# Rhinehart vs. Mckenzie



## knarrly (Dec 21, 2004)

I just finished a shoot last weekend and our club had both Rhinehart and Mckenzie targets out, the only targets that I sank up to the fletching on were the Rhineharts and they were our newest targets. I had heard that Rhineharts were supposed to last better that Mckenzies. What are anyone elses experiences been? I have noticed that most Rhinehart targets are smaller in size so that could be some of it. What does anyone think?


----------



## sticks (Apr 15, 2003)

I just did a shoot at a local club that just replaced all the McKenzies with Reinharts. I have to say I LOVE reinhards. They were so much easier to pull from did'nt have to pull out the arrow puller once. I did'nt see anyone haveing problems shooting all the way to the fletching like you mentioned. I then did a shoot 4 days later at a club with McKenzies, don't get me wrong the McKenzie's are nice but what a pain in the butt to pull from.

Sticks


----------



## Mr. October (Feb 15, 2003)

Just finished shooting an almost all Rinehart course an hour ago. What a pleasure. The targets don't disjoint themselves like the McKenzies and they are much easier to pull arrows from. I do think the arrows go into them further but the tend to fall apart less on removal then the McKenzies. 

One of the guys running the shoot said he had complaints of the McKenzies already getting pass throughs and they were nearly new. 

Evidently the Rineharts must use some metal in theirs somewhere though. My shooting partner hit a mule deer high and back. It made a loud noise and demolished the arrow.


----------



## rembrandt (Jan 17, 2004)

Have to agree with the above. The Rhinehearts are so much easier to pull arrows from and I've heard more durable.


----------



## Lumis17 (Jun 9, 2003)

> Evidently the Rineharts must use some metal in theirs somewhere though. My shooting partner hit a mule deer high and back. It made a loud noise and demolished the arrow.


Rineharts may have metal in them (I don't think so, though), but I'm guessing that your friend hit an insert that was stuck inside the target. I've done that twice before and seen it happen a few times to other people. The first time my carbon just cracked in half and the other time it took 3 people to get my arrow out. My arrow was jammed inside a large glue-on tip (that traditional shooters use on their wood arrows).


----------



## lazrus (Jun 12, 2005)

I have to agree with the majority. The Rhineharts are very easy on my arrows. Very easy to pull and they seal well. The only negative I have is the reference marks on the Mckenzie targets are much easier to locate in low light condidtions and the 12 ring placement on the Rhineharts is not in the center of the 10 as with most of the Mckinzie's.


----------



## LHpuncher (Apr 12, 2004)

i like to shoot the mckensizes .......

i like the pull of a reinhart........



the bottom line is I like mckenzies the best because they support archery better.......

they are giving the ASA a good deal, a better deal than reinhart.......


I supposrt companies that support the sport.........


----------



## Bowhuntxx78 (Oct 7, 2003)

*Rinehart*

For me, I personally like the Rinehart's the best, just a much nicer target to deal with all the way around...


----------



## olehemlock (Dec 10, 2004)

Rineharts for me, shooting camo arrows into anything else is a pain.


----------



## shootstraight (Apr 28, 2005)

*targets*

Lazrus, I would disagree on finding the 12 spot. I think all dark Mckenzie targets are really hard to find the 12, shoot it's hard to find the 10 at times. The Rinharts have more definition and markings on them that help you to pick a spot to shoot at. Try finding a spot on a boar or bear mckenzie. I have several in my back yard. Something else that is a problem with Mckenzies are bugs, birds, and bees. They all love them. I went to pull an arrow out the other day and got chased down the trail by a couple of bumble bees that were making a nest in a hole put there by some birds last year. For some reason they don't burrow into the rinhart's. As far as messing up arrows, the inserts have a hard plastic drain tube that will catch an arrow every once in a while. Trashed an arrow last week.


----------



## Pinwheel 12 (Jun 11, 2002)

I like McKensies best. Their new foam isn't hard to pull, the old foam wasn't that bad unless you had an HD and it was below freezing with carbons, then you had to get three men and a boy to pull arrows. Other than that it isn't a biggie. Everyone knows how to shoot them too, so everyone is on equal ground there also.

And as others have stated, McKensie is supporting our sport of 3D by giving the major orgs a chance to save a few bucks and thus helping them continue in the future. I'll always shoot whatever target one puts out, but I prefer McKensies to anything else currently made. JMHO


----------



## VorTexan (Jan 8, 2005)

Ok guys which one's look more realistic? I have a Mckenzie in my yard that I shoot at and at first it was hard to pull but dang some of those targets are flat out ugly. I don't want to shoot at something as ugly as some of the targets you see. You can barely tell they are a deer, some look like an ugly dog.


----------



## 1moyard (Jan 2, 2004)

*Rhineharts*

Man the Mckenzie easy pull if you have a truck it is. Shot some last weekend and this one and there is no comparison to the Rhineharts.
The mckenzie target is a flat target face with little body contour or lines and the healing is not all that great.


----------



## 3-D (Jan 22, 2004)

*Rinehart*

Rinehart's!! By far are the best 3-D target. :thumbs_up


----------



## Top Cat (Jun 22, 2002)

*What?*



1moyard said:


> The mckenzie target is a flat target face with little body contour or lines and the healing is not all that great.


 McKenzie's all the way. They look like the animal they are supposed to represent not like some cartoon chareter that most of the Rineharts look like. 
If you can't pull the arrows lube them. Thats what I do and my son and girlfriend don't seem to have any trouble pulling my arrows :teeth:


----------



## wollfrun (Aug 12, 2004)

mckenzies have a more realistic look even when your aming at them, the size
is right and rineharts are a little flat around the shoulder area almost like
shooting paper. winter time was the only time we had a problem pulling
and a little bar soap took care of that,,,,,,,,I vote mckenzie.


----------



## rembrandt (Jan 17, 2004)

I can verify that there is some metal in the Rhinehearts. I shot an African antelope of some sort and it rang like a bell. Hit him in the leg and the arrow (CX300) jumped straight back at me. It also drove the point about 3 inches up into the shaft.


----------



## reylamb (Feb 5, 2003)

Rineharts do indeed have metal tubing in the legs to support the target where the rebar is inserted, but I believe McK's have the same metal tube. I am not aware of any Rineharts having any metal in any other locations though. They have plastic tubing holding the insert in, but no metal.

I prefer the Rineharts, hands down. They are the only targets our club shoots now, and as long as they are in business it is the only target we will ever shoot (unless McK makes some major improvements).


----------



## Bo Bob (Feb 12, 2004)

Love those Rineharts!!!!!!!!!!!!!! They pull so easy!


----------



## hoytxcutter (Sep 1, 2003)

Our club thought about going to Rinehart but Mckenzie does so much more in promoting the sport of archery.


----------



## Top Cat (Jun 22, 2002)

reylamb said:


> I prefer the Rineharts, hands down. They are the only targets our club shoots now, and as long as they are in business it is the only target we will ever shoot (unless McK makes some major improvements).



What would you suggest for improvments, make them look like some kind of animal mutant cartoon ? Oh wait rinhart already has that covered


----------



## Bees (Jan 28, 2003)

> I just finished a shoot last weekend and our club had both Rhinehart and Mckenzie targets out, the only targets that I sank up to the fletching on were the Rhineharts and they were our newest targets. I had heard that Rhineharts were supposed to last better that Mckenzies. What are anyone elses experiences been? I have noticed that most Rhinehart targets are smaller in size so that could be some of it. What does anyone think?



Her's what I think: 



> I have noticed that most Rhinehart targets are smaller in size so that could be some of it


Most clubs when purchaseing Rhinehearts for the first time will buy the smaller targets because they can get more for the amount of money they have. A small target usually means it is placed 20 to 30 yards out. I have noticed that will the larger diameter arrow and the higher poundage draw it won't take but 100 shots at the 12 ring to start tearing that target up. The Mckenzies don't fair any better at the same range either. The reason you imply that the Mckenize's are holding up better is because they are larger and they are placed farther away which saves any target. 

As you club gets somemore money and buys the larger Rhinehearts they will 
last longer because they will be farther away.

Bottom line place any target close and it will get tore up place any target farther downrange and it will last longer. 

That's what I think...... :beer: :beer: :beer:


----------



## reylamb (Feb 5, 2003)

Top Cat said:


> What would you suggest for improvments, make them look like some kind of animal mutant cartoon ? Oh wait rinhart already has that covered


Oh, I don't know..............

How about replacement cores that are easy to replace? You know like Rinehart....

How about targets that have replacement cores not getting huge gaps in the seams of the targets during a shoot? You know, like Rinehart.....

How about targets that are easy to pull arrows from without needing to tote around soap or other lubes? You know, like Rinehart.......

I watched a guy in my group have a target break in a McK in the 10 ring. Granted, it was an older McK, but still, how about a target that does not get harder with age? You know, like a Rinehart.

Looks? I like the way most of the Rinehart targets look. Which ones specifically look like cartoon to you? Alright, so the standing brown bear does look like he is taking a leak if you shoot his rear kills, but other than that?????? Have you seen the new Rinehart Leopard? That is one awesome looking target.

Just a few things I could think of off the top of my head.........
:beer:  :beer:   :cocktail: :cocktail:


----------



## tedhunter (May 3, 2004)

*Rhinehardts*

Rhinehardt.

Have a McKinzie javelina that completely shot through after a year and a McK turkey that has the same consistancy as concrete. When you finally manage to tear out an arrow, little grey hunks of foam are brazed to the shaft (My rig doesn't shoot that fast). And this isn't winter - it is anytime.

I bought a LITTLE broadhead deer of Rhinhardt's that has taken 3 times the shots of either McK, stops the arrows better and I have a 30 dollar NEW CORE to go right in there when it starts to bury up. Don't have to toss the target or buy an entire front section (seen the price on those!!) Holes heal up well and it is easy to pull. Not much experience with the new McK's foam -I wish them well, especially if they keep promoting the sport, but if they are waiting on my Rhinehardt to wear out - will be a while before i swap it out. 

Good luck at the Superman Classic guys - have to work this year. :-(


----------



## XADDICT (Apr 12, 2005)

I prefer Rinehart's over the MK's. Easier pull, look more realistic, much more durable and hold the inserts better. I see lot of MK's that need a chiropractor.The new MK's are a little shiny. Oh, and it's tough to pull lines on an MK.


----------



## skynight (Nov 5, 2003)

I prefer the look of the Mckenzie. Why does Rhinehart insist on putting multiple scoring rings on the target? Too confusing. Plus, I have all the 10 rings memorized on the Mckenzies.


----------



## Bnbfishin (Apr 25, 2004)

rembrandt said:


> I can verify that there is some metal in the Rhinehearts. I shot an African antelope of some sort and it rang like a bell. Hit him in the leg and the arrow (CX300) jumped straight back at me. It also drove the point about 3 inches up into the shaft.


 Didn't mean to single out this quote...but if you guys would come a little closer to hitting the kill zone, I'm sure you won't hit any metal  

The Rhineharts are far better than the Mctargets bottom line! I do find that on Mctargets that black shafts do pull easier than camo shafts. I have come close to throwin out some part of my body trying to remove shafts from Mctargets. As for the targets being hard.....I had my arrow penetrate the center of a 2" sappling better than it does a Mctarget. And yes the foam that's left on your shaft from them damn targets gets pretty irritating  
Cartoon characters?? Just shoot it. You know what it is supposed to be and you SHOULD know where to hit it. You guys that use binos at 3-d events... you make me laugh so damn hard it isn't funny. Why don't you try educating yourself on deer anatomy and you will know just where you need to hit these foam targets :thumbs_up That being said I do not agree with the rear kill zones that Rhinehart uses. Theres no reason to shoot the bobcat at a 45% angle (quartering away) in the rear hip. There is plenty of body on that target to shoot further up and still be going through the heart/vitals. If I shot that thing where Rhinehart has it marked, all I would do is hit it in the thigh and then out the last part of it's ribcage on the other end. Would it die? Most likely...would I be happy with that hit....hell no!!!

Just my .02 and I'm sure someone isn't gonna like what I have to say......just ask yourself....am I wrong?


----------



## McCann (Feb 27, 2005)

I have only shot the Rhinehardts once. I loved the way they pulled, BUT, Gimmnee how many score zones does one target need???????? The brothers I shot with had a very interesting scoring method. It reminded me of playing with my Grandpa as a little kid. What ever rules helped Grampa win were the rules that applied. Both of the brothers probably picked up 10-20pts with poor shots that hit another score ring.

IMO Rhinehardt should offer a Scoring midsection for Joe Schmoe (the ones they have now) and ones for Clubs that have only one set of scoring rings.

Marc

Then they would trully beat MCkenzie hands down


----------



## reylamb (Feb 5, 2003)

> Why does Rhinehart insist on putting multiple scoring rings on the target?


They do it to help the clubs offset costs a little and extend the life of the target. The small targets typically have the front/rear kill scoring rings, not the larger targets. On the smaller targets after about 3 shoots on one side the 12 ring can get destroyed pretty easily. With the rear kills the club can quarter the target and use the target for more shoots, thereby extending the life of the target. Also, 3D is about target archery, not necessarily hunting practice.

Personally, our club does not use the rear kills as I do not like setting up quartered targets. The 1/4ed targets are more prone to glance offs, and I do not like that at all.


----------



## tedhunter (May 3, 2004)

*Glancing and 12 ring*

Never seen one glance - I am sure it could happen if you missed the aim point a bit. A good consideration whether setting up a course or in your backyard.

As for the location of the 12 ring mentioned in several posts above, by putting it low in a quarter of the 10 ring, you will probably be SHOOTING for it, thereby RISKING an 8 or even 5 if you miss your yardage. Centered up 12's on the 10 ring just drives up the scoring becuase there is no reason NOT to try and drill the middle of the circle. 

IMHO - a tournament should be won by the guy that shoots the LEAST amount of 8's and not the MOST amount of 12's. Leave that 12 ring offcenter and tapping on the 8/5 ring!!! Go for it on PURPOSE to get the bonus.


----------



## Daniel Boone (May 31, 2002)

*Rhineharts*

Are the better target

We buy mckensies because we shoot ASA circuit.


----------



## Silent Predator (Jun 14, 2005)

*Rhinehart*

I perfer the rhinehart targets to shoot into but like the look of the McKenzie better. If you could get the rhinehart foam with the McKenzie look I feel that you would have the perfect 3D target.


----------



## Deezlin (Feb 5, 2004)

You certainly won't get much meat of the scroney little Riehart deer!!! :smile: I would pass on that one if it came by!!


----------



## Target Tony (Mar 3, 2003)

most courses i shoot have a mix of both McKenzies and Rineharts.. i like the look of both targets , but the Rinharts are easier to pull.. 

but i vote for Mckenzie they i just prefer them....

if you dont like pulling arrows , then keep score...  

Shoot Strong
Tony


----------



## reylamb (Feb 5, 2003)

Tony, I typically end up keeping score.........you see, I have developed a reputation of sorts.............I do not know what pulling a line means......I do not know what pushing a line means..........I do not know what rolling a line means..........but I do know what touching the line means, and some folks don't like how I call arrows........so I typically end up keeping score. I just feel bad for those guys having to grunt and groan getting arrows out of the McKenzies :smile:


----------



## DKN (Dec 14, 2003)

At one club I shoot at, there was a tree stand stake that they put a Mckenzie and Rhinehart next to each other to see how they compaired to each other. Well to say the least they have replaced the Mckenzie 3 times were as the Rhinehart still has the first core in it and holding good. Rhinehart targets are the best there is. Mckenzie has some work to do to come close.


----------



## Seth the XSlayr (Feb 20, 2005)

I know a fella who at 35 yards shot the eyeball out of a freakin' dinosaur. It was absolutely the funniest thing I've ever witnessed at a shoot. Real glass eyes in that sucker, go figure.
Easton Fat Boy to the Orbital.......




P.S. That was a shoot where we grew tired of the Dinos...we prefer the lifelike targets Rhineheart Rinehard Rinehardt, etc. makes. 

The Coca Cola bears are neat, just not at 40 yards. They're like 20" tall? Like a whistle pig..


----------



## cgchris99 (Apr 10, 2003)

I greatly prefer the Rineharts. Everyone said they would be hurting after loosing/quiting the asa. We buy Rineharts and it is 2-3 weeks to get one, and it has been this way for months. They are swamped with orders.


----------

