Arrow penetration

[Mighty Mouse]

I've heard it, but haven't understood it. How does an arrow fly tip down just because it's EFoc? The drag of the fletching should be correcting that. It might do it for the first bit, but the fletching will pull the back of the shaft behind the point unless it doesn't have enough drag.

I don't think FOC has any effect on the angle an arrow adopts during flight. I do think that a slower arrow will fly more tip down and that the effect of reduced speed on flight angle gets mistakenly attributed to increased FOC. When guys dabble with high FOC, they often don't hold total arrow weight (and thus speed) constant, they just add a bunch of weight to the front and see what happens. The results then get ascribed to increased FOC when they're often a product of increased total arrow weight (and/or reduced speed). I submit my thesis to the scrutiny of the 'slide:

Disregarding possible near-launch aberrations due to the bow being out of tune, any arrow shot toward a horizontal target begins flying with the tip pointed above horizontal because the shooter intentionally (and necessarily) aims the bow/arrow at an angle above (typically just slightly above) horizontal. The arrow maintains a positive (tip up) angle until it reaches the apex of its trajectory. At the apex, the arrow's angle relative to horizontal momentarily becomes zero (parallel to the ground) then becomes negative (tip down) for the remainder of its flight. The negative angle post-apex is caused by drag force acting in the vertical direction. We typically only think about drag acting horizontally along the length of the arrow and working to slow the arrow's forward progress, but because the arrow is also traveling vertically as it travels horizontally toward the target, there is also a drag force acting vertically. Both drag forces (horizontal and vertical) act through the arrow's "center of pressure" (CP), the location of which is largely determined by amount of fletching and lies rearward of the midpoint on an adequately fletched arrow. After the arrow reaches the apex of its trajectory and begins falling, vertical drag (shown as Dy in the sketch below) is directed upward, which tries to rotate the arrow clockwise around its center of gravity (CG). This rotational force (aka, torque) is counteracted by the horizontal drag force (Dx) acting in the negative x direction (leftward in the sketch), which tries to rotate the arrow counterclockwise around its CG. The magnitudes of these torques can be quantified by multiplying the linear force values by the perpendicular distances between the arrow's CP and CG. These perpendicular distances (aka, lengths of the "moment arm") are equal to the distance (B) along the arrow shaft between CP and CG multiplied by the sine and cosine, respectively, of the arrow's angle (A) relative to horizontal. At any given instant, the drag-induced torques acting around the arrow's CG are equal and opposite; thus, Dx•B•sin(A) = Dy•B•cos(A). B appears on both sides of the equation and thus cancels out, meaning that the location of CG (and therefore the amount of FOC) has no effect on the angle relative to horizontal that the arrow adopts during flight. The calculation of A resolves to the inverse tangent of the ratio of drag forces, arctan(Dy/Dx), meaning drag forces alone determine angle A regardless of CG or CP location (or, by extension, amount of FOC). Drag forces are directly proportional to speed, so Dx would certainly be smaller for a slower arrow. I think Dy would remain relatively constant, or possibly increase due to longer flight time and thus more time for gravitional acceleration to take effect. If true, this would cause the ratio of drag forces (Dy/Dx) to increase and the magnitude of the angle relative to horizontal, calculated as arctan(Dy/Dx), to increase, meaning a slower arrow would tend to fly at a more negative (tip down) angle. At moderate ranges with fast bows, the angle differences are so slight that they're difficult to discern. At longer ranges as the arrow slows significantly, it's easier to see the tip down terminal angle.

 

[Billy Goat]

@Mighty Mouse

I think to get the tip down, it's a loss of forward momentum coupled with the increased drop. It needs to slow to where the drop is actually giving air resistance to the fletching and causing it to hold the back of the shift higher.

I'd assume this happens well outside of hunting ranges.


So I guess it's something that can happen at any point past the apex, but it's gotta be pretty insignificant and is more due to fletching size over point weight.

 

[Jpsmith1]

JP, I think its admirable you did what you think best to improve arrow penetration.

The fact is, you don’t need a 600g or 700g arrow to kill a whitetail…thats a laughable claim when we see trad guys blowing through critters with very low energy setups. I have personally blown 2 arrows through a moose with a 46# recurve that barely makes 30 KE And didn’t have penetration issues with that bow Using a 2 blade.

I think this guy in the vid is partially right when he states penetration problems are due to bad arrow flight, especially considering many of the mech guys don’t BH tune.

Pair an inefficient BH with an untuned arrow and its no wonder guys have penetration problems. The mech head guys that do tune don’t have a problem.

In retrospect, my problems have come from a few places.

1. Tuning. Tuning. Tuning. I've only recently gotten to a place of quality arrow flight and found a shop who will help me to get there and built a consistent enough and repeatable enough form to achieve that.

2. Poor broadhead selection and maintenance. Didn't pick heads compatible with the setup I was shooting. Lighter arrows with Grim Reaper mechanicals for an example.. Combining that with #1 is a recipe for a bad result.

3. Buck fever and poor fieldcraft skills. Between not being able to hold my mud when the deer is in range to following poorly shot animals too quickly and pushing them before they were dead.

So, hopefully some new guys.can take a few lessons from what I did.

Still working on that first archery buck, though.

 

[Mighty Mouse]

@Mighty Mouse

I think to get the tip down, it's a loss of forward momentum coupled with the increased drop. It needs to slow to where the drop is actually giving air resistance to the fletching and causing it to hold the back of the shift higher.

I'd assume this happens well outside of hunting ranges.


So I guess it's something that can happen at any point past the apex, but it's gotta be pretty insignificant and is more due to fletching size over point weight.

Agreed. Outside of clout shooting, I don't think anyone will notice the tip down terminal angle of their arrow. I think that all arrows do arrive at the target tip down (and that FOC neither helps nor hurts that tendency), but the angle is so slight as to be insignificant within hunting ranges.

 

[Mighty Mouse]

Thanks JP, and hopefully everyone actual reads the Ashby 12 Penetration Factors and the supplemental 2021 and 2022 reports from testing in animal tissue. Arrow mass over 650 grains is the 12th factor and hopefully everyone realizes it moves up to about number three if heavy bone is encountered. If no heavy bone is encountered its number 12.

I'm glad to see that the Ashby crowd has softened their stance a bit on arrow weight, but they're still pushing 19+% FOC as the third most important penetration factor (behind their uncontroversial advice that an arrow should #1 be structurally strong and #2 fly well). A strong (i.e., medium-to-high gpi) arrow with over 19% FOC is going to necessarily fall on the heavy end of the spectrum. They're still pushing guys toward heavy arrows even if they aren't beating the 650 gr drum quite as loudly nowadays.

 

[Beendare]

I would love to see arrows in flight slo mo from the side if anyone has that with the arrow tipped in a 10 deg down position.

The slow mo footage I’ve seen they are real close to horizontal. Maybe at long range on the tail end of the parabolic flight path they turn down, I dunno.

 

[MattB]

If I understand your point it is that a 2" additional drop between a 450 grain and 705 grain arrow is your definition of reduced accuracy? If we both ranged the target at 60, but it was really at 65 the 450 grain arrow would be a killing shot low 7.5" and the 705 would hit 9.8" low or 2" lower in bone. On the other side is a 705 grains exceeds the bone breaking threshold and thus still a killing shot one might assume. However even with an elk kill zone of 12" we would still both miss the kill zone anyway. Sounds like you just have a different bias.

Speaking of biases…

An alternate and perhaps more realistic way to interpret the data is a hypothetical situation where the actual distance was closer to 63 yards and the 405 gr arrow is still in the vital zone, but the 705 gr arrow drops enough that it breaks a bone with nothing vital behind it resulting in a cripple.

 

[Bump79]

Speaking of biases…

An alternate and perhaps more realistic way to interpret the data is a hypothetical situation where the actual distance was closer to 63 yards and the 405 gr arrow is still in the vital zone, but the 705 gr arrow drops enough that it breaks a bone with nothing vital behind it resulting in a cripple.

Exactly. Running out these scenarios is humbling - there's no easy fix for range error but we can minimize it. People need to be brutally honest with themselves about what their ability to range is - this is what's led me to believe that I shouldn't shoot past 50 yards without a perfect range and conditions. And that's with a 30" 70# draw that launches a moderate/lighter arrow pretty damn quick. If I was a shorter draw I'd probably limit my range to 40 yards if I don't have a perfect range on the animal.

I'm not a mechanical guy, or a super light and fast guy. I'm just saying if you're a heavy weight guy (or just low energy) - be honest about the sacrifices. Get really really good at ranging, get closer, or hold onto that range finder tight and hope it doesn't bust you as you're drawing later, or hunt with a buddy over your shoulder. If you range the animal and then he moves a bit when you're at full draw you probably should let down. I don't get many opportunities and I want to be confident that if I've pre-ranged at a calling setup and have a decent idea about ranges - I'm letting one fly if I think he's at 50 yards.

 

[Bump79]

I find it somewhat ironic that the heavy weight discussion is always about either a 350 grain arrow or a 600+. As if the standard build if you walk in to buy nearly any shaft in a archery shop you'll walk out at 420-520 grains. You have to get very deliberate to get to either of those ends.

10 years ago before I started doing my own builds I walked into the shop and he said shoot this shaft as it's a little heavier and will penetrate well while still having a good trajectory. It was an Axis 340 and came out at 445 grains. 10 years later - I've played around with every weight under the moon and I'm shooting a 300 spine arrow at 445 grains. It's not a some conspiracy that shops and arrow manufacturers recommend these moderate weight arrows. It's because it works best in the widest variety of situations.

 

[Dennis]

Speaking of biases…

An alternate and perhaps more realistic way to interpret the data is a hypothetical situation where the actual distance was closer to 63 yards and the 405 gr arrow is still in the vital zone, but the 705 gr arrow drops enough that it breaks a bone with nothing vital behind it resulting in a cripple.

My biases are because of lost and wounded animals (elk primarily) which seems to get lost in this conversation about penetration. It is not that I didn't shoot a 400 grain arrow setup for years and well aware of its trajectory and their penetration. After much research and building the perfect arrow according to modern wisdom I was that guy. A 3D killing machine with charts and graphs. I had complete penetration on a doe, next day deflections on a buck with two different shots, complete chest pass through on an elk at 55 yards with no blood, an antelope at 24 yards with a good chest hit and no pass through requiring an additional shot two hours later. These are just a few examples off the top of my head and there are more. All were shot with 65lb bow at 29.5" draw and 100 grain slick tricks (standard and viper tricks) and are only a few examples. I also spent a year or two shooting SEVR heads. I can focus on the shots where everything went right or question why the same or similar shot went wrong. Which is how I got to my bias.

I would like to use one example of the arrow set up you are suggesting from last year's "Cold Bow Challenge". Let say it was a perfect shot and if you have ever shot SEVR broadheads you know how the practice mode works. It is really nothing that should imped penetration in foam to the point of bouncing out.

-MER of target was 55 yards
-Arrow: Gold Tip Kinetic Pierce 300 spine, 445 gr, 16% FOC
-SEVR 1.5 Ti broadhead
-SEVER bounced out of Matrix foam target (it was in practice mode so it’s made not to penetrate.)

Really? Yes good to go as they say. Guys are shooting accurately with broadheads and arrows bouncing out of foam targets and that does not seem to bother anyone else. I think elk ribs are tougher than foam, but that is only a guess.

In closing, these are just the thoughts and ramblings of an old hunter that was hoping to help a few young hunters along the way.

 

[5MilesBack]

The slow mo footage I’ve seen they are real close to horizontal. Maybe at long range on the tail end of the parabolic flight path they turn down, I dunno.

Some years back I tried to test the theory of high FOC hitting lower than lower FOC. I had two arrows similar in diameter, same spine, but 3gpi difference in weight. First I tried filling the lighter gpi arrow with weed trimmer line to match the other arrow's weight using equal weighted 100gr points. Impacts at 60 yards were similar.

Then I removed the line and used a much heavier point on the lighter gpi arrow to match total arrow weight of the heavier gpi arrow. Those arrows with much higher FOC consistently hit about 6" lower at 60 yards.

However.........was that the effect of higher FOC.......or the effects of breaking down the spine on that light gpi arrow???? It's hard to come up with a test that ONLY shows the effect of one change at a time.

 

[ddowning]

JP, I think its admirable you did what you think best to improve arrow penetration.

The fact is, you don’t need a 600g or 700g arrow to kill a whitetail…thats a laughable claim when we see trad guys blowing through critters with very low energy setups. I have personally blown 2 arrows through a moose with a 46# recurve that barely makes 30 KE And didn’t have penetration issues with that bow Using a 2 blade.

I think this guy in the vid is partially right when he states penetration problems are due to bad arrow flight, especially considering many of the mech guys don’t BH tune.

Pair an inefficient BH with an untuned arrow and its no wonder guys have penetration problems. The mech head guys that do tune don’t have a problem.

I would say you are right. My bow is BH tuned to 60 yards with fixed heads. I shoot arrows that are around 5 grs/# of draw weight and a 1.75" 3 blade mech. that I sharpened the blades on. I have zero penetration problems. When I shoot whitetails from the ground the arrow goes 30 to 40 yards passed the deer after the pass through. I have put a hole in both scaps and still had the arrow go 12 yards past the deer.

I have been under a rock for the last 20 years since I quit shooting 3d. I just shoot a few whitetails every year and have had no problems with this same setup on 80+ kills (not counting turkeys).

I think this conversation really distracts new bowhunters from what the focus should be. They should be focused on being better archers. I have shot with guys that think they are the cats pajamas. At 20 yards their arrow groups are bigger than mine at 80, and I'm not even that good. Why would they be losing deer/elk? Surely not their archery ability. I think a lot of people lie to themselves about arrow placement and shot angle on lost animals. Many animals I have helped find after bad hits that were "perfect" prove this out. I have done it myself as well and realized upon recovering the animal that there was a shot placement/animal angle error.

In ancient times, all this stuff was killed with knapped heads and stick bows. It is shot placement, sharp broadheads, and tuning in that order. Unless you are a high level archer pushing the limits or a small archer pushing the limits, efoc, arrow weight, BH construction is all a mute point if it is sharp and puts a hole in both lungs. Not much lives for long with a double pneumothorax.

 

[Beendare]

It seems to me that the very heavy arrow and very high FOC proponents-the 2 most well known; Ashbys and Ranch Fairy- have a following by the bowhunters that had poor arrow performance.

They claim, “ Use our setup” when all along there are trad guys with very low energy setups and a million bowhunters using an avg arrow in the mid 400’s and good arrow flight blowing through everything.
So what gives?

I think this vid explains it…at least partially. A tiny wobble in arrow flight can kill penetration. Factor in, many guys shooting the big mech heads don’t BH tune. ( the guys that do never complain about penetration- hmmmm)

Then there is the fact we sometimes lose perfect form on a hunting shot-another case of poor arrow flight.

These factors can be cumulative- no BH tuning, inefficient BH, form errors, etc-

I think THATS why guys migrate to these internet influencers heavy arrow solution instead of solving those issues- they want a silver bullet.

Otherwise why on gods green earth would guys think they need a 700g arrow to kill a whitetail?

 

[Bump79]

My biases are because of lost and wounded animals (elk primarily) which seems to get lost in this conversation about penetration. It is not that I didn't shoot a 400 grain arrow setup for years and well aware of its trajectory and their penetration. After much research and building the perfect arrow according to modern wisdom I was that guy. A 3D killing machine with charts and graphs. I had complete penetration on a doe, next day deflections on a buck with two different shots, complete chest pass through on an elk at 55 yards with no blood, an antelope at 24 yards with a good chest hit and no pass through requiring an additional shot two hours later. These are just a few examples off the top of my head and there are more. All were shot with 65lb bow at 29.5" draw and 100 grain slick tricks (standard and viper tricks) and are only a few examples. I also spent a year or two shooting SEVR heads. I can focus on the shots where everything went right or question why the same or similar shot went wrong. Which is how I got to my bias.

I would like to use one example of the arrow set up you are suggesting from last year's "Cold Bow Challenge". Let say it was a perfect shot and if you have ever shot SEVR broadheads you know how the practice mode works. It is really nothing that should imped penetration in foam to the point of bouncing out.

-MER of target was 55 yards
-Arrow: Gold Tip Kinetic Pierce 300 spine, 445 gr, 16% FOC
-SEVR 1.5 Ti broadhead
-SEVER bounced out of Matrix foam target (it was in practice mode so it’s made not to penetrate.)

Really? Yes good to go as they say. Guys are shooting accurately with broadheads and arrows bouncing out of foam targets and that does not seem to bother anyone else. I think elk ribs are tougher than foam, but that is only a guess.

In closing, these are just the thoughts and ramblings of an old hunter that was hoping to help a few young hunters along the way.

This is a much more balanced response. My whole comments on this thread have been just being transparent with the differences between setups. Ranch Fairy and the video you shared from Lucas - who I like - lead you down a path that there's no actually a tangible difference in trajectory. My point is that there is, it's not insignificant to increase weight by 40% and it should be considered.

Do you think you'd have the same luck with a 450 grain COC single bevel as the Slick Trick that has 4b chisel tip and four blades? Seems like a small increase from 400 gr to 450 gr (12.5%), a little more FOC (12-18%) and a super sharp COC head would address the penetration issue.

I just have a strong dislike for these massive pendulum swings in setups. Its wasted my time and money and countless others. The only people that's truely benefiting is the manufacturers. This is coming from a guy who is now selling custom arrow builds. I try to save people money - not talk them into rabbit holes. Go hunt and spend less time thinking about FOC and arrow weight.

 

[Jpsmith1]

It seems to me that the very heavy arrow and very high FOC proponents-the 2 most well known; Ashbys and Ranch Fairy- have a following by the bowhunters that had poor arrow performance.

They claim, “ Use our setup” when all along there are trad guys with very low energy setups and a million bowhunters using an avg arrow in the mid 400’s and good arrow flight blowing through everything.
So what gives?

I think this vid explains it…at least partially. A tiny wobble in arrow flight can kill penetration. Factor in, many guys shooting the big mech heads don’t BH tune. ( the guys that do never complain about penetration- hmmmm)

Then there is the fact we sometimes lose perfect form on a hunting shot-another case of poor arrow flight.

These factors can be cumulative- no BH tuning, inefficient BH, form errors, etc-

I think THATS why guys migrate to these internet influencers heavy arrow solution instead of solving those issues- they want a silver bullet.

Otherwise why on gods green earth would guys think they need a 700g arrow to kill a whitetail?

To a point, I agree with you. I went to the Ashby stuff to solve a problem. I don't think I was looking for a "silver bullet" solution. I've NEVER been opposed to hard work and I don't want any "gimmes" but when you're doing everything 'right' and you're not getting the results, you wind up with serious questions. I had put a lot of scouting time in, a LOT of stand time in and was getting some opportunities, I just wasn't able to get an arrow through a deer.

I'm very happy with my current setup in terms of performance. It runs through a deer just fine. Going to try SEVR2.0s next year.


I'm also kind of holding back on all the back story stuff and the deep analysis that I've done on each shot opportunity to get to the bottom of every failure as best as I can. Bows that weren't tuned because the shop said "Oh, we don't paper tune bows anymore. Don't need to." Arrows that were dull because I didn't fully understand what a sharp edge was. Buck fever so bad at 35 years old that I almost fell out of a tree because I hadn't seen a buck in the field since I was 12.

I'm sure a mentor would have helped this process, but I picked up the bow again as an adult and it's become the dominant way that I hunt. Never been able to find a mentor. I've learned everything from internet forums, FB groups and some hard, bitter experience. I've also, unfortunately, wounded more deer than I care to talk about with a bow, which always pushes me to do a deep dive and analyze that failure.

Go hunt and spend less time thinking about FOC and arrow weight.

Since I drive far more than I hunt and I work alone, I listen to many hours of podcasts. It's been listening to Aron Snyder and several other extremely successful hunters basically laugh off the EFOC/heavy arrow stuff in favor of a moderately weighted arrow with reasonable FOC, super clean flight and a SHARP head and putting it where it belongs.

 

[Bump79]

It seems to me that the very heavy arrow and very high FOC proponents-the 2 most well known; Ashbys and Ranch Fairy- have a following by the bowhunters that had poor arrow performance.

They claim, “ Use our setup” when all along there are trad guys with very low energy setups and a million bowhunters using an avg arrow in the mid 400’s and good arrow flight blowing through everything.
So what gives?

I think this vid explains it…at least partially. A tiny wobble in arrow flight can kill penetration. Factor in, many guys shooting the big mech heads don’t BH tune. ( the guys that do never complain about penetration- hmmmm)

Then there is the fact we sometimes lose perfect form on a hunting shot-another case of poor arrow flight.

These factors can be cumulative- no BH tuning, inefficient BH, form errors, etc-

I think THATS why guys migrate to these internet influencers heavy arrow solution instead of solving those issues- they want a silver bullet.

Otherwise why on gods green earth would guys think they need a 700g arrow to kill a whitetail?

This is an excellent point. If you run out the math these guys are facing an extraordinary amount of confirmation bias. They get people who have had penetration problems and they want a solution so it doesn't happen again. He solved the equation for the data provided. The problem is it's a skewed data set and it gives a false impression of the lethality problem. Most people aren't having penetration problems - even with junk heads and poor tunes. But stack too many things and you'll be in trouble.

You also hear about every pass through that a heavy SB setup does. Take the Hunting Public (who I like) there will be a video or multiple videos are year talking about they heavy single bevels when it worked - but you'll never see their setup pointed out when they gut shoot a whitetail as it had a longer time to react. Then they're left with a 1" 2b hole in it and the dogs get called. Maybe a larger cut fixed (or even a mechanical) would have put that animal down quicker. It's always one side of the story. Then the gut shot is well stuff happens.

Consider this: There's 3.5 million or so bow hunters in the US alone. Just for an example let's say 5% of those hunters have had penetration issues - That's 175,000 hunters and is not insignificant. Let's say one in 100 of those people it was enough of a concern that they reach out to RF and ask for advice. That's 1,750 emails or comments to Troy that is responding to per year. People aren't designed to take this much confirmation bias in - we can take some but not at this scale. Now, I don't know if that's accurate as I'm obviously not in his inbox but he gets a lot of views. Probably half of which are from guys like me who just like to nerd out and pick things that make sense to improve our build even though we haven't had penetration issues.

@Beendare I completely agree. I know a lot of guys who have shot Rage for like 15 years and have never had a single issue. Never even been on a track as it dies in sight. It seems like it's a massive disconnect between what is happening on YouTube and hunting TV shows and real life hunters. For me and those around me - I've never been on a track that was "I didn't get through near side bone". If you get through near side bone - it's dead nearby. If not it's probably alive and well. I have been on too many tracks from shots too far back. This is my number 1 issue. Enough so that it would actually be

 

[Bump79]

Since I drive far more than I hunt and I work alone, I listen to many hours of podcasts. It's been listening to Aron Snyder and several other extremely successful hunters basically laugh off the EFOC/heavy arrow stuff in favor of a moderately weighted arrow with reasonable FOC, super clean flight and a SHARP head and putting it where it belongs.

Glad to hear it. He presents are very balanced view. I do as well - don't get me wrong. I just wish these influencers like RF would take this more reasonable stance. It's become like an ideology.

 

[Will-will hunt]

IMO for compound archery arrows if you stay between 6-8 grains per pound of draw weight, taking into consideration dynamic arrow spine based on FOC weight you will get great penetration and relatively flat trajectory.

 

[Zac]

This is an excellent point. If you run out the math these guys are facing an extraordinary amount of confirmation bias. They get people who have had penetration problems and they want a solution so it doesn't happen again. He solved the equation for the data provided. The problem is it's a skewed data set and it gives a false impression of the lethality problem. Most people aren't having penetration problems - even with junk heads and poor tunes. But stack too many things and you'll be in trouble.

You also hear about every pass through that a heavy SB setup does. Take the Hunting Public (who I like) there will be a video or multiple videos are year talking about they heavy single bevels when it worked - but you'll never see their setup pointed out when they gut shoot a whitetail as it had a longer time to react. Then they're left with a 1" 2b hole in it and the dogs get called. Maybe a larger cut fixed (or even a mechanical) would have put that animal down quicker. It's always one side of the story. Then the gut shot is well stuff happens.

Consider this: There's 3.5 million or so bow hunters in the US alone. Just for an example let's say 5% of those hunters have had penetration issues - That's 175,000 hunters and is not insignificant. Let's say one in 100 of those people it was enough of a concern that they reach out to RF and ask for advice. That's 1,750 emails or comments to Troy that is responding to per year. People aren't designed to take this much confirmation bias in - we can take some but not at this scale. Now, I don't know if that's accurate as I'm obviously not in his inbox but he gets a lot of views. Probably half of which are from guys like me who just like to nerd out and pick things that make sense to improve our build even though we haven't had penetration issues.

@Beendare I completely agree. I know a lot of guys who have shot Rage for like 15 years and have never had a single issue. Never even been on a track as it dies in sight. It seems like it's a massive disconnect between what is happening on YouTube and hunting TV shows and real life hunters. For me and those around me - I've never been on a track that was "I didn't get through near side bone". If you get through near side bone - it's dead nearby. If not it's probably alive and well. I have been on too many tracks from shots too far back. This is my number 1 issue. Enough so that it would actually be

The reason shots are too far back is because people are already erroring back to begin with. I'm not saying it's wrong, but there is definitely a correlation between lighter setups with mechanicals and the wrong shot being back instead of forward. Likewise the archer with the heavier fixed blade may be more prone to miss forward simply based on what is being aimed at. Your not going to see a lot of gut shots from the RF crowd because they are all aiming for the V. While the Dudley crowd is probably all aiming mid body.

 

[Beendare]

I make up my own arrows…but-if I didn’t, @Bump79 would be the first guy I would call- you get it!