Author Topic: Broadheads and Penetration (Read 764 times)

Tony D · « **on:** December 02, 2003, 09:36:12 AM »

I've been seeing a lot here and always believed myself, that cut on contact broadheads would penetrate better than the Muzzy/Thunderhead type broadheads. If you subscribe to Bowhunter Magazine, check out Dave Holt's article in the December 03 issue. He shot arrows tipped with a 2 blade Zwickey Eskimo for the cut on contact blade, a Thunderhead 150 grain ferrul with a non-vented 2 blade to match the cutting width of the Zwicky and a Thunderhead 125 3 blade. For the test, he set up each arrow so as to have the same kinetic energy and properly tuned for the bow set up. He shot into 3 media: cardboard, ethafoam and green cowhide and meat, described as beefside plate without bones.

All three setups in all media produced penetration that was within 1/2" of each other. The biggest difference was the total cut area - here the Thunderhead 125 gave almost 40% more.

Something to think about...

myronman3 · « **Reply #1 on:** December 02, 2003, 02:09:53 PM »

the biggest study ever done on the only media that really matters, live animals; clearly shows that a two blade design will penatrate better and is more lethal when less than ideal hits (such as heavy bone) are made. it was called the natal study if i am not mistaken. i will try to dig up some info on it here as soon as i can.

Bowhunter57 · « **Reply #2 on:** December 03, 2003, 02:56:40 PM »

Tony D,
Archery is full of personal choices and that's part of what makes is so attractive to so many. :grin:

I prefer cut-on-contact broadheads, period. I've shot them out of compounds, self-bows and recurves and I always get better penetration from them. Of the cut-on-contact broadhead designs, I prefer mulit-blade broadheads for better blood trails.

A 2 blade broadhead is very difficult to beat for penetration, but getting good blood trails from them (consistantly) is another matter. :roll:

Good hunting, Bowhunter57

Dutch/AL · « **Reply #3 on:** December 04, 2003, 05:26:24 AM »

Here's what you guys are looking for I believe. The broadhead study by Dr. Ashby a few years back answered a lot of questions bowhunters had.

[/url]http://www.tradgang.com/ashby/

JeffG · « **Reply #4 on:** December 04, 2003, 05:55:24 AM »

I believe the new broadheads like Muzzy, and NAP do a great job, and function well on higher speed compounds with aluminum, and carbon arrows.
The Zwickey Eskimo, the Ace,and the Magnus 2-blade do MUCH better at moderate speeds with heavier arrow, such as cedar, chundoo, or as some of the traditionalists are doing, caulk filled aluminum arrows. We're talking a difference of about 100 grains in the arrow weight. This is the kinetic energy difference in traditional archery. NO, I am not going to open that can of worms! I shoot both...what I am suggesting, is that modern equipment utilizes kinetic energy DIFFERENTLY than traditional, because of the arrow speeds possible. Case in point: when we speared hogs this year, our "arrow" was 7ft. long, and weighed 4 lbs. Properly thrown at about 25 fps the spear wanted to go all the way through a BIG hog! I was quite suprised! My two cents. JeffG

Myk · « **Reply #5 on:** December 04, 2003, 09:43:21 AM »

Rule #1, don't shoot heavy bone with any broadhead, "Bad to the bone" is just advertising.

Once you learn and are able to follow that rule it doesn't really matter with most hunting bows and hunting arrow combos. So you stuck 5" into the ground after pass through vs someone else's 10" into the ground.

JeffG, you bring up an excellent and often overlooked point. Except it's a momentum difference rather than a kinetic energy difference.
Because it's so often overlooked we have people out there shooting very lightweight arrows that don't carry enough momentum to penetrate anything and then blaming their broadhead because they did the math and figured they had enough KE.

They can increase their speed and KE by going lighter and lighter but they are destroying the arrow's momentum by doing so.

Sam · « **Reply #6 on:** December 04, 2003, 01:23:57 PM »

You all have made good points ! I personally shoot a 125 Thunderhead. It has never failed . It does open up a lot better hole than any 2 blade but I think the real point I want to make is shot placement!!! Any head worth its weight will do the job if we hit them right. I'm shooting a pretty fast bow and light weight shafts and I always blow through. I have never shot a mechanical and probably will never but from what I hear you need a fast bow for them to work. But back to my 2 cents --Practice shot placement and we will have alot less problems!

ahunter55 · « **Reply #7 on:** April 13, 2004, 10:00:34 AM »

I have pretty much done it all in Bowhunting over 40 years now (starting 48th) & when i hit the field I use a 3 Blade rocky Mountain 125gr. Razor since they came on the market. Shot thru Black Bear, Caribou, Elk with both traditional & compound but I tend to use a heavy aluminum shaft most of the time. I am not to concerned with SPEED (hunting) thou I was when I was a tourny shooter. I dropped in weight on my compound this last fall (from 70# to 60#) & when I took a 900# Buffalo was concerned I would not get the penetration on such a large animal. My buddies used 70# & 65#s with carbons & 2 blades. I used a 2216 aluminum & 3 Blade 125gr Rocky Mountain Ironheads. I worried for no reason-complete penetration at 40 yards.