I agree that there is more friction. I actually understand physics very well. I also understand that the same amount of force applied over a smaller area will result in an increase in pressure and therefore have a higher likelihood of penetrating a surface with less loss of energy. A broadhead on an arrow should nearly mitigate this effect but friction, albeit less than in a foam target will still be a factor. I understand believing in a product and considering it to be the best, but it shouldn't be at the exclusion of other information. As far as I know there are no objective tests that have been performed on these two different arrow types on animal tissue. Perhaps Dr. Ashby would be willing to give it a try? All that I am saying is that IF a lighter arrow can have similar penetration, and IF you can get it to tune from your bow, and IF it is tough enough for the job, and IF it costs about 2/3 as much, isn't it worth considering. Reports that I shot 2 arrows and they didn't break really don't hold alot of weight without an objective study behind it. And on the subject of penetration, almost undoubtedly both arrow types would easily penetrate well enough to kill just about anything on the planet. Perhaps the grizzlystik arrows are the best out there for hunting. I guess I'm just skeptical. Even if they are they best arrow on the planet, 90 dollars per have dozen bare shafts is a little steep. That being said, it didn't stop me from buying some.