Just a reminder …

[Ed Ashby]

#7559

… that we’re all looking forward to hearing the reports of everyone’s hunting successes and how your arrow setups performed, along with lots of good photos! And, since we’ve been discussing it lately, be sure to check how well your broadhead held its sharpness after penetrating through the tissues.

Ed

[Robin Conrads]

#63316

Dr. Ed, do you still need input for your study via the report forms that can be downloaded? They are in the first thread in this forum, Field Data Report and Blood Trail Report.

[Ed Ashby]

#63324

You bet I do, Robin. The more information we can collect the better. Especially needed are the Blood Trail Reports.

Ed

[wildschwein]

#63912

Sounds cool. If I manage to whack a Deer I’ll fill you in.

[tom-wisconsin]

#8432

Just glued my brown bear single blades to the adaptors. I have 30% FOC and 655 total arrow wt. for my 40# recurve. I hope to harvest my first deer with a traditional setup. I hope to fill out the reports for you, Dr. Ed.

[coyote220]

#17447

Not giant but it was a great stalk!!

I’ll try to be specific for the Doc.

Bear Super Kodiak 55#
Gold Tip #5575 Traditional (Wood Grain pattern) 30″ draw length
Zwickey Black Diamond Two Edge 11/32 125gr

Still hunting, 15 yard, Quartering to me shot. Deer crouched at the release of the arrow. The Zwickey impacted just below the spine after piercing the outer ear.

The deer traveled no more than 50 yards.

The arrow remained within the deer. No visible damage to broadhead. A simple paper cutting test was only slightly reduced compared to unused arrow taken from my quiver.

[MOUNTAINSLICKER]

#30906

Dr Ashby, Efoc has me going in many directions with most of the pitfalls you have so completely covered. A stupid question came to mind. What would be the results of a staged separation at impact much like a 2 stage rocket sans additional propulsion. The efoc head and forward inserts would have already absorbed the speed and most of the energy and could travel on without the penetration robbing rearward damage. Late at night and to much thinking maybe but a thought that might be refined.

[apfarmer]

#33967

Dr Ashby:

I just recently returned from the last week of CO elk hunting. I got lucky on 25 September, and have posted the resulting photo. The pertinent parameters are:

Bow: Bighorn takedown recurve; 62 inches, 60# @ 30 inches
Arrow shaft : Arrow Dynamincs Traditional, 31 inches
Broadhead: 160 grain ABowyer Brown Bear w/100 grain steel adaptor
Total Arrow mass: 665 grains
EFOC: 23%

Elk shot @20 yards, hit high , nicked rear of shoulder blade. Broke ribs enterring and exiting. Elk ran 30 yds, stumbled, then fell and died quickly. There was a decent blood trail in that 30 yds, with dollar size blotches of blood every 5-10 yds.

This was my first year using the new arrow setup, and I am very pleased with the results. Thanks for your effort in conducting lethality analyses.

[apfarmer]

#33971

Sorry, let me try again! Here is photo.

[Ed Ashby]

#34773

Coyote 220, sounds like great results on a QUARTERING TOWARDS shot. With ‘usual’ arrow setups the Study’s ‘usual shot outcome’ of quartering towards shots, even of modest size game, were so poor that such a shot could not be recommended. Maximizing your arrow’s terminal performance, especially as regards arrow integrity, broadhead skip angle and keeping arrow mass above the heavy bone threashold, has made the forward quartering shot a very viable option, at least for moderate size game.

Mountainslicker, that’s an option, but the only problem is that you will likely lose your broadhead and adaptor on most shots! If you want to see how this works try a shot into a foam target without having the broadhead (with adaptor, if used, and the insert) guled into the shaft. The shaft stops, but the broadhead/adaptor/insert continues traveling forward. When I’ve tried that I have the shaft stop in the target, but the broadhead carries on, often exiting the target and traveling on for several feet or yards past the target (and hard to find!).

Apfarmer, it sounds like your setup performed to perfection. What was the level of internal bleeding into the thorax when you opened the chest cavity?

Ed

[apfarmer]

#35138

Ed:

I really didn’t open the thorax-I boned the animal in place. Indirect evidence suggests, however, that there was substantial bleeding. First, there was an almost immediate blood trail, in spite of the hit, which was in the upper half of the chest cavity. Second, there was substantial blood in the larynyx area when I sectioned it to remove the lymph nodes for CWD testing. Third, the mouth cavity was full of blood when I removed the upper canines.

I also forgot to mention that the tip of the Brown Bear broadhead was curled a bit (about 1/16 inche of the tip), which I assumed had been caused not by contact with elk tissue but by rocks when the animal tumbled, and fell. I assumed this because the curled tip was ragged as though it had made contact with rock.

[Ed Ashby]

#35445

Thanks, Adrian. I fully understand boning out the animal in place. Before starting the Study I always did exactly the same thing … anytime I had to pack the animal out on my back!

The additional information is appreciated, and the indierct evidence does, indeed, suggest substantial internal bleeding. Would be nice to know for sure what caused the curled tip on the Brown Bear, but no way to ever know for sure.

Thanks again,

Ed

[coyote220]

#41821

Ed, I Just reread the entire thread. I wanted to let you know I have now downloaded the detailed forms for my kill reports. Very scientific forms! I guess there is paperwork everywhere.

[Ed Ashby]

#42375

coyote220 wrote: I guess there is paperwork everywhere.

Unfortunately, detailed records are a necessity for any meaningful research! With Outcome Driven Studies it is even moreso, because a huge number of results are needed to find the trends: What CAN occur; how often does a particular outcome actually occur; under what conditions is it more likely to occur; what factor influence the frequency of occurrance and how much do those factors influence the frequency. The answers require sifting through huge amounts of information, over and over. That’s a big reason it takes so long to find the answers.

Ed

[Author]

Posts