Ashby on light weight bows...

[IronCreekArcher]

Elknut1...not trying to get into a pissin' match but you can consistently hit the vital zone of deer and elk at 35 yards with trad gear...   ?  Are you sure you are not using that old wheelie bow?  :D

[Arkansaslongbow]

what a great thread..  

[frank bullitt]

What Rob said on pg. 3 I said pretty much on pg 2 earlier. The ping pong ball is not a comparrison, come on!                            

  In the late 40's and 50's, there was an engineer from Allis Chalmer, I think , that wrote alot about the light arrow, light weight theory, He also put it to use, hunting, Someone on here knows who I'm talking about. I read a reprint of his article in a 1980's Traditional Archer mag. Good read, Good shootin, Steve

[Jason R. Wesbrock]

Originally posted by IronCreekArcher:
Elknut1...not trying to get into a pissin' match but you can consistently hit the vital zone of deer and elk at 35 yards with trad gear...    ?  Are you sure you are not using that old wheelie bow?   :D  

I read his post as referring to 35 yards on elk, not deer. Either way, keeping one's arrows in a target the size of an elk's lungs at 35 yards isn't at all unreasonable.

[Bjorn]

Elknut and others with all due respect this is not new; what you have discovered that penetration on foam, plywood etc is accomplished with certain ballistics.
Penetration on an animal that is a different material and very slippery inside is just not the same thing. Concluding one based on the other is like blaming global warming on man.

[elknut1]

Jason, thank you for qualifying that statement! I did say elk sized critters out to 35yds. I would have no issue taking elk at that distance & deer out to 30yds in the blink of an eye!

  Arkansas, no speed is not the concern here or I'd consider a 375grn arrow, problem is I'd sacrifice penetration, that's a bad trade off on ones elk hunt! Just as too heavy can be ones downfall as his arrow wt. is to extremes the other way, once again penetration would be sacrificed. If one was guilty towards one or the other I'd take too heavy over too light a setup. I'm referring to a reasonable amount here.

  What's being talked about here is a nice blend of speed & penetration not over board one way or the other! My son has taken 2 bulls with a 40# hoyt bow & a 380grn arrow & a 400grn arrow when he was a lad. Since then we've both taken a few more bulls with arrows in the 400grn to the heaviest being 565grn, from 40# to 70# with both compounds & trad gear, penetration is as important as is speed, both compliment one another when a balance is met. In my findings 600grn + arrows is not a balanced blend in the 55# range. I'm sure it would spill over more likely from 48#-56# As I've said, 600+ will kill as will 475grn or less but you do sacrifice penetration when varying from a bows peak performance of its weight. Thanks!

  ElkNut1

[Pinecone]

I am getting to this thread a bit late and have only read the opening pages, but since I mostly shoot 46#-47# bows @ 27", I thought I'd add my two cents to the conversation.  So... here goes:

My bread and butter arrow weighs just a hair over 480 grains which is equivalent to 10.2 GPP @ 47#.  This arrow when perfectly tuned and tipped with a razor sharp BH is both optimal in terms of trajectory and devastating on game.  That said, the devil IS in the details...and in the case of low-pundage set-ups, I personally believe that every detail matters. Those details are as much a part of what Ashby reports on in his study as the arrow weight/penetration issue.

This year I will be elk hunting with a 47# Schafer Silvertip and my bread and butter 480 grain arrow tipped with super sharp Grizzly ElGrande BH's.  I have complete confidence in this set-up.  Now I wish I could say the same for my aging knees...    !

Claudia

[Shinken]

Like Claudia said - Grizzly El Grande BHs are a good choice for maximizing penetration!

(I think Dr. Ashby said something similar...due to "mechanical advantage"....)

Shoot straight, Shinken

[ChuckC]

Elknut, try shooting the handi planks with blunts instead of field tips.
ChuckC

[SteveB]

elknut's studies are far easier to read and deal very well with what I hunt.

Steve

[elknut1]

Claudia--(Pinecone) Great setup!

   Bjorn, nope info is nothing new, the thread starter asked a question & I was answering it as honestly & factually as possible, the thread has evolved into this is all.(grin) I've been bowhunting nearly 30 years now myself, I still learn new things, never too old to learn for sure, I speak for myself there!
  Materials used are what I had at hand, I was simply checking the amounts of penetration each offered. What material do you want me to use? Some here are not sure what "Hardi Plank Cement Board is? It's major tough, when a hole is punched, it looks like an arrow going through cardboard, it doesn't shatter or explode. It's tough & it takes serious energy to get through it very similar to a scapula or shoulder-plate.
   The 617grn arrow simply did not have the energy at 55# to get through 3 sheets, the 485grn arrow did. Now if you were doing your best to choose a good weight arrow for an up-coming elk hunt & wanted the most penetration you could get & you were the one testing & these were the results you yourself found what arrow weight would you decide on? One must make the right decision with the facts not emotion! I have done this.

  I have taken many different animals over the years many of them are elk I do know the difference between Hardi Plank & animal flesh & bone! It was a good honest test!

  ChuckC, why would I want to use blunts instead of a field-tip? That's a good way to bust all arrows shot into a solid object other than a target or gelatin!

  ElkNut1

[J from Denmark]

Elknut not trying to be a wiseass here  its still not the same foc on thoese arrows.
200 grain upfront on a light arrow will give high foc, great penetration and less arrowmass to be pressed onto the tip on impact ( stronger arrow/tip connection.
200 grains up front on the heavier arrows will equal lower foc, penetration and arrow/tip strength

[ChuckC]

Because blunts tend to blow out the rear side of the board and leave you with a hole larger than the arrow shaft.  As long as the bow / arrow has enough power to get thru the board you will likely get better penetration with the blunt than with a field point or broadhead.

What does that mean ?  Nothing.  Apples and oranges, just like shooting two different diameter shafts into a compressed foam sheet target.  

I do not see how Ashby's stuff is at all theory.  He has numbers and figures and actual experience backing him up, though, granted limited in nature.  Numbers,  using the substrate we are actually hunting, not blocks or plywood or gelatin.

What IS the issue is whether or not you NEED to have all that penetration available on an animal the size of a whitetail deer.

That, my friend, is what should be debated here.  I tend to agree with you, that it is not required on deer.

ChuckC

[Jeff Strubberg]

Speed can get you through stiff material, especially if there is nothing behind it to slow the arrow down.  

Try your test into something with more give to it and you will get a completely different result, I promise.  You just can't simulate shooting muscle tissue by shooting a board.

[Jeff Strubberg]

Originally posted by Bjorn:
Elknut and others with all due respect this is not new; what you have discovered that penetration on foam, plywood etc is accomplished with certain ballistics.
Penetration on an animal that is a different material and very slippery inside is just not the same thing. Concluding one based on the other is like blaming global warming on man.

   

[Jason Jelinek]

I remember talking with a fellow member at our archery club who had 8" of penetration on an elk shot at 20 yards in 2007.  He was using a 400 grain arrow from a 70# compound.  The arrow hit the vitals area He figured he hit a rib going in.  Arrow weight does make a difference.  It seems speed can't make up for arrow weight in all cases.

[James Wrenn]

Jason I would be willing to bet he did not have a Stos broadhead on that arrow.  :D  Don't confuse what you see with light arrows on hunting shows as arrow weight problems.Most are shooting 2" wide expandables.Those same arrows tipped with broadheads like we use would never be found they would go through so fast.  

[Jason Jelinek]

This wasn't an expandable, more like a thunderhead.  I agree the choice of head makes a difference.  That was the second report we've heard of where a light arrow going fast didn't make it through an elk that fall.

[EIGHTWGT]

Wow...

Best thread Ive read on here in a while...

[SteveB]

Originally posted by Jason Jelinek:
I remember talking with a fellow member at our archery club who had 8" of penetration on an elk shot at 20 yards in 2007.  He was using a 400 grain arrow from a 70# compound.  The arrow hit the vitals area He figured he hit a rib going in.  Arrow weight does make a difference.  It seems speed can't make up for arrow weight in all cases.

He had to have something else going on.
I shot a mature cow elk with a 420 gr arrow from a 53lb recurve - 185 to 190 fps - 15 yds.

Clipped the outer edge of the scapula, thru a rib, both lungs, rib, thin part outer scapula - buried in the shoulder muscle. His bow had up to 50% more umph then mine - if the rib hindered penetration that much, there where issues of somekind in his setup outher then arrow wght.

Steve