Change from Fixed Broadheads

Joined
Mar 5, 2025
Messages
31
I just got back from my archery trip this year and unfortunately, I made a bad shot on a bull and did not recover. I shot too close behind the shoulder, quartering away and I think I only got 1 lung. I have been rethinking everything about my set up and other than not making a bad shot, I am thinking about tinkering with my arrow set-up. As a traditional guy I have always leaned toward the heavy-arrow cut-on-contact SB side of the spectrum. On my componud, I currently shoot an Iron will broadhead. While I could never swing to the other side of the spectrum and shoot an expandable, I am thinking about shooting a wider broadhead or adding a bleeder blade.

Can you guys share some experiences of bleeders or wide single bevels that you have had? Pros and cons?
 
I just got back from my archery trip this year and unfortunately, I made a bad shot on a bull and did not recover. I shot too close behind the shoulder, quartering away and I think I only got 1 lung. I have been rethinking everything about my set up and other than not making a bad shot, I am thinking about tinkering with my arrow set-up. As a traditional guy I have always leaned toward the heavy-arrow cut-on-contact SB side of the spectrum. On my componud, I currently shoot an Iron will broadhead. While I could never swing to the other side of the spectrum and shoot an expandable, I am thinking about shooting a wider broadhead or adding a bleeder blade.

Can you guys share some experiences of bleeders or wide single bevels that you have had? Pros and cons?

Unfortunately, making a bad shot and losing an animal is part of archery. Some will claim they've never made a bad shot or never lost an animal, but that tells me they haven't bow hunted long enough. I'm not sure in this case a broad head change would have made a difference. If you were shooting a large cut mechanical with insufficient KE, sure but otherwise, keep hunting.
 
I mainly am thinking about if I had had a larger cutting broadhead it increases your chances of causing fatal artery hemorrhaging in the lung I did hit.
 
I mainly am thinking about if I had had a larger cutting broadhead it increases your chances of causing fatal artery hemorrhaging in the lung I did hit.
I've been there a few times myself. Personally, I think a 1.25" 3 blade broadhead like the Exodus, Contact MD3, Annihilator XL is a great balance of flight and penetration and durability. I'm shooting a Terra Firma 3 blade single bevel - hopefully I get some results to show this year.

I wonder with a 2 blade what orientation I hit and how that affects what vitals you clip.
 
I think adding surface area to the front of your arrow just decreases forgiveness and increases chances of a bad shot. Just an opinion of a very mediocre archer.

I made a really bad shot on a black tailed deer last fall. Recovered it and credit it 100% to using a hybrid mechanical with wide cut.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I think adding surface area to the front of your area just decreases forgiveness and increases chances of a bad shot. Just an opinion of a very mediocre archer.

I made a really bad shot on a black tailed deer last fall. Recovered it and credit it 100% to using a hybrid mechanical with wide cut.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I agree completely. That's really just an objective fact IMHO. A head like the Evolution Hyde 150 might check a lot of boxes @Quailchaser410

Can run both fixed and hybrid heads in your quiver. In tight timber run a fixed
 
Stick with what you have. It is the bad shot placement that ended up in a result you did not want. The broadhead had nothing to do with it. Sometimes we like to make changes, just for the sake of making a change. I was not there, but can say with some confidence that a wider broadhead would not have changed the outcome of what you experienced. (To put it bluntly: the 1/8" or 1/4" wider head is irrelevant; you were off by half a foot or more.)
 
I like 3 blade heads, whether an original NAP Spitfire 1.5” mechanical or 1-1/8” replaceable fixed blade head way better than 2. And 4 blades, accomplished with bleeders are excellent too.

In my experience (extensive over 50 some years) blood trails are often not great with 2-blade heads (Zwickey, Bear Razorhead, VPA and even 1.5” original Ulmer Edge).

4-blade Zwickey heads (bleeders) worked very well for me.
 
2 blade with bleeder 3 blade or 4 blade.

I'm hopeful to shoot a couple doe with evolution Hyde this year.. single bevel w/ bleeder iw works well and will blow through a scapula
 
I think the problem is a lack of penetration not broadhead width or number of blades. Adding width or additional blades to the same arrow and shot placement does not in my experience increase penetration. On lung is still one lung. My suggestion is to check out the Ashby Bowhunting Foundation for information on how to increase penetration on actual animals. It has totally changed my harvest rate for the better.
 
Gonna echo blockcaver. I mean no offense today anyone. Let me be clear. Idc what you shoot. My passion is working a tracking dog. (I will get out of the deerstand to go track) I track 20-25 deer/bear a year. Tracked and recovered 3 in the last week. I hunt traditional now but hunted with a compound over 20 years.
All my findings are my observations, and anecdotal at best. Generally i believe there is no replacement for displacement. That said it doesnt apply to archery. There is no replacement for marginal shots in my experience. What i see is 3_4 fixed put the best "trackable" blood trails with the least amount of sacrifices. Penetrations, failures, etc. What i see in two blades, fixed or mechanicals, is vertically oriented cut esspecially in between ribs have marginal bloodtrails. Single bevels seem to come up short more times than not on blood. And the rotation is very minimal in reality. Blade orientation on entry is out of your control obviously. This is why i like 3_4 blades. I dont care if the deer goes 100_150 if i can follow the bloodtrail. I also only see problems..... People dont pay me to track there deer that paint the woods and fall in sight. I have tracked several that go a hundred plus yards with no blood then pour blood. But generally they bleed or they dont. The broadhead i recommended to my elderly father was the 3 blade cutthroats. (He loves sharpening broadheads). I really think specs rather more than brand and agree with all of those recommended above. Also i realize this was about elk, but if you are shooting whitetails, for godsake dont shoot them head down!
Good luck this season fellas
 
I think the problem is a lack of penetration not broadhead width or number of blades. Adding width or additional blades to the same arrow and shot placement does not in my experience increase penetration. On lung is still one lung. My suggestion is to check out the Ashby Bowhunting Foundation for information on how to increase penetration on actual animals. It has totally changed my harvest rate for the better.
I'm not sure how you're coming away with this conclusion - the OP was using a IW standard width broadhead without a bleeder. Penetration didn't have anything to do with his issue in the slightest. On a quartering away shot it's not a penetration problem to get two lungs - it's a left/right issue. He clearly is familiar with the Ashby work based on his statement. He, like myself and many many others, are questioning the dogma that is penetration at all costs is the key to lethality.

The question is: Can say a 1.25" cut on contact with a 3/4" bleeder clip some more vitals and be more lethal than a 2 blade 1-1/8"? As far as I know, Ashby didn't study this and they theorized on it. So with that example, on one side of the broadhead you have 1/16" more main blade and 3/8" bleeder on that side. Given that an elk body cavity is approximately 19" wide, we can assume that one lung is about 8" of that. So from a probability standpoint - the bleeder one one side is ~5% of the width of a lung.

Personally, I'll take that 5% for a very, very marginal difference in penetration and no tangible difference in flight. Archery is a probability game.

As a traditional guy I have always leaned toward the heavy-arrow cut-on-contact SB side of the spectrum. On my compound, I currently shoot an Iron will broadhead.

I struggle big time with this concept and still find little evidence for not adding a bleeder or extra blade. A bleeder reduces penetration by so little and I can imagine extraordinarily few instances that it prevents a pass through. I can however picture clipping lung with that extra blade. Or if you lose an animal with a 2 blade you wonder what way the broadhead was oriented and if it rotated 30-45d if it would have been lethal. I've done both.

I still don't understand why with a compound bow at the height of bow tuning, awesome arrow and broadhead availability that we're still worried about penetration so much.
 
To back up a bit on the conversation, is the issue lack of penetration or just wanting to do more damage? I'm kind of on that quest ATM because I have penetration/power to spare. So i'm trying out Evolution Hydes because they have a fairly robust leading cutting blade so I'm okay with slowing the arrow down with the wider cut. COC blades are my #1 criteria nowadays

A bad shot is a bad shot. Some pieces of data are statistical outliers. Case in point would be the last deer I shot with a bow. Only ran 30 yards, but absolutely zero blood trail. But the head cut both lungs and esophagus. The exit wound was right on the cartilage and fat cap of the bottom of the rib cage. The wound sealed up with the use of a single bevel w/bleeders. I don't plan to change equipment. Weird stuff happens. I had a similar situation happen 4 years ago but I was using a 2 blade w/o bleeders so I switch to having bleeders. The lesson learned would be to try to wait for a shot that doesn't have an exit near the rear of the rib cage.

If you find you're making bad shots on the regular, then maybe its a you problem
 
Agree with above. Stick with what you have. Learn how they shoot and dial your bow in for that specific broadhead. I don’t care what kind but please practice with Broadheads! I have arrows and heads matched up before the season to get my best flying combo.
Accurate setup is WAY more important than head type
 
I think the problem is a lack of penetration not broadhead width or number of blades. Adding width or additional blades to the same arrow and shot placement does not in my experience increase penetration. On lung is still one lung. My suggestion is to check out the Ashby Bowhunting Foundation for information on how to increase penetration on actual animals. It has totally changed my harvest rate for the better.
The problem was not lack of penetration. 560 gr arrow with a single bevel coming out of a compound is a missile for NA game. Hit the shoulder knuckle on the opposite side, I don't know what it'd take for an arrow to bust through that but it's not a reasonable tradeoff. I shoot 700 gr set ups out of my self-bows and have read almost every word published by Dr. Ashby.


I'm not sure how you're coming away with this conclusion - the OP was using a IW standard width broadhead without a bleeder. Penetration didn't have anything to do with his issue in the slightest. On a quartering away shot it's not a penetration problem to get two lungs - it's a left/right issue. He clearly is familiar with the Ashby work based on his statement. He, like myself and many many others, are questioning the dogma that is penetration at all costs is the key to lethality.

The question is: Can say a 1.25" cut on contact with a 3/4" bleeder clip some more vitals and be more lethal than a 2 blade 1-1/8"? As far as I know, Ashby didn't study this and they theorized on it. So with that example, on one side of the broadhead you have 1/16" more main blade and 3/8" bleeder on that side. Given that an elk body cavity is approximately 19" wide, we can assume that one lung is about 8" of that. So from a probability standpoint - the bleeder one one side is ~5% of the width of a lung.

Personally, I'll take that 5% for a very, very marginal difference in penetration and no tangible difference in flight. Archery is a probability game.



I struggle big time with this concept and still find little evidence for not adding a bleeder or extra blade. A bleeder reduces penetration by so little and I can imagine extraordinarily few instances that it prevents a pass through. I can however picture clipping lung with that extra blade. Or if you lose an animal with a 2 blade you wonder what way the broadhead was oriented and if it rotated 30-45d if it would have been lethal. I've done both.

I still don't understand why with a compound bow at the height of bow tuning, awesome arrow and broadhead availability that we're still worried about penetration so much.
This is the type of response I am looking for. Great insight.

My biggest problem was leaving the dog at the house. I shot broadheads out to 80 and planned on not making a bad shot. Turns out that didn't work out like I wanted.
 
Agree with above. Stick with what you have. Learn how they shoot and dial your bow in for that specific broadhead. I don’t care what kind but please practice with Broadheads! I have arrows and heads matched up before the season to get my best flying combo.
Accurate setup is WAY more important than head type
I agree, but my question is based on when you make a bad shot. Not based off having a bad set up.

I usually just pair my single bevel with a tracking dog and don't worry about nothing. But I didn't bring her this trip.
 
The way I see it(cause I have been there before) is if you killed that bull with zero problems then you would be telling everyone how great your broadheads are 😜 I killed my bull with a QAD exodus this year but had to do some tinkering to get them to fly with my arrows
 
The problem was not lack of penetration. 560 gr arrow with a single bevel coming out of a compound is a missile for NA game. Hit the shoulder knuckle on the opposite side, I don't know what it'd take for an arrow to bust through that but it's not a reasonable tradeoff. I shoot 700 gr set ups out of my self-bows and have read almost every word published by Dr. Ashby.



This is the type of response I am looking for. Great insight.

My biggest problem was leaving the dog at the house. I shot broadheads out to 80 and planned on not making a bad shot. Turns out that didn't work out like I wanted.
Happy to help. I'm sorry you lost the animal, that's a bitter pill. Been there a few times too recently..
 
The problem was not lack of penetration. 560 gr arrow with a single bevel coming out of a compound is a missile for NA game. Hit the shoulder knuckle on the opposite side, I don't know what it'd take for an arrow to bust through that but it's not a reasonable tradeoff. I shoot 700 gr set ups out of my self-bows and have read almost every word published by Dr. Ashby.
Quailchaser 410, I did realize you were shooting missiles. I guess you’re right it must take an unreasonable trade off to have an arrow to bust through an elk. I don’t know how this exit photo from last week could be possible. That sucks you lost your elk!
 

Attachments

  • IMG_7801.jpeg
    IMG_7801.jpeg
    604.5 KB · Views: 20
Quailchaser 410, I did realize you were shooting missiles. I guess you’re right it must take an unreasonable trade off to have an arrow to bust through an elk. I don’t know how this exit photo from last week could be possible. That sucks you lost your elk!
Are you suggesting that a 560 grain arrow with an Iron Will Single Bevel out of a compound bow is insufficient for penetration on elk? I don't even think Ranch Fairy would say that.. Also, not one person on here has said he should lighten up his arrow. The question is in regards to the size and number of blades on the broadhead.

I don't think there's a thing wrong with @Quailchaser410 560 grain arrow. Rock it. Why increase weight? I still choose to live in the real world I guess. I went down this heavy high FOC road for compounds as parts of it make sense. The problem is that there is diminishing returns with almost everything in archery and those were very quickly exposed to me. You can post pictures of a pass through (as could myself and so many others with lighter setups) but there's more situations where having a light moderate to heavy moderate weight arrow (like the OP) is very beneficial.

Heavier arrow = more potential for penetration = slower = more time to target = more potential for animal movement = more range error.
Faster Arrow = More finicky in flight = Louder bow noise (marginal in my experience), louder arrow = less penetration potential
Smaller 2b broadhead = smaller entrance and exit = less potential blood trail = less potential damage to vital organs = more potential penetration.
3:1 Ratio Broadhead = More surface area = Poor Flight Characteristics = Less Forgiving = More Wind Drift

Those downsides are unreasonable tradeoffs, for me as I wasn't having any issues with penetration anyway. Or honestly for anyone I know. I still think this is largely an online phenomena vs a real world issue. My uncle still shoots through bulls and deer with something like a 100 grain Thunderhead at like 26" draw 55# out of a solo cam Mathews, and Scheels brand std dia carbon arrows that probably weigh 400 grains. I guarantee he doesn't have a scale, nor has he been on the internet. He's not gotten through shoulder one time like 20 years ago. My setup is significantly better than his.. so why would I be concerned about penetration if he isn't? It's just not something that is worth the tradeoff for me. Maybe it will bite me someday. We'll see.
 
Back
Top