80lbs Bows

[Wilderlife]

Comparisons with big rifles are certainly interesting but not really in the same ballpark.

An arrow out of a 70# or 80# bow with the same 125gn broadhead is going to leave pretty well exactly the same wound channel - leaving aside things like hitting bone, etc. People might want to shoot a faster or heavier arrow for particular purposes and that's fine, but it's not the same argument where people say "well sure, you can kill a fallow deer with your .300WM, but you won't recover anything off the front third of it."

The bigger you go with rifles, the more potential you have for ruining meat or hide, as well as the difficulty of managing recoil. With the bows, besides having to have the strength to pull it back and shoot it accurately, the difference between the other stuff isn't big enough to justify bringing it up in this sort of discussion. again, there are exceptions, but the sake of discussing things consistently and with general rules of thumb, no one can deny that this isn't the case.

So with a perfect broadside shot on a regular old pig (for example), a 500gn arrow from a 50# longbow, 490gn from a 70# compound, 550gn arrow from an 80# compound, will all leave the same wound if using the same broadhead with the same shot.

The difference in damage on that animal between a .223rem using a 55gn soft point, and a .300wm using a 150gn Interlock, are not even close to being the same thing.

So for the sake of 'summing up' this nonsense I'm carrying on with, the 'because I can' argument isn't the same with big rifles as opposed to 80# compounds. For the most part, within reason and general rules of thumb, the heavier bow you can shoot, the better off you could be. The same can't always be said for rifles, but a lot of that depends on what your goal is when hunting. When culling pigs off quad bikes down here I like to use a big rifle because I can kill reliably with Texas heart shots and we aren't recovering meat so a stack of damage isn't something we care about.

 

[Maverick1]

It never ceases to amaze me how few people understand resistance training and how it can benefit any sort of physical activity.

How about the blokes shooting trad bows? A 55# trad bow is harder to shoot consistently and for extended periods than a 70# compound bow, all other things being equal. I shoot trad bows over 65# reasonably well (and reasonably consistently) and I'm 5ft 7in and only weigh about 175lb.

Lots of good chat in this thread for sure and a lot of great insight, but this shouldn't be overlooked. The stronger you are and the more you understand the pulling and pressing movements, the easier you will shoot a bow and the longer you will be able to do it for. There are stacks of 'old crusties' with destroyed shoulders from shooting trad bows, but you only need to watch them shoot a couple of shots to see why. Incorrect form from the start and not knowing

Bloke, you look like Pedro Pascal. Rock on!

 

[Thinkingman]

So why aren’t you shooting 60 or even 50? It’ll kill an animal just fine in most situations and the cumulative effect on your body is less. My wife shoots 40 pounds and had a pass through on a 6x6 bull. She also weighs 117 pounds. Should she shoot 70? Should I shoot 40? Of course not, because our bodies are different.

You put every human being into 1 category. The 70lb category. My point is everyone is built different so to say 70 is ok but everything else isn’t ok. The Muzzle brake analogy is dumb. Everyone’s ears are the same. Everyone’s body is different. Your bmg example is dumb too actually. What does that have to do with anything at all unless 80lb bows weigh more than 70lb bows. Or, are you saying a 80lb bow isn’t necessary to kill an animal? That’s a different argument than the tired old argument about shoulders.

Congratulations to your 117lb wife shooting 40lbs getting a pass-thru on a 6x6.
She's a one-percenter.
I treat my hunting setup like I'm making major power factor in an action pistol match....Back in to the calculation.
I draw 27" so that means to make 70 ft/lbs, I need to push my 455gr arrow 270fps.
70lbs on my Bowtech BTX28 gets me there with accuracy and I can hold it as long as (reasonably) practical.
Nor will you see me bragging about attempting a 60 yard shot in a 20mph wind.

I really didn't expect you to comprehend the idea that just because you CAN carry a 50BMG, that you SHOULD.
Lost on you.

 

[Ucsdryder]

Congratulations to your 117lb wife shooting 40lbs getting a pass-thru on a 6x6.
She's a one-percenter.
I treat my hunting setup like I'm making major power factor in an action pistol match....Back in to the calculation.
I draw 27" so that means to make 70 ft/lbs, I need to push my 455gr arrow 270fps.
70lbs on my Bowtech BTX28 gets me there with accuracy and I can hold it as long as (reasonably) practical.
Nor will you see me bragging about attempting a 60 yard shot in a 20mph wind.

I really didn't expect you to comprehend the idea that just because you CAN carry a 50BMG, that you SHOULD.
Lost on you.

Let’s say you have 2 people.

A - 58 years old, 27 inch draw, obviously an older smaller guy and his max draw on one rep is 90 pounds. A 70 pound bow is 77% of his max.

B - 40 years old 29” draw, in good shape. His max draw on one rep is 110 pounds. A 70 pound bow is 63% of his max.

Do you think those 2 guys should be shooting the same poundage? And if so, why?

 

[fngTony]

@Thinkingman @Ucsdryder are any of the bows made by Toyota or Kia?

 

[Thinkingman]

@Thinkingman @Ucsdryder are any of the bows made by Toyota or Kia?

PSE= Pieces Strewn Everywhere...Probably a Toyota subsidiary.

 

[fngTony]

I s

PSE= Pieces Strewn Everywhere...Probably a Toyota subsidiary.

I shoot a pse…..

 

[Thinkingman]

Let’s say you have 2 people.

A - 58 years old, 27 inch draw, obviously an older smaller guy and his max draw on one rep is 90 pounds. A 70 pound bow is 77% of his max.

B - 40 years old 29” draw, in good shape. His max draw on one rep is 110 pounds. A 70 pound bow is 63% of his max.

Do you think those 2 guys should be shooting the same poundage? And if so, why?

58 year old guy with athletic background, thick chest, short arms, lots of shoulder injuries from football. I could probably draw 110 once then regret it, so I draw 70lbs 200 times a week during the season.
I don't FEEL 58, but knowing what you did to your body in your younger years that adds up is something you probably won't understand for a while.

 

[Thinkingman]

@Thinkingman @Ucsdryder are any of the bows made by Toyota or Kia?

Toyota trucks do seem to be a popular billboard for whatever product you shoot/drink/think/need to impress others on the road.

 

[MightyWhitey]

I am referring to professional golfers that swing a club maybe 500 times a week, every week.

Me too.

 

[sndmn11]

Here's some numbers that will come out in our Elite Omnia review in a few weeks.

This arrow is 550gr, the IBO for the Inline 5 is 343fps, the Omnia is 347fps

Prime Inline 5 28.5" setting (28 5/8" actual)

79.75lb

275fps

Elite Omnia 70# limbs 28.5" setting (28 3/4" actual)	70.56lb	266fps
	66.7	259fps
	63.02	250fps
Elite Omnia 60# limbs 28.5" setting (28 3/4" actual)	61.14	250fps
	57.15	242fps
	53.33	234fps

I think it is worth considering a "speed" bow at 10lbs lighter peak draw weight. While I did see a difference in trajectory in fiddling with this Omnia, I don't think it is earth-shattering and bet that most people would see a bigger reduction in pin gap by playing with their distance their sight is from the riser, and their peep height.

 

[Wilderlife]

58 year old guy with athletic background, thick chest, short arms, lots of shoulder injuries from football. I could probably draw 110 once then regret it, so I draw 70lbs 200 times a week during the season.
I don't FEEL 58, but knowing what you did to your body in your younger years that adds up is something you probably won't understand for a while.

Absolutely, but that doesn't mean all people have injuries from previous sporting experiences that need to be taken into consideration, or may have a significant impact on what they can do in their later years.
It's an important thing to raise but if nothing else, all it points out is that no two people are the same.
For the sake of being consistent during an argument/discussion, bringing up old sporting injuries is pointless, unless everyone shooting bows has exactly the same injuries, is the same age, and is in roughly the same physical condition. There will always be exceptions and people need to take responsibility for their own wellbeing, ability, and make the best decisions possible.

"People shouldn't shoot 80# bows because I injured my shoulders playing football when I was younger" is just as pointless as saying "people shouldn't carry more than 100 pounds out of the backcountry because I hurt my knee playing football when I was younger."
I know that's not the point you were really trying to make, but there is no point muddying the waters with exceptions here and there for the sake of making a blanket statement.
You could just as easily argue in the other direction that a lot of people who take their strength and fitness seriously SHOULD be able to shoot 80# bows without hassle. Hell, if someone my size can shoot 70# easily, what's stopping a whole stack of other people shooting 80# easily?

 

[JStol5]

^My attitude is similar- if you can shoot more comfortably, why not? What's the downside? I see more reasons to shoot higher poundage than lower poundage if you can..

And why should you care what other people shoot?

 

[Reburn]

So why aren’t you shooting 60 or even 50? It’ll kill an animal just fine in most situations and the cumulative effect on your body is less. My wife shoots 40 pounds and had a pass through on a 6x6 bull. She also weighs 117 pounds. Should she shoot 70? Should I shoot 40? Of course not, because our bodies are different.

You put every human being into 1 category. The 70lb category. My point is everyone is built different so to say 70 is ok but everything else isn’t ok. The Muzzle brake analogy is dumb. Everyone’s ears are the same. Everyone’s body is different. Your bmg example is dumb too actually. What does that have to do with anything at all unless 80lb bows weigh more than 70lb bows. Or, are you saying a 80lb bow isn’t necessary to kill an animal? That’s a different argument than the tired old argument about shoulders.

Muzzle brake analogy is spot on. It's cumulative damage that isn't reversible. The damage is there whether you perceive it or not.

65-70 lbs is want is generally needed to get a "normal" weight arrow to a speed that doesn't resemble a rainbow. It's not a arbitrary number.

 

[Wilderlife]

Making the assumption that drawing a heavy bow will always cause damage to shoulders is incorrect. With correct technique, very heavy bows can be pulled for a very long time.
Before I learned proper technique I gave myself bursitis with a recurve I was pulling about 52# with. Since recovering, learning more, and increasing my strength, I can shoot a recurve of close to 65# very easily, and haven't injured myself with it yet after a few years.

Not saying I'm an expert or the best or anything, but just making the point that incorrect technique with very light bows will still cause injury. It's more to do with overall technique than the weight itself.

Why is this so hard to understand?

One one hand, I regularly have people telling me "you shouldn't deadlift" and "you shouldn't hike out that much meat". Why? Because it'll hurt my back, apparently. Meanwhile, many of the same individuals struggle to move around a dead animal in the backcountry and even struggle to lift the hindquarters of deer into a cooler on the back of my ute.
Who is more at risk? I can easily deadlift twice my bodyweight for reps and my back and core are much stronger as a result. The argument about deadlifts hurting your back is only if you deadlift incorrectly. Deadlifting correctly will see my back be much stronger than it otherwise would or could be. Lifting significantly less weight, incorrectly, will injure your back.

Same with bows.

 

[Ucsdryder]

Muzzle brake analogy is spot on. It's cumulative damage that isn't reversible. The damage is there whether you perceive it or not.

65-70 lbs is want is generally needed to get a "normal" weight arrow to a speed that doesn't resemble a rainbow. It's not an arbitrary number.

15-25 years ago people were still shooting 70lb. Bows are significantly more efficient, faster and smoother, with much better draw cycles, and arguably easier on the shoulders. So 70 is ok now, but wasn’t then? Or 70 was ok then, but now what is ok? My 80lb prime draws as easy, if not easier than my old 70lb tribute.

And what’s a normal weight arrow? What’s a normal speed? Both arbitrary numbers. I remember my first bow, a Martin in the 90s…I could barely pull that thing back at 70lb and it shot rainbows with aluminum arrows.


I put a mechanical through the shoulder of an elk a couple years back. The tip curled on the shoulder and it still had enough MOMENTUM to keep pushing into the vitals. That was a 565gr arrow at 278fps. A “normal” arrow weight at a “normal” speed would never have made that penetration.

It goes back to the same concept… shoot what you can comfortably shoot, and just because you can’t or won’t, doesn’t mean others can’t or shouldn’t.

 

[Reburn]

Comparisons with big rifles are certainly interesting but not really in the same ballpark.

An arrow out of a 70# or 80# bow with the same 125gn broadhead is going to leave pretty well exactly the same wound channel - leaving aside things like hitting bone, etc. People might want to shoot a faster or heavier arrow for particular purposes and that's fine, but it's not the same argument where people say "well sure, you can kill a fallow deer with your .300WM, but you won't recover anything off the front third of it."

The bigger you go with rifles, the more potential you have for ruining meat or hide, as well as the difficulty of managing recoil. With the bows, besides having to have the strength to pull it back and shoot it accurately, the difference between the other stuff isn't big enough to justify bringing it up in this sort of discussion. again, there are exceptions, but the sake of discussing things consistently and with general rules of thumb, no one can deny that this isn't the case.

So with a perfect broadside shot on a regular old pig (for example), a 500gn arrow from a 50# longbow, 490gn from a 70# compound, 550gn arrow from an 80# compound, will all leave the same wound if using the same broadhead with the same shot.

The difference in damage on that animal between a .223rem using a 55gn soft point, and a .300wm using a 150gn Interlock, are not even close to being the same thing.

So for the sake of 'summing up' this nonsense I'm carrying on with, the 'because I can' argument isn't the same with big rifles as opposed to 80# compounds. For the most part, within reason and general rules of thumb, the heavier bow you can shoot, the better off you could be. The same can't always be said for rifles, but a lot of that depends on what your goal is when hunting. When culling pigs off quad bikes down here I like to use a big rifle because I can kill reliably with Texas heart shots and we aren't recovering meat so a stack of damage isn't something we care about.

Here we go.
Almost everything you said about bullets is not correct. Meat and hide damage and wound Chanel has nothing to do with diameter and everything to do with bullet construction. You touched on construction but it unclear the point you were trying to make.

The only factual thing that you said is managing recoil on big rifles is harder and a heavier draw bow doesn't make a bigger wound channel.

Here's some numbers that will come out in our Elite Omnia review in a few weeks.

This arrow is 550gr, the IBO for the Inline 5 is 343fps, the Omnia is 347fps

Prime Inline 5 28.5" setting (28 5/8" actual)

79.75lb

275fps

Elite Omnia 70# limbs 28.5" setting (28 3/4" actual)	70.56lb	266fps
	66.7	259fps
	63.02	250fps
Elite Omnia 60# limbs 28.5" setting (28 3/4" actual)	61.14	250fps
	57.15	242fps
	53.33	234fps

I think it is worth considering a "speed" bow at 10lbs lighter peak draw weight. While I did see a difference in trajectory in fiddling with this Omnia, I don't think it is earth-shattering and bet that most people would see a bigger reduction in pin gap by playing with their distance their sight is from the riser, and their peep height.

16 fps is significant on a 550 grain arrow considering most guys are at 450-480. There is a reason 3d guys try to be at an arrow weight that gets to 300fps. Not a draw weight that gets there.

 

[Billy Goat]

It's pretty well established that people don't shoot heavier poundage as well.



We always sacrifice a little for hunting accuracy versus ultimate accuracy, gets to be a point where you need to decide where to be.


I think everyone is different, and while me drawing 70# for 25k cycles is going to do different damage to my joints then someone else who might even be able to do 80# for 25k cycles with less damage, I wonder why? A joint is going to lift (X) amount of pounds over its lifetime, I'd rather make it last as long as possible. It's like loosing 15-20# to save your knees. 80 versus 70 is what, 15% more? That's not insignificant.


I draw my 49# bow back and all kinds of things go pop and Crack on that first cycle.

 

[Wilderlife]

Here we go.
Almost everything you said about bullets is not correct. Meat and hide damage and wound Chanel has nothing to do with diameter and everything to do with bullet construction. You touched on construction but it unclear the point you were trying to make.

The only factual thing that you said is managing recoil on big rifles is harder and a heavier draw bow doesn't make a bigger wound channel.

Incorrect. Read it again. I said bigger rifles have more potential for bigger meat damage. It's not always the case, which is why I made an effort to say things like "for the most part", "all things being equal", and "general rule of thumb".

Bullet diameter, all things being equal, does have an impact on wound channel and damage. That's the point. If you were shooting FMJ in a .223rem and .300WM, the .300 would damage more tissue because the diameter is bigger. Are you trying to argue this isn't the case?

It's also not just about bullet construction. It's also about the case capacity. Hence why a .300WM has more potential for meat/hide damage than a .308win.

In any case, the variability between bullet diameter, bullet construction, and case size, provides a much larger spectrum for tissue and bone damage, than my analogy about the same broadhead on the front of an arrow coming out of any bow.

 

[Billy Goat]

I s

I shoot a pse…..

It's OK little buddy.....