# broadhead testing



## amorgan1006 (May 3, 2010)

I've designed my own expandable broadheads and the parts are about ready at the machine shop. I'm trying to decide on just how I'm going to test their penetration, cutting and the performance of the blade deployment.

I'm looking into gelatins but also thinking about some simpler tests with a homemade layered test target. Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated!


----------



## 05_sprcrw (Aug 18, 2009)

Durabilty shoot a leg bone from a whitetail its a possible real world issue. I have just got done shooting the leg bones I saved from deer I got earlier this year last night with a broadhead.


----------



## amorgan1006 (May 3, 2010)

The first thing I want to do is just test the blade deployment and wound channels. Durability tests would follow those... I'm thinking of wrapping some leather around a watermelon or something like that. Any auggestions would be appreciated!


----------



## 05_sprcrw (Aug 18, 2009)

I would just shoot a water melon or any fruit with soft flesh. If they open in softer materials they will open in harder materials.


----------



## WPAtrapper (Nov 17, 2009)

Go get yourself a roadkill deer!!


----------



## Squawsach (Apr 26, 2008)

Shoot soft foam, like the the foam used for matress covers, to test for opening. You can change the amount of layers you use to test how easily they open. Looking for blade cuts on the back of the foam will tell you if the broadhead expanded. You can compare your broadhead the other available broadheads using this method. For example, maybe your broadhead opens fully in three layers of foam while name brand broadhead X needs 5 layers to open. For penetration, use the same foam but sandwich a piece of 3/8" or 1/4" plywood between layers of foam.


----------



## deadhead (Aug 26, 2004)

plastic zip lock bags with water suspended in front of a foam broadhead target, to check for blade deployment in the plastic bag


----------



## amorgan1006 (May 3, 2010)

Thanks for those!


----------



## hunt123 (Jan 17, 2009)

amorgan1006 said:


> Thanks for those!


So...these are going to be considerably different from what's on the market now? Or is it just a fun thing to do?


----------



## amorgan1006 (May 3, 2010)

They're different than anything on the market now. I'm a design engineer (by profession). I'm just an archery junkie and die hard bowhunter. I am trying to address what I see as the one significant drawback with all broadheads that hasn't been dealt with in any of the designs on the market now. The prototypes that will be coming out of the machine shop this week for testing are just the first attempt to prove out a concept. If the concepts tests successfully, I'll refine the design to produce a fully usable braodhead for hunting and at that point I'll decide whether to apply to USPTO... all of that before disclosing exactly what I am doing differently.


----------



## markvan (Aug 3, 2008)

Sounds very interesting.....

Several very new styles of mechanical's have come out in the last few years....would love to see what you have in store!! Hope all goes well, and get that patent so you can let us in on you`re concept!


----------



## swampboss (Sep 8, 2009)

amorgan1006 said:


> They're different than anything on the market now. I'm a design engineer (by profession). I'm just an archery junkie and die hard bowhunter. I am trying to address what I see as the one significant drawback with all broadheads that hasn't been dealt with in any of the designs on the market now. The prototypes that will be coming out of the machine shop this week for testing are just the first attempt to prove out a concept. If the concepts tests successfully, I'll refine the design to produce a fully usable braodhead for hunting and at that point I'll decide whether to apply to USPTO... all of that before disclosing exactly what I am doing differently.


I hope you have done an extensive patent search. Otherwise you are putting the " cart before the horse " not to mention the money you are spending during the prototype stage.


----------



## amorgan1006 (May 3, 2010)

Like I said, I'm a design engineer. I wouldn't even be talking about patents unless I had crossed that bridge. But thanks for the thought.


----------



## pure havoc (Apr 21, 2003)

Do yourself a favor make the ferrule out of steel and not aluminum , that is a huge selling point to alot of people tha have had bent , broken or damaged ferrules in the past from going through ribs and bones, blades break we all know that but the ferrule should stand some punishment


----------



## crankn101 (Jan 26, 2007)

I stole this off another site... It shows a Slick Trick that cleanly went through a elk leg, see the hole. And the next shot on the same leg stopped it and destroyed the head, look at the 6" crack in the bone. 

So just shooting at any bone can vary drastically from one shot to another.


----------



## RackAssasin (Oct 18, 2010)

get a garbage bag and go to lowes or homedepot and buy a couple cans of "great stuff" the expandable foam. Im subscribing to this thread to see what you have in store.. im excited for you.


----------



## amorgan1006 (May 3, 2010)

Thanks for the input. Like lots of others out there I'm sure, it'll be a decision that gets made in consideration of this concern and the overall weight.


----------



## amorgan1006 (May 3, 2010)

Thanks for that suggestion... I've used that stuff around the house and know exactly what you're talking about. I might give that a try.



RackAssasin said:


> get a garbage bag and go to lowes or homedepot and buy a couple cans of "great stuff" the expandable foam. Im subscribing to this thread to see what you have in store.. im excited for you.


----------



## soonerboy (Sep 6, 2004)

Everybody shoot a 55 gal barrel to test toughness. I'm not sure it's a realistic test but I would do it just to see what happens to a head I designed.


----------



## markvan (Aug 3, 2008)

amorgan1006 said:


> Thanks for the input. Like lots of others out there I'm sure, it'll be a decision that gets made in consideration of this concern and the overall weight.


 I wouldn't get too concerned about the extra weight... I like a good heavy arrow, (and large cutting diameter broadheads.) Most guys hunting with crossbows are adding brass inserts to increase the FOC of their arrows, so a heavier broadhead may be just the thing alot of hunters would use.


----------



## no alibi (Jun 22, 2010)

get you a five gallon bucket,cut one side off(square sight window),wrap the bucket in plastic wrap,fill the bucket with mulch/sand or somthing,then cover the open end of bucket with plastic wrap to hold your fill,set bucket were you will have a straight shot thru the bottom of the bucket,after your shot,dont pull your arrow out,remove the plastic from the open end of the bucket and dump your filling out,use the sight window you cut out to check your penatration.this is the best i can do but a bucket full of gel would be perfect but i havent got that far yet,hope this helps you and your great plans.


----------



## amorgan1006 (May 3, 2010)

The "concept proof" tests went great! I did several tests for blade deployment, arrow flight and penetration and I was surprised that the prototypes worked exactly how I had planned (on the first try)!

I'll be meeting with my patent attorney this week and once I establish recorded protection of the art I'll explain the concept and post photos.


----------



## 1/4ing away (Jan 23, 2006)

If you want to do durability tests you could find the density of a deer shoulder bone and get some foam that is the same density. Much easier to make once you get the correct density. I worked for a foam company and you can make the foam ANY density you want. Of course you would have to contact them to get some foam but it's just part A and part B. Mix it together and get it the same thickness as the bone you want to test and you will have a foam bone. I would do this myself but i'm not that interested in the matter. I worked for IPI. They were based out of Maryland and had a plant in Arkansas but we were bought out by BASF.


----------



## RackAssasin (Oct 18, 2010)

amorgan1006 said:


> The "concept proof" tests went great! I did several tests for blade deployment, arrow flight and penetration and I was surprised that the prototypes worked exactly how I had planned (on the first try)!
> 
> I'll be meeting with my patent attorney this week and once I establish recorded protection of the art I'll explain the concept and post photos.


cant wait bud, i subsribed to this thread last month and have been waiting on your results.. good on you man.


----------



## amorgan1006 (May 3, 2010)

Sounds like a good idea to me. Do you have a supplier for the foam mixes?


----------



## amorgan1006 (May 3, 2010)

I appreciate that! Hopefully you don't think my idea is stupid... 



RackAssasin said:


> cant wait bud, i subsribed to this thread last month and have been waiting on your results.. good on you man.


----------



## EvrthngsBIGRnTX (Nov 2, 2010)

I'm subscribed! Can't wait to see this outcome.


----------



## Bnbfishin (Apr 25, 2004)

Well I've been waiting to see what you came up with. Any idea on weights for the heads you're going to produce? I'm subsrcribing now so I don't forget about this


----------



## wesgillock (Dec 15, 2008)

sign me up gotta see this thru. Let me know if you need a field tester. lol


----------



## tiuser (Mar 22, 2009)

I have to stick with this too, I am a broadhead junkie.....Subscribed


----------



## ks.bowhunter (Jan 20, 2009)

Sounds interesting.I will happily field test them for you.


----------



## amorgan1006 (May 3, 2010)

Right now I'm focused on 125 grains for a first production. My proof is 156 grains but I know I can get the concept down to 125 with some modest adjustments... So far I've just been focused on proving the concept as far as arrow flight, blade retention during the shot and in flight, blade deployment, etc. Getting it to 100 grains would require shortening the cutting diameter (right now at 1-3/8"). But down the road it shouldn't be a problem. First I have to (a) establish protection for the art. I'm meeting my attorney tomorrow morning - should get me there. (b) Disclose the concept to as many people as I can to get feedback... and try to make a better determination about the market potential by getting as much feedback on the concept as I can get. I know this design addresses something that has frustrated me a lot with every other broadhead I've shot... and I know it's frustrated lots of others. But I need to get a better understanding of just how many people have had the same frustration, just how much it has frustrated them and whether folks would want what I've come up with so that (c) I can decide just how far I want to go with it. Because the next steps are all chunky $$$ ;-)... And if all goes as I hope it will, I'll definitely ask for some help testing them out in the field.


----------



## EvrthngsBIGRnTX (Nov 2, 2010)

I hope all goes well. I am definitely curious about it.


----------



## ls3 (Jun 30, 2010)

Sounds awsome can to see them!! If you need help testin them I will be glad to help


----------



## sawtoothscream (Apr 19, 2008)

cool. cant wait to see what you go. like seeing new designs of things.


----------



## amorgan1006 (May 3, 2010)

The lawyer said I shouldn't tell anyone for now... probably a few weeks.


----------



## wesgillock (Dec 15, 2008)

take your time this seasons done underway. Gives us next year to tune and test. Thanks to people like you who have enginering skills to come up with better or improved products and offer to your brotherhood of archers. Thats the American way! Thank a vet today!


----------



## revwilder (Apr 11, 2005)

amorgan1006 said:


> Right now I'm focused on 125 grains for a first production. My proof is 156 grains but I know I can get the concept down to 125 with some modest adjustments... So far I've just been focused on proving the concept as far as arrow flight, blade retention during the shot and in flight, blade deployment, etc. Getting it to 100 grains would require shortening the cutting diameter (right now at 1-3/8"). But down the road it shouldn't be a problem. First I have to (a) establish protection for the art. I'm meeting my attorney tomorrow morning - should get me there. (b) Disclose the concept to as many people as I can to get feedback... and try to make a better determination about the market potential by getting as much feedback on the concept as I can get. I know this design addresses something that has frustrated me a lot with every other broadhead I've shot... and I know it's frustrated lots of others. But I need to get a better understanding of just how many people have had the same frustration, just how much it has frustrated them and whether folks would want what I've come up with so that (c) I can decide just how far I want to go with it. Because the next steps are all chunky $$$ ;-)... And if all goes as I hope it will, I'll definitely ask for some help testing them out in the field.


I have talked with David Hale of the famous K&H Calls. It is all marketing. You don't have to know whether or not people need it, you have to make them believe that they need it. If you can make them believe that they need it they will buy it. That is where your original idea comes in play. Shoot me a PM, I will give some feedback for marketing, (FREE).


----------



## kg4cpj (Jul 29, 2004)

I'm subscribing to see what the outcome is, sounds like a good idea


----------



## redneckone (Nov 2, 2010)

If you are this serious about testing, then either kill a whitetail and hang it up and shoot it with your new BH or a pig at a slaughter house maybe. If you were close to me you could shoot up the next doe i kill(given you dont hit my backstraps) and then you can gut the deer and check out real life what the BH performs like....document it and then post for us to all see.


----------



## amorgan1006 (May 3, 2010)

Here's an update: I satisfied myself with the concept using the initial prototypes and I went into more detail on existing patents with my attorney. There are a few out there that have some overlap... But none of the three existing patents employing the primary concept I'm designing around are on the market today. And my design has several differences from those already patented. My patent attorney tells me it is about a 50 / 50 chance at a utility patent. So instead of dumping $10,000 down that hole, I have decided to refine the design and make another prototype run of about 100 sets of the parts, in the proper materials and do some more extensive testing to be sure I'm on a worthwhile path. I refined the design and ordered the parts about 3 weeks ago. They'll be ready in time for me to take them on my next whitetail hunt (January 6 - 9 in Mississippi). I'll do more thorough testing with the new heads before deciding on the expense of the patent and / or further production. The worst case scenario is that I will have spent a few thousand dollars for about 100 broadheads. LOL


----------



## NC_BowMan (Dec 5, 2010)

looking forward to hearing your results.


----------



## deadhead (Aug 26, 2004)

i saw that your concept head was 156 gr i like to shoot heavey heads and would be interested in shooting a 156 gr mech. head since about the heaviest are 125 gr would you consider making them at the 150 + gr heads for sale.


----------



## markvan (Aug 3, 2008)

Thanks for the update.... hope things progress well..


----------



## deertracker (Aug 4, 2006)

good luck. i'm subscribed to see where this goes.


----------



## aread (Dec 25, 2009)

For your testing, you should check out Dr Ashby's reports. They are available on Alaska Bowhunting Supply's website and TradGang.com.

You may not be interested in his specific results, but in his testing methods. Tough to duplicate in PA (serious shortage of water buffalo there ), but interesting reading anyway.

Allen


----------



## greenearchery11 (Dec 12, 2010)

amorgan1006 said:


> I've designed my own expandable broadheads and the parts are about ready at the machine shop. I'm trying to decide on just how I'm going to test their penetration, cutting and the performance of the blade deployment.
> 
> I'm looking into gelatins but also thinking about some simpler tests with a homemade layered test target. Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated!


I have always shot through a piece of 3/4" ply wood......good simulation of the shoulder blade.


----------



## amorgan1006 (May 3, 2010)

It is going to take a bit of extra effort to get a 125 grain version. Once I have the new parts (made of the proper materials) I should be able to work that out. But I definitely intend to have a 150 grain version as well. Actually, I already have it in mind that (if I do go ahead with real production for the market) I will make an even heavier version with a tougher ferrule. So I think there is a decent chance I wil end up with versions in 125, 150 and 175 grains. 



deadhead said:


> i saw that your concept head was 156 gr i like to shoot heavey heads and would be interested in shooting a 156 gr mech. head since about the heaviest are 125 gr would you consider making them at the 150 + gr heads for sale.


----------



## Thadchad1 (Oct 22, 2010)

Good luck


----------



## deadhead (Aug 26, 2004)

i am hopeful you get them to market


----------



## sethjamto (Jun 29, 2008)

This thread is useless without pics!

....just kidding! I can't wait to see what you come up with!


----------



## markvan (Aug 3, 2008)

I think that a 125 head is a must..... at least if you want to make some money off it. I think having a BH of an odd ball weight, would be a hard sell. Largely just because having a equal weight field point, makes practice, and sighting in so much easier. That being said, I would probably be in the minority that would shoot something odd ball, if I really liked the broadhead....but I imagine most shooters would quickly pass over it if they don't have fieldpoints of the same weight.... regardless of it's properties. For a lot of buyers, finding a broadhead that matches what they are currently shooting may be one of the few, (possibly only), criteria they have when buying. The 'bling' factor may be able to sway some easily too. You have to remember, most archery hunters probably aren't as enthusiastic as the average user on this forum. Being able to attract as many hunters to you're product as possible may be key to break into the market. It will be a tough task for sure.... I hope you succeed, and I am able to try out you're design some day!!


----------



## crankn101 (Jan 26, 2007)

markvan said:


> I think that a 125 head is a must..... at least if you want to make some money off it. I think having a BH of an odd ball weight, would be a hard sell. *Largely just because having a equal weight field point, makes practice, and sighting in so much easier. * That being said, I would probably be in the minority that would shoot something odd ball, if I really liked the broadhead....but I imagine most shooters would quickly pass over it if they don't have fieldpoints of the same weight.... regardless of it's properties. For a lot of buyers, finding a broadhead that matches what they are currently shooting may be one of the few, (possibly only), criteria they have when buying. The 'bling' factor may be able to sway some easily too. You have to remember, most archery hunters probably aren't as enthusiastic as the average user on this forum. Being able to attract as many hunters to you're product as possible may be key to break into the market. It will be a tough task for sure.... I hope you succeed, and I am able to try out you're design some day!!


 Just sell the BHs with field tips too.


----------



## markvan (Aug 3, 2008)

Sure... that would make sense, practically, but not necessarily from a business point of view. If you're investing money in the company, don't you want to be able to reach the largest # of potential customers??? I think that has to be key if trying to break into a market as a unknown.

For maximum market penetration, you want the guy who is gonna go into the shop looking for a 100 or 125gr. b/h because that is what he is setup for, to atleast be able to consider you're product.

If at all possible, why make the guy who owns a bow, but only hunts with it a few days a year have to adjust his set up specifically for your broadhead, and then not be able to use anything else?? Or maybe he likes to shoot small game as well when in the stand, (as I do occasionally......) I bet he doesn't buy the odd ball broadhead, and just buys what ever he finds in the weight for what he is set up for.


----------



## SCBOWHUNTER903 (Jan 28, 2010)

suscribed interested to see what you have in store


----------



## markvan (Aug 3, 2008)

I think there are quite a few subscriptions to this thread.... can't wait to see.....


----------



## amorgan1006 (May 3, 2010)

The weights affects elevation only. Broadhead selection is generally more of an issue with windage affects. This isn't the case with my design.

First of all, I'm not interested in this to make money. I already have money and a career where I make much more than I need. I began developing this because of the frustrations I've had with the 7 or 8 different broadheads I've bought, shot and tried to get to fly like field tips. I've tried multiple fixed blades and expandables. They all kill deer and they can all be dialed in plenty well to shoot a deer at 30 yards. But to get more you often need to spend serious time on the tuning, adjustments ot your rest and sights... and maybe your arrow and fletching. And several times I just decided I needed to abandon the field points point-of-impact and get a certain bow shooting a certain broadhead accurately the way I want. Then I go back the field tip after the season. It shouldn't be that way....

My only interest is to make a broadhead that is easy to set up to shoot accurately and is of the highest quality in materials and toughness. If I don't end up believeing that is what I have, it will never be sold... I'll just have a couple hundred very expensive broadheads for me and some friends. 



markvan said:


> Sure... that would make sense, practically, but not necessarily from a business point of view. If you're investing money in the company, don't you want to be able to reach the largest # of potential customers??? I think that has to be key if trying to break into a market as a unknown.
> 
> For maximum market penetration, you want the guy who is gonna go into the shop looking for a 100 or 125gr. b/h because that is what he is setup for, to atleast be able to consider you're product.
> 
> If at all possible, why make the guy who owns a bow, but only hunts with it a few days a year have to adjust his set up specifically for your broadhead, and then not be able to use anything else?? Or maybe he likes to shoot small game as well when in the stand, (as I do occasionally......) I bet he doesn't buy the odd ball broadhead, and just buys what ever he finds in the weight for what he is set up for.


----------



## amorgan1006 (May 3, 2010)

Than you for these thoughts and comments... I really appreciate it! I've been focused on 125 grains throughout. I think it is critical that I am able to get it to 125 if I want to sell many of them.



markvan said:


> I think that a 125 head is a must..... at least if you want to make some money off it. I think having a BH of an odd ball weight, would be a hard sell. Largely just because having a equal weight field point, makes practice, and sighting in so much easier. That being said, I would probably be in the minority that would shoot something odd ball, if I really liked the broadhead....but I imagine most shooters would quickly pass over it if they don't have fieldpoints of the same weight.... regardless of it's properties. For a lot of buyers, finding a broadhead that matches what they are currently shooting may be one of the few, (possibly only), criteria they have when buying. The 'bling' factor may be able to sway some easily too. You have to remember, most archery hunters probably aren't as enthusiastic as the average user on this forum. Being able to attract as many hunters to you're product as possible may be key to break into the market. It will be a tough task for sure.... I hope you succeed, and I am able to try out you're design some day!!


----------



## amorgan1006 (May 3, 2010)

That's my plan. On January 6th I'm taking a 4-day weekend to hunt my land in Mississipi. I'll definitely shoot something with the new broadhead... It might not be a big buck but it'll be something. Then I'll definitely use the shoulder blades / upper torso for some testing. And I will take pictures and record some video. I have another MS hunt planned later in January and I'll have a 4-day hunt in the FL panhandle in early Febuary. So the heads will see some action soon.



redneckone said:


> If you are this serious about testing, then either kill a whitetail and hang it up and shoot it with your new BH or a pig at a slaughter house maybe. If you were close to me you could shoot up the next doe i kill(given you dont hit my backstraps) and then you can gut the deer and check out real life what the BH performs like....document it and then post for us to all see.


----------



## Phelptwan (Nov 2, 2009)

Home made ballistics gel... http://www.myscienceproject.org/gelatin.html


----------



## hunt123 (Jan 17, 2009)

Phelptwan said:


> Home made ballistics gel... http://www.myscienceproject.org/gelatin.html


Very cool! I bookmarked it.


----------



## amorgan1006 (May 3, 2010)

Thank you! I was looking for something like this...



Phelptwan said:


> Home made ballistics gel... http://www.myscienceproject.org/gelatin.html


----------



## amcardon (Mar 17, 2009)

Like everybody else I am really interested and excited to see where this goes. I really appreciate your attitude of recognizing that what you want doesn't exist so you're going to go to the drawing board yourself and make it. Too many people get complacent with their options and are willing to settle for mediocrity rather than fight for perfection. It's not always an option, I understand, but being willing to analyze your options and be comfortable in choosing nothing that currently exists but with the motivation to put the time/effort into creating it yourself is fantastic. It's 2am right now so I don't know if I'm making any sense (I swear I speak english!) but I just wanted to say "thanks" for having some ambition and balls to move forward with this.


----------



## hollywood88 (Feb 9, 2009)

i would love to see these broadheads hit the market. i dont think the heavier models would sell as good for whitetail, but i think they would more than make up in sales for bear, elk, moose, ect. i think it would be a great weight for big game.


----------



## g5hoytbowhunter (Aug 17, 2010)

when can you post pictures? and i can also definately test them for you in the field!


----------



## Krypt Keeper (Oct 10, 2007)

I would love to see how these head perform. Its great to have people designing new heads as they see flaws in whats offered today.

If anything you will always have the heads that you designed and had made for you to use. That right there is amazing and you should be proud of yourself no matter what the outcome.


----------



## g5hoytbowhunter (Aug 17, 2010)

they would also sell good for african big game


hollywood88 said:


> i would love to see these broadheads hit the market. i dont think the heavier models would sell as good for whitetail, but i think they would more than make up in sales for bear, elk, moose, ect. i think it would be a great weight for big game.


----------



## amorgan1006 (May 3, 2010)

So here's where I am... My machine shop & tooling guy let me down by not getting me the parts until the night before my hunt. That night when I started assembling a few I realized they had cut the blades too short. So I went on the trip without my broadhead. And it was a shame because I stuck a big doe on Friday and killed a good buck (photo) on saturday. The blades are supposed to be done this week. All that aside, the rest is kind of hinging on my next testing results. But the prior art is dense and dropping the $ on a patent application seems unnecessary. The question is whether it proves itself and whether or not people experienced and knowledgeable people think the concept is useful. So I am kind of thinking I should just post my design and photos of prototypes for feedback. Anyone on here in the industry, please feel free to help me out here with advice?


----------



## Gobblergetter23 (Mar 11, 2009)

looking forward to getting to see these heads


----------



## wesgillock (Dec 15, 2008)

I wouldn't, You post these spec's there gone forever you'll kick your self later. Take your time, seasons over now work on these this year see what comes out of it, you got plenty of time to develop and register if you keep it to your self awhile longer.


----------



## dw'struth (Mar 14, 2008)

wesgillock said:


> I wouldn't, You post these spec's there gone forever you'll kick your self later. Take your time, seasons over now work on these this year see what comes out of it, you got plenty of time to develop and register if you keep it to your self awhile longer.


Probably some good advice here. Good luck!


----------



## madarchery (May 28, 2003)

Yup keep quiet. While you work it out and possibly pitch the concept to some in the industry. Small and start up company's would be my target. I think you could maneuver better and they know the patent game.

I can toss you one bone. Try game warning system in Plymouth, WI. There a manufacturer of archery equipment. As far as I know they have no BH in there line up. Maybe a win win for the 2 of you.


----------



## amorgan1006 (May 3, 2010)

Today I did some shot testing of the (completed yesterday) 2nd revision prototypes. They have 1-1/2" cutting diameter. I shot through layered targets, layers of cardboard and finally the front right shoulder (every bit of the shoulder except the hide) of the 152 lb buck I killed last weekend. The flight, blade deployment, etc. went perfectly every shot. Full blade deployment occurred between 3/8" to 3/4" into the target on every shot. Penetration was equal to or better than two other broadheads I shot for comparison (G5 strikers fixed blades, Trophy Ridge Meatseekers expandables). But on the shot through the deer's shoulder, one blade snapped in half. The shoulder was semi-frozen... probably 75% thawed. I shot it from 15 yards at about 290 FPS. Now I'm trying to decide how hard to take that... I figure it means I need to beef up the blade or use something better than 440A. If anyone has thoughts on input for me, I'd really aprpeciate it.


----------



## Stab 'em (Dec 26, 2008)

amorgan1006 said:


> Today I did some shot testing of the (completed yesterday) 2nd revision prototypes. They have 1-1/2" cutting diameter. I shot through layered targets, layers of cardboard and finally the front right shoulder (every bit of the shoulder except the hide) of the 152 lb buck I killed last weekend. The flight, blade deployment, etc. went perfectly every shot. Full blade deployment occurred between 3/8" to 3/4" into the target on every shot. Penetration was equal to or better than two other broadheads I shot for comparison (G5 strikers fixed blades, Trophy Ridge Meatseekers expandables). But on the shot through the deer's shoulder, one blade snapped in half. The shoulder was semi-frozen... probably 75% thawed. I shot it from 15 yards at about 290 FPS. Now I'm trying to decide how hard to take that... I figure it means I need to beef up the blade or use something better than 440A. If anyone has thoughts on input for me, I'd really aprpeciate it.


I have a few suggestions: As for your patent and the like, don't start posting pictures or brief descriptions on here until you have applied for the patent with a full-scale mechanical drawing that describes the broadhead, its dimensions, and its new and improved benefit to the archery world at the patent office. The last part will win you the patent. If you start posting pictures before you do this then any one of the various engineers that look at Archery Talk, who work for the many manufacturers with the long dollar, may indeed use your improved benefit to their benefit... 

After seeing many flawed tests of various manufactured items, and knowing there are many of us who see through marketing BS: Keep your testing non-bias. To do this you need to make sure that you are using the same bow, with the same weight arrows, with the same weight heads, with roughly the same cutting diameter for all the shots; even if you have to add some weight to another manufacturers' broadhead to keep them all at the same weight up front. If your heads weigh more, then add a touch more weight to the others' broadheads or to the inserts to see if penetration is still better with your new head. This will keep penetration tests more honest and no one can slam you for it. Though there is nothing wrong with showing how it out penetrates the different types of broadheads like you have done already!

For some reason unknown to me, most of the broadhead industry seem to use roughly the same thickness of steel for their heads. The notable exception would be Steel Force. They use a thick, hard alloy steel for their heads and it shows by their quality. So don't be afraid to go with thicker steel to make a head that weighs a little more but that won't bend or break up upon impact. 

If you have a truly remarkable head, then the industry will reward you for it in sales--especially here. Good luck with you venture. PM me with any questions and I'll be glad to help.


----------



## hunt123 (Jan 17, 2009)

amorgan1006 said:


> Today I did some shot testing of the (completed yesterday) 2nd revision prototypes. They have 1-1/2" cutting diameter. I shot through layered targets, layers of cardboard and finally the front right shoulder (every bit of the shoulder except the hide) of the 152 lb buck I killed last weekend. The flight, blade deployment, etc. went perfectly every shot. Full blade deployment occurred between 3/8" to 3/4" into the target on every shot. Penetration was equal to or better than two other broadheads I shot for comparison (G5 strikers fixed blades, Trophy Ridge Meatseekers expandables). But on the shot through the deer's shoulder, one blade snapped in half. The shoulder was semi-frozen... probably 75% thawed. I shot it from 15 yards at about 290 FPS. Now I'm trying to decide how hard to take that... I figure it means I need to beef up the blade or use something better than 440A. If anyone has thoughts on input for me, I'd really aprpeciate it.


It isn't too reliable to take one error and extend that further. It's something that makes you stop and think, but there could be other causative factors. It's a little early to assume weak or too thin steel. I'd keep shooting at a fully thawed shoulder with all the heads you have. 

That would give you a better dataset than one head at a semi-frozen shoulder. Not too many hunters shoot semi-frozen deer. You do want to stress test products, but you want a solid baseline to start from. If all heads you have work fine on a thawed shoulder, that gives you a starting point. Then, are the heads marginal enough that freezing causes a problem and if so, can that result be duplicated, was that head somehow defective, etc. etc.

R&D is sometimes tedious and frequently expensive, unfortunately.


----------



## mrbillbrown (Sep 30, 2009)

Maybe I'm in the minority, but I don't expect a broadhead to be "reused" after a successful harvest. Call me superstituious, lazy, silly or whatever but I won't shoot the same BH a second time. I'd rather lose a few dollars per head on each deer than risk a failure the second time trying to save a few bucks. So I'm not sure that failure inside the cavity (after the initial opening of course) is too big an issue to me after the damage is done. On another note, I've always heard that one should mail themselves a copy of the product/design etc.. through the US Postal service as a sort of "poor man's patent" to help establish a timeline of concept design etc.. Could be bunk, but I've heard that for years.


----------



## amorgan1006 (May 3, 2010)

I spent today repeatnig the tests. I thawed the shoulder completely (it was cold but thawed) and repeated the same shot (through the shoulder and actual should bone) several more times. On the second shot, another blade snapped in half. So I have concluded that the blades are not tough enough.. I am not satisfied. You're right about R&D being expensive. I'm in for nearly $5,000 already between the two prototype parts runs and the lawyer... and I only have about 100 pieces of what I view as an unsatisfactory product. But then again... now I know what I wanted to know. 



hunt123 said:


> It isn't too reliable to take one error and extend that further. It's something that makes you stop and think, but there could be other causative factors. It's a little early to assume weak or too thin steel. I'd keep shooting at a fully thawed shoulder with all the heads you have.
> 
> That would give you a better dataset than one head at a semi-frozen shoulder. Not too many hunters shoot semi-frozen deer. You do want to stress test products, but you want a solid baseline to start from. If all heads you have work fine on a thawed shoulder, that gives you a starting point. Then, are the heads marginal enough that freezing causes a problem and if so, can that result be duplicated, was that head somehow defective, etc. etc.
> 
> R&D is sometimes tedious and frequently expensive, unfortunately.


----------



## amorgan1006 (May 3, 2010)

Thanks for the thoughts. I have recorded the drawings, etc. in dated files and I do have receipts from the lawyer that are dated. Should I go ahead with a patent application and run into a situation where somebody else does the same thing before I am finished, I have the dated paper trail to establish when I designed it. As for the reuse of broadheads... I tend to think the way you do. Until now, I have stuck with replaceable blade fixed blade broadheads (G5 strikers) because you can easily replace the blades and the ferrule is very, very tough. I've shot into the ground and not found any real damage to the ferrule or tip. But my goal is to have a broadhead that will go through any part of the animal without any damage to the head. If I do get it where I want it to be and decide to sell it, my head will not be cheap. But it will be unique (the main features I still have not disclosed make it pretty darn cool) and will be very high quality. But it will also be repairable (tip, ferrule and blades all replaceable).



mrbillbrown said:


> Maybe I'm in the minority, but I don't expect a broadhead to be "reused" after a successful harvest. Call me superstituious, lazy, silly or whatever but I won't shoot the same BH a second time. I'd rather lose a few dollars per head on each deer than risk a failure the second time trying to save a few bucks. So I'm not sure that failure inside the cavity (after the initial opening of course) is too big an issue to me after the damage is done. On another note, I've always heard that one should mail themselves a copy of the product/design etc.. through the US Postal service as a sort of "poor man's patent" to help establish a timeline of concept design etc.. Could be bunk, but I've heard that for years.


----------



## hunt123 (Jan 17, 2009)

amorgan1006 said:


> I spent today repeatnig the tests. I thawed the shoulder completely (it was cold but thawed) and repeated the same shot (through the shoulder and actual should bone) several more times. On the second shot, another blade snapped in half. So I have concluded that the blades are not tough enough.. I am not satisfied. You're right about R&D being expensive. I'm in for nearly $5,000 already between the two prototype parts runs and the lawyer... and I only have about 100 pieces of what I view as an unsatisfactory product. But then again... now I know what I wanted to know.


Good thing you have the available cash to chase this down!


----------



## amorgan1006 (May 3, 2010)

Yes... but I still ask myself whether I am just wasting money. I love tinkering and if I can get this to where I want it, I would definitely enjoy selling it. I really do think it's a cool idea. But it was a disappointing weekend. 



hunt123 said:


> Good thing you have the available cash to chase this down!


----------



## PastorRod (Mar 2, 2007)

*Your Idea*

amorgan1006,

Reading through your journey reminded me of some quotes by Thomas Edison. 
“Nearly every man who develops an idea works at it up to the point where it looks impossible, and then gets discouraged. That's not the place to become discouraged”
"Many of life's failures are men who did not realize how close they were to success when they gave up.”

Sounds like you are on to something.

God Bless,
Rod


----------



## markvan (Aug 3, 2008)

There is bound to be more than one setback.... hope you keep going, and eventually have success.

and that is a great quote, Pastor....


----------



## amorgan1006 (May 3, 2010)

Thank you for that!



PastorRod said:


> amorgan1006,
> 
> Reading through your journey reminded me of some quotes by Thomas Edison.
> “Nearly every man who develops an idea works at it up to the point where it looks impossible, and then gets discouraged. That's not the place to become discouraged”
> ...


----------



## hutch04 (Oct 13, 2010)

i think the same way. i have a spot for my shot arrows and broadheads. i dont shoot doe's or small bucks so usually if i get a shot its at something worth putting on the wall.. maybe not a head/shoulder mount but some type of mount and the arrow usually goes along with it. i let my wife and kids shoot all the doe's. hehe. i may go a year or two without killing but when i do i dont expect to use that arrow or bh again. you are definatly onto something. just like it says under your name. Alway remain calmn! a disappointing weekend is not always a bad weekend. you could have had a great weekend and non of the test went bad and then later on something happens. its good that the hiccups are coming out in the first test you do. hope im making sense. im not very good with words and explaining things to smart people. lol.. im just a 30 year old country boy that will never have much money or be able to invent anything but i love the outdoors and i love to hunt and i think its great to see people actually have the smarts to accomplish what your trying to accomplish not just to make a dollar but to satify yourself with your product and then maybe to make a dollar if you approve it. sorry for babblin on but i put it the best i could! GOOD LUCK


----------



## Arkie Archer (Nov 9, 2005)

I'm subscribing to this! Can't wait to see the final product!


----------



## wesgillock (Dec 15, 2008)

AMORGAN this is looking great there are a lot of sportsman supporting you in this endever and hoping for the best for you. Thank GOD we have personalities like your's to keep this sport growing. Keep testing untill your satisfied and keep improving you patent! |Thank you on you efferts.


----------



## g5hoytbowhunter (Aug 17, 2010)

good luck and i cannot wait to see the finished product!


----------



## hunting_4_life (Mar 19, 2007)

keep on doin what you do cant wait to see the final product subscribed to this thread and many people are waiting to see!


----------



## amorgan1006 (May 3, 2010)

To briefly describe the design without giving anything critical away... It is a hidden blade broadhead. Blades are hidden until impact with the target. The broadhead can be handled and shot like a field tip because as far as your fingers and the wind are concerned, it is a field tip. Within 1" of penetration into the target the head transforms into a 1-3/8" cutting diameter 2-blade broadhead. I have 123 grain versions finished with .060" thick blades. But like I said, I twice broke blades when I was test firing them through a buck's front shoulder bones. I'm at a point where I need to decide if I am going to go any farther. I've already spent over $4,000 and taking the next steps would mean spending thousands more. I've learned that the basic concept has been done before but now no major manufacturers offer hidden blade broadheads. My design is different in some ways and does have a couple of advantages related to handling, reduced target damage, etc. But I'm not sure it is worth going any farther. Thoughts or comments?


----------



## hunt123 (Jan 17, 2009)

amorgan1006 said:


> To briefly describe the design without giving anything critical away... It is a hidden blade broadhead. Blades are hidden until impact with the target. The broadhead can be handled and shot like a field tip because as far as your fingers and the wind are concerned, it is a field tip. Within 1" of penetration into the target the head transforms into a 1-3/8" cutting diameter 2-blade broadhead. I have 123 grain versions finished with .060" thick blades. But like I said, I twice broke blades when I was test firing them through a buck's front shoulder bones. I'm at a point where I need to decide if I am going to go any farther. I've already spent over $4,000 and taking the next steps would mean spending thousands more. I've learned that the basic concept has been done before but now no major manufacturers offer hidden blade broadheads. My design is different in some ways and does have a couple of advantages related to handling, reduced target damage, etc. But I'm not sure it is worth going any farther. Thoughts or comments?


Personally, I think I'd back out of it. $4,000 is a tough pill to swallow but if it was me I'd just stop my losses at this point. From a business standpoint, you have to look at additional projected R&D expenses, and the other expenses relative to bringing it to market. Direct sales vs distributors vs selling it to an established manufacturer. All have different and lesser or greater costs associated. Also manufacturing costs: Is everything outsourced, partly outsourced, self-manufactured. Different expenses there also.

Also on the radar is the fact that other manufacturers have taken a run at the basic concept and no one feels it's viable for whatever reason. Not that yours isn't better, but perhaps there's some basic reason they all feel the concept isn't marketable. 

Then you have to look at how long it's going to take to recoup your investment ($4,000 + $???) and can the broadhead even be sold for a price that will allow you to recover your money and make a profit within a reasonable time frame.

If you do a cost analysis of where you are now + manufacturing costs + cost of bringing it to market and compare that to the price point of the average 1 3/8" cut expandable and a low guestimate of how many could be sold each year, then you could figure out how long before you get your money back then start to turn a profit. If that timeline proves to be accurate, would you be comfortable with that. What if it isn't. Would you be OK with that also.

The cost of bringing it to market will be pretty tough to calculate unless you have a lot of experience dealing with marketing channels. The guestimate of how many could be sold is also really tough. Highly dependent on how it's marketed and how effectively it's marketed.

If you can get a positive, strong business plan out of those basic questions and everything looks good enough to convince someone that loans people money for a living, then I'd say it's viable if you still have enthusiasm and motivation for it. The SCORE website (www.score.org) has a number of online helps including a business plan generator that asks those kinds of questions and more. You might be interested in looking at it. In order to keep from losing your shirt, a strong business plan is essential and will help you through the questions you have.


----------



## Stab 'em (Dec 26, 2008)

With the amount of engineering, money, and patent research that you have done so far I would, at the very lease, apply and go forward with the patent to get that awarded to you. That is the one thing in this whole endeavor of your that will allow you to make or at least recoup some money off this project. Because with that patent you have something that no one else can use for at least 15 years, without your permission of course. With that patent you have the law and leverage on your side. The law, if someone else should try to manufacture your produce without your permission. And leverage, if an archery manufacturer wants to partner up with you to manufacture your broadhead for both of your profits. You can seek out and find this company on your own and agree upon the manufacturing and profits each of you will retain for your part in the "partnership".

Many inventors are patent holders that contract with an established company to manufacture and market their product for them. In turn the inventor/patent holder just collects a royalty check for an agreed upon amount of the sales. By doing this all you do is collect a check on your patented idea. Plus those established manufacturers can make and distribute the head much cheaper than you can.

As for the blades breaking off, do something that no other expandable does, use real thick and beafy blades, like .080 thick. By going proportionately bigger you gain much more strength when going through bone. The additional weight of the blades will be negligable, as you would have a 125 grain expandable. (A good weight for FOC, momentum, and penetration, which is what most expandable's are lacking).


----------



## Bzn Bow Hunter (Jan 30, 2011)

I am not patent expert, just a salesman, but I think you should get a patent and then post your ideas and then maybe a large manufacture will see it and want to team up with you or just buy the patent rights. I know someone that has done very well for himself and I asked him how he did it. He told me he had an idea an put all his money into it and now he has more money than I can dream of. He told me if I have the same opportunity, I should go for it. As for the blade breaking, I wouldn't let that hang you up. let's face it, we shouldn't shoot animals in shoulders anyhow, and if it flies better, then shot placement should be better. And, like someone else said, it is all marketing, and based off your reply earlier this morning, you have a product that could be sold. I think I could easily sell it in the market today, but I could sell reading glasses to my blind grandmother if I wanted.


----------



## amorgan1006 (May 3, 2010)

Thanks for all of the thoughts. I do happen to be very familiar with distribution, marketing, etc. I run a successful manufacturing company (multi-million $) and I wouldn't have to borrow anything if I wanted to pursue this farther. But all that doesn't change some of the things that have caused me to question this... several of which you mentioned.



hunt123 said:


> Personally, I think I'd back out of it. $4,000 is a tough pill to swallow but if it was me I'd just stop my losses at this point. From a business standpoint, you have to look at additional projected R&D expenses, and the other expenses relative to bringing it to market. Direct sales vs distributors vs selling it to an established manufacturer. All have different and lesser or greater costs associated. Also manufacturing costs: Is everything outsourced, partly outsourced, self-manufactured. Different expenses there also.
> 
> Also on the radar is the fact that other manufacturers have taken a run at the basic concept and no one feels it's viable for whatever reason. Not that yours isn't better, but perhaps there's some basic reason they all feel the concept isn't marketable.
> 
> ...


----------



## g5hoytbowhunter (Aug 17, 2010)

Go for it and continue!


----------



## jbuhr (Feb 13, 2011)

i would see it through, you already have this much time and money in it would be a shame to stop now. and with all the people on here wanting to see it and willing to help you test it, me included, it would be disappointing .to never see it on the shelf


----------



## Bzn Bow Hunter (Jan 30, 2011)

jbuhr said:


> i would see it through, you already have this much time and money in it would be a shame to stop now. and with all the people on here wanting to see it and willing to help you test it, me included, it would be disappointing .to never see it on the shelf


Agreed!!!


----------



## sagitarius (Sep 11, 2007)

Would narrowing your cutting diameter shorten the blades? 

Shorter blades should be stronger and less apt to break and many broadheads are a 1" cut.

Plus it would help you get the weight down.


----------



## g5hoytbowhunter (Aug 17, 2010)

sagitarius said:


> Would narrowing your cutting diameter shorten the blades?
> 
> Shorter blades should be stronger and less apt to break and many broadheads are a 1" cut.
> 
> Plus it would help you get the weight down.


 but then you would have all the Rage fans saying that it sucks because u cannot fit your fist in the entrance hole. they always say my G5s wont work because they are 1.5, but i prove them wrong everytime :wink:


----------



## amorgan1006 (May 3, 2010)

Seriously... I have always shot G5 Strikers (1-1/8" dia) and I have proven over and over and over again that this is more than enough. Actually, I'm on a little roll lately - the last four deer I have arrowed literally dropped in their tracks. Shot placement is everything. Cutting diameter doesn't matter much when you hit the sweet spot. That's why I started this in the first place. I am sick and tired of spending hours and hours in September trying to get my broadheads to hit the same spot as the field points I shot all summer in 3D shoots. And I always end up abandoning that and just adjusting for the broadheads. I don't want to re-fletch and all of the tweaking in the world of my rest, my blade alignment, etc. doesn't seem to be able to get them hitting the same exact spot. So I said to myself... "why doesn't someone make a broadhead that looks (and cuts through the air) like a field point until it strikes the target. So I started to sketch. What I have now is exactly what I wanted except that it isn't as "tough" as I want. Blades breaking on shoulder blades is not satisfying me.



g5hoytbowhunter said:


> but then you would have all the Rage fans saying that it sucks because u cannot fit your fist in the entrance hole. they always say my G5s wont work because they are 1.5, but i prove them wrong everytime :wink:


----------



## sobradsayz (Oct 30, 2010)

is there anything new with this broadhead


----------



## viperzulu (Mar 14, 2010)

Ok I need to keep up on this as well, hope the best for your testing and designs.


----------



## skynight (Nov 5, 2003)

sagitarius said:


> Would narrowing your cutting diameter shorten the blades?
> 
> Shorter blades should be stronger and less apt to break and many broadheads are a 1" cut.
> 
> Plus it would help you get the weight down.


Eastern deer hunters may not like this but as an elk hunter I'd be interested in a tough & reliable mechanical with a small cutting diameter.


----------



## crazygary (Sep 28, 2009)

I just subscribed. I've always been scepticle of mech heads exept on turkeys and pronghorns. But I figure someone will eventually make a head good for deer.


----------



## g5hoytbowhunter (Aug 17, 2010)

I have also had great success with G5 products and the only time i ever did not recover something i shot was the ONLY time i used rage 


amorgan1006 said:


> Seriously... I have always shot G5 Strikers (1-1/8" dia) and I have proven over and over and over again that this is more than enough. Actually, I'm on a little roll lately - the last four deer I have arrowed literally dropped in their tracks. Shot placement is everything. Cutting diameter doesn't matter much when you hit the sweet spot. That's why I started this in the first place. I am sick and tired of spending hours and hours in September trying to get my broadheads to hit the same spot as the field points I shot all summer in 3D shoots. And I always end up abandoning that and just adjusting for the broadheads. I don't want to re-fletch and all of the tweaking in the world of my rest, my blade alignment, etc. doesn't seem to be able to get them hitting the same exact spot. So I said to myself... "why doesn't someone make a broadhead that looks (and cuts through the air) like a field point until it strikes the target. So I started to sketch. What I have now is exactly what I wanted except that it isn't as "tough" as I want. Blades breaking on shoulder blades is not satisfying me.


----------



## g5hoytbowhunter (Aug 17, 2010)

cannot wait to see your broadhead!


----------



## Veni Vidi Vici (Jan 23, 2011)

amorgan1006 said:


> I spent today repeatnig the tests. I thawed the shoulder completely (it was cold but thawed) and repeated the same shot (through the shoulder and actual should bone) several more times. On the second shot, another blade snapped in half. So I have concluded that the blades are not tough enough.. I am not satisfied. You're right about R&D being expensive. I'm in for nearly $5,000 already between the two prototype parts runs and the lawyer... and I only have about 100 pieces of what I view as an unsatisfactory product. But then again... now I know what I wanted to know.


Make sure you are actually getting what you think you are getting for the heat treat. Also, take a look at some of the 17-4PH alloys. Carpenter 445 in Condition A might be good, too. In strip form, it has a 0.2% yield strength of 135 ksi, HRc=33, and Elongation % (in 1 inch) of 18%, % Reduction of Area is 54%.


----------



## Veni Vidi Vici (Jan 23, 2011)

Veni Vidi Vici said:


> Make sure you are actually getting what you think you are getting for the heat treat. Also, take a look at some of the 17-4PH alloys. Carpenter 445 in Condition A might be good, too. In strip form, it has a 0.2% yield strength of 135 ksi, HRc=33, and Elongation % (in 1 inch) of 18%, % Reduction of Area is 54%.


I mis-typed. That was supposed to be Carpenter 4*55*


----------



## Stormforce (Jul 28, 2009)

I don't know about anyone else, but if I hit a pig with an expandable broadhead in the shoulder blade, I wouldn't expect the blades to survive. Hell, I don't even expect the whole broadhead to be useable after bringing down an animal, but if it is useable, then it's a bonus, but I probably wouldn't use it again, just in case there was something damaged, bent or broken that I can not detect, because when it counts, every bit of gear has to be in A1 condition. 

I use aluminium shafts (Easton Gamegetters xx75 - 2117/400) on pigs due to their heavier weight and providing greater penetration on long distance shots, and they usually bent or break, after hitting the animal, so if a broadheads blade snaps off, to me, it doesn't matter. 

You wouldn't expect to re-use a bullet / projectile after hitting an animal. I think you are expecting too much. 

Personally I think in testing, you should be looking at maximum penetration and see how much actual damage the broadhead makes, rather than whether it survives the test. If the blades break just going through muscle and sinew, then there's a problem, but if it hits bone and the blades survive two out of three hits I think you are onto a winner. 

Not all hunting products work exactly in the field as they do in testing, there are way too many variables to take into account, and there are way too many products out there that even though the marketing says will improve everything from tighter groups to better flight, greater accuracy, etc, etc, etc, we as consumers usually take the marketing claims with a pinch of salt. Ultimately, the consumer will decide what they are looking for in a product, based on recommendations from freinds and successful hunters, the marketing only makes us consider the product for comparison against others that we are already aware of.

As long as it flies like a field point and the end result is equal to or better than, the long proven products already on the market, I'd continue ahead with the product.


----------



## ohiobullseye (Feb 6, 2011)

I hope you keep on trying to complete the process you have take it this far and sounds like you have a realy good idea. I do undersand that money does not grow on trees, but if finantually you are able to follow through with it and you still back out now you could possibly regret it down the road. I am and so are many others on this sight are interested on seeing what you have designed and found through your journey to the perfect broad head.


----------



## amorgan1006 (May 3, 2010)

The answer is yes... but not as much as I first thought. It is a hidden blade broadhead where hte blades are contained in the ferrule until impact. This iliminates the need for broadhead tuning. The mechanism for blade deployment and the way the blades are set in the design are new with my design.



sobradsayz said:


> is there anything new with this broadhead


----------



## amorgan1006 (May 3, 2010)

I've thought about it that way. But from the beginning I have looked at this witht he attitude that I want to make a truly awesome product that will nto necessarily be inexpensive but will be very high quality. I made it with thicked blades in an attempt to get to a point where breakage wouldn't happen - even on bones.

On the two that had a blade snap going through the shoulder blade, I still had a 1"+ hole coming out. I'm sure they'll do the job. But I am placing higher expectations on it.




Stormforce said:


> I don't know about anyone else, but if I hit a pig with an expandable broadhead in the shoulder blade, I wouldn't expect the blades to survive. Hell, I don't even expect the whole broadhead to be useable after bringing down an animal, but if it is useable, then it's a bonus, but I probably wouldn't use it again, just in case there was something damaged, bent or broken that I can not detect, because when it counts, every bit of gear has to be in A1 condition.
> 
> I use aluminium shafts (Easton Gamegetters xx75 - 2117/400) on pigs due to their heavier weight and providing greater penetration on long distance shots, and they usually bent or break, after hitting the animal, so if a broadheads blade snaps off, to me, it doesn't matter.
> 
> ...


----------



## CarbonTerry (Jan 8, 2003)

FYI: I haven't read every post but I did see that it was $10K for a patent.....well, did you know that the US Patent Office is REQUIRED to help all patent owners at no charge to apply for their patent?


----------



## revwilder (Apr 11, 2005)

I don't know if your Broadhead is going to be like the Epek XC3 but I just found this online.
http://epekhunting.com/default.aspx


----------



## jbuhr (Feb 13, 2011)

anything new? are they anything like the xc3?


----------



## amorgan1006 (May 3, 2010)

I've checked that one out, too. As far as I can tell, that is the only hidden blade broadhead on the market.



revwilder said:


> I don't know if your Broadhead is going to be like the Epek XC3 but I just found this online.
> http://epekhunting.com/default.aspx


----------



## amorgan1006 (May 3, 2010)

Actually, I've been through the process before both with and without the use of a patent attorney. It takes about 18 months to get a first response from the USPTO after you submit an application. And the examiners definitely seem to be predisposed to nit-pick with applications composed without the assistance fo a patent attorney. 



CarbonTerry said:


> FYI: I haven't read every post but I did see that it was $10K for a patent.....well, did you know that the US Patent Office is REQUIRED to help all patent owners at no charge to apply for their patent?


----------



## Olydog (Sep 1, 2010)

Here is an idea you could try. Get some of the more popular fixed and mechanical broadheads and shoot them with your broadheads at the same shoulder bones. See if the others hold up or have similar or worse component failures. That will let you know where your product stands in comparison with what is out there now.


----------



## g5hoytbowhunter (Aug 17, 2010)

Olydog said:


> Here is an idea you could try. Get some of the more popular fixed and mechanical broadheads and shoot them with your broadheads at the same shoulder bones. See if the others hold up or have similar or worse component failures. That will let you know where your product stands in comparison with what is out there now.


good idea


----------



## sawtoothscream (Apr 19, 2008)

sounds like it will be one tuff expandable when alls said and done. good luck


----------



## Oceantoad1 (Sep 5, 2009)

After reading these 4 pages of posts I got to see how it turns out. Good Luck. Sounds like you have plenty of support from the posts. I'd also be honored to be a field tester.


----------



## yoda4x4 (May 11, 2004)

As was suggested before, I'd buy a few of the most popular mechanicals on the market and compare the results of them going thru bone versus yours. If yours are equal or better, than I wouldn't try to make an indestructible head. Some heads that come to mind for testing are: Steelheads, Spitfires, Rage, G5 T3 and Tekan II.

Good luck,
David


----------



## BOWTECH-340 (Mar 13, 2011)

G5's are a guaranteed kill for me every time! I use Montecs and have passed through every heart, lung, neck and hind quarter i have arrowed. Some of those (neck & hind) were not ideal shots or where i was intending on hitting, but they passed through, arrow was recovered with broadhead undamaged and a dead deer was down within 75 yards every time. I will continue to use this broadhead each season. "If it ain't broke, don't fix it"!


----------



## AppleOnMyHead (Nov 22, 2009)

Need an update....lol


----------



## clw74 (Aug 28, 2006)

AppleOnMyHead said:


> Need an update....lol


Me too.


----------



## aheadhunter (Mar 1, 2011)

always looking for new andvanced broadheads, would love to see one that takes them down quickly, love finding them, hate dragging them.........subscribed


----------



## HawgEnvy (Mar 2, 2011)

waiting on more details....


----------



## Justgot2hunt (Sep 27, 2010)

Was hoping this was going to end happy.........doesn't look like it with no update in 8 months. Would have liked to try 'em.


----------



## thelefthand (Nov 3, 2011)

I don't think that any of the ballistics gels will work for what you want to do. They may do a great job for testing penetration and expansion on bullets, but they generally drag a lot more on an arrow shaft than normal tissue would. Having said that, a few years ago I purchased 2 batches of a clear ballistic product called Perma-Gel in order to test several of the popular muzzle loader projectiles. I re-melt it down in a normal roaster oven that I bought for $20. I've used it over several times, and it's now been sitting in my garage for over 3 years and it's still in good shape (doesn't rot). If you do want to use some king of gel, I highly recommend the Perma-Gel. http://www.perma-gel.com/

Just my 2 bits,
Mark


----------



## AppleOnMyHead (Nov 22, 2009)

Sent OP a PM, he hasn't been on since Sept 22nd.


----------



## nick060200 (Jul 5, 2010)

busy making BHs


----------



## Don Schultz (Jul 5, 2002)

I would do initial tests in any kind of foam which proves consistent. I would finish test by buying a field dressed but skin on hog. (s'pose they all come that way). Shoot from far enough back that the arrow has time to settle oscillation. So 15 yards at least. Look fwd to seeing results.


----------



## amorgan1006 (May 3, 2010)

*been a while*

I let the the busy world take my attention away from this for about 10 months. Since hunting season came around I have started thinkng about this again and have just opened my box of prototypes, mechanical drawings, patent attorney paperwork, etc. The wheels may be turning again...


----------



## howie (Apr 7, 2004)

Whats happening with your trials?
Be interested as I also have laid out a bunch of money on design work.
Good luck mate
Howie


----------



## eastoneasy (Jan 22, 2011)

wanna keep up on this post sounds like a great head


----------



## amorgan1006 (May 3, 2010)

I did trials with the second prototypes. I proved the function... had 100% results for the the functional design characteristics. But I did have blade breakage twice and one other part break once when test-shooting through a deer's front shoulder blade. I was hoping for better durability than that. I'm at the point where I either go farther or I don't. If I do, it'll be putting out a lot of money (a patent application, a production run, branding, packaging, marketing, etc.).



howie said:


> Whats happening with your trials?
> Be interested as I also have laid out a bunch of money on design work.
> Good luck mate
> Howie


----------



## moosehunter09 (Aug 23, 2011)

is there any money in selling your design to a larger company? i would have to think with as much work as you have put it in it would be easy to sell, probably with a stake in the profits.

good luck with your design


----------



## mt hunter22 (Dec 16, 2007)

been subscribed hoping to try these out someday.. i hunt elk and breakage is the main reason i dont try to many expandables,but sounds like yours are on the right track.


----------



## hunting_4_life (Mar 19, 2007)

never did hear anything from this so what was the outcome?


----------

