3Rivers Archery



The Trad Gang Digital Market













Contribute to Trad Gang and Access the Classifieds!

Become a Trad Gang Sponsor!

Traditional Archery for Bowhunters






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


Author Topic: Fred Bear on Hunting Arrows - in 1943!  (Read 683 times)

Offline Dr. Ed Ashby

  • Trad Bowhunter
  • **
  • Posts: 673
Fred Bear on Hunting Arrows - in 1943!
« on: July 19, 2007, 11:17:00 PM »
An interesting old article by Fred Bear that I came across. Not too long, so here's a copy and paste of the text. The graphics wouldn't copy, so if you wish to see them, the article is at

 http://members.tripod.com/~tmuss/shotfrompast/bear.htm


The following article was taken from the February 1943 issue of Ye Sylvan Archer


Hunting Arrows
by
Fred Bear



The article by Tom Imler in the December issue of Ye Sylvan Archer is very timely. Modern archery hunting is "on trial" and care should be taken by all those who enjoy this sport to make sure that their equipment is adequate for the game hunted.
Too few archers realize the importance of using a rather heavy arrow for hunting. The growing popularity of field shooting has created a demand for light weight, fast arrows and it is assumed by many archers that the same qualifications are proper for hunting. It is also a more or less common belief that a light arrow traveling fast will have as great killing power as a heavier shaft going at slower speed when both are shot from the same how.
In support then, of Tom Imler's arguments for heavy tackle I would like to submit a chapter dealing with arrows from the manuscript of a book being prepared on Bow Hunting.
"In 1980, F. L. English conducted a series of tests to determine the striking power of various weights of arrows when shot from a how having a draw weight of 50 pounds. This being classed as a light weight hunting bow and in as much as only one bow was used it was thought desirable to conduct similar tests using not only arrows of various weights, but bows of varying weights as well.
"Accordingly, a 'bob' was constructed by nailing together 4 pieces of wood resulting in a box 9 inches square and 15 inches long, open at both ends. This was filled with pieces of corrugated paper cut into squares which were kept in place by narrow slats nailed across the top and bottom of the ends leaving a sufficient amount of corrugated paper exposed to receive the arrows.
"This bob was suspended, pendulum fashion, from 4 wires running to the ceiling (about 10 feet). A light weight wire 'whisker' with a small piece of pencil lead attached was hinged to the back end so that it had a vertical travel only. The pencil end rested on a piece of graph paper just slightly below and back of the bob.
"Six arrows were made weighing 300, 400, 500, 600, 700, and 800 grains each. All shooting was done from a machine so that the draw and loose would be exactly the same for each shot,
"Eight bows, varying in weight from 45 to 68 pounds were used.
"The six arrows were shot from each bow and the performance of each recorded. The results were then grouped for each arrow weight, added together and divided by 8 to give averages which revealed the following.
"The 400 grain arrow struck 20 per cent harder than the 300 grain, the 500 45 per cent, the 600 66 per cent, the 700 82 per cent the 800 100 per cent.
"In order that the reader may more completely comprehend the startling results revealed by these experiments, figure 1 shows a chart indicating the findings for each different combination.
"A study of this will show the striking force of a 500 grain arrow shot from a 61 pound bow to be less than l per cent greater than a 600 grain arrow shot from a 45 pound bow. Also that a 68 pound how with 500 grain arrow strikes less than 3 per cent harder than a 52 pound bow with a 600 grain arrow.
"The reason for this difference, of course, is because the light arrow does not absorb nearly as much of the energy of the bow as does the heavy one.
"To the casual observer it may seem that the recommendations as to bow weights in the chapter dealing with bows should not have been made, as arrow weight has a greater bearing on killing power. This would be true perhaps, if it were not necessary, from an accuracy standpoint, to establish a definite relationship between bow weight and arrow weight. A good rule to follow in this respect is to select arrows that are not heavier in grains than your bow weight with a cipher added to it, and not lighter than 10 per cent less. As an example, in choosing hunting arrows for a 60 pound bow you simply add a cipher to the 60 which allows a maximum arrow weight of 600 grains and a minimum of 540 grains.
"Arrows that are heavier than this ratio will most likely have too high a trajectory and for this reason will be difficult to shoot accurately except at close range. If much lighter than the above recommendations they may lack sufficient killing power for large game and, under hunting conditions, be less accurate.
"Lightweight arrows are more inaccurate under hunting conditions because they are not as stable as the heavier shafts. Hunting shots differ from practice or field shooting. In the former it is the first shot that counts most because, in many instances, an opportunity for a second shot does not occur.
"Upon that first shot therefore hinges your success or failure and it is here that the heavier shaft will aid your accuracy. Being less sensitive to correct loose and form which, you may rest assured will not be at its best, your chances of scoring a hit are much better and you are more certain to get your trophy.
"It might be well to mention again, as in the chapter under bows, that a deer can be killed with most any combination if no heavy bones are struck but what is needed is some thing that will crash through where the going is tough.
"Some archers will take exception to these recommended arrow weights, arguing that the heavier shafts, because or their faster drop will greatly affect the accuracy. It is the opinion of the writer, backed by many of the most successful archer hunters that, in-as-much as very little game is killed with a how beyond 40 yards, the more stable shooting qualities of heavier shafts will more than compensate for any loss of accuracy due to a greater drop. And you will recover many trophies that might otherwise escape wounded,
"It is not necessary to construct a hob to arrive at this conclusion. Watch how a heavy bow rocks a target or try to shoot light weight blunts through a board.
"The heavier arrows with their additional penetrating power are more likely to pass entirely through large and heavy game animals. Experience has proven that deer will go further if they carry the arrow with them than they will if it clears the body. The logical reason for this is that the arrow frightens them. The sharp blade is felt at each movement and, with the brightly colored shaft and feathers protruding from their body, it might easily be imagined that some strange creature were clinging to their body and clawing at their 'innards'. In this frantic condition they will run until the very last heartbeat and you may not locate your game unless tracking conditions are good.
"On the other hand, the swift almost silent passage of an arrow thru the body will, in most cases, have the same effect as a pain and sick feeling in the stomach would to you or me. A sensible reaction would be to lie down at the first convenient place you could find. Animals will do this too and if not pursued at once will he found within a short distance from where they were hit.
"It is true that a protruding arrow will cause additional cutting when the rear end comes in contact with trees and bushes. This will hasten death. However, it may, also lengthen the distance to your trophy as much as five times."
The majority of archers in this area do use heavy equipment although our interpretation of the word as applied to hunting equipment means bows 65 to 70 pounds.
I go along with Tom all the way with the exception of his statement that "most normal men can use a 70 to 80 pound how with ease."
If this figure had been 60 to 70 pounds it would, in my opinion, be nearly right.
Most men do not have the bone structure to support muscular development necessary to shoot bows of more than this weight with ease. While many could work into the 80 pound class and some to the 90 or 100, few have the time to devote to this task.
There is absolutely no question but that the really heavy bows do pack a tremendous wallop; and bows, unlike guns, can never be too heavy for the archer.
So, in establishing minimum bow weights for game no larger than deer, let us not place them so high as to discourage the archer hunter who does not have quite so much hair on his chest, or those who do not have enough time to devote to this muscular build-up.
It is entirely another question if one plans to tangle with the big bears, moose, large boar and such game, but the largest game that the majority of archers will ever have occasion to shoot at are deer and, very occasionally, black bear.
Don't get me wrong, there is definitely no substitute for heavy bows and heavy arrows. A light weight arrow traveling faster will not bring the desired results. But let us not insist that moose tackle be used for deer and that nothing less will suffice.

Offline Islandlongbow

  • Trad Bowhunter
  • **
  • Posts: 236
Re: Fred Bear on Hunting Arrows - in 1943!
« Reply #1 on: July 20, 2007, 04:17:00 AM »
Quote
"The heavier arrows with their additional penetrating power are more likely to pass entirely through large and heavy game animals. Experience has proven that deer will go further if they carry the arrow with them than they will if it clears the body. The logical reason for this is that the arrow frightens them. The sharp blade is felt at each movement and, with the brightly colored shaft and feathers protruding from their body, it might easily be imagined that some strange creature were clinging to their body and clawing at their 'innards'. In this frantic condition they will run until the very last heartbeat and you may not locate your game unless tracking conditions are good.
"On the other hand, the swift almost silent passage of an arrow thru the body will, in most cases, have the same effect as a pain and sick feeling in the stomach would to you or me. A sensible reaction would be to lie down at the first convenient place you could find. Animals will do this too and if not pursued at once will he found within a short distance from where they were hit.
What has your experience shown Doc? Is a pass through better?
This is a great article....thanks for re-printing it    :thumbsup:    

Jerry
Procrastination is the thief of time.

Offline Littlefeather

  • Moderator
  • Trad Bowhunter
  • ***
  • Posts: 2744
Re: Fred Bear on Hunting Arrows - in 1943!
« Reply #2 on: July 20, 2007, 06:50:00 AM »
Good stuff Doc! Glad to see you continuing to educate. I know that you knew Fred. Did you and Fred ever chat about any of the info in this article or anything related? Just wondering if he ever shared any equipment ideas with you. What about the other guys like Ben Pearson? Did he ever share any arrow lethality ideas? Thanks! CK

Online Charlie Lamb

  • Administrator
  • Trad Bowhunter
  • ****
  • Posts: 8251
Re: Fred Bear on Hunting Arrows - in 1943!
« Reply #3 on: July 20, 2007, 08:08:00 AM »
:thumbsup:    :thumbsup:    :thumbsup:
Hunt Sharp

Charlie

Offline TimZeigler

  • Trad Bowhunter
  • **
  • Posts: 986
Re: Fred Bear on Hunting Arrows - in 1943!
« Reply #4 on: July 20, 2007, 08:25:00 AM »
Great read!  The chart being used really dates the article, "hickory backed yew", "silk backed osage", wouldn't mind seeing those bows now.  Definitely makes me want to go home and reconfigure my arrows to see what happens.

thanks for sharing.
tim
USMC 1992-2000
PBS Associate Member

Offline OzarkRamblr

  • TGMM Member
  • Trad Bowhunter
  • ***
  • Posts: 446
Re: Fred Bear on Hunting Arrows - in 1943!
« Reply #5 on: July 20, 2007, 08:50:00 AM »
As someone who's bow hunting education (without wheels) only began a couple of years ago, I appreciate the education you provide. Thanks for taking the time you do for this.   :clapper:
"A friend of mine said that I'm lucky, I told him luck has nothing to do with the life I chose, we choose the life we have and don't have, so choose wisely"...Kingwouldbe

Words to live by.

TGMM Family of the Bow

Offline JC

  • Moderator
  • Trad Bowhunter
  • ***
  • Posts: 4462
Re: Fred Bear on Hunting Arrows - in 1943!
« Reply #6 on: July 20, 2007, 08:58:00 AM »
Thanks for the excerpt Doctor Ashby.
"Being there was good enough..." Charlie Lamb reflecting on a hunt
TGMM Brotherhood of the Bow

Offline SlowBowinMO

  • Trad Bowhunter
  • **
  • Posts: 2540
Re: Fred Bear on Hunting Arrows - in 1943!
« Reply #7 on: July 20, 2007, 09:36:00 AM »
Very good, I love that kind of stuff!   :thumbsup:
"Down-Log Blind at Misty River"

Offline LCB

  • Trad Bowhunter
  • **
  • Posts: 81
Re: Fred Bear on Hunting Arrows - in 1943!
« Reply #8 on: July 20, 2007, 10:00:00 AM »
Great stuff! Thanks for sharing!

Chuck
Success is measured not by inches of antler growth, but in the heart, soul, and mind!

Offline Seeking Trad Deer

  • Trad Bowhunter
  • **
  • Posts: 885
Re: Fred Bear on Hunting Arrows - in 1943!
« Reply #9 on: July 20, 2007, 10:01:00 AM »
Thanks for all you do to educate us Doctor Ashby.  I've learned a lot from your reports.    :thumbsup:
The Lord is my Shepherd

Offline eagle24

  • Trad Bowhunter
  • **
  • Posts: 499
Re: Fred Bear on Hunting Arrows - in 1943!
« Reply #10 on: July 20, 2007, 10:20:00 AM »
Great Article.  Thanks for sharing and teaching.

Offline Mark Baker

  • Trad Bowhunter
  • **
  • Posts: 1633
Re: Fred Bear on Hunting Arrows - in 1943!
« Reply #11 on: July 20, 2007, 11:28:00 AM »
I love that old article...one of my favorites and aptly illustrates the importance of heavy hunting arrows.
My head is full of wanderlust, my quiver's full of hope.  I've got the urge to walk the prairie and chase the antelope! - Nimrod Neurosis

Offline hormoan

  • Trad Bowhunter
  • **
  • Posts: 2056
Re: Fred Bear on Hunting Arrows - in 1943!
« Reply #12 on: July 20, 2007, 11:54:00 AM »
:thumbsup:  As always great reading!

                    Brent

Offline carphunter100

  • Trad Bowhunter
  • **
  • Posts: 130
Re: Fred Bear on Hunting Arrows - in 1943!
« Reply #13 on: July 20, 2007, 12:14:00 PM »
great reading.
Member WV Bowhunters Associaion Life member of Trad. Bowhunters of Southern WV

Offline Kevin Bahr

  • Trad Bowhunter
  • **
  • Posts: 1010
Re: Fred Bear on Hunting Arrows - in 1943!
« Reply #14 on: July 20, 2007, 12:25:00 PM »
Great information, Dr.  I especially appreciate Fred stating that a 50 lb bow is classed as a lightweight hunting bow.  
All we ever hear is "speed kills", but we knew all along that it doesn't, penetration does.

Offline bowdude

  • Trad Bowhunter
  • **
  • Posts: 576
Re: Fred Bear on Hunting Arrows - in 1943!
« Reply #15 on: July 20, 2007, 05:54:00 PM »
Awesome.  I love provable data and beliefs.  Thanks Doc.    :clapper:

Offline Dr. Ed Ashby

  • Trad Bowhunter
  • **
  • Posts: 673
Re: Fred Bear on Hunting Arrows - in 1943!
« Reply #16 on: July 20, 2007, 06:59:00 PM »
My experience is the same. When all else is equal, a pass through hit leads to faster recovery. I want a pass through as often as I can possible get it. The reason? Below is an excerpt from the 2005 Update, Part 5. (Sources are referenced therein)

"What good does it do to have so much penetration that ‘normal hits’ end up with the arrow sticking in the dirt after passing through the animal? Isn’t it better to have a larger wound channel with penetration stopping at the off-side of the
animal?

"Medical studies from human arrow wounds confirm that hemorrhaging as a result of a broadhead tipped arrow wound occurs significantly more quickly when the arrow/shaft does not remain in the wound; applying direct pressure upon the
tissues. The hemorrhage increase is so vital that first-responders are advised to never attempt removal of the shaft from such a wound until adequate facilities are available to deal with the increased hemorrhaging which results.

Additionally, it has been suggested that, in a moving animal, the tissues exert additional lateral pressure upon the shaft, further slowing hemorrhaging. Based on those findings, it would appear that a complete pass-through is the desired shot outcome on game."

Curtis, I can't say that Fred, or Ben, and I really had a 'discussion' about these topics ... I merely sat there and listened, like the eager but empty young vessel I was, trying to absorb all I possibly could. Both, however, believed in penetration as THE critical element with big animals (that included deer-size game).

Fred, in particular, talked a lot about why the Razorhead's bleeder blades were of very thin and very hard carbon steel. He felt they had to completely shatter on ANY bone impact; even very light rib; so the main blade could penetrate like a good 2 blade. His number one goal  was to open a bigger hole in the skin, which he believed reduced shaft drag, increasing penetration. He also felt the bigger skin opening increased EXTERNAL bleeding; but that never seemed to be the big point he stressed. That was the reduced shaft drag.

It was years later that Fred began to talk about "hitting them once with a four blade is like hitting them twice with a single blade". From things I heard direct from him, I'm fairly certain he didn't actually believed that, but it was good marketing! Regardless, the original bleeder-blade concept was, I believe, the best 'multiblade' concept yet. Fred understood that the bleeder blade couldn't be made of steel that would bend; it HAD to be designed to shatter on impact.

Ed

Users currently browsing this topic:

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
 

Contact Us | Trad Gang.com © | User Agreement

Copyright 2003 thru 2024 ~ Trad Gang.com ©