Though the database information does have a 'theoretical' cut-volumn calculated field for each shot, cut volumn becomes difficult to accurately calculate, or even estimate, especially with the single-bevel broadheads. If you read through the 'Why Single-Bevel Broadheads' article you will see why. The wound channel they cut is often much wider than the blade width, because of the tissue 'wind-up' effect. In highly mobile tissues, such as intestines, there are often the 'star burst' cuts, with multiple minute areas of laceration located as far as 2 1/2" to the side of the arrow's epicenter of passage. How does one calculate that, to factor it into the 'cut volumn'?
Even on a straight-course penetration, the rotating single-bevel BH (at approximately one complete revolution in just under 16 inches of penetration through 'pure meat'), the BH's rear edge subscribes a tissue-cut path that is much longer than the straight-line length of the wound channel. That means the 'cut volumn' is not simply the total cut-width multiplied by the total tissue-penetration depth.
There are also other 'lethality factors' that are difficult, if not impossible, to calculate. Single-bevel bone breaks often creat secondary bone-fragment missiles. Then there is the 'mushing effect' they often show in soft lung tissues; "scrambled lungs", as Ray Hammond so aptly described the effect in one of his post.
Yes, it stands to reason that, on any given hit, the BH which reaches the most vital areas, and does the most damage to them, will be the most lethal. It's easy to ascertain which penetrates the most deeply, but how does one measure the degree of damage done? As noted in the above examples, the differences in the nature of the wound created by the single-bevel BH's (as opposed to that caused by a non-rotating BH wound channel) makes it very difficult to accurately quantify the amount of 'tissue damage' that that have done.
With a wound-loss rate of less than 1% across the last 600 plus big game bowkills I've made since starting to keep records, it's hard for me to see how use of a wider cut BH would offer much improvement in my animal recovery rate, and none I've tested offer the heavy bone hit lethality potential of the long-narrow single-bevel BH's.
There's an old saying amoung gun hunters, "An animal lives between the shoulders". On the lighter big game, the increased bone penetration potential offers a great advantage in that it allows me to crowd the shoulder on my shots, with a high degree of certainty that I'll penetrate ANY of the shoulder bones I might inadvertently hit; be the cause a poor shot, deflected shot or animal movement. Aiming on the shoulder also reduces, to a large degree, the likelyhood of a gut hit. Additionally, though there have not been many, so far I've lost not a single gut-hit animal with the long-narrow single-bevel BH's. What advantage would increasing BH width give me on a gut hit?
Blood trail difference? I can't give anything conclusive until I've gathered enough data, but the data to date shows no indication that the degree of blood trail correlates with the number of BH blades, or the 'total cut width'. Hopefully, with the help of Ray, and the Urban Deer Management Program of North Georgia, there may someday be definitive data about the correlation of the degree of blood trail and the BH type or cut width used.
Ed