[MCuiksa]

in reply to: Treed-itional? #17198

My definition of traditional is simple (but not necessarily agreed upon by all):

1) Shoot a bow without wheels, without sights, without releases. (Although I still have not decided if the carbon nano coming out is a traditional bow – since it’s advertised in TBM and I have the utmost respect for TBM I’ll assume it is traditional until proven otherwise).
2) Put time in before the season tuning your setup, sharpening broadheads, etc out of respect for the game you hunt for a quicker, higher percentage kill.
3) Doff your cap after the kill and thank God and the animal for what’s been provided.
4) Keep the ATV out of the hunting area.

After those “standard” requirements, I think we all just vary on whether we are at the “Primitive” end of the traditional spectrum or at the “Modern” end. Decisions such as factory made treestands vs 2×4’s, treebark camo vs wool breakups, popups vs natural blinds, wood vs carbon, factory game calls vs none (or natural), etc are small sub-categories for our overall large family of Traditional Hunters. Just my opinion. Mike.

[MCuiksa]

in reply to: Signs of Approaching Bow Season #17158

Wow, it’s a small world…my wife and I were headed out the other night and she asked if I would mind putting jeans on instead of the shorts I was wearing……:lol:

[MCuiksa]

in reply to: 150 grain single bevel? #16409

I’m not sure if you are wanting glue-on or screw-in but the Tusker Concordes come in a 155gr glue-on. By the time you sharpen them (they are tough to sharpen) the weight would be 150+/-. (BraveHeart Archery – 6 for $25)

I’m sure when you say single-bevel you mean broadheads with all the Ashby specs. The Concordes come very close to meeting all of those specs (MA, Tanto tip, large ferrule, solid, robust, etc). I don’t know of any screw-in in the 150 range that meet the Ashby specs…maybe when Doc logs on the next time he will.

From what I’ve seen, mfgs are trying to keep inventory levels manageable so they’ve met the Ashby broadhead specs with heavier heads to also meet the FOC specs Ed has guided us on. Mike.

[MCuiksa]

in reply to: Harvest is not a 4-letter word. #16205

George/SteveMcD, I like your way of thinking…I now feel comfortable using the term “harvest” because that is what we’re truly doing (along with killing) and, for me, it isn’t disrespectful in any way to the animal OR to the people listening to the story…the best of both worlds. Good thread. Mike.

PS: SteveMcD, I also agree….too much time on the computer, let’s go hunting!! 😀

[MCuiksa]

in reply to: Wee little muleys #16193

cyberscout wrote: Dave —
I also would really like to Kill/Take/ Render unto my Possession, a Really Nice Mule Deer Buck
Scout

Now that’s funny!! :lol::lol:

[MCuiksa]

in reply to: Harvest is not a 4-letter word. #16050

Interesting thread. To DP’s point, I really don’t think I’ve thought about why I use the words I use. I don’t believe I’ve ever used the word harvest when referring to hunting. But, I don’t use the word kill very often – the word “kill” to me has a negative connotation that infers an act of malice or anger (although the correct word for that would be “murder”).

That may stem from my wife’s family being a group of non-hunters (not anti-hunters) and the reaction I see in their faces when talking about killing an animal. I’ve found that using other terms – and I use several now that I think about it – is less distasteful to them.

I find I use the term “took” a lot as in “I took a nice doe this morning”. I use “provide meat” a lot too as in “I was able to provide meat for the table the last couple of years”.

I don’t know if this is giving in to political correctness or not. I look at it as a small compromise to being able to tell stories to a bunch of non-hunters without inserting the “shock-factor” that they deem distasteful. I can say, my wife’s family loves hearing stories of the things I run across while in the woods and they even share in the meat it provides – it may go back to SmithHammer’s article that he linked to, they just don’t want to think about where it comes from (just like the wrapped meat on white styrofoam in the grocery).

One last point, going back to the malice comment, I do KILL coyotes and openly talk about it with my inlaws as coyotes have overran their place as well as mine. My inlaws are always wanting me to come over and quote “Kill ‘Em All”….but yet I don’t KILL deer….I might have to seek counseling if you guys keep posting these kind of questions on the forum!! Wow, I’ve thought too much (or not enough per DP’s post).
Mike. ❓

[MCuiksa]

in reply to: A hunting widow's philosophy #15956

When you come back in does she say “Why you home so soon?” :P:P

Sorry Dave, couldn’t pass it up. 😆

[MCuiksa]

in reply to: Tuning with Crystalshrimp. #15251

bully26 wrote:
So… as long as the arrows are accurate, impact angle doesn’t matter? Shouldn’t the mass of the entire arrow impact as “stacked” as possible. Wouldn’t any deviation upon impact cause the tail of the arrow to be less of a factor?
I shortened my arrow and corrected the kick a little more but then ran out time.
Simply, I just don’t understand how impact of a bareshaft has no effect on a finished arrow.
Thanx in Advance

Bully26, I’m no expert and it took me a couple of readings of Adcocks guide to understand the principle so let me explain it the way I understood it to see if it clicks with you.
Using JW’s explanation of planing like a boat rudder I’m sure you can picture that if the arrow is flying at an angle it is going to plane toward where the point is aiming. The point you might be missing is that you want your bareshafts to group with your fletched shafts. So, if the bares and fletched group together, then your bareshafts have to be flying straight. If they were pitched in flight, they’d be grouping somewhere other than with the self-correcting fletched arrows. The nock kick after penetration can be induced by target imperfections, density, etc. You must make sure your bareshafts and fletched arrows group together.

While a bareshaft is not unstable in flight, it will have a tendancy to let the nock end oscillate. Oscillations would balance each other out making them group with fletched shafts. The oscillations can however cause the arrow to kick when it strikes the target since the nock would not be directly behind the point of impact. I hope this helps. Mike.

[MCuiksa]

in reply to: My first Deer is down! #14093

Congrats!! I’m glad you found it…it’s a sick feeling to search so long and come up empty. Congrats!! Mike.

P.S.: Good call on waiting until morning…..when in doubt, wait it out!

[MCuiksa]

in reply to: Storm and Hurricane damage #13814

That non-event took some lives and did some damage far greater than causing someone to have to move a stand and track a little harder.

If it were me, I’d go run a chainsaw for a couple days because he’s a neighbor who needs help and to thank him for allowing me to hunt in the past…..

Just my thoughts. Mike.

I don’t mean to suggest your post was meant in a disrespectful way….the “non-event” term just seemed a little cold-hearted to those who lost loved ones and your idea of suffering from the hurricane means your hunting area was affected.

[MCuiksa]

in reply to: Treestand Safety #8493

Bruce, I stay on the ground while hunting so I cannot speak to treestands. However, my job requires I work off the ground quite often. OSHA outlawed belts for high restraint years ago because of the severe back injuries that can occur during a fall. If you have enough slack in your setup that you could even fall 3 or 4 feet before the belt “catches” you, go to a full harness as that is enough to produce a life-altering injury. If you keep the tie-off short to where the belt let’s you lean but not fall you might be ok but it’s still not recommended. Be safe. Mike.

[MCuiksa]

in reply to: Arrows change, yet POI stays same? #8086

I believe if you hit “Preview” on occasion the timeout will not happen since it sees you’re still there. Don’t accidentally hit “Save” or it’ll post and you’ll have to go back and edit. This seems to work for me but I don’t type too many long replies. WORD works too of course. Mike.

[MCuiksa]

in reply to: Where have all the Grizzlies gone? #63592

Tusker Concorde. They run $4-6 each depending on style/weight. I like them real well – does take some time to figure out how to sharpen them, but once you get the knack, they do get razor sharp.

My next purchase I will try the new Tuffheads that are out. They are getting rave reviews on this forum but I think they’re more like $15 each. Worth it though from what everyone says.

You can get the Tusker Concorde factory sharpened in a few sizes but the cost jumps up. Mike.

[MCuiksa]

in reply to: Does anybody really pay this much? #53492

R2, well said. The meat tastes just as good. You’re right on with the clothes/boots too in my opinion. I have three hunting purchases that I’ve regretted:
1) A cheap pair of boots that didn’t make it through two seasons – and my feet were wet the whole time even though they were sold as water repellant (yes, I know water repellant isn’t waterproof, but these actually attracted water I think!! 🙂 )
2) A cheap set of rain gear. I was cold and wet a lot in them.
3) A cheap pair of binoc’s. Terrible in low light, hard to focus.

Had I spent 50% more the first time, I wouldn’t have had to buy ’em a second time. 🙁

That doesn’t mean you need to go “nano” on every purchase but more often than not I’ve found middle-of-the-road to be a good balance. Mike.

[MCuiksa]

in reply to: Kingwouldbe & Tuffhead #51244

😯 😳

[Author]

Posts