Single Bevel Hype and The Missing Blood trails

[JohnV]

Okay, several of our online experts have established that a 1 1/8" diameter broadhead is too "skinny" to result in good bloodtrails.  Last time I checked the Zwickey Eskimo double bevel broadhead was 1 1/8" in diameter.  I think the Bear Razorhead was the same width but am not 100% certain on that.  Those two broadheads have probably caused the death or more animals than all other broadheads combined!  Yes, given a choice I would prefer the widest broadhead that will achieve complete penetration but to insist that 1 1/8" is too "skinny" is to ignore 50+ years of bowhunting history.

[Bisch]

Okay, several of our online experts have established that a 1 1/8" diameter broadhead is too "skinny" to result in good bloodtrails.  Last time I checked the Zwickey Eskimo double bevel broadhead was 1 1/8" in diameter.  I think the Bear Razorhead was the same width but am not 100% certain on that.  Those two broadheads have probably caused the death or more animals than all other broadheads combined!  Yes, given a choice I would prefer the widest broadhead that will achieve complete penetration but to insist that 1 1/8" is too "skinny" is to ignore 50+ years of bowhunting history.

If that was aimed at me, I have a response!!! I am certainly no expert, but I do have lots of years of first hand experience doing this. And my post above was just my observations using many different broadheads over the years. I never “insisted” anything. And, yes, I know there have been a bazillion critters killed with 1 1/8” broadheads; I killed a fair share myself. I just have had waaaay better, and more consistent blood trails with wider heads!

Bisch

[WESTBROOK]

Okay, several of our online experts have established that a 1 1/8" diameter broadhead is too "skinny" to result in good bloodtrails.  Last time I checked the Zwickey Eskimo double bevel broadhead was 1 1/8" in diameter.  I think the Bear Razorhead was the same width but am not 100% certain on that.  Those two broadheads have probably caused the death or more animals than all other broadheads combined!  Yes, given a choice I would prefer the widest broadhead that will achieve complete penetration but to insist that 1 1/8" is too "skinny" is to ignore 50+ years of bowhunting history.

I dont think any one said they're too skinny, just that they leave consistently less blood on the ground than a wider head...makes sense.

As far as archery history goes, its just that, history...should we ignore improvement that have been made?

[Doug_K]

Okay, several of our online experts have established that a 1 1/8" diameter broadhead is too "skinny" to result in good bloodtrails.  Last time I checked the Zwickey Eskimo double bevel broadhead was 1 1/8" in diameter.  I think the Bear Razorhead was the same width but am not 100% certain on that.  Those two broadheads have probably caused the death or more animals than all other broadheads combined!  Yes, given a choice I would prefer the widest broadhead that will achieve complete penetration but to insist that 1 1/8" is too "skinny" is to ignore 50+ years of bowhunting history.

I dont think any one said they're too skinny, just that they leave consistently less blood on the ground than a wider head...makes sense.

As far as archery history goes, its just that, history...should we ignore improvement that have been made?

Absolutely.

[pavan]

Considering the no blood doe that B posted, compared to the heavy blood trails that i have had with similar hits, I am not going to change how i sharpen my skinny broad heads. 

[Terry Green]

I have no idea why some disparage single bevel heads by insisting that they are not hunting cape buffalo, elephant, etc.  Have you never hit a whitetail or hog and failed to get adequate penetration?  While I am not hunting a rino, If my shot is a bit off and I hit the scapula I want a broadhead/arrow combination that maximizes the ability to bust through the bone and get to the vitals.

Not busting your chops in any way.....just curious....

What poundage is your bow, and how many scapulas have you busted through.?

Thanks....

[pavan]

My wife put a Grizzly through the scapula on the exit on a doe, on the low end of it.  The arrow was not quite a complete pass through, the feather end broke off inside the deer when it bolted.   It ran hard for about 70 yards and went down, up hill heart shot.  In another case a kid put an aluminum arrow with a Bear head through both scapulas, the bent up arrow was still in the deer when we found it.  They had trouble finding the start of the blood trail, it was light at times but steady, the deer ran into a standing corn field, the blood drops were hard to see on the dirt, but they were there.  The hit was in front of the lungs but an artery was nicked, it was enough to find the 6 pointer.  Perhaps the scapula on a smallish whitetail in no way resembles the medium Dr. A tested, but when someone is shooting a light bow with a shorter draw, his logic may be relevant to a whitetail deer hunter.

[JohnV]

I shoot a hybrid longbow with carbon arrows that weigh about 600-650 grains.  I prefer the Abowyer Wapiti single bevel head which is 1 1/4" in width.  My longbows range from about 52-57# in draw weight.  I normally get complete penetration or passthroughs with this setup.  Blood trails tend to be very heavy.  While it is subjective, I do think I get much better blood trails than when I used Zwickey Delta 2 blades.

Several previous posters emphatically stated that 1 1/8" wide broadheads did not, in their opinion, give adequate blood trails.  Say what you want but you are basically stating that you think the broadhead is "too skinny" because then you go on to say that a wider 2 blade works just fine.  Myself and quite a few other experienced hunters disagree with that assessment.  While the wider broadhead will cut more tissue, the 1 1/8" wide broadhead will do just fine if you place a properly sharpened arrow in the right spot.  And the blood trail will be good as well.  That is all I am trying to say.

[Bisch]

I agree with everything you said, except the “and the blood trails will be good as well” part! 1 1/8” heads work just fine. They are very efficient at killing critters when they are put in the correct place. They just don’t consistently leave as good blood trails as wider heads do!

Although I have no scientific proof, here’s what I think happens:

A 2-blade head cuts a slit, first thru the skin, then thru the muscle, then thru the vitals, then thru muscle, and then thru the skin on the opposite side as it exits. As the animal moves, sometimes the slit in the skin is misaligned with the underlying slits, which basically shuts off the flow. That would explain why sometimes the blood trail is awesome, and sometimes it is nearly nonexistent!

It only stands to reason, that with a wider slit there is less chance of the slits getting misaligned and shutting off the flow of blood, resulting in a higher percentage of good blood trails.

I am a firm believer that a guy should use what works for him, and that he has confidence in. Through experience, I have seen that a 1 1/2” wide head leaves more consistently better blood trails for me, so that is what I will use for certain animals like deer and small hogs. If I am hunting a tougher critter like a big hog, I will still use the 1 1/8” heads to get the extra penetration.

Bisch

[DesertDude]

For me the bigger the hole the more blood. (Not Always)

[GCook]

I've killed a hundred animals with Satellites and Thunderheads.  When I was young the blood trails seemed adequate and they did well for me.  Went to a G5 Montec and they did fantastic at killing but left spotty blood trails. 
Personally I like wide cut heads.   I've done some hunting with heads that apparently we can't name on here but seem to be effective out of my recurve.
I'm not the blood trailer I used to be.  I don't own a blood tracking dog.
The more blood on the ground the better off I am.   

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

[DarrinG]

I'm a whitetail deer hunter (soon black bear) and I shoot the biggest cut on contact, proven design broadhead my rig will handle. Snuffers and Zwickey Delta, and this will be my first year shooting a Simmons Shark. They are not heavy boned, thick-skinned animals and I wanna punch the biggest hole in one I have decided to take that I possibly can. Why not put every odd I can in my favor for a heavy blood trail and quick kill?

[Roy from Pa]

From Terry:

Administrator
Trad Bowhunter
****

TRADGANG POSTING FINE TUNING
« on: August 08, 2018, 02:21:02 PM »
QuoteModifyRemoveSplit Topic
Hello TGers!!!!!!!!

I need to make a post....no one get out of wack .....no one take this personal....its just me keeping the site 'on target'.

Lately there have been a few posts that are causing us to drift and causing a bit more confusion and doubt than need be.....I'll give and exception or two......

OK, there was a thread recently where a guy wanted to know whether a 630 grain arrow would work better than a 565 grain arrow as both shot accurate from his bow.  There were folks chiming in and all was well......of course my thoughts are either would work for MOST applications as both were over 10 grains per pound.

However, here is where the problem arose......

Not one, not 2, but THREE people started relating to their COMPOUND BOW experiences....and one guy even mentioned his experience of witnessing experiences of MECHANICAL HEADS....

Again, don't take this personal......that is NOT what this is about....

We just don't need outside 'static' causing strife and confusion to SIMPLE answers by dragging in compound comparisons......I have a 72 Toyota Landcruiser FJ40 with 14.50 x 36 Super Swampers, and IF I had a question, a reply comparing it to a Ferrari Daytona Spider would have NO relevance.....and only ADD to the confusion.... Therefore, we don't need compound bow comparison info confusing ANY questions about TRAD BOWHUNTING......as they are NOT the same and have NO relevance on the answer to TradBow concerns.

Then there came a comparison to MECHANICAL HEADS....we don't ever want ANY discussion of those type heads period.....

So there....I said what I needed to say....

All is well in the Trad Bowhunting Community HERE on TradGang.......just some minor adjustments need to be made.....and anyone seeing such confusional correspondence please hit/click moderator alert so we can handle it ASAP.

I hope you all understand and continue to enjoy the site.....

 

[pdk25]

.

[pdk25]

And overall, this issue gets people way more stirred up than it should.  For the exact same shot placement, the only way a smaller diameter head will put more blood on the ground is if that broadhead penetrates further or gets a second hole, and the other setup would not have.  There are instances when that will be the case, although that is most likely the minority.  And yes, it could be the difference in recovering an animal, especially if it means the difference in getting to the vitals, but if you have to go through heavy bone, your odds of success just went down no matter what equipment you use.  Whatever anyone choooses to use is up to them. Bigger wider broadhead, usually more tissue cut, smaller head ( single or double bevel) usually less tissue cut but in some cases better penetration.  Chose what you want, have fun, and don't take it personally if someone chooses to use equipment that you wouldn't chose.  Whether that means heavy versus light bows,  heavy versus light arrows, or choosing among the many great broadhead options available.  The same truth always exist.  If you put the arrow in the right spot, you will recover your game the vast majority of your time.  I would, however, encourage anyone who has a chance to use a dog for tracking if legal in your area.  It can sure make he difference of recovering a difficult animal, and more hours in bed, lol.

[GCook]

I've killed a hundred animals with Satellites and Thunderheads.  When I was young the blood trails seemed adequate and they did well for me.  Went to a G5 Montec and they did fantastic at killing but left spotty blood trails. 
Personally I like wide cut heads.   I've done some hunting with heads that apparently we can't name on here but seem to be effective out of my recurve.
I'm not the blood trailer I used to be.  I don't own a blood tracking dog.
The more blood on the ground the better off I am.   

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

No offense, but kills made with non trad equipment don't really equate to some of the issues faced with trad bows, where penetration can be more of an issue.  Particularly those faced by those using relatively low energy setups.  Personally, I only occasionally use single bevel heads because I have only had one animal where the choice of broadhead may have made a difference in the outcome.  That was a large boar hit in the shield with a short 3 blade.  I usually will opt for a 3 blade or slightly wider 2 blade,  as penetration isn't usually an issue for me because I shoot a higher energy setup with a longer draw weight, and typically fairly heavy arrows.    I prefer the opportunity for an improved blood trail, but there are so many variables in place that affect how good a blood trail is.  Especially on hogs.  Then again, I only have a little under 100 trad kills in the last couple years, so anything could happen in the future.

I've shot deer with a Thunderhead out of a Samick Sage and got pass through.  It's not that different. 
Hogs are tough and any head can fail you. 

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

[NY Yankee]

A lot of deer and elk have been killed with Bear, Zwickey, Ace, and Journeyman heads, among others, long before the "single bevel" fad was a thing. And EFOC too. The old standards of a sharp head, well tuned arrow and good shot placement is what kills critters. Not because they are single bevel or EFOC or whatever. Someone WANTS to use that, be my guest. Doesn't mean you can forget the first three.

[pdk25]

.

[GCook]

Y'all crack me up.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

[Chuck Jones]

A lot of deer and elk have been killed with Bear, Zwickey, Ace, and Journeyman heads, among others, long before the "single bevel" fad was a thing. And EFOC too. The old standards of a sharp head, well tuned arrow and good shot placement is what kills critters. Not because they are single bevel or EFOC or whatever. Someone WANTS to use that, be my guest. Doesn't mean you can forget the first three.

The single bevel "fad" has been around for about 7000 years, at least. I have several single bevel flint points found over the years.I guess they had the same discussions back then.
Points by okawbow, on Flickr

Points by okawbow, on Flickr