Bowsite.com

Also, where we think we hit an animal and where we actually do isn't always the same. Working with video crews has proven that many times.

Good luck. Man, I think I was 16 before I went 57 yards away from home on vacation. :-)

That's a long poke. It's a light arrow. Lot's of variables here. Learn from them regardless of the outcome. Look for him until you find him or are out of options. Good luck and God Bless

Hope u do though!!

Hope you find him though.

Hope you find him!

That far of a shot, you may have not been privy enough to the view of the arrow as he ran away and if it broke, it may have broken with some arrow attached and sticking out which would put you more shallow and a non-fatal shot.

Josh

I'll say this tho....on a couple of occaisions when we thought all was lost...just thru sheer determination we did find the animal....with a degree of luck thrown in.

Keep looking! Good luck.

So, yes, I'm putting it out there, be responsible and take it easy on the long shots like that. Get closer or pass it up.

If its a "I can drill that softball size spot no problem" then shootem.

If its a "I think I can...." then you risk this outcome....

8" might have been enough to take out one lung, but an elk can survive a long time on one lung, esp. if the hit was high.

That bull turned 180 and was GONE when that arrow went thru the empty air and hit the stump that behind that bull. One of those moments you never forget.

That seems to be his main game plan to begin with. First elk, a marginal arrow weight, and too long a shot. What did he expect?

Like others, I hope you find him, but at this point that also would be mostly luck. The best advice, learn from this.

i think i posted that...sorry...i must have typed something other than what i meant to express...thats not my game plan ever for the record tho... I wasn't the one who posted the story .... all i meant to say was we have found animals after the track and blood had been lost and it appeared helpless. We just continued to search blindly, after all once you lose the track /blood, thats really all you are doing. My only point was to the original poster and it was simply to keep looking / keep the faith kinda thing....sometimes even after the trail has been lost you can get lucky and find the animal and or pick up the trail again. Thats why I added with some luck thrown in....

Not all circling birds will be over a dead critter and sometimes birds never get on a critter, but if you see birds, go look!

That being said, I would spend as much time as possible trying to locate him.

Best of Luck, Jeff

No, just poor use of the possessive on my part. I edited my post.

Ethical is a matter of ones opinion and skill.

Increasing your odds has a place in bowhunting.

Hope you find him, if not, don't beat yourself up, just learn from it like we all do.

Good luck...its still possible.

Best of luck w/ your search

I've lost elk too - not trying to be an a$$ .... its a learning process

But like all arrows, if you don't put the arrow in the right place, expect bad results.

Web- I'm glad you guys took a day and looked for him. Sorry to hear you didn't find him but these are the learning experiences that make us efficient hunters when we choose to learn from our mistakes. And yes you may want to consider shooting an arrow with a little more weight behind it when chasing elk. Now my only question is weather or not your guide was at your side when you took the shot? If so I think it's crazy he let you take the shot knowing your a rookie hunter.

Sorry for your poor outcome. In the future, you might look into 3 things. 1. Increased arrow weight, especially FOC. 2. a Cut on contact broadhead. 3. Closer shots will achieve better penetration because the arrow hasn't had a chance to slow down as much.

Elk are big critters with tough bones. Your set up is undoubtedly great for deer, but IMHO a bit light for elk, especially with (what I believe to be) a mechanical broadhead.

Of course this come from a guy who shoots a 50 lb stick bow, so take my opinion for what it is worth.

I do hope your guide finds the rack.

TBB

First shot - Complete pass-through entered behind shoulder and exited in front of shoulder. Near side lung was solidly hit and far side lung was hit in outer edges, but solidly hit. Second shot (3 hours later) was a pass through as well from further than 53 yards. It entered rearward of the body and exited front of the chest (he went like 5 yards after this shot and was dead).

Why was this Elk still alive after 3 hours and why no pink foamy blood? All the muscle and connective tissue of the shoulder and brisket did not allow the wound to suck - and thus let the lung deflate and blood to escape. The blood I was seeing on the ground was from the shoulder/brisket muscle.

Elk are tough - real tough. Read the evidence where the animal was when shot and go from there. Trust what you see on the ground and not what you thought you saw. Sometimes things don't work out, but learn from them.

at 57 yard, with the loss of arrow speed and momentum IMO just not enough left when the arrow got there

NvaGvUp everyone is caught up in KE still .... I wonder what % of KE is lost at 57 yards compared to 5 yards where KE is measured ? The loss of that X2 speed in the equation drops KE quickly.

I shoot 600 gr total weight for whitetails, 63# compound. I remember hunting with light arrows, compounds and recurve/longbows too. Had enough bad outcomes.

Sorry for the lost bull WEB - truly. I've been there, so much work and effort and time into it for an end result like that. I am sorry

you are stretching when you bring up howard hill. have you seen some of his videos? that guy went through more arrows than most indian tribes back in the day! ill bet between him and bear they wounded more game than most of us will ever see. In todays standards they would be considered extremely unethical by any ones standards.

michael

I've seen it many times....guys not giving elk the credit for being big tough critters that can take an arrow in a less than vital spot......and keep on going.

Guys thinking their fast and light arrows are the equal to a heavier one on elk are just plain asking for disappointment eventually.....I've seen that many times too.....I blame it on the "KE" equation where guys rationalize their UL arrow shows a high number.

57 yards shaking my damn head

50 is the new 20. Muzzy even had an add somewhere along that line I think.

I was killing time at a 'pro shop' a few weeks ago and was looking and laughing at the Rage Kore when a 'pro' approached and tried to make a sale, long story short he informed me that he is a fixed blade guy but uses the mechanicals for the 100+ yard shots.

This is what some consider bowhunting I guess.

WEB, This could be the greatest lesson in your bowhunting career. Good luck in the future.

I don't think that the solution...I think that is the problem. When it comes to hunting, we need a whole lot less confidence and more sense. We need a new method of deciding what distances we should shoot and confidence doesn't need to enter the picture. My best example of what I an eluding to is my preparation for an upcoming turkey season. If I use a Mackenzie sstrutter and target tips for practice and super light arrows in the yard under good conditions with not pressure I will become completely confident I can kill every time I pull the trigger out to 60 yards. So what I do is do everything I can to destroy my confidence...not shooting confidence but distance confidence. I get the smallest Turkey target I can find and mimic hunting conditions as close as possible and accept nothing but kill zone shots. My confidence goes from 60 to 30 real quick. Then , because I can't mimic hunting conditions pressure I reduce my new confident distance another 30%. Another way to destroy confidence it to shoot robins. A robin is the size of a turkeys kill zone....if you can't knock feathers out of a robin thin you don't need to shoot at a Turkey that same distance. I know we are talking elk, but my point is I am sure the op was confident in a 60 yard shot...probably a little farther.

And I hope that is the lesson he learns. Live elk are NOT stationary foam targets, and a hunting shot will NEVER be under as controlled a situation as when on any 3d course.

That bull I mentioned above was a once in my lifetime herd bull scoring over 350''. After that horrific 2 days I went back to that ranch 2 years later and killed this 6x7 w/ a 2 blade 580gr arrow from a 60+lbs recurve. The shot was at 30yrds w/ the bull trotting by me. Arrow was placed perfectly and poking out the other side.

You are the only one that can decide in a hunting situation and it sometimes works but the situation will never be identical.

I was told for YEARS to go heavy - and I ignored what I was being told by guys who knew way more than I did.

When I went back to compound, I stayed with heavy arrows because the concept remains the same.

Many animals are lost on close shots, bad hits, animal moves etc etc. Certainly the greater the distance the more things play into the shot until hit.

Ziek my point was accuracy - a compounder at twice the distance can outshoot most trad shooters. I've been both, there are exceptions ... but I'll stick to my comment, compounds are way more accurate.

IMO, not knowing anymore than I know, same distance and hit with a 600 gr arrow and 2 blade COI head and he's have full penetration. JMHO

When I read WEB's initial post about having taken a 57 yard shot and hitting the bull "too far forward half way up the animal" it led me to believe he simply pulled the shot at release, causing him to hit the shoulder. The exact same thing can happen when taking a shot at a deer at half that distance.

WEB, I'm sorry you weren't able to find your bull. Marginal hits happen with all bowhunters... even the judgmental ones.

Since then I have shot 3 prairie MD. Stalk. 51,55 and 65.

All dropped within sight.

Web, I really wish you'd have got him, but next time on the range pay attention to how much time it takes for that arrow to go "thunk" at 50 or 60 yards.

This Bull had all kinds of time to move considerably before the arrow got to him and they move faster than our eye's can follow.

Sorry, but what constitutes an ethical shot does not change because of the time and money involved. Rationalizing an unethical action does not make that action ethical.

Actually, it's significantly better at 20 yards than it is at 57 yards.

A shot that misses your spot by 10" at 57 yards only misses your spot by 3 1/2" at 20 yards. Dead elk at 20 yards. Not so dead elk at 57 yards.

I don't disagree and would never intentionally take what I consider to be an unethical shot. That being said, with no shot being a 100% guarantee, I personally am more likely to shoot at a slightly longer range if I am confident with the shot next month in New Mexico than I would at my home base.

Have to ask NvaGvUp though, at what range do you consider the shot to covert from ethical to nonethical? 26? 27?, etc.

"Have to ask NvaGvUp though, at what range do you consider the shot to covert from ethical to non-ethical? 26? 27?, etc."

Nice try but I'm not biting.

If I live in Iowa and I know I can put five out of five arrows into a 5" pie plate @ 40 yards every time, but can't do that at 50 yards, then it's unethical for me to take a 50 yard shot on an Iowa deer, is it not?

How does that somehow change if I'm hunting in a western state, spent a lot of money on the hunt and had to travel a long ways to get to the hunt?

It doesn't.

Your ability to shoot does not change based on where you are hunting or how much $$$ you spent on the hunt.

Stay on that horse. What you've said needs saying.

As far as arrow speed loss at distances, it does not equate to much. I think I determined that my 401 grain arrow starting at 295 fps only loses 10 fps at 70 yards. So just how much time does an elk have to react to an arrow shot at 70 yards from my bow……about .46 seconds. That is 0.724 seconds for the arrow to reach it minus the .26 seconds it takes the sound of my bow to get to the animal.

I've had lower/upper limbs hit the ground/branches, etc. arrows hit unseen sticks, misjudged yardage, bent sights/rests, derailed cams with sticks at the shot and yes, at times just plain jacked the shot. Stuff happens.

"about the choices you make..." cool. I know a dozen that should make the choice to never let the arrow off the string at live game no matter what the range.

This case? Kind of a long poke, but not off the charts long IMO. I know a few select folks I'd trust with that shot over a great many at 20... IYKWIM....

Arrow a bit light for my liking, but tons of elk and larger animals on the ground with that or lighter weights. The head I don't know but could guess. Likely plenty of game taken with whatever head used.

Sometimes stuff happens even when it all seems to line up. Are there things a person may have done that might have given a better edge??? the real answer... as most of bowhunting's definitive answers... maybe....

WRT the REAL question on the OP rather than a critique.... elk can live a long lucky life with that hit. Elk can die with that hit, they may go seemingly forever, or may drop in sight with that hit, all depends on what was actually, you know, hit. Again.... the definitive answer.... maybe....

We all live and learn. Bowhunting is a game of inches. Pretty sure a couple inches here or there and they might have that bull on the ground. Tough deal. We live. We learn. We move on. Better luck next time.

That said even bow/arrows that many consider not enough at 60 yards are significantly more powerful then what guys hunted elk with (archery) for most of the last 100 years.

I am not proposing unethical shots and wounding elk - but an elk is a BIG target and today's bows are substantially better then the bows we used 10 years ago (or more).

I obviously missed that thread.

I've passed 15 yard shots that were far less ethical than some 35 yard shots I've been offered

howie define the yardage of what is ethical then. To the foot please. Also is that uphill, or downhill or flat shooting? Animals head up, or down? How do you know the EXACT yardage, you always range finder your shots ?

hmmmmm not so easy is it ?

WEB come back with photo's of your your tagged bull, this one of another one, I sure hope you filled your tag.

I take the opportunity to go out and practice when the wind is blowing. I set my target with obsticals in the way and shoot sitting, kneeling and standing, bending different ways. I even get out the ladder and shoot from the peak of my house roof, just to mix it up. These are far from perfect conditions.

But non of this has anything to do with whether the shot taken by the OP was leathal or not. No one can answer that question with the information given. A lot of elk that survive a bow shot may not make it through the winter but many do.

I have only been hunting elk for 7 years and of the 4 elk I have killed with my bow, the only one that took me a day and a half to find was shot broadside at 8 yards. The 10, 30, and 43 yards shots went down in sight.

everything

if you cannot hit a 12" circle at 30 yards in the yard you shouldn't consider a 50 yard field shot.

if you can shoot 3" groups at 50 yards, you're going to be really good at 20

accuracy matters, a lot, though it isn't everything

"Stealthycat - obviously the distance he shot and lost the elk was too far for him, otherwise it would be dead! "

nope

he missed his shot, for whatever reason he simply didn't make it

you telling me you've NEVER missed? ever ? were the distances you shot too far on those misses ?

c'mon now

Archer136 it is the compound world of today. I re-entered it after 7 yards of traditional ... my how things have changed.

I took what I learned and applied it to compounds.

Even last year on my antelope hunt my arrows were 500 grains.

heavy retains energy - had I been able to get my 600 gr setups flying as well at 60-70 yards I'd have shot that :) and yeah, I imagine my arrow had quite an arch on it, but it passed through and that was my goal.

He is capable of wounding at 57 yards, making a poor decision by shooting to light an arrow for that distance and the game he was hunting...plus shooting a small cutting diameter broadhead..and somehow you are putting a feather in his cap...come on x man..you know better...or..maybe you don't.

I've learned that TBM is fully capable of using correct spelling, grammar and composition when he is serious and a little mad about something.

Anyways, always surprises me that the same guys saying compound shooters shouldn't shoot 50 yards due to time lag are often shooting recurve at antelope at 20 yards. Time lag is about the same.

As far as ethics goes each guy needs to figure that out himself. Everyone makes mistakes, let's lift each other up, help each other out and move on.

Last season while bowhunting in South Dakota, I passed numerous shots at deer easily within the range of my bow and my abilities and ended my season by shooting a spike at 22 yards. The deer ran about 30 yards and stood stock-still until he fell over. I would like all of my future seasons to end it such a manner. Passing on the shots that feel questionable in your own estimation is the best way to ensure that we can look ourselves in the mirror after the shot.

SO OBVIOUSLY THE SHOT WAS TOO FAR FOR HIM TO MAKE ON THIS OCCASSION! SIMPLE! Otherwise it would be a dead elk!

A rabbit is the size of the elk vitals? Apparently center punching the heart is the only way to kill an elk then? If not... that is a huge rabbit.

WEB, sorry to hear about how things turned out.

What is your malfunction? You have never even killed an Elk so how the heck is it that you think you are an Elk anatomy expert and could even hazard a guess where his arrow hit? Also, when you pop off about distance a guy should shoot you are the pot calling the kettle black! You can kill 217 turkeys but you wounded 3 deer last year inside 25 yards? JESUS! Buy a gun dude or quit aiming for the Ham!

Cant wait until someone post an elephant thread next so you can take us all to the TBM anatomy school and talk about where you should shoot and where the arrow might have hit on a lost one etec... gezzzzz. You have probably never even seen a dead Elk or gutted one or even looked at the wound track but you will talk about where his arrow likely hit even though you have little data of the actual shot, trajectory and angle to base your uneducated remarks on. LMAO.

Sometimes you take the cake and I am now seeing why so many here get so exasperated over you.

that was a mistake IMO but I shot light arrows too once because that's what compounders are taught - KE rules as does speed and mech broadheads

its very hard to un-teach

howie I noticed you didn't expand your on your own personal shooting history and misses/wounds

if you're a hunters, you're going to miss/wound - that's an inescapable fact of hunting - I don't know anyone who's never missed and exceptionally few who've never wounded (none personally)

what you learn FROM those misses/wounds is what matters

after I went heavy, I've not lost an animal, and I don't think that's coincidence

thank you

Always had a theory as well.... getting through it depends a great deal on if the animal has it's weight on that leg... anchoring or solidifying the hit. The shoulder is a very flexible attachment and "floating" piece of anatomy. Easy to see when you cut one off deboning.

Hang a target by a cord and shoot it. Then anchor it solid, screw it down with lumber if necessary so it cannot give, cannot move. You will see a huge difference in penetration on that target using the same rig, same arrow.

It was a shot missed by a couple inches. I have to laugh sometimes... I think some folks have no idea how many elk are not just off by inches but completely whiffed at jaw dropping close range. A shot much farther off target, but generally giggled at. Many are clearly clueless.

Very likely this shot was but a few inches from perfect, watch it go down perfect, and is getting dragged over the coals... where somebody somewhere is telling his story of a complete whiff, a far worse shot, over a campfire and laughing it off... go figure...

If you've never killed an elk, you probably wouldn't know a backstrap from a jock strap, and your anatomy lessons are a hoot, LOL!

When you've dressed out over 100 elk, deer, and antelope like I have, then come back and give me another anatomy lesson Mr. Expert, LOL!

Wow.......

"I hit too far forward half way up the animal. Arrow penetrated 8"

With 8" of penetration, is it possible that I penetrated the shoulder blade? With 8" of penetration is it possible I got one lung"

" In this situation the elk was standing in brush with the entire lower half and back half covered by the brush with the leg not visible. I believe I simply misjudged the target area"

Lots of data there for a guess. Who knows where or what he hit. He likely hit right where he thinks he hit and I didn't see anything that he hit forward of the shoulder blade.. To far forward from where intended and forward of the shoulder blade are 2 different things.

IMO, You guys use such an incredibly powerful weapon and waist it's potential with such a low mass bullet.

I continue to wonder.

I just did an interesting test on target penetration and was surprised what I found. I am in the process if videoing it all in steps to show the facts.

I say yes - absolutely more penetration ALWAYS increases the chances on killing because you're cutting more.

momentum, not KE .... closer, not farther away, heavier, not lighter, 2 blade and not 3 or more blades ... all those things mean more penetration

The heavier the arrow the slower it travels and you reach a point where a lighter faster arrow will perform better based on the sheer speed differential. I was just testing this a little and was surprised.

From 15-60 yards my 50 grain heavier thinner arrows out penetrate the thicker lighter series 22's. However my friend having the same arrow length has brand new arrows that are a touch thinner than mine but weight 50 grains less than mine and on every distance out to 60 yards they penetrate much further out of my bow. Several inches to be exact. Unfortunately apples to apples with thickness must be same to get a reliable result.

I think I need to get 6 different arrow weights that go up in weight 50 grains each and start with 350 grains and then 400 and then 450 all the way up to 600 grains and see what happens. I am not sure at what point the heavier arrow will penetrate better but i already know the lighter arrow thats a touch thinner and 50 grains lighter wayyy outperforms my new Hunter XT arrow. Like I said it is not an apples for apples comparison because they are just a bit thinner than mine are but not much.

Because they are thinner I cannot use it as reliable but I bet dollars to donuts that an arrow 50 grains heavier traveling 20FPS slower will NOT penetrate as far as an arrow traveling 20FPS faster even though it is 50 grains lighter. The thinner shaft arrow my buddy uses cannot account for 2 inches more penetration. the speed it is traveling is making up for its weight.

I plan to do a good comparison test on this at some point because i want to know at what weight point and loss of speed will the heavier arrow finally perform better. Add weight loose speed and therefor loose momentum. Somewhere is the magic threshold and I plan to find it. lol

The spine is not that high, especially the farther forward portion of it.

The heart is a little lower than that.

The liver is not that large and doesn't go back past the ham. That's a freaking elephant liver.

Today I put a tiny bit larger circumference field tip on and it was just a touch wider than the arrow shaft and it made a huge difference in penetration. Well over 1 inch. Funny how a tiny thing like that makes such an impact.

When i do my testing I will need to make sure my testing parameters are very tight because the smallest thing will throw it off.

As to a foam target....If you shoot 12 arrows thats are identical arrows but 6 arrows are 50 grains heavier and you find the lighter arrow penetrates further "every time" then it doesn't matter that it's foam. On live game the result would still be similar. Granted foam is not live tissue, hair bone or hide but if the results are that obvious it "will" translate into live game as well IMO.

Sorry Hammer your assumption is incorrect. One must understand the laws of physics.

I already said that. When I test it the shafts will all be the same. Naturally a BH cuts a huge hole. The larger FT was just an interesting find because I didn't catch it at 1st and it was throwing off my testing.

Trophy 8,

What? If you get 2 inches more penetration on a foam target and 4 inches more on a fabric target that "is" translating into "more" energy. How else do we account for the arrow penetrating further on every single shot bar none? If the lighter arrow or heavier arrow penetrates more on every target it will do the same on live game.

To sum this up...... I sacrificed 2 arrows dicking with this test. Let me say that the lighter, faster moving arrow penetrates more into 2 stacked 2x4's at 30 yards. FT was identical on those 2 shots. Larger diameter FT on the heavier arrow should have made a difference but it didn't and the lighter arrow just flat azz out shots the heavier arrow every time at these weights. I will figure out at what weight the heavier arrow finally surpasses the lighter faster moving arrow.

that defies physics doesn't it ?

A compound bow shooting machine can sling a heavy arrow of 600 grains at a very high rate of speed and would blow thru any bone of any animal one chooses to shoot.

What is it that one looses or sacrifices that out weighs the benefits of the above?

Larger arrow equals more friction.

KE and momentum can be equal for both arrows...still the friction foam causes will change how much they enter the foam. This is the reason foam is a poor indicator of arrow penetration.

On live animals the issue is moot...arrow weight, KE and momentum are more defining factors.

So far I don't think it is going against conventional wisdom because I did not have identical arrows until today. I plan to tune each arrow when I test this so it is as accurate as possible.

Trophy,

Yes I already knew that. This is why I replaced the FP on my arrow to get the same effect. I didn't realize it at 1st and when I saw the lighter arrow head had a little bigger FP to the circumference of the arrow compared to mine being flush I went ahead and changed mine to get a closer comparison. Like I said when I did that I gained on the lighter faster arrow a little but the lighter faster arrow was still blowing the 50 grain heavier arrow out of the water all the way back to 60 yards. But again the lighter arrow was just a touch thinner. When I say a touch I mean only a little but it was enough to warrant a further test of identical arrows with different weights which I performed today.

Today we tested two arrows through a chrono. One was 49 grains lighter and the arrows other than that were identical for todays test. The lighter arrow was 21FPS faster and out to 40 yards it blows the heavier arrow out of the water by almost 2 inches. At some point in distance which I have yet to determine I would imagine that the heavier slower arrow will penetrate better but I am not sure at what distance down range that will be and if it will occur at hunting ranges or not. The arrow weights today were 350 versus 400. I simply ran out of time today to test back further than 40 yards. I will back up to 50,60 and 70 to finish these weights and see what the results show. I will video all this and edit it to show each shot at each weight as I work my way up and post the results when we are done. I plan to do it with 50 grain increments and next it will be 400 grains versus 450 grains and keep going up to 600 grains. Then I will do a few where there are big difference in arrow weight. Say.....350 versus 450 or 425 versus 575. I am doing it more for kicks and just to see what happens and how it impacts at hunting distance.

You guys all do realize that KE, momentum and penetration is all a direct result of the speed of the arrow right? LOL Of course you know that. It was rhetorical. Now if you have a 62lb bow that spits an arrow 300 FPS at 350 grains but it shoots 400 grains 20FPS slower then the question becomes how much speed is required to spit the lighter arrow into the target the same distance. So far the lighter arrow at 20FPS faster is whipping the heavier arrow out to 40 yards so 20FS is not even needed to penetrate more. I am sure as the weights increase I will start to see a difference because as of right now these arrow weights are both still pretty lite. It will be interesting to see how it turns out. As of now I am thinking that 20FPS with a 50 grain lighter arrow is better than 20FS slower with a heavier arrow because almost 2 inches of penetration with the lighter arrow cannot be argued against. The lighter arrow is kicking the heavier arrows azz so far at these lighter weights and 50 grain differences.

Catch 22 maybe......If I compare a 450 grain arrow against a 350 grain arrow out of my bow then we would see a 30FPS difference in speed between the two arrows. That's a ton of speed for the heavier arrow to overcome and I am not sure at hunting distances if the heaver arrow could compensate for the speed. If I compare 350 to 550 grains I would loose 60FPS. I am not sure that much loss of speed could ever be overcome. I think there is a magic number and distance where they will cross and I suspect it is on the outside range of a hunting shot. When I video it all we can look at it and see what it shows and tear into it if we want to. Like I said I am only doing it for kicks and something to test because I can shoot more too. lol

the vertebrae / backbone has a "fin" .... spined animals that have their spinal cord severed drop, the broadheads that fly high lodge in that "fin" and they are not wounded gravely

see what I'm saying ?

biggest bull I ever shot was in that area - I didn't hurt him, that shot/experience hurt me though

HAMMER - based on your advice, I'm going to shoot 100 gr total weight combo, I should blow through anything with that huh ?

are you really trying to say lighter objects retain their energy better than heavier ones ?

really ?

Sorry to say this but your condescension seems a bit ridiculous given that I am merely doing a test and reporting what I have found so far and NEVER gave ANY advice. (not yelling).. Certainly I am not saying to use a 100 grain arrow. However if it will travel at 600FPS than yeah I might use it because regardless of what anyone might believe you can make up for weight with enough speed. lol

I made this very clear that I am testing something to find out where the speed difference will show up against a slower heavier arrow. I will bet you 100 dollars to wounded Warriors that two identical arrows where one weights 350 grains and the other weights 400 grains that the lighter arrow out to 40 yards will win not just occasionally but on every single shot out of the same bow. I know because I just tested it and it was not even close. Once I had identical arrows I was able to gauge this much better. I am not saying "all" heavier arrows will loose at all but rather at what weight comparison and speed differential and distance will it perform better is what I am looking into. Out of my bow the 20FPS lighter and faster arrow seems to be enough to blow the 50 Grain heavier arrow out of the water on every shot. Got video of it too.

Drummerboy,

LOL. Tried to be nice? Why not just stay nice? Why change? Questions and finding are nothing more than that and lets not forget I only have conformation on 50 grains out to 40 yards when comparing apples to apples arrows. It may go against conventional wisdom but it is what it is. Like I said above I think the weight differential may need to be larger and/or the distance needs to be further and/or the speed differential needs to be closer because as of now 50 grains extra weight will NOT win thus far out of my bow. I now have 10 shots each and the lighter arrow going 21FPS faster had almost 2 inches more penetration on each and every shot out to 40 yards.

I have hunted many places in the US but with a recurve and I used the same arrow and arrow weight for 25 years but that makes no difference because I am newer to compounds, KE and momentum and this whole speed thing. In the past it made zero difference. Last 2 years I had series 22 arrows that were those fat shafted arrows and was getting poor penetration on live game. I recovered all but one critter but on the others I did recover I noticed poor penetration and knew it would eventually bite me and it finally did on what was also a poor shot. Poor penetration is what started this. I switched to a heavier arrow and a much thinner shaft. They penetrate better but IMO it has more to do with the circumference of the arrow on target shooting than the extra weight because it is only something like 44 grains difference between my old arrows and my new hunting arrow and I already know that 49 grains extra weight cost me 21FPS and the extra 49 grains cannot keep up on penetration out to 40 yards with a lighter arrow within 50 grains.. I will eventually post up the videos and you guys can see what I may have done right or wrong and challenge the findings.

By the way speed is not less important than KE and MO IMO. It is equally important. In fact IMO more so even. I have a kids bow and if you shoot a 250 grain kids arrow it will barley poke in the target an inch but if you shoot a 600 grain arrow it will sometimes bounce right off it or hit and then fall out. lol.. That's a fact. It requires speed to get any KE or momentum to start with. The more speed the higher KE and MO. The MO and KE is a direct result of the speed. If two arrows weigh the same 600 grains and one goes 20FPS faster and penetrates better which it would then the speed is the only thing that made that difference because the arrows are the same weight. I know what you mean and speed is not the be all and end all of arrow penetration but it all starts with the speed IMO.

after getting unsatisfactory results on 3 bull elk with my 550 grain aluminum arrows (muzzy broadheads), I found a carbon arrow on the range one day and tried it. I was surprized by the extra penetration on targets. the arrow weight was about 380 grains.

so I decided to switch, for me this was an experiment and I would not have recommended it to anyone else. I also dumped the muzzy for the magnus buzz cut 4 blade.

the results will take years to prove a trend however this years result was quite interesting, took my longest shot ever on game, 60 yrds with a light 380 grain arrow, the arrow exited thru the off side shoulder blade and the arrow was not recovered. but the bull was recovered.

so if my light arrow had enough energy to pass thru the shoulder blade going out at 60 yards isn't that enough?

my previous recovered bull with the 550 grain arrow only went in to the fletchings on a 17 yard shot entrance and exit was behind the shoulder.

much like the op 2 years ago I shot a bull in the shoulder and only got a few inches of penetration difference was my shot was 30 yrds with a 550 grain arrow, same result lost bull, point is a heavy arrow dosn't mean you can bust thru bone like some have suggested. light or heavy a bad shot is a bad shot.

and finally don't you love how someone always has to bring up the ping pong ball vs golf ball. I looked it up,lost my notes but from memory I think the golf ball was 17 times heavier. so unless your arrow weight is 6460 grains your comparison is pointless.

" There are three main phenomena that slow an arrow: resistance to material failure, friction and drag.

Material failure is an easy one to understand; in order to move past a solid object, the arrow must either move the material out of the way and/or break it. Shoot an arrow at paper, the paper is “broken” and the arrow moves past it and slows down a tiny bit because of the resistance. Shoot an arrow at 1/8? plywood and the same occurs, but this time the arrow slows down more because more energy was used to cause failure in the wood. Shoot an arrow at a reinforced concrete wall and well…you get the idea. To cause material to fail the arrow expends some of it’s energy and the overall kinetic energy left in the arrow is less as well as its speed.

Friction is a much tougher animal to tackle because of the complexities of the phenomena. It comes in various forms, the one most familiar being solid to solid friction or dry friction. This friction is governed by the equation

Force = mu x N

where “mu” is the coefficient of friction, a value experimentally determined depending on the materials of the solids, and N is the normal (perpendicular) force between the objects. Basically this formula says that the harder you push two moving objects together, the greater the resistance force to move them. Energy from the moving objects is converted into heat in this case, which can readily be seen by rubbing your hands together and feeling them heat up.

When an arrow penetrates an animal full of fluids, there is some lubricated friction that occurs between the wetted parts of the animal and the solid arrow, and more importantly, skin friction. Skin friction is the friction between a solid and a fluid moving parallel to each other and is a large factor in the overall drag of an object moving through a fluid. If you put your hand under water and sweep it around you in a big arc has fast as possible, you will feel the skin on your hand that runs parallel to the path of your hand pushed back, this is skin friction (no pun intended!) The force you feel on the front of you hand that is perpendicular to the movement is the frontal drag force.

Drag is what occurs when an object moves through a fluid and the fluid pushes back on the object. We already discussed part of the drag as skin friction; the other part is the form drag. Form drag is the resistance to movement of the solid through the liquid because of the form or shape of the solid. An arrow head must push the fluid out of the way before it can pass through the fluid. Unlike breaking through a solid, the arrow head does not “break” the fluid, but rather moves it out of the way and the fluid collapses back upon itself after the solid has passed. A sleek, pointed arrow head is going to move fluid out of the way much easier and with less resistance to a blunt object.

So what does all this have to do with penetration of faster/slower and lighter/heavier arrows? I’m glad you asked! When an arrow enters a target, let’s say solid foam for simplicity sake, the foam directly in front of the arrow head is broken or pushed past it’s failure level by the arrow head. As the head passes and the initial shock diminishes, the material begins to collapse back onto itself and onto the arrow shaft; dry friction! The faster the arrow, the longer time that more of the shaft has to pass before the target foam collapses and exerts a normal force onto the shaft, increasing friction and creating heat, thereby robbing the arrow of energy and slowing it to a stop. Generally speaking with a target of perfectly homogeneous foam throughout, a faster, lighter arrow has a better chance to penetrate deeper than a slower, heavier arrow. This is a very tough test to carry out to any degree of accuracy because every section of a target, even ballistic gel, is different and will act accordingly; not to mention gravity adding another dimension to the problem. But that is beyond the discussion at hand.

Now back to penetration in an animal. Just like with a target, the arrow point must first break through the solids of the animal before the lubricated/skin friction and drag forces begin to take affect. However, once into an area of high fluid concentration, the arrow head begins to experience a phenomena completely different from a solid target. The resistance to the solid arrow passing through the fluid, the drag, is actually greatly increased with higher velocities. An extreme example of this would be gently entering a pool or doing a belly flop; care to try this experiment and share the results with us? In a simple way of explaining it, fluid particles have a harder time getting out of the way of a faster moving solid than a slower one and thus faster moving objects experience a higher drag."

what changed to make one 50 grains heavier ? field tip ? didn't that change the spine and how well the arrows fly ?

True, but is an animal really "an area of high fluid concentration"? Let's think about what makes up a typical good killing shot ... the double lung shot.

The hair is certainly not a fluid. As for the hide, fat, ribs and muscle, although they contain blood/water/fluids, they do not conform to the definition of a fluid. Neither does ice, green wood or ballistic gel. (probably part of the reason why ballistic gel is used to simulate animal tissue) They all contain significant amounts of water, but are not fluids.

The lungs do contain fluid, air and blood. The air will induce drag as did the air outside the animal, but there is only a foot or so of it to penetrate. The blood in the veins and arteries of the lungs is a true fluid. However, there is only an inch or two of it at the very most to overcome and the arrow velocity has decreased significantly by the time it reaches them. There is a slight advantage to the slower arrow, but it would be SLIGHT.

"The faster the arrow, the longer time that more of the shaft has to pass before the target foam collapses and exerts a normal force onto the shaft, increasing friction and creating heat, thereby robbing the arrow of energy and slowing it to a stop. Generally speaking with a target of perfectly homogeneous foam throughout, a faster, lighter arrow has a better chance to penetrate deeper than a slower, heavier arrow."

True, but why would not the same phenomena occur in any tissue that collapses back around the arrow that's inside an animal? Therefore a slight advantage to the faster arrow. If the tissue does not collapse back, then that's even better for penetration.

Videos on YouTube, through foam, paper and ballistic gel, all show about the same thing that Hammer is finding.

Penetration is always directly proportional to the energy which the arrow hits the target (animal) and inversely proportional to the average resisting force of the target (animal).

If Hammer's lighter arrow is penetrating deeper, it's because it is either hitting with more energy or is encountering less average resistance or both.

Some things that are often overlooked in such tests are:

Not using field points of the same shape. It's best to use the very same arrow and tip for all tests and vary the weight via weight tubes. Not eliminating target movement. It's best to have the entire target backed up by an unmovable object.

Not omitting and redoing hits within 3" of a previous hole.

Not using a homogeneous target material. Remember, a slower arrow will have a greater arc and can hit the target material at a slightly different angle. Fibers or fabric that may be easily separated by a perpendicular hit may have to be broken for torn when hit at a slight angle.

Look out for the small stuff when doing a test.

"Hammer, keep up the good work, but I think you're going to have a hard time beating opinion with facts."

Amen!

Changing the FP to a larger FP doesn't change the laws of physics or what happens but it elongates it therefore changing drag to a degree. Just enough to show up on a foam target too because I saw it with my own eyes and even had witness's that tried it too and will swear to it in an affidavit and court of law. lol...:o).

If the FP is flush with the arrows circumference then as the FP hits the foam it will create almost an instant drag on the "arrow shaft" because the field point is only blowing the target hole apart the width of the FP and almost instantly coming in contact with the foam. Now to be precise I am sure there is likely some mechanics and outward displaced energy that come into play that would prove it separates more on impact than the circumference of the head and then rebounds back but for sake of discussion and because I cannot measure that lets just say the hole cut or the hole separated by the FP is only as large in circumference as the FP cutting the hole. As the arrows shaft passes through the foam it starts to partly close black around the arrow shaft or has remained around the arrow shaft creating instant drag. Now, If you put a larger circumference FP on the arrow so the FP diameter is bigger than the arrow shaft diameter that closing around effect or drag on the arrow is changed and reduced because the head is a bit bigger and cuts a bigger hole therefore allowing the arrow to get into the target just a bit more before the foam rebounds back around the arrow. Its like shooting a fat series 22 arrow and then a thin arrow of the same weight. The thin arrow always wins because it has less surface to drag. This is why after I changed to a wider circumference FP that I was able to gain a little more penetration. We did this with 3 different shooters arrows and each one with the wee bit larger circumference FP penetrated just a better. It makes sense it would because that foam is not contacting the arrow shaft as fast as it would with a flush tip.

Stealthy,

As far as arrow flight there was a small amount of tuning so the arrows were flying well but not pain staking tuning to the nth degree. The test is just not that important to spend that much extra time. As long as they fly well and not caddywampus its good enough for me and what we are doing. Both arrows flew very well. Regardless of whether the spine changed a little between the two and we still have a penetration difference that is very noticeable. The weight and tip weights were within the tolerance of the arrow. Regardless of what anyone says IMO 2 inches on each shot is a significant amount of energy difference to get that much more penetration. Could part of it be because of the spine change? I am sure it could but 50 grains is not that much weight. I would think the spine difference would show up on weight when I get much heavier.

For this test almost all the extra weight was on the tip but we only have 49 grains difference to be exact. I can only quickly use heavier nocks for the azz end but other than that most weight was on the tip. Now I call it 50 grains because it is close enough for sake of discussion even though it was 49 to be exact. Maybe after I do this I will try to get the FOC on each arrow as close as possible to each other on each arrow as I go up the scale and run another test but I don't really want to spend a fortune testing this with FOC and spine differance. lol. On top of that we all buy arrows form the same places. We all choose straightness and spine for the setup we want. Many guys then add weight to the arrow above and beyond just screwing a head on it.

You Think there Vap arrows are out penetrating everything on the market to date because there just that better?? Nope It's because the tip is larger then the diameter of the arrow shaft

It's why guys shooting higher speeds often have to scrape target material off their arrows when it melts onto them.

Slower arrows create less heat. Higher heat aids penetration in foam. Diameter will have many times more effect in foam than on a living animal as well. Although direct bone I understand the smaller diameters have an advantage.

Have talked to Woody many times about that.... foam is good for self healing targets.... not so much as test media. Another note....not all foam is the same by a long shot.

Test media is where all the penetration testing hits the wall so to speak. You can test for toughness to a degree, edge retention, etc. But penetration....very little can emulate a living breathing animal, especially taking all the variables into account. Even the (very expensive) gels have their drawbacks.

I have heard of folks creating layered targets of shag carpeting over plywood over gel, etc. that were interesting. Lots of time as well as money involved.

Testing in foam is not the same as on game. Prove to me how? Foam density is nothing like an living animal...the materials that make up both are nothing alike and they don't react alike.

Hammer...I PM you with some good reading.

So I guess you where there and I wasn't. Watched that bull for 2 hours on Friday and another hour Saturday morning thru my Spotter and the arrow was in the spine.

I know my targets have no melting going on I am seeing. Fabric, carpet, foam, phone books, wood etc I am seeing better penetration on any target from the lighter arrow but I am still at close distances so the heavier slower arrow likely hasn't had its chance to shine yet. I am think down range is where I will see it show up because the light arrow will slow quicker. I find it impossible to believe however that if you get better penetration on pretty much any target material that it wont some how translate into a live animal in some way.

Trophy,

I will prove the thinner arrow penetrates better in about 1 month when I drop 3 deer and they all pass-thru. The last several years I was using fat series 22's and did not get a complete pass-thru even on the smaller game I hunted like deer. I think there is no doubt that when an arrow is going through a critter that the wound channel will rebound back around the arrow shaft and therefore slow it down more the fatter the arrow is. I have never seen a wound where you could look through one side of a critter and see light on the other side like you can do when you look through my ears. :o)

I have to believe there may have been an arrow flight issue for you not to go thru a deer. Hit major bone...different story.

Read over what I sent you.

It CAN be especially helpful when going through any type of bone.

I hope this spreadsheet comes through. If so, note the varying penetration with about 150 grain difference in total arrow weight. I doubt if the resulting 25 fps (approx.) difference in velocity between the heavy and light arrow caused the foam to melt with one and not the other. The varied results seem to indicate that too.

Even coating the arrows in motor oil didn't drastically effect the results.

Will check it out later when I am back online. I will say my arrows were and always are tuned as perfectly as they can be. The fly straight and true.

Was jus reading and in that article I posted it was an interesting claim that 4 out of every 12 arrows will not fly properly.

I tend to think that as well because lighter penetrating deeper than heavier all things considered defies physics as I know it.

flybyjohn -- you're right - a well placed field point will kill a whitetail.

light, fast and mech work great when shots go good - when they go bad, they suck.

heavy, slower and COI work great when shots go good, and then they also give you best chances when shots go bad

just sayin ...

If two arrows of different weight hit a target with the same KE, what law of physics says the heavier arrow will go deeper?

Now you got it right, as a spinal shot would have taken out at least part of that bull's ability to function on four legs!!!! I know what you're saying now, as I dressed out and deboned two bulls and two cows last year alone.

lighter sheds energy quicker

I think what many do not realize is there 'is' a crossing point between two identical arrows who's only difference is 50 grains of weight when the lighter one is traveling that much faster.. At a certain distance (yet to be determined) the 2 would perform identical on penetration merely on the simple fact that the lighter arrow makes up for its weight by speed. It stands to reason that if you can push an arrow X amount of FPS faster then you can get it to produce the same KE and the same momentum as the heavier arrow. If anyone knows the formula then spit it out because I do not. I only know that on every target surface I have tried the lighter arrow that is going 21FPS (10 miles per hour) faster is winning and that has to translate to live game in some way. How can it not.

How can anyone without a rocket science degree who would have all the math and formulas say that a 50 grain lighter arrow going 21FPS faster will somehow not penetrate better at any distance? All we can do is test it with our limited funding and knowledge and see what happens but to say it defies the laws of physics is wrong on so many levels IMO unless you know the exact FPS differential that is required for the lighter arrow to perform just as well. i am sure everyone would agree that if you could get a 50 grain lighter arrow traveling fast enough that it will blow a slower 50 grain heavier arrow out of the water. The question is how much speed difference is required.

I think some folks think it must need to travel 100FPS faster or something to offset a mere 50 grains of weight. I say it only requires a little more speed to pull it off. Somewhere around 20-25 FPS more per 50 grains of weight. IMO to say that a 50 grain heavier arrow going 21 FPS slower will out penetrate the lighter arrow out to 40 yards defies my logic center which is of course fundamentally flawed anyway. lol... Maybe at 50 or 60 yards it will finally drop off and loose enough energy to show up on any target surface. Out to 40 it hasn't yet regardless of the target material. Thats all I am getting at on this. Really wasn't trying to open a can of worms per se either. I was into the lighter arrow speed crap for a while thanks to a buddy and then I flipped back quick to heavier but then after a little testing i am not so sure what to believe now. Back where I started i guess.

Life was easier with my old recurve and 550+ grain arrows and ignorance of all this and not even caring and just hunting was blissful. This has no basis in fact because it is a guess but i think the difference in arrow weight and penetration will not show up on the heavier arrow in any significant amount until there is a 80-100 grain difference between the arrows. Once something much heavier is rolling it is harder to stop even when moving slow and the heavier it is the harder it is to stop and I think once you get up into that 475+ arrow weights where you have 100+ grain difference is when you will see the difference from 50 yards and in. At the lighter weights and 50 grain increments I will bet that my test will be the same regardless of target but when I test 350 grains against 500 grains I think the 500 grain arrow will win out even though it is going wayyyyyy slower. it will win by the huge differential in weight. There should be a math formula for this crap. lol... Even if there was one which I am sure there is I aint smart enough to figure it out.

Hammer, everything you are saying about velocity could also be said about mass. There is no KE without mass either. The only formula you need is:

penetration=(1/2 mv^2)/average resisting force = KE/avg. resisting force

As you can see from the data I provided in the above spreadsheet from tests I made, penetration, in some of the tests, increased with speed and in some it decreased. There was no trend or consistency in results despite a 150 grain difference in arrow weights. For whatever reason, your test results are not indicative of what everyone will see.

Physics says that penetration is based solely on KE and the resisting force......nothing else.

Maybe so and maybe not so but either way the KE is determined by how fast the object is traveling and so is momentum and that is also physics 101. In fact I am convinced that KE plays less of a role in penetration. I always looked at KE as the initial smacking power and concussive force and momentum as the driving force that keeps the arrow driving forward. They are not one in the same or are they. It appears they are not.

I could push a 4x4 piece of plywood flatways at 100 FPS and it would have a hell of a KE when it hit something but it wont penetrate for nothing do to its size. It is a horrible example but KE is not the most important factor. If you want to smack an animal with enough KE to knock it down then that could likely be accomplished but if you want to push through it you need momentum and a tip. Point is there are so many variables that this debate will likely rage on for 100's of years and still never be settled and now my head hurts.

KE (1/2 mv^2) is a form of energy (work) due to a force acting through a distance. It's units are foot-pounds. 10 foot-pounds can be either a 10 pound force acting through a distance of 1 foot or a 1 pound force acting through a distance of 10 feet or any combination of force and distance that multiplies out to 10.

If an arrow has 50 KE of energy it is because 50 KE was used to draw the bow. (assuming 100 percent effeciency to keep things simple) This bow could have a power stroke of 2 feet with an average pull force of 25 pounds. (2 x 25 = 50 KE) If the arrow strikes the target and penetrates only 1/2 foot, then the arrow applied an average force of 100 pounds and the targets average resisting force was also 100 pounds (equal and opposite).

The greater the applied KE, the greater the penetration. The less the average resisting force, the greater the penetration.

Things that effect the resisting force are blade sharpness, number of blades, cut diameter, target density, etc. In your plywood example there would be no penetration due to the extreme resisting force. However, hit with the corner of the plywood and the resisting force is greatly reduce and penetration is possible.

In your example the plywood had momentum (mass x velocity) too. Why did you only blame KE for the lack of penetration? Momentum (the physics term) has nothing to do with penetration. Positive KE bends the bow, gets the arrow moving, and keeps it moving to the target. Negative KE stops the arrow.

couldn't have said it any better.

Purdue you make several good arguments but stumble here. There is NO such thing as negative kinetic energy. It is not even mathematically possible based on the equation used to calculate it, let alone conceptually meaningful or possible.

I said "negative KE" just to indicated that it opposes or stops or absorbs the arrows energy. Technically, it's the target's resisting force that is negative to the arrow's positive force. That negative force acts on the arrow for the distance the arrow travels. (-F) x (-D) = KE

An easy analogy is this. Would you rather be shot with a marble from a sling shot or a ping pong ball shot from a sling shot?

The golf ball (marble) / ping pong ball analogy is not accurate. There are very disparate weights involved. We're talking about an arrow that is ~ 2/3rds the weight of the "heavier" arrow. Therefore, the ping pong ball would need to be 2/3rds the weight of the golf ball to make the comparison more accurate.

All I know is if the annacannapannatan flings the thingamajig with "enough speed" it will pass through the whatchamacallit regardless of whether the thingamajig is lighter. LOL..

Saxton,

Would you rather be hit with a pool ball out of a sling shot or a baseball out of slingshot? lol..Better yet....would you rather be hit with a pool ball out of a weak sling shot that has weak bands and then have the guy change the bands to new more powerful ones that can propel a lighter baseball 20MPH faster and then choose between the slower pool ball and the faster baseball. :o)......

Congrats.

Hey, wait a minute, you don't suppose that was his main intention because he's......???

measuring as it leaves your bow isn't a great indicator is it ? because speed in the KE equation is 2X .... faster increases your KE significantly, that's one reason KE has become a marketing tool with bow makers. a bit faster increases KE because of that 2X factor, right ?

if 50 grains isn't that much ... how can it be THAT much faster ?

remember - KE is the energy needed to get an arrow from a resting state to full speed ....... that's it, it has nothing to do with energy retention once the arrow impacts something

HUH? Where is anyone stretching to justify anything? We are just talking that's all and I am personally just stating what I have found with 50 grains.

Stealthy,

No I have not checked speed at impact. I only checked at about 8 yards. Don't want to shoot through an expensive chrono at 40-60 yards either incase I pull a shot and ruin the thing. Don't need to check at impact either because I already know at 40 yards the identical lighter arrow is moving faster at impact because it penetrates much more. IMO that much of this is simple. The target material and distance shot is a different variable.

Like I said above I am sure the heavier arrow at longer distances will shine because it is loosing its energy slower or perhaps its not loosing its energy slower but rather has the ability to store more energy and looses its energy slower. Not sure but my commonsense tells me I will likely see the difference at further ranges on these 50 grain test but for now the lighter faster arrow on any target surface so far out to 40 yards is out penetrating the heavier slower arrow by a significant margin. How and why IMO is the speed differential is holding up at those distance but regardless it is happening. Some say it wont translate to live game but I think it will at the distance I have tested. Hopefully I can get lucky and kill all 3 deer I will shoot in a few weeks from inside 25 yards and film them all using different weighted arrows. I would need to get even luckier and hit close to the same spot on each one but I am gonna try and pull it off and see what happens. I doubt I will succeed. Sure I will get all 3 deer but I doubt the shots will be even close to the same and neither will the distance.

Maybe I will put out bait to help my odds on distance and just make sure they are all dead broadside. lol.... Better yet I will use there carcass to shoot into after to further validate the testing and findings... Naaaa that's all way to much effort. I will use different weighted arrows though.

Not as hard as it looks - shoot through the animal length wise (nose to arse) with a 2 blade Rage.

"All I know is if the annacannapannatan flings the thingamajig with "enough speed" it will pass through the whatchamacallit regardless of whether the thingamajig is lighter." This is the perfect answer to this problem.

I think I spoke of a diminishing return at some point in this thread if you remember and i cant go lighter anyway so it is moot. I would be below the safety zone of my bow too and the energy stored in the arrow would be effected as well if you get too low or stupidly low. No test is worth blowing up my bow.

Instead of throwing out the preposterous just wait until we have completed videoing this and then tear into it if you want. When I mentioned what I found I certainly didn't think it would be the catalyst for several strong opinions and ridiculous comments.

On an interesting note my buddy Hunting 101 just tested a very light arrow (341 grains) against one 100 grains heavier (441grains) and he found the same results. What has changed is the distance the heavier arrow is now penetrating. With the same FOC on all arrows the 100 grain difference is catching up fast out to 30 yards but the heavier arrow is still loosing. It is now only loosing by about 3/4 to 1 inch. Not sure why yet but it was as I expected. I will duplicate it and see

Well, that's just my guess anyway. Carry on.

Like I have said in all this all along....I am not saying the heavier slower arrow will not perform better on penetration on live game per se. I am only saying that with a 50 grain differences out of "my" bow that the lighter arrow is penetrating much better all the way out to 40 yards regardless of the target material we have used thus far and I think that must translate in some way on live game. I also have said that I believe there is an intersecting point on distance with speed the differential where the heavier slower arrow will cross with the lighter faster arrow and they will perform identically. Everyone knows regardless of the arguments used that if you have "enough of a speed differential" you can push a lighter object into any target further than a heavier one. The question I am trying to get an answer to by testing is what is the speed differential required to do so and at what distance. The 21FPS differential seems to be more than enough at 'THESE' weights and out to 40 yards. My reason for even doing this test was just to see for myself where that point is and if it is inside of normal hunting ranges. My mistake was pointing any of it out here.

We just spent the last hour testing a 100 grain difference in arrows with as close to the same FOC as we could possibly get but this test was only into foam. The 100 grain heavier arrow out of my bow closed the gap and was out to 40 yards compared to when there was a 50 grain difference but it is still loosing by about 1/2 of a nock length. That is a big difference to the 50 grain shots when the lighter arrow was winning by 1 3/4 to 2 inches.

The weird thing is that out of my buddies bow which is much faster than mine (+18FPS) we were seeing the lighter arrow winning over the heavier one by a much larger margin compared to when shot out of my bow. The further back we got however the closer the arrow penetration we would see between the two just like we saw out of my bow but the differential between arrow penetration was wayyyyy different. Out of my bow the lighter arrow would win by 1/2 of a nock but out of his bow the lighter arrow would win by 1.5 inches.

This might throw some for a loop. We haven't tested it yet because the chrono is broke but we have 3 identical arrows. 1 is a .300 spine and the other is .350 spine and the last is a .400 spine. Which one do you guys think will shoot the fastest out of the same bow or do you think they will all be the same speed? The arrow length, weight and FOC will al be the same and the only variable will be arrow spine. We think the stiffer spine arrow will be the fastest. Does that make any sense?

It doesn't change - and from what I understand, a heavier arrow absorbs, and retains, more energy than a lighter arrow when shot from a bow.

KE = 2X speed in the equation, yes, but speed and KE means nothing when the arrows hit.

if 50 grains less is giving you MORE penetration, then 60 grains will give you more, 70 grains, 80 grain and 100 grains even more.

I understand diminishing returns and how thinking that might play into it too, but I'm not going absurb here, just saying if what you are doing is true, drop down another 25 grains and you should see even MORE penetration

If lighter and faster is truly the key to penetrations

I don't believe it is though. I do think your tests are interesting, it just goes against everything I've read in the past 10 years on the subject, and doesn't hold consistency either ( drop another 50-100 grains, see if penetration is more of less)

I am confused on why some would think that a 50 grain heavier arrow traveling much slower will penetrate further than a lighter one moving disproportionally faster. That just defies logic in my mind and defies the testing. Now before you quote me and blow this out of context I am talking about 50-100 grain differences here and not hundreds. Maybe when I get around the 125-150 grain difference like a 350 grain versus a 500-550 grain I will see the difference go the other way completely. I think its right that you need a certain amount of energy to pass-thru any object and the mass of both object make a difference as well. Forward driving energy giving an object speed means forward momentum and with enough speed a lighter object can pass through something that a heavier slower moving object cannot pass through because it did not start or retain enough speed to begin with.

Example: Under some folks logic I should be able to take my bow and shoot a 800 grain arrow at 20 yards and it should blow right through the target burying the veins into the target and leave the 350 grain arrow in the dust on penetration right? I mean after all it is 2 times as heavy as the average hunting arrow and over 2X as heavy as the 350 so it will penetrate much further even though it would be traveling 135FPS slower right?... No it wouldn't and wont.

By the way that diminishing return works the other way now. Example: Out of my bow a 350 grain arrow has 71ft.lbs of KE and it is going 301FPS. An 800 grain arrow (that's is as high as my speed calculator goes) gives me 49ft.lbs and is going 166FPS. That is a 92MPH difference in speed. NO WAY the heavier arrow wins under any circumstance or target surface at those speed differentials right? If you would agree to that then it will begin to dawn on you why I think at normal hunting distances and a 'disproportional' drop in speed that it will cause the lighter arrow to penetrate better at this 50 grain difference that I am seeing. Like I said I think at these ranges the lighter arrows 21FPS-10mph difference in speed cannot be overcome by the other arrows 50 more grains because the other arrow didn't just get extra weight but it lost 21FPS-10MPH of speed as well. If it only lost 10 FPS it would likely perform identical. If it only lost 5FPS it would likely win at any distance. Fact is it lost 21FPS which is 10 MPH and it is loosing on every target surface so far out to 40 yards. Don't ask me how and why I only know it is happening.

We cant have this both ways. This is why I have said there is an intersecting point where the lighter arrow and the heavier arrow at reasonably different weights and not preposterous weights will intersect. Under some weights and distances and speed differential the lighter arrow has to perform better. It just has to. It cant not perform better from what I am seeing. I guess I need an elephant to shoot into with both arrows 100 times each so I can figure it out. lol

"It doesn't change - and from what I understand, a heavier arrow absorbs, and retains, more energy than a lighter arrow when shot from a bow. "

Under normal circumstance I would tend to agree with you that the heavier arrow can absorb more energy but I do not believe it retains its energy any longer per se. If they both absorb the same exact amount and were shot at the same speed then yes. Also You are assuming a disproportional amount of energy transfer from the 50 grain or 100 grain lighter arrow to that of the heavier one. Unfortunately we have no way to measure whether the heavier arrow is taking on more energy than the lighter one. For all we know the arrow weights are both sufficient to take on all the energy my bow can produce regardless of whether it is 350 or 400 grains. How fast each arrow is loosing the energy can probably be measured through a little commonsense but measuring how much energy is being stored at the instant it is fired is hard to determine and how much is not being transferred one over the other is impossible for me to determine. I can only go by FPS the arrow is traveling at a close distance from my bow or down range.

Before I started this little test I had the exact same answer to that question as you but now after doing this I am not so sure. My commonsense tells me this should not be happening but then it tells me it should be because of the huge speed differential.

If a bow could fling a 1000grain arrow 500 FPS no one would care about this crap. lol..

My inquisitive nature and wanting to understand why has me jacked up now. I should never have done this test. Now I am confused. lol... My buddy came by to shoot one day and with my new arrows I was noticing some of his thinner new ones were out penetrating mine much more than my old ones did the year before. That's when we started to look into al this and arrow circumference and weights and speed became a factor and I wanted to know and understand it just for something interesting to do. I guess I was bored too. lol

Then you do not believe in the laws of Physics.

The link I sent you clearly explains it.

I commend your interest, effort and desire to learn as I am very much the same way but....

If your objective with this intense efforting is to find out which arrow combination/setup is best for penetrating a backyard target medium of your choosing then OK and fun and interesting.

If you are doing the above with the mindset that the penetration results can be equated, in any way, to the animals we hunt with our bows....ain't happnin'. Ain't hapnin" today nor tomorrow.

And again....why do elephant bowhunters use heavier arrows and not their sexy flat and fast shooting deer arrows?

Because the heavier arrow setup will give them the best chance of maximizing penetration in the ANIMAL.

Now...I really don't think this is what you are doing nor do I think this is your objective but below is what I think most people are doing as it relates to backyard penetration tests....

To begin with, sooooo many bow shooters like to shoot arrows that cover a decent amount of real estate with a super flat trajectory. Usually flat as possible as far as possible. That is very sexy and attractive to many bowholders...and that is NOT accomplished by increasing that weight of the arrow. The easiest way this objective is accomplished is by using a light arrow. The other way is by using a heavier weight bow.

With trad guys, the FFF objective (flat, fast, far) must be done with the light arrows as mentioned because it takes more effort than is desired to pull a heavier trad bow.

With compounders it can be done with a heavy bow and the light arrow which REALLY maximizes arrow speed. And this can make for an extremely powerful weapon.

With that all powerful FFF objective looming in the minds of bowholders it is virtually impossible to steer from that attraction.... towards a heavier slow bone busting arrow setup. Sooooo.....something has to be done to make the super fast and light arrows appear to be the WINNER in arrow penetration tests....because the personal desires must be justified some how some way.

Even though we all buy our bows to hunt animals, the REAL ANIMALS are rarely the tests mediums that are used to provide the predetermined results. The test mediums are always something else that has totally different surface area friction properties. And it is always something quite handy in one's backyard, which makes sense. These types of target mediums can show different results including the light fast arrows penetrating the most. The common denominator is that ALL of those results are insignificant as it relates to real animals.

The end result is this.....The backyard penetration tests results can be exactly what the FFF objective doctor ordered but that doctor will not use those same results to hunt elephants.

WHAT? By definition KE has everything to do with the energy of the arrow as long as it is moving.

"And again....why do elephant bowhunters use heavier arrows and not their sexy flat and fast shooting deer arrows?"

Zimbabwe requires at least a 463 gr. arrow to hunt jackel and game birds. Must be the minimum that's capable of getting the job done. LOL

Heavy is better, but using government laws to justify laws of physics seems a bit odd. Do you think the spine of a 800-1200 grain arrow might have some influience on penetration? More mud to confuse things.

Yes heavier arrows an in excess of 100lb draw weights = more potential energy.

LOL I wouldn't say it is an intense effort at all. It doesn't take much effort to change the arrow weights and get FOC as close as possible and then shoot at different distances and measure speeds and look at penetration. It is just something to do, learn and have a little fun with in the process. Maybe I need to make a bigger effort and shoot into carcasses to be more authentic. Then someone would say it is dead with no circulatory system so it is not valid. lol.... I am just messing about... I do however understand that a back yard target no matter what it is made of or how many different target materials you use is considered a no-no and totally invalid and will not in any way ever translate to live game in any way shape or fashion. Ever! I understand that....I just don't totally buy it.

The elephant line is a good one but.....Not many hunt elephants and I HIGHLY doubt any compound bow hunter is using his 50-60LB bow maxed out like me to shoot an elephant regardless of the arrow weight. Not only do they use a heavier arrow and I may be wrong but I would bet they are using a bow that can fling that heavier arrow wayyyy faster then the average set up of say, a deer hunters for example. My guess and it is only a guess is that they have the best bows money can buy set at the absolute max they can muster to pull back a few times along with the optimal arrow weight for that bow. I have never been elephant hunting and never met a guy who has killed one so I don't know and am only guessing but if I was to do it I would buy the fastest bow and crank it up as high as I could pull back and I would use whatever arrow weight was in that bows sweet spot of speed, KE and momentum. But that's me and I am just guessing. Now on a side note I do know the minimum caliber rifle for elephant hunting is a 375. At least I think it is because my pops just bought a 375 Sako and it was one of the selling points that it was the minimum caliber to hunt an African Elephant with. The thing kicks like a damn mule too. More than a bow that's for sure. lol

Logic question to the experts or those whom are not experts but know much more about this...... You are hunting a elephant. You have four 70LB bows sitting there with 323 IBO's and a 28.5" draw and 4 arrows matched perfectly and tuned to each bow. All have identical and optimal FOC.....,

The 1st bow will fling its 440 grain arrow 275FPS (187MPH) and produce 74FT-LBS of KE with .536 MO.

The 2nd bow will fling its 550 grain arrow 242 FPS (165MPH) and produce 72FT-LBS of KE with .570 MO.

The 3rd bow will fling its 730 grain arrow 188FPS (128MPH) and produce 57FT-LBS of KE with .608 momentum

The 4th bow will fling its 1000 grain arrow 107FPS (72MPH) with 25ft-lbs of KE with .474 MO.

Which set up do you choose #1, #2, #3 or #4? Those numbers are accurate to what my set up would fling those arrows exactly. Notice how KE is maxed with the lightest and goes down and then falls sharply and how MO is maxed at 730 and then falls sharply.

What if we take it a step further and throw a 5th outrageous set up in there and what if the arrow was 1200 grains? Then it would be going 47FPS (32MPH)and produce 5 FT-LB of KE with .250 MO. Would you choose that arrow? No way you would because it would bounce off the critter but under the laws of physics shouldn't it penetrate better if the speed is not all that important? ah Ha!:o)....On a side note out of my bow the calculator shows a 1350 grain arrow would produce no KE and go 2 FPS. LOL...

I have always maintained a contention that every bow has a sweet spot where you get the max KE, MO and speed and if you take the time to figure it out you can maximize your setup for the most speed, power, KE, MO and penetration it can muster. Not all bows are the same. Just 50 grains either way can drop it out of its sweet spot IMO and a heavier arrow is not always the answer or is it. If it was everyone would use 1000 grain arrows because wouldn't physics say it will store the most energy and if speed makes no difference then it should penetrate better right? Unfortunately we all know it wont with number like that. Why?

This guy Bunch-o-bull has the answer in his 1st post IMO but we cant shoot different weight arrows at different distances so we choose the best fits all for our set up and it may be most guys set ups if they are using to heavy an arrow they are not at the bows peak performance/arrow combination. It is just like the ballistics of a gun. There is a reason a .22 doesn't shoot a bullet the weight of a .44 mag. The same energy would be pushing it out the muzzle just like a bows energy is the same on release regardless of the arrow weight. How much energy is transferred is the same but how much is lost and how fast it scrubs it off would be different based on the arrows weight and bullets weight right? The .22 does not have enough energy to push that .44 bullet very far, fast or with any amount of KE or MO and penetration would suck even though it absorbed every ounce of the energy the charge had. A bow should be no different and each bow should have a perfect weight arrow that will optimize its performance just like a guns bullet right? Why would it be different for a bow?

With my bow and a little research and bowsite threads and testing I think I have determined that about 425-440 grains is its sweet spot for Speed, KE and MO and penetration. This is why I was using the 25-50 grain increments when testing. It was based off the numbers. If I go just a bit heavier according to the numbers I loose a little KE and gain a little MO. If I go just a bit heavier than that I loose even more KE but then gain more MO. So that puts me back in the middle where the KE and MO and speed is at its highest I can get per grains. Disclaimer: Though I was trying to optimize both I did put more importance on KE and trying to max it and still have a decent amount of MO.

A good example of a sweet spot would be according to the data for my bow with my draw and weight etc the max KE I could get my bow to ever produce would be 74FT-LBS of KE with the ideal arrow weight to get that. It hits 74 FT-LBS at 408 grains and then at 489 grains it drops down to 73 again. I have 80 grains where it is at 74. From 408 to 440 it goes up and then at 441 it starts to drop back down and work its way back to 73. This means with my bow the max KE it can produce is at 440 grains. Make sense?

The momentum on my bow will keep going up until I get to 730 grains where it hits .608. However my speed drops to 188FPS and it only produces 57LBS of KE. That is 17 FT-LBS less. That's a ton. It is curios because what is the most important factor. Is it KE or MO or is it an exact combo of both or is one better than the other to a certain degree. I say both. On top of that I am unfamiliar with how to read the MO numbers exactly. I am unsure how much more .608 is to that of .508 and if the KE being 17FT-LBS less could be made up for by adding only .100 worth of momentum. On penetration testing it looks like a combo of both with KE being favored will win because on a 730 grain arrow I will bet ya that my 400 grain arrow will smoke it on penetration because it is going 287 FPS which would be 111FPS faster. That's 76 MPH and I think there is something on the speed variable that is not included or computed. I will try a 770 grain arrow that gives me the most MO and compare it to the arrow with the most KE and speed and see what's the most important between the two. Will it be KE with max speed or will it be max weight with max MO and a very slow speed?

Sorry for the long postings guys but it is an interesting topic. Sorry to the OP for high jacking this area of the thread.

Hey brotha KE changes for every fps your arrow slows down and guess what, you sir have no,earthly idea what the speed of your arrows are once it encounters tissue. LoL

But keep,buying that marketing hype hahaha

Momentum doesn't change unless you loose arrow mass. So it's a much better predictor of potential penetrating energy.

But all the compound speed geeks who couldn't shoot their bows out to 120 yards and hit a barn if they didn't shoot sub 300 grain arrows out of 80 pound bows could not justify hunting with these unless they calculate KE.....at 3' in front of the bow!!!

Keep buying the hype it's quite hilarious

"Those numbers are accurate to what my set up would fling those arrows exactly."

Are you serious?

"On a side note out of my bow the calculator shows a 1350 grain arrow would produce no KE and go 2 FPS."

Think, Hammer, think.....you can throw an arrow left handed like a girl faster than that. Your "bow calculator" is as insane as animal penetration tests in foam.

I regularly shoot 1000 grain arrows from my 71# recurve at around 150ish fps.

Come on Hammer. By the way, how long will you be visiting earth? :))

761 gr. --- 174 fps 776 gr. --- 171 fps 941 gr. --- 161 fps 1015 gr.--- 154 fps

Sorry to hijack this "interesting" thread, but after this long he should have either been found or be alive and recovering.

Pat needs to add a thread called "Irrelevant Nonsense" for crap like this so OP threads can stay on topic

You just did it again! Why not just say nothing instead of making comments like that at the end of your post. You call the thread content that "naturally" progressed into 'shot distance' and 'arrow weights' and speed irrelevant nonsense and crap. The OP questions were answered long ago and it is very common for different angles of a shot and causes of a lost critter because of a lighter arrow as some see it to be discussed in a thread like this. Arrow weights and speeds almost always come up in a case like this where a light arrow was used. Threads naturally progress in this type of manner all over bowsite.

Sapcut,

"Your "bow calculator" is as insane as animal penetration tests in foam"

Your not listening. :o) This is not an animal penetration test no matter what I shoot the arrows into. I already said that it will not translate into live game no matter what. I could bury the arrow into 36" thick solid wood up to the fletching's and I know it is not live game and wont translate into live game. :o)..... I need to use a carcass and video it to end all doubt on my part. I could post video and I am sure there will still be doubt by some though.

As to the speed cal. It was on the internet so it must be true right? LMAO... I used a specific Internet calc but the one I usually use only goes to 800G and that one is very accurate because I have tested the findings through a chrono at several different arrow weights. I was surprised it was actually pretty accurate and translated into the real world.

I had to search the net to find one or two that even goes up to 1000 grains because the one I usally use doesnt. The numbers after 1000 grains didn't look right to me either so if that bugs you then just choose 1-3 then because I know they are dead on accurate.

A 999 grain arrow on one calc will show one number and on another it will be just a little different but they don't show out of my bow that it would go 150FPS. Both showed the 1000 grains around that 87-107 range. I used the higher of the two. It was late and it was a long post and I was going back and forth so maybe I entered something wrong. However 150FPS for 1000 grains seems impossible to me out of my bow but I am no speed/weight expert. I can only get to 299-302 FPS out of my bow with a 350 grain arrow and I have tested that. A 1000 grain arrow is almost 2/3rds heavier or 3X as heavy and you think I would loose less than half my speed?

I use this one to get a rough estimate of arrow speed and KE for my bow after playing with the arrow weights up to 800 grains,

http://www.backcountrybowhunting.com/articles/calc/

I use this one once I have arrow weight and arrow speed to figure the momentum and KE. The 1st link only had KE so I used this one to get MO and confirm KE was close

http://archerycalculator.com/archery-kinetic-energy-and-momentum-calculator/

I used this one to confirm some data and when you get to 1350 grains this one shows a negative speed for my set up so I discounted it. It was showing a - speed at 1350 grains which I knew was bunk. There was a reason I ended the 1350 numbers with a "lol,"...On a side note this link was accurate on my current arrow speed and it confirmed the real world chrono speed but is showing a 1350 arrow at -speed. lol. Why?,

http://utopiaprogramming.com/ke/KineticEnergy.html#

I used this one as well to confirm things were close on the 730G arrow weight in option 3,

http://www.utopiaprogramming.com/ke/ke.php

I used this one where it shows a 1350 grain arrow out of my set up basically has no KE and goes a few FPS but at least it wasn't in the negative like one calc was showing...lol,...It was close on the other weights though and confirmed my past chrno testing at lower weights, IMO this is a good link

http://backcountrybowhunting.com/articles/toolsOLD.php

My bow has an IBO of 323. I used a 70LB draw weight with a 28.5" draw length with 20 grains on the string in every calc. You are welcome to give it a try and see what you come up with.

How is it sapcut that your bow can fling an arrow that is 1000 grains at speeds in excess of 150+ FPS when my bow maxed out and being a compound which stores more energy to start with would only fling the same arrow about 110FPS according to every calc I have tried? Why would a calc be very accurate at weights I have tested through a chrono but once the weights get wayyy up there the calc is suddenly off? Naturally I have not tested weights over 550 grains through a chrono yet to know but the lower weights I have and the FPS is usually really close to what the calc said it would be. This is why I say the 730G info is for sure correct. Out of my bow if I shot your 761G arrow we would shoot almost identical speeds. You have a bad azz traditional bow.

It is strange that the excessively high weights have such a precipitous drop off when using the internet calcs compared to that of the weights up to 800 grains or in the real world. I will let you giver er a try because maybe on the 1000 and 1350 grain arrow I entered something wrong but I don't think so. Also as a side note please understand I have NEVER shot an arrow of these high weights to even know what it would look like or how fast it would go. Even with my old Bear recurve I used for 20+ years I didn't have weights that high and until recently didn't even know what they weighed. I think when we weighed them recently for comparison sake my traditional arrows were something like 575 grains so that is the heaviest arrow I have ever shot. I understand and agree with you that a 1350 grain arrow out of my bow CANNOT only go a few FPS. It WOULD be much faster. I am just trying to figure out now why the hell the calcs show that heavy of an arrow only going a few FPS but they are pretty damn accurate on the speed at weights up to 550 grains which I have tested through a chrono. It is some weird "crap" that's for sure.

When heavy mass is set in motion it is not found of slowing down or stopping. It keeps its speed ip much better than a light object. That is why KE is not a good indicator of penetration. Not sure the silly calculator can think that way.

I don't need a lesson from you about how people often take threads way off topic as a form of keyboard masturbation. I want to know what happened to the bull WEB shot, and don't appreciate having to wade through 200 posts of claptrap in the process.

How about this: Why don't you post up a few photos of bulls you've killed, along with the arrow weight, broadhead choice, shot angle, and penetration, and let's discuss the relative merits of each?

Nice handle.

"you sir have no,earthly idea what the speed of your arrows are once it encounters tissue. LoL

Your right because the chrono broke so we couldn't test it yet beyond 10 yards but I know the lighter arrow is much faster at the POI compared to the 50 grains out to 40 yards and 100 grain heavier arrows tested out to 50 yards because each time regardless of what we shot into the 50 grain lighter arrow penetrated better. The reply is no matter how many different materials you shot into it is not live tissue so it wont translate over. So be it and time will tell I guess.

Hell at 50 yards you can even see the difference and hear it when my buddy was shooting 348 grains compared to 448 grains. The lighter arrow got there much faster and sounds like it hits harder but your right that we do not know the speed at impact. We know it at 10 yards and that's it thus far. We wont know speed at impact until the chrono is repaired.

I do use a 425 grain arrow for hunting and likely will never go lower on weight. This was a just some fun testing to see for the hell of it what happens. It confused me but not enough to switch. Ease up on the elitist tude!

50 grains extra gives you THAT much faster of an arrow?

really?

KE

In physics, the kinetic energy of an object is the energy that it possesses due to its motion.[1] It is defined as the work needed to accelerate a body of a given mass from rest to its stated velocity. Having gained this energy during its acceleration, the body maintains this kinetic energy unless its speed changes

When that arrow hits something - it goes through a great reduction process because almost all the speed is being removed

What matters, is the energy RETENTION .... right? The energy that exists until the arrow stops is what make it penetrate more, right?

Heavy things retain energy better than light things, right ?

KE is the perfect predictor of penetration if the average resisting force is known. The slow and fast arrow will penetrate to the same depth IF they hit with the same KE. The slow heavy arrow decelerates slower, but it was going slower in the first place. The fast light arrow decelerates more quickly, but it had more speed in the first place. Formulas derived from Newtons law prove it.

The advantage to going heavy is the greater KE it gets from the bow and the lesser drag when passing through the air. There is no advantage IF, IF, IF they would hit with the same KE. This is also true in animals except with a bladder shot or similar, where large quanties of fluids are found.

Ease up there man. I wasn't trying to give you any lesson. I was merely pointing out the obvious on this specific topic and that of BH's. They often go off into different areas but are still somewhat related to the way the thread flows. I do not think every person purposely pulls a thread off the rails. It just happens sometimes and even legitimately.

The OP stated his bull was all but lost wayyy up the tread.

All 3 of his post are near the top and pretty easy to find by the bright orange "THREAD OWNER" that is next to his handle and 'only' his handle. They end before this really got going. Sorry we made it so hard for you to find it in this mass of drivel you hate so much.

Sapcut,

I agree a heavier object keeps its speed up better but at hunting distances I believe after a little testing that the much quicker lighter arrow is still maintain enough of a speed differential and has yet to shed its energy enough for the heavier one to catch up. It is not scrubbing it off enough for the heavier lugging arrow to surpass it at least at 40 yards. Keep in mind that way up this thread I said I would likely find that a 'much heavier' arrow will do better at distance even though the numbers I can see seem to show otherwise.

One thing I think I am sure of now by testing....If I shoot a 350 grain arrow at 20 yards it wont shed enough energy for a 100G heavier one to beat it on penetration regardless of the material or if it is live game. I know it wasn't live game I was shooting into but I am convinced. I wont switch arrows and will stay with my 425G but I am convinced that the speed not dropping off is making the difference and eating up the slower arrow at shorter ranges.

I am out of this discussion now. It is pointless until I have something better to shoot into to confirm it.

Stealthy,

Yes I have 20-21FPS differences between the arrow weights. I think because it is going that much faster it has not lost enough speed for the slower arrow to surpass it because the slower arrow started out slower and is also scrubbing speed as well though not as fast. I was always told the further down range you get the better the heavier arrow does compared to the light one. I think the lighter arrow is doing better only because the distance is still short.

Happy hunting guys and good luck.

Remember, KE number is gotten with 2X speed .... lighter arrows have to be faster to catch up to the "KE" formula that heavy arrows are at

when they hit, the lighter loses its energy quicker, the heavier does not which means the end result is the heavier penetrates better / more

KE isn't an indicator of how well something penetrates - its an indicator of energy used to get an arrow from Zero to top speed.

".... lighter arrows have to be faster to catch up to the "KE" formula that heavy arrows are at "

I might agree but you again are assuming the lighter arrow is not taking on all the bow has to offer for energy. IMO that's a big assumption due to how many different bows there are out there and all the different draw weights and different power specs on each bow at each draw weight chosen. Would it be reasonable to think a bow can only apply X amount of KE maximum to an arrow? Regardless of the arrows weight a bow can only produce a certain amount of KE right? My bow seems to only be able to produce 74FT-LBS of KE max and that's at 440 grains. If I put a 540 grain arrow in my bow it cannot produce anymore KE into that arrow just because it is heavier. The difference then would be momentum and energy lost down range between the two because they both have all the bow can offer. The difference then is one is flying faster and would the speed difference and energy shedding be enough for the heavier arrow to perform better inside 40 yards. I again come back to my bullet ballistics analogy. A .22 can only produce a certain amount of energy and if you put the same weight bullet in a .22 that a .44 takes and you use the same .22 charge used to send the bullet it will NOT perform as well as the lighter faster bullet that is set to the guns peak performance abilities and charge. Wouldn't each bow be the same? Would each bow have its peak performance at a specific weight and anything over or under would then cause it not to perform at its peak performance? I would think each bow has a magic arrow weight just like a gun has right?

Energy is the capacity to do work. Work = force x distance. When you draw the bow you apply a varying amount of force for some nominal distance. The average draw force may be 60 pounds for a distance of .875 feet (29" draw - 7" brace = 21")This is the work put into the bow limbs and stored as potential energy. Work = 60 x .875 = 52.5 ft-lbs = PE = KE(assuming no losses) It does not mater if you draw the bow fast or slow; the same amount of work is done and the same amount of energy is stored.

When the arrow hits the target, the same thing happens in reverse. The energy is converted into work. The arrow applies a force which causes it to penetrate the target for a distance.

At the bow the force and distance are predetermined by the design and settings of the bow. Now at the target anything can happen. KE can be lost on the way to the target due to shape, speed, distance and the target's resisting force (and therefore the arrows opposite penetrating force) can be light or heavy. The faster the arrow slows the greater the resisting force and arrow force must be ...... F=m A Obviously the smaller the resisting force the deeper the arrow will penetrate. Penetration = KE/ Resisting force.

I know they are correct up to 550 grains because through the chrono the ones we tested matched what the calc said they would shoot or they were within a few FPS. Like I said above I never ran a 700 grain arrow through a chrono.

I ran 350, 400, 425, 450 (within a few grains + or -)and then I think we shot a 550 grain arrow as well but it was a different arrow than the rest. We also tested arrow speed for my kids bow. Anyway all the weights at those lower grains between 350-550 were almost dead on accurate to what the calc said they would be out of my bow. Not sure why the real super, crazy heavy arrow weights drop off so disproportionally on the calc after 800 grains. Maybe your right and my bow will shoot a 1000-1300 grain arrow 150FPS but I doubt it would. I just don't know so I am guessing at that portion. I can only say for certain what the #'s were on the ones we ran through a chrono.

My bow when new was shooting a 355 grain arrow something like 289 or 298FPS threw the chrono. It was tested the day I bought it by me and verified a few weeks later at a 2nd range. It just so happens it almost matched exactly what the calc showed my bow should fling that arrow. I am assuming the chrono is correct. Because of that and the other weights recently tested at the range I assumed the arrow speed calc was correct but maybe it is off on the very heavy arrows.

same size arrows - the heavier should penetrate more when there is only 18-20 fps difference right ?

heavier retains energy, lighter sheds energy quicker

" assuming the lighter arrow is not taking on all the bow has to offer for energy "

an arrow NEVER absorbs 100% of a bow's energy

ever

but assume the both absorb SAME ammount ... the heavier still retains it while the lighter sheds it - that's the physics as I understand it anyways

"an arrow NEVER absorbs 100% of a bow's energy " "Ever"

Are you arguing just to argue? Of course no bow can transfer all the energy it has. Neither can a gun. A bow can transfer all it has to offer to an arrow and that's it is the point. How much the bow cant transfer do to energy loose in other areas is not my point. It cannot transfer more energy once the arrow is already of sufficient weight to take on all the bow can transfer to it. Being a heavier arrow will not allow the arrow to take on more energy if the lighter one is already taking on the max transfer too.

"the heavier still retains it while the lighter sheds it - that's the physics as I understand it anyways"

Both arrows shed energy. One just sheds it faster. Does the lighter one shed it fast enough to allow the heavier one out to 40 yards to overcome the initial advantage the lighter arrow has? I don't think it does at the weights and distances I have tested. If they both absorb the same energy then speed comes into play regardless of what anyone thinks. If the speed is maintain enough to offset the heavier arrow then they could perform the same or the lighter one can even do better it seems.

My gun analogy..... No one wants to touch that because when we look at it that way it makes you think a little. If a heavier bullet could be fired from a gun then why aren't they shooting thin rounds that are weight of a .44 mag through a .22? Each gun has a set optimal bullet and charge to it. If you go to a much heavier bullet in the same gun with the same charge as the lighter bullets uses it will not go as fast or penetrate anywhere near as well right? Why would a bow be any different and/or why wouldn't a bow have an optimal arrow weight for each bow? Guns do but bows don't. I wonder why?

Both have the same KE...an equal force is needed to stop the arrow.

Lighter arrow sheds its energy faster, heavy arrow has more momentum, thus it does not shed as fast.

Again, your testing on foam, its collapsing properties would allow the faster arrow to penetrate further.

Did you read any of the articles in the link???

Yes I read some of it but not all of it.

What you posted above I in essence already knew. Also I did not test into foam only.

An FYI.....The site you linked me to with that info is one of the sites I already have used many times in the past and I used it in my 1,2,3,4 option choice post above. I used that exact site to confirm and reconfirm and calculate Momentum, KE and my arrow speeds that Sapcut thinks are inaccurate. In fact that site gives even slower speeds than the ones I posted so I didn't use them and I only used that site for momentum. It shows a negative -31FPS speed for a 1300 grain arrow from my bow with a 323 IBO, 28.5" draw, 70LB draw weight, 20 on the string and a 1350 grain arrow.

I am not saying all their other info is invalid due to the speed calc being so bad on higher weights either. I just didn't use that site for arrow speed because I felt it was best to try and represent as close as what the real world shows through a chrono so I used the numbers I know were right and then weights I had not tested I used the calc with the highest FPS results that also closely matched my chrono testing at the lower weights . Needless to say that site actually has the arrow speed correct on a 355 grain arrow out of my bow but wrong on the others and wayyy wrong on a very heavy arrow. There is no way a 1300 grain arrow would travel a negative speed like their calc says. Something is jacked with some of these calcs on these so called good sites.

One of the things I noticed right off the top that caught my eye was when he said this, "Knowing that a heavier arrow will always have a higher kinetic energy and momentum to begin with, and knowing that it will also slow down at a lower rate downrange, it becomes obvious that a heavier arrow will not only begin with more energy and momentum, but will retain a higher percentage of its energy and momentum downrange"

He makes the same error. How does he know that a heavier weight arrow will automatically have more KE to start with? He writes it like it is a universal truth no matter the arrow weight. If the lighter arrow is already of sufficient weight to take what the bow has to offer then the lighter arrow will not have less to "begin" with and it instead will have the same. The starting point IMO is flawed. I am not convinced that a 450 grain arrow out of my bow has less KE than one that weighs 700 grains. I think they both are sufficiently weighted to take the same amount right off the get go. Naturally the lighter arrow will shed its energy quicker though but then its a question of how fast and when does the heavier arrow surpass it and is it at hunting ranges. He says something very similar in the portions about downrange shots. He looses me right there because I think that is wrong. Again he says it like every arrow comparison regardless of its weight the heavier one will have more KE right off the bat.

Do you believe a 1300 grain arrow has more energy transferred to it from the bow than one that is 700 grains or do you think they both are sufficiently weighted to take on all the bow can give them?

He says this....."At typical archery distances, the lighter arrow will almost always maintain a higher speed than the heavier arrow." I agree!

"Even though the lighter arrow is slowing down faster, it started out much faster and the heavier arrow is also slowing down." I agree!

"Because the heavier arrow is decelerating at a slower rate, it will maintain a higher percentage of it’s original speed than the faster arrow." I agree!

"Also remember that the heavier arrow has more kinetic energy and momentum than the lighter arrow at launch already." I disagree for reasons stated above.

"This gap only grows larger as the arrows progress downrange" I agree... but.... if both arrows are sufficiently weighted to take on the most energy the bow can put to them to start with and they both took on the same amount then the faster arrow will win every time at hunting distance because when you have a big speed differentials with two arrows that have stored the same amount of energy then the lighter arrow will get there 1st and be traveling at a much faster velocity to boot! I agree it will have lost more of its energy because it is lighter but I do not believe it has lost enough. I think this is why my arrows are beating the heavier ones. they both have the same energy to start with and the lighter one has not scrubbed enough out to 40 yards for the heaver one to beat it out.

If this wasn't the case then you could shoot a 1500 grain arrow out of a 30 pound bow at 5 yards and blow through a deer. That will NOT happen with those weights and the arrow would bounce off the deer. At some point on the scales a sufficiently weighted arrow for each set up will take all the bow has to offer and just because you use a heavier one does not mean it will take on any more energy to start with. It has the potential to take more but it wont because each bow can only produce what it can produce. Using a heavier arrow cannot make a bow suddenly gain energy. The stored energy a bow has is pre set so to speak. Getting the right arrow weight to take on all that energy is the best way to go I would think just like a bullet and if you go heavier than what's needed then you hurt the over all performance of the bow arrow combination.

This again comes to my bullet analogy no one has been willing to touch. Heavier is not always better. Each weapon has an optimal size and weighted bullet for the energy the shell can produce and if you add a bunch of weight but keep the energy pushing it the same it will perform much worse at just about any range. Once the perfect arrow weight is found for each bow you can add weight and it will only hurt the performance right? Why would a bow be different than a gun in this area?

Note: In his arrow comparison test he used 580 grains versus 326. That's nuts light but regardless his test could be invalidated because the 326 grain arrow is not sufficiently weighted to take on all the energy the bow has to offer to start with. If he did it with a 426 grain arrow verus a 680 grain arrow where the lighter arrow likely is weighted enough to take all the bow can transfer to it and tested against it I bet the numbers would be very different and penetration would be different at shorter distance like that of hunting. His KE numbers would be much closer together too. A 326 grain arrow will loose because it cant take the bows potential to start with right?

To end my participation again and to repeat like the broken record I am... If 2 arrows are sufficiently weighted where they both can take all the potential energy a bow has to offer them then just adding weight to one of the arrows will not give it any more energy to start out. I think this is likely the crux of the matter for super light arrows guys shoot and why I suffered on penetration with 355 grain arrows. To light an arrow that cannot absorb all the energy should no doubt loose to a heavier arrow but if you use just heavy enough(sweet spot) of an arrow to absorb all the energy the bows can transfer then that arrow should win out over all other arrow weights + or -. At least I think. lol

Yes it should because the heavier arrow will nearly always get more KE from the bow and retain that KE because it has less drag by virtue of its lower velocity. However, the reality is that the lighter arrow actually penetrated further.

The only 3 possible explanations are: 1. The lighter arrow actually had more KE due to a faulty test. (shot with different draw length, arrows not identical, faulty release, etc.) This is very unlikely. 2. The average resisting force was less for the lighter arrow. ( bow not tuned for both arrows, target density variation, target movement, point shape variation, heat variation effecting friction, target material separation due to velocity effecting friction, etc.). Any of these are quite likely to have occurred. 3. Some combination of 1 & 2.

In my tests I frequently get a 1" variation in penetration using the very same arrow and setup. No test is perfect and exactly repeatable. A large sample size is essential to any meaningful test.

"He makes the same error. How does he know that a heavier weight arrow will automatically have more KE to start with? He writes it like it is a universal truth no matter the arrow weight. If the lighter arrow is already of sufficient weight to take what the bow has to offer then the lighter arrow will not have less to "begin" with and it instead will have the same. The starting point IMO is flawed. I am not convinced that a 450 grain arrow out of my bow has less KE than one that weighs 700 grains. "

Yours is the thinking that is flawed. Every test that I have done or seen shows the as arrow weight increases, KE increases. See my spreadsheet above. Essentially there is no sweetspot for KE. It just keeps going up with arrow weight. Every bow is different and at extreme weights (generally above 1200 grains with high poundage bows) KE will level off and MAY even start to drop.

Seems you don't believe anything except your own tests so I suggest you get your chrono fixed and start testing.

Your gun analogy is flawed too. 1. Smokeless powders' energy output varies with bullet weight. It is not a constant as you imply. 2. You say each gun has an optimal bullet. What is the optimal bullet for a 30-06? 130 grain high velocity bullet or a 220 grain heavy slow bullet. Define optimal ...... most KE, flattest trajectory, most accurate, least case distortion? I'd hard to answer or debate an illogical / ambiguous question or statement.

If you dry fire a bow, where does the energy go? Sound and less audible vibration. Shoot a heavy enough arrow that when you release the string barely moves the arrow across the rest. The 2nd example would result in all energy transferred to the arrow except what is lost in inherent friction in the system (including arrow rest contact) because there is minimal vibration and sound (or 'lost' energy).

Obviously there is price to pay in shooting too light of an arrow (excess noise and the higher friction due to the higher velocity). Shooting too heavy of an arrow (although having a higher absorption of energy) leads to exaggerated hold over and criticalness of ranging issues.

For me, I'll lean on the side of a quieter bow as a result of shooting a heavier arrow (567 grains with a lighted nock) so that I've better utilized the finite energy my bow can impart while significantly reducing game spooking arrow releases more reminiscent of a muffled 22 cal rifle.

Purdue,

Now I am illogical too and only believe my own testing? Wow. That's not accurate. Illogical maybe but I do not only believe my own test

"Essentially there is no sweetspot for KE. It just keeps going up with arrow weight. Every bow is different and at extreme weights (generally above 1200 grains with high poundage bows) KE will level off and MAY even start to drop."

That is impossible IMO. Do you have proof of this from an actual test you did. By the way your chart above.. I cant read it. If I zoom in it gets fuzzy and I cat make it out.

Are we talking to different KE here? The KE the bow sends to the arrow and the KE the arrow hits with are the same or different IYO? I know an arrow loose some of the KE the bow gave it as it travels down range but when it smacks a target you could measure the KE remaining. If you had a KE FT-LB measuring plate and shot an arrow at it are you saying the heavier arrow will always hit harder than the a much faster but lighter one regardless of the arrow weights if shot from the same bow? If you shot a 450 grain arrow at 20 yards and it was going 280 FPS at impact do you think it would hit harder than an identical arrow from the same bow that weighs 550 grains and is going 250 at impact? (not real world numbers and just an example)

Lets start small on this too for my benefit so I can understand this. Do you think a 1200 grain arrow will take all the energy a bow can transfer? Do you think a 700 grain arrow will take it all? I say both will and even a lighter arrow will. How do we know the cut off of arrow weight that will absorb all the bow has to offer? Once you have that weighted arrow how can more weight give it more KE?

When you compute KE on any calc with the same energy sending it (all bows energy stored at draw does not change due to the arrow weight)the KE goes up up up and then once you get to 440 grains with my bow set up it shows the KE begins to slowly drop. Why is it that it cant drop once it hits 440 but it can once over 1200 like you say it 'might'? Seriously? If that was accurate wouldn't everyone hunt with a 800 grain arrow no matter what bow they use? Open plains hunters should all use a massively weighted arrow right? Like 1200 grains. It might only go 80FPS and have a hell of an arc but it will have a hell of an impact when it hits and cut through both front shoulder on a bad shot and bury into a rock behind it. (sarcasm). Velocity is a bigger factor then people think IMO and it impacts how much the arrow will penetrate. It is not 'all' about the weight IMO. Velocity at impact matters

In 20 years this will all be moot because bows will keep getting better and eventually a bow will spit a 650 grain arrow 500FPS and it wont matter. I will just keep using my new 425 grain arrow and when hunting bigger game I will go to 525. Then when the new bows come out I will get the one that will shoot the heavier arrow faster.

One thing is for sure. Regardless of the answer thus far I have been able to hunt successfully for 25 years with both style archery weapons so I guess in the end its not a big deal. It was just something fun to test. Funny though that I wont be changing to a super light arrow anytime soon. Regardless of what my test showed I would never use a 355 grain arrow EVER again.

Sadly and unfortunately and no doubt painfully for him the bull was lost. 'no luck finding him and a lesson was learned' or something to that effect is what he said along with 'thank you for all the input.' Its just to bad some piled on and likely made it even harder on the poor guy.

Its a real bummer he didn't find it. Hopefully next time he will get a real dandy to make up for the heartache he is now feeling.

Would have been nice if the elitist here had something to say anytime over the 1st 5-6 days when the OP a fellow open and honest hunter was being bashed and piled on about shot distance and having a light arrow weight when he was NOT asking about any of that! He wanted input on if we thought it was fatal penetration and if we thought recovery would be possible. Oh that's right.....Some of you don't roll that way and only speak up when or if it gets into anything technical as a response to something someone says. Some of us talked about arrow weights as a spin off and natural flow of the tread well after the OP dropped out with a "no luck finding him" and "lesson learned" post and we get into the related spin off and you make a big deal about it 9 whole days later! However, bash a guy for his shot choice or distance shot and arrow weight when that's not what the tread is about and give unsolicited advice on that front for 5 days and the elitist say nothing. Pretty fricken Sad!

Then you opinion is wrong. Yes I have proof ( actually just test data) in the test I did that took you 5 days to tell me you cant read. BTW, I can read it on an iPad.

"The KE the bow sends to the arrow and the KE the arrow hits with are the same or different IYO? "

Yes, the same KE or a little less due to drag.

"If you shot a 450 grain arrow at 20 yards and it was going 280 FPS at impact do you think it would hit harder than an identical arrow from the same bow that weighs 550 grains and is going 250 at impact? "

I don't know what "hit harder" means. The one that has the most KE when it hits will penetrate the deepest IF, IF, IF, they both encounter the same average resisting force.

"Lets start small on this too for my benefit so I can understand this. Do you think a 1200 grain arrow will take all the energy a bow can transfer? Do you think a 700 grain arrow will take it all? I say both will and even a lighter arrow will. How do we know the cut off of arrow weight that will absorb all the bow has to offer? Once you have that weighted arrow how can more weight give it more KE?"

As I said before, all bows are different. A trad bow won't act the same as a compound, a kid's bow won't act like a 90# bow, etc. Each bow design would have to be tested to see at what arrow weight maximum effeciency is reached reguarding KE.

My theory as to why a bow is more efficient as arrow weight increase is because the string and limbs move more slowly with a heavy arrow. They too would see less drag (wind resistance) with a heavier arrow. Drag, whether it's on the arrow, string or any moving part, is increased at the square of the velocity.

People don't shoot extreme arrow weights for most game due to their limited range/trajectory and you usually only gain about 12% more KE over a much light arrow. (will vary with each bow)

"In 20 years this will all be moot ......"

It was moot a long time ago. Arrow placement is what really matters.

I cant read the darn thing or I would. I cant read it on the screen as it sits and when I blow it up to see it better the numbers fuzz out. Sorry.

You said ""Essentially there is no sweetspot for KE. It just keeps going up with arrow weight" I said "that is impossible IMO" and you then say "I would be wrong" and you site your testing but then turn around and say " Each bow design would have to be tested to see at what arrow weight maximum effeciency is reached reguarding KE." .....Well if it keeps going up like you said then why would it need to be tested on the KE front? I don't think it does keep going up and I think there is a sweet spot for max KE.

"Arrow placement is what really matters"

Sure does but that's another debate. All I know is I am a decent shot and sometimes thing beyond your control happen and the arrow doesn't go where you want and then the arrow weight, velocity, Ke, Mo, blah blah matter IMO.

Now as I sated already you said 'each bow would need to be tested to find its max KE/arrow weight.' If that is the case and you found that weight and then went heavier you would loose velocity and KE and have no real advantage then right? At some point ther 'must' be a diminishing return.

Have you found out the arrow weight that gives you the max KE your set up could possibly offer?

If so what is it and at what weight arrow does it begin to drop off?

Also why do the KE calcs start to go down on KE with my set up right at the 441 grain mark? It climbs until 440 and then goes down according to every calc I tried. All were within a few grains of showing the same thing. Do you happen to know why it goes down at that grain weight? I mean if the KE keeps going up until you hit extreme weights around 1200g then why the heck are all the calc showing something soooo much different than that?

How can they be accurate on speed and KE up to a certain weight and suddenly be wrong at higher weights? I have no clue why. I would think if they were all so wrong that no one would use them at all and the archery community would run them out with a stick.

Gezzzz! Some of the high handed people here crack me up. Was it so hard to find the update you seek? Took me 30 seconds to find all 4 of the OP postings.

Why don't people just take the 30 seconds it takes to scroll down and look for the OP BRIGHT ORANGE letters right beside ANY thread owners name that say "THREAD OWNER" in BRIGHT ORANGE and get their updates and then keep the self absorbed BS condemnation of others discussions to themselves!

Wake me up when the bull is found.lol

No. I have shot a mechanical through an elk with 41 foot-pounds of KE when using a 400 grain arrow, so I know I have enough KE. No point in seeking more KE. I'm more concerned with trajectory while keeping the noise level reasonable. For me that is done by using a 400-450 grain arrow.

"Also why do the KE calcs start to go down on KE with my set up right at the 441 grain mark?"

I have no idea why your calculators are giving squirrelly, illogical results. I assume their algorithm is bogus.

I miss Woody when these idiotic threads get going!

I have yet to find a calc anywhere that shows the KE keeps going up regardless of the arrow weight. What one do you use? Perhaps a link to it? Thanks.

The reason why I asked about the max KE and if you have found it with and arrow for your set up was mostly for those occasions when it is a bad shot and not a good one. Heck when I was a kid I had an old bow for 2 years that was a 30 pound bow and I pass-thru on a deer at 20 yards but it was a perfect shot. Not all shots are that way so I try to prepare for the worst.

Hammer, on the last bull you shot, what was your arrow weight and estimated KE, where did you hit it, and what sort of penetration did you achieve?

I don't use one. I use actual measurements with a chronograph and a weight scale.

Th below website shows some graphs of what one specific bow did with different arrow weights. It is typical of what I have seen with my bow and what others have posted here.

http://archeryreport.com/2009/11/arrow-kinetic-energy-momentum-archer/

I look forward to seeing the answer here too. Would love pics as well.

Lol, but real world MEASURED data takes away the opportunity to endlessly pontificate the estimated results one may or may not get.

That's one of the links I provided already that I used that you said was showing bad data. An example of what it shows: With my setup and lets say a 400 grain arrow it shows 284 FPS with 73.5KE. With a 700 grain arrow it shows speed at 184FPS and the KE drops to 52. Must be yet....another bad calc.

There ain't no way every KE calc on the planet is wrong.

Jaquomo,

After the tude you threw you want to talk my last Elk shot with me and KE along with penetration too? LMAO...Seriously? I thought this was all "speculative drivel that is not germane to the OP's topic" gezzzz. Its not your thing remember? Instead you piss and moan when people do talk about this and other things like BH and it's obvious you don't want to talk anything of the sort.

How about it? Give us the details of your last bull and let's discuss.

The only way to truly know what your bow is doing is get a good chrono and start testing. Then you can run a KE formula yourself and know how much KE your bow/arrow is doing.

I could care less what KE my bow produces. I care to a certain extent what kind of speed it will produce though. With this speed I can push a heavier arrow faster and deeper (for penetration).

So take your 440 grain arrow and run it thru the chrono. Then take a 500 grain arrow and run it thru the same chrono. The 500 will have more KE I promise.

As to the OP. Sorry to hear about your lost bull. I am sure you have beat yourself up enough. Take what you have learned and make it count the next bull that is in front of you.

The OP was clearly done and the guys who bashed him on shot distance and arrow weights opened the door for others to challenge his arrow weight was insufficient or that his shot was too far. It naturally progressed from there and had the OP came back in and started to discuss his shot more I am sure everyone would have went along with him but after he went MIA for days and never returned the thread "then" flowed the way it flowed. You make a big deal about it like its the end of the word. Kinda silly if you ask me.

Just to put a smile on your face: My last Elk hunt was 4 years ago Lou and I had a clean pass-thru. I passed right through the bulls hair and missed at 27 yards. I used a 55# Bear Super Mag recurve. Want the serial number too or are you like happy and need pics?

No, I think I said the calculators you were using were producing bad data. I said to look at the GRAPHS on that page. Appearantly he used a chronograph when plotting the graphs for his bow that show increased KE with an increase in arrow weight.

"There ain't no way every KE calc on the planet is wrong."

What Fulldraw1972 said is correct. In fact, there is a note at the bottom of the "Archery Report" calculator page that says the same thing, if you had taken the time to read it. Here it is for you:

"Note: This calculator makes the assumption that increasing or decreasing arrow weight by 3 grains will change the speed by one foot per second. As arrow weight increases, bow efficiency also increases. As a result, as arrow weight increases much beyond IBO/ATA specs of 5 grains per pound of bow draw weight (350 grain arrow at 70 lbs. draw weight) most bows will change one foot per second with added arrow weight of more than three grains. For example, a 70 lb. bow may lose one foot per second for every additional three grains of arrow weight for arrows near 350 grains, but for arrows near 450 grains it may take 4 grains of arrow weight to reduce the speed one foot per second."

-------

And who knows how much it would be for a 700 grain arrow much less one of 1200 grains???? I don't know if every calculator has this built in error, but the ones you have used so far evidently have it.

Slow down, reread some of the posts here. Read the links that have been sent and try to understand the physics. Generally speaking going slower makes things more efficient. Does your car get better mileage going fast or going slow? Speed (motion through a fluid like air) increased drag exponentially.

I'm getting PM's from some folks who aren't sure you've ever actually killed an elk, after ripping TBM for expressing his opinion without killing an elk in your first post.

I have read what's posted here and the links and until fulldraw said something no one was popping out the answer on why the calcs were pretty much on up to 450-500 grains and so off on 700+. Like I said I know they are right up to the arrow weights I ran through a chrono because the arrow speed matched pretty darn close so the KE would have been accurate..

I will say based on that info that the calcs would have to be off by a huge margin and not just a little. from 440 to 1200 I think the KE was less than half so not only were they off by half but on the + side as well.

Anyways...Happy hunting and good luck to your seasons guys. Be safe.

By the way my recurve is the #55lb bow with the 550-575 arrow. The 440G arrow goes with 62lb compound setup. In case it come up again EVER I wouldn't want confusion and speculation. lol... I may be overthinking this arrow ting but it is only because of the fact that the arrows are lighter than my primitive set up and like I said before when I 1st got this new bow the 355 grain arrows were not penetrating well on multiple shots that were bread and butter shots and hit well. I mean I double lunged a tiny doe at 15 yards a few years ago and it barley made it through to the other side. It had a rage head of course so that hurt it big time IMO but I was still surprised I did not get a pass-thru on a double lung shot. After several more poor penetrations I thought it better to find the best arrow combo for my setup rather than just grabbing a 550 or 600 grain arrow and overdoing it unnecessarily. Once I started fiddling with those calc I guess I was done for.

Still would like to see a pic and details of your last bull, just to clear up some of the confusion over your actual experience in these things. It would sure give you much more credibility. TBM was honest about never having killed an elk (or having hunted them, for that matter). We all know what TBM is about, but he has a sense of humor and a thick skin. He agreed to fight me in a MMA cage match (Idyllwild's idea) but we haven't been able to schedule it yet.

I will leave you with this. I have been on Bowiste for 4 years now and if hunters who ask questions and debates certain things like arrow weights or a 2 blade SBBH like I have because they never saw the debates and are just wanting to gain knowledge have to also go out of their way to prove their hunting worth and specific experience to others just to gain knowledge on other unrelated things they do not know then that is a sad state of affairs for us hunters and likely partly why our ranks continue to lessen instead of swell.

I have not made any grandiose claims here as being a great shakes BGH. I have hunted areas around the US in years past and bagged my share of the critters that God saw fit. The biggest claim I have ever made other than hunting different areas of the US is that I am a better than average deer hunter and a decent shot because of my childhood hunting days and the opportunity afforded to me which I will not bother or even bore you with because frankly you don't really care and neither does anyone else. The rest of my skills evolved from that deer hunting base starting point and I just do OK on other critters I hunt. I am sure I could not compete with you on BG or most others here nor would I try. I have not spent time out of the US hunting all over places like Africa etc like some have though I wish I could.. I no longer have the physical ability so likely never will be able to either. I have hunted in Canada 1 time so does that count?. I am not a fame seeker or stroke my ego kinda guy.

Some of my friends on bowsite know me personally and know these things of me and I refuse to go out of my way to prove my worth to spiteful fellas I do not even know who are supposed to be part of the same hunting community I am in but go out of their way to be spiteful nonetheless.

I can guess who PM you and I would bet I know what state they are in too and they don't like me much because when guys are attacked for their shot choice or hunting preference or someone continuly acts like an A-hole I am that A-hole guy that comes in rudely calling for a bit of fairness and not a bunch of BS snaking and kicking a guy when he is down.. When a new guy comes in dropping nukes it is each guys job if he choices to believe his BS or not and do a check through the site to see what they have said to lines up. Many guys that suddenly do that nuke dropping, challenging and spatting are new arrivals within a few months and they never last or they got banned and have came back. Either that or they rarely post.

If I need to after 4 years here now go through kill shots on past game I have bagged to get some "credibility" I am not even seeking or that shouldn't even be needed to gain knowledge on things I don't know then what's the point in participating? It's not supposed to be a game.

I can assure you that I will only rarely post up my nice critter camera pics because I have done that and watched other do that in the past on other sites and my fellow hunters seem to have a knack for hammering a guy on what he sees as a big buck or nice bull or just a great critter etc...They suck the joy! I have even seen it on simple trail cam pics over and over. Many never take the time to consider exactly where game is bagged and how that area effects growth traits etc so they hammer your definition of a trophy or big critter all the while they themselves do not have a single trophy photo or cam photo of their own to look at to compare yours too. lol. For some if you do not post up your hunts and trophy photos and even trail cam pics your not a hunter or maybe you are but an obvious poor hunter.

Please note I am not calling you out on these things above specifically. I only called you out on how you pop into a thread and find a way to be pretty insulting and demanding about a topic or how YOU think a thread should read.

I am out. Gonna watch the 9ers whoop Chicago. Gonna use my new arrow and see how it goes. I am sure it will be fine and I have no plans for anything bigger than deer until next year so I have time to figure it out and add weight if I think I need to.

Pulling 82 lbs - 510 grain arrow - 290 FPS = 94.5 ft lbs of kinetic energy. QAD exodus fixed broad head.

Used to not believe all the hype about an elk shoulder blade being darn near impossible to penetrate. After a bummer incident last year I am a bonafide believer now. Flat shoulder paddle may be a slightly different story, but regardless I'm putting a lot of momentum out of my setup, and much more than the average string puller. Wouldn't have believed it had I not experienced it. Tough lessons for sure, but good ones nonetheless....

My point is, I thought my setup was pretty much bullet proof. (Big, giant negative)

OP: Trust me when I say I feel your pain. Hope you can get back up on the ol' proverbial horse and keep on a ridin'. You'll get em' next time!!!!!

I'm with you, though I'd settle for a pic of anything he's killed. His cousin is the real hunter in the family. Ol Ham can type pretty quick though. Long winded too. He side tracks many threads with his extremely long and drawn out responses.

Anyhow, would love to see some pics of anything....he's shot with a bow. I think he said "many of critters" up above. I wonder if blue jays, squirrels and raccoons with the truck are being counted. Haha

Later!

From practical experience (been around +100 Aus buff bow kills), I can assure you the heavier arrow (e.g. 850 grain) by far out penetrates the lighter arrow (e.g. 450 grain) at any bow distance on these animals.

Cheers

"I'm with you, though I'd settle for a pic of anything he's killed."

Why? What reason did I give anyone here where I challenged a shot or kill info or claimed to have specific knowledge or more knowledge or comprable knowledge or claimed specific kills that I would need to show 'you' or anyone here anything. Other than generalities of where I have hunted and a few pissy in kind responses to others that I have killed big game or enough big game to know better what reason would justify needing or 'requiring' such things? I don't go into kill threads and pop off about myself or others here or try to give unsolicited advice like I know more than others. In fact I don't give any advice to speak of unless specifically asked. All my threads are almost always question threads and even then some of you folks go haywire. Its no wonder so many don't post photos of themselves here or trail cam pics. Why would they with the tude we often see on the net sites.

Are you a show me a pic or it didn't happen guy? Well keep waiting because I will NEVER post a single pic of myself on this site or 'ANY'other site for that matter no matter the site. Oh by the way...I wouldn't shoot blue jays either so I guess that leaves just coons and Squirrels.

"He side tracks many threads"

Seriously? Maybe my own threads go off the rails into something unrelated or perhaps at times I will challenge a guy that is asking for it due to the insane but go back and look because I was not the 1st,2nd or even 5thth person to talk about unrelated stuff that the OP was not even asking about here. I did decide to get into arrow weight when the opportunity presented itself because I am now a full time compound hunter and curious about this "arrow weight speed" stuff out of a fast compound. I find it funny that some of the high handed and rude hunters here NEVER say crap when their pals go off topic or bash a poor guys shot choice or arrow weight choice when he is not asking for that info but long post or BH and arrow weight/speed debates that a person doesn't even have to read where nasty and hard railing is the norm are somehow fair game to bash away. Funny thing is I have noticed over these 4 years that the culprits are the same guys almost each time

'his uncle is the real hunter?' Really? What do you possibly know about him other than nothing. The "real" super man hunter in my family is my cousin. I supposed some will want pic of his trophy room too with brown bears and polar bears in glass cases and every BG you can think of. It wouldn't count because no pics and he is a gun only hunter. :(

Happy,

Seriously? You didn't believe I even had specific trail cam pics I was claiming I had and were asking for pics multiple times like a child even though you have no pics up either. Once I post a few exactly as I said they were you then say squat! You're supposedly new to bowsite and even lied about how long you were on Bowsite too. You come into our MI state forums like you have been there for years and you live in WI but claim to hunt the UP exactly like a past member who was banned. You're the HUNTER who claims to be better with a compound than you are with a rifle. Your the one who claim to struggle with a scoped rifle at 150 yards and later when challenged on that 150 yard thing you claim it is because of 150 yard "thick woods" shots. LMAO. How many guys take 150 yard shots in thick woods? How many have even had the chance hardly ever or even heard of a 150 yard shot in "thick woods" hardly ever! Its preposterous! I can play this game to happy if that's what you want but be carful what you wish for. You want to pull out of context quotes of me to put up in the MI forum and keep demanding things then have at it. The difference is I know better and know what makes sense regardless of the pics you wanna see at any given time.

Move on guys.

"Long winded too. He side tracks many threads with his extremely long and drawn out responses. "

Couldn't have said it better myself. Expect 1000+ words in every retort and he feels the need to retort every post. He hates it when people don't opine the same as him and shoves his opinions down your throat. The next one will be a doozie for sure. Grab a Snickers.

my brother just killed his first bull (decent 5 nothing big) single lung and it barely hit the lung that it did hit.....he's a good shot, but got a bit excited.....anyway.....the bull went 120 yards and laid down we watched him for about an hour and a half until it was to dark to see.

he got up once and walked 20 yards and laid back down. I decided to pull back.....the shot looked too far back, but not really far back. definitely not what you want to see. We came back about an hour before the sun came up (about 8 hours later) he had just died....eyes were still glossy and calf muscles were still very warm (it was about 30 degrees that night) joints and ears were still floppy and there was still warm blood leaking out of the wound. I would guess he took 7-8 hours to die. Did not lose any meat....and anyone that has been around elk knows you don't have long to get the guts out before you start to lose your shoulders and the front half of your back straps.

That being said.....he didn't go more than 140-160 yards......no where near a mile.

The lung he hit (and that is all he hit...no liver....just barely clipped one lung) was completely deflated and full of blood....the other lung was perfectly healthy. Elk are tough, but if you take out a lung they don't run for miles.

Question- What should I be hit with for even revisiting this thread?

Oh yeah, basically the premise for my post. It's hard to read or follow his posts due to the overly long, drawn out nature of them. That and the fact he insists everyone shares the same opinion.

He did speak of several deer and turkeys he's wounded the past few years, yet always puts his "buddies" down when talking about their shooting or their hunting. Several posts insinuate exactly that.

Anyhow... I think posting pictures of one's experience is a great way to gain credit on an internet forum where anyone can be "anyone"... I've come to the conclusion he is a talker....not a walker.

As one of my professors and writing coaches told me many years ago:

- Say more with less

- If you enter the arena, expect slings and arrows

is that a result of the energy not transferring enough to the arrow ?

Used to not believe all the hype about an elk shoulder blade being darn near impossible to penetrate. After a bummer incident last year I am a bonafide believer now. Flat shoulder paddle may be a slightly different story, but regardless I'm putting a lot of momentum out of my setup, and much more than the average string puller. Wouldn't have believed it had I not experienced it. Tough lessons for sure, but good ones nonetheless..."

I feel your pain. First Bull I ever took a shot at was standing at 22 yards, I found out the exact same thing. My setup was almost identical. My results were identical to yours. They ain't no whitetail. And demand you mind that front leg unlike the whitetails.

God Bless

I rarely call a guy out on anything unless it is complete BS or preposterous like our 'new' member happygolucky who made a splash with his arrival in the MI forum a few months ago and then yesterday claims in the MI "MBH image" thread thread that he struggles with a scoped rifle on 150 yard shots but is golden at 40 and in with a bow. His BS reason given when asked and even challenged on that is to scurry backward when he realized his error and what I was getting at. It was to say it is because of "thick woods." ANY real hunter who has used a rifle very much AT ALL knows damn good and well that is complete BS to the NTH degree because there is no such shot as 150 in "thick woods." That's 1.5 football fields long let alone seeing an animal at 150 in "thick woods" at 150 but no worries it is what it is. When a new guy yes man slings BS you boyz just keep believing it but when another hunter starts a thread to ask some questions on 2 blade SBBH or asked about arrow weights and KE and has the gull to include his opinion or preliminary findings to forward the debate and is willing to debate it to learn it you blast away at him not talking kill shots and posting photos. LMAO So be it and have at it.

" He plays an expert on the internet but he's complete BS."

Hmmm Not quite sure where that comes comes from. An expert would not need to ask questions on anything archery related and freely admit scores and scores and scores of times he is no expert like I have.

"- If you enter the arena, expect slings and arrows "

I fully expect arrows on any data I might interpret or anything that I might believe or think that others see as incorrect. However I refuse to accept that it is a prerequisite that a hunter 'must' talk specific kill shots and post photos of kills to ask those questions.

Like I said...We wonder why our ranks are decreasing and not increasing. That goes for many areas of bowsite too. We are all supposed to be from the same community but it is obvious in todays world of hide behind a keyboard that we are not all from the same group and sniping is the norm nowadays.

I see and understand what you are driving at and maybe it is exactly why but wouldn't that go the other way as well? There is a reason there is a minimum arrow weight for each bow right? I would think once you get to a certain arrow weight you have enough weight to take all the energy the bow can give and arrow regardless of how much heavier you go after that. I just have no idea what that weight is. No one else seems to either.

I know the calcs are off now on higher weights but it seems weird that my bow would show a drop off in KE a mere 100 grains from its minimum safe arrow weight of 350 grains. Even accounting for the disclaimer that was pointed out we wouldn't be over 480-490 grains max before my bows energy would supposedly peter out.

He's typed more that past few weeks than I am, and I write for a living! :-)

Is there going to be a test on this when the semester-long class is over, Hammer?

Nope but you write some great stuff... I am no teacher. Just ask questions I don't know the answer to and give opinion when the topic opens into an area I find interesting. I admit at times I write long post and sometimes very long post because at times I have a hard time condensing things when in written form. Always have! At times I even address 2 or 3 people in a response separately so those don't count do they? lol....My teachers when I was young hated it when I wrote long reports and could not understand it. It was later determined why which is not really important to talk about here.

There are always a few TOOLS out there that continually follow a guy around and insist on making a big fuss about word count too instead of just skipping over my drivel when that happens but apparently they just wont do so. Some just cant help themselves and they MUST find this and that to bitch about no matter what it is. Actually it is kinda funny to watch them spin their head around like a top instead of just skipping over it. I even admit I skip over some long post by others many times if it is not something I am really interested in. I don't ever say anything about it though. I just skip it and quickly find the stuff I 'am' interested in. It ain't all that hard.

Maybe pat needs a word limit counter that way the big babies who fuss about it would be happy they got their way on yet one more thing in life- ;o)

All one has to do is say something like you did because he's no TBM. Hammer is very thin skinned, thinks he's always right, and tries to make others follow his own opinions. He goes off on tangents that are actually disturbing.

I'm grabbing another Snickers now. We'll get to 400 posts.

LOL. I could care less if others follow my opinions or follow them at all. You make the mistake of thinking I see that stuff you and a few others do as anything more than cheap entertainment. Writers post didn't bother me in the least actually and not quite sure what you were reading there but his post was kinda funny. The end of my post was speaking about you and 2 others and not writer. He didn't say anything offensive and even put a little smiley in the right spot.

Debate is supposed to be debating something and not just blinding accepting what another has to say as gospel truth. That's what forums are supposed to be like. You debate the merits of something and give opinion. This isn't a take what I say and do it place happy as much as you want it to be.

Now it seems to look like you are the one that is thin skinned here because I am not the one following you into any thread and demanding things of you over and over other than I have asked you at least 5 times in the past to just leave me be after I found out you were lying about your entrance to bowsite but you refuse to honor my request to do so unless it is topic specific to the header. In just about every thread you and I are in you came in after I post and demand things like pics or explanations on things unrelated and you "yes man" others post and if they challenge me on something you are that guy that comes in and says " yeah show me because I wanna see it too." You are that guy. This is why I nailed you this last time when you made the mistake of saying you struggle on 150 yard shots "in thick woods". You asked for it given your history but I think the point has been made now.

Carry on.

"That's the thing with you hammer, if people respond directly to you, with facts, they are rude. Apparently if they totally ignore you, and don't read what you write, that is somehow respecting you. Sorry, but that is a completely parallel universe to the one I was brought up in. The strange thing is, I don't particularly care how you feel about what I post. The only thing I have any concern about at all, is whether or not anyone else, especially new people, reading your posts will take them as factual and accurate."

Nope I don't think everyone is rude and I believe I even said so in that same thread you quoted me from. (bet it took a few min to find that) Strong effort on your part, shows real strength of will.

Facts are one thing and don't bother me at all but condescension and being a total azz hat is quite another and it seems to come from the same few fellas. I find a few people on this site to be rude and condescending at times but that's pretty much been their MO and everyone knows it but the very vast majority are not that way and I have no issue with them and never have and they have helped me learn a few things numerous times and I am grateful because no one knows it all regardless of what they want you to think or how long they have hunted.

Since you guys are crying like little babies about me and just cant seem to let go here is the smallest violin in the world playing just for you during your very sad and weepy time. Maybe after you will shed a tear and move on already because I am. If not carry on however you want and when sad or mad just refer to this video and you will feel my enduring pain. LMAO

Good one happygolucky. It's a guarantee.

I tried making that point once on the MI board. No need to tell you how that turned out :).

" There is a reason there is a minimum arrow weight for each bow right? "

liability for bow manufacturers

I 100% believe bows were built faster because they started pimping KE ... and KE was pimped because bows were made faster.

in late 80's, early 90's I don't remember ever remembering reading about speed this, KE that .... that started in later

why ? KE didn't matter in the day when compounds shot 200 fps .... and aluminum arrows weighted heavier than carbons and no broadheads under 125 was made etc.

I contend KE and Speed are for manufacturers to sell bows - and not just a whole lot more.

momentum is the key - heavy arrows and COI heads are the key

recurve/longbow shooters have known it forever, compounders have forgotten it

-------

Momentum has no DIRECT connection to penetration. Additional arrow mass will help get more KE from the bow and help retain the KE over distance by reducing the velocity which reduces the drag, but that does not mean momentum has anything to do with it.

Because KE and momentum share the same components, momentum will increase as arrow mass increases and is therefore mistakenly given the credit for increased penetration.  However, it has nothing to do with penetration. KE is what propels the arrow and is what stops the arrow. KE and the average resisting force are what determine penetration.

If momentum was truly a factor in penetration, it wouldn't matter whether the momentum came from velocity or mass. Look at these two combinations of weight and velocity that produce equal amounts of momentum ( 0.5713 slug-ft/sec) :  740 gr @ 174fps = 49.7 ft-lb  KE and 350 gr @ 368 fps = 104.7 ft-lb KE. If momentum is a good predictor of penetration then they should have about the same penetration.

Do you really think that an arrow with 49.7 foot-pounds of KE will have the same penetration as one with 104.7 foot-pounds of KE ?  So how good of a predictor of penetration can momentum be?  Try it.

---------

Heavy is good, but momentum has nothing to do with penetration, it's all about energy. Can you find any formula or even a sample problem on the Internet where distance is calculated by using momentum? The units just won't work out.

And KE is the energy needed to get an object from zero to top speed, right ?

How the energy drive the arrow is the key - not how the energy gets an arrow going really fast.

Light arrows and mech broadheads work great when the shots go right.

heavy arrows and COI heads work great when the shots go right.

When shots go bad - light arrows and mech heads do not work well when shots go bad, heavy arrows outperform as do COI heads. I'm sorry, they just do.

Would it have mattered for this orig poster here? I don't know - but I can assure you a heavier arrow would have driven deeper, i absolutely believe that and i think its exceptionally important in bowhunting.

I guess I'll chime in, unscientifically. All of the above makes my head hurt. Literally

Would you rather a 'roided-out Mark McGwire hit you as hard as he could on the chest with a whiffle ball bat? Or a wooden bat?

My guess is that the whiffle ball bat would HURT, and would probably break some ribs. Maybe. Although going slower, the wooden bat might kill you! Would definitely break ribs and probably cause some extensive internal energies.

I know this is apples to oranges

But there's a reason guys don't shoot elephants with a .17 caliber bullet going 4300 feet per second.

They shoot them with a .375 + caliber, going 2000 to 2400 feet per second.

That's apples to apples. The heavier bullet going much much slower will out penetrate the lighter faster bullet TO A POINT. (here you get into the old debates about ballistic coefficient and sectional density, once you get above the .375 calibers, which I won't get into)

Bake

Hopefully my above bat and bullet analogies will inflame this thread to another worthless 200 posts :) :)

Bake

Yes they have different formula. What is your point?

"And KE is the energy needed to get an object from zero to top speed, right ?"

Yes, and it is also the energy the arrow has as it moves through the air and the energy it has as it passes through the target or animal. KE is the energy of mass in motion at any particular velocity.

"How the energy drive the arrow is the key - not how the energy gets an arrow going really fast."

OK, I'll bite. What is the key way for energy to drive an arrow? LOL Don't bother to answer. With all due respect, I don't think you are able to discuss this topic in a logical way or by giving data for evidence. Just having an opinion is neither proof nor evidence.

"......... heavy arrows outperform as do COI heads."

I never said they wouldn't. In fact I gave supporting arguments and data that agrees with you. What I did say is that penetration has nothing to do with momentum. Heavier and therefore slower arrows deliver more KE and MAY see less average resistance. They are also frequently stiffer. These are the reasons a heaviest arrow frequently penetrates better.

You obviously are not reading my posts or you wouldn't be chalanging me on things to which we agree. Weird!

You know, if the hunter had been using a RAGE broadhead that elk would be dead-nuts by now!

Or, if it would have been shot in the ham, by Ted Nugent, hunting behind a high fence, over a feeder, it wouldn't have been a problem to recover!

There, that should keep it going for another 500 hits, at least.

Whiffle ball bat compared to a baseball bat is like comparing a soda straw to an average arrow.