Home Forums Friends of FOC broadheads

Viewing 38 reply threads
  • Author
    Posts
    • ssumner1
      Post count: 109

      Hi guys,

      I have been absent for quite a time at least in the aspect of commenting and giving stories. I am newly married and thus all the money my wife and I make goes to the bills and the house we were fortunate enough to purchase. The issue I have recently found myself in is the knowledge of the single bevel broadhead. I have been reading so much of the Ashby wisdom and he has completely sold me to the idea of the single bevel. The issue I am having, is finding one that is affordable. I see them for outrageous amounts per 3. The question I have, is has anyone seen a pack of 3 that is around 30 to 40 dollars or has anyone ever tried using a CNC or plasma cutter to make their own?

      Thanks guys,

      -Andrew

    • David Petersen
      Member
      Post count: 2749

      Andrew — I am personally sold on Tuffheads, but yes, they are among the premiere and therefore pricey brands. I haven’t personally checked it out yet but I hear on good authority that Zipper, the new owner of Grizzly broadheads, is or soon will be selling their improved versions for about the price you quote, but for 6! If so, and if they’re hunting sharp out of the package, like the Tuffhead and a growing number of others are (that is, sharpened by KME or another top-end honer)they will be giving all other brands a perhaps market-shaking run for the money. I don’t know if they will offer screw-ins, but if that’s what you need you can always use adapters, as I do with the Tuffhead. You could start by giving Zipper a call. Keep us posted. Dave

    • wahoo
      Member
      Post count: 413

      look at 3 rivers archery – you can pick up Zwickey eskimos for about $24 fo 6.

    • bruc
      Member
      Post count: 476

      I got single bevel Concordes from Braveheart Archery.

      A six pack was $26.99. They shoot good but need lots of sharpening. Mine were 190 grain

      Bruce

      Price has gone up a little bit.

    • ssumner1
      Post count: 109

      Thanks guys. I will check into all the options provided and see where I can go from there.

      -Andrew

    • wideangle
      Member
      Post count: 35

      For a great two bladed broadhead I would suggest you consider Magnus They are top notch. They sharpen very well with a KME and you can use them for many seasons.

    • SteveMcD
      Member
      Post count: 870

      Nothing against the Single Bevel. But I have to agree with wideangle. As the saying goes, if it ain’t broke why fix it. You cannot go wrong with any of the tried and true traditional heads out there. Magnus and Ace come to mind. My favorite is the Journeyman – when you can find them (but Eclipse is the same thing).

    • Raymond CoffmanRaymond Coffman
      Moderator
      Post count: 1035

      I echo David —

      Tuffhead is my current choice — if the new grizzly { I used the old one, over 20+yrs] is as advertised — it will give everybody “a run for their money”

      I also personally think Highly of Aboyer brown bears. yes, they are not cheap but how many do you shoot at big game? even including practice [ which I do a lot off LOL]

      Use the best you can afford – I believe, I owe it to the Magnificent Game animals I love to Hunt–It may be a Western {vs eastern} thing – bigger animals / shot at the edge of trad bow range [25yds] – just a thought thrown out for discussion?

      Scout

    • David Petersen
      Member
      Post count: 2749

      Steve, in my personal experience plus many others I’ve heard from over the years, it is broke. But then again my “ground zero” is elk. I’d be a lot less exacting if I hunted only deer and never ever had a failure to get lethal penetration, no matter what. No disrespect, nor even an argument amigo–I’m a big fan of yours–but the “if it ain’t broke” cliche would have us still stuck in the dark ages s if everyone had always gone by it. I’m with Scout, and I’m sure you are too, that there can be no such thing as excess in chosing trad gear that gives us the best crack at killing fast and cutting way down on wounding loss. And the broadhead always walks point. Selah, Dave

    • SteveMcD
      Member
      Post count: 870

      I don’t disagree with you at all, Dave. And you are right, my experiences is only with thin skinned deer and bear, not Elk. So your point is well taken. Nothing wrong with improvements and experimentation either (I have over 200 different broadheads in my collection!) :D8) I’m just not sold on the single bevel. To me, a sharp well placed broadhead will penetrate and kill anything. All of the African Big 5 were killed long before the Grizzly Single Bevel came along.

      It all boils down to individual choice. And I do not mean to discourage anyone from trying anything new.

      I have some Grizzlies in my stash. If this gentlemen can’t afford them, he can PM me and I will send him a few for free to keep, to try them out. 8)

    • sapcut
      Post count: 159

      I think the one’s who don’t like to “fix things they think aren’t broken” are the same one’s who are not real crazy about “improving” what they don’t know can be improved. They also aren’t interested because that’s maybe why they’re in “traditional” bowhunting to begin with. To hunt the “unimproved” way. And nothing at all wrong with that.

      I personally am all for improving my weapon while still being a very challanging ordeal and could not care less about the romance involved with the “trad” bow. Trad is all I have done and all I will do.

      I think the TuffHead is a vast improvement from other heads. I could be wrong but it is very hard for me to imagine that the characteristics of the TuffHead 300 could be improved. For instance, I never would have thought that the sharp double bevel heads could get any better. They are sharp and will cut. But I was wrong. Then I thought nothing could be better than the single bevel Grizzly. Wrong again. Then I used the TuffHead. The wide single bevel on the TuffHead 300 is not only incredibly sharp, the bevel and edge is incredibly smooth. I think the smoothness and being a single bevel is much better than the ones mentioned. And that wide bevel will rotate no matter what…creating a bone splitting construction site. The double bevel head has each bevel working against each other eliminating the ability for it to move bone out of its way.

      Although the price for TuffHeads is more than the run of the mill broadhead. That’s less than a tank of gas for one trip to the hunting camp.

      It’s really not that much money considering your buying the best product of its kind on the market.

    • SteveMcD
      Member
      Post count: 870

      Sapcut wrote: I think the one’s who don’t like to “fix things they think aren’t broken” are the same one’s who are not real crazy about “improving” what they don’t know can be improved.

      Unless we’re having a discussion about Mechanical Broadheads which many of us feel fall into the category of almost being unethical, considering their performance and failure rates.

      A broadhead is a broadhead, all one has to do is visit any of the ABCC Broadhead displays to see that there is not much that has not been designed before.

      Any properly tuned shaft with a equally sharp broadhead that is well placed will penetrate and effectively kill an animal. To be realistic even a Field Tip will kill an animal.

      All I am saying is that the Single Bevel is not the be all to end all broadheads. And as a matter of public record not everyone agrees with the Single Bevel testing. Bob Mayo has a long and lengthy discussion about the comparison made in the Dr Ashby study and presentation at KZoo this past year, regarding the comparison of ACE Broadheads to Single Bevel.

      Single Bevel is not superior – they are just another option. And yes, even given the type of animal and conditions, yes, may in fact be an excellent choice. But there are many broadhead choices none of them wrong or less superior.

    • Stephen Graf
      Moderator
      Post count: 2361

      SteveMcD wrote: …as a matter of public record not everyone agrees with the Single Bevel testing. Bob Mayo has a long and lengthy discussion about the comparison made in the Dr Ashby study and presentation at KZoo this past year, regarding the comparison of ACE Broadheads to Single Bevel…

      Is this available online?

    • SteveMcD
      Member
      Post count: 870

      Steve Graf wrote:

      Is this available online?

      Yes, Steve it is over on the other site –

      http://leatherwall.bowsite.com/TF/lw/thread2.cfm?threadid=233606&category=88#3166962

    • sapcut
      Post count: 159

      First of all, never are we talking about a perfect shot. Because you are correct, a field point will make a deer dead on said shot. The understood “given” here is when the shot is NOT perfect

      But Bob, with Ace, is one person selling his broadhead WITHOUT any research close to the Ashby reports. Ashby isn’t selling anything. He has just tested many broadheads in an unbiased fashion. HAD he found that double bevels penetrated the most difficult resistance material in animals…all hunters that were already using the double bevel would then use the Ashby reports to back up their already personal preference.

      Not having the knowledge to even have a preference beforehand, it made perfect sense to ME that the twisting of the single bevel did and does go through bone better than a double bevel, all else equal. I have since done it. Compared to the double bevel I once used…the single is better.

      Instead of a broadhead maker just saying he doesn’t like single bevels. I would love to see ANY real testing like the Ashby reports from a broadhead maker. I have yet to see anything anywhere.

    • bruc
      Member
      Post count: 476

      I purchased the single bevel Concordes so I can try them and see how they perform. They were very reasonably priced so if they do not get used for hunting then I am not out a lot. The key thing for me will be, if I can get them “REALLY SHARP”. I’ll be comparing them to Stos, Zephyr and three blade Woodsman. The ones I get the sharpest will be the ones I use. They are all good broadheads and there are many more. The key for me is”SHARP”

      Bruce

    • Jason Wesbrock
      Member
      Post count: 762

      Steve McD,

      If I could reach through the computer screen and shake your hand, I would. I always found it ironic that using several decades of recreational bowhunting results to explain why our traditional bows are perfectly capable in a time when much higher powered compounds are the norm is acceptable, but using that same logic when it comes to our broadheads borders on unethical, irresponsible, or just being uneducated. I’ve never understood the double standard in that line of thought. Anyone could easily substitute “compound” and “recurve” for “single bevel” and “double bevel” in this dogma to make a case against traditional bows, but I’m guessing everyone here knows full well how effective our bows are at humanely taking big game animals. If it’s not broken, don’t fix it? Indeed.

      My bowhunting experience isn’t exactly bound by little whitetails, or large ones for that matter. I’ve put normal arrows and normal broadheads completely through several dozen big game animals over the years, up to an including elk and bull moose. A pass through is a pass through, and if the only way for me to quantify an increase in penetration is by measuring how far my arrows burry in the dirt after going through an animal, I see no reason to change what I’m doing.

    • Jason Wesbrock
      Member
      Post count: 762

      Sapcut wrote: But Bob, with Ace, is one person selling his broadhead WITHOUT any research close to the Ashby reports.

      Bob Mayo is a broadhead manufacturer making a product with over 80 years of proven history behind it. I’ve personally used them to put several dozen big game animals in my freezer. I’ll take that over three or four uncontrolled shots into dead carcass any day.

    • Bruce Smithhammer
      Post count: 2514

      J.Wesbrock wrote: Steve McD,

      If it’s not broken, don’t fix it? Indeed.

      A pass through is a pass through, and if the only way for me to quantify an increase in penetration is by measuring how far my arrows burry in the dirt after going through an animal, I see no reason to change what I’m doing.

      This debate seems to rear its head on a regular basis, and personally, I feel like it gets pretty tiresome. I don’t feel that making a choice to shoot a trad bow means we all have to sign on to the same, set-in-stone mentality, nor does it have to mean consigning oneself to a static, un-evolving way of doing things.

      Traditional archery is not fixed at some arbitrary moment in history….or at least in doesn’t have to be. If you consciously make the choice to adhere to some point in our history that you feel was the apex of our sport, and not entertain anything that may have been developed since, that’s fine, and I really don’t care what others choose. But saying that there is no need to do things any differently than how you’ve chosen to do them, and at the point in our evolution that you’ve chosen to stop evolving at, is no less dogmatic than what you’re purporting to be reacting against.

      Personally, I see our trad history as something that continues to be dynamic – not fixed, and that has been continually evolving since the first time someone affixed a string to a pliable piece of wood (or horn, or…), and will hopefully continue to do so. I think that tinkering and evolution are generally good things, if they stand up against the test of usefulness. And if they don’t? Then the over-arching rule of practicality that guides our sport will eventually consign them to the dustbin.

      But this mentality that “everything has already been figured out” and that there is no need to try anything different anymore, baffles me. There are so many innovations that many of us “traditionalists” currently enjoy, and that get defined as “traditional,” that we wouldn’t have if this peremptory mentality ruled the day. Fastflight? Modern composite wood construction? Non-wood shaft options? Ever-evolving bow designs? Unless the folks espousing this, “no need to innovate” mentality are purely using self bows with handknapped heads and sinew, I think this point of view is rather inconsistent and arbitrary, to say the least. History is, by its very nature, dynamic and ever-evolving. Nostalgia, on the other hand, tends to breed just the opposite.

    • SteveMcD
      Member
      Post count: 870

      Sapcut wrote: I think the one’s who don’t like to “fix things they think aren’t broken” are the same one’s who are not real crazy about “improving” what they don’t know can be improved. They also aren’t interested because that’s maybe why they’re in “traditional” bowhunting to begin with. To hunt the “unimproved” way. And nothing at all wrong with that.

      SAPCUT.. this was an unfounded, presumptious and to be polite an incorrect statement.

      As Jason has stated, ACE Broadheads have been around since the 1930’s. ACE as well as all other Broadhead companies with patented designs for their products, I can assure you have done their research and done it well. As an inventor of multiple U.S. Patents of my own, it is an intense laborous process whereby your claim in the patent must be proven.

      I believe if you would have read all of Bob Mayo’s statements, you would see that the test comparing the ACE Broadhead to the Single Bevel is questionable at best.

      I am going to leave this post as my final, on this subject, as I realize, the Single Bevel has taken on an almost cult like following on this website.

      To each is his own.. but SAPCUT never assume the rest of us are “Uninformed” and “Unwilling” to know, just because we don’t get on the latest bandwagon.

    • Robin ConradsRobin Conrads
      Admin
      Post count: 907

      Andrew asked about single bevel heads according to Dr. Ashby’s studies and where to get them. He didn’t ask which is the best method or why he should or should not follow these guidelines. Now the poor guy has been dragged down with this recurring argument.

      Dr. Ashby’s studies have changed the way a lot of folks look at broadheads and arrows, and he has dedicated his life to this work. If it isn’t for you, please don’t be disrespectful or critical of anyone who wishes to follow his guidelines. Conversely, if someone decides to keep doing things their own way, please show them the same consideration.

      We have a whole forum dedicated to conversations about Ashby related studies. Perhaps this thread should have been moved there before it got all twisted up. Let’s get back to the topic at hand, where to get good single bevel heads, and just agree to disagree. It’s Webmothers Day, don’t make me come back in here. 8)

      In the future, if your thread is pertaining to questions about Ashby related topics, please post in the Friends of FOC forum.

    • Raymond CoffmanRaymond Coffman
      Moderator
      Post count: 1035

      I am always surprised { I guess I shouldn’t be anymore} at how emotionally charged the ” Broadhead” issue is —

      I read the other thread in it’s entirety [ posted by Mr Mcdonald]. Dr Ashby’s “study” is the only one I know of? It’s parameters are published,if you disagree with a broadheads performance why not redo the test under the same criteria*,to prove one’s point- No pun intended– but a lil levity is appropriate- I believe–

      Scout

      or develope one’s own.

      PS –sorry webmom ! you posted while I was writing I apologize if I fanned any flames– Happy Mom’s Day to you also—

    • David Petersen
      Member
      Post count: 2749

      Bravo and thank you, Robin. And happy Mother’s Day. I have no doubt you’re as good in that role as you are as Web Mother.

    • Bruce Smithhammer
      Post count: 2514

      Thanks, Robin. And Happy Webmother’s Day!

      I would just like to reiterate, for those newcomers and others who may get the wrong impression from these discussions, that there is plenty of history and tradition behind single-bevel heads, EFOC arrows, recurves…heck, even composite bow construction. None of this represents new-fangled innovations. This has already been abundantly pointed out and detailed elsewhere. So I urge folks not to be influenced by certain points of view into thinking that opting for these things makes one any less “traditional.” There is plenty of time-tested tradition behind all of this – it’s just a matter of choosing which “traditions” work best for you.

      Carry on…

    • Jason Wesbrock
      Member
      Post count: 762

      Smithhammer,

      I thoroughly enjoyed and agree with your initial post following mine…except where you attributed those opinions to me. Since anyone who knows me knows I’m usually the guy getting grief from other people about “not being traditional enough,” and never the other way around, I’m not sure how you came to the conclusions about me you did. Regardless, my apologies to Robin, and thanks to her for the reminder about Mother’s Day.

    • Bruce Smithhammer
      Post count: 2514

      Let’s get this thread back on track. This was started by a guy who is interested in trying single bevel heads, not a debate about others’ personal choices.

      Any comments about the broader issues that got this of track can be handled in PMs, in my opinion.

    • Raymond CoffmanRaymond Coffman
      Moderator
      Post count: 1035

      ssumner1

      Kustom King/3rivers shows Zwickey No Mercy BHs in single bevel for $18.-19.00 per 3pack–

      Scout

    • ssumner1
      Post count: 109

      Thanks guys for all the help, and although it may have gone a little farther than anyone ever intended, I appreciate debates when evidence is given, and for the most part that was what occurred in this thread. Again, thank you for the insightful information, and Thanks SteveMcD for your generosity.

      -Andrew

    • Mark Turton
      Post count: 759

      A while ago I tried to apply some maths and geometry to this subject that lead into areas of propeller design that quite honestly left me thinking even if I had paid more attention at school I still would not understand what I was reading.

      There are so many variable in this argument that frankly say ‘no one size fits all’ if you have a combination that works for you use it.

      A couple of conclusions I made for arrows of same mass and profile travelling at the same velocity were:

      1. With straight fletching and single bevel, on soft tissue insufficient force is exerted on the bevel to generate rotation over 300 mm. of contact with soft tissue.

      2. With helical fletching and single bevel, the rotation of the arrow in flight far exceeds any ‘predicted’ rotation of the broadhead in the target.

      3. With straight fletching and double bevel, performance in soft tissue should in theory be almost identical to 1.

      4. With helical fletching and double bevel, again results in theory as at 2.

      5. Common finding terminal velocity of arrows with straight fletching will be higher thus retaining more kinetic energy, no suprise there and agrees with Doc Ashby.

      6. Only variable being the profile of the broadhead and of that variable the only significant component being profile of the tip.

      My conclusion is that the profile of the tip is what gives the single bevel an advantage on dense tissue such as cartilage and bone. So the bigger, stronger and tougher the beastie you are hunting the this will give an advantage so long as you put it in the thick stuff.

      If I may add, a single bevel ‘tanto’ (hope that’s the right description) leading into a double bevel would be interesting to see.

      That’s all I have to add, and no I did not save any of the data I generated.

    • Stephen Graf
      Moderator
      Post count: 2361

      pothunter wrote: …and no I did not save any of the data I generated.

      Data is collected, not generated. If you generated your data, you might be accused of something indecent 🙄 😳 😯

      A question like this (what broadhead is best) cannot be solved theoretically. There are too many non-uniformities in the body of an animal to allow that. Empirical data (like that collected by Ashby) is the only way to answer the question.

      If a person has a lot of empirical data (meaning he/she has killed a lot of critters without significant wounding), then that person has a right to his/her opinion. But that opinion is limited to the type of critters that person has killed.

      I think the thing forgotten in this debate is that the Ashby research was done on big critters, not deer. His results would be hard to duplicate on deer, or squirrels.

      But if a person claims they have “done the math” or “applied the physics”, then I have to laugh. This question keeps causing rancor (I humbly suggest) because it is assumed that there is 1 true answer that can be simply derived. The only one true answer is, it all depends…

      And thus the experimental approach is the only valid approach to finding the best broadhead.

      Data are not accepted as real, and theories are not accepted as true, until the results have been replicated by several independent scientists working independently…

      Maybe one of you fair minded chaps would like to take on the chore of attempting to repeat Ashby’s work? Until somebody does repeat the experiments, this debate will not advance.

    • Bruce Smithhammer
      Post count: 2514

      You make some really good points, Steve. The only thing I would address is the common misconception that the Ashby study only applies to large animals, and not to smaller animals such as deer. Here is a link to Dr. Ashby addressing this:

      (fast forward to 2:30):

    • Stephen Graf
      Moderator
      Post count: 2361

      I stand corrected 🙂

    • David Petersen
      Member
      Post count: 2749

      Steve, I may be misreading you, but afraid I can’t agree with your presentation here, which seems to be confusing data with scientific theory. You are absolutely correct that the latter depends on replication of results. But Ashby’s study is not a theory–wherein you propose something and try to disprove it. Rather than his data proving (or not proving) a pre-projected theory, his thinking evolved from testing results … he really had no preconceptions going in. And so far as replication is concerned, from my readings the Ashby study is rife with it.

      Also–and this seems so simple and straightforward I am left to wonder why anyone would argue against the Ashby results without seriously trying it for themselves–I was early among those to use the Ashby study to start running experiments of my own. And the results are nothing less than amazing. And consistently, repeatedly so.

      A final point your make, with which I must respectfully disagree, is that arrow penetration dynamics are species specific. If a heavier arrow with EFOC and the right broadhead consistently performs better on massive animals, where is the physics suggesting it won’t also perform better on lighter animals? Only the opposite would be true: an arrow set-up that works fine on deer won’t necessarily work fine on heavier game. For me the bottom line has been spoken often in these conversations by others, to wit: While the “old” ways may work, the “new” way consistently works better. I don’t care that much what people shoot at deer and grant most trad shooters the experience and smarts to figure out through experience what works and what doesn’t. But I care a bunch about what people shoot at elk and other big animals, and frankly (and I don’t mean to be smug but this fits within our discussion here) few trad bowhunters have had the opportunity I’ve enjoyed to have shot elk almost annually for more than 30 years, experimenting with all sorts of arrow set-ups and testing every element of Ashby’s studies that I can. The old ways failed to work with consistent reliability, while the Ashby ways deliver pass-throughs almost every time.

      And as a sidenote, I humbly suggest that this whole thread should be on the Ashby forum.

    • Stephen Graf
      Moderator
      Post count: 2361

      Dave,

      Yea, I think you may have misread me. As you have done, I have tested the single bevel efoc arrows and been impressed. I have used that setup exclusively for the last 3 or 4 years.

      When I brought up the smaller animals like deer and squirrels, I intended to point out that the effect wouldn’t be as observable on those critters. 10 inches of penetration gets you through a carolina deer. 2 inches gets you through a squirrel. I didn’t mean to say that the single bevel efoc arrows would be less effective on smaller game.

      And on the replication thing – somebody else has to replicate it. Self replication makes your hands hairy 😯 😳 🙄

      I was simply trying to be factual without taking a stand…

      I’m done now. I’m off to put an edge on my hunting arrows – 620 grn, 21% fOC, Abowyer Brown Bear heads, 1.5″ aluminum collar behind the head for strength. Fancy laquer cresting, and home made Carolina Turkey Feathers.

      Dave, I know you don’t approve, but I’m going bear hunting next week in New Brunswick. Hopefully this won’t come between us 8)

    • David Petersen
      Member
      Post count: 2749

      Steve – Uh oh, portents of another massive topical side-trip here. Sorry, Andrew, but I simply must take Steve’s bait. 😀 In fact I have nothing whatsoever against fair chase black bear hunting. I don’t personally view baiting, of anything, as hunting. I like to keep the “hunt” in hunting. And with bears, at least out here in the RM West, they’re so embarrassingly easy to find if you just study their habits a bit, that to kill one over bait would be for me an admission of imcompetence and/or laziness, and with dogs, and shooting a treed bear, even worse. IMHO. But that aside, I’ve eaten (fair chase) bear and it tastes real good; just a bit of “mouth feel” difference, maybe “graineness” is the word, to get used to, but no biggie. I just don’t care to hunt bears myself, since if you have a chance to “get to know them” in the wild as I have, they quickly start seeming almost human. And the nonhuman part is a big dog. But again, I have no problem whatsoever with those who hunt black bear fair chase. Despite the rumors to the contrary, I don’t have a “My way or the highway” outlook, but just informed opinions. Like the song says, “I haven’t said enough, I’ve already said too much.” How about this: “Good luck on your fair chase hunt!” 😀 Dave

      attached file
    • Bruce Smithhammer
      Post count: 2514

      Steve Graf wrote: …I’m off to put an edge on my hunting arrows – 620 grn, 21% fOC, Abowyer Brown Bear heads, 1.5″ aluminum collar behind the head for strength. Fancy laquer cresting, and home made Carolina Turkey Feathers.

      Hope we’re going to see a few pics of those when they’re done.

    • Bruce Smithhammer
      Post count: 2514

      Whoops.

    • ssumner1
      Post count: 109

      I have come to love statistics despite what Twain has suggested about it, but I really do enjoy math and I believe physics is some of the more enjoyable aspects of it. I have nearly attempted to determine the differences of both styles along with shaft sizes to decide which is better on paper. This would be something that I would really have to play with, and most likely wouldn’t be worth the effort. In all honesty, I like the idea of the single bevel. That is why I have decided to try it.

      As a side note, I really do enjoy reading what you guys have to say about the two types. It provides insightful and if I may say so, comedic results at times.:D

    • Stephen Graf
      Moderator
      Post count: 2361

      Smithhammer wrote:

      Hope we’re going to see a few pics of those when they’re done.

      As requested… These broadheads went through 5 deer last season 😀 Maybe they are good luck.

      Picture was taken before edges were shined up.

      attached file
Viewing 38 reply threads
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.