Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
in reply to: THE WEAK LINK #15487
I had a chance today to measure adapters made from steel,aluminum,stainless steel and titanium.Most likely all made by different manufactures .?? I do not know the source these were adapters that I have accumulated over time
1. The shanks all measured .200 plus or minus .002 .Not much variation probably not enough to make one stronger or weaker than the other.
2 There was a variance of about 1/32 inch in length of the threads.Probably would not make a difference as long as the adapter was screwed in tite
3 As close as I could measure the shanks were within .005 of each other in length. Don’t really think this would be a factor in bending.
Open for more ideas !!!!:?::?::?:
in reply to: THE WEAK LINK #13932There has been another discussion of this subject “weak link” on tradbow on the Friends of FOC I think it is titled “bent steel adapters” or something like that. That link is below.
https://www.tradbow.com/members/cfmbb/messages.cfm?threadid=1570CF95-1422-1DE9-ED3A567585989435
in reply to: THE WEAK LINK #13920Steve Graf wrote: This is somewhat before my time, so maybe I wasn’t interpreting the picture correctly, but I have seen video of the early screw in points from Bear Archery on some of the old Bear movies. These may be the “answer”
Instead of an #8 threaded shaft used to connect the point to the arrow, it appeared to be closer to the diameter of the arrow. at least a 1/4-32 or maybe even 5/16’s or so. I don’t know what was left to cut threads into in the shaft, but the threaded end of the point sure was big.
I’ve never had an aluminum broadhead insert fail. But I have had 4 or 5 steel ones bend. They always bend in the same place – the shoulder of the threaded part bends.
Joe – The last one that bent was my last little trip in Hawaii when I shot a little piggy. I’d be happy to send that insert to you for analysis (if I can find it). It may be a little bloody 😯
STEVE
I have samples of bent steel adapters Thanks for the offer! They are all bent as you describe.:(
Do you recall when you retrieved your arrow if there was any sign the adapter loosened at the insert joint?
How heavy of a arrow were you using and how much wt forward. Just curious.
I am surprised about your experience with aluminums.I don’t,know what to think about that.Kind of throws another variable into the pile.
Your observations of the vintage head is interesting. It would be almost impossible to use a heavier threaded section now as arrow adapters especially with skinny arrows would not except a bigger thread.
Steve thanks for your input
in reply to: THE WEAK LINK #13905ausjim wrote: Joe,
I think it was on one of the youtube videos you guys posted from Ashby’s 2012 Kalamazoo seminar that I remember him saying that as far structural integrity is concerned, strong wooden shafts performed best. Do you remember if that is correct?
Jim
JIM
I did not remember that exact quote. I went back and checked the tapes and found where he discusses damage rates of arrows and he shows graphs where the damage rate of wood arrows is considerably less than carbon and aluminum. He included as damage every thing associate with the hunting arrow.
.The damage on aluminum and carbon on his graphs are proportionately much higher than wood.Test were made on dead animals shooting at the shoulder .This is a link to that discussion
http://www.tuffhead.com/education/kalamazoo%20jan%202012.html
Jim your study of Ashby’s works is showing through,nice job.:D
in reply to: THE WEAK LINK #13420mhay wrote: Thank you MR. FURLONG ,
I appreciate your responce with such detail and thought .
I’m actually wondering if a ”REAL” fool proof arrow can be made . That is , and stay within desirable FOC , and arrow weight , and good velocity , without occassionally bending an arrow or insert or both .
I shot at a squirrel . I pulled the shot and clipped a 1 inch sassafrass sapling with the ”HAMMER” blunt . It ruined the shaft . Point being , that a 688 grain arrow from 51# , @ 152 fps was ruined . What about an arrow at more velocity and greater FOC hitting the radius of a rib or a shoulder blade .
I realize there are so many possibilties that can happen when an arrow strikes the target , it makes me wonder if there will ever be a ”REAL’ cure for this problem .
MHAY
I think you are probably right…. A perfect arrow, as we know it,may hit a bone at a weird angle and react differently than if it hit the bone straight on. It is hard to eliminate all the problems that can occur with the hunting arrow, but a lot of fun trying:D:D
in reply to: THE WEAK LINK #13409dwcphoto wrote: Okay, just a guess on my part, as I’m not a machinist or scientist. Any time you great a link or a joint it’s a potential place for a malfunction. Probably you could eliminate this by building a one piece adapter/insert to glue into the shaft and into the broadhead. Of course there would have to be a lot of combinations to match diameters and weights.
Overall, I’d say good luck at building something that can fly right and never, ever break. You’re doing a heck of a job eliminating almost all of the problem as it is.
My two cents. dwcphoto
David
TuffHead offers the adapter/insert in one piece you can see them at
http://www.vintagearcheryco.com/shop/ they are down in about the middle of that page.
You are right it takes many different sizes to fit different arrows and to offer different weights within those sizes.
Like you say maybe everything is being done that can be done to eliminate the WEAK POINT.
in reply to: THE WEAK LINK #13279mhay wrote: I’ve been thinking on this problem for some time . It realy hit home as I was building front end of my arrow with the STEEL broadhead adapter , and STEEL broadhead. That aluminum insert sucks.
Then in my post yesterday about PLAYIN’W/FOC , Mr. Petersen stepped in with his thoughts and mentioned the weak link . His comments got me to thinking again . So , I pulled a broadhead off the shaft ,,,,,dug out a new aluminum insert .Here’s what I found .
I.D. of insert at the shank area of BH adapter = .204 inch.
O.D. of adapter shank,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,= .196 inch.
Is it the unsupportered space between the insert wall and the shank of the adapter causing the weakness?
Is it the simple fact that the insert is too short ?
Or a combination of both and the insert being aluminum ?
What do you think ,,,,,or know ?
mhay
Bent adapters is not isolated to aluminum .Some have experienced the same problem with steel. Bending of steel adapters is generally associated with heavy arrows (750 grn +) hitting large bones. I do not know what the actual cause is as I have been doing tests and can not duplicate the bending of steel adapters.
I beginning to think that upon impact of the broadhead that the adapter thread make up with the insert is jarred enough to break it loose and create a small gap which allows it to bend …..Just a theory as I have not been able to duplicate it.
I do not recommend a aluminum inserts as they are to soft and really prone to bending. (for what ever reason that causes it)
For most hunting in the USA a steel adaptor of 100grn or 125 grn would be my choice. These are still not fool proof.
Bending of the adapter upon impact more than likely will hinder,slow, or retard good penetration.It is important to try and bomb proof the WEAK LINK AREA
For large game such as moose and buffalo or large african game I believe titanium adapters with a extended adapter (part that fits in 5 degree taper.)should be used. Grade 5 titanium has twice the tensile strength as steel.The reason I say it should have a long taper is there are some titanium adapters that have short tapers similar to the 75 grn steel adapter and other aluminum
adapters. Until someone can isolate the reason for bending I would stay away from short tapered adapters.
There is an other alternative to the screw on adapter and that is a adapter/insert combination. This option eliminates the threads and any potential gap between the broad head and arrow.I have no reports of this alternative creating problems. For large game the adapter/insert and a footed arrow would eliminate most potential problems.
This bending problem is not just isolated to glue on broad heads with adapters.It is also happens to broadheads that have the threads built into the head,
which should lead to some conclusion???????
I hope some one can shed some light:idea: on this problem as it is driving me up the wall:D
in reply to: New "Meat Head" from Tuffhead #63032T Downing wrote: This is good news! Love Tuffheads…Looking forward to trying the Meat Heads out. Hopefully I can use them this year for Pronghorn…Thanks Joe
Tom, I hope you do get a chance to shoot some MeatHeads with good results. I really like your stories and pictures:D
in reply to: New "Meat Head" from Tuffhead #63025JodyS wrote: Like Dave, I picked up some of the “Meat Head” broadheads at KZoo. I am looking forward to giving them a try. I am gluing the inserts in them tomorrow, and hope to introduce them to a doe this weekend (our bow season is still going on here in Arkansas).
Joe, it was great to meet you. I enjoyed getting to talk with you.
Jody
Jody It was a pleasure meeting you at Kazoo. Thanks for your purchases. Please give me any feedback good or bad with your MeatHead experiences.
in reply to: New "Meat Head" from Tuffhead #63005David Petersen wrote: Joe — Since you can produce and sell carbon steel heads for a lot less than stainless, why not offer the full Tuffhead line in carbon, making them more affordable to more folks? Is the market demand for stainless that much stronger that carbons won’t sell as well even when cheaper? In my case I am happy to take the little additional care to keep carbons shiny and sharp, rather tha pay the extra price. So long as steel quality and hardness is there, and the heads come hunt-ready (and shaving) sharp, either works for me. We are still in full winter mode here, snowing nicely at this moment, so I’m a ways away from testing the new Meat Heads.
David, I had written an answer to your post earlier and some how lost it before it posted.. FUN… FUN …FUN .
When I got the idea to build a broadhead I did not give much thought to what would be the cheapest way to build it for marketing purposes or I probably have settled on using carbon steel.
My thought was to build a broadhead that incorporated all Dr.Ashby’s theories and which incorporated my own:idea: ideas. I felt that the “perfect broadhead “ should be made of stainless steel as the edge is easier to maintain as it is not as effected by corission or rust There were several single bevel broadheads on the market , but none that incorporated all of Ashby’s ideas. If I was going to make a premimum broadhead it should be made of stainless. Ask any knife maker they will tell you corrousion and rust are their worst enemy.
The MeatHead being made of carbon does not weaken it nor is it softer than the stainless. Both the MeatHead and the Tuffhead are the same Rockwell hardness (RC 52) The MeatHead is made of thinner steel as you noted to make it lighter in total weight .It sill is plenty thick at .050. The edge of the carbon steel broadhead does needs attention before hunting , and during prolonged hunts particularly in wet weather.(Vasoline does help)
I was raised with carbon steel knives and broadheads .
Traditional hunters of old still think carbon to be superior and that idea right or wrong is reinforced by the attractive price of carbon broadheads.
I am glad that I can offer a good broadhead (MeatHead) at a reasonable price that gives more hunters the opportunity to use a broadhead that incorporates most of, if not all, of Dr, Ashby’s ideas. I believe traditional hunting will be benefited by it.
I do not have plans to make any heavier or lighter weight carbon broadheads . For now I am staying with the present line up of broadheads. Every single bevel model requires two version a right and left. It does not take long to develop a lot of inventory with three models.
I do have thoughts of a heavier TuffHead and have SS steel for it , but don’t know when I will get to it. Most would think a heavier head , more than the 300 grain TH broadhead ,is not practical ……….. .. Some times you just have to follow your ideas . It is all fun .:D
By the way the MeatHead is now listed on the shopping page of the TuffHead web site
I did some target practice today.It was cold ,in the teens.I need some thing to blame the poor shoots on I know it can’t be me:oops: Spring will be here sooner than you think Dave, than you can get out and test those broadheads
in reply to: New "Meat Head" from Tuffhead #36523David, enjoyed our visit at Kzoo wish we had more time to compare notes on hunting and broadheads but that is the way it is at shows.
Thank you for your critique of Vintage Archery’s new broad head.
We had a lot of interest in the new MeatHead and sold quite a few. I believe that the MeatHead while not stainless and not as heavy as the TuffHead models will still out preform other broadheads in the same 190-200 grain weight class.
As you mentioned we are able to offer the carbon steel broad head at a price considerably less than the SS TuffHead as it is quit cheaper to manufacture,that is the steal is cheaper to purchase and the processing (heat-treat. etc ) is cheaper. Even at a lessor price than the SS TuffHead all of the other features of the premium broadhead were maintained.
The MeatHead comes factory sharp has a cut on contact tanto tip and is coated with a ceramic finish . It is has same basic dimensions of the TuffHead.
The MeatHead is not listed on our web site as of yet, but will appear in the coming days
in reply to: DVD ideas??? #27445dwcphoto wrote: There’s a great film by Dick Proenneke called Alone in the Wilderness. Not about archery, but about a man who moved to Alaska, built a cabin and lived alone for 30 years. He filmed the building of the cabin and his lifestyle with a 16 mm movie camera. PBS aired it as a promotion and you can purchase it through them. Neat stuff. dwc
Here’s a clip from one of his films.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=z7jxFbscIJY
I would have to second David’s reccomendation The book is also a great read .I have both the book and video
in reply to: Steel Broadhead Adapters Bending #19543vintage archer wrote: It seems that bending of adapter is either associated with high FOC or heavy arrows or a combination of both. I say that not to cast negativity on FOC and heavy arrows but to call it to everyone attention. If your arrow falls into these categories maybe you should account for a possible problem
When I referred to heavy arrows all experiences personal and reported were with arrows 800 grains and heavier.
all shots were made in heavy bone.
in reply to: Steel Broadhead Adapters Bending #19535It seems that bending of adapter is either associated with high FOC or heavy arrows or a combination of both. I say that not to cast negativity on FOC and heavy arrows but to call it to everyone attention. If your arrow falls into these categories maybe you should account for a possible problem.
Dr Ashby reports minimal problems with 125 grain adapters I have not heard of anyone having problems with the insert/adapter combination nor with titanium adapters.
About a year ago the company that made most of the adapters in the USA and supplied most of the large supply houses quit making adapters.
It is my understanding most of the adapters now
again are being made by one company (not original co.) may be they are using a different grade steel???
in reply to: Steel Broadhead Adapters Bending #15249Steve I don’t have any hardened It would take experimentation to harden Have no idea what steel is used . I will be playing with it. if I come up with any thing I will let you know!
-
AuthorPosts
