I'm aware of Ashby's research and have read/listened to enough to feel confident discussing it on at least a surface level. But I'm curious about the grading system. What sort of animal is that based on? Since most of his research was done on very large African game, are we grading an arrow based on its ability to cleanly and effectively kill a caped buffalo, or a whitetail deer? I have a couple of comments on this. 1. The quick, clean kill was 100% attributed to your shot placement. As I like to say "Dead is dead". You putting a broadhead-tipped arrow through the boiler room did that. The holes in the deer's lungs and heart don't know what made them, and they don't care. 2. In my 30 years of bowhunting, I have anecdotally noticed that animals shot with a fixed blade broadhead tend to stop much quicker than those with mechanicals, resulting in more of them tipping over in sight. My assumption is the same as many others - a good, sharp fixed head zips through them so quickly that they don't feel much of anything. Where a mechanical probably feels like getting slammed with a baseball. The same outcome in the end, but they certainly seem to elicit different reactions. I begin to get irritated with this conversation when people split hairs with deciding the superiority of one product over another based on inconsequential details like whether the deer ran 50 yards or 100 yards before dying. Once again, dead is dead. There are absolutely zero reasons not to have confidence in that setup. You're pushing a lot of weight with a high-quality, razor-sharp broadhead on the front. It will get the job done every time you put the arrow where it needs to be. That has never been questioned. Just don't let that setup give you a false sense of security in what you can or should be doing. The heavy arrow/broadhead debate bothers me because I feel like people focus on that aspect too much and not on practicing, bow/arrow tuning, and shot placement more. When Joel Turner was on the Joe Rogan podcast recently, he talked about how resistance releases are a "mechanical solution to a mental problem" regarding overcoming target panic. To a certain degree, I think this heavy arrow trend is a similar thing. It's a mechanical solution to the problem of people not practicing enough, having poor shot placement, and taking shots they shouldn't be taking. Bowhunters love to blame their equipment and not themselves. So they look for a mechanical solution in their arrow/broadhead to overcome the problem of simply not shooting the animal in the right spot. Personally speaking, I'm very happy with my 5oo-ish grain arrows shooting either mechanicals or fixed blades, and I'm very confident that if I do my job, they will do theirs as well.
I just think some put way too much thought into this topic. The native americans killed all kinds of game with primitive equipment. Fred Bear has killed large african game with recurves. Modern compounds, arrows and broadheads are superior in every way and then some. Bows are incredibly efficient, arrows are strong and recover faster and there are some awfully good, strong broadheads out there that don't cost an arm and a leg. I'm sorry, but guys like ranch fairy are simply taking an idealogy and monetizing it. For any big game in north america, you absolutely don't need 650gr arrows and single bevel, 50 dollar broadheads to get the job done efficiently. For me personally, when I build up an arrow/head combination, I try to build for foregiveness for 95% of my shots. Build an arrow thats fast enough to help for my mistakes in judging distance or if an animal ends up at 29 yards instead of 25 and I let it go with my sight at 25 yards. The heaviest arrows these guys are pushing make that game much more critical. I'm also looking at a broadhead that does well on bone and may bail me out if i'm in the shoulder area. In my opinion, thats much more important than a wide cut for max damage on a hit further back. Any broadhead will kill if you gut shoot a deer and do your part with the process of recovery. As I mentioned before, I think for whitetail and even elk, a mid weight arrow in the 450gr area with a strong, simple fixed head will be more than enough for anything in north america. Tune the bow to shoot fixed and field points to same impact and you're good to go.
This the real problem with the whole debate, not enough discussion is considered about the target animal. While I am a fan of a heavier arrow to increase chances of a pass through, what that entails depends on the animal being hunted. Is a 600+ grain arrow necessary for whitetails? Clearly not as thousands have been taken with lighter set ups. But, it is probably a good idea for elk and larger animals. What I would really like to see in future Ashby Foundation research is building on the foundational principles and the building a scale that recommends target weight and FOC ranges for arrow builds based upon the target animal. The larger the animal, the more likely a heavier arrow set up will be needed to ensure pass through, especially on shots with less than ideal shot placement. When the research starts heading that direction, this debate can probably be put to rest. Who am I kidding? This debate will never go away, just like the fixed blades vs mechanical broadheads. Some people just need something to argue about.
I’m very familiar with the principles of this and first became familiar with Ashby‘s approach close to 20 years ago. Over the years, it seems like online communities around bowhunting and archery tend to follow specific hot topics. This seems to be the latest and one of the most popular debates for the past few years. There is no doubt in my mind that these principles lead to better penetration, but they don’t take into account what you’re trading off and losing in order to gain that advantage in extra penetration. I do believe this is the optimal set up for dangerous big game or if you are shooting pigs under a feeder at 20 yards. But I believe the trade-offs on speed aren’t worth it for people like me that shoot at whitetails, mule deer, or antelope out to 40 or 50 yards. I really believe having an arrow at 285-290 fps that is medium weight with a broadhead that is appropriate for the energy you’re producing is the best option for the scenarios I’m in most often. If I can get two holes, in a slim diameter shaft, and the most cutting diameter possible in a bad shot scenario (most commonly back), then I’m happy. Today I’m shooting 530ish grain arrows at about 290fps with a 2” Spitfire XXX. They have been devastating on whitetails, antelope, and mule deer and I don’t plan on changing anytime soon.
match the setup to the animal hunted ... very simple and some over do it and over think it, but that is their choice, and I have my choice which has worked FOR ME for well over 25 yrs+ ... I sure as hell dont 'need' 80lbs and 600+ grs in a modern compound for deer or antelope or even elk, moose or big bear, now IF I was going to Africa for dangerous game, well ......
I do think there is validity to many of those factors...but the one that I disagree with the most is the 3:1 ratio. That mechanical advantage is great for splitting wood or designing a wheel chair ramp...where generating lift is the goal. But it has little to do with cutting thru something. The only way it would physically apply to broadheads is in the thickness, as that does generate a tiny bit of lift--but not with the cutting diameter. And I've found in many mediums, the extra length creates greater surface friction which impedes penetration. With compound bow speeds, shorter heads penetrate better than longer heads, all other things equal, in all of the test mediums I have used. As for weight, I prefer a medium weight arrow--460 grains--for everything in N America at least. It seems to give me enough momentum while also keeping my trajectory more flat than a heavier arrow would. I do like 20% FOC for down range flight improvement, at least out of my set up. But when I hunted Cape Buffalo, I did use a heavier arrow. I even experimented with an 1187 gr arrow--but the drop was incredible and I worried about hitting overhanging brush, so I went with a 780 gr arrow. The greater the mass, the greater the momentum, the greater the penetration--that's just physics. But I've also shot a big bull elk with a 370 gr arrow and had the vanes bury inside the elk, that was quartering toward me. So heavy may be more optimal for penetration, but not always necessary. Just my thoughts. Re broadhead design as well, when I see tests of different arrows being pushed by hand or machine thru a medium at super slow speeds, I kind of cringe because that test has little bearing on what happens at 270 fps, thru a compound bow. Broadheads do a lot more punching thru mediums than purely cutting, at least at those higher speeds. I've used a file to dull a broadhead as much as I could--like butter knife dull, and it still penetrated about the same as the razor sharp one.
I will say this about draw length, draw weight, arrow weight etc. I do not know of any bow hunter that said I wish I had not shot that deer so hard. I always had my set up heavy and hard enough to make up for an off shot, I did not take chances because of my set up but having a heavy arrow hitting hard save my bacon once, or even twice.
To be straight to the question posed - yes, I don't question or disagree with the 12 factors of penetration. Regardless of whether someone chooses to go heavy or not, those 12 points don't change.
I did notice that it's a known factor that people have been killing deer with lighter arrows so it should not be an issue yet no one brings up that when you go heavy it shows down your arrow yes, but thousands of deet have been killed with slow arrows too. Sent from my Pixel 6 using Tapatalk
