[Ireland]

in reply to: Appropriate discussion? #54795

Dr. Ed Ashby wrote: Hunting season is well underway and I’ve been watching a few forums for wounding/loss threads. By the comments posted it seems that many folks (perhaps most) feel that even mentioning wounding and loss of game is inappropriate; that it merely provides fuel for anti-hunters. The following two quotes are pretty typical of what appears to be a majority opinion.

Discussions on the ways to lower the % ARE best done out of the limelight.

I agree … may be used as fuel for the anti’s. Something we should avoid at all costs.

I disagree. We all know that game is wounded and lost, and so do all the anti-hunters (and nothing we say – or don’t say – is going to alter any anti-hunter’s mindset anyway). It’s those ‘on the fence’ that might be influenced. I feel it is far better for bowhunters to be seen as trying to address the issue, doing all we can to minimize the wounding/loss rate than to be seen as trying to ‘cover up’ information about wounding and loss. To that end there’s no better situation than the examination of shots that fail, with the goal of trying to address things that could have been done that would have lessened the odds of the shot resulting in a wounding hit. Here are a few excerpts from some of the wounded and lost postings. I couldn’t help but add a few comments of my own, which I’ve placed in bold type and clearly marked.

… approx 12-14 yards … he ducked and was moving back from the direction he came … hit him a bit high and a bit back (mid body back) … ran into the ravine with the arrow sticking out, at least eight inch penetration … 53# at my draw, cedar arrow with Zwickey 4 blade (bleeders)

[bold] Maximizing your arrow’s penetration potential is always a good idea when bowhunting big game. There’s no such thing as a big game arrow that penetrates TOO MUCH! Something about this setup inhibited the arrow’s penetration. It could be the quality of arrow flight. A hit “a bit high and a bit back” might have impacted the back ribs, near the spine. If so, then the bone penetration quality and skip angle of the broadhead become penetration limiting factors, as does the broadhead’s Mechanical Advantage (MA). The animal’s movement also has a penetration reducing effect, which is another good reason for using an arrow with (what many seem to consider) “over-penetration” for a deer sized animal. It’s impossible to know exactly where this hit was placed, or the angle of the arrow in the deer, but more penetration MIGHT well have made a huge difference on this hit, and certainly would not have lessened the chance of recovery. – Ed [/bold]

I shot a buck with a 160 Snuffer, little forward. As he took off I saw more arrow sticking out then I expected. However, looked to be at least 4″ (which would put the arrow in the front lung) … I tracked him through the cover, with plenty of blood … I lost all blood on the edge of the picked corn field. Searched on my hands and knees for 4 hours. NOTHING! Very disapointing!

[bold] When ‘things go wrong’, a broadhead with a low MA always has an adverse effect on penetration. Having a double lung hit and an exit would certainly have helped. Bigger (cut area) does not always mean better!– Ed [/bold]

My family used to own a meat packing house. You could not imagine what a buck can survive. Deer have been brought in with entire arrows inside, lots of gunshot scars from previous years, an unnumberable amount of broadheads inside deer over the years

[bold] I constantly read that “not much penetration is needed for an arrow to be adequate for deer size game”. Sounds like more than a few folks are not ‘blowing through’ every deer they hit. Over-penetration leaves a lot fewer broadheads in game too! – Ed [/bold]

Hit him a little too far forward… and in the shoulder and didn’t get very good penetration… finally lost the trail in the neighborhood of 300-400 yards from start… NOTHING.

… hit him on the shoulder blade and failed to penetrate in the chest cavity.

Heavy shoulder hit, little penetration, LOTS of blood … followed a very good blood trail over two and a half hours. Shoulder hits are rarely fatal. If your not in the vital organs he will not bleed to death.

[bold] “Shoulder hits are rarely fatal”? Really? On deer sized game I generally aim ON the shoulder. (NOTE: I DID NOT SAY I AIM AT THE SHOULDER BONES). The mid-shoulder area is only meat, with underlying ribs. Aiming there reduces the hits ‘too far back’, and I can comfortable do so because I’ve tested my setup thoroughly and KNOW that, should my shot hit a bone in the shoulder, it is more than capable of penetrating ANY bone to be found there. The ability of the broadhead we CHOSE to use to penetrate bone can make the difference between getting through a shoulder bone, and when a ‘good bone-performance’ broadhead is used on an arrow with a mass above the heavy bone threshold penetrating through the shoulder bones of a deer, and into the thorax, becomes the likely outcome. I reiterate, maximizing your arrow’s penetration potential is ALWAYS a good idea when bowhunting big game. There’s no such thing as a big game arrow that penetrates TOO MUCH! – Ed [/bold]

Unfortunately it is a part of our hunting that happens … The arrow once released is beyond our control. Since we are shooting a moveable and excitable target sometimes the best shot can result in the worst hit. What can we do to help cut down the occurances of wounds…..practice with our equipment so we can be the best we can be……only take high percentage shots at stationary and relaxed targets…..always be sure we are shooting in our comfort range, don’t say I only shoot 15 yards then blaze away at a buck at 30 just cause he was a monster.

[bold] What? Not even a mention of maximizing the terminal performance of the arrow we CHOSE to use? Is the assumption that all arrow setups work equally well, on every type of hit? – Ed [/bold]

I messed up on a great 130″ class 8ptr in NJ 2 years ago when I was 17 feet up and he was another 4 or 5 feet down hill but only 7 yards away … richoched off ribs, slid down the briscuit and into the ground. No blood, just some hair and fatty meat on arrow.

[bold] No mention of the broadhead used, but this is clearly a skip angle issue. Using broadheads with good skip angles reduces the odds of the broadhead skidding on the bone’s surface. Along with knowing the skip angle of your broadhead, knowing where the bones are located and what their shape/profile is from differing angles is can help in your shot selection? – Ed [/bold]

I shot a buck at 15 yards from high in a tree that seemed to have lung blood. Bright red/pinkish with bubbles … heard the deer crash … went back to the truck with all my gear and got my deer buggie to get the deer out …. went to where I heard him crash. He wasn’t there … good blood … never found him

[bold] The skip angle of the broadhead we CHOSE to use becomes an important factor any time the angle of impact between the broadhead and the surface of a bone (any bone) is anything other than near perpendicular. The linear (along the long axis) curvature of the ribs gets greater the higher on the rib you go. Shooting from a downward angle onto the steeply curved ribs greatly increases the odds of the broadhead skidding on the rib. When shooting from an elevated position this, along with your broadhead’s skip angle, is something that needs to be considered in your shot selection. – Ed [/bold]

… had a buddy lose a doe due to Rage broadheads … 15 yard quartering away shot … swears he hit the center of the ribs heading for the off side front leg … on trying to open deflected off of a rib and slide along the rib cage up to the front shoulder, it never entered the chest cavity … Never recovered the deer after a half mile tracking effort

[bold] This is clearly a skip angle issue. I’ve tested NO mechanical broadhead that has shown a good skip angle. The Rage has rear-deploying blades, and this does show a better skip angle than any of the front-deploying mechanical broadheads I’ve tested. That said, the skip angle of the Rage is still not what I would consider more than marginal, at best. – Ed [/bold]

Now I’m interested to hear what YOU think. Is openly discussing shots that wounded rather than killed, and things that might have prevented that outcome, a benefit for bowhunting, or is it something we bowhunters should try to hide and pretend never happens?

Ed

I seem to be having problems with my computer at this time. I have twice typed a lengthy response, and “lose it”. I’ll try again this evening.

Ireland

[Ireland]

in reply to: Wensel woodsman for elk #54675

Cottonwood wrote: I have two poeple on here that I read and listen to the most… Dr Ed Ashby and Dave Petersen. I’m not saying no one else isn’t in the know, but these two gentlemen are always spot on.

Cottonwood has said it best!!! Read what Dave Petersen has to say and READ AND RE-READ the Ashby reports. These reports are based upon great research. Apply that wealth of knowledge/information in your own personal set-up and you will be successful.

Ireland

[Ireland]

in reply to: What Broadhead weight is better #54127

Dr. Ed Ashby wrote: Ireland, There are some advantages to the A&A pattern, but any of the smaller fletchings can be used, regardless of the pattern of the cut.

The A&A cut is a simple tringle. The back of the fletching is cut at a 90 degree angle, and is 1/2″ high. From the fletching’s rear to it’s front is a straight taper. This makes the fletching easy to cut from a full length feather, even if using just scissors.

The A&A’s advantage I was refering to is that the largest portion (the majority of the fletching’s surface area) is located at the very rear end. This increases the distance from the major portion (greates surface area) of the fletching to the arrow’s balance point. That means a longer rear steering arm for the greatest portion of the fletching, which permits slightly smaller fletching to be used. Smaller equals lighter, which helps when trying to get Ultra-EFOC.

A square cut rear on the fletching also shows the least air turbulance of ny design, reducing noise in flight. I also find it to be the most water resistant of any fletching pattern I’ve tried; virtually unaffected by moisture, even when soaked in a bucket of water for a full 30 minutes. I THINK that has to do with the stiffness of the low cut.

Hope that is of some help,

Ed

Dr. Ashby,

Thank you so much for your very informative response. Lots of great information here. Can’t wait to give the A&A cut a try. Once again, thank you for everything that you do to help fellow hunters!!!

Best wishes,

Ireland

[Ireland]

in reply to: Single bevel? #52670

sagebrush wrote: I shot an elk this year for the first time with a single bevel broadhead. It was a tusker 155 gr. concorde. I hit it low in the chest. I got the heart. It must have twisted a little going in because the hole was square shaped. Usually my two bladed heads just make a slit. It died within forty yards and in sight. Anybody else try a single bevel this year? I would also like to hear about your penetration and the shape of the entrance hole. I never found my arrow. It was pretty thick there with lots of falling aspen leaves. My fletching was yellow and it blended right in. Gary

P.S. Being hit low in the chest, it left a very bloody trail. In the past, hits high in the chest sometimes don’t leave a lot of blood on the ground.

Gary,

I used the Abowyer Brown Bear single bevel last season and the Grizzly El Grande this year. Both are outstanding heads and have produced great blood trails on the six whitetails I have taken the past two seasons. In 25 years of bowhunting, I have finially found a broadhead design that I’m extremely confident in using in any situation.

Ireland

[Ireland]

in reply to: Single bevel? #52653

turtlebunting wrote: i have single bevel no mercy they are hard as heck to get a good edge on them compare to double bevel heads. are all single bevels hard to sharpen?

I used to think so until I met Ron of KME Sharpeners. I once read there are two kinds of hunters who sharpen broadheads…those who can and those who can’t. For years I was in the “those who can’t” group. The KME knife sharpener is the best I have ever used. You will never meet a guy like “Sharpster”. If necessary, he will spend the time with you on the phone making sure “you get it just right”. Contact KME…you will be glad you did!

Ireland

[Ireland]

in reply to: What Broadhead weight is better #52567

Dr. Ed Ashby wrote: [quote=J.Wesbrock]Even an 800-grain EFOC arrow won’t penetrate worth a lick if it flies like a corkscrew.

That’s “spot on”. Perfect arrow flight is the “enabler” for all of the other penetration enhancing factors, allowing each additional to factor perform at maximum efficiency, and is second in importance to only total structural integrity of the entire arrow system.

Start with the tip weight you want to use then develop your arrow setup around that, such that you end up with a structurally strong arrow that is tuned for as near perfect flight as you can achieve.

Unless you are shooting arrows with very, very low FOC (well below 5 or 6 percent), if your arrow is well tuned you won’t need anywhere near 5″ or 5.5″ of helical fletching to give ‘accurate arrow flight’ AND stabalize ANY (properly aligned) broadhead on the market! If your arrow’s FOC is anywhere in the commonly used range and you need that much fletching to get your arrow to shoot ‘accurate’ then the tuning is far from perfect.

Don’t take the above to mean that there’s not an advantage to using larger fletching ON HUNTING ARROWS HAVING LOWER AMOUNTS OF FOC. When FOC is at the lower levels using large amounts of fletching area helps with faster paradox recovery, and that translates into greater penetration ON SHOTS AT VERY CLOSE RANGES.

Well tuned EFOC and Ultra-EFOC arrows never require large amounts of fletching area. When properly tuned the EFOC/Ultra-EFOC arrows recover from paradox extremely quickly; far more rapidly than arrows having lower amounts of FOC. The very goal of proper FIELD-POINT bare shaft tuning EFOC/Ultra-EFOC arrows is to find the precise dynamic spine that gives rapid, correctly aligned arrow flight WITHOUT FLETCHING with the heavy point weight. Once that is acheived you only need enough fletching to overcome the broadhead’s wind shear effect (and any release irregularatied you might have).

Hope that helps a bit,

Ed

Thank you Dr. Ashby for your excellent reply. The A&A fletching that you have experimented with appears to be a “home-made” design and not availble for purchase. Does the 2 inch Rayzr by Gateway Feathers fullfill the requirements of “only need enough fletching to overcome the broadhead’s wind shear effect”. What is your take on this design?

Thanks,

Ireland

[Ireland]

in reply to: Left Vs Right helical #50777

jmsmithy wrote: Hey Ireland,

What’s a “turbulator”??

I’m new to this too and have heard typically yright-handed shooters shoot left helical etc….Also been told doesn’t matter. I can say with assurance that my left fletched slight helical (using Bburger left clamp) with 5 in feathers definately get my MUCH better groups than straight fletched 4 in…

Be well all.

What is a “turbulator”? Go to the Ashby forums and read the the post, “The Silent Arrow”. Excellent information…

[Ireland]

in reply to: Left Vs Right helical #50733

Patrick wrote: Left vs right wing makes absolutely no difference, unless you ask the bird they came from. You don’t want to be a turkey with left wing feathers on the right wing or vice versa. It’d be goofy looking and probably would make it very difficult to fly.

With that said, I shoot left wing feathers so that when I shoot single bevel broadheads, I shoot left beveled. And the reason for that is, it’s easier for me to sharpen using my right hand (I’m right handed) with the arrow pointing away from me on a left bevel broadheads than with a right beveled broadhead, while using a file.

The greater degree the helical, the more the fletching will control the arrow flight, and the faster the arrow loses speed, due to drag. Also, the great degree the helical, the louder the flight of the arrow. I use a very, very slight offset. Not dead on straight, but not even close to what would be considered helical.

Excellent answer… now my question. Isn’t “fletching controlling the arrow flight” exactly what we are trying to achieve?. I will take loss of arrow speed any day to achieve the best broadhead flight possible. More helical does produce a somewhat louder arrow, but if your bow is tuned well, I have observed a great reduction in arrow flight noise.

I have been experimenting with the turbulators and have found them effective in reducing arrow noise.

Ireland

[Ireland]

in reply to: What Broadhead weight is better #50493

David Petersen wrote: I practiced and hunted this year with the ABS Ashby primarily, but also carried the new 200 El Grande. Both fly great with the same carbon shafts because the 100-grain screw-in adaptor used with the El Grande brings the weights very close. Last year I killed an elk with a Brown Bear, which is very close to the Ashby but a lot cheaper. Also had good luck with Tusker Concords, and here again you can balance all these heads to nearly the same weight with inserts and adapters. I shoot them all from the same bows on the same shafts with very little if any difference in accuracy. If you’re hunting elk etc. with that 50-pounder, the heavier heads are important. If just deer you don’t need that kind of weight. That’s my experience. dave

In 99% of actual deer hunting situations, as Dave has stated, “deer don’t need that kind of weight”. I’m in full agreement. How about the other 1% when things go wrong? Please refer to the post “Broadhead Sharpness and Bloodtrails” posted by “Sharpster”. One of Sharpsters hunting friends shot this deer with a 810 grain arrow, 25% EFOC and Grizzly broadhead. Please note the pictures showing the poor penetration. It sounds like the hunter was pretly happy that he went into the woods with an set-up that would possibly be considered “over-kill” for even an elk. His arrow weight is almost exactly double what many bow hunters carry into the field year after year.

Ireland

[Ireland]

in reply to: Washing Clothes: Baking Soda? #45677

[quote=Danny Klee]I hate to be the unpopular one here but when i went hunting with my dad and his brothers it seemed none of them washed their clothes in anything other than what my mother and aunt used to wash the clothes. Two of my uncles were serious cigar smokers and the rest of them were cigarette smokers who regularly smoked while they hunted. Almost all of them were successful each and every year, either bow or gun hunting. I just dont see the need for expensive clothing nor do I see the need to wash your clothes in baking soda. At least not after seeing those fellas getting deer after deer all the while smoking right in the field. I personally don’t smoke but I don’t know that it matters all that much. I’m sure quite a few of you will disagree with me and that’s fine but I only know what I have seen in the past with my own eyes.

Dan,
You are not unpopular, you are just reporting what you have personally observed first hand. I have observed similar strange events of hunters smoking or going into the woods without any type of scent reduction procedures in place and harvesting big bucks. Through science, personal observations of hundreds of hunters and quality research, we know enough about whitetail behavior to do our best to be scent free and yes, hunt the wind. Hunters that do, have the greatest success rates year after year. Scent reduction takes some time and effort, but will pay great rewards in your personal success rate.

Ireland

[Ireland]

in reply to: Washing Clothes: Baking Soda? #38673

Hiram wrote: I just wash my clothes in a generic unscented, or as close as I can get detergent. Air dry outside if thee are no foreign odors present. Good ole outside air is hard to beat!
I also use Ivory hand soap to shower with, seems the thing to do. Much ado but, being clean and downwind is the best precaution! Avoiding a vehicle ride with you hunting clothes on is also wise, unless you are sure no air fresheners, perfumes, or other stink is present in the vehicle. I think if they can smell you at all, their gone!:)

Great information for all…

In 38 years of bow hunting, I have found Sport Wash by ASTKO to be one of the best products for cleaning my hunting clothes. DO NOT wash your clothes in regular detergents because most contain artificial fragrances and brightners. Sport Wash does not. Plain old baking soda works just fine, but does not remove the oders as well as Sport Wash. Astko makes a great hair and body soap as well.

Good luck!

[Ireland]

in reply to: The Silent Arrow #26462

Steve Graf wrote: My last post on turbulators dropped off the cliff in record time. So I hesitated to post this update. But it’s too hot to shoot, so you will have to bare it out.

Turbulator – I ended up using a 4 inch long strip of duct tape about 1/8 in wide. I tried placing the tape right at the leading edge of the fletch out to about 5/8 of an inch away. The most quiet position was between 1/4 and 3/8 inch out (leading edge of fletch to leading edge of tape). The tape holds up surprisingly well.

Fletching – I have been using 4 fletch with 70 deg / 110 deg orientation for several years now. But I learned that the 90 deg 4 fletch arrow is significantly more quiet than the other orientation. This tells me that there is a pressure differential between the unevenly spaced fletching causing the noise – and maybe other mischief.

So I have switched to the 90 deg fletching and I have gone back to 5 inch fletching. With this configuration and a turbulator wrapped about 3/8 inch (leading edge of tape to leading edge of fletch) out, my arrows are very quiet and fly really well. They seem to penetrate the target a tad better too.

I know some folks were tuning the turbulators to allow them to use less fletching. But I went the other way and did it to allow me to use more fletching. Because I need all the help I can get!

Steve,

Thank you so much for taking the time post the update above. I “missed it” the first time around. What a great idea and what a pleasure to find something that didn’t cost me hundreds of dollars to try. Can’t wait to go out and do some shooting with my new turbulator arrows!

Ireland

[Ireland]

in reply to: EFOC #26405

Dr. Ed Ashby wrote: I not yet sure that there is a point of diminishing returns with EFOC/Ultra-EFOC. Remember that going up in FOC does not always mean going up in arrow weight. As I’ve moved the testing into EFOC/Ultra-EFOC I’ve been able to progressively reduce total arrow mass (on buffalo) while simultaneously maintaining or improving on the penetration demonstrated by substantually heavier, perfectly tuned arrows having the same broadhead, but having normal and/or high FOC.

So far I’ve only been able to test FOC up to the 32% level, but it appears that every benefit of FOC only gets better as the FOC gets higher: Flight gets more stable, less fletching area is required to stabalize the broadhead in flight, paradox recovery gets faster, and the rate of gain in soft tissue penetration, per each percent of FOC increase, gets gereater the higher the arrow’s FOC. (There will be more data coming in the next Update on the degree of progressive rate of penetration gain as FOC get higher.)

As Dave correctly points out, the degree of FOC has no effect on the heavy bone threshold. For breaking heavy bone it’s important to keep the arrow’s mass at or above 650 grains, and that’s assuming you have the other factors in place; TOTAL arrow integrity, perfectly tuned arrow flight and a broadhead with a Mechanical Advantage of 2.6 or more (and “broadhead ratio”, as some use the term, does not always mean same as the MA – don’t confuse the two. There are some popular broadheads being referred to as “3 to 1 ratio” broadheads that have a MA well below 2.0!).

Ed

Thank you Dr. Ashby for your very informative response. Your reply is an outstanding summary of the real world benefits of Ultra-EFOC. Thank you for the years of research that produced the data for the studies that we all can truly use to our advantage.

Ireland

[Ireland]

in reply to: EFOC #24198

Dr. Ed Ashby wrote: [quote=Ireland]Does any company make steel adapters heavier than 125 grains or brass inserts heavier than 100 grains?

Here’s a link to a thread that has the links that take you to a website for heavier, steel inserts.

https://www.tradbow.com/members/cfmbb/messages.cfm?threadid=85901E0D-1422-1DE9-ED2018C61D4B27EA

Ed

Thank you so much Dr. Ashby. I appreciate your time and efforts in responding to my questions. I have checked out the link and the product looks very promising. Thanks again for your assistance. Best of luck in your recovery!!!

Ireland

[Author]

Posts