THE Perfect hunting arrow

[Cng]

I’m down to about 535gr and my brain likes the gaps a lot more with that.

This has been my sole reason for not wading into the heavy FOC world. Shooting instinctive, I just seem to have a natural feel for the trajectory of my 560-ish grain arrows.

 

[Sapcut]

Total arrow weight of a tuned arrow is what affects trajectory much more than a particular FOC of a tuned arrow. If anything, I have noticed a heavy 30%+ FOC shows a flatter trajectory than the same weight arrow of much lower FOC. I actually thought I was seeing things the first time I noticed it. Then I heard Dr. Ashby confirmed the same observation. I can’t seem to find any negatives of extreme FOC this far. But like has been already mentioned, we don’t all have the same objectives.

 

[Cng]

Total arrow weight of a tuned arrow is what affects trajectory much more than a particular FOC of a tuned arrow. If anything, I have noticed a heavy 30%+ FOC shows a flatter trajectory than the same weight arrow of much lower FOC. I actually thought I was seeing things the first time I noticed it. Then I heard Dr. Ashby confirmed the same observation. I can’t seem to find any negatives of extreme FOC this far. But like has been already mentioned, we don’t all have the same objectives.

Hmm. Interesting. I played around with bare shafts and a heavy field tip test kit. I have no idea what the FOC was on different arrows, as I was just tinkering, but when I screwed on that 300grain field tip, that arrow just seemed slow and arching. Past 15 yards, I was hitting low every time. I don’t know if it was a mental thing or what.

 

[Sapcut]

I have no idea what the FOC was on different arrows, as I was just tinkering, but when I screwed on that 300grain field tip, that arrow just seemed slow and arching. Past 15 yards, I was hitting low every time. I don’t know if it was a mental thing or what.

Your total arrow weight was maximized as well with that heavier point. Arrow may or may not have been tuned.

If you were to build and TUNE an arrow for your bow by adding an extra 200 grains the length of the shaft and build an tuned arrow with the 200 extra grains up front, I think you would be surprised at the flight differences of both arrows. Although perhaps our naked eye is inefficient at seeing an accurate difference but it sure looks like there is.

I haven’t shot lower FOC arrows of the same weight to compare trajectory in years but I just remember how surprised to see the flat trajectory at the time.

In my case, I have noticed when bareshaftimg heavy high FOC arrows it will hit a bit nock high after getting left and right dynamic spine correct. But at that point it only takes very small fletching to get that beast to fly perfect with a broadhead.

 

[Cng]

In my case, I have noticed when bareshaftimg heavy high FOC arrows it will hit a bit nock high after getting left and right dynamic spine correct.

I’m glad you said this. I noticed this as well. Neither moving nocking point nor lowering brace height would fix nock high. I thought I was screwing something up!

 

[Trumpkin The Dwarf]

I went down the ultra heavy EFOC rabbit hole years ago. I was shooting well tuned 750 grain arrows with 400 grains of tip weight, out of a 64 lb recurve. I found that my trajectory was better with an arrow that was well tuned and 100 grains lighter. I know what I've seen in my personal tuning, but I won't deny those heavy arrows hit damn hard.

I just realized it was overkill for anything I could imagine shooting. 550-600 grain arrows at 185 fps is going to wreck anything in North America. I get a cheat code with my 32" draw and I will take full advantage of it.

 

[TaterTot]

I’m glad you said this. I noticed this as well. Neither moving nocking point nor lowering brace height would fix nock high. I thought I was screwing something up!

Yup, I've noticed the same thing.

 

[TaterTot]

I went down the ultra heavy EFOC rabbit hole years ago. I was shooting well tuned 750 grain arrows with 400 grains of tip weight, out of a 64 lb recurve. I found that my trajectory was better with an arrow that was well tuned and 100 grains lighter. I know what I've seen in my personal tuning, but I won't deny those heavy arrows hit damn hard.

I just realized it was overkill for anything I could imagine shooting. 550-600 grain arrows at 185 fps is going to wreck anything in North America. I get a cheat code with my 32" draw and I will take full advantage of it.

With today's carbons it's pretty simple to build an efoc arrow in the mid 500s. I got one for my 45# thats at 29percent foc and 586gr total arrow weight. Haven't shot that bow in quite some time but I watched that combo blow through a deer from stem to stern. Went in the front of the chest, broke 2 ribs, broke the pelvis and poked out the hide of the rear ham.

 

[Trumpkin The Dwarf]

With today's carbons it's pretty simple to build an efoc arrow in the mid 500s. I got one for my 45# thats at 29percent foc and 586gr total arrow weight. Haven't shot that bow in quite some time but I watched that combo blow through a deer from stem to stern. Went in the front of the chest, broke 2 ribs, broke the pelvis and poked out the hide of the rear ham.

Also true, until you have a 32" draw. Haha! We all have to work with what we've got and optimize for our draw length, release, etc.

 

[Beendare]

_

 

[Sapcut]

this is an Ashby claim in his published study decades ago that was debunked by actual scientists [physics guys that shoot archery from UC Berkeley] He pulled his study though he persists with the claim. Its bogus.

I don't know or haven't heard anything about that. When I saw what I saw was when I tinkered up a 960ish grain arrow with 36.4% FOC arrow years ago. After bareshaft tuning, I added small feathers and shot it. My first thought was I couldn't believe how flat it flew for 16-18 yards to my target. Nothing suggested to me from reading or anyone that may happen. It was just what I sure thought my eyes were seeing....over and over and over again. It absolutely could be that I was subconciously expecting something different that didn't happen.

 

[TaterTot]

Also true, until you have a 32" draw. Haha! We all have to work with what we've got and optimize for our draw length, release, etc.

I have a 29.75 inch draw. Not quite the albatross arms you got lol, but there are plenty of shafts out there now that are crazy stiff with a very low gpi.

 

[TaterTot]

Then you defied the laws of Physics....this is an Ashby claim in his published study decades ago that was debunked by actual scientists [physics guys that shoot archery from UC Berkeley] He pulled his study though he persists with the claim. Its bogus. It works with the rubber bands and weighted straws he used to develop his "Theory" but its simply not true.

A very high FOC arrow does not fly further....or have better trajectory of a same weight arrow.

_

Perhaps in a vacuum. But in the real world a high foc arrow requires less fletching. Resulting in less drag, and even more importantly, it has less of a lever effect in a cross wind.

Now with all things being equal. And all variables removed you are correct. A high foc arrow and a low foc arrow of the same weight will have the same trajectory.

To bad we don't live in a vacuum .

 

[Beendare]

Delete

-

 

[Sapcut]

What did Mr. Newton say about his exhaustive research findings on arrow trajectory when building and shooting high FOC arrows? And what are your experiences with building and shooting 30+% FOC arrows compared to 10% FOC. What are the differences you’ve seen?

What have you seen from the two different arrows that are propelled from the rear with one heavily weighted in the front, with heavy flight control from the front and one weighted in the middle with flight control from both ends. ?

 

[Tartan]

y'all actually agree, but continue to argue against different points.

If everything is equal except FOC (total arrow weight, fletching configuration, tune, etc) then a standard and efoc arrow will have the same trajectory.

if everything is equal except FOC and drag (due to fletching configuration) then the arrow with less drag will bleed less speed downrange. Therefore, have a slightly flatter trajectory.

If your eFOC arrow is heavier, but has less drag... Well that takes some physics above my head.

FOC isn't magic, but it may allow you to build an arrow with less drag.

tl;dr TRADjectory (see what i did there...) isn't a one variable equation...

 

[TaterTot]

You guys remember Sir Isaac Newton from your HS science class?

Its an undisputed law of physics and Ashby’s claim that more FOC carries further or has better trajectory is simply not true.

-

I already explained how it works. Believe what you like.

 

[Tartan]

let's take ashby's 12 factors of penetration. In order:

1. Structural Integrity
2. Perfect arrow flight
3. Arrow’s Forward of Center (FOC) balance point
4. Mechanical Advantage
5. Shaft-Diameter
6. Arrow Mass
7. Blade Edge Finish
8. Shaft profile
9. Broadhead/Arrow Profile
10. Type of Edge Bevel
11. Tip Design
12. Arrow-Mass above Heavy Bone threshold


I don't think there is anything to argue about these points. What we tend to argue about is where the point of diminishing returns are. And what many people forget is that they focus on one or two of the factors, but ignore the most important elements (#' 1 and 2) I have bolded the points that I personally think about when building a hunting arrow. I don't have the resume of many on here, but this is where my experience has led me.

Some of the non-bolded items are just give me's. I don't shoot standard diameter arrows anymore. There are just too many good micro options on the market now. But I also wouldn't stress over it if I had to. I can't think of one situation I have been in where a micro shaft actually made the difference in lethality. Maybe one of you have. Same thing with edge finish, there is just no reason I can't get a head razor sharp, so I'm going to do it.

Now take hunting into consideration and the most important factor for killing an animal beyond penetration. #1 for me is placing the arrow where I want it. A lighter arrow with better trajectory extends my accurate range by reducing errors in range estimation.

Am I going to launch an arrow at an animal 40 yards away without ranging it (probably not). Have I stalked into what I thought was 20 yards of a group of pigs, rushed myself, didn't range them, and missed a shot low b/c they were actually 26 yards away (yes).

Should I get better at patience during the moment of truth (for sure).

But for my purposes, I've lost more animals (missed) due to poor range estimation than I have from lack of penetration. So I favor a better balanced arrow that will still effectively penetrate (structural integrity, perfect arrow flight, decent arrow mass) but will give me more margin for error on range estimation. That doesn't mean that speed is now my #1 factor. Balance is. I want an arrow set up that gives me the best average outcome across all potential opportunities, not just the best for a subset.

Maybe somebody else on here, hunts in the swamps and never gets a shot opportunity past 20 yards. They have tight shot windows and may need to take a quartering to shot (or they won't get another) For those people, my perfect arrow would not be their perfect arrow.

 

[Beendare]

Delete

 

[Sapcut]

Beendare, not gonna argue with you but the words you type sound eerily similar to what someone would type if they had not a fraction of a clue about building, tuning and shooting an UEFOC arrow…as well as someone who has a personal issue with someone else who happens to have the best exhaustive field research you have ever seen anywhere of which the results just happen to not jive with what you personally prefer to shoot.