies, to carbons, and now back to woodies. My current arrows are Doug Fir shafts with 125 gr. Zwicky Eskimos and I have to utmost confidence in them. Now I just need to get a shot at some game!
I'm shooting Cedars and Fir with 160 gn points and BH's. I like the extra durability of the heavier head. I too tried the FOC and EFOC and ran out of spine real fast with wood-even tried carbons but did not like the flight; I like the feel and warmth of wood.
Another POC and 125 fan here.
I "know" that front loaded carbons will penetrate better than a wood arrow with that good ol zwickey eskimo BUT my eyes dont confirm it.
I use what I got which is anywhere from 125 grains upto 220 grains. I like he heavier heads for longevity and durability. I keep only the 160 or lighter on the woodies. They do just fine. I have a freezer that says a 500 grain surewood fir outta of a 59 pound Maddog longbow, tipped with the proven MA-3's at 125 grains, will shoot through them as quick as a 20% foc carbon anyday.
I think it is like everything else in the market today. Gotta have it because it is better. Only proven by marketing, not results. Funny, these broadheads cost as much or more per one as a half dozen of the proven. I still wander why guys can't connect the dots on tha one. God Bless
Personally, the only reason that I am shooting a heavier broadhead right now is that I have a supply of 60-65 POC from when I was younger and cannot shoot that heavy a bow any more. So I am using heavier broadheads to get the shafts to work for me. When I run out of these shafts I will probably go back to 125 bh's.
I just went to a stronger wood than cedar (they break if you look at them wrong). I started hunting with 150 gr BH, now I shoot 160 Snuffers.
QuoteOriginally posted by DesertDude:
I fully understand the pro's and con's of carbon arrows with high FOC. Done that, Single bevel, that too, but when I started 125gr Field point/Broadhead was the standard. I shot my first critter with it, forward 20 years now I hear you need more BH weight.
While making up some Cedar arrows with good old Zwickey's Delta's or Eskimo's I remember when this set up was the norm. I don't know, maybe I'm just getting tired trying to keep up with the ever changing world of Trad Archery.
I love all the new ideas, new bows, arrows, BH, and all the new gear. I know this new stuff works, but the Old norm still works also.
DD.....
I don't think anyone says it won't work or that you NEED heavy front loaded carbons to kill deer. the nature of light stiff carbons pretty much requires upping point weight to soften them up.
I shoot front loaded carbons, my wife shoots cedars (this year they are poplar) shafts with 135gr 2-blade Zwickeys up front. I've shot no deer yet this season and she is done and has shot her 2 bucks already with her MOAB and polpars......so the woods are definitely better if you ask her. :D :D
Put it where it counts and it doesn't matter as long as the head is sharp and the arrow is tuned to the bow. Her mid 40's# MOAB has gotten complete pass throughs on 3 of the 4 deer she has shot with it......all with woodies and either a 125 Magnus or a 135 Zwickey.
I'm in no way saying one is better than the other, just woundering what happened to the Old Standerd. I to shoot from 125gr bh to 160gr bh on my woods. Just thinking out loud.
Archery is like any other "leisure" activity nowadays. Be it golf or fishing etc.
We now have so many great suppliers and they need repeat business to stay in business. Get the customers to constantly upgrade or by the latest/greatest.
And the so called short cuts are always popular any any sport and short cuts cost money.
I thinks its just ease of use and time. I know its much less time consuming to sit down and have a dozen carbons up and running than to make a dozen woodies. I'm not saying the carbons are better, just faster/easier to make.
I shot woodies for years and years and carbons are relatively new to me. I'm likely going back to woodies next season as well. They smell better when broken than does broken carbon. ;)
I shot my first deer with 125gr Steel Force heads and Cedar shafts as well...I swamped to carbon because as a wheel shooter I hardly ever broke an arrow and so far the same as been with trad arrows and carbons... Plus I just love to watch that heavy arrow arc into the sweet spot each time.
You're not alone, Mark. There are plenty of us oldtimers still shooting the same arrow setups in the same type of bows that we shot thirty, forty or even fifty years ago.
I shot POCs until the late 1970s and then switched over to Easton aluminum arrows. No setup changes since then.
Mike
Messed with carbons in the off-season just for kicks, always hunt with wood and 125gr Magnus or Zwickey heads. I do have some heavier Ace heads I want to try, though...
Wood arrows with 125-160 grain heads is all I use. In my mind, that is all that is needed for anything in North America.
Fanto, I wander if all the tribes 1000 years ago have read Dr. Ashby's reports? I am sure they killed their fair share of big game animals. I don't think his reports proves anything that you claimed. However, common sense and shot placement with well tuned arrows tipped with sharp broadhheads have proven to kill foor century's, not high foc arrows. God Bless
It's really hard to beat the aroma of making cedar arrows. That's what is in my quiver with Magnus 125 grain heads. I've used Bear Razorheads for over forty years, and they too work great. I love the nostalgia of these arrows.
Bernie Bjorklund
NC Iowa/SW Wisconsin
I remember it well that it was standard ! "BACK in the day" it was unusual to have heavy heads ! There were TWO available The Howard Hill head was HEAVY at 150 grains . ( at least they weighed that on my scale no matter what they were advertised at ). AND Pearson Dead heads which came at 140 and 160 ( advertised ) MOST guys wanted the 140s cause it was closest to the 125 head THAT WAS THE NORM !
NOW that said , it was PROBABLY the reason that SOME arrows got the reputation for Erratic flight, with broad-heads! Not enough weight in the front. POSSIBLY why Pearson Dead heads and HH Bhs ALWAYS flew so well for me . JUST A THOUGHT !
QuoteOriginally posted by Fanto:
Reading Dr. Ashby's testing it is very clear that high FOC (25% and up) coupled with overall arrow weight over 650grns is required to lethally penetrate large, heavy boned animals like asiatic water buffalo.
Its a peace of mind thing for us novices I think, if you know your arrow will split a buffalo rib, penetrate both lungs and then exit the far side of the ribcage, then surely a deer or goat will be cleanly killed with one shot.
Absolutely, but 99% of hunters are using water-buffalo set-ups for whitetails. A 125 grn head is plenty for most north american game. In fact, stone points often weigh considerably less than 100 grns and they have been bringing down north america game for thousands of years...
I'm shooting 125s this year. I'll let you know what penetration looks like when I bag something bigger than a racoon...
Been shooting cedars and 125 Eskimos since the beginning, over 40 years ago. Never deviated and see no reason to start. Heck, I don't even know what FOC or EFOC means, nor do I care. Glad to hear there are some other old timers here.
Hell you can put lights and whirly-gigs on your arrows now too... doesn't mean I'm gonna do it.
125's and POC or Douglas Fir is all you will ever see in my quiver. No reason to change.
Well, quality cedar has gotten hard and harder to come by.
Newer bows are also getting more efficient, which means we need higher spine weights, which makes the shortage of good cedar even harder to live with.
Both have pushed us into looking at other arrow materials (like we needed a push, right?). Once you start messing around with "artificial" arrow shafts, you can get crazy spines and start playing with things like more point weight.
I think is just easier to put together a great arrow with carbon and high FOC than it is to put together cedar shaft.
I was thinking along the same lines this weekend. I used to worry sbout overall arrow weight. Now I'm thinking FOC....
60-65 or 55-60 125 gr up front,cedar, poplar, ash or laminated birch....fly very well for me!
When I don't have a primative stone tipped arrow on the string, I am shooting zwickey eskimos on POC shafts out of my selfbow. They fly quick, flat and straight!
Next year for me. I am going back to 145 or 160 up front on wood. Shooting 220 grain BH on fir shaft at this time. Into the season and my brain is used to this arrow flight pattern. I am going back next year to get a little faster arrow. 125-160 on the nose has worked for along time. Just get the spine right for that weight BH.
What happened? You got old Mark! haha Just kidding. I totally agree. The pendulum has swung a long way to one side and is slowly coming back to center again. 125-160gr heads have killed a lot of animals over the decades. Since I'm not hunting water buffalo I'll stick with my setup. Good hunting buddy!
Lighter weight shafts and arrows with 125 grain broadheads have been killing things just fine for a long time, will continue to do so and are obviously up to the task. That doesn't mean we can't do better. The experiences of many hunters, and the Ashby studies in particular, have proven that there are real advantages to heavy arrows and high FOC's, especially with marginal and bone hits.
The Ashby studies started out with deer size game and the findings are very applicable to deer. He had to move up to the heavy stuff to test the equipment to its limits.
I'm a great fan of Zwickey Deltas and won't hesitate send one toward some hair if that's what flies the best. I found myself liking heavier heads a long time ago before I ever heard about the Ashby studies. I'm currently shooting 200 grainers on my fir shafts.
QuoteOriginally posted by Brad Arnett:
I don't think anyone says it won't work or that you NEED heavy front loaded carbons to kill deer. the nature of light stiff carbons pretty much requires upping point weight to soften them up.
QuoteOriginally posted by Brad Arnett:
I thinks its just ease of use and time. I know its much less time consuming to sit down and have a dozen carbons up and running than to make a dozen woodies.
These are two of the reasons I do it. The carbons I use are a little light in GPI (under 10gpp for my setup), so I used a stiffer shaft b/c it's heavier per inch to get my total arrow weight up. Then I needed to add more tip weight since switching to a heavier spine to get them to fly straight. My setup puts me at about 10 grains per pound, but I have 250 grains up front. If I knew how to make woodies and had the tools, I'd definitely try it out and would have no problems using 125 grain heads if the arrow flew well.
The third reason is that it's less expensive for me as I already had the tools and knowledge from my compound days.
QuoteOriginally posted by AWPForester:
Fanto, I wander if all the tribes 1000 years ago have read Dr. Ashby's reports? I am sure they killed their fair share of big game animals. I don't think his reports proves anything that you claimed. However, common sense and shot placement with well tuned arrows tipped with sharp broadhheads have proven to kill foor century's, not high foc arrows. God Bless
I SWORE to myself that I wasn't going to get dragged into this debate, because you guys are right....the cedar+125gr head have killed a bazillion deer...
The above quote is not entirely accurate though...not trying to single any one out. I've heard this argument dozens of times and always go back to the reports Ashby did, not on foc, but on the tribes in papua new guinea. Those tribes shoot ridiculous amounts of FOC and have been since they acquired iron.
As for the native americans....its not as if the popularly romanticized mental image of the wise, nature-conscious, environmentally responsible indian using his trusty longbow to feed his family is entirely accurate either. When they HAD to eat, they often drove bison off of cliffs, because it is stupid to "hunt" when you have more sure-fire methods of not starving to death.
Also, while they did kill thousands of deer with flint heads and wood arrows, as soon as they got their hands on some guns they started using those, because guess what...their flint heads weren't all that effective.
Cue angry cries of "he's bashing the proud native americans!" Im not. They were survivors and they used THE MOST EFFECTIVE TOOLS THEY HAD AVAILABLE. Why shouldn't we do the same?
I Vote for the Old and Trustworhty too! :thumbsup: Call me Old Fashioned, I appreciate it!! :biglaugh:
That is what I am hunting with my friend. Cedar shafts and the Bear razor heads with out the bleeders. Works great for me.
Tom
I have 125's on carbon arrows. I use carbon because they last for a long time. I tuned my arrows for 125 grain heads because they are easy to find. I have shot through a deer and a bear with that set up.
I think a turkey fletched cedar tipped with a Zwickey is a thing of deadly beauty.
I shoot CE and heavy VPA's becuase they are also effective and bomb proof.
Life is compromise.
I try not to worry about keeping up with the trends whether they be the "ever advancing" ones or the "Let's do it old school" ones. My hunting outlook and equipment is a lot of both.
Rob
Mark that's the beauty of this sport, you can start out shooting a home made bow and arrows work your way up through longbow,recurve,compound, and then start all over again.same with the arrows,point,releases, isn't great.
(you have got to much time on your hands my friend) :thumbsup: Redant
Although I have used alum. and carbon in the past (as well as POC), two weeks ago I tagged out with a Zwickey Eskimo on a cedar shaft.
What did the arrow weigh? I don't know, nor do I care and I don't think the deer cared either, as the vintage Red Wing Hunter zipped it home!
I want to say this, This post was never ment to say what is better than the other....
This was me just thinking back when I started and guys like "Redant60/65, Rex, Bill, And Ken Hobbs were showing me the ropes and that's what they used. A wood/aluminium arrow tipped with a 125gr bh. I was not trying to single out what type of wood shaft or bh type.
Just me remembering when.........
I love this sport/way of life, I love all types of Traditional Equiptment... Just remembering When.......
DD
QuoteOriginally posted by psychmonky:
Quote
Cue angry cries of "he's bashing the proud native americans!" Im not. They were survivors and they used THE MOST EFFECTIVE TOOLS THEY HAD AVAILABLE. Why shouldn't we do the same? [/b]
That's exactly why compound shooters can't understand why we use such "limited" weapons. :saywhat:
I've always liked to change around and try different setups when it came to broaheads.
I started out back in the mid 60's with 125gr Bear and aluminum shafts..never shot wood shafts. But it didn't take me long before I was shooting Dead Heads and Goshawks. Can't remember what grain they were..140 or 160 I think.
I shoot Simmons 190gr Tree Sharks on carbon shafts now and really for the first time can't see myself switching to anything else.
DesertDude, I'm with you. I either shoot 125 or 145 grain broadheads, depending on which bow I'm using. I shoot 55# or 65# hunting bows and have found that arrow performance is very acceptable as long as it is tuned well. I have never been a great tinkerer, so fiddling with the FOC, adding weights, etc. just does not float my boat.
Maybe if I hunted the very large or dangerous game, I would re-think all of this, but with the whitetails at the distance I shoot, I already get plenty of penetration. You can only get two holes with a single arrow, one going in and one coming out the other side. The "standard" as you refer to it works just fine.
One other thought, I just may be too simple minded to grasp all the technical stuff.
QuoteOriginally posted by DesertDude:
I fully understand the pro's and con's of carbon arrows with high FOC. Done that, Single bevel, that too, but when I started 125gr Field point/Broadhead was the standard. I shot my first critter with it, forward 20 years now I hear you need more BH weight.
DD.....
Most of my hunting arrows are cedar & 125 (or 130 gr) broadhead tipped. Same for target & blunts. The rest are Douglas fir but still the same file sharpened single-blade double edged beveled file-sharpened heads.
All I'll likely ever use. I just happen to like making and shooting wood arrows.
Agree!
I guess it comes down to time and money for me.
I LOVE building and shooting wood arrows, but I shoot alot, and carbon arrows have saved me alot of time and money...ALOT!!!
One tribe in New Guinea? One tribe in the whole world bro? I can find a white deer if I look for one but they are by no means the standard or the norm. Bone and rock weigh a lot less than steel. Pretty easy to determine. American Indians took to the gun for the same reason you would have. It doesn't prove anyone right or wrong. It just proves that smaller, physically weaker people, shooting much less efficent bows, killed what Fanto claimed wasn't possible.
So there was no misleading with my earlier comment. It was a simple and true statement. One tribe? They used the iron because it made better tips, not because it was heavier. :knothead: Basically, the same reason the Native Americans picked up the rifle. Come on, you can see that. It doesn't take a $30 broadhead and $15 arrow shaft to kill any animal.
And your idea of better has just as many test done by way more qualified people than me to show just the opposite of what you claim. Some of them 50 years ago. This high FOC isn't a new idea. :deadhorse: To each his own, and I mean that. Come on, one tribe is all you could come up with, than say they used it because of weight versus pracical purposes? Pretty much proves my point. God Bless
It's awful hard to measure and compare penetration between a wood shaft/125gr and a carbon shaft/250gr head when both arrows are stickin in the dirt after blowing through a deer. :laughing: ;)
There are a number of cedar arrows with 125 Zwickeys, Grizzlies and the Hunters Heads that were the 125 grain version stuck in the woods duff in northwest Iowa, after they flew through deer, shot by members of my family. If you find them I would like them back.
QuoteOriginally posted by pavan:
There are a number of cedar arrows with 125 Zwickeys, Grizzlies and the Hunters Heads that were the 125 grain version stuck in the woods duff in northwest Iowa, after they flew through deer, shot by members of my family. If you find them I would like them back.
You have a great way with words, Pavan.
I, for one, will be trying my first wood shafts, Surewood Douglas Firs, with 125 Eskimos up front this late-season. I cannot wait... especially since I finished the last bit of venison I had today!
Still what I use to date; if it ain't broke....
Sometimes less is more and I like to keep it simple as long as its working. I'll stick with poc. If I didn't know a guy with 4000 shafts I would reconsider.
I still shoot cedars and 125 or 130 Grizzlys. I just like the simplicity.
When I start hunting Asiatic Buf I'll switch.
When I start hunting Asiatic Buf I'll switch.
AWPForester, maybe you could list some references to lightweight setups being used to kill cape buffalo or asiatic buffalo in the remote past. My searches on the internet haven't been very succesful.
I love and still use Cedar shafts, but upgraded to Simmons broadheads, they are awesome.
QuoteOriginally posted by DesertDude:
I want to say this, This post was never ment to say what is better than the other....
DD
Surely you knew that anytime you mention carbon and wood in the same sentence it's gonna open up a can of worms, bro.
Cedar and old bear greenies for me out of my self bow. Have started using some bone and stone heads but still like my old bears and Zwickeys.
just recieved 2doz 5/16 cedars with the 125 zwickey deltas from Elite Archery,,, shoot as good as aluminums for me..
It all "worked" didn't it? We have the photos, we have the written accounts. So do flat bows but I don't see many around here using them. As did the model "T" but I don't see anybody here opting for that over thier pick'em up truck.
You know why you don't opt in for the old stuff? I'll tell ya...Margin of error/failure.
I get so tired of hearing about puttin "it" in the right place. No duh. In the traditional world, all you have is the best use of the materials that fall into that catagory, why not use them to your advantage?
Personally, if I have an arrow set-up that can punch through both shoulders of a 160 pound deer
within 15 yards I've just decreased my margin of error and opened up the front 1/3 of the chest area haven't I? Say yes, because I have.
Is the shoulder my intended point of impact? Certainly not, but it makes it easier to put "it" in the "BEST place" which is "just below and behind" the shoulder when I'm not subconciously worried about hitting the shoulder.
IMHO that's where a large number of gut shots come from...fear of the shoulder. Why fear it when you don't have to?
So if my 695 grain heavy FOC (21%) single bevel out of my little 53 pound laminated recurve happens to hit the shoulder, or the deers angle isn't "perfect", I don't care, my arrow is still headed home, and that deer isn't going far, if anywhere.
Case in point, my last 175 pound Illinois buck the shaft entered about 10 inches behind the shoulder blades alongside the spine, and exited (punched through completely) the sternum at the bend in the chest. Penetration stopped at the feathers. The deer went 10 yards and tipped.
Oh and he knew he was hit, he just about dropped to his knees. I kinda like having a shaft setup with that kind of performance out of such a minimal draw weight. Imagine the possibilities out of a 63 pound rig and 825 grain arrow set-up!
Don't tell me I got lucky, that shaft went through the top of the rib cage, entire chest cavity, and the center of the sternum with authority. Cedars and 125's have no chance of that performance. We also have the wrtten accounts of that don't we? Unfortunately very few photographs.
Are you going to push a 3 blade through all that with a 53 pound recurve? No chance. You going to do that with 10 GPP set up? No chance. Are you going to do that with a non-3:1 BH? Yes, I did it with an DB Ace. (Today I have SB grizzly's)
I had a shot opportunity I could take because of mechanical advantage. It didn't cost any more to create that opportunity either. Just some planning and a bit of patience.
Again this is not about which is better, I fully understand what carbons with high FOC have to offer. I have them made up for my bow, I'm just saying "Remember When "......... Nothing more..
I shoot both but from different bows. I have an old Chastain Wapiti that screams cedar and Zwickey. Last time I reached for it with a quiver of FOC carbons it spit at me.
Okay I said,so I have a quiver full of home made woodies just for it.
My other bows are not so opinionated, so I experiment with those.I do shoot a lot of FOC setups. Especially from my ILF, they shoot really well.
My big animals I've taken with heavy heads. Whitetails and smaller I've used both.
That Chastain has killed a lot of game.
I'm extremely confident with both.
And I'm blessed to be able to choose what I hunt with.
If I had to survive on game, I would hardly use a bow or gun. I'd have snares set up everywhere.
I understand what yer saying Mark. I am a "Sentimental Old Fuddy-Duddy" too, according to my Children. I dont mind, the Past is so full of Rich Memories and Gathered Knowledge, its hard not to be a Nostalgiac. :thumbsup: (sp) My Kids Favorite Saying is: "Yeah Dad, the way they did it 'Back In The Day'....". :campfire:
(http://i1136.photobucket.com/albums/n486/Shedrock1/P1020721.jpg)
330# bear taken down with my wimpy 52# longbow, light cedar shaft tipped with a 125 grain 3 blade. This was a pass-through. I have 100% confidence in cedar arrows and 125 gr heads. All my bows love 9-10 grains per pound, and cedar and other wood arrows with 125-160 up front does the trick.
I just made up some cedars with 125gr heads that fly great out of my selfbow. I have no doubt it will get the job done.
I use cedar or doug fir with 125-130 tips. Still works for me. from the look of this thread, I'm not the only one ;)
Hey Mark, what are you smokin' in your avatar? Haven't had me a good cigar in many moons.
My favorite for many years was 427 grain arrow with 100 grain broad heads. but the most popular broadhead weight was 125's. i think the last count was 67 elk taken in our little hunting party over the last 20 years.... all of them with light weight arrows and light weight broad heads.
Yup.... i remember ..... What i shoot now has nothing to do with the thread really. But it's human nature to want to find a more efficient system on anything you do.
I still have lots of cedar shafts and arrows, but have pre-firred doug fir for the last 20 years. 125 to 145 broadheads are all I've ever used.
I've never bought into all the FOC craze, and don't intend to. I like my gear and hunting as simple and uncomplicated as possible.
Happy hunting! :archer:
my brother and my nephew are now getting into traditional archery and hopefully bowhunting. While I shoot doug fir with 160 heads mostly...I started with Zwickey Eskimos and only switched to Ribteks after a couple welds came loose on ferrule of two eskimos.
setting up my brother and nephew...I am recommending sitka spruce arrows and 125gr Zwickey heads. :) :)
Those Ribteks are a great head. I got some from the St.Judes auction.
I think it's all good, just that my fondest remember when's were from about 50yrs ago shooting Dead Heads and Gashawks with aluminum arrows.
DD, Thanks, this is a great topic for a novice like me to read. It helps me fight the urges of chasing the next best thing and questioning a perfectly good setup. I like tinkering around like most, but I like not having to second guess either. There are a lot ways to skin a cat, and I think I better perfect one way before moving on to another :thumbsup:
i admit i get tired of the FOC EFOC speed weight 26.943216 sharpening angles on 1.37 sides of the surface with a string made from material with .035% less stretch but .000059 more speed.
I get a bow I like...a string that is made for the bow...I shoot and get them flying where I am looking....practice to ensure broadheads fly where I am looking as well....then I wax the string and check brace height every now and then. I got away from wheels 20+ years ago to be simpler...not muddy my experience with all this other crap.
thanks for the perspective...
well said, brock.
160 and 125 grain heads on wood shafts is all I use, and until I hunt water buffalo or t-rex I see no reason to change. simplicity is a beautiful thing.
I think alot of guys like to tinker with arrows and broadhead combinations. It makes things fun. Once you get your bow/arrow combination spined correctly, there is nothing left to tinker with. Thats no fun. :)
pdk25, I think the exsitence of mankind kinda suggest that like game was killed as needed with non EFOC arrows. Besides, my post said nothing about recent hunting of Asiatic Buffalo's with ultra light setups. Use what suits you, just don't expect everyone to fall head over hills in line to do the same. Cause what this original thread was about was wood arrows and 125 grain broadheads. Not how well Dr. Ashby or efoc has done, or what is needed to kill Asiatic buffalo.
BTW, the test I was referring to were done by men over the decades in targets, not animals. Which is really the only consitenet medium that can be toughted as consitent enough to give semi accurate results. But resuls tend to go both ways.
But to prove I was actually thinking with my own brain, I have watched africian tribes on you tube stab lions to death with short spears and knives. So I just assumed since the human race has multiplied to over 6 billion people now that we had a good start from eating all those animals that were touted as can only be killed by a $60 arrow with a 30% foc or higher. My mistake.
Scarne, I shot a big doe last year at 12 yards as she looked up at me head on. The arrow entered the neck below the white patch, traveled down the neck, into the boiler room and poked out the sternum. All the arrow was hanging out hanging out but the feathers. I know this because she feel in her tracks. The only reason it didn't go all the way may have been because it hit the ground and stopped.
It was with a 49 pound longbow, dacron string, and an arrow that weighed 418 grains. I shot a buck 2 weeks ago that was at 22 yards broadside. 59 pound Longbow, Ultra cam string, 500 grain doug fir tipped with a 3 blade 125 grain MA-3. Busted through both shoulders no problem. If you do the math, that is a little over 8 gpp in both cases and about 11% foc. Seems to be working just fine.
This really is getting ridiculious. It always does when you try to suggest that for your purposes, you see no need in a EFOC arrow. God BLess
QuoteOriginally posted by Scarne:
Are you going to push a 3 blade through all that with a 53 pound recurve? No chance. You going to do that with 10 GPP set up? No chance. Are you going to do that with a non-3:1 BH? Yes, I did it with an DB Ace. (Today I have SB grizzly's)
The ten-pointer on my wall would disagree with you. I shot him in 2002 at the same angle and penetrated the same things as you, with a 53# Chek-Mate Hunter II and a 475-grain arrow tipped with a Wensel Woodsman.
There were two differences though. Your deer weighed 175#, mine was 200#...dressed. Your arrow stopped at the fletching; mine burried in the dirt.
great thought provoking thread DD....
back in the 80's and 90's there was a fella named Jake Powell...some of you newer fellas probably never heard of him...anyway, out west he was/is an unsung legend. He shot almost everything in No. America, including Moose, and gobs of elk with a Pete George longbow and 400 gr. arrows and Hunter's Heads. He always said he shot completely through almost everything. That's light tackle by todays 'standards', but back then everyone looked at the fellas game tally record, not what the chrono's and test reports said. Nowadays we put alot of stock in the test reports, sometimes more than the proven track records of hunters over many, many years. There's alot of fellas shooting dangerous game setups for east coast whitetails. Why? because it's the latest and greatest?
For some situations it might be the best way to go, but for the majority of American hunters shooting American game, the cedar (lighter weight) arrows and 125 gr heads work wonderfully.
I've shot through both shoulders of many deer, bucks and does, using cedars and 125 to 160 gr heads. Deer shoulders are not an issue most of the time for most shooters and I like to aim there personally. But one thing I know, there is a vast majority of hunters out there who do not pull their bow to full draw when drawing on animals, and I think this lack of bow power is one of the main reasons of poor penetration, not light arrows.
QuoteOriginally posted by Fletcher:
Lighter weight shafts and arrows with 125 grain broadheads have been killing things just fine for a long time, will continue to do so and are obviously up to the task. That doesn't mean we can't do better.
I'm sure somewhere there's a guy with a Matthews looking at a longbow thinking the same thing. I always found it odd that while "because it's worked for generations" is apparently not acceptable when it comes to our arrows, it's the gold standard for the weapon that shoots those arrows. Seems a bit of a pot/kettle sort of thing to me.
Probably half the animals I have killed with my longbow have been with good old cedar shafts and either 135 grain Zwickey Deltas or 125 grain Woodsmans. The only reason I went to carbon was for more durability and I don't have time to make them due to college. A well made wood arrow with a 125 grain head has killed more game then any of these extreme foc arrows most are shooting these days. I believe some old guy with a last name of Bear shot and killed quite a few animals with a 125 grain broadhead.
All I want is a clean pass through. And have had plenty using 125's.
YORNOC, Smokin a CAO Brazila, I enjoyed one tonight. I sure do love this life and how traditional archery has shaped me. Alot of great friends, people I have met, All the different types of bows I have owened. Wow how cool and how blessed I'm am to be a part of it.
I'm Just Remembering when, Then and now.....
Thank you all for being part of it.... :notworthy:
QuoteOriginally posted by Jason R. Wesbrock:
QuoteOriginally posted by Fletcher:
Lighter weight shafts and arrows with 125 grain broadheads have been killing things just fine for a long time, will continue to do so and are obviously up to the task. That doesn't mean we can't do better.
I'm sure somewhere there's a guy with a Matthews looking at a longbow thinking the same thing. I always found it odd that while "because it's worked for generations" is apparently not acceptable when it comes to our arrows, it's the gold standard for the weapon that shoots those arrows. Seems a bit of a pot/kettle sort of thing to me. [/b]
Bingo, you nailed it Jason.
Wow, I guess I fall into the old school catagory. Cedar with 125 Zwickies here.
I am with Dave Mitchell ... Bingo JRW !
Douglas fir and 125 gr Woodsmans for me. I've got a bunch of cedar arrows,too.
Shooting wood just feels better to me, nothing wrong with carbon or aluminum, though.
QuoteOriginally posted by Jason R. Wesbrock:
QuoteOriginally posted by Scarne:
Are you going to push a 3 blade through all that with a 53 pound recurve? No chance. You going to do that with 10 GPP set up? No chance. Are you going to do that with a non-3:1 BH? Yes, I did it with an DB Ace. (Today I have SB grizzly's)
The ten-pointer on my wall would disagree with you. I shot him in 2002 at the same angle and penetrated the same things as you, with a 53# Chek-Mate Hunter II and a 475-grain arrow tipped with a Wensel Woodsman.
There were two differences though. Your deer weighed 175#, mine was 200#...dressed. Your arrow stopped at the fletching; mine burried in the dirt. [/b]
exactly...friend of mine shot a big black bear with a snuffer broadhead and was not doing FOC or anything...just regular arrow setup. Blew through until it hit offside upper leg...cracked leg bone even. That was with a gamegetter alum shaft if not mistaken. Good arrow flight, sharp broadheads, and proper shot placement are the ticket.....without that no amount of EFOC, FOC, SB, etc is going to make up for a poor shot.
amen
Well I for one find GOOD CEDAR hard to find and getting very expensive if you do...too bad Sweetlands not around anymore!
I killed a bunch of deer with cedar and 125 zwickeys and some with 160 snuffers. Im almost convinced that wood outpenetrates wood. I would be convinced if it werent for all the research to the contrary. I have killed 3 deer this year with high foc carbon and none of them had impressive penetration. They shoot good and are tough but they just dont penetrate as good as wood for me.
I remember shooting a big doe about 20 years with an old Ventura recurve 60 pound dacron string with a fat 23/64 cedar tipped with a 125 eskimo. The arrow caught the top of the shoulder blade, broke the spine, and then exited about 12 inches thru the offside shoulder blade. She just stiffened up and fell over.
I could tell you a bunch of stories about impressive results with wood arrows. I dont have one good story to tell about carbon penetration and Ive probably killed 20-30 deer with carbon. Seriously.
Maybe old school is really better! Dang it! Now Ive got to drag all my wood arrows back out. 8-)
I've been debating this with myself for some time. I shoot wood with 200 gr, or wood with 175 gr heads, 2 blade. It places my arrows on the heavier side with 45-50# bows. Most of my shots are within 15 yds though. So, why not go heavier for more penetration? Elk and deer.
The conclusion I came to is for the summer fun shoots where I may shoot 30+ yds, I shoot "target shafts" with 125 gr. Hunting, I go a bit heavier with the 175 and 200 gr heads. I figure ill give that another year or two and change if I need to. I shot lots of deer with light and heavy heads.
BROADHEAD SHARPNESS seemed to make the biggest difference in penetration from my personal experience.
I haven't had penetration problems with wood, even busted bear leg bones in half while bending ribteks after pass throughs with light pine shafts...lightweight wood arrows and moderately heavy 125 gr or so heads are proven performers...
one thing that I appreciate about wood, over carbon or aluminum, that I almost never see anyone talk about...maybe it's taboo or something.....
if you were to perchance miss the vitals on a big game animal and the arrow stays in the animal, cedar or other lightweight woods have a very good chance of breaking off as the animal runs through the woods, and the resulting wound can heal. With Carbon's toughness, will it break off? NO WAY, it must stay in the animal, moving around inside the flesh, festering, etc until it finally is stressed to the breaking point, or the animal dies of infection. Not my idea of a humane, hunting method if you realize that we all make poor shots now and then.
I just came back in from making more arrows. I sure do love making arrows...
POC arrows with 125 Snuffers or 135 Zwickeys up front. Always.
I like to keep it simple. Anything more complicate than that and it will start to feel like works!!!!
I'm making up a half dozen surewoods and they will be sporting 125 gr heads. Had pass throughs on my first two deer with 125 gr heads but just had to experiment. Kept going heavier and heavier but it seems I've come full circle. Kind of like why I got started in trad in the first place.
All I shoot is 125grain Magnus 2 blade broadheads.
I'm shooting Zwickeys from poplar shafts. When I shot aluminum I shot Zwickeys as well. If it ain't broke, don't try to fix it!
That's all I shoot.
POC's with the "new and improved" 120 grain Grizzlies for me!
I played with carbons, EFOC and my old aluminum shafts shafts all summer long and the closer it got to hunting season I went right back to my woodies. I'm using Surewood shafts, and 125 gr. grizzlies and ribtechs. Always worked for me and I can hear nothing but a little "whump" when I shoot. The others, no matter how well tuned, make a bit of noise that bugs me. I shoot longbows, they may not be quit as noisy with recurves that are generally more center shot. Dunno.
Good post! Seems to me that sometimes we take something as pure and simple as traditional archery and turn it into a physics and scientific nightmare, when in fact the tried and true wood shafts and 125 gr. heads have been bringing down big game for yrs.
Dont get me wrong, the advances in arrow and broadhead technology benefit us all, but sometimes i feel that we lose sight of the tools of the trade that have proven themselves time and time again, in the hands of folks such as Bear, Swinehart, Hill, Pearson, Ishi ,ETC ( you get my point).
Not being one to follow trends, and choosing the simpler, and more rewarding path of traditional archery, i choose not to not make a scientific experiment out of every trip to the range or field, i think ill stand pat with what works V.S what works, but requires a P.H.D to make it work.
History is our greatest teacher, so why not be its pupil?
What's so high tech about a carbon arrow with 250 grains on the front end with a two blade head? :dunno:
Seems pretty simple to me.
We gotta remember that Fred Bear was a great innovator and tinkerer. Somebody else figured out that if you put fiber glass on the limbs a bow would shoot "better" and last longer, etc. I wonder what Fred would be promoting if he were with us today. :confused: He would no doubt think ILF technology is the berries and I bet he would shoot carbons--just my opinion.
I actually find carbon arrows to be simpler and faster to build than woodies!
QuoteOriginally posted by ishoot4thrills:
What's so high tech about a carbon arrow with 250 grains on the front end with a two blade head? :dunno:
Seems pretty simple to me.
Very Simple Same here also when I shoot carbons, I never ment for this post to be a Pro wood and carbon bad... I was just remembering when most shot wood or aluminium arrows with 125-160 bh...
Right on DD....a 125 Magnus with a tapered port orford cedar and you're a tall dog in short grass...!! Shoots like a dart.......still love em'...
Use'm all the time, even for stumping. When I break one, the aroma of the cedar brings back all the memories of good things. Sort of like the scent of Hoppes #9 gun cleaning solvent, it's nostalgic.
Last two deer have been taken w/ cedars.
I also believe Fred Bear would be shooting carbons these days. He was very quick to embrace aluminum arrows. I still like cedar arrows. I shoot Beman MFXs out of my Widow with 250grs up front. They hit very hard. I do seem to break more carbons than woodies however. It seems that one small rock is enough to snap the end off a carbon. The woodie just sort of shakes it off.
I agree DesertDude, it sure is fun making arrows!! :cool: I am making my pal Denny, that had the Longbow gifted to him, some POCs as we speak! They are drying in the utility room, haning from THE Worlds Greatest Invention: The Wooden Spring Clothespin!! :thumbsup: 1,000,001 Uses for those simple but elegant contraptions! :archer:
DD,
I'm thinkin' you're 'remembering when' is gathering the makin's of future lyrics for some good campfire song with friends.....
May the broadheads of diversity herein bear gifts to those who read.
Notrace
Cedar and Zwickey Eskimo's are in my quiver
I think the woodies with 125 grn heads are out hunting, not braggin about all that FOC stuff and all the water buffalo that they haven't killed... :thumbsup:
I'm with Bob, cedar and Zwky eskimo's or Ace is all I use. Good old 10 percent FOC. :thumbsup: :campfire:
QuoteOriginally posted by Shedrock:
(http://i1136.photobucket.com/albums/n486/Shedrock1/P1020721.jpg)
330# bear taken down with my wimpy 52# longbow, light cedar shaft tipped with a 125 grain 3 blade. This was a pass-through. I have 100% confidence in cedar arrows and 125 gr heads. All my bows love 9-10 grains per pound, and cedar and other wood arrows with 125-160 up front does the trick.
Just sitting here reading through some old threads while I wait for our grandkids to wake up and this sure was an interesting one to say the least.
Bottom line for me is, I want consistency in my set up so that when those shooting slumps come from time to time, I know it's me and not the occasional arrow or two that's not matching up with the rest.
Besides all that stuff, Shedrock, this is the second pict of your bear I've seen and again, just wanted to say congrats one more time. THAT is a beautiful bear! :thumbsup:
QuoteOriginally posted by Shedrock:
(http://i1136.photobucket.com/albums/n486/Shedrock1/P1020721.jpg)
330# bear taken down with my wimpy 52# longbow, light cedar shaft tipped with a 125 grain 3 blade. This was a pass-through. I have 100% confidence in cedar arrows and 125 gr heads. All my bows love 9-10 grains per pound, and cedar and other wood arrows with 125-160 up front does the trick.
Just sitting here reading through some old threads while I wait for our grandkids to wake up and this sure was an interesting one to say the least.
Bottom line for me is, I want consistency in my set up so that when those shooting slumps come from time to time, I know it's me and not the occasional arrow or two that's not matching up with the rest.
Besides all that stuff, Shedrock, this is the second pict of your bear I've seen and again, just wanted to say congrats one more time. THAT is a beautiful bear! :thumbsup:
they break pretty easy :rolleyes:
(http://i1135.photobucket.com/albums/m637/cjohntalk/Kills/1352678000.jpg)
What ever happened to cedars and 125 gr. broadheads, nothing.....they are still in my quiver!
I bought some very old tapered cedars with late 50s style Bear 4 blades. These arrows are tapered for half of their length and are the most perfect cedars I have ever seen. They fly out of three of my longbows and they are going turkey hunting next spring.
That's what I'll be shooting outta my red wing hunter
Desert Dude, I'm with you! :thumbsup: Cedars and 125 gn field points/broadheads are alive and well here in Jersey. Right along side some Sitka Spruce and Dougie Firs. Wood is always more quiet to me than carbons too. :archer:
I've just started tinkering with carbons in the last 6 months and I'm already looking back at my woodies and Zwicky heads..Something magical about wooden arrows and takes more time making them up but I have a blast spending time in my shop tapering,straightening,dipping and fletching them up..Seems now I try to do everything in a weekend cause we live in a fast forward 100 mile an hour world...Reminds me of the 75 mile an hour speed limit signs..What's wrong with driving 30 mile an hour on a backroad scanning fields just before sunset?
They are like drugs,it starts as soon as you open the package,you're done!You're hooked!It has passed thru your nostril and lungs and the information is stocked into your brain. Then once you break it,it continues! You take the broken arrow and bring it right under your nose,they smell SOOOOO GOOOD!!! :readit: ;)
At the Coon Rapids shoot, when someone would destroy a carbon on a tree everyone would pull a face like they smelled a do-do. When someone would shatter a cedar on the same tree they would pick up the broken pieces and smell it. I had to chuckle about carbon shooter that asked me "Why cedar?" I handed him a piece of one my shattered arrows and 20 minutes later he was still walking around with it and sniffing it while he was waiting his turn to shoot.
I think a well balanced arrow penetrates most efficiently because it centers and delivers the enertia Not just to the point or b/h, but to the forward section of the shaft. The result of such an arrow upon impact keeps it driving straight, there by increasing penetration. A forward weighted arrow hits more like a bullet, and like a bullet becomes more easily deflected from its entrance path, there by losing penetration and enertia. This lose is countered by an increase in mass Weight. Both schools of thought work here. Personally I prefer a well balanced wooden arrow with a 125 to 160 grn. b/h for my N. american game hunting as it provides a flatter trajectory out of my medium weight bows. Just my theory on the subject.
QuoteOriginally posted by pavan:
At the Coon Rapids shoot, when someone would destroy a carbon on a tree everyone would pull a face like they smelled a do-do. When someone would shatter a cedar on the same tree they would pick up the broken pieces and smell it. I had to chuckle about carbon shooter that asked me "Why cedar?" I handed him a piece of one my shattered arrows and 20 minutes later he was still walking around with it and sniffing it while he was waiting his turn to shoot.
Does that mean you were their cedar arrow pusher that day ? :D :bigsmyl:
I'm the nostalgic type, which is why wood arrows and old-style bows are my favorite gear. I'd like to think there's still some traditional left in traditional archery. As good as they might shoot and as long as they might last I simply don't see much that is traditional about carbon arrows. That's why I don't hunt with them. Hunting with a traditional bow gives me great pleasure. It would lose alot of it's luster if the last thing I did before settling in to my deer stand was pulling a plastic arrow from my quiver. It's not a bother for many people, but it would be for me.
Along with avoiding electronic aides and getting 'up close' before shooting, for me making and using old-school arrows for hunting just makes for a much, much richer traditional experience.
TSP, you forgot the AMEN :thumbsup:
Posted by "sunset hill"...."if you were to perchance miss the vitals on a big game animal and the arrow stays in the animal, cedar or other lightweight woods have a very good chance of breaking off as the animal runs through the woods, and the resulting wound can heal. With Carbon's toughness, will it break off? NO WAY, it must stay in the animal, moving around inside the flesh, festering, etc until it finally is stressed to the breaking point, or the animal dies of infection. Not my idea of a humane, hunting method if you realize that we all make poor shots now and then."
I, personally, cannot think of a single animal that hasn't broken a carbon shaft that didn't penetrate completely. This year I killed two turkeys and 3 deer with carbon arrows. One deer and turkey were pass thrus. The others were not and I have 3 broken carbons sitting on my counter. While carbons are very tough when it comes to head on shots they seem to me to break very easily when they are bumped against a tree or if a turkey flaps its wings with the arrow protruding out both sides. One of the broken arrows was a full metal jacket!