Bowsite.com

Penetration testing

I’ve been playing around with different shafts trying to find the best penetrating one. I bought 5 different shafts and shot them all today into a foam target. Setup is a 27.5” Elite Energy 35 set at 60 lbs. I used the same Broadhead on all of them - a 175 grain VPA. Spine was 340 for 2 different Gold Tips - a Hunter Pro and Kinetic Kaos, and 350 for Black Eagle Carnivore, Rampage and Deep Impact. From 20 yards into a foam target I shot the arrow and marked on the shaft how deep each penetrated. The Black Eagle Deep Impact penetrated the deepest, followed by the Kaos, Rampage, Hunter Pro and Carnivore. All flew very well. The Carnivore was the lightest at 440 grains and the Deep Impact the 2nd heaviest at 507 grains. Pretty interesting as I’ve always shot standard diameter shafts.

Thought I’d share, Lee

Penetration into a foam target has no relevance to anything else.

Correct. Especially when some of them have smaller shafts than points/inserts.

Sand, or maybe water would be better. Something that will close-in around the shaft like skin/flesh.

^^^^^^^^^^^. I disagree, based on although foam isn't the same as hide, muscle etc, etc, of a deer, foam is a test medium who's structure offers up IMHO more resistance then the soft tissue of a deer's muscle and organs. This again IMHO, would indicate that your arrow should at the least penetrate the soft tissue elements of a deer a distance equal to if not marginally greater then the foam. If we are talking about a layered closed cell foam target.

I agree that foam is not the same. Live tissue is lubricating as BH cuts through but your test result likely shows that momentum is the confounding factor.

^^^^^^^^^^You are correct Bullbuster and as I said, an arrow should out penetrate live tissue VS foam, so accordingly if your BH tipped arrow is penetrating an average of 20-25" of foam, its a safe bet it will penetrate at least that much and likely considerably more living tissue of a deer or other similar game animal. Foam will not tell you your maximum penetration on an animal but IMHO it will tell you your minimum and at the vary least be used as an indicator as to the likely hood of you getting a complete pass through. In short if your arrow is penetraiting and average of 22" of foam at any given distance, I feel it's a safe bet that it will result in a complete pass through of a broad side shot at that same distance. Some one correct me if I'm wrong, but a target made of compressed non welded foam like the home made target I shoot that is made up of 1/2"thick layers of closed cell foam offers up much more resistance and is accordingly MUCH harder to penetrate than any living tissue your BH tipped arrow will ever encounter while passing through any member of the deer family in NA.

So what is the difference when an arrows centers a layer of foam vs going between them ?

Lots of deer been killed with pass throughs with big arrows and slow bows. The single biggest factor determining penetration is where you hit the animal. I’d focus a lot more on that than wether a 420 grain arrow penetrates better with a big/small/footed/inserted shaft. Just my 2 cents.

Thx for the info Lee.

Playing devil's advocate, it appears that the difference between best penetration and worst penetration was perhaps 2"? Granted we strive to maximize everything, but to me your test suggests that there isn't that much difference in the penetration of different arrows. Enough to consider when it's time to buy new arrows perhaps, but not enough to discard what you're currently shooting and switch to something else.

Have fun tinkering!

Regardless of your test Medium. you will be getting two holes in whatever you shoot with any off those arrows. and entry hole and an Exit hole. you have a great setup and it will blow through big game!

My main concern on penetrating animals is how the broadhead and arrow react to a hard bone impact. You want a broadhead that will survive the blow and keep its edge and stay Lethal. When it comes to the arrow - you need Mass - 450 grains at a Minimum. Also the ferrule end of the arrow needs to be strong, quality insert and i prefer a footing on the shaft - especially with a longer broadhead like the VPA - reinforcement of the insert and ferrule will keep everything "laminated" in one piece at impact.

Ohio hunter I’ll gladly show you a “test” where arrows penetrate the center of my target better. As many have pointed out targets are not uniform throughout(especially once they are shot a few times, even sand is likely to have a hard spot. A layered foam target is hardly consistent. Nothing against Lees study but to get a true test you would have to shoot the same deer in the same spot for the first time with each arrow. That’s hard to do. ;)

Things like arrow placement, arrow weight, and bow poundage have far more to do with variances in penetration than whether an arrow is 5mm thick or 6mm. Shoot what you believe in because the biggest difference in penetration is probably in the 6” between your ears.

I knew this would generate some talk! It is hardly a definitive "study" but I was having spine issues with my Gold Tip Hunter 400's and X-Man suggested 340's would correct the problem (old thread titled Spine Issues) and another response talked about Lancaster Archery selling single arrows (which I didn't realize you could buy). Long story short I bought 5 different shafts that were recommended for my setup using the OT2 software. I'd read a bunch of Randy Ulmer's articles talking about the virtues of the smaller diameter shafts in wind and in penetration so tried a few of them in the mix. He also talked about 4 fletch so I fletched them up that way as well. Whole reason for all this was a shoulder hit on a big deer last year and am looking for something that MAY have gone through. My old setup did not, unfortunately. I've killed a lot of deer over the years and know if I hit one in the sweet spot that any of those arrows (including my current setup) are sticking in the dirt on the other side. Unfortunately I have a short draw length and can't shoot the higher poundage anymore. The design of the VPA that I shot in my test is pretty sleek - I tried the same shots with a 125 VPA that is an 1/8" wider. The 175 definitely out penetrated the 125 on every shaft. Could be due to the extra weight but likely due to the design angle.

Smarba - the AAE fletching is 3" so I'd have to measure the difference to be sure but the Deep Impact went about 5" deeper than the Carnivore (which is very comparable to what I am shooting now). I am looking at a new arrow as I am down to my last 3, hence all the tinkering.

I had fun messing with it and thought I'd share. Regardless of whether it is foam or not (and since I can't go shoot a bunch of deer), that Deep Impact out-penetrated all the others every time. I shot a new (unshot) spot on the target for the final 5 arrows, btw.

Thanks,

Lee

Thx for additional info Lee. I agree that 5" more even in a "less than perfect" medium is useful information. And since it sounds like you're looking for new arrows now's the time to experiment and figure out what to spend $ on.

Sounds like you did the best testing you could come up with and I'd agree it points to the Deep Impact looking like the right arrow for you.

Have a great season!

Let's just change the laws of physics. ..

The key to any "test" is to have the most consistent or exact setups. I don`t think you need to replicate a "live animal" for simple testing. The R&D departments of the manufacturers have already done this, the same with shaft makers. For a simple penetration test shoot the exact medium for depth and then shoot the same medium for durability. Tests on actual bone are actually more flawed as you will NEVER strike the bone in the EXACT same manner with various broadheads or shafts. You would get a better result from shooting a piece of plywood or sheet of metal. These tests have been done to DEATH and are not needed in my opinion. Putting the arrow where it belongs is far more important, every broadhead on the market will kill if used correctly.

Lee,

If you look at your picture, the deep impact arrow has an outsert that is considerably larger in diameter than the shaft behind it. In foam, the only part of that arrow affected by friction going in is the outsert. The shaft is just along for a free ride. It takes a second or so for the foam to close around the shaft. By then the arrow has stopped moving. The other arrows in your test did not have that advantage.

There's nothing wrong with your choice, but your penetration differences are not apples to apples comparisons.

I have shot a decent amount of critters with 11/32" and 23/64" shafts going well under 200fps and always expect enough penetration to have 2 holes of they are broadside or slightly quartering.

I do believe that skinny shafts are an advantage but way down the list from great tuning, broadhead design and momentum.

The Deep Impact 6 penetrated the most by how much? 1/2"?

Take it for what it’s worth fellas! It’s easy to read all of the information but it’s another to do it yourself. I am Looking for the best shaft for my bow that may make the difference if I don’t execute perfectly - which has been know to happen! Franklin mentioned “if used correctly” - I want to plan for the worst. I agree on the outsert making the difference but if that helps it penetrate best then that’s what I’m looking for! I’d never shot one if these skinny arrows and was a bit skeptical. I was surprised that the Kinetic Kaos never beat the Deep Impact as it is about 20 grains heavier and has a similar collar behind the head. I shot each about 15 times and the Kaos never won.

Glunt - in your opinion what’s the best head you have found? I really like how the VPAs are built and the sleek design - I used to shoot the old Rothaar Snuffer and that was the best penetrating head I ever shot - this 175 seems pretty similar. Always open to suggrstions!

Lee

You have a good broadhead. But I'm betting your best bet to get through a shoulder to the vitals is the heaviest shaft in your test. Not the skinniest. In an animal, the broadhead is going to make plenty big enough hole that any shaft will slide along behind the broadhead with little resistance. The heavier shaft will keep pushing that broadhead along though.

2 points - about that or a little more vs. 2nd place and about 5” more than the last place shaft.

12 yards - the Deep Impact was the 2nd heaviest.

Ohio hunter any target that’s been shot a few times is not consistent

Lee, then it would probably do second best on an animal shoulder.

Never publish your broadhead testing on the internet unless you want to be told how dumb your testing is. It's about as guaranteed as anything unfortunately.

Anything that is not a live animal is not a live animal and therefore is not the same as a live animal. So basically unless you are testing on a live animal, "it's not the same thing." Any live animal that you hit with one arrow, can no longer be hit in the same spot with another arrow where the "test medium" is the same as it was with the previous arrow. The animal has either died, and is now a dead animal and no longer the same as a live animal, or the first arrow caused damage so that impact point is now different for the second arrow, and it is no longer a similar comparison. It's also practically impossible to hit two different live animals exactly the same way with different shots, and besides they are now different animals, and there muscle and bone structure may be different so it isn't an exact comparison.

So in conclusion, we all know the perfect test can not be made for a bowhunter to replicate perfectly shooting at a live animal. Let's just let people have fun with their testing.

Foam targets use friction on the broadhead, shaft, outsert (if any), etc. as well as the force required to cut the original hole by the broadhead. On an animal there is much less friction and the vast majority of the energy is taken up by the the broadhead cutting/breaking through tissue and bone. The friction on the shaft in minimal.

A closer representation would be to shoot the arrows into a brand new target but have the shafts well lubricated to nullify the resistance from the friction on the arrow.

“who cares if the blood and guts of themanbearpig after a solid hamblaster will lubricate the gaping wound of a very sharp, but not hair popping sharp, vpa bc in the end we all know the piss spiders will find it anyways“

I suppose lee doesn’t care and I don’t care if he cares if I care. ;) That said It looks as if there are plenty of people that care. Ohh by the way I don’t care and I’m glad lee has discovered a better mousetrap.

Chuck Adams did an article in the 80's pointing out that foam was a poor judge of arrow penetration...it hasn't changed.

I kind of wish you had included either an aluminum or aluminum clad arrow in your mix. I kind of feel the major factor affecting fairly similar arrows is how slick their outer surface is, I very much believe that's why the Kinetic didn't out penetrate the Deep Impact in your test. This slickness factor of the exterior surface is mostly nulled out by the blood in an animal. I've always felt if a person could make a wet medium that was fairly easily replicated, they could get some decent accurate results!

Beendare nailed it. Foam is not a good medium when you change OD of the arrow (esp w/ and outsert/half out that is wider) as the test may very well tell you which arrow is narrower rather than which will penetrate more deeply in an animal.

Register here to reply to this topic