Fact checking Ashby

[4fletch]

Ill reply to this as I can actually make this relevant to this thread.

jack and roy were a quite different time with different bullets. At their time with the componets they had avaliable they were correct. Comparing yesteryears bullets to todays bullets is asinine.

anything the 06 or 308 can do the 300wm can do better you claim.

Does the 300wm make the deer deader inside of the minimum expansion velocity for both rounds? Is the terminal wounding better with increased velocity on the same bullet?

Does the increased velocity of the WM at 300 yards make the deer deader? Does it make the bullet expand better?

How does comparing a 40 cal handgun at subsonic / transsonic speed with a completely different bullet construction have and relevance to a 270 at supersonic speeds with a different bullet construction.

Hint hint. The answer is no. The only thing the 300 wm does is increase the range at which you hit minimum expansion velocity.

Hint Hint. it has been proven that over 20 ft lbs of recoil and the accuaracy of a shooter decreases due to the increased recoil. Im sure your a stud and can shoot ultra mags 1/2 moa all day long without a flinch.

Hint Hint. Bad shot placement with a heavier bullet or arrow isnt going to make up for bad shot placement.

Your claim broken down
A 50 cal black powder rifle with a bullet with a thin jacket specifically weakened for expansion and cavitated for performance at its velocity has the same effect as a .50 bmg of the same weight with a bullet designed for optimal expansion at its velocity. You could not be more wrong.
And for the record Jack and Roy hunted together. Jack tested Roys rounds in Africa. It was Jacks love of the .270 that prob brought them together. Jack lived through and wrote about the improved construction of bullets. I think we are done here, to be polite.

 

[5MilesBack]

There was a website that did some testing on this back in the day, Archery Report or something like that.…Im not sure its still around but it was good stuff.

That was Widgeon (sp?). And he showed with graphs that KE and MO continued to rise with heavier arrows shot out of the same bow "with the bow tuned to each arrow". That last part was key. And yes, the rise was still going up to 1800+ grains......but flattening.

 

[Billy Goat]

Your claim broken down
A 50 cal black powder rifle with a bullet with a thin jacket specifically weakened for expansion and cavitated for performance at its velocity has the same effect as a .50 bmg of the same weight with a bullet designed for optimal expansion at its velocity. You could not be more wrong.
And for the record Jack and Roy hunted together. Jack tested Roys rounds in Africa. It was Jacks love of the .270 that prob brought them together. Jack lived through and wrote about the improved construction of bullets. I think we are done here, to be polite.

So, how do they not have the same effect??

Is one more dead than the other?

The thing is, everyone one thinks somehow penetration is what kills, hitting vitals is what kills. On NA game, the large majority of vitals aren't hiding behind bone, not on good shoots anyway.


Many hunters are better off with a 308 over a 300wm. Know why?
Cause they will be more accurate. If you can shoot a 300wm with no difference in accuracy, go ahead, but that's not very common.

But this is an archery forum, and there's very limited use in comparing bullets to arrows.

 

[Billy Goat]

So now I'm wondering, why was Jack O'Connor such a fan of the .270?


Why not the '06 or even the 35 wheelen?

I mean, they all have close to the same case capacity. Why not go heavy?






Maybe he realized that the .270 was plenty capable and he didn't want to give up other factors for the benefits it offered.

 

[Beendare]

. I don't think there's anything magical about a 3:1 ratio; those that claim there is are just regurgitating another one of Ashby's misguided attempts to establish definitive "threshold" values for various aspects of arrows. Better combinations of penetration and strength may well exist at ratios less than 3:1.

Agreed. You nailed the gist of this.

These Influencers need a “Threshold” to get folks on board with their snake oil pitch.

Ashby’s 3;1 ratio is developed with flawed logic.

Ashby’s 30% FOC threshold is a joke. Currently, I think he has recently revised this “ Threshold” down into a more reasonable range probably due to the experienced bowhunters calling him out.

Lets not even go there with Ranch Fairys ridiculous “Manly Arrow” scale or whatever he does. Besides the fact a guy calling himself RF is talking manly arrows. Has the guy ever killed a Mule Deer or an elk out west?

Anyway. Thankfully, sites like Rokslide have provided a forum where experienced guys can call out this bullshit and set the new guys on the right path.

I’ve talked with a lot of experienced bowhunters from Rokslide and though they don’t always post that much they do chime in when their bullshit detector goes off.

 

[Beendare]

If prof Spencers math shows us anything, its that we cannot use bullets from a gun as a comparison. For one thing, there isnt the same compressive force on the shaft During launch.

 

[Beendare]

So here is a question;
The vast majority of experienced guys see through the Ashby Snake oil selling.


Why does outfits like P&Y and Dallas Safari club promote him?

Is it that the folks in charge of these outfits are easily fooled? Thats not good….

 

[4fletch]

So, how do they not have the same effect??

Is one more dead than the other?

The thing is, everyone one thinks somehow penetration is what kills, hitting vitals is what kills. On NA game, the large majority of vitals aren't hiding behind bone, not on good shoots anyway.


Many hunters are better off with a 308 over a 300wm. Know why?
Cause they will be more accurate. If you can shoot a 300wm with no difference in accuracy, go ahead, but that's not very common.

But this is an archery forum, and there's very limited use in comparing bullets to arrows.

The claim is not what someone is better with, or better off with. The claim is not what makes something "deader". The claim was that KE is a bad metric for archery hunting because as i have shown it can falsely lead you to believe a lighter faster arrow from the same bow has more potential to "kill" than a heavier arrow that goes slower from the same bow. Something you yourself have pointed out rightfully that more weight is the fix for an arrow that needs more pen, not perhaps more speed.
Now when it comes to firearms lets put all the little childish insults and distractions aside and face the claims and the truth.
Bullets transfer energy. The act of expansion is to take advantage of this. Unless somebody wants to claim fractions of an inch are making all the difference between life and death if we are just "poking holes". "Is it deader than the other?" Irrelevant. When you add velocity all things being equal to a bullet you increase damage. You increase the area of damage. You increase the types of damage. So the question being not is one deader than the other, but is one dead quicker than the other and does one increase the amount of damage, and the answer is yes. The faster one.
Who is comparing bullets to arrows? My point is that guys who use KE, or fish and game that set limits by KE do not at all understand how arrows work and are doing so because KE IS a useful metric for bullets.
I dislike hearing people say "you do not need" "most people can not" "nobody needs" because those kind of statements in my experience are tossed out A LOT by people who can not, or have not, under the guise of wisdom.

 

[4fletch]

So now I'm wondering, why was Jack O'Connor such a fan of the .270?


Why not the '06 or even the 35 wheelen?

I mean, they all have close to the same case capacity. Why not go heavy?






Maybe he realized that the .270 was plenty capable and he didn't want to give up other factors for the benefits it offered.

You really do not understand the claim here do you? The honest version of your question would be why would you choose the 25-06 over the 257 Roberts?

 

[Billy Goat]

So here is a question;
The vast majority of experienced guys see through the Ashby Snake oil selling.


Why does outfits like P&Y and Dallas Safari club promote him?

Is it that the folks in charge of these outfits are easily fooled? Thats not good….

I'd bet it's money.

 

[Billy Goat]

You really do not understand the claim here do you?

I guess I'm really not understanding.

 

[4fletch]

I guess I'm really not understanding.

KE does not tell you even remotely what an arrow could do. KE does not even give you a fair comparison between two very different arrows. One could fail to do what we need arrows to do while the other could be a pass through. While with bullets if you can accelerate a small light bullet to match a heavier slow bullets KE you are going to see a favorable result. (pen being the issue on the extremes of game and as it would have it momentum again becomes key, big heavy and well constructed)
KE is a good metric for bullets. The same bullet going faster does more damage.
And for the record Jack was a huge fan of the 06, so was his wife.

 

[TheTone]

I'd bet it's money.

Fully agree. P&Y has made some puzzling partnerships of late, I called them about it and spoke to the social media/partnership guy. I was highly unimpressed. Super odd that he runs P&Y stuff and also the same for other companies that share the same people, partners, etc

 

[Reburn]

KE does not tell you even remotely what an arrow could do. KE does not even give you a fair comparison between two very different arrows. One could fail to do what we need arrows to do while the other could be a pass through. While with bullets if you can accelerate a small light bullet to match a heavier slow bullets KE you are going to see a favorable result. (pen being the issue on the extremes of game and as it would have it momentum again becomes key, big heavy and well constructed)
KE is a good metric for bullets. The same bullet going faster does more damage.
And for the record Jack was a huge fan of the 06, so was his wife.

Bullets and mouths.
Faster bullets and faster mouths using more words doesnt equal better.
I feel bad you cant grasp that.
I wish you the best of luck

 

[Billy Goat]

Lot of those bullets don't do too well at high impact speed....



It's unfortunate more don't understand that.

 

[gelton]

While with bullets if you can accelerate a small light bullet to match a heavier slow bullets KE you are going to see a favorable result.

A 30.06 can shoot a 95 grain projectile over 4,000 fps. It can also launch a 180-grain bullet at 2700 fps.

If Kinetic Energy is a good metric for devastating impact on game, why aren't more people shooting the 95-grain bullets? Do you know anyone hunting medium-size game with a 95-grain bullet out of an .06?

Why do you think that is? I mean based on KE it outperforms the 180-grain bullet by more than 400 ft #'s.

 

[summs]

While I’m not the biggest fan of the Ashby ranch fairy stuff. I feel it often gets mislabeled. High FOC especially. It’s a easy to measure, adjust and compare. I think it’s why it gets harped on But the overall 12 rules makes sense, not one rule makes a good arrow.

The most important rule was arrow construction. use quality arrows and broad heads, here are 11 things to look for when building/tuning. then test. It’s hard to argue that is a bad thing.

Take the ‘science’ out of it, and it makes sense. But add numbers that easily compare and you’ll forever have the debate like 7mm rm versus 300wm rinse and repeat.

 

[Beendare]

While I’m not the biggest fan of the Ashby ranch fairy stuff. I feel it often gets mislabeled. High FOC especially. It’s a easy to measure, adjust and compare. I think it’s why it gets harped on But the overall 12 rules makes sense, not one rule makes a good arrow.

The most important rule was arrow construction. use quality arrows and broad heads, here are 11 things to look for when building/tuning. then test. It’s hard to argue that is a bad thing.

Take the ‘science’ out of it, and it makes sense. But add numbers that easily compare and you’ll forever have the debate like 7mm rm versus 300wm rinse and repeat.

Well of course some of it makes sense, you have to have a sprinkling of truth in there to get folks on board.

Its some fact presented in a way to mislead, the; if some is good…then more must be better Argument. Its flawed logic.

Take a couple of Ashby's rules as an example.

1) Of course arrow construction is important but THE #1 factor? Then why are literally millions of animals killed with a weak mech head on somewhat light arrows? The problem is, we have new guys that read the Ashby stuff thinking they need to build arrows that will pierce a bank vault door.....

Last time I checked, these animals don't have body armor.....

2) Do you really think FOC trumps arrow weight? It does to Ashby. Remember, Ashby used to claim very high FOC arrows fly further than avg FOC arrows. Thats physically impossible BTW and he was called out for it many years ago. He still clings to that premise and includes very high FOC in his dog and pony shows with rubber bands and weighted soda straws. Its on Youtube.



Now Ashby has changed his hard and fast "Thresholds" in recent years to become more mainstream.
He had to, his original theories were pretty far out there;
He still claims a single bevel BH outperforms double bevel...but BH manufacturers like VPA have said this is hogwash. Years ago the owner of Bowsite challenged the ashby claims and shot a cape buff bone with his double bevel head and sure enough, he split the bone. He split a bone going in on his shot to kill the beast too as I recall. Just one more experienced bowhunter that is telling us; Some of the stuff from these guys is hogwash to promote their own celebrity.

Now many mnfr's have jumped on the single bevel bandwagon....but of course its self serving, they sell more product. Many have proven that there is not a significant advantage to Ashby and Ranch Fairy's claims.

It all boils down to what Prof Spencer is showing in his lectures;
Be advised, these are not scientifically backed facts from Ashby or Ranch Fairy, its anecdotal observations from slanted tests devised to promote their theories.

Now ask yourself, how do these flip flamers like Elizabeth Holmes [Theranos] or Bernie Madoff types get so far? They sprinkle some truth in there, show results they want you to see...and bam, they suck you in. Sound familiar?

>

 

[summs]

Well of course some of it makes sense, you have to have a sprinkling of truth in there to get folks on board. Its some fact presented in a way to mislead.

Take a couple of Ashby's rules as an example.

1) Of course arrow construction is important but THE #1 factor? Then why are literally millions of animals killed with a weak mech head on somewhat light arrows? The problem is, we have new guys that read the Ashby stuff thinking they need to build arrows that will pierce a bank vault door.....

Last time I checked, these animals don't have body armor.....

2) Do you really think FOC trumps arrow weight? It does to Ashby. Remember, Ashby used to claim very high FOC arrows fly further than avg FOC arrows. Thats physically impossible BTW and he was called out for it many years ago. He still clings to that premise and includes very high FOC in his dog and pony shows with rubber bands and weighted soda straws. Its on Youtube.



Now Ashby has changed his hard and fast "Thresholds" in recent years to become more mainstream.
He had to, his original theories were pretty far out there;
He still claims a single bevel BH outperforms double bevel...but BH manufacturers like VPA have said this is hogwash. Years ago the owner of Bowsite challenged the ashby claims and shot a cape buff bone with his double bevel head and sure enough, he split the bone. He split a bone going in on his shot to kill the beast too as I recall. Just one more experienced bowhunter that is telling us; Some of the stuff from these guys is hogwash to promote their own celebrity.

Now many mnfr's have jumped on the single bevel bandwagon....but of course its self serving, they sell more product. Many have proven that there is not a significant advantage to Ashby and Ranch Fairy's claims.

It all boils down to what Prof Spencer is showing in his lectures;
Be advised, these are not scientifically backed facts from Ashby or Ranch Fairy, its anecdotal observations from slanted tests devised to promote their theories.

Now ask yourself, how do these flip flamers like Elizabeth Holmes [Theranos] or Bernie Madoff types get so far? They sprinkle some truth in there, show results they want you to see...and bam, they suck you in. Sound familiar?

>

1. Yes. I do believe it’s the # 1 factor. but on what scale i haven’t decided. If it’s 1,000 shots with a shitty arrow before error and 5,000 with a sound arrow. It’s an improvement, but at what degree does that helpMost hunters shoot 10-50 deer in a lifetime.

I could shoot a deer with a broom stick with a pointed end, but there’s a better option. As with a mechanical head, it can work and does work 1000’s of times a day. But it also fails. If there is an option proven to reduce failure, and increase efficiency in kills (not shooter error), why would anyone not be interested?

2. You’re right on the money, this is when I was first reading up and right away questioned the legitimacy of the ‘studies’.

And of course double bevel and mechanical broadheads are going to cry foul, they would lose their business. I shoot a stinger buzz cut, I have also shot fixed 3 blade and even mechanicals for 2 years. I never had a mechanical fail, but less moving parts is what I was looking for.

Unfortunately ‘science’ becomes cloudy when $$$ gets involved.
Sirius/Apollo, grizzly stick, etc.

As for the body armor, again nail on the head. I want a pass through arrow. But I don’t want to be able to pass through a deer, a tree and stick 10” in the ground. That’s a waste of energy. I want the energy transferred to the deer. Same reason why we don’t use fmj to rifle hunt.

Even if Ashby is right or wrong, people are talking and people are testing. The rage craze came and went, this to shall pass. Where we wind up next, who knows but people will argue that also.

No one is being forced to use any arrow they don’t want, and I’ve seen plenty of deer killed with Walmart arrows and heads. To them, a $100 broad head is a waste, to another it’s a bargain if it makes them feel like success will be higher.

 

[Foggy Mountain]

Idk why everyone is talking about bullets. They’re very different than broadheads. Regarding the bullets though a certain grain isn’t all a certain grain. The bullet type/design has more to do with it than weight. Lots more can be done changing bullets, lots more than upping weight. It’s mute though. Different subjects and irrelevant