Originally posted by bowhunterfrompast:
Originally posted by TRAP:
So, the small game head was produced after the full size Broadhead proved to be what? Too weak?
I could not find any written facts, but I was told, hearsay, that the manufacturing process was not always perfect, so the main blades were cut down to make the small game head. Wade....help! [/b]
Trap & Rick -
Originally, the small game Tigerpaw was actually the scrapped rejects from producing the broadhead.
When a broadhead was not true, the blade was cut off at the angle or corner where the blade and sloped shoulder met.
Actually the 1984 Tigerpaw was a remake of the SR-100 Magnum that was introduced in 1960... I spoke with the Tigerpaw manufacturer when he was still experimenting before he settled on a production design. He said that he never heard of the 1960 SR-100 Magnum and was surprised that in 1960 someone had invented the design that he thought he invented in 1984.
When I tried to explain the 1960 design was a financial failure, he was still convinced that his cast version was much stronger and would be a financial success.
I have talked with dozens of makers of broadheads over the past 50 years or so. Guess with only one single exception, I have never met a designer of a broadhead who thought that he had not created the best broadhead design ever.
The Tigerpaw was a failure for many reasons, not the least of which is that the head is simply too large for the common bow weights and arrow weights.
Topic: This week in 19__ (Read 15158 times)
