Ashby on light weight bows...

[J-dog]

I think everyone debates heavy versus light, or which animal is tougher to get through, or whether Ashby's work should be followed. Like was said I bet not many change their setups - elknuts stuff is interesting for sure, can't see where the speriments were bad??. Need to do some more elknut but I have no suggestions? If elk were not so good to eat I would say you should try some of Ashby's style testing on downed bulls. Hey North American Ashby tests!

I agree with what elknut said in that you can't just slap a heavy arrow on a bow and expect great performance or a super duper penetrating arrow, there has to be a threshhold there somewhere where the weight becomes a deficiency.

Where I disagree is that a light can out penetrate a heavy giving both are at there optimal performance, using their weight efficiently in motion.

Keep this going - good stuff here,

J

[elknut1]

Once again, very good points guys!!!
  jdog, that's what I've been playing with! Light if you want to call it that, that will out penetrate too heavy an arrow. The same applies to too light of a setup. One must take into account the draw weight the user is pulling, simple as that, it does not need to be scientific as I'm no Scientists for sure but I do have enough smarts & experience to be dangerous! (grin) Thank you for your comments!

  IronCreekArcher, you've just come in a bit late is all, I already covered those variables you mentioned & their results with different diameters & arrows with various targets & tough to penetrate structures. It's in the previous pages please check those out & you'll see the results, you will find them extremely interesting with what I will share here in a minute, all from backyard testing & much in the way of putting animals on the ground!

  Everyone please read this part it is of interest for sure! I started this particular phase of backyard testing a few days ago. I've done similar testing in the past but not to this extent, but enough to satisfy myself that I was using a very sound setup in both compound & trad gear use. I will say I have not been disappointed! Our results in the field speaks for itself over the years.
  What I find interesting is the lack of support by some saying my testing is inadequate & cannot be relied upon or used in the real world of hunting, is this true? I'm not perfect & I made a few adjustments with some recommendations by others & I say thank you! I wasn't interested in splitting hairs! The info I came up with & its results are as accurate as I could be & definitely usable by other hunters other than myself. I wasn't trying to be scientific or win a Nobel Prize! (grin)

   Here's where it gets interesting! I took the time this afternoon & read for the first time Ashbys report for 2008 just to see where he's coming from. I believe it's his latest info if I'm not mistaken. Much of it is over my head & you need to be a college graduate to sift through it all & digest it. But his bottom line is this, he recommends what he shoots & tests, don't blame him there! His tests were as a result of an 82# bow with a 720grn arrow, is that a heavy arrow? Not at all, not for that poundage. This is exactly what I've been trying to explain.
    His arrow to poundage ratio is 8.75grns per pound, does this sound familiar? (grin) When I said my tests showed that the 485grn arrow was the best penetrator out of a 55# bow in comparison to an arrow that weighed 617grn some of you guys thought I was nuts! Guess what the ratio is with a 485grn arrow at 55#, 8.81grns per pound. Nearly exactly what the good Dr. would recommend & use himself. I realize I did this in the backyard but it goes to show you even a stubborn old elk hunter can come up with the proper results with such testing.
   The Hardi Plank Cement board isn't such a joke now! (grin) The 8.81grn arrow showed in my tests it was the best performing arrow for that draw wt. & Dr Ashby would agree according to his studies.
  As most of you know I used the same 200grn wt. at the head of all those different weight arrows, from aluminum to wood to carbon, all penetration winning combination's were won by the arrow supporting the 8.81grn, coincidence? I think not, penetration is penetration I don't care how elaborate you want to make it.
   Make sure all arrows are tuned & spined to the bow at use & you too will have these same results, facts don't lie!

  Apply this 8.80grn per pound ratio to your draw wt that you pull & you'll have darned near the best weighted arrow for your setup. I don't care if you shoot aluminum, carbon or footed shafts, your setup will be absolutely a deadly penetrator for most game you'll ever hunt. If arrows are not tuned to your bow then the proper weight means nothing, you must fix it!
   This doesn't mean you cannot have 9.5grn per pound or 8grn per pound it just means you're in the ballpark for a finely matched arrow to your setup! As for the thread starter who asked what's best for his 48# setup it's not the 615grn arrow which nearly tops out at 13grn per pound, it's too much & penetration will suffer in comparison to a 485grn arrow or even a bit lighter! Thanks!

  ElkNut1

[STICKDP]

Are you sure you dont want everyone to shoot 6 grains per # (grin)

[Traxx]

No Elknut1,
Thank you for takeing the time to share your tests and experience with us all.Even though you may at times feel like your beatin your head against the wall,Some of us appreciate it.

[amar911]

I read Dr. Ashby's report a bit different than Elknut. I can understand that everyone tends to interpret results in a way that is consistent with pre-existing understandings. A couple of examples of the last Ashby report that may be missed are: (1) the 82# bow is described by Ashby as being inefficient compared to some high efficiency mid-60's# bows that were capable of shooting the same arrows just as fast; and (2) heavier arrows than those mentioned by Elknut were also used by Ashby and showed greater penetration than the lighter arrows. Ashby also describes instances of lighter arrows giving very little penetration on various animals.

Dr. Ashby is unquestionably a proponent of heavy arrows. Like Dr. Ashby, professional hunters in Africa who have seen the best and worst of hunting equipment in daily use on the largest animals in the world for many years uniformly recommend very heavy arrows for maximum penetration. They do this based on real life experience with live animals that can and do fight back. Professional hunters make their recommendations based upon what works to kill dangerous game, not how far an arrow will penetrate foam.

An example of how target materials can affect penetration is that a light .22-250 bullet traveling at high velocity will easily penetrate steel plate that will only be dented by a heavy .470 Nitro Express bullet traveling at moderate velocity. However, the same .22-250 bullet will be stopped in a few inches in an elephant's skull, while the .470 bullet will penetrate for feet. So, how much do we learn about terminal ballistics for hunting bullets by shooting them into steel plate? Not much. In practice, I think there is a huge difference between penetration in foam and penetration in animals with arrows. Even the results reported by Elknut for penetration in his hog target of only a couple of inches is vastly different from his reports of pass throughs in elk. I applaud his efforts to perform actual testing rather than rely totally on anecdotal statements. I also think Elknut has shot enough animals to know that his arrows from his bows are more than adequate for the animals he is hunting. He is obviously a knowledgeable, ethical hunter for his prey. On the other hand, there is a huge difference between the animals he is hunting and the large, dangerous game that Ed Ashby and others are designing arrows and broadheads for. I would not hesitate to hunt any elk with a .270 Winchester, but I would feel grossly undergunned if I were using that cartridge on a cape buffalo, rhino or elephant. I would feel very comfortable using a much lower velocity, big cartridge on those same animals because people for years have successfully used the large cartriges and found the smaller, lighter ones to be much less effective.

I will be hunting cape buffalo later this month and will choose to use what has been proven in the hunting fields to be effective. My arrow will weigh 915 grains with an Ashby broadhead. I expect it will do its part if I do mine. On the other hand, like Elknut, I use a significantly lighter arrow on elk and deer.

I'm not being rude or attacking anyone's ideas, just stating my impressions. None of my statements are original thought anyway. Someone else already related everything I have said. I'm just choosing to agree with tried and proven results.

Allan

[elknut1]

amar911, very good post my friend! Yes I agree his setups do vary in the 720grn to 815grn range out of the lightest of 3 bows which the tested one was 82#. His record keeping & explanation is very very good & yes he's more into the larger deadlier game the earth has to offer. In using bows in the 80#+ to 90# range I totally agree that 800grn to 900grn arrows are not out of the question for the animals he's hunting.

    But it's less than 1-grn per pound difference than a 720grn arrow to a 815grn arrow. That's not a huge life altering difference for the animals 95% of us hunt. If I were hunting cape buffalo I'd surely do some serious testing of my own & come up with the perfect setup, ones life could depend on it! (grin)

  How many here already have a setup they're happy with, I dare say most do! OK, how may here according to what they draw poundage wise are shooting arrows in the 8.5 to 9.5 grain per pound in a finished arrow? I shoot an 8.8grn per pound out of my 55# L/B---This is a very good arrow wt. & performs well for me & I'm within the parameters! This can help  determine ones best wt. range & have the best of both worlds in penetration & speed! But most hunters don't care & will not listen to the point of making changes. I'll bet many here are shooting 12grn per pound & up, yet even after showing them with testing of my own & Ashbys testing they still will maintain their setups because they feel they work just fine! And I'm sure they do in most hunting situations. There's not just one arrow wt. per bow that can work there is a range that will suffice but there's only one Peak, after that it suffers slowly depending on which end of the scale you're on! Be balanced & you'll reap the rewards!

   Ones broadhead choice & sharpness is important as well! You will have folks that love 2-blades & folks that love 3-blades for various reasons. I want 3-blade for blood on the ground & I have my reasons just as most have theirs. But one thing we can all agree on is to do our best to take the animals we hunt as cleanly & humanely as possible! Let's stick together as hunters & learn from one another, Lord knows I love soaking up any info that will move me up to the next level! Thanks! Come on Elk Season!!!!!!

  ElkNut1

[nightowl1]

Guys thanks for all the input and private comments... this has been very helpful.

[elknut1]

nightowl1, the loaded question is, what arrow wt. did you decide on? Curious folks would like to know! (grin) Or you can PM me if you're more comfortable? Thanks for your patience!!!

  ElkNut/Paul

[nightowl1]

I bought some 35/55 blems from BigJim...I plan on shooting 200-225 up front so it should land around 485 ish... We will see what happens in the bareshaft tune. But this would give me around 20% FOC and 10.5 gpp. WIll be shooting a snuffer and keeping the shots in 20 yards.

Shooting from 30 yards i just loved the flatter trajectory of the lighter arrow.

This should keep me happy for a while...ya keep up the chat if you like... been great.

Now i have to figure out my fletching choice back to the 5 vs 4 thread!!! haha

[nightowl1]

btw when i eventually head to find an elk i might boost the wieght a bit but ill know more after i stick a few big pineywood rooters

[elknut1]

Hey, thanks for the reply!!! Your setup will work just fine! If it helps any I've shot the similar weight arrow as yourself with both 4-4" feathers & 3-5" feathers, I couldn't tell any difference in arrow flight at all, I then tried 3-4" feathers with the same results, good luck in your testing, you'll appreciate it more! (grin)
  Of course this was all done with a well spined arrow! I was shooting the SnufferSS 125grn, this year I'm a smidge heavier up-front with a 75grn brass insert. Last years was a 173grn up-front, it passed through the bull.

  ElkNut1
  ElkNut1

[Jason Jelinek]

elknut1,

I read in previous posts that the 485 grain arrow had a 125 grain point and the 617 grain point had a 200 grain point.  Is the 200 grain used in the 617 grain arrow larger in diameter than your 125 grain point used in the 485 grain arrow?

I've noticed that my heavier arrows I use for 3D's and target shooting (using 250 and 300 grain points), don't penetrate foam as far as those with my smaller diameter 125 grain points.  I believe it's because the 125 grain points have a smaller diameter than the 250 grain points.  However, when hunting and using broadheads the heavier arrows penetrate further.

[rollin]

Dont know if this was already posted but it seems MR.Bear has some info on this same subject pretty interesting and from a good source I think lol. Check it out  http://www.fredbear-online.com/

[elknut1]

Jason, No, the field-tips on both the 485grn arrow & 617grn were identical. The 485grn arrow also had a 75grn brass insert giving it 200grn up front. They were equal up front. The 485grn arrow was 8.8grn per #. The 617grn arrow was 11.58 per # it was too heavy to be the better penetrator with that poundage!

  It certainly can be true one setup out-performs the other. You don't say what you consider heavy or light & what poundage you're using? Too, are you using the same broadhead? Are they both 2-blade or one 2-blade & a 3-blade on the other? All this must be considered in comparisons.

  It's sorta like the guy that wrote about his buddy with a 65# compound & 400grn arrow & it bounced off a hog because it was too light. Is that really what happens with such proper setups? No it is not, something was wrong. Arrow not tuned to the bow, he jerked his bowhand & threw the arrow into a fishtail or maybe both, that is he possibly shot an un-tuned arrow & jerked his bow arm & really sent a squirrely arrow out there never able to straighten out before it reached the hog! It's obvious there was a breakdown somewhere there!
  We've taken way too many bulls with that setup to know that arrows don't just bounce off critters.

  Like yourself I've used extra weight up front for several years now & like the results but I don't sacrifice penetration by going TOO heavy, it doesn't make sense if I do. I want a balanced weight that will blow through nearly any part of an elk. I'm not interested in trying to blow through an elks leg. If that happened where contact were made there you're not killing him anyway as there's no vitals there. At least your odds are hugely against you in killing & finding him!
   The same goes with a scapula hit, the only part you can penetrate & still have decent odds of a kill & recovery is to hit the bottom portion of it below the main ridge or partition. That's where top of lungs end any higher & you go over them. If that happens you are at the mercy of your broadhead to somehow take a needed downward angle & float around & carve things up. Not good odds! (grin)
  In my opinion there are no major bones that require penetrating to get to the vitals on an elk. If you find yourself needing to blow through leg bones for a kill you are taking bad angled shots. Nothing wrong with quartering to you, quartering away or broadside shots, but none of those require major bone penetration to get an arrow through. A rib is not major bone, it can be blown through with a 40# bow & 400grn arrow. A scapula hit on elk means you shot 12"-15" to high, lower your shots!  
   If you can stay within the 8grn--9.5 grn per pound of draw you will have one lethal setup! Of course your arrow MUST be tuned to your bow! Thanks!

  ElkNut1

[J from Denmark]

Elknut thanks for taking all the critiqe so well !
I know that you are a very skilled hunter ( have one of your dvds btw ) but I simply just dont agree with you ( Niether do Ashby )

Here is three points if interest

# There is no such thing as to many grains pr pound of drawweight when it comes to penetration.
If you have acces to a chronograph try testing it for youself. even at 15 grains per puond both momentum AND kinetic energy will be higher then ANY lower gr.pr.#  And that is a FACT

# I have read ALL of Ashbys material several times and ( btw. he has more TRUE BIG GAME KILLS under his belt then any of us together backing up his findings ) I proved that with a LIGHTWEIGHT and SLOW LONGBOW with an ekstremely high grain per pound arrow he got better penetration then with heavier bow with medium gr.pr.puond. ( btw. his very first studys are very informative and has less number cranking )

slim arrows with high foc and as heavy as you can accept regardin loss of trajectory is the way to go.

[J from Denmark]

That should say " he proved"

[James Wrenn]

Everyone needs to just use what works.If you don't have the experiance to know what will work read about it from someone you like,ask someone you trust and try there way.It might work for you and if it don't try something else untill you find what does.This is a topic that will never be agreed on.We all have the bad habit of letting our own experiances with things influence our judgements.No written report or thousands of test is going to make someone change from what they know from years of doing it works quite well.If I ever desire to kill a buff I will pat attention to those that have.If elk hunting I think elknut has done it enough to know what he is talking about and has proved it has worked.For most of the stuff like deer which is hunted more than anything else by us...well it all works.  :D  

No matter what you choose the only true thing that works for killing animals is learning to shoot well enough you can hit them in the soft spots.Without that nothing else really matters anyway.If we spent as much time doing that as we doing trying to dissagree so much we might wind up agreeing more when we see the outcome in the fall.  

[elknut1]

James, thanks for the kind words, they're appreciated! But inquiring minds need to know! ME!!!!(grin) As long as the debate is healthy & informative I'll go with it, no harm in that plus I need to prove to myself what are the real facts! My resources may be limited but they haven't let me down so far over the years on tough critters!

  J----I will load up & tune a 750grn or so arrow & stack it up against my 485grn arrow & send it on it's way with the 55# draw L/B--I may even use a single bevel edge ABowyer head for the tests. My gut tells me the 750grn arrow is too slow to out penetrate the well balanced 485grn arrow!
   So far in my testing the 617grn arrow is aprox. 0-70 that's right the heavier arrow has not won one time. I should say the too heavy an arrow! (grin) I'll be back! (grin)

  ElkNut1

[J from Denmark]

Looking forward to hear your results.

Remember to use a carbon arrow as close in diameter to the light one as possible.

HIT-inserts carbons will outpenetrate regular carbons so you also need to use same design carbons

While we wait I can tell you that from our tests on legbones from calves we kept the same bows  (both recurve and compound ) but tried different weight arrows and the results was that  penetration increased as as arrowweight increased.

But actually I belive that arrowdiameter and maybe also foc are atleast as important as arrowweight. And the great thing about thoese is that there are no downsides to them whereas there is the obvious downside of bad trajectory to haevy arrows.

[IronCreekArcher]

J From Denmark:

Force = Mass x Acceleration...yes you can have to many grains per pound of draw for adequate penetration.  Try shooting a 1000 grain arrow from a 30 lb bow...I know this is on the unrealistic side of the spectrum but it makes the point.  See my previous posts in the earlier pages...there is a point of diminishing returns for every set-up.