Home Forums Bows and Equipment Single bevel Question…

Viewing 13 reply threads
  • Author
    Posts
    • wojo14
      Post count: 325

      Ok, I have 2 single bevel heads. TuffHead 225, and Kodiak 200.

      Both set up with inserts to a weight of 325g. Both fly great.

      Both basically same length.

      Kodiak is a tad wider.

      What is better (insert opinion) a wider head to cut a bit more, or a tad narrower head to get a bit more penetration?

      Probably over thinking this….but thats what I do!8)

    • grumpygrumpy
      Member
      Post count: 960

      yup, over thinking is just what you are doing. I try to limit myself to questions that can be answered, at least outside of Bible study.

    • jpcjpc
      Member
      Post count: 170

      wojo14 wrote: Ok, I have 2 single bevel heads. TuffHead 225, and Kodiak 200.

      Both set up with inserts to a weight of 325g. Both fly great.

      Both basically same length.

      Kodiak is a tad wider.

      What is better (insert opinion) a wider head to cut a bit more, or a tad narrower head to get a bit more penetration?

      Probably over thinking this….but thats what I do!8)

      Hi Friend , you try to break down a door open :shock::D:shock:

      this is the subject on which all studies have been made

      Ever heard of a certain Dr. Ashby ??

      http://www.tuffhead.com/education/ashby.html

    • Stephen Graf
      Member
      Post count: 2336

      So maybe the real question you should be asking yourself is: “What are you going to do to make sure you get to use all your broadheads?”

      Be kind of silly having all those broadheads and nothing to do with them.

      If you spend too much time deciding which beautiful girl you want to go out with, you may end up on no date at all 😳

    • Brennan Herr
      Member
      Post count: 403

      Jason,

      I would use the tuffhead. They seem to be of better quality IMHO.

    • Ptaylor
      Member
      Post count: 567

      I remember reading Dr. Ed saying he files the Grizzly broached into a narrower shape to get a higher ratio of length:width. I think that was called mechanical advantage. His findings were a narrower broadhead is better than a wider one for penetration.

    • wojo14
      Post count: 325

      Ptaylor wrote: I remember reading Dr. Ed saying he files the Grizzly broached into a narrower shape to get a higher ratio of length:width. I think that was called mechanical advantage. His findings were a narrower broadhead is better than a wider one for penetration.

      Ptaylor, Thank you! I was too lazy too ready the full report. I love to read, just hard to find time to do everything I want to do…kept seeing DR Ed refer to the single bevel Grizzly head…

      Steve, I in fact intend to use the heads to make meat. I already took a white tail doe with the Kodiak this year. Now I treaded on the Tuff Head for a Buck. There is still plenty of time…and I did ask the pretty girl… I married her!8)

      Brennan, I have to agree. I was just wondering if that little bit of a wider cut would make a difference. Both heads are VERY similar in design. I will say, the Kodiak did a number on the doe.

    • Stephen Graf
      Member
      Post count: 2336

      wojo14 wrote: … Steve, I in fact intend to use the heads to make meat… and I did ask the pretty girl… I married her!8)

      Good Man!

    • Dan Jackowiak
      Post count: 106

      It’s an 1/8″ difference, I don’t think it is going to make any difference what so ever, buuuut, that is just my opinion 😀 I do think that the steal is better quality on the tuffhead.

    • wojo14
      Post count: 325

      2blade wrote: It’s an 1/8″ difference, I don’t think it is going to make any difference what so ever, buuuut, that is just my opinion 😀 I do think that the steal is better quality on the tuffhead.

      The steel on the tuffheads are stainless…so ya, better steel.

      I am sticking with the Kodiaks for now. They are flying great.

      I will tune up the tuffheads for my possile moose hunt in 2016.

      8)

    • Ed Ashby
      Member
      Post count: 816

      When I was doing the buffalo testing there were very few single-bevel broadheads available to test with. Most of the testing was done with the 190 Grizzly, in three configurations; full-width, narrowed to 1″ and narrowed to 7/8″. The narrowed heads were made by changing the blade angle WITHOUT narrowing the tanto tip. There’s no doubt that the narrower the blade the better the penetration. That said, the full width 190 Grizzly, when mated to a suitable arrow, breached the heavy bones and gave thorax-traversing penetration on the buffalo.

      An important factor worth considering came from the Heavy Bone Threshold teasing. On EFOC arrows EVERY broadhead with a Mechanical Advantage of at least 2.6 gave a 100% heavy bone breaching rate when arrow mass was above 650 grains. Once the bone was breached the resultant overall-penetration was more dependent on the amount of arrow FOC than on the broadhead’s width. In other words, the full-width Grizzly on a meaningfully higher FOC arrow gave higher average post-breaching penetration than the narrower broadheads gave on arrows with a meaningfully lower amount of arrow FOC.

      Bottom line: the last buffalo I killed was with a 655 grain arrow at 31.4% FOC. It was shot from the same 82# longbow used for much of the testing. It not only breached an entrance AND an exit-side rib but drove 26″ of arrow out the off-side. That arrow had a full-width prototype of the Ashby broadhead, which has a somewhat lower MA than the full-width 190 Grizzly.

      Is it worth the effort to narrow the broadhead? Perhaps. Especially if one is shooting a lower poundage bow on very large game, or if one has an exceptionally short draw-length. I only draw 27″ but know that a full-width Grizzly (or TuffHead, or A-Bowyer, etcetera) will give me enough penetration for Cape or Asian buffalo. Enough said.

      Ed

    • wojo14
      Post count: 325

      Ed my set up is a 51# @ 27″ static tip recurve. ( I draw 27″)

      Arrow is an Easton ACC pro hunter. 648total weight.

      27.6% efoc. The 200gr Kodiak heads with 100 gr inserts shoot awesome.

      I was hoping this would be good for Canadian moose this fall….?

    • Ed Ashby
      Member
      Post count: 816

      wojo14 wrote: Ed my set up is a 51# @ 27″ static tip recurve. ( I draw 27″)

      Arrow is an Easton ACC pro hunter. 648total weight.

      27.6% efoc. The 200gr Kodiak heads with 100 gr inserts shoot awesome.

      I was hoping this would be good for Canadian moose this fall….?

      Get it really sharp and I’d happily use that on a moose!

      Ed

    • wojo14
      Post count: 325

      Dr. Ed Ashby wrote: [quote=wojo14]Ed my set up is a 51# @ 27″ static tip recurve. ( I draw 27″)

      Arrow is an Easton ACC pro hunter. 648total weight.

      27.6% efoc. The 200gr Kodiak heads with 100 gr inserts shoot awesome.

      I was hoping this would be good for Canadian moose this fall….?

      Get it really sharp and I’d happily use that on a moose!

      Ed

      Good to hear!

Viewing 13 reply threads
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.