# 40lb for deer?????????????



## MGF (Oct 27, 2012)

I sure hope so because that's what I'm using. LOL

Actually my Omega Delta is 42# @ 28" but I only draw about 27"...so about 40# on the fingers.

I haven't killed anything with it yet. This year's hunting season kind of fizzled out to nothing. Maybe next year.


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

MGF said:


> I sure hope so because that's what I'm using. LOL
> 
> Actually my Omega Delta is 42# @ 28" but I only draw about 27"...so about 40# on the fingers.
> 
> I haven't killed anything with it yet. This year's hunting season kind of fizzled out to nothing. Maybe next year.


Stay close.... have fun, and pray for woodsmanship skills.


----------



## coilguy (Oct 3, 2012)

Are your heads sharp?

If so I will say yes.

first bow kill was a 45# recurve at abut 20 yards

CG


----------



## ghostgoblin22 (May 3, 2013)

yes, it is my set up last year was 43# @ 29''


----------



## kegan (Aug 28, 2006)

Honestly? It depends.

I have firm faith that if you set up the bow half-well, and use the right arrow, you're looking at venison steaks. Of course it's not really that cut and dry though.

Some bows deliver more energy. Something like a Covert Hunter at 40# will deliver around 36-38 ft-lbs of KE. Where as a PVC recurve will deliver about 20 ft-lbs. That's a huge difference. Arrows play a big role too. If your arrows are coming out of the bow sideways you're not going to get very good penetration. Same with technique. Snap shooting any bow a couple inches short of anchor is going to rob performance, but that means even more on a lighter bow. 

What's your set up?


----------



## dan in mi (Dec 17, 2009)

Back in the 70's 80% or more of the bows Bear sold were 45#. That should be an indicator right there. 


In 1977 when I picked up a used 55# Super Mag 48. I had all kinds of people calling me out for having such a heavy unnecessary bow.


----------



## buckdeer13 (Sep 12, 2013)

sounds good to me thanks everyone magnus buzcuts a good head choice?


----------



## kegan (Aug 28, 2006)

buckdeer13 said:


> sounds good to me thanks everyone magnus buzcuts a good head choice?


Yeah but the regular Stingers would be a little better. The serrations do take from penetration somewhat.


----------



## jakeemt (Oct 25, 2012)

Not it hijack this thread but, I was under the impression that buzz cuts enhanced cutting power. Just curious I have never used them but have considered them.


----------



## Roger Savor Sr (Feb 16, 2014)

Draw length has much more to do with an arrow's energy delivered at the target than 5# of draw weight ever will. I have no earthly idea why so many use draw weight as the sole factor in an attempt to predicate potential penetration. Hell, by switching strings I've gained 12-15fps and had to step up one full spine size in doing so. But, to answer your question directly, yes absolutely, 40# will kill deer cleanly all day long. I know this because I've actually done it, unlike those who say it's not a good idea, and oh by the way, they've never tried it, but are experts nonetheless. There is also a few thousands years of anecdotal information regarding 40#, even much less used to consistently deer and even larger game to boot.


----------



## kegan (Aug 28, 2006)

jakeemt said:


> Not it hijack this thread but, I was under the impression that buzz cuts enhanced cutting power. Just curious I have never used them but have considered them.


Marketing hype. If you have a scalpel and a serrated steak knife, which one will require more effort to push through the steak? You have to "saw" with the steak knife but just cut with the scalpel.

The idea is that the Buzzcut and other serrated heads do more "damage". No idea if that's true, but I do know that a clean cut bleeds more profusely.


----------



## martha j (May 11, 2009)

no, you need to shoot at the very least 80 pounds & a 3" WIDE BROADHEAD.


----------



## martha j (May 11, 2009)

NOT REALLY, 35 is enough according to the game & fish in Arkansas.


----------



## Roger Savor Sr (Feb 16, 2014)

kegan said:


> Marketing hype. If you have a scalpel and a serrated steak knife, which one will require more effort to push through the steak? You have to "saw" with the steak knife but just cut with the scalpel.
> 
> The idea is that the Buzzcut and other serrated heads do more "damage". No idea if that's true, but I do know that a clean cut bleeds more profusely.


Kegan, sorry man, but the 'steak knife analogy' is bunk. Knive use a stipple serration and the Buzzcut broadhead uses a chisel serration on one side of the blade only. I've actually found a little more in the way of profuse bleeding when using the Buzzcut. The idea behind this design to provide relief in the cut and many report enhanced penetration using the Buzzcut over the Stinger, but I would have to admit it would be difficult to prove or disprove those claims. At any rate it's an incredible head, IMHO of course.


----------



## Tradbow Guy (Feb 9, 2007)

40lbs is more then enough. I used to not believe that but the more tests and footage I watch, the more I study and learn, the more I realize yes. Also, as far as the buzzcuts, they are susposed to do more damage from an uneven wound. Personally I dont like anything on my broadheads that slows down penetration. I have always subscribed to razor sharp cut on contact heads, even when most of the bowhunting world was going nuts over "Bone penetrating" chisle tip type broadheads. Those broadheads may work well, i've never taken an animal with them. I've done a lot of home grown broadhead tests and have found that I much prefer the strength of a good solid one piece head.


----------



## kegan (Aug 28, 2006)

Roger Savor Sr said:


> Kegan, sorry man, but the 'steak knife analogy' is bunk. Knive use a stipple serration and the Buzzcut broadhead uses a chisel serration on one side of the blade only. I've actually found a little more in the way of profuse bleeding when using the Buzzcut. The idea behind this design to provide relief in the cut and many report enhanced penetration using the Buzzcut over the Stinger, but I would have to admit it would be difficult to prove or disprove those claims. At any rate it's an incredible head, IMHO of course.


Ahhh! I appreciate the correction. Never looked at a Buzzcut up close. Can you explain a bit more about the relief? It's a new concept to me.


----------



## Tradbow Guy (Feb 9, 2007)

Roger Savor Sr said:


> Kegan, sorry man, but the 'steak knife analogy' is bunk. Knive use a stipple serration and the Buzzcut broadhead uses a chisel serration on one side of the blade only. I've actually found a little more in the way of profuse bleeding when using the Buzzcut. The idea behind this design to provide relief in the cut and many report enhanced penetration using the Buzzcut over the Stinger, but I would have to admit it would be difficult to prove or disprove those claims. At any rate it's an incredible head, IMHO of course.


I would think the buzzcut would provide slightly more bleeding, as an uneven wound would have more problem sealing. By the same token, I would have to think the stinger would provide more penetration. That being said, I think in both instances, your talking by a very very negligible amount. Both heads will do the job, it just dpeneds in which manner you prefer to do it.


----------



## Tradbow Guy (Feb 9, 2007)

Roger Savor Sr said:


> Draw length has much more to do with an arrow's energy delivered at the target than 5# of draw weight ever will. I have no earthly idea why so many use draw weight as the sole factor in an attempt to predicate potential penetration. Hell, by switching strings I've gained 12-15fps and had to step up one full spine size in doing so. But, to answer your question directly, yes absolutely, 40# will kill deer cleanly all day long. I know this because I've actually done it, unlike those who say it's not a good idea, and oh by the way, they've never tried it, but are experts nonetheless. There is also a few thousands years of anecdotal information regarding 40#, even much less used to consistently deer and even larger game to boot.


I agree, 40# will kill anything in north america. Unless maybe you hit a moose directly in the shoulder nuckle, even then, I would not want to be that moose. I should also add, that I have and always will be an advocate of shooting as much poundage as you can handle comfortably. And by that I mean a bow you can draw sitting, kneeling, shaking, cold, wet, ect with little undue strain. Though 40lbs will do the job, more weight enhances your chances for a complete passthrough (Arrow completly leaving the animal) which translates into a better blood trail. It also enhances bone penetration, and gives a flatter shooting harder hitting arrow at longer distances. I will be using a 40# Imperial from Kegan to hunt this year, and probably next year, but I will be working my poundages up over the years.


----------



## Yohon (Aug 28, 2003)

I was sitting in the tree just this afternoon thinking about my low 40 lb bow and wondering again....is it enough? I chrono'ed my Titan last summer and was 178-180 fps. While in the tree I looked on line and discovered 180 fps is 122 mph!!! I think that works.....LOL 

I have a file that I store any story/pix on "low bow weight" that grabs my attention, its getting to be several pages long and there is enough evidence around that tells me that we should be worrying and working harder on making good CONTROLLED shots and let the sharp pointy thing do its job 

175 lb buck, quartering away at 23 yards, penetrated to the cresting, with the BUZZCUT stuck in the off shoulder


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

Yohon said:


> I was sitting in the tree just this afternoon thinking about my low 40 lb bow and wondering again....is it enough? I chrono'ed my Titan last summer and was 178-180 fps. While in the tree I looked on line and discovered 180 fps is 122 mph!!! I think that works.....LOL
> 
> I have a file that I store any story/pix on "low bow weight" that grabs my attention, its getting to be several pages long and there is enough evidence around that tells me that we should be worrying and working harder on making good CONTROLLED shots and let the sharp pointy thing do its job
> 
> 175 lb buck, quartering away at 23 yards, penetrated to the cresting, with the BUZZCUT stuck in the off shoulder


Who's that handsome guy  

Great deer John 

Looking forward to shooting with you this year


----------



## Easykeeper (Jan 2, 2003)

Yohon said:


> I was sitting in the tree just this afternoon thinking about my low 40 lb bow and wondering again....is it enough? I chrono'ed my Titan last summer and was 178-180 fps. While in the tree I looked on line and discovered 180 fps is 122 mph!!! I think that works.....LOL
> 
> I have a file that I store any story/pix on "low bow weight" that grabs my attention, its getting to be several pages long and there is enough evidence around that tells me that we should be worrying and working harder on making good CONTROLLED shots and let the sharp pointy thing do its job
> 
> 175 lb buck, quartering away at 23 yards, penetrated to the cresting, with the BUZZCUT stuck in the off shoulder


Beautiful buck, and a nice picture too. Congratulations...:thumbs_up


----------



## Roger Savor Sr (Feb 16, 2014)

kegan said:


> Ahhh! I appreciate the correction. Never looked at a Buzzcut up close. Can you explain a bit more about the relief? It's a new concept to me.


Well, being the logical thinker you are, just guessed(correctly) you would appreciate that.  "relief" was a new concept to me, and to be honest, might still be 'unclear' to me as well. It appears that the gaps between the chisel serrations help somehow to 'pull' the broadhead through the penetrating process, on hide and flesh. Not scientific, I know.  I've personally used both the Stinger and Buzzcut version on whitetails out of the same bows. Now, at my 27 3/4" of draw length using "high performance" recurves and longbows with even higher performance strings tuned well to the arrow and bow, both versions normally blast through deer as if they were made of tissue paper using 40#-50# of draw weight. So, no telling for me which actually has the most potential for penetration, as it just isn't an issue. My son has now taken two deer using the Buzzcut. His setup is a 35# compound drawn to 23.5" and has gotten two pass-throughs using the Buzzcut. Both of those shots impacted the near side shoulder muscle and one exited through the offside shoulder's muscle and the other mid-rib, again, on the offside. That arrow is 330 grain traveling at about 170fps through the chrono'.........that's paltry by all of our standards, to say the least. Neither version, however, just like all broadheads is "perfect". The vents are done to save weight and he broke one in half lengthwise shooting in to another deer's shoulder blade. Bad shot, bad outcome. No telling if another head would have done better, but I doubt it would've. In so far as blood letting goes, I don't have ANY doubts about the Buzzcut.

But, back to "relief". What else I "think" is happening with those wide chisel serrations is that they are separating more flesh allowing the non serrated portion of the blade(rear half) an easier path through the animal's denser muscles........Make sense? Again though, for those of us(adults) with an average draw length, we will likely not realize it's benefits with regards to penetration anyway.


----------



## Tradbow Guy (Feb 9, 2007)

Roger Savor Sr said:


> Well, being the logical thinker you are, just guessed(correctly) you would appreciate that.  "relief" was a new concept to me, and to be honest, might still be 'unclear' to me as well. It appears that the gaps between the chisel serrations help somehow to 'pull' the broadhead through the penetrating process, on hide and flesh. Not scientific, I know.  I've personally used both the Stinger and Buzzcut version on whitetails out of the same bows. Now, at my 27 3/4" of draw length using "high performance" recurves and longbows with even higher performance strings tuned well to the arrow and bow, both versions normally blast through deer as if they were made of tissue paper using 40#-50# of draw weight. So, no telling for me which actually has the most potential for penetration, as it just isn't an issue. My son has now taken two deer using the Buzzcut. His setup is a 35# compound drawn to 23.5" and has gotten two pass-throughs using the Buzzcut. Both of those shots impacted the near side shoulder muscle and one exited through the offside shoulder's muscle and the other mid-rib, again, on the offside. That arrow is 330 grain traveling at about 170fps through the chrono'.........that's paltry by all of our standards, to say the least. Neither version, however, just like all broadheads is "perfect". The vents are done to save weight and he broke one in half lengthwise shooting in to another deer's shoulder blade. Bad shot, bad outcome. No telling if another head would have done better, but I doubt it would've. In so far as blood letting goes, I don't have ANY doubts about the Buzzcut.
> 
> But, back to "relief". What else I "think" is happening with those wide chisel serrations is that they are separating more flesh allowing the non serrated portion of the blade(rear half) an easier path through the animal's denser muscles........Make sense? Again though, for those of us(adults) with an average draw length, we will likely not realize it's benefits with regards to penetration anyway.


How are they doing anything when the front part of the broadhead is opening up the wound in front of the serrations? And how are big flat serrations opening a wound more then a thin sharp edge? Im sorry but none of this makes sense to me and its only confusing me further.


----------



## Roger Savor Sr (Feb 16, 2014)

Tradbow Guy said:


> How are they doing anything when the front part of the broadhead is opening up the wound in front of the serrations? And how are big flat serrations opening a wound more then a thin sharp edge? Im sorry but none of this makes sense to me and its only confusing me further.


They aren't "big flat serrations". They are angled in the same manner the rest of blade is beveled. The confusion obviously lies with what you think the blade looks like verses how it is actually constructed. You need to look at and handle one.


----------



## Tradbow Guy (Feb 9, 2007)

Roger Savor Sr said:


> They aren't "big flat serrations". They are angled in the same manner the rest of blade is beveled. The confusion obviously lies with what you think the blade looks like verses how it is actually constructed. You need to look at and handle one.


Your probably right. I've tried to get a good look at it in pictures but its hard to see. Are the flat edges of the serrations sharp like the rest of the blade? Whereas a traditional serration like a steak knife as kegan pointed out, would be sharp within the grove of the serration.


----------



## buckdeer13 (Sep 12, 2013)

Yohon said:


> I was sitting in the tree just this afternoon thinking about my low 40 lb bow and wondering again....is it enough? I chrono'ed my Titan last summer and was 178-180 fps. While in the tree I looked on line and discovered 180 fps is 122 mph!!! I think that works.....LOL
> 
> I have a file that I store any story/pix on "low bow weight" that grabs my attention, its getting to be several pages long and there is enough evidence around that tells me that we should be worrying and working harder on making good CONTROLLED shots and let the sharp pointy thing do its job
> 
> 175 lb buck, quartering away at 23 yards, penetrated to the cresting, with the BUZZCUT stuck in the off shoulder


what a buck great kill im glad i seen this!


----------



## Yohon (Aug 28, 2003)

Tradbow...I took this pix last summer for a post and it fits here. Magnus made the serration to be smaller "cut on contact" points that help in breaking down tougher internal structure (big vein/artery's windpipes etc) We loose alot of a sharpness just getting thru the dirt/skin/hair on the outside of the critter. The serrations are there to help cut more.See how as you move up the blade each serration is kind of a point of it own facing the direction the head is going? I look at it as insurance, you don't always need it but its there. You sharpen them like they aren't there (another indication that not all serration are the same) and I know since using the buzzcuts AND a getting a KME sharpener to make them really sharp my blood trails have been brighter and shorter, its made a difference for me.


----------



## Homey88 (Dec 10, 2013)

Great buck Yohon!


----------



## Tradbow Guy (Feb 9, 2007)

Yohon said:


> Tradbow...I took this pix last summer for a post and it fits here. Magnus made the serration to be smaller "cut on contact" points that help in breaking down tougher internal structure (big vein/artery's windpipes etc) We loose alot of a sharpness just getting thru the dirt/skin/hair on the outside of the critter. The serrations are there to help cut more.See how as you move up the blade each serration is kind of a point of it own facing the direction the head is going? I look at it as insurance, you don't always need it but its there. You sharpen them like they aren't there (another indication that not all serration are the same) and I know since using the buzzcuts AND a getting a KME sharpener to make them really sharp my blood trails have been brighter and shorter, its made a difference for me.


Thanks for the clarification.


----------



## Bill 2311 (Jun 24, 2005)

I too think it is enough, but if you can shoot more weight with a correspondingly heavier arrow, even better. I like to have more than I need for when things don't go as planned.
Shoot as much bow as you can ACCURATELY.


----------



## gun (Apr 26, 2005)

I talked to the owner of Magnus on the phone last summer about this very subject. I wanted his opinion on what BH I should use for elk from a 47# longbow. His suggestion was the 4 blade 100 grain Buzzcut, this is what he uses. He explained the serrations as Roger and Yohon have, he favored the 100 grain for penetration on elk since it is slightly narrower, and believed that the bleeder blades enhanced penetration. I didn't get a shot on elk with them, but certainly respect his opinions.

To the OP's question. Kegan and Roger gave great advice and Yohon visual proof. But, asking if X amount of draw weight is enough, and I have asked the same question, really isn't enough information. Like Roger said, draw weight is huge in the equation, but you can't change that. Examples of his sons arrow weight and speed are what we really need to measure. If you have a draw weight around 28" and pull around 40 pounds, keep shots within 20 yards, tune, sharpen etc, you will be fine as long as you are accurate.

I go against what many others say in that I would rather hunt with a38# bow that I can shoot in any condition without struggling than a 45 pound bow that I struggle with in certain position and possibly short draw.


----------



## flygilmore (Aug 23, 2011)

Well, you can see my sig and that's what I'll be hunting with this fall. Arrows are tuned (approx. 440gr.) and flying like darts and I am very pleased with my accuracy. I'll be keeping any shots to approx. 20yds and closer and be waiting for a very high percentage shot. I know I need to stay away from all major bone structure.

On the topic, I'm assuming I should stay with a 2 blade C.O.C though I like more blades personally................what selections should I be looking at?


----------



## Doofy_13 (Jan 2, 2012)

When I was drawing about 40 pounds I sent an arrow through the front door of my barn....you will be fine for deer


----------



## gun (Apr 26, 2005)

Flyg

The Magnus Stingers either 4 or 2 blade would work for you. I'm not a 2 blade fan, but many have great success with them.

I personally like 3 blades like the Woodsman Elites or VPA's. I think there penetration is as good as or close to a 2 blade head and you have a better chance for more blood.

Although a pass through May provide more blood on the ground, a bh that stays in the heart lung area as the game moves off does tremendous damage. I shot a buck this year with a Woodsman Elite and hit the opposite shoulder, no pass through, but the deer was down and dead in 25 yards and when I processed the carcass the damage was devastating.

As always, lots of good choices and lots of right ways to do the same thing, get a good clean quick kill. Get a set up you have confidence in.


----------



## kegan (Aug 28, 2006)

Big cuts mean more blood: https://www.simmonssharks.com/


----------



## muley40 (Jun 10, 2005)

Don`t tell this deer that I was only using 40#!


----------



## gun (Apr 26, 2005)

Muley,

Nice buck.

Just curious, what broadhead?


----------



## jshperdue (Feb 1, 2010)

I think that picture of muley40 and his buck is one of my favorite of all times. This picture and muley40's story about the deer got me moved to start a thread about it on another site. He is now one of my bowhunting heroes and I don't even know his name.


----------



## rickstix (Nov 11, 2009)

buckdeer13 said:


> is 40 lb at 20 yards enough out of a long bow or recurve for whitetail deer?


Short answer is “yes”…and the other side of having done it is when thoughts begin to arise as to what might have been “improved”…or not. We all come to our own conclusions based our own experience…and we also process theories in individual fashion. If we get the results we’d hoped for then certain theories appear to hold water. Generally, this applies similarly to the multitude of variables in the equation as it does to the basic question: “is 40 lbs. at 20 yards enough”…which presently remains theoretical to the OP.

Anyhow, the question prompts me to tell a story I’ve told a few times before.

In 1976, I visited the Damon Howatt facility. At that time Martin had just purchased DH and Dale Marcy was managing the operation. (Back then, if internet forums had existed, compound bows would have been put in the “Miscellaneous” category…just as “Traditional” has been relegated, until recently.) Dale and I spent a couple of very memorable hours speaking “archery”…with the welcomed ease and fluency one might find when returning to speech in their native tongue.

When we got around to discussing draw weights being used for different applications is when he related this story to me. At a recent time, in one of the western states, there was debate over raising the draw weight minimum for elk. In support of not wanting the existing law to change, was the position that a higher draw weight would remove a group of present and future elk hunters from the equation…and more specifically, many women and youth.

Enter Dale Marcy and a group of wildlife officials to a place where matters could be put to the test. Armed with a 27# bow and a very sharp broadhead (as Dale was careful to note), an elk was put on the ground…and the law was not changed.

Sooo…my point reverts to the “seeing is believing” kinda thing, where I first started. People can tell you what works for them and their reasoning behind it for almost every choice out there…but it is virtually impossible to duplicate a kill with infinite precision. An arrow with no blades will kill…and what can be attributed to broadheads, from the smallest to the largest…follows similarly…"how" (optimum flight characteristics) and "where" the shot is placed says the most about whatever equipment one was using.

Personally, I just don’t care to give thought to anything that leans towards “maximum wounding”. Granted, lots of blood makes for easy tracking…but the amount of blood flow can vary by innumerable factors…so precisely how much blood is lost can vary with each kill, when using the same equipment; but this speaks to “after-the-shot” conditions. From personal experience, I know that if I put the arrow where it belongs the critter will be dead in seconds…and I will find it. It will have died from a lack of oxygen…whether by collapsed lung(s) or other disruption in the circulatory system...and whether or not the evidence of what happened in a very small measure of time can be found on the ground. 

Autopsies are interesting, as are blood trails…and, in all likelihood, the results will serve to “reverse engineer” the event(s) that preceded them. Consensus should be that 40 lbs can work…consensus on equipment depends on when and where it’s asked…but you won’t know all that much until you’ve dropped the string, yourself. And…Best of Luck with it…Enjoy, Rick.


----------



## Foxrod5.0 (Sep 3, 2010)

I'll throw my two cents into the broadhead convo. Read an article a while back saying that a jagged wound coagualates and stops bleeding sooner than a clean wound. Something about how the nervous system perceives trauma. Think of how a paper cut will bleed for a while but a scrape just scabs over.


----------



## rickstix (Nov 11, 2009)

Foxrod5.0 said:


> Read an article a while back saying that a jagged wound coagualates and stops bleeding sooner than a clean wound. Something about how the nervous system perceives trauma. Think of how a paper cut will bleed for a while but a scrape just scabs over.


The different between ripped flesh and flesh that’s been cleanly cut is that one wound will have ragged edges that tend to overlap and mend themselves…where a clean cut typically needs stitches to hold the 2 sides together.

When it comes to coagulation…with a well shot deer there just isn’t enough time for that process to get underway. As, I mentioned, having any wound that is not immediately terminal is not one of the outcomes that I am capable of embracing for an instant. For me, that would paint a worse-case scenario that constant efforts are made to try to avoid.

I suppose, for me, it's just kinda difficult to get too focused on what's involved with the healing process. Yes, chit happens and worst-case has a list of definitions…but if worst-case should happen I suppose I’d rather believe the critter might have survived...after I've completed an exhaustive search. Rick.


----------



## gun (Apr 26, 2005)

There is a thread over on the "wall" on light bow kills. A guy just posted that killed 5 deer this year including a dandy buck using a [email protected]" Bear Montana that he draws to27", so about 37-38 pounds. and the Montana isn't a speed demon.


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

rickstix said:


> The different between ripped flesh and flesh that’s been cleanly cut is that one wound will have ragged edges that tend to overlap and mend themselves…where a clean cut typically needs stitches to hold the 2 sides together.
> 
> When it comes to coagulation…with a well shot deer there just isn’t enough time for that process to get underway. As, I mentioned, having any wound that is not immediately terminal is not one of the outcomes that I am capable of embracing for an instant. For me, that would paint a worse-case scenario that constant efforts are made to try to avoid.
> 
> I suppose, for me, it's just kinda difficult to get too focused on what's involved with the healing process. Yes, chit happens and worst-case has a list of definitions…but if worst-case should happen I suppose I’d rather believe the critter might have survived...after I've completed an exhaustive search. Rick.


Well from my perspective, the scalpel is the best blade for hunting for several reasons. One is going through bone. Deer and goats maybe the ribs are less a problem, but I use snuffers for a purpose... peace of mind. I try to get them as sharp as I can for the reasons Dr's use sharp... if its bleeding it stays bleeding..... I can prove this... two days ago I took off the tips of three fingers with a table saw....but I was able to stop bleeding relatively easy.... I had barracuda slice my palm once and couldn't stop the bleeding for several hours with compression on it.... :laugh:


----------



## Easykeeper (Jan 2, 2003)

Beautiful buck Muley...:thumbs_up


----------



## Roger Savor Sr (Feb 16, 2014)

rattus58 said:


> Well from my perspective, the scalpel is the best blade for hunting for several reasons. One is going through bone. Deer and goats maybe the ribs are less a problem, but I use snuffers for a purpose... peace of mind. I try to get them as sharp as I can for the reasons Dr's use sharp... if its bleeding it stays bleeding..... I can prove this... two days ago I took off the tips of three fingers with a table saw....but I was able to stop bleeding relatively easy.... I had barracuda slice my palm once and couldn't stop the bleeding for several hours with compression on it.... :laugh:


I certainly would not want a broadhead made like a scalpel.........Ask an orthopedic surgeon if he'd use one to cut through hide, hair and bone. We don't get the luxury of multiple cutting instruments to kill the deer - just one. A broadhead's durability must far surpass that of a scalpel or it wouldn't work well very often.

And for those who think that serrated broadheads "cut ragged hole", again, another bunk analogy. The Buzzcut and like serrated heads cut very, very cleanly and those serrations get every bit as sharp as the rest of the blade.


----------



## muley40 (Jun 10, 2005)

I shot buck on my own land he fooled me he had ground shrinkage he grossed 127" and with deductions wouldn`t have made book I try hold out for something bigger I have lot bigger bucks come threw my place when the pre rut kicks in the week before I missed a good 150" got real excited when he got into range and shot over his back if you don`t get excited when a big buck comes towards you better take up tennis, I used full length Gold-tip 35/55 with a 100gr. brass insert 125gr Magnus 4-blade SS Buzzcut blew right thru him watch him run about 30yds into CRP field tip over easy tracking when that happens!


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

Roger Savor Sr said:


> I certainly would not want a broadhead made like a scalpel.........Ask an orthopedic surgeon if he'd use one to cut through hide, hair and bone. We don't get the luxury of multiple cutting instruments to kill the deer - just one. A broadhead's durability must far surpass that of a scalpel or it wouldn't work well very often.
> 
> And for those who think that serrated broadheads "cut ragged hole", again, another bunk analogy. The Buzzcut and like serrated heads cut very, very cleanly and those serrations get every bit as sharp as the rest of the blade.


If you missed the analogy, which apparently you did by wide measure, a sharp broadhead works and has an almost 80 year test period with still a 100% validation.... :laugh: And you're not going to tell me that serrated edge is superior to a straight edge are you?


----------



## buckdeer13 (Sep 12, 2013)

What have I started??? Thanks for all the replies


----------



## [email protected] (Jul 13, 2008)

Aye God, it's a wonder anybody ever killed anything with an arrow until Allen came along. But the history is different.


----------



## Roger Savor Sr (Feb 16, 2014)

rattus58 said:


> If you missed the analogy, which apparently you did by wide measure, a sharp broadhead works and has an almost 80 year test period with still a 100% validation.... :laugh: And you're not going to tell me that serrated edge is superior to a straight edge are you?


Really, folks were killing game as far back as "80 years"? Serrated heads were working long before The Great Depression, the Zwickey and the Ace. Guess native Americans were doing it the wrong way, apparently. And your not going to tell me which works better/best when you've not tried serrated heads, are you?.


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

[email protected] said:


> Aye God, it's a wonder anybody ever killed anything with an arrow until Allen came along. But the history is different.


Nah.... it was the stone point made the difference... :grin:


----------



## Yohon (Aug 28, 2003)

Dang, this one only pulls 42 lbs, shot this one walking at 13 yards, was not a pass thru but it was a really really sharp buzzcut and it went less than 100 yards....I love this stuff


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

Roger Savor Sr said:


> Really, folks were killing game as far back as "80 years"? Serrated heads were working long before The Great Depression, the Zwickey and the Ace. Guess native Americans were doing it the wrong way, apparently. And your not going to tell me which works better/best when you've not tried serrated heads, are you?.


No... and I'm not about to. the advantage of serration, is that it cuts faster but not cleaner. They are harder to keep sharp but they, I'm told but not that I BUY but will take it on face, somewhat stronger than a straight edge... Now if you are planning on arguing with me that a stone point is superior to a sharp straight edge... have at it... If you want to continue this primitive tact with me, lets get it on.... my point is that a sharp broadhead is the essential for hunting. If you wish to argue the point that a serrated blade is SHARPER than a straight.... my argument... let the games begin..... :laugh:


----------



## Tradbow Guy (Feb 9, 2007)

kegan said:


> Big cuts mean more blood: https://www.simmonssharks.com/


The tree shark is what I plan to hunt with. I really love the design and size of the head. That thing is just nasty. Never went with anyones opinion on heads though always tested and decided for myself, encourage all here to do the same. I took many many deer with Montecs when people were complaining they weren't sharp enough or strong enough to kill and leave good blood trails (One deer left a blood trail on the ground about 6" wide all the way to where he was laying dead). Tried a popular mech head against my better judgement, only deer I ever almost lost, took 2 full days of tracking and losing needle point blood drops before I found him, and he'd been mostly consumed by coyotes. Examination of the wound confirmed the shot was where I wanted it, have no clue what the BH did because it was not recovered.


----------



## Tradbow Guy (Feb 9, 2007)

rickstix said:


> Short answer is “yes”…and the other side of having done it is when thoughts begin to arise as to what might have been “improved”…or not. We all come to our own conclusions based our own experience…and we also process theories in individual fashion. If we get the results we’d hoped for then certain theories appear to hold water. Generally, this applies similarly to the multitude of variables in the equation as it does to the basic question: “is 40 lbs. at 20 yards enough”…which presently remains theoretical to the OP.
> 
> Anyhow, the question prompts me to tell a story I’ve told a few times before.
> 
> ...


I mostly agree with this. While I do prescribe to the maximum damage, heaviest poundage, least margin of error for myself, as you said, if you put a field point through both lungs the deer is going down. A good example of why I like to maximize my deer though, one deer I shot I did not get a passthrough on, and due to the angle from my treestand the shot had to be placed a little high to get the propper angle into both lungs. As a result of the high angle and the arrow not passing through there was no blood at all, I couldnt find a single drop of blood. A less experenced hunter may have gave up there thinking they had missed, however I was confident I made a good hit so I did a grid search of the area and found the deer laying dead about 40 yards away. When I opened it up blood poured out everywhere from where it had pooled inside the animal. My point is, I do think it matters to a degree how your gear performs. Even if all broadheads kill, I do not believe they all perform equally.


----------



## spookinelk (Feb 10, 2013)

kegan said:


> Big cuts mean more blood: https://www.simmonssharks.com/


With a 40# bow small cuts mean 2 holes and better bloodtrails.... JMHO

http://www.zwickeyarcheryinc.com/ecommerce/broadheads/eskilite/5-16-eskilite-2-edge-screw-on.jsp


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

FWIW?...I'm of the opinion that within reason?...."bow weight"...has very little to do with the overall big picture of a cleanly executed harvest but imho?...here's the big things that do matter and why...

1. "Broad Head Selection": A hair popping sharp broad head of an appropriate choice for the weight bow you are shooting...IOW's?...you don't want the smallest cutting diameter 2-Blade on your 68# modern recurve anymore than you want the largest diameter 4-Blade available on your legal min 35# longbow...BH selection must be appropriately matched to maximize the effect yet not so large as to overwhelm the given draw weight of the bow.

2. "Anatomy": None of us are Superman equipped with X-ray vision therefore?...it would behoove any archer to study and become intimately familiar with the anatomy and "Bone Structure" of the game they hunt and know that anatomy well enough that they are easily able to visualize a bone free pathway to the creatures vitals hence make sound decisions regarding "Shoot/No Shoot" scenarios and it is in this respect that it would matter little the weight of the bow should the broad head encounter a direct hit on bone upon entry.

3. "Legal Minimum Draw Weight": Some states require a 40# minimum while more than several states are just fine with 35#s...I've personally put a 2-Blade Magnus Broad Head through two (2) gallon jugs of packed wet sand off a 37# R/D Longbow and there's not a doubt in my mind that had it been a "flesh only" strike?...there would've most definitely been an exit wound.

4. "When More Can Become Less & Less Can Become More": Two hunters...one doning a 60#er with arrows sporting huge diameter multi-blade broadheads and the other bow hunter?...shooting the smallest legal 2-Blader broad head off a legal min DW bow...I think you get the picture here as while the archer with the 60# bow and massive Broadheads may very well become overly confident via heavy kit?...he may not be as selective, discriminating or focused as the archer wielding the lighter rig.

Matter fact?...I have a magnus 2 Blade glue-on BH on one of my 5/16ths cedars...if I get a chance to play around tomorrow?...maybe I'll do a penetration vid of that arrow off my 32# Falco D shape Longbow....folks don't seem to realize just how lethal even a lighter weight bow can be and is as even just at 150fps?...that's still two well angled razor blades moving at over 100mph...that's razor blades at "Faster Than Most" MLB pitching speeds folks....if you can't kill with that out too 20yds?...

L8R, Bill.


----------



## Captainkirk (Sep 18, 2014)

In a nutshell...
A properly-placed shot (read; 'vital organ shot placement') with a sharp broadhead will bring home the bacon. Sure, a heavier bow may penetrate better, and different variations of broadheads may cause death by blood loss a few yards sooner, but bottom line is this: if you can 'thread the needle' with a lighter bow, then that's what you should hunt with (if legal). The most important factor, as Bill mentioned, is knowing the correct anatomy of the game and putting a very, very sharp arrow there.
Roger mentioned complete pass-thru's with 40# and I believe that can be done with proper shot placement and a very sharp broadhead.
I also have noticed sharp straight cuts bleed longer and take longer to heal than serrated cuts. I will be sticking with Zwickey or Magnus 2 blade glue-on razor heads on my woodies.


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

Sharp, tuned to fly straight, I'll take your word on it from there. I'll be happy if they come back to my yard to find their friend. We're out of meat, and next season is too long


----------



## muley40 (Jun 10, 2005)

Here is another deer that got shot with a 40# bow 2 years ago.


----------



## kegan (Aug 28, 2006)

spookinelk said:


> With a 40# bow small cuts mean 2 holes and better bloodtrails.... JMHO
> 
> http://www.zwickeyarcheryinc.com/ecommerce/broadheads/eskilite/5-16-eskilite-2-edge-screw-on.jsp


The Landshark and Tiger Shark aren't that big. Chris Spikes killed a deer with a 45# bow, 450 gr arrow, and big Tree Shark to prove it could be done- and got a pass through. A bit much I suppose, but I wouldn't have any hesitation to use the TigerShark from 40#.


----------



## Roger Savor Sr (Feb 16, 2014)

rattus58 said:


> No... and I'm not about to. the advantage of serration, is that it cuts faster but not cleaner. They are harder to keep sharp but they, I'm told but not that I BUY but will take it on face, somewhat stronger than a straight edge... Now if you are planning on arguing with me that a stone point is superior to a sharp straight edge... have at it... If you want to continue this primitive tact with me, lets get it on.... my point is that a sharp broadhead is the essential for hunting. If you wish to argue the point that a serrated blade is SHARPER than a straight.... my argument... let the games begin..... :laugh:


Who says the serrated heads cut less cleanly? My actual experiences with them reveal they cut ever bit as cleanly as non serrated. And I have not found them to be more difficult to sharpen or to keep sharp for that matter. Sounds like your operating off of hearsay and conjecture, on the other hand I've personally used serrated heads extensively. But, you have third hand 'information' which I'm certain trumps my experience.


----------



## Roger Savor Sr (Feb 16, 2014)

Kegan, I really like the Shark series of heads as well - very well thought design. You using some sort of round or half round file to sharpen them?


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

muley40 said:


> Here is another deer that got shot with a 40# bow 2 years ago.


Awesome My friend


----------



## ghostgoblin22 (May 3, 2013)

VPA broadheads, nuff said


----------



## kegan (Aug 28, 2006)

Roger Savor Sr said:


> Kegan, I really like the Shark series of heads as well - very well thought design. You using some sort of round or half round file to sharpen them?


Yes, I bought the sharpening kit Simmons sells and it's a half round file and set of round rods. Takes a little bit of time, but it's worth it. I still have a bare spot on my leg from testing for sharpness:lol:


----------



## Roger Savor Sr (Feb 16, 2014)

Tradbow Guy said:


> I mostly agree with this. While I do prescribe to the maximum damage, heaviest poundage, least margin of error for myself, as you said, if you put a field point through both lungs the deer is going down. A good example of why I like to maximize my deer though, one deer I shot I did not get a passthrough on, and due to the angle from my treestand the shot had to be placed a little high to get the propper angle into both lungs. As a result of the high angle and the arrow not passing through there was no blood at all, I couldnt find a single drop of blood. A less experenced hunter may have gave up there thinking they had missed, however I was confident I made a good hit so I did a grid search of the area and found the deer laying dead about 40 yards away. When I opened it up blood poured out everywhere from where it had pooled inside the animal. My point is, I do think it matters to a degree how your gear performs. Even if all broadheads kill, I do not believe they all perform equally.


Well, no........A deer shot through the lungs with a field point will not necessarily die. Lung material is a very unique tissue in mammals. Actually, necropsies have reveled that deer have in fact been shot through both lungs, with both identified and unidentified projectiles WITHOUT causing a double pneumothorax. In other words, the lung tissue healed quickly enough to "seel" the wound and enable the animal to survive. Un sharpened and/or damaged broadheads have been shot through the lungs of a variety of animal's and some of them have in fact survived. This would be the primary reason for me to prioritize the broadhead's edge and edge durability.


----------



## rickstix (Nov 11, 2009)

Roger Savor Sr said:


> Well, no........A deer shot through the lungs with a field point will not necessarily die. Lung material is a very unique tissue in mammals. Actually, necropsies have reveled that deer have in fact been shot through both lungs, with both identified and unidentified projectiles WITHOUT causing a double pneumothorax. In other words, the lung tissue healed quickly enough to "seel" the wound and enable the animal to survive. Un sharpened and/or damaged broadheads have been shot through the lungs of a variety of animal's and some of them have in fact survived. This would be the primary reason for me to prioritize the broadhead's edge and edge durability.


Having been taught how to address a similar wound in humans…and holding it up against what proves fatal to deer…humans generally don’t run at full tilt after such an event…and that being the case, it is often the deer’s natural inclination that serves to cause them to collapse in mid-stride.

Anecdotal evidence is often interesting, though it’s often representative of exceptions; i.e.: given the proper care in a timely manner the odds of human survival would increase.

That said, and trying to discard the field point example (…where keeping the deer moving could change the result) this 40# for deer question has some similarity to the other post going on in regard to broadhead selection. In neither case would I normally be given to consider a single aspect of healing.

Done, as nearly correctly as possible, I fully expect a whitetail to expire before its body’s natural defensive mechanism starts to kick in…and especially, in consideration of my just having defeated it, the first time. Just MO…Enjoy, Rick.


----------



## skramr12 (Dec 20, 2014)

Nice deer Yohon and Muley40. I feel 40lbs would be the lowest I would use for hunting deer here in New England. But a razor sharp broad head and tuned arrow out of a 35lb. bow will work better than a un-tuned semi-sharp headed arrow out of a 50lb. bow. For many years I have always over-bowed myself at 65+lbs. Now that I am older and wiser I feel 55lbs is the weight I am completely comfortable with and should have chose it 10 years ago even though I could shoot 65+ lbs. Speed is one thing, holding at full draw comfortably and hitting your spot time after time is another. Its funny how time and experience will change your opinions. At one time (in my 20's and early 30's) the perfect bow was around 60" and a higher draw weight. Now that I am in my early 40's I find the longer bows (62"-64" recurves & 68" longbows) at a mid-weight much more smooth, accurate and forgiving and just nicer to shoot for me. A well shot arrow is everything. -Ray-


----------



## Attack (Oct 25, 2011)

I think there are 2 ways to look at it. One is, normally you are going to be more accurate with less pounds draw, making the likelihood of a bad shot less. Now a really good shot, even at very low poundage will kill a deer. Heavier poundage(heavier than your normal shooting weight) increases the chances of a bad shot, but the increased weight somewhat makes up for a less than great shot.


----------



## MGF (Oct 27, 2012)

I don't believe that more weight significantly increases the chances of a good outcome with a bad shot...all else being equal. I'm thinking of whitetail sized game here.

The reason I say that is because I've had some poor results from bows of 55# and up. there were a couple of things going on. First, I didn't know very much about tuning. I tried but the results were inconsistent enough that I didn't know what to do with it.

Second, my shooting probably wasn't very good which, also, contributed to the above. Here again, I tried and "sometimes" I could hit some really small targets but, failure to do any kind of real measurement, left me thinking that I was better than I was.

With no place to really hunt and no chronograph, it's all kind of hard to prove but a nice clean shot off my 42# bow really seems to slam them in there.

A heavier bow could certainly do it too as long as the archer can. I just suspect that some (many?) add weight when that's not really the solution.


----------



## Buffalo freak (Jul 29, 2012)

ghostgoblin22 said:


> VPA broadheads, nuff said


Damn straight man!


----------



## 4 Fletch (Jan 25, 2014)

gun said:


> Flyg
> 
> The Magnus Stingers either 4 or 2 blade would work for you. I'm not a 2 blade fan, but many have great success with them.
> 
> ...


FWIW a hunter w decades of experience recently told me the same thing. 

While he has killed lots of animals w 2-blades, he likes the Wensel Woodsmen, which in his live and carcass tests has demonstrated better penetration. Arrow pinch is a potential issue w 2-blades, whereas the 3-blade opens a hole that doesn't pinch the arrow and typically provides better blood trail.

To add more confusion to the discussion... my Spyderco Delica has a combination straight/serrated edge, and the serrations are only on one side, like a chisel edge. 

Yes, it takes longer to sharpen. I use the Spyderco tri-Sharp system. 

No, cutting does not require a sawing motion. 
I like the combo edge because around here I cut rope and twinder bine often, and the serrations "grab" the rope while slicing thru it, if that makes any sense. Sorry, that's about as best I can describe. 

*As for the OP's question*, my recurve is 38# @ 26"... three years ago my friend (sadly no longer w us) whose DL was 29", shot three deer with the same model bow on opening day. All died on the spot, right below his stand. 

While my friend used NAP Spitfires exclusively with his compound, and two-blades with his recurves and longbows, I don't recall what broadhead he used to get those three with the recurve. 

Regardless of what he used, shot placement counted. And Bambi was delicious. :mg:


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

Roger Savor Sr said:


> Who says the serrated heads cut less cleanly? My actual experiences with them reveal they cut ever bit as cleanly as non serrated. And I have not found them to be more difficult to sharpen or to keep sharp for that matter. Sounds like your operating off of hearsay and conjecture, on the other hand I've personally used serrated heads extensively. But, you have third hand 'information' which I'm certain trumps my experience.


Oh.... and how did you measure that.... :laugh:


----------



## Tradbow Guy (Feb 9, 2007)

Roger Savor Sr said:


> Well, no........A deer shot through the lungs with a field point will not necessarily die. Lung material is a very unique tissue in mammals. Actually, necropsies have reveled that deer have in fact been shot through both lungs, with both identified and unidentified projectiles WITHOUT causing a double pneumothorax. In other words, the lung tissue healed quickly enough to "seel" the wound and enable the animal to survive. Un sharpened and/or damaged broadheads have been shot through the lungs of a variety of animal's and some of them have in fact survived. This would be the primary reason for me to prioritize the broadhead's edge and edge durability.


I agree its not idea but a field point is the size of a 9mm bullet. I would think more often then not a hole that size through 2 lungs would result in death, without medical attention. I know its not a perfect analogy, but bullets arent razor sharp either.


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

ghostgoblin22 said:


> VPA broadheads, nuff said


Yeah, if I ever run out of Snuffers, they is next on my list... :grin:


----------



## MGF (Oct 27, 2012)

Tradbow Guy said:


> I agree its not idea but a field point is the size of a 9mm bullet. I would think more often then not a hole that size through 2 lungs would result in death, without medical attention. I know its not a perfect analogy, but bullets arent razor sharp either.


Bullets impart hydrostatic shock. Expanding bullets impart lots of shock. The right bullet hitting the front end can burst blood vessels in the back end. Arrows don't really do that.

There really isn't any analogy there at all.


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

Tradbow Guy said:


> I agree its not idea but a field point is the size of a 9mm bullet. I would think more often then not a hole that size through 2 lungs would result in death, without medical attention. I know its not a perfect analogy, but bullets arent razor sharp either.


I've seen animals killed with field points. I've heard of many others that escaped to do what I don't know. That being said, a bullet is usually going 3 to 10 times the speed and bullet expands.. or generally does and there is the shock factor with bullets... :grin:


----------



## Tradbow Guy (Feb 9, 2007)

MGF said:


> Bullets impart hydrostatic shock. Expanding bullets impart lots of shock. The right bullet hitting the front end can burst blood vessels in the back end. Arrows don't really do that.
> 
> There really isn't any analogy there at all.


I understand, it was not a great anology. But a 9mm solid round nose doesnt expand much or dump a lot of shock but will still put a hole in you that will kill you even if it zips right through. I guess I should just stop comparing it to bullets and say, IMO, a field point sized hole through both lungs left untreated will result in death the vast majority of the time


----------



## ghostgoblin22 (May 3, 2013)

i think some of you are over analyzing this a tad too much, its simple, sharp broadhead, tuned arrow, good form and the deer is dead


----------



## MGF (Oct 27, 2012)

Tradbow Guy said:


> I understand, it was not a great anology. But a 9mm solid round nose doesnt expand much or dump a lot of shock but will still put a hole in you that will kill you even if it zips right through. I guess I should just stop comparing it to bullets and say, IMO, a field point sized hole through both lungs left untreated will result in death the vast majority of the time


It's a complicated topic but the 9mm is packing a lot more energy than an arrow. That's where much of the shock comes from. The question is, how much of that energy is imparted to the target. A bullet that really doesn't expand sometimes doesn't kill all that well either.

A arrow kills by cutting. The less it cuts, the less the harm.


----------



## Tradbow Guy (Feb 9, 2007)

MGF said:


> It's a complicated topic but the 9mm is packing a lot more energy than an arrow. That's where much of the shock comes from. The question is, how much of that energy is imparted to the target. A bullet that really doesn't expand sometimes doesn't kill all that well either.
> 
> A arrow kills by cutting. The less it cuts, the less the harm.


I agree with everything you said. I just used a bad analogy to try and say what I was trying to say.


----------



## MacIndust (Feb 7, 2012)

rattus58 said:


> I've seen animals killed with field points. I've heard of many others that escaped to do what I don't know. That being said, a bullet is usually going 3 to 10 times the speed and bullet expands.. or generally does and there is the shock factor with bullets... :grin:


The lung tissue isn't the only thing that will kill a deer, either. Entrance into the diaphram alone will usually result in death. The problem is we take limited instances and present them as facts when they are really opinions based on limited circumstance.

I feel dirty for joining this bu yes, 40# at 20 yards will do just fine


----------



## Roger Savor Sr (Feb 16, 2014)

How didn't you measure it?


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

Roger Savor Sr said:


> How didn't you measure it?


I measure by two parameters... three if a dead animal is the measure, they are, of the broadhead, sharp, drag, and result.That is why I shoot Snuffers. Your result might parallel mine but the dynamics of the two are going to be vastly different.


----------



## Pitty2617 (Mar 27, 2010)

gun said:


> There is a thread over on the "wall" on light bow kills. A guy just posted that killed 5 deer this year including a dandy buck using a [email protected]" Bear Montana that he draws to27", so about 37-38 pounds. and the Montana isn't a speed demon.


Lol...that was me. All 5 of those deer had 2 holes in them...so yes 40# is plenty for deer. But like others have said if you are gonna shoot that weight your rig has to be very well tuned. I am shooting 29" 1816's..with 125 grain magnus stingers...and they fly like darts out of my Montana. I am very very confident in this hunting setup....just be smart and know you and your bows capabilities and all will be well. Oh and here is the buck I was very blessed to arrow this season.


----------



## Tracker12 (Sep 22, 2003)

Shot this hog last week with a #43 longbow. Complete pass thru with Magnus Stinger.


----------



## Roger Savor Sr (Feb 16, 2014)

Tracker12 said:


> Shot this hog last week with a #43 longbow. Complete pass thru with Magnus Stinger.


Just wait......they'll tell you the hole was "ragged" and really didn't kill the animal.......or that a field point is the same diameter as a 9mm, so it's the same thing. Got to love the internet


----------



## Tradbow Guy (Feb 9, 2007)

Roger Savor Sr said:


> Just wait......they'll tell you the hole was "ragged" and really didn't kill the animal.......or that a field point is the same diameter as a 9mm, so it's the same thing. Got to love the internet


Or that sharp solid edged broadheads dont kill as good as heads with pieces cut out of em? Or that deer shot through the lungs wont die because lungs are made of special stuff? I know what you mean about that darned internet. (He said the hog was killed with a stinger not a buzzcut btw)


----------



## Homey88 (Dec 10, 2013)

Nice deer pity2617 and nice hog tracker12!


----------



## gun (Apr 26, 2005)

Pitty
Thanks for adding to the thread, great buck as well.


----------



## Easykeeper (Jan 2, 2003)

Pretty buck Pitty, great photo too. Congratulations...:thumbs_up


----------



## Roger Savor Sr (Feb 16, 2014)

Yes, I noticed the stinger reference and mine was tongue in cheek. Unlike some with unqualified opinions, I've actually used both models, but thanks. So far Tradbow Guy You've offered up a lot in the way of very bad and completely incorrect analogies. When others point out that they are completely bunk, you then merely try and talk your way out of it......Like when you didn't understand that sights on bows have been around and were incredibly popular many decades prior to your Neotrad indoctrination an entire nine years ago.

I've never said that straight edge broadheads don't kill as well those with "pieces cut out of 'em". But, they do cut and kill every bit as well. You on the other hand have not used serrated heads, but ironically have strong opinions about them, and again, 'supported' by yours and your friend's bunk analogies, rhetoric, hearsay and conjecture. In the future, how about when you don't understand something, why not just ask questions instead of making blatantly false statements.


----------



## Tradbow Guy (Feb 9, 2007)

Roger Savor Sr said:


> Yes, I noticed the stinger reference and mine was tongue in cheek. Unlike some with unqualified opinions, I've actually used both models, but thanks. So far Tradbow Guy You've offered up a lot in the way of very bad and completely incorrect analogies. When others point out that they are completely bunk, you then merely try and talk your way out of it......Like when you didn't understand that sights on bows have been around and were incredibly popular many decades prior to your Neotrad indoctrination an entire nine years ago.
> 
> I've never said that straight edge broadheads don't kill as well those with "pieces cut out of 'em". But, they do cut and kill every bit as well. You on the other hand have not used serrated heads, but ironically have strong opinions about them, and again, 'supported' by yours and your friend's bunk analogies, rhetoric, hearsay and conjecture. In the future, how about when you don't understand something, why not just ask questions instead of making blatantly false statements.


And here you seem to know me so well. I never said serrated heads didnt work. I absolutly do not have strong opinions about them. You say I have bunk anologies but talk about how serrated heads cut "The tougher arteries and stuff" while at the same time being unable to offer up any proof except "I use em" well I use strait blade heads and I know they cut arteries as well. As far as in the future when I dont understand something...take a look right on back up through this post and read me say I dont understand how these heads are susposed to be a different kind of serration, then, me asking how they work. You seem to be a my way or the highway type guy with no room or debate for discussion. I was perfectly willing to ask and learn but you come on here with your "Facts" that are really "Opinions" offer no evidence, then hop in a post and take a shot at me about the field point thing, so I shot back. My "Bunk" anology never says a field point has the energy or a 9mm, I would think it would be blatantly obvious to most I was not saying that. I said 9mm size hole. Sorry but a hole the size of a field point through both lungs of an animal IS death the vast majority of the time. There are extreame cases as you pointed out, but theres also people who survive gunshot wounds to the head. Maybe if you come at people with a much less "Matter of fact" "I know what im talking about you dont" approach, people might take you a little more seriously when you talk about how your serrated heads out penetrate strait blades, and the uselessness of scalple sharp broadheads against "Dirt and hair".


----------



## Tradbow Guy (Feb 9, 2007)

Roger Savor Sr said:


> .Like when you didn't understand that sights on bows have been around and were incredibly popular many decades prior to your Neotrad indoctrination an entire nine years ago.


I understand the history of archery perfectly well sir. I never once stated that sights havent been around for decades. I am well aware that sights were a common thing on recurves pre-compound bow. I've never in my life met someone who jumps to so many conclusions, and knows how everyone thinks, states blatant lies based on 1 or 2 setences he reads, and has so much rage over people making posts he disagrees with on the internet. I dont even know how to respond of a "Neotrad indoctrination an entire nine years ago", because I have no clue what your even trying to say there its so far out in left field. Your just another know it all a-hole who doesnt know a damn thing and loves to come into posts attack people and stir up arguments so we all have to share in a bit of your constant misery. 217 posts of contribute nothing uselessness.


----------



## Shotkizer (Nov 3, 2012)

For me, it's all about getting passthroughs. You need to find your deer once you find him. If your bow poundage and overall setup provides consistent passthroughs, it's adequate. 

Pitty's testimonial is eye opening. I would have never thought it. Nice buck btw.


----------



## Roger Savor Sr (Feb 16, 2014)

It's amazing that you continue to do this.

Can you reference the post where I wrote "the tougher arteries and stuff"? I can't find it, and to save you some time, neither will you. Btw, a "my way or the highway type of guy" is one who offers unqualified opinions in place of fact that are based on the guesswork of other people, which your arguments on this board continue to follow.......Sorta like when you advise others that they likely won't find much in the way of advice on sights here with regards to 'trad' bows, because after all, they really aren't traditional and then challenge the same to link them to "traditional archery".

You've lost everybody here with your silly 9MM/field point analogy - the two projectiles have nothing to do with one another and do not kill by the same means. And it not necessarily the case that a fp can puncture lungs, but it would be an "extreame" case for the animal to survive. I've had a lot in the way of discussions with veterinarians and pulmonologists alike regarding this subject, and certainly nothing they've told me anyway supports your claims.

When it comes to scalpels I don't recall mentioning "dirt and hair", but then again neither do you. Likewise, I've never stated "the uselessness of scalpe sharp broadheads". The question I did pose, however, is what would a surgeon have to say about cutting through hide, hair, tissue and bone with a scalpel alone? Not a "scalpel sharp" BROADHEAD, but a scalpel itself......The point being they would laugh at you. In order for a broadhead to contact lung tissue it is likely going to break and/or cut bone, and hair, before reaching that 'spongy' tissue. Try that with a broadhead built the specifications of a scalpel and you will destroy it's edge most times before it reaches the lungs.......Got it? Others sure did. Every bit as important as "sharpness" is the durability of the head's edge. "Scalpel sharp" at the bow is useless if it's build causes it to lose the edge's integrity at the animal. This is why broadheads aren't scalpels and scalpels aren't broadheads.

I think part of, if not entirely the problem here, is that you don't know what is that you don't know.


----------



## Tradbow Guy (Feb 9, 2007)

Roger Savor Sr said:


> You've lost everybody here with your silly 9MM/field point analogy


You speak for everyone here now? Oh thats right, you think your the only one whos opinion matters. I think the problem here is you dont know what I dont know which is probably less then you know and less then you think you know. Im done arguing with you, find another avenue to vent your rage.


----------



## Roger Savor Sr (Feb 16, 2014)

No, I don't speak for everyone here, but had you bothered to read everyone else's responses to that nonsense and comprehended them, then I don't see how you'd draw a contrary conclusion, which I'm sure is coming.


----------



## Tradbow Guy (Feb 9, 2007)

Roger Savor Sr said:


> then I don't see how you'd draw a contrary conclusion, which I'm sure is coming.


Not really man, I could really care less about you or what you think.


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

Tradbow Guy said:


> I understand the history of archery perfectly well sir. I never once stated that sights havent been around for decades. I am well aware that sights were a common thing on recurves pre-compound bow. I've never in my life met someone who jumps to so many conclusions, and knows how everyone thinks, states blatant lies based on 1 or 2 setences he reads, and has so much rage over people making posts he disagrees with on the internet. I dont even know how to respond of a "Neotrad indoctrination an entire nine years ago", because I have no clue what your even trying to say there its so far out in left field. Your just another know it all a-hole who doesnt know a damn thing and loves to come into posts attack people and stir up arguments so we all have to share in a bit of your constant misery. 217 posts of contribute nothing uselessness.


Hey mon.... when they start taxing intelligence, some will be deserving of refunds.... :laugh:


----------



## Tracker12 (Sep 22, 2003)

We should stop using this thread to bicker and contribute to the OP. 40#will kill plenty of game with a well placed shot while using a sharp broad head.


----------



## keb (Jul 17, 2007)

I shot this deer with a bow marked 42 at 27, which was my draw I am sure I short drawed. I was using a 500 grain 11/32 cedar with a 2 blade zwickey.

17 yards pass thru, deer weighed 330lbs


----------



## Roger Savor Sr (Feb 16, 2014)

"You may do better asking about sights in the FITA section then the traditional section. Traditional archers dont use sights"

"I understand the history of archery perfectly well sir. I never once stated that sights havent been around for decades. I am well aware that sights were a common thing on recurves pre-compound bow."

Mouth, this is Foot......Foot, meet mouth.


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

Tracker12 said:


> We should stop using this thread to bicker and contribute to the OP. 40#will kill plenty of game with a well placed shot while using a sharp broad head.


precisely


----------



## gun (Apr 26, 2005)

Keb

Beautiful buck, what a horse!


----------



## Tradbow Guy (Feb 9, 2007)

Roger Savor Sr said:


> "You may do better asking about sights in the FITA section then the traditional section. Traditional archers dont use sights"
> 
> "I understand the history of archery perfectly well sir. I never once stated that sights havent been around for decades. I am well aware that sights were a common thing on recurves pre-compound bow."
> 
> Mouth, this is Foot......Foot, meet mouth.


What does sights being prominant on recurves until the late 70's and traditional archery have to do with anything? I think your pulling strings, I think your reaching. My statement still stands. My definition of traditional is different from your definition of traditional. My opinion is still that traditional archers dont use sights. Traditional archery didnt start in the 60's-70s. None of it has anything to do with this thread you should go start a thread titled "Looking for childish arguements and to insult people to feel supirior in my sad little life." Grow up and lets get back on topic shall we?


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

keb said:


> View attachment 2149364
> 
> 
> 
> ...


330 pounds??? What the damn thing live in the projects on pizza? :laugh:


----------



## Roger Savor Sr (Feb 16, 2014)

Tradbow Guy said:


> What does sights being prominant on recurves until the late 70's and traditional archery have to do with anything? I think your pulling strings, I think your reaching. My statement still stands. My definition of traditional is different from your definition of traditional. My opinion is still that traditional archers dont use sights. Traditional archery didnt start in the 60's-70s. None of it has anything to do with this thread you should go start a thread titled "Looking for childish arguements and to insult people to feel supirior in my sad little life." Grow up and lets get back on topic shall we?


"Actually I picked up my first stickbow about 9 years ago. But you seem to know a lot about me. I'll bow out now as I dont argue with hot headed people.".......Tradbow Guy("Guys with sights" thread)

You made that statement on another thread and then continued to argue. You made virtually the same statement on this thread, and again, continued to argue. Then you accuse others of "Looking for childish arguments". And it's not "pulling strings", they're your words - own them. That shoe leather can't taste good, does it?


----------



## Tradbow Guy (Feb 9, 2007)

Roger Savor Sr said:


> "Actually I picked up my first stickbow about 9 years ago. But you seem to know a lot about me. I'll bow out now as I dont argue with hot headed people.".......Tradbow Guy("Guys with sights" thread)
> 
> You made that statement on another thread and then continued to argue. You made virtually the same statement on this thread, and again, continued to argue. Then you accuse others of "Looking for childish arguments". And it's not "pulling strings", they're your words - own them. That shoe leather can't taste good, does it?


Hit me up on facebook sometime and we will continue this debate. https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100002321563929&sk=about. Nice to put a face to the kid im talking to. Sometimes people love to show their true colors behind the anonymity of the internet.

http://www.whitepages.com/name/Roger-A-Savor-Sr/New-Castle-PA/auxv438

Want to talk on the phone? Like men? I want to see if you act like such a child with normal contact or if you just come to the internet to be an ass and attack people. I can give you a call and we can sort this mess out just let me know if you want to talk. Or you can just drop it and we can go on talking about the effectiveness of 40# bows like i've been trying to do for the past day that you've been trying to attack me and pull up all kinds of dumb crap on me.









(None of this information is private, all public)


----------



## Roger Savor Sr (Feb 16, 2014)

Gee, that looks like my house from above.....sweet. 

Ya' can't stop....can ya?


----------



## Tradbow Guy (Feb 9, 2007)

Roger Savor Sr said:


> Gee, that looks like my house from above.....sweet.
> 
> Ya' can't stop....can ya?


No I cant, you keep sucking me back in. You have a very nice lawn I might add. You gotta tell me your secrets. Perhaps that would be a better discussion then this one.


----------



## Doofy_13 (Jan 2, 2012)

keb said:


> View attachment 2149364
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Dayummm what a chunk!

I short draw too under pressure. You can also kiss aiming goodbye too


----------



## Beendare (Jan 31, 2006)

Its funny, the guys that have never used Buzzcuts criticize them....and the guys that have rave about them. Put me in the rave category. 

I too was skeptical but a trusted buddy used to work for them and after much testing kept telling me, "I'm not sure why but the Buzzcut just works better than anything else we tested". Now that I have used them, I agree...not even close to a serrated knife. Swipe them on some angled chock sticks like the Spyderco Sharpsmaker and those thing will cut you just by looking at them. I use them in my compound too and like the fact they pass through so fast the animal rarely reacts- they have no clue what happened until they fall over. None of this arrow dangling out spooking the animal as it runs off....like on TV.

OP- 40#, no problem. You can max out the lethality of that setup by (1) using a slightly heavy arrow 9-10GPP and (2) a super efficient BH like a tapered 2 blade.


----------



## MacIndust (Feb 7, 2012)

Awesome buck, keb.


----------



## kegan (Aug 28, 2006)

Beyond the arguing I think this thread is starting to shape up to be one of the more informative.

I'm appreciating the correction on the Buzzcuts. It's nice to learn when something actually works, and isn't just a gimmick


----------



## spookinelk (Feb 10, 2013)

The only reason I don't use the buzzcuts is you can't use an accusharp on them.


----------



## Beendare (Jan 31, 2006)

kegan said:


> Beyond the arguing I think this thread is starting to shape up to be one of the more informative.
> 
> I'm appreciating the correction on the Buzzcuts. It's nice to learn when something actually works, and isn't just a gimmick


Kegan, shoot me a PM and i will mail you one....its the least I can do for all of the good info over the years. I'm hoping to have a real good blood trail to show you from my upcoming deer hunt the end of the month- grin

i have my theories; I think many shoot heads that are less than sharp....or they shoot short heads that compress on hide and slightly dull the heads on contact with hair and hide- i've seen it a couple of times myself with Slick Trick mags. It wouldn't take much to have a blade push arterial tissue and slide past it vs cut. No way in heck these Buzzcuts will do that-each serration is like a little razor that won't slide past anything without cutting- thus the great blood trails. Now if you were shooting cape buff or water buff with lots of bone- overlapping ribs more than 1" thick- this isn't your head as it has a split ferrule [not the strongest] and the serrations would have to hang up just a bit on that much bone. Curled a couple zwickeys on those WB in a test.....


----------



## Shotkizer (Nov 3, 2012)

Keb,

Is that a Kansas deer? I'm still surprised to see the pass throughs with 40# bows.


----------



## kegan (Aug 28, 2006)

Beendare, that's a generous offer but I'm quite alright! My arrows are set up for a 175 gr tip, besides, I don't have any way to test it against what I do have! 

However if enough people offer first hand evidence that something works as described, there has to be something to it 

Besides, I'm busy enough trying to make myself a set of 40# ILF limbs!


----------



## dougedwards (Sep 5, 2010)

The question was pertaining to "killing" whitetails, I believe. I have not a question in my mind that a high performance traditional bow at 40 lbs with the a correctly spined arrow tipped with a very sharp head will KILL a whitetail. Heck.....even a good 40 lb bow without the improperly spined arrows and a dull broadhead can do it but the purpose of hunting is not usually the killing of an animal but the taking possession of it. To enhance the possibility of actually securing the animal in the back of your pick up truck we must think in terms of accuracy and penetration. 

Now I have been bow hunting long enough to know that twisting around and shooting at slowly moving animals is not like taking target practice in my back yard. Even well executed shots can miss their mark as the animal physically reacts to the sound of the bow before the arrow arrives. Thus, we need deep penetration ideally to the point of a pass through. We need not only that the animal should bleed to the point that it passes out but we want that to happen rather quickly. 

A 400 grain arrow with a sharp blade proceeding at 150 fps can do it, no doubt. But it can also lead to the whitetails demise and a feast for the coyote also. I choose to limit myself to rigs that yield 35 lbs of kinetic energy coming from the bow and 20 yards of shooting distance. Sure, I could kill something at 25 yards but killing isn't my objective. Venison is.

Doug


----------



## Roger Savor Sr (Feb 16, 2014)

Then Doug, you should definitely continue to do it your way. Out of curiosity, what draw weight do you shoot?


----------



## Matt_Potter (Apr 13, 2010)

Tradbow Guy said:


> Hit me up on facebook sometime and we will continue this debate. https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100002321563929&sk=about. Nice to put a face to the kid im talking to. Sometimes people love to show their true colors behind the anonymity of the internet.
> 
> http://www.whitepages.com/name/Roger-A-Savor-Sr/New-Castle-PA/auxv438
> 
> ...


Tradbow guy I don't know how old you are but this is the behavior of a 12 year old. 

Matt


----------



## Tradbow Guy (Feb 9, 2007)

Matt_Potter said:


> Tradbow guy I don't know how old you are but this is the behavior of a 12 year old.
> 
> Matt


If less people posted anon them maybe less people would spend half a dozen posts off topic to try and bash/discredit someone. If you'll notice, the troll stopped in his tracks right after that post and this thread got back on subject. Your right, you dont know how old I am, or anything else about me. Yet you still felt the need to post more irrelevant bs.


----------



## dougedwards (Sep 5, 2010)

Roger Savor Sr said:


> Then Doug, you should definitely continue to do it your way. Out of curiosity, what draw weight do you shoot?


Shooting [email protected] high performance recurve for hunting and drawing close to 30". I am fortunate to have a long draw but at 60 yrs old my shoulder struggles with the weight. I just love shooting too much to slow down.

Doug


----------



## Roger Savor Sr (Feb 16, 2014)

dougedwards said:


> Shooting [email protected] high performance recurve for hunting and drawing close to 30". I am fortunate to have a long draw but at 60 yrs old my shoulder struggles with the weight. I just love shooting too much to slow down.
> 
> Doug


"A 400 grain arrow with a sharp blade proceeding at 150 fps can do it, no doubt. But it can also lead to the whitetails demise and a feast for the coyote also. I choose to limit myself to rigs that yield 35 lbs of kinetic energy coming from the bow and 20 yards of shooting distance. Sure, I could kill something at 25 yards but killing isn't my objective. Venison is.

Doug"

Doug, I know some folks who are just as concerned as you are about wounding deer and some of them say that if your not pulling at least 65# then you aren't doing the best you can to ensure the animal isn't wounded. Would you agree with them?


----------



## Roger Savor Sr (Feb 16, 2014)

Tradbow Guy said:


> If less people posted anon them maybe less people would spend half a dozen posts off topic to try and bash/discredit someone. If you'll notice, the troll stopped in his tracks right after that post and this thread got back on subject. Your right, you dont know how old I am, or anything else about me. Yet you still felt the need to post more irrelevant bs.


Tradbow Guy, I don't think your picking up what a bunch of folks here(Matt_Potter included) are putting down. No one on this site is trying to bash you, including me. But, when you hit the same site on multiple threads and argue incessantly on all of them, and then tell everybody your in fact not arguing, but "trying to learn", and then continue to argue, then your going to continue to get the responses from folks you do. Posting a photo of a man's house and then challenging him to a 'Facebook Fight' is about as 10 year old spoiled, daft and childish as it gets. I suppose if you got the irony there......well.....you wouldn't have done it then in the first place.


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

dougedwards said:


> Shooting [email protected] high performance recurve for hunting and drawing close to 30". I am fortunate to have a long draw but at 60 yrs old my shoulder struggles with the weight. I just love shooting too much to slow down.
> 
> Doug


Perfectly acceptable setup. You're pulling close to 50 pounds and and over the years more deer have been killed with a 50 pound bow than any other... according to Fred Bear. Having a close to 50# bow will cast any arrow with sufficient energy to kill deer. Good hunting! :thumbs_up


----------



## Tradbow Guy (Feb 9, 2007)

Roger Savor Sr said:


> Tradbow Guy, I don't think your picking up what a bunch of folks here(Matt_Potter included) are putting down. No one on this site is trying to bash you, including me. But, when you hit the same site on multiple threads and argue incessantly on all of them, and then tell everybody your in fact not arguing, but "trying to learn", and then continue to argue, then your going to continue to get the responses from folks you do. Posting a photo of a man's house and then challenging him to a 'Facebook Fight' is about as 10 year old spoiled, daft and childish as it gets. I suppose if you got the irony there......well.....you wouldn't have done it then in the first place.


I never challenged you to a fight theres your problem. You keep putting words in my mouth, telling me what I know, then digging up quotes and trying to apply them to stuff they have nothing to do with. You quote a thread where I say im done argueing here, and in fact, did stop argueing, then apply it to this thread. You pull out another one where I said traditional archers dont use sights, when imo, they dont, and try and use it to say I know nothing of guys using sights in the 70's, which, I do, as if thats the entire scope of traditional archery. Almost all of my posts here are asking questions trying to learn things, but just because I try and learn things doesnt mean I know nothing. Broadheads are of particular interest to me and I test the hell out of them so pretending like I should never debate about something I know of, by calling it argueing and pointing out how long i've been into archery is just stupid. Also saying I argue on every thread, is just stupid. Pretending to know anything about me, is just stupid. Having 200 somthing post count with half of them being insult/troll posts, is just stupid. Continueing to use a draw weight thread to keep trying to insult me, is just stupid. I was asking serious questions and trying to learn about buzzcuts when you got all butthurt over nothing and started trying to insult me because I wanted to know how the broadhead worked rather then just taking your word for it that they were the best broadheads of all time. Its not my fault your such a sensitive lass. Now, shoot back. Lets just keep argueing on this thread til its shut down, since that seems to be why you come to internet forums i'll oblige since im such a nice guy.


----------



## dougedwards (Sep 5, 2010)

Roger Savor Sr said:


> "A 400 grain arrow with a sharp blade proceeding at 150 fps can do it, no doubt. But it can also lead to the whitetails demise and a feast for the coyote also. I choose to limit myself to rigs that yield 35 lbs of kinetic energy coming from the bow and 20 yards of shooting distance. Sure, I could kill something at 25 yards but killing isn't my objective. Venison is.
> 
> Doug"
> 
> Doug, I know some folks who are just as concerned as you are about wounding deer and some of them say that if your not pulling at least 65# then you aren't doing the best you can to ensure the animal isn't wounded. Would you agree with them?


Well, I guess a more certain method of putting a deer down is to zip a 165 grain 30-06 round through him. But since I choose to hunt in a more primitive method I also am choosing to be much more mindful of a small twig that might possibly impede in the line of flight of the arrow, drawing at just the right time, possibly shaking while holding at full draw and a host of other conditions that would not receive one thought if hunting with other weapons but this is the method that brings me joy.

It is very difficult to establish hard and fast boundaries for ourselves and just about impossible to impose those limitations on others. That is for the Game and Fisheries agents and the state legislature. We should keep in mind that our intention is to hemorrhage the animal to the point that the brain runs out of oxygen and does that in a place that we might retrieve that animal. We can do that hunting with a 40 lb bow but as we shoot lighter arrows at slower speeds we also increase our risk of not retrieving our prey to some extent. As said, a well placed broadhead that penetrates 4-5 inches into a whitetail will take them down but that is easier said that done in the hunting field.


----------



## gun (Apr 26, 2005)

Doug

It sounds to me that you have a very lethal set up. Your draw length is a huge benefit. Enough for most North American game in my opinion.

I can shoot 45-50#'s or even a little more with what I consider enough accuracy for hunting pretty easily in the warmth of summer and the comfort of my back yard. But, in cold temps standing and turning on a tree stand,I find it not nearly as easy. So, when I hunt elk in warm temps I use a heavier draw weight than I do when I crawl into a tree in November on a cold Wisconsin morning.

My point is, you need to be able to control your bow in all hunting conditions. I often see the comment to hunt with the heaviest draw weight that you can shoot accurately, and, while I don't disagree with this advice, I think one needs to factor in hunting conditions. Don't choose the heaviest draw weight you can shoot accurately on an 80* August day,unless you only hunt under those conditions.
I personally find shooting from a tree stand in awkward positions limits my draw weight.

So, if one needs to reduce draw weight and, if they think it necessary, shot distances,so be it. It's ok to pass up a shot, it's ok to limit shots to whatever yardage you are truly confident in.

It's all about self assessment. Some guys are just better shots than others. Know thyself as the saying goes. If you want to shoot greater distances, work on that, if you want to shoot more weight work up to it.

We would help each other a lot if we stopped using the cookie cutter type comparison for hunting archers. We are not all the same.

When I read these threads, I am concerned about those new to our sport,or this forum. Let our responses be directed at helping others improve, simple enough.

Ok, I'm done with my preaching.

Gun


----------



## kegan (Aug 28, 2006)

gun said:


> Doug
> 
> We would help each other a lot if we stopped using the cookie cutter type comparison for hunting archers. We are not all the same.
> 
> ...


I agree that not everyone hunts the same so they don't need to same set up, but when the majority of a group suffers from the same issue (overbowing for example) cookie cutter advice isn't as harmful, in my opinion, as letting people "find their own path". 

I don't think greater accuracy ever cost anyone a critter


----------



## Maine Iceman (May 30, 2012)

It boils down to razor sharp broadheads, if your ask me. As long as you keep them sharp, that should be plenty.


----------



## kegan (Aug 28, 2006)

kegan said:


> I agree that not everyone hunts the same so they don't need to same set up, but when the majority of a group suffers from the same issue (overbowing for example) cookie cutter advice isn't as harmful, in my opinion, as letting people "find their own path".
> 
> I don't think greater accuracy ever cost anyone a critter


Which isn't to argue, Gun, but rather just elaborate a bit on my own cookie cutter suggestions.

Maine Iceman summed it up fairly nicely though


----------



## rickstix (Nov 11, 2009)

buckdeer13 said:


> is 40 lb at 20 yards enough out of a long bow or recurve for whitetail deer?


The easy answer is…Arizona allows bowhunters to use 30# for antelope, bear, bighorn sheep, deer, elk, javelina, mountain lion, and turkey. For buffalo 40# will do. 

The efficiency of the bow, who makes what broadhead, or how far you decide to shoot does not matter.

Next question…do you want to shoot anything bigger than a buffalo? Rick.


----------



## Roger Savor Sr (Feb 16, 2014)

dougedwards said:


> Well, I guess a more certain method of putting a deer down is to zip a 165 grain 30-06 round through him. But since I choose to hunt in a more primitive method I also am choosing to be much more mindful of a small twig that might possibly impede in the line of flight of the arrow, drawing at just the right time, possibly shaking while holding at full draw and a host of other conditions that would not receive one thought if hunting with other weapons but this is the method that brings me joy.
> 
> It is very difficult to establish hard and fast boundaries for ourselves and just about impossible to impose those limitations on others. That is for the Game and Fisheries agents and the state legislature. We should keep in mind that our intention is to hemorrhage the animal to the point that the brain runs out of oxygen and does that in a place that we might retrieve that animal. We can do that hunting with a 40 lb bow but as we shoot lighter arrows at slower speeds we also increase our risk of not retrieving our prey to some extent. As said, a well placed broadhead that penetrates 4-5 inches into a whitetail will take them down but that is easier said that done in the hunting field.


Doug, had you been having problems in only getting "4-5 inches in to a whitetail" using 40# bows? I ask only because I've always gotten two-hole penetration from light bows and my draw length is only 27". Btw, most of those arrows hovered around the 375gr mark.


----------



## gun (Apr 26, 2005)

Kegan,
I think we are coming from the same place. I totally agree that most of us have been over bowed, I have for sure. I'm finally getting it, and have cut down in weight, currently have one bow that draws 35#'s, loving it. I can only imagine if I would have started with a manageable weight to begin with.

So, I agree with the cookie cutter grouping in the sense that so many begin with too much weight. I know Viper always suggest starting out with a very light bow. 

I always enjoy your posts, have learned a lot from them.

Gun


----------



## dougedwards (Sep 5, 2010)

Roger Savor Sr said:


> Doug, had you been having problems in only getting "4-5 inches in to a whitetail" using 40# bows? I ask only because I've always gotten two-hole penetration from light bows and my draw length is only 27". Btw, most of those arrows hovered around the 375gr mark.


My "easier said than done" comment pertained to the exact placement of the arrow rather than of degree of penetration. What I should have said is that 4-5" of a good sharp broadhead penetration piercing directly into the heart is all that should be required for a quick kill and recovery. That type of precision is a goal but seems to be somewhat elusive when it comes to my real world experience. Thus, I choose a set up that would allow the puncture and breaking of the upper and larger part of the rib as I shoot downward from my treestand. 

BTW, I read many testimonials of hunters killing extremely large whitetails with very light set ups but that has not been my personal experience. Even with my "lethal" set up a complete pass through is not the norm for me. I have to make my choice of poundage, bows, arrows and such based on my own experience....not the experience of others. I pass on the benefit of my own experiences to those who ask questions in hopes that they understand that I am definitely not the last word on ANY subject pertaining to traditional archery or hunting.

Doug


----------



## Oldruffedhunter (Aug 3, 2008)

My dad has killed 5 or 6 deer and a bear with knapped heads and Osage selfbow that was 37#@29. Two of the deer the arrow was buried in the ground 2" or so. All shots were under 25 yards. So yes it is more than enough setup right.


----------



## kegan (Aug 28, 2006)

dougedwards said:


> BTW, I read many testimonials of hunters killing extremely large whitetails with very light set ups but that has not been my personal experience. Even with my "lethal" set up a complete pass through is not the norm for me. I have to make my choice of poundage, bows, arrows and such based on my own experience....not the experience of others. I pass on the benefit of my own experiences to those who ask questions in hopes that they understand that I am definitely not the last word on ANY subject pertaining to traditional archery or hunting.
> 
> Doug


Shot with a guy who was big into compound archery a couple years ago. He shot 70# and fast bows. At the time I had shot four deer with my longbow. He asked if I ever got a pass through, and said he hadn't until he broke the 300 fps mark by using light arrows and a heavy draw weight. At the time he had collected something like six deer, but lost many more. I told him I had gotten pass throughs on all of my deer, even using a big Tree Sharks. Later I found out that not only had he never tuned any of his bows for bullet holes on paper, but his broadhead selection and attention to edge sharpness left a lot to be desired. He wasn't a bad shot, either.

There are lots of factors, but the importance of the basics can never be over stated.


----------



## Tradbow Guy (Feb 9, 2007)

kegan said:


> Shot with a guy who was big into compound archery a couple years ago. He shot 70# and fast bows. At the time I had shot four deer with my longbow. He asked if I ever got a pass through, and said he hadn't until he broke the 300 fps mark by using light arrows and a heavy draw weight. At the time he had collected something like six deer, but lost many more. I told him I had gotten pass throughs on all of my deer, even using a big Tree Sharks. Later I found out that not only had he never tuned any of his bows for bullet holes on paper, but his broadhead selection and attention to edge sharpness left a lot to be desired. He wasn't a bad shot, either.
> 
> There are lots of factors, but the importance of the basics can never be over stated.


I have no clue what my fps were, but I shot all my archery deer, around 20 with a 2006 hoyt ultratech at 30" DL set at 70lbs with a goldtip pro hunter 7595 cut to 29 1/2" with a 100 grain g5 Montech. Shot ranged from 15-40 yards, with the vast majority being either 20 yards, or 40 yards, every arrow I hit a deer with was sticking in the ground on the other side save 1 I shot with a popular expandable that I was testing out, that arrow was never recovered and the animal was to badly eaten by coyotes to tell what the shot had done. I believe the bows IBO was 305fps. I often wonder how many people get full pass throughs sticking in the ground with trad gear.


----------



## dougedwards (Sep 5, 2010)

kegan said:


> Shot with a guy who was big into compound archery a couple years ago. He shot 70# and fast bows. At the time I had shot four deer with my longbow. He asked if I ever got a pass through, and said he hadn't until he broke the 300 fps mark by using light arrows and a heavy draw weight. At the time he had collected something like six deer, but lost many more. I told him I had gotten pass throughs on all of my deer, even using a big Tree Sharks. Later I found out that not only had he never tuned any of his bows for bullet holes on paper, but his broadhead selection and attention to edge sharpness left a lot to be desired. He wasn't a bad shot, either.
> 
> There are lots of factors, but the importance of the basics can never be over stated.


It can not be disputed what you say about the relationship between arrow penetration into a whitetail and a well tuned, bow, arrow, broadhead combination. But there is much more to this process of killing and securing our prey than that. First of all, there is the archer....his stance, his ability to shoot accurately with heavy clothes, his release, his ability to hold at full draw without shaking, his ability to know when to draw, among many other variables that enter into the equation while hunting for whitetails. 

In addition to that we have the variables that are presented by small limbs and brush which sometimes visually fade away as we focus on our spot which frequently is a slowly moving target through this terrain. There are just too many variables to mention here but based on my own personal traditional hunting experience, I need to choose a set up that will, at least, partially give me confidence that a slightly off center shot will penetrate into the vitals to the point that the deer bleeds out quickly. This is especially a requirement when I am hunting in close proximity to swamps which I frequently do. 

As previously mentioned........we only need 5" of penetration directly behind the elbow of the deer to stop the heart and bring our prey to a quick demise. Sounds simple huh? Maybe it is for some. But for me, if it were truly a simple process, I probably would not be so much in love with the sport of traditional whitetail hunting. 

Doug


----------



## kegan (Aug 28, 2006)

Tradguy, I haven't had any issues passing through the soft spot so long as the bow is tuned and head is sharp. KE is around 40 ft-lbs for my rigs.

Doug, if you lose an inch of draw due to heavy clothes, and unpracticed shot angle, nerves, or shooting on the edge of your comfort range weight-wise in the cold you'll lose your tune and penetration. In those instances a bow that you can easily get to full draw (and therefore deliver the arrow in the manner it was tuned for) resulting in better performance. I think that's why you hear about so many people getting pass throughs with light bows, while guys shooting heavier stick bows don't. There are several videos on youtube of guys shooting 60# bows and not getting pass throughs. My opinion? Their perfectly tuned gear was short drawn in the heat of the moment, and suddenly far less efficient.

It's like vehicles. A poorly running six cylinder can produce less power than a well running four banger. More power doesn't really mean more power if poorly executed.


----------



## Tradbow Guy (Feb 9, 2007)

kegan said:


> Tradguy, I haven't had any issues passing through the soft spot so long as the bow is tuned and head is sharp. KE is around 40 ft-lbs for my rigs.
> 
> Doug, if you lose an inch of draw due to heavy clothes, and unpracticed shot angle, nerves, or shooting on the edge of your comfort range weight-wise in the cold you'll lose your tune and penetration. In those instances a bow that you can easily get to full draw (and therefore deliver the arrow in the manner it was tuned for) resulting in better performance. I think that's why you hear about so many people getting pass throughs with light bows, while guys shooting heavier stick bows don't. There are several videos on youtube of guys shooting 60# bows and not getting pass throughs. My opinion? Their perfectly tuned gear was short drawn in the heat of the moment, and suddenly far less efficient.
> 
> It's like vehicles. A poorly running six cylinder can produce less power than a well running four banger. More power doesn't really mean more power if poorly executed.


I would agree with this, if you watch a poorly tuned arrow kick or purpose around in flight you can only imagine the amount of energy it loses. When you watch a perfectly tuned arrow thump a target head on theres a major difference.


----------



## Roger Savor Sr (Feb 16, 2014)

kegan said:


> Tradguy, I haven't had any issues passing through the soft spot so long as the bow is tuned and head is sharp. KE is around 40 ft-lbs for my rigs.
> 
> Doug, if you lose an inch of draw due to heavy clothes, and unpracticed shot angle, nerves, or shooting on the edge of your comfort range weight-wise in the cold you'll lose your tune and penetration. In those instances a bow that you can easily get to full draw (and therefore deliver the arrow in the manner it was tuned for) resulting in better performance. I think that's why you hear about so many people getting pass throughs with light bows, while guys shooting heavier stick bows don't. There are several videos on youtube of guys shooting 60# bows and not getting pass throughs. My opinion? Their perfectly tuned gear was short drawn in the heat of the moment, and suddenly far less efficient.
> 
> It's like vehicles. A poorly running six cylinder can produce less power than a well running four banger. More power doesn't really mean more power if poorly executed.


I agree completely, Kegan. Some of my friends and hunting companions over the years have had great problems with penetration. Their answer was to just keep buying heavier and heavier bows......Consequently their problem got worse and worse.


----------



## dougedwards (Sep 5, 2010)

kegan said:


> Tradguy, I haven't had any issues passing through the soft spot so long as the bow is tuned and head is sharp. KE is around 40 ft-lbs for my rigs.
> 
> Doug, if you lose an inch of draw due to heavy clothes, and unpracticed shot angle, nerves, or shooting on the edge of your comfort range weight-wise in the cold you'll lose your tune and penetration. In those instances a bow that you can easily get to full draw (and therefore deliver the arrow in the manner it was tuned for) resulting in better performance. I think that's why you hear about so many people getting pass throughs with light bows, while guys shooting heavier stick bows don't. There are several videos on youtube of guys shooting 60# bows and not getting pass throughs. My opinion? Their perfectly tuned gear was short drawn in the heat of the moment, and suddenly far less efficient.
> 
> It's like vehicles. A poorly running six cylinder can produce less power than a well running four banger. More power doesn't really mean more power if poorly executed.


 Very good points!


----------



## Highstrung1 (Oct 20, 2010)

no.


----------



## jhill56 (Jul 22, 2014)

Yep


----------

