Hunt Backcountry Podcast 512: Bowhunter Data

[B_Reynolds_AK]

Very interesting podcast this week that Steve & Mark had with Jeremy Dugger from Xpert Archery on his 500+ sample size data set on wounding rates.

I cannot help but make the connection to this and the small caliber vs magnum cartridge debate. Heavier and faster has the potential to create wider wound channels and “Wollop”, but what happens when you put that equipment in the hands of a hunter in field conditions?

Have a listen. The data speaks for itself.

512 | Bowhunter Data on Broadhead Lethality & Shot Distance

Podcast Episode · The Hunt Backcountry Podcast · 03/19/2025 · 1h 15m

podcasts.apple.com

 

[Moosehunter]

Thanks! Ill give it a listen

 

[MT_Wyatt]

The comments on wound rate influence based on how the fixed blades perform in poorly tuned bows or less forgiving situations was both surprising (being higher than mechs) and also not surprising at all. Super good episode.

 

[Moosehunter]

That was real good!
I'm a fixed blade die hard. Love a super tuned bow and fixed for elk. Good data tho. Good to listen to with an open mind. I ges maybe I've got more testing to do

 

[sndmn11]

Can someone share the data?

 

[sickles107]

500+ total samples on western game

broadhead type / wound rate
mechanical / 12%
fixed / 23%

Arrow weight / Wound rate
0-400 / 14%
401-450 / 12%
450-500 / 20%
500+ / 32%

Shot distance / wound rate
0-30yd / 14%
31-40yd / 25%
41-50yd / 19%
51-60yd / 9%
61-70yd / 17%
71-80yd / 16%
80+ was too small sample size

 

[TripleJ]

Listened to it yesterday. It's refreshing to have actual data to draw conclusions from, as opposed to opinions being parroted as knowledge.

 

[B_Reynolds_AK]

Listened to it yesterday. It's refreshing to have actual data to draw conclusions from, as opposed to opinions being parroted as knowledge.

 

[P Carter]

I liked the podcast, question whether the information is properly characterized as “data”; it comes from conversations (“hunting stories”) the fellow has at his shop. I would guess that: the wounding is seriously underreported (who tells a hunting story to the archery shop about wounding and losing animals? Some, but surely people are several times more likely to tell a kill story than wound story); yardage is just plain inaccurate (how many times have you misjudged range in the field?); and the sample size isn’t large. Also, the fellow says at the outset that the archer’s experience is the biggest factor in wound rages, and in his shop the most experienced, most accurate archers use mechanicals. If both those are true, that seemingly could account for much (maybe most?) of the difference in wounding rates.

This is *not* a criticism of the podcast. I loved the information and really desire more good, actual information like this. Just a note to put it all in some context, which I think all the participants in the podcast would agree on. Good info, for sure.