WAY OT- Heavy Arrows

[CEMENTHEAD]

Picking the collective audience's experience and minds.

I shoot a Mathews FeatherMax compound bow. 60lbs @ 27" with a release. I presently shoot 28" Easton Epic arrows with 100 grain heads. Speed is 240 fps.

I'm looking to bump up the weight of my arrows and slow down the speed. (Kinda like Elmer Kieth would do... ) Approx 600-700 grains finished @ 30".

I've been reading about heavier shafts/heads for increased penetration and stabilization @ http://www.alaskabowhunting.com/ .....the added benefit of course is a noise reduction. This speed revolution is pure stuff as far as I'm concerned. When I used to shoot 50lb draw w/2117's and 140 grain Bear broadheads I ALWAYS had a pass through. Now, less than 25% are complete pass thru's. I'm just looking for your experience, advise, and conclusions.

Thanks, Tom

[86er]

I'd explore three things that may (should) increase penetration. 1) What is your spine stiffness? Maybe go from a 350 to a 380 or 400. You have to match it to your draw weight but move up a notch within the bows capability. 2) Use a thinner shaft. I like the Axis but there are other very thin shafts available. 3) Try American Broadhead Sonic's in whatever weight you want. I use 100 gr. http://www.americanbroadhead.com
Also, a side consideration - some bows have less string vibration imparted on the shaft at a certain weight. You may need to adjust your draw weight by 2 lbs increments and find the sweet spot where you're not getting as much shaft vibration. Lastly, look at your accessories. Capture rests, fletching and wraps, tube corrected peep sights, undersized nocks all rob the arrow of speed. Collectively it can be as much as 60 fps! (I just saw a bow that increased 58 fps by tweeking the accessories and no other modifications). If you increase the bows potential to transfer the energy to the shaft, you can shoot heavier shafts with less loss of velocity. Make sure you tune to the new arrow precisely to limit the vibration. A heavy arrow doesnt penetrate more if it is not stable. Are you using a release? If you have a string loop you can try a string connect release and then increase your draw length by the difference, thereby allowing a slightly longer arrow. On a longbow or recurve you could explore different string lengths in 1/2 inch increments up or down to achieve stabilization with a heavy shaft. If you want to discuss anything specifically, call me. I'm glad to help.

[kimwcook]

Tom, I have absolutely nothing for you. The last bow I shot was an old bear recurve my Dad bought my brother and I. That was about 45 years ago. Wish I knew where that bow is now. Would be nice to have.

[JB]

Picking the collective audience's experience and minds.

I shoot a Mathews FeatherMax compound bow. 60lbs @ 27" with a release. I presently shoot 28" Easton Epic arrows with 100 grain heads. Speed is 240 fps.

I'm looking to bump up the weight of my arrows and slow down the speed. (Kinda like Elmer Kieth would do... ) Approx 600-700 grains finished @ 30".

I've been reading about heavier shafts/heads for increased penetration and stabilization @ http://www.alaskabowhunting.com/ .....the added benefit of course is a noise reduction. This speed revolution is pure stuff as far as I'm concerned. When I used to shoot 50lb draw w/2117's and 140 grain Bear broadheads I ALWAYS had a pass through. Now, less than 25% are complete pass thru's. I'm just looking for your experience, advise, and conclusions.

Thanks, Tom

How heavy are you arrows now? I can't imagine needing a 600 to 700 grain arrow unless I was shooting 70lbs or so on very large game. I'd do the energy calculations first. Heavier slower arrows will maintain their energy longer than the faster lighter arrows, but with only 240fps now, your speed is going to really hit the floor with a 600 to 700 grain arrow. I'd be curious of what your kinetic energy is now.

[BigSky56]

I fish and bird hunt with a couple of guys that are traditional bow hunters they use recurve bows and build their own arrows and get pass thru on elk they order the wood out its been compressed, do know they both use the old style bear broad heads that are noted for going around bone and not sticking in it and the arrows are heavy. Pretty sure they are running 50 lb bows give or take a couple lbs. Probably the magazine Traditional Bowhunter would be a good source of info and material. danny

[Rusty]

I shoot a 50# recurve and having looked at most of the traditional archery sites I know I've seen references to Alaskabowhunting.com before. I was under the impression that they cater to the traditional hunters not compound shooters. I really don't know much about compounds but most longbows and recurves need a certain ratio of grains of arrow weight per pounds of pull to obtain their best performance. You might try talking to the folks you posted about to make that more clear. I'd say it does make a difference if you shoot compound vs traditional.

[44magHunter]

Well, I'm glad you're going for more penetration, not speed. I personally like about a 450-grain arrow at about 280fps, but that's just me for whitetails. I also shoot past 60 yards.....

For the weight of arrow you are wanting, the best choice I know of would be the Alaska Bowhunting Grizzly stik arrows. They are very heavy and hard hitting:
http://www.alaskabowhunting.com/Bad-Thr ... e-W10.aspx I personally like an arrow about 450 grains, like I said, but I ONLY use cut-on-contact broadheads, which cut and penetrate MUCH better than expandables or chisel tips. If you do go with a 600+ grain arrow, with that bow and DL, your speed will certainly be under 200fps, which can limit your range quite a bit for hunting..... That's just my $0.02

By the way, I shoot hunted this past year with a 50# bow and 400-grain arrow at 244fps and this year will be shooting a 70# bow with about a 455-grain arrow at around 280 like I said above.

[Nath]

I ain't shot no big game (yet) but I like a heavy arrow. I treat my compound just as if it were a recurve range wise so thats 30yds tops but usualy less.
I like the way a heavy arrow leaves the bow, quiet usualy. My heads are single bevel home made. I like 500 to 600grains however I am getting through some lighter carbons and the recent switch has convinced me how much I prefere the heavier ones I last used up. I am getting through my oddments slowly and then will settle on a 2315 ally with added string plus my heavy broad heads. I will be back to 500grn plus. These super fast thing ain't for me, indians did ok without super fast arrow speeds!

I fill the arrows (ally and carbon) with string to dampen them out.

Joe, I thought a 350 is stiffer than a 400?!

Nath.

[JB]

Joe, I thought a 350 is stiffer than a 400?!

Nath.

Yes, a 350 is a stiffer spine than a 400. Or at least it is in the same brand arrow. Some shaft manufacturers don't mark their shafts at the true spine.

[ceb]

I almost always get pass throughs with my set up, unless I hit bone on the far side. Increased arrow weight will cost you about 1 fps for every 10grs on increased arrow weight in my experience. Besides increased penetration, other advantages include a more stable arrow, a quieter bow and less hand shock

My set up? A 64# @ 27" longbow of my own manufacture with a 600gr feather fletched wood arrow with a sharp 2bl Zwickey Delta broadhead. My arrows leave my bow at a whopping 175 fps. This has worked for me for 40yrs now.

[CEMENTHEAD]

Thanks for the help.

A few things...the arrows I shoot now are 340 spine with a total weight of 385 grains, I shoot a "D" loop with a release, and it's a compound bow.

I have a self imposed limit of 30 yards on game shots. So speeds under 200 don't bother me. My old Bear compound was around 190 fps.

Thanks, Tom

[JB]

You'd actually loose kinetic energy with your setup and an arrow that heavy. You said your getting 240 fps with a 385 grain arrow. That's about 50 ft-lbs of energy. If you jump up to a 650 grain arrow, you speed will drop to about 161 fps and give you an energy of about 37 ft-lbs (according to an online calculator). You'll also have a huge rainbow trajectory even out to 30 yards. Assuming a 20 yard zero, you'd be 7" high at 10 yards, and about 21" low at 30 yards.

Increasing your total arrow weight to 400 to 425 grains (about what I shot for years) would still leave about 50 ft-lbs of energy and you should maintain a bit more energy out to your 30 yard limit.

[BAGTIC]

You may lose kinetic energy but you will gain momentum. Momentum should diminish less with range than does KE. At arrow velocities momentum will be more important to penetration than is velocity.

[JB]

The momentum of an object can be described as the amount of force required to stop the object in one second. The kinetic
energy of an object can be described as the amount of force required to stop the object over a distance of one meter. You're right, I probably should have used momentum for an arrow versus the standard kinetic energy traditionally used for bullets. I can't see the very slight increase in momentum being enough to justify the huge increase in trajectory. Of course the biggest issue I and everyone else ignored was the massive increase in spine he'd face. Will a 600 to 700 grain arrow tune properly from his setup? A properly tuned setup is far more important than any velocity, energy, or momentum issues. If the arrows aren't flying straight, they won't penetrate worth a darn. If if you're lucky enough not to miss or gut shoot the animal. Paper and or walkback tuning are vital to making sure you're using the right setup.

[Nath]

With the greatest of respect JB I say this, ftlbs killed nothing! If killing depended on ftlbs a bow would stand no chance.

Ftlbs is just a mathmatical equation to demonstrate something on paper period.

Indians did not have any of this "enlightenment", if they did they would of made a great mistake and thrown their bows on the fire figuring they are useless.

A bow is for throwing a blade with, this fasination with ftlbs is worthless more so than with a bullet with a bow!

Best wishes. Just my opinion.

Nath

[JB]

With the greatest of respect JB I say this, ftlbs killed nothing! If killing depended on ftlbs a bow would stand no chance.

Ftlbs is just a mathmatical equation to demonstrate something on paper period.

Indians did not have any of this "enlightenment", if they did they would of made a great mistake and thrown their bows on the fire figuring they are useless.

A bow is for throwing a blade with, this fasination with ftlbs is worthless more so than with a bullet with a bow!

Best wishes. Just my opinion.

Nath

Comparing the native Americans and their bows to modern compounds is kind of like comparing the early matchlock smoothbores to a modern rifle. Those early mathlock shooters didn't know anything about rifling, balistics, but it doesn't mean it's not important. Bow hunters that don't take the time to tune their equipment aren't being fair to themselves, much less the game they're after.

[Nath]

With the greatest of respect JB I say this, ftlbs killed nothing! If killing depended on ftlbs a bow would stand no chance.

Ftlbs is just a mathmatical equation to demonstrate something on paper period.

Indians did not have any of this "enlightenment", if they did they would of made a great mistake and thrown their bows on the fire figuring they are useless.

A bow is for throwing a blade with, this fasination with ftlbs is worthless more so than with a bullet with a bow!

Best wishes. Just my opinion.

Nath

Comparing the native Americans and their bows to modern compounds is kind of like comparing the early matchlock smoothbores to a modern rifle. Those early mathlock shooters didn't know anything about rifling, balistics, but it doesn't mean it's not important. Bow hunters that don't take the time to tune their equipment aren't being fair to themselves, much less the game they're after.

The native American's took the same game animals as any modern bow can.
The early matchlock shooters took the same game animals as the later rifle shooters do.
Maybe they were better hunters!
Tuning a bow/arrow combo goes hand in hand. Anything else would be like a rifleman just walking in a store and buying ammo without testing it.

I still say ftlbs have nothing to do with it.

Nath.

[JB]

The native Amercians didn't take the same the game (as in large dangerous game) nor anywhere near the same ranges we take game with archery equipment now. The same with early rifles or smoothbores. You don't need a 30-06 to kill most North American game, but you can sure do it a lot more effectively and humanly than you can with a 45 caliber smoothbore musket. A stickbow with sinew bowstring and a stick for an arrow with a flint broadhead is an extremely short range weapon despite what the movies show. Saying speed, energy, or momentum have no bearing on archery hunting would be the same as saying they have no bearing on firearm hunting.

[CEMENTHEAD]

Boy did I open a can 'o' worms...............

[Nath]

The native Amercians didn't take the same the game (as in large dangerous game) nor anywhere near the same ranges we take game with archery equipment now. The same with early rifles or smoothbores. You don't need a 30-06 to kill most North American game, but you can sure do it a lot more effectively and humanly than you can with a 45 caliber smoothbore musket. A stickbow with sinew bowstring and a stick for an arrow with a flint broadhead is an extremely short range weapon despite what the movies show. Saying speed, energy, or momentum have no bearing on archery hunting would be the same as saying they have no bearing on firearm hunting.

JB, We never mentioned large dangerous game did we? That asides what proof have you that the native Americans did not tackle large dangerous game?
All the muskets I read about and see tend to be larger than .45, I'm not aware of a .45 musket from the musket period in common use. .60 plus yes.
All the evidence clearly shows a .60 and greater musket is as effective as a 30-06, I mean how do you get deader than dead?
Speed, energy and momentum do have no bearing on hunting, they are just numbers. The hunter has more bearing on the hunt. You see someone could shoot a deer in the stump of it's tail with that good ole' 06 and it don't matter diddly how many units of energy you got because it's useless. Now someone may and do get within 15yds with a stick bow and plop that flint in the ribs and after a short walk find their deer!

I have asked this question many times and no one can give me a clear answer so I will try again, here goes.

At exactly what ftlb of energy does an arrow, stone, musket ball or bullet fail to kill?

No can of worms Cementhead, just opinions born from experiences

Nath.

[JB]

JB, We never mentioned large dangerous game did we? That asides what proof have you that the native Americans did not tackle large dangerous game?
All the muskets I read about and see tend to be larger than .45, I'm not aware of a .45 musket from the musket period in common use. .60 plus yes.
All the evidence clearly shows a .60 and greater musket is as effective as a 30-06, I mean how do you get deader than dead?
Speed, energy and momentum do have no bearing on hunting, they are just numbers. The hunter has more bearing on the hunt. You see someone could shoot a deer in the stump of it's tail with that good ole' 06 and it don't matter diddly how many units of energy you got because it's useless. Now someone may and do get within 15yds with a stick bow and plop that flint in the ribs and after a short walk find their deer!

I have asked this question many times and no one can give me a clear answer so I will try again, here goes.

At exactly what ftlb of energy does an arrow, stone, musket ball or bullet fail to kill?

No can of worms Cementhead, just opinions born from experiences

Nath.

Based on your arguments, why not just hunt with a knife. If it's truly all in the hunter, you could just stab game with your knife and forget all about the bow and arrow. After all it's all the hunter. Early man hunted with spears before the bow came along. He didn't starve to death, so the spear must be just as effective as a bow. When it comes to rifles, why not hunt everything with a 22LR. After all if you're a good hunter and know where to hit them, that's all you need. You could spend the day making stupid arguments. As you wrote how do you getting any deader than dead?

I'm well aware the native Americans hunted buffalo, but from everything I read, they weren't one shot kills from a stickbow. They were normally long drawn out affairs of running them off cliffs or shooting or stabbing them many times. I doubt too many took on large bears unless they had to or had multiple hunters around for backup.

Speaking of all your evidence clearing showing the .60 caliber ball just as effective as a 30-06. At what ranges has the evidence shown that .60 caliber ball as effective as a 30-06? That would also mean that a shotgun would a slug would be just as effective as a 30-06. That's a pretty bold statement to make with out some qualifiers.

[JB]

JB, We never mentioned large dangerous game did we? That asides what proof have you that the native Americans did not tackle large dangerous game?
All the muskets I read about and see tend to be larger than .45, I'm not aware of a .45 musket from the musket period in common use. .60 plus yes.
All the evidence clearly shows a .60 and greater musket is as effective as a 30-06, I mean how do you get deader than dead?
Speed, energy and momentum do have no bearing on hunting, they are just numbers. The hunter has more bearing on the hunt. You see someone could shoot a deer in the stump of it's tail with that good ole' 06 and it don't matter diddly how many units of energy you got because it's useless. Now someone may and do get within 15yds with a stick bow and plop that flint in the ribs and after a short walk find their deer!

I have asked this question many times and no one can give me a clear answer so I will try again, here goes.

At exactly what ftlb of energy does an arrow, stone, musket ball or bullet fail to kill?

No can of worms Cementhead, just opinions born from experiences

Nath.

Cementhead?

Tell me more about all the evidence that clearly shows a .60 and greater musket is as effective as a 30-06. At all ranges? So I'm assuming the same holds true for a shotgun slug. They must me just as effective as a 30-06. That's a pretty bold statement to make with no qualifiers.

The hunter has more bearing on the hunt. So why not just hunt with a spear a early man did. They must be just as effective as a bow and arrow. Early man killed game with spears and knifes.

Or since it's all the hunter and his skill, why not just use a 22LR for everything. After all dead is dead and a good hunter knows where to place his shot.

[CEMENTHEAD]

I'm Cementhead. No dig at you from Nath.

[JB]

I'm Cementhead. No dig at you from Nath.

O.K., I couldn't figure out where the name calling came from!

[donw]

heavy is always better IF you can move it faster...

for years i shot heavy ash, cedar and Douglas fir arrows but had to give them up for lighter carbons as i aged i was unable to draw the needed draw weight for heavy arrows...now i opt for faster lighter carbons to make up some difference.

i had to drop down to 40 lbs draw weight. i could not shoot a 650 grain arrow fast enough from a 40 pound bow to get more than 20 yards from it...

[Nath]

JB, We never mentioned large dangerous game did we? That asides what proof have you that the native Americans did not tackle large dangerous game?
All the muskets I read about and see tend to be larger than .45, I'm not aware of a .45 musket from the musket period in common use. .60 plus yes.
All the evidence clearly shows a .60 and greater musket is as effective as a 30-06, I mean how do you get deader than dead?
Speed, energy and momentum do have no bearing on hunting, they are just numbers. The hunter has more bearing on the hunt. You see someone could shoot a deer in the stump of it's tail with that good ole' 06 and it don't matter diddly how many units of energy you got because it's useless. Now someone may and do get within 15yds with a stick bow and plop that flint in the ribs and after a short walk find their deer!

I have asked this question many times and no one can give me a clear answer so I will try again, here goes.

At exactly what ftlb of energy does an arrow, stone, musket ball or bullet fail to kill?

No can of worms Cementhead, just opinions born from experiences

Nath.

Cementhead?

Tell me more about all the evidence that clearly shows a .60 and greater musket is as effective as a 30-06. At all ranges? So I'm assuming the same holds true for a shotgun slug. They must me just as effective as a 30-06. That's a pretty bold statement to make with no qualifiers.

The hunter has more bearing on the hunt. So why not just hunt with a spear a early man did. They must be just as effective as a bow and arrow. Early man killed game with spears and knifes.

Or since it's all the hunter and his skill, why not just use a 22LR for everything. After all dead is dead and a good hunter knows where to place his shot.

JB, no name calling to you JB no way. I respect you to much. It's this discussion we simply differ some on.

Game is taken to this day with spear, look on youtube. Muskets do continue to take large game today JB, checkout The muzzleloading forum.

They take game as good as any other method all be it less range but that was not the discussion, we were talking about ftlbs. I still get no answer to my question, at what point is not enough ftlbs going to fail to kill?

Lot of stuff has fallen to a 22lr JB including big bears! Hmm shall we call it 100ftlbs from a 22lr give or take, would we go on a guided bear hunt with a 22lr? Maybe not, would we go on a guided bear hunt with a bow with less 100 ftlbs? Yes.

Thats why I ignor ftlbs, you know when you have enough medicine in your hands.

Nath.