Should I use fixed blades and keep the distances as short as possible? Or use mechanicals because the poundage will still provide sufficient KE for good penetration even at somewhat longer distances?
Jake
I would sight in for the fixed blade. Who cares where your target tips hit while hunting.
We actually saw quite a lot of moose in the open. DAVE
After getting a great moose tag last year I upgraded to a heavier arrow and broadhead worrying about penetration. After seeing the reviews about the slick trick broadheads I decided to give them a try. I would shoot four arrow groups, first shot would be a slick trick, followed by three field points. I was confident out to 50 yards. The broadheads and field points grouped great. I have had good results with other heads out to 30 or 40 yards, but was very happy with the slick tricks.
Good luck with whatever you use, Scott
Did you have the opportunity to shoot a moose? If so, can you tell anything about the penetration?
Jake
Did you have the opportunity to shoot a moose? If so, can you tell anything about the penetration?
Jake
Or better yet, tune with Slick Tricks and then carry a few of those and a couple of MBH's as well. Presuming your arrows are well built and properly spined, and your bow is properly tuned they should shoot to within "minute of moose"-sized groups at any reasonable distance.
If the Slick Tricks really fly like my target tips, I'll give them a whirl.
I shoot Tricks and they fly the same as my FT and Penetrate just fine.
But if you want a cut on contact head why not shoot a Stinger ? They fly the same as a field point out of a tuned bow .
good luck on your hunt
We have a hunt planned in Sept this year and will be using the Montec's and may even try out the G5 Strikers.
For me, it's fixed blade only for moose.
Statements like that amaze me. Perhaps it's me, but it sounds like you're saying, "I've now spoken. Now you have THE answer to your question. Go forth and slay. My way. The ONLY way!"
Give me a break!!
THERE - NOW it is settled. Nuff said! ;^)
TAC
The key is to be well tuned and good shot placement.
I would also highly recommend the Slicktrick for moose.
From the standpoint of killing a critter, there is not a better broadhead on today's market than a sharp snuffer. If you don't want to go the heavy route (which I would suggest on moose) then try the new, smaller Snuffer SS. I would even be happy to sharpen those snuffer for you free of charge to anyone who killed a polar bear.
I too will be hunting moose this fall and will be trusting my hunt to a sharp snuffer.
Have a great bowhunt BB
Built to out-perform out-dated designs, sturdy, straight, they weight exactly what they say they do, also built for ultra speed for todays faster bows, & will last forever.
You wont be sorry.
Ask the whole staff of Bowtech. 2 years of Africa animals, no complaints.
D.
I think you pretty well know that you can kill cleanly with most of the BH's mentioned in this thread. It's what you are comfortable with is what you'll end up using.
Question is, do you want to risk a mechanical failure?
Sounds like you don't, or at least have some hesitancy with the concept. Also sounds like you are probably getting decent acuracy out there to 40 yards. Probably better than I can at 20 with my longbow.
I'd recommend a COC broadhead with 3 or 4 blades for a good, short blood trail. That said, the regular old Snuffer is a great broadhead. The Wensel is another great one. Have killed lots of critters with both. You do have to work on them quite a bit to get them straight and sharpened, though.
I think that the new Razor Caps are the best broadhead out there these days. They are adjustable for weight from 100, 125, 150, 175 or 200 grains, come sharp, super tough, and are perfectly straight. Killed an elk, an antelope, and three whitetails last year with no complaints other than they are hard to re-sharpen. Trick is to use diamond stones because the stainless steel is so hard.
Three things of interest came out of the tests:
1. Most mechanical broadheads had very small entry holes -- You need a pass-through to have a good blood trail with most of these heads.
2. Cut-on-impact blades had the best penetration. One surprise was that the average penetration for four-blade heads was almost the same as for three-blade heads. This is because all three-blade heads had either tocar, conical, or pyramid points out in front of the blades. Of course, the four-blade heads had about 33% more total cut.
Having said this, since the articly was written some new 'cut-on-impact' three-blade heads have come out on the market. These may have better penetration.
3. In the torture tests mechanical heads were much more prone to mechanical failure that were the fixed-blade heads.
The heads tested were all 100-grain heads and used with the same arrows.
Moose are big animals. I recommend a cut-on-impact head -- and you should get about the same penetration with a four-blade as with a three-blade.
For those who want to go the menhanical route I would recommend the 125 grain First-Cut EXP -- It has a fixed blade of 1 1/8 inches guaranteeing a good entry hole, and two mechanical blades which follow the fixed blade with a cut of 1 3/8 inches at right angles to the fixed-blade cut.
If you are hell-bent on using mechanicals then at least try them out with some tests of your own -- make sure the one you like has a good entry hole and that it can stay together when hitting something more solid. You owe this much to the moose.
For my 2c...I've killed 5 moose with a bow, all with fixed blade heads, most with Muzzy and have had pass throughs on some, and quick kills with the others. I would never consider a mech for moose either...and I believe it's still illegal in AK to use them for moose anyway. I like a strong broad head that will be more forgiving if I happen to penetrate a shoulder blade or hit a rib square. Good luck bud!
Jake, I'd be more concerned with broadhead durability if I were shooting 90 lbs.
Steve
With the exception of one caribou and this year's polar bear....every animal in my game room is a one arrow kill. I agree with you completely....a sharp broadhead in the right spot WILL do it every time.
Unfortunately, this is not a perfect world, and I am not a perfect shot. I shoot as many arrows as any dedicated archer that I know (probably more than most, now that I have more free time), and yet the potential will always exist for a less than perfect shot. It is because of this animals size, that I wanted to "test the waters" regarding broadhead types via this forum.
I am just thankful that there have been so many helpful posts. I have heard many valid points discussing the merits of various broadhead types. Now it is simply time to select the one that I am most comfortable with......
Jake
Based on my experience and that of my acquaintances, it makes me say NO WAY IN HE** would I ever use a mechanical on moose.
just my 4 cents(with inflation rising may be my 6 cents by the time you read this)
One other thing comes to mind. If I was paying the big bucks to have a guided trip that would make me say even more emphatically no to a mechanical. Why take the chance on just wounding when you've spent all that money?
The Moose in the picture I took with a 100 gr Muzzy , 70 lbs bow and 440 gr arrow.
Three things of interest came out of the tests:
1. Most mechanical broadheads had very small entry holes -- You need a pass-through to have a good blood trail with most of these heads.
2. Cut-on-impact blades had the best penetration. One surprise was that the average penetration for four-blade heads was almost the same as for three-blade heads. This is because all three-blade heads had either tocar, conical, or pyramid points out in front of the blades. Of course, the four-blade heads had about 33% more total cut."
I have the article, very interesting test. I like reading the results of broadhead penetration tests.
The best fixed heads went 14 15/16'' they were the Game Tracker First Cut, and the Wasp Hammer SST. Next was the G5 with 14 12/16''
The rocket Steelhead went 14 4/16'' which was better than many of the other fixed heads, including the Muzzy 3 and 4 blade, Thunderhead, and even slightly better than the Steelforce.
It did make a smaller entry hole.
It's odd that even when tests demonstrate that a certain mechanical like the Steelhead penetrates as well or better than a fixed head people continue to give the same advice. ie... use a fixed head.
Archerontario told of his results on two moose with steelheads and no one seemed to notice; he had passthrough shots on both.
I have not shot a Moose, but if I get the opportunity to go I shall use a Rocket Steelhead. Field point flight, reasonable cutting diameter, and penetration all in one tidy package.
Interesting thing about that issue of Bow & Arrow Hunting is another story in the same magazine by Brandon Ray called, "Go Light For Deer." He told of his success with lightweight arrows on deer and hogs.
I see the same negative comments often made about light arrows as are made about mechanical heads; likely the people who discredit certain equipment have not even tried it.
im-ocd's Link
But tests have to be conducted properly to mimic field results.
Things aren't always as they seem. If field results don't mesh with a test something is amiss. Guys looking at that test and the fixed heads and mechs know thats not what they see in the field in terms of penetration and strength.
So whats amiss???
To test a mech in plywood the blades should be open when it hits. Otherwise the blades aren't meeting resistance like the fixed heads. Hide and flesh are supposed to open mechs so when they get to bone the blades would impact same as a fixed. In other words the strength and penetration of the mech blades aren't being tested as they are not open through the plywood.
Put something in front of the mechs to insure they are fully open before they hit the plywood and then you will get a fair comparison with fixed blades as to what you will see on animals.
Then guys who have shot both will tell you the results mirror what they have seen in the field.
Well, others can choose a head that won't penetrate plywood and loses blades or bends ferrules if they want to.
I'll go with the head that penetrates and stays intact.
I would think a quality, layered foam target would simulate the density of chest cavity fairly well, minus rib bone of course.
Plywood maybe if you plan on using the shoulder blade or leg bone as a target.
I guess it comes full circle back to shot placement??
My "never been moose hunting" opinion. ;-)
They make a new model with heavy duty blades. That would be my recommendation.
Regardless of your choice, I hope your hunt is a very memorable one for you. Best of luck.
Scottie
JimG
Not being able to use mechs on Moose or any big game animal in my home state of Idaho is a good policy IMO.
And Snuffer results with plywood does reflect that of animals. Any old schooler trad shooter who has used big old Snuffers will tell you if you hit hard bone you will not penetrate as well as other heads. Same as plywood. You can do searches on here and see guys shooting Snuffers say just that.
No need to make silly assertions that implies plywood testing shows a traditional setup won't kill.
I will quote Deflatem. "I would pick the razor sharp one. Stick it through both lungs. That should do it."
Which is precisely what New York Bowman did.
Funny how some people try to make something out of nothing.
im-ocd's Link
Are they tougher than steel? :-)
Broadhead tests conducted by 5shot on steel drums.
www.broadheadtest.com
Magnus Stinger 2 blade: "it went through the first side with 3/4 of the head sticking out the back"
Magnus Stinger 4 blade: "the head busted through the first wall with the tip penetrating up to the front of the bleeders"
Steel force Premium 4 blade: "it got through one side and bounced off the back"
Muzzy 3 blade: "went through the first side, with the tip and the front part of the blades sticking through the backside"
Rocket Steelhead 125: "the head penetrated both sides, with only minor bending of the blades"
If you are going after really tough animals, with bones harder than plywood, you need the broadhead that penetrated BOTH sides of the steel drum (a mechanical).... Rocket Steelhead 125 :-)
www.broadheadtests.com
Steel Drum: full penetration of both sides, no damage.
SLICK TRICK 100 STANDARD
Thats a moose broadhead, no doubt about it.
What pretty much everybody agrees on. And those tests were done 20 years ago before the superior heads of today.
They favor a heavy 2 blade head for maximum penetration. A 2 blade head has more potential for penetration because it cuts less and has less chance of encountering bone.
If you are hunting African game with a longbow that is a good choice. However, with a compound bow you will do well with a reasonable diameter multibladed head that penetrates well to make a more open hole to cut arteries and veins for a quick kill and bloodtrail. Thats why 90% of bowhunters are using 3 or 4 blade heads.
Guys going to Africa call to order Tricks saying that is what their PH told them to bring. You can bet a Africa PH has experience with big game and penetration and knows what will get the job done, and is not being paid by anybody to push heads. Or at least they aren't getting paid to push mine, nor is anybody else.
I don't see how a Slick Trick, because of their design, wouldn't do the same thing on a moose that a Muzzy would do. I totally agree with the points regarding the useage of a fixed blade head on moose though.
I've shot the Slick Trick standard at 305 F.P.S. and it flew with my field points at 30 yards. It would be a great choice and so would the Wasp Boss Bullet.
I just get sick of the same blanket statement about mechanicals not penetrating as well, or not being as durable as a fixed head. The Steelhead is better than or equal to many fixed heads. I cannot fault the Boss Bullet or Slick Trick if one wants to use a fixed head.
As well as all the guys on here who are blowing heads through stuff.
All you gotta have is a little common sense. If you see a head blow through 3/4" plywood or through both sides of a steel drum, you know what would happen if that head hit you. And what would happen if it hit an animal. Bones aren't magical as some would have you believe. Guys on here have plenty of experience with bones and know what they are.
All you need is a little common sense, and reading my posts in this thread that is what you will find. Like Tricks, no fancy talking, just solid stuff.
Plywood can be shot to good effect.
With an animal, every shot is different, even a 1/8" off can yield a completely different result. Thats where the tester then uses by guess and by gosh on what happened, and where tester bias creeps in. And where pronounced results leave room for doubt.
Shooting at an angle, fine and dandy, as long as the test is consistent, controlled, and repeatable.
Chuck Adams has killed way more trophy animals than you ever will. I would expect from your logic that you use the same heads he does.
I can't say that because I didn't say that. Never said there was no difference. Just that you can get a good idea of broadhead performance with it.
The reason Chuck is brought up is because, failing to convince anybody of anything with logic, you are attempting to make the case that you know more about broadhead performance because of the animals you have killed.
By that logic since Chuck has killed more trophy animals than you, he is the greatest expert on broadheads, and everybody including you should be shooting whatever he is shooting.
Yes, I have shot plywood. And I have killed animals. But, unlike some, I have no interest on getting on here beating my chest about how I am the worlds greatest hunter. Actually I haven't ever been interested in beating my chest, as a matter of fact few in my home town know I have a broadhead company and it was a while before my family found out about it.
I suppose you can call me your average working hero in business, and in bowhunting. I have never killed a WR, and I would bet my life I never will. But then again, I'm not trying. If I spent all the time bowhunting that Chuck Adams has perhaps I would have killed a WR. On the other hand if Chuck Adams had spent as much time working on broadheads as I have perhaps he would have invented a better broadhead. Actually he did have his own patented broadhead on the market a short time, but shoots others now. Why? Because animals killed does not translate into knowing more about broadheads and having the best head.
Frankly I have never been too ambitious bowhunting. Being out in the woods alone with nature away from arguments about politics, religion, money, war, etc. etc. etc. has always been enough for me. And perhaps that has something to do with me growing up modestly, where I came from there weren't but a handful of bowhunters, and affording to travel out west elk hunting was considered pretty much an impossible dream.
But could I hunt Africa in the future and kill a Cape Buff, or Alaska a big Moose, or kill a monster Whitetail, or a bruiser Bear??? Perhaps, with enough time and money. When it comes to trophy hunting, everybody on here knows the odds of success depends on time and money. If your average working hero takes a week of vacation here in Arkansaw his odds of killing a Moose aren't real good.
On the other hand, if you have loads of leased tightly protected land with bucks under 160 passed up every year, trail cameras, food plots, antler supplements, 4 wheeler trails, treestands in every conceivable location, great buck doe ratio, etc. etc. and can hunt anytime you want, theres a reasonable chance you might kill a big buck.
Now, theres nothing wrong with that, and all of us would enjoy that if we could. And guys who kill big bucks are great hunters. But in my book the average working hero who struggles to get a few days to hunt and bags a good 8 pointer on public land is just as great a bowhunter.
A real bowhunter is somebody who can go on a bowhunt and kill nothing and have a great time.
Truth is I have a creative bug, and 25 or so years ago I started hunting broadheads. I scouted, I stalked, and after all these years I bagged one that is top rated. I have made a lot of sacrifices with that, in every way. But that was my choice. I have learned who I am and I am comfortable with whatever my destiny is. I am like an old miner who rides his mule to the mountains every day with his pick and studies the ore and prospects. Either one day he hits it or one day he falls over dead. Thats how its going to be, and thats that.
My favorite Razorback coach is Lou Holtz. The little runt didn't win many championships with his playing skills. But that didn't mean after working a ton he didn't learn how to coach a championship team.
This fall, if I'm lucky and get away from work,(and while I am no longer a one man team here, I'm still close), I hope to go to Idaho and elk hunt with a lumberjack I know. Just a good old average working hero hunt. I may kill a bull, I may kill a cow, I may kill time and have a few laughs. I'll be happy if I get to do any of the three.
As far as if I am advertising, well, I suppose you can call it that if you want too, I don't care. I'm a sponsor. Same as Magnus is a sponsor and you are on here typing same as me and somebody can say you are advertising too. Here in Arkansaw I would call it more chit chatting than anything else.
You have commented on how you seem to be offended that I refer to field reports of what bowhunters tell me Tricks do. Well, I don't see that much different than you giving Magnus field reports. Except that the guys reporting to me aren't getting paid a dime, they voluntarily call me up out of the blue and do it out of appreciation for the job the head did. Theres only one of me, no matter what I killed my field reports would pale in comparison to the thousands of guys out there killing stuff with Tricks.
And as far as broadhead tests, I gotta admit I doubt I will ever be impressed with a company sponsored broadhead test. Been a while since I have seen a company involved with a broadhead test where that companies broadhead didn't somehow come out on top. I'm waiting for a company to publish a test where the competitors broadhead tested best. That one might have some integrity.
I will tell you this. I am not in business to be a celebrity. While I have a famous name, I have always cherished anonymity and being able to quietly go about my business investigating whatever interested me. Don't waste your time waiting to see me in bowhunting videos or whatever. Thats others thing, not mine. I enjoy chewing the fat with people, but I am happiest in my shop puttering around. Sometime thats what I will be doing, but right now people want to know about broadheads, and after studying them all this time and inventing Tricks theres only me right now to let people know what they want to know about them.
People can be snobs and ridicule me because I'm from Arkansas, or because of education, or the car I drive, or clothes I wear, or how I hunt, or whatever else. They run out of things let me know and I will add to the list. Ridicule has always made me laugh.
So if guys out there want to buy broadheads from the worlds greatest bowhunter, or the worlds richest broadhead maker, or the owner with the most tv shows, or the owner with the most celebrities and yes men, they'll have to find another broadhead besides Tricks.
I make them for however many guys appreciate what they will do, and I always hope for that to be the average working heroes.
Stick me with a fork on this one, I'm done on this thread, and from the looks of orders, not gonna be able to blow on forums much before long. But if you ever need anything theres the email at slicktrick.net, and if I don't answer within 24 hours on a weekday you can bet either it didn't get here or I didn't get there, try again, or if all else fails call. Email screws up from time to time.
Ok, I'm stuck.
I won't get into the mechanical debate except to say this: We had a hunter in camp last fall who shot a bull with a >60# Matthews and a Spitfire broadhead. The first shot broke the upper leg, sending the bull 600 yards into a peat bog. The hunter and guide caught up to the bull the next day. It took three more arrows before one got enough penetration to hit one lung, eventually killing the moose. It wasn't a pretty sight, and certainly not a very humane kill.
Contrary to popular opinion, a "perfect" bullet hole with a paper tune does NOT guarantee a good flying broadhead. I gave up on paper tuning years ago. I found that there are cases where my broadheads still did not fly true.
A better method to use is what I call point of convergence. Take 2 good known arrows. Tip one with an aligned broadhead and the other with a field point. Shoot both. Make adjustments (vertical first) until the two hit the same point of impact. Works almost every time without a hitch. I haven't paper tuned in years.
On your original question, I would recommend going after anything bigger than a whitetail with a mechanical. They just aren't that strong. Moose are big animals with big bones. Best to stick with the strongest broadheads available.
Just my thoughts.
I really don't think it matters if you call it "rupturing" or "cutting". The newer generation of short, solid, 4 blade heads IMO are doing both, and based on hunter feedback are doing a damn good job at it. They are here to stay, no doubt.
The results of how they perform on game animals, their durability, and the fact that they are more accurate then the longer & bigger heads is why I think so many people are choosing to use them.
Obviousy the older style 2 blade heads can get the job done as shown by JRW's nice bull moose.
JWR's story (the one told, not his)serves a big purpose IMO, learning from other hunter's experiences can help all of us. It is one of the reasons we discuss issues like broadhead effectiveness/design etc.
If you are offended don't take it personal but rather tell us what your own experience has been.
im-ocd's Link
I was referring to the new short 4 blade heads like the Slicktrick. You have implied that they are rupturing rather than cutting and my comment was that I think they are doing both which is why they are proving to be so effective. If you find the head lying 10 yards past the dead moose then I guess the term "rupture" is a good thing and most likely there was a lot of cutting going on also.
Interesting, the "shorty" heads have been very popular here for a couple of years now, based on how well they are working on large game. Quite a few passthroughs on elk, bear, and moose. The results have been quite opposite of what you see with a mech. The only problem's were having here with heads like the Slicktrick and the Shuttlelock, is keeping them on the bowshop wall. Guy's are buying them up because of the results they are getting.
The passthroughs I acheived last season with a "shorty" on a mature bull elk and mule deer confirm what other hunters are reporting as far as how effective this style of head is.
Result: Complete pass through at 23 yards on a beautiful 144 7/8 Shiras.
Moral: Comfort with your gear and shot placement is 90% of the game. So it always was, so it always shall be. ;)
Other heads, well, others can vouch or dispel them if they want to.
But Tricks, penetration and blood trails are outstanding. It doesn't matter the size of the game, you can see on slicktrick.net pics like guys send all the time and testify to the performance.
What you want for moose is a strong great penetrating head. The Standard is exactly that, either the 100 or 125. Of course, if you really want maximum penetration, the heavier arrow is the way to go, and the 125 Standard is built like a tank. Blade angle is the same as a TI 100 for those that think that has relevance, and the ferrule is stronger than Titanium. With 4 .035 blades with Alcatraz Bladelock, first thing you will think when you see one is it looks like a moose head. And it is.
Accuracy and strength is keys to moose. Accuracy to put the arrow where you want it, and strength when it gets there.
Beware of heads that bend or break, cross those off your list. That is the achilles heel of long aluminum heads, and when a head bends or breaks you are screwed. Moose are tuff and need tuff heads. The long heads are inherently weak.
The Standard Trick is terrific moose medicine. No doubt whatsoever.
I have first hand experience with this feature:) Only having a longest pin of 70 yds, I had to take a guess at the hold over and mis judged short by about 15 yds. No Sweat, the arrow just skipped like a stone and hit the moose in the lungs and finished him off.
I haven't seen that category on any Broadhead tests, maybe it's time to update them.:)
And that's a true story.
I don't know about the great shot part of it, Obviously if I was such a great shot I wouldn't have needed the follow up. However I give all the credit to the broadhead design.:)
Sorry, I haven't checked back on this thread in a few days. Yes, TBM will publish an article I wrote about the moose hunt. If memory serves, I think it'll be in the Oct/Nov '07 issue.
Jake
I guess I can’t tell what I’m looking at in that entry wound pic. Hardly stands to reason that you could get a bigger hole than the width of the head unless shooting at a fairly extreme angle....
What did I miss??
