Author Topic: OPINIONS ON THIS BROADHEAD DESIGN (Read 990 times)

Bonebuster · « **Reply #20 on:** March 19, 2010, 08:59:00 PM »

Strong, two edge heads in variable weights...very desireable.

The same ferrule, accepting different, replaceable blades, very desireable.

The diffuculty is going to be making them affordable.

Keep at it.

A tip of the hat to you.

Oregon Okie · « **Reply #21 on:** March 19, 2010, 09:41:00 PM »

oops double post about Oregon. didn't see the first one.

Kenneth · « **Reply #22 on:** March 19, 2010, 10:06:00 PM »

Very cool design! I like the wide cut and interchangable blades. If you take the barbed design away from the back I think you'd have a real winner. Maybe offer a 4blade option similar to the slick trick razor trick in a 175gr. to 200gr.

bayoulongbowman · « **Reply #23 on:** March 19, 2010, 10:08:00 PM »

too short .....

shortstroke 91 · « **Reply #24 on:** March 19, 2010, 10:15:00 PM »

The second one looks a little better to me but I'd still prefer a longer one. One other thing is with the shaft actually going up and into the head folks with shafts cut real close to the riser might not be able to get to full draw since they'd be giving up what looks like 1/2" or so.

JARHEAD1371 · « **Reply #25 on:** March 19, 2010, 10:32:00 PM »

shortstroke
On the second drawing the shaft is 3/8" past the end of the blades. I did that in order to make the ferrule shorter and stronger. Basically all of the trad guys I know have at least 1" of shaft beyond their riser at full draw.

I'll work on a few more designs and hopefully get them posted in the next few days.

amar911 · « **Reply #26 on:** March 19, 2010, 10:40:00 PM »

I like the second design quite a bit, although to eliminate the problem with the "barbed" rear you could could always do what was done on the Simmons Land Shark broadhead where the blade extends backwards parallel and adjacent to the shaft. That would let you sweep the back edges of the blade slightly forward or at a 90 degree angle. Here is a link to a picture of a Land Shark for comparison. http://www.huntinfo.com/product/simmonssharks.php

I know there is the criticism that the effective length of the shaft is decreased, but that is easily solved by using slightly longer shafts, which is generally a good thing anyway because longer shafts tend to be more forgiving. Obviously, the folks who use Land Sharks don't have a problem with that.

Keep up the good work on your designs. I think you are onto something with pushing the ferrule forward for strength. It will be a tough road ahead of you to ever get a broadhead into production, but don't let hard work ever keep you from doing something that is worthwhile.

Allan

Fletcher · « **Reply #27 on:** March 19, 2010, 10:54:00 PM »

Illinois removed the non-barbed language from the code a few years back. Had to do with the Tecan mech head.

Jarhead, I prefer a longer edge and won't shoot much steeper than a Zwickey Delta. It takes a good deal more force to push a steep edge thru tissue compared to slicing. The Ashby tests pretty much bear this out. In my limited experience, generous blood trails are much more the result of shot placement, edge sharpness and luck than width or number of blades.

hayslope · « **Reply #28 on:** March 20, 2010, 07:52:00 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Terry Green:
Looks like a WIDE silver flame....the exclusive run.

That was my first thought, except for the length.

Bill Carlsen · « **Reply #29 on:** March 20, 2010, 08:27:00 AM »

If you are making blades that are interchangable why not make some that are closer to 3:1 for those that prefer them?

Apex Predator · « **Reply #30 on:** March 20, 2010, 08:58:00 AM »

Why not make the ferrule out of steel? I like the wide two blades, but prefer more length as well. The interchangeable blade idea is a good one.

getstonedprimitivebowhunt · « **Reply #31 on:** March 20, 2010, 09:10:00 AM »

..hand make a few and see what works !

Lamont Granger · « **Reply #32 on:** March 20, 2010, 09:38:00 AM »

I think Wisconsin removed the "non-barbed" terminology from the laws also. Lamont

getstonedprimitivebowhunt · « **Reply #33 on:** March 20, 2010, 10:09:00 AM »

Maybe take trailing edge of head straight across and have it extent with a groove down over shaft with a slight gap for different shaft sizes...just a crazy thought.That would keep ferrel short and heavy duty!

getstonedprimitivebowhunt · « **Reply #34 on:** March 20, 2010, 10:13:00 AM »

Never seen one taken down over shaft ..but it might work good.

poison arrow · « **Reply #35 on:** March 20, 2010, 01:11:00 PM »

A friend of mines brother is buying a broadhead company. I have had thoughts of getting together with members to design a head and submit it to him. The company sale has yet to go through just yet though.

Overspined · « **Reply #36 on:** March 20, 2010, 07:18:00 PM »

looks like a great turkey head

Ragnarok Forge · « **Reply #37 on:** March 20, 2010, 11:12:00 PM »

Barbed in Washington and thus illegal here.

DesertDude · « **Reply #38 on:** March 20, 2010, 11:40:00 PM »

Kinda looks like this Broadhead, They were called "Super II" 1 1/2 wide.

James on laptop · « **Reply #39 on:** March 21, 2010, 04:09:00 AM »

Bad mechanical advantage,worse shape for quartering shots and not legal in most states.


LEFT HAND BOWS CLASSIFIEDS	TRAD GANG CLASSIFIEDS ACCESS	RIGHT HAND BOWS CLASSIFIEDS

News:

Author Topic: OPINIONS ON THIS BROADHEAD DESIGN (Read 990 times)

Users currently browsing this topic: