My way of thinking is if you have a perfect flying arrow a heavier weight is just going to make hit lower. Accuracy with tuned equipment is the shooters responsibility. A perfect flying arrow is a perfect flying arrow no matter what it weighs.

Like you ???????:D

Arrows, whether high FOC or not, aren’t inherently “accurate.” They are only accurate in relation to the mechanism, and the variables (bow, release, shooting technique, etc) that launch them. In other words, a well-tuned low FOC arrow and a well-tuned EFOC arrow, with all other variables being consistent, have an equal potential to be “accurate” within commonly accepted hunting range shots.

However, a high FOC arrow has more inherent stability in flight and will track better when real world factors come into play, such as wind, than a low FOC arrow. Even more so if fletching is reduced as well, which reduces windage. In this way, it helps improve consistent accuracy, assuming everything else is tuned properly and technique is consistent.

Increasing FOC is really about improving penetration, but stability in flight is a beneficial by-product, and stability helps with consistency, which benefits accuracy.

I hope that helps answer the question.

I rarely answer these technical discussions being an amateur physicist and a beginner long bow shooter. But here goes. My rig this year was 300gr up front. Same arrow carbon trad only 500 with 50# shrew–started tuning for bigger game–350, 375, 400 up front. Using tuffhead field points and steel adapters.

At 12 yds in my garage range–gotta wait for 14 feet of snow to clear the outdoor, my groups got tighter the heavier I went. Target at chest height–arrow flight perfect. Using the 400 gr head I had to start shooting one arrow at a time as I was stripping fletching and busting nocks:D .

For reference I shoot split and push pull no pause.

I’ll let Doc Ed discuss the mechanics although I think Bruce covered it well. What I would say is Try it.

At Trad bow limits I don’t see any ballistic disadvantage requiring aim off our correction for point of aim point of impact our hyperbolic parallelism. Aw sorry Bruce that last is for you and the Doc–don’t forget I was a tanker a long time ago and EFOC was our mantra. Not trad related but if your interested I can post an e-mail I sent to Dave some years ago that addressed that issue8)

Hope this helps you guys–bottom line just try it.

Semper Fi

Mike