It should be noted that even some secondary tips are actually COC styles like this Rage 3 blade.
After some heated discussion online (on another site) that centered around broadhead tip designs and what is a COC (Cut On Contact) broadhead VS a chisel tip VS a cone tip VS other styles of broadhead tips and their effects on penetration. It was suggested that a comparison should be done. I volunteered to do that comparison because:
1. my Son and I have a bit of a broadhead collection (about 300 heads)
2. I hunt with my own homemade broadheads so I can be impartial.
3. I'm into this sort of thing.
4. Everybody else had a life.
**** DISCLAIMER ***** To call this a scientific test would be unfair to every scientific test ever conducted. This is simply a
COMPARISON of penetrating ability through a given material to see the force needed for different broadheads to cut, poke, ect through the medium. I know this is not a deer hide but what the material is, is not important so long as all the heads are compared using the same material.
Every head was given 5 chances to penetrate the material and an average was taken. I set up my digital camera in front of the scale to record both images and video and then later captured a still of the video that represented the peak force immediately prior to going through the material.
The set up I used is as follows. I made a wooden frame by cutting a hole in a piece of particle board. Over that hole, I will lay the material to be punctured. To prevent the material from simply being pushed through the hole I used wood blocks to clamp the material on two sides. The reason I did not clamp the material on all four sides is that I would have lost the stretch factor and the material would have been tight (Like a drum head) and would have required almost no effort to make a hole through it.
The wooden frame sat atop wood blocks to provide enough depth clearance to prevent the longest of the broadheads from bottoming out. All of this wood applied a force on the scale so I adjusted the scale back to zero. The scale and the wooden frame were then set under the head of my drill press. In the chuck of the drill press I chucked an arrow insert so I could quickly change from head to head without damaging the threads on the broadheads.
With a head loaded in the drill press, I would use the drill press handle to lower the broadhead onto the material and continue to apply a constant and even force until the head went through. In front of the drill press sat my camera on a tripod to capture the data so I could focus on applying the force without worrying about having to read the scale.
Here is a picture of the set up.
Here is the test material. It is a cloth that has a rubber/vinyl coating on both sides and is used for seat covers.
I cut strips of the material to make it easier to manage moving it over the hole in the frame each time I did a test.
To set up a sort of control or perhaps a worst case test, I used a practice point (field tip) and then a Hilbre broadhead to show examples of what I plan to do with a series of broadheads.
First, the practice point. Here you can see the "Stretch factor I was talking about earlier and why I did not clamp down all four sides of the material.
I turned on the camera and did 5 tests with the practice point. The results were very consistent. It took
20 pounds of pressure to poke through the material. Here is a still captured at the peak force moment.
And here is a video of what it looked like in real time.
That was clearly a puncture with no cutting taking place and I did it to explain what I am planning on doing with all the heads and because a few of the heads I plan to test, have a secondary point that will have to employ a bit of "Stretch Factor" prior to the blades cutting the material.
Topic: Broadhead tip comparison study (Read 1093 times)
