I agree hitting any kind of bone can prove a disappointment doesn't matter what you're shooting! No guarantees you get an arrow into the vitals because you feel you have a bullet proof setup, because nobody does! Anytime a leg bone is considered in the equation as a high productive shot to reach the vitals, then your shot thinking is way out of line! A hunter should allow things to develop & choose all shots carefully.
Sure crap happens but really how many times does this happen in real life hunting situations? Too, is a two bladed head a cure-all? A lot depends on the hunter himself, he must examine his strong points & his weak points. Are you the hunter one that consistently "crowds" the shoulder & just can't help it? If so, consider a 2-bladed head! Are you a hunter who seems to crowd the liver or one lung because of angles or even the guts but rarely are near the shoulder blade area? Choose a 3-bladed head. Everyone of us fall into a certain category or even our hunting groups for that matter, just think back on stats over the last 5 years & see where you as an individual or your group lies!
I suspect that Mr. Ashby has at one time or another been a "crowd" the shoulder type hunter so has come up with a formula that will help him out as this issue arises. Heh, I applaud him for taking the necessary measures to help out his cause. I say this because it's not the standard to try & force an arrow through the scapula or leg bone of any critter in an attempt to reach the vitals. We should be patient & wait till a much better shooting angle arises or let the animal walk, not just force a shot because he may get away despite your equipment!
Our hunting group has killed as many animals as anyones & I can't ever recall one leg bone hit, yes several scapula hits but those were rare indeed in comparison to the hundreds of non-scapula or any bone hits. (ribs don't count) This shows me the facts that major bone rarely comes into play but it's much more common to be just off the lungs towards the liver or guts or too high or too low in those areas. Penetration is rarely the issue with well tuned equipment, when this happens I want a large wound channel & a blood trail. If the arrow stays inside I want it carving it up like a cleaver this is why razor sharp heads are a must!
On elk blood does not readily spill out like on deer, the hair soaks it up good, you need a hole where blood continues to ooze even if the arrow still plugs the entrance hole some! Here are some actual facts I've put together!
2-Blade , 3-Blade or 2-Blades with bleeders! Which are best? A lot depends on what you're hunting & what you expect from your head of use. It seems to be a subject often discussed & will continue to be so after we're all long gone! (grin) I have my preference as well, the only difference may be that I've been able to pull some stats together over the years of using both types of heads. My conclusions as to what's best for us are supported by my stats & findings under real elk hunting conditions with a few deer thrown in here & there! (grin) I gathered these from the last 5 years from our elk hunts, this is important to me because elk are thick skinned & hided, more so than deer. What works well on elk will no doubt carry over into like animals. When hunting elk I want blood on the ground, even on less desirable hits. This is very important if you hunt country with thick under-growth where trailing is tough without it.
These stats are from 24 elk killed, 2 cows & 22 bulls, here's my break-down, hard facts don't lie. (grin) Out of these 24 Elk two were hit in the scapula/shoulder plate, one with a 2-blade Swickey 125grn & the other from a 3-bladed muzzy 125grn. Both elk were recovered. Seven other Elk were hit in less desirable areas bringing that total to 9. The remaining 15 were hit in the heart & lung area. This shows us that 62% of the elk taken or the 15 would have expired quickly no matter the head used. The less desirable hits were 9, that's 38% out of the so called "kill zone" when this happens you need your head to do all the damage it can & still have a blood trail to follow. Fortunately for us this was the case with razor sharp heads.
Here's how I view the results, 2 scapula hits out of 24 elk. That's 6 1/2% that were hit where a 2 blade could have made the difference, the one 3-bladed muzzy scapula hit was from a compound bow, it still had the energy to penetrate & do it's job. This leaves us with 93 1/2% of shots somewhere in an elks body away from major bone as scapula/shoulder hits that so many are concerned about. Ribs on an elk or like animals are no match from a reasonable setup where 40+ pounds is used along with 10grn per lb arrows. Distance is always a factor especially in lighter draw weights & setups. Point is, we have now turned to using nothing but 3-bladed heads or 2 blades with bleeders, why, larger wound channel & way more blood for trailing. We've taken 6 elk with 2-blades all results are the same, that is, little to no blood spilled. Funny thing is where the elk dies there's generally lots of blood from 2 blades but none in-between for tracking. This would be bad for the 38% where elk were hit outside major organs. I will play the odds & use 3- bladed heads, 93 1/2% chance I will miss the scapula & yet have plenty of blood on the ground for tracking purposes when needed!
Yes, 2-blades kill, but blood trails are at a minimum. 3 blades kill & blood loss is maximized! This is not a post, use what I use, this is a post we stick with what has proven itself time & time again to work & offer us great blood trails in very dense underbrush much of the time. It's not uncommon to be in chest high grasses & willow brush, if you've tracked game in such spots you'd better be following blood because tracks are no-where to be found! Use common sense & consider the areas you hunt, use what works best for you!
ElkNut1
Topic: Ashby on light weight bows... (Read 16427 times)
