# Helix single bevel VS Vpa Penetrator VS bone!



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

So I had some time to get more bones and do some testing with various broadheads. Their has been concern floating around that single bevel is "hype", or single bevels blade retention is not as "good" as some double bevels. Since I'm a fan of single bevel broadheads I took this a little personal and even got challenged and bet money against! ( which he probably won't pay up). Anyhow I'm posting a few pics and I'll label them as I post them. This is for informational purposes only so don't tell me you don't hunt bones or that I need to make a perfect shot so I don't hit a bone. I'm not contracted by either companies I just felt like testing them against each other.
Bow for testing
Diamond deadeye 65#
343 ibo.

Easton axis 340 with helix 100 grain head total weight 423 grains
VS
Easton axis 340 with 150 Vpa penetrator

Clear winner....

























helix no damage spins perfectly...still sharp








Vpa penetrator , elf shoed , arrow trashed . I was a bit surprised here on the "tough steel". Still sharp











helix vs Vpa vs the knuckle, Vpa lost. Both 530 grains arrow weight, used brass hit to match weight with 150 Vpa
















after math, Vpa lodged barely in knuckle , other bent , the knuckle shot helix is sharp shiny and spins perfect .


----------



## TimmyZ7 (Aug 11, 2010)

Yessir!


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

The very first shot, the Vpa weighed 50 grains more so it was 473 grains vs 423 grains...


----------



## bambikiller (Feb 27, 2004)

Single bevel is hype they say ! Weaker edge they say ! Won't split bone as well they say! Oh and to DHscents please tell me in a "not so nice way" as you said . That double bevel are superior in every way .... Sponsor propaganda debunked . I love it .


----------



## harrywrash (Aug 6, 2014)

Wow! That's crazy_! Nice experiment with such heavy bone.


----------



## bhutso (Jan 4, 2007)

bambikiller said:


> Single bevel is hype they say ! Weaker edge they say ! Won't split bone as well they say! Oh and to DHscents please tell me in a "not so nice way" as you said . That double bevel are superior in every way .... Sponsor propaganda debunked . I love it .


Lol I could be wrong (it happened once in 87). But I'm pretty sure if you reread the thread, the guy you are calling out quoted Seth, was agreeing with Seth, and was implying that Seth said it way nicer than he would have to the guy pushing vpa. I don't think anyone agreed that single bevel was hype


----------



## 07commander (Dec 22, 2010)

sethro02 said:


> The very first shot, the Vpa weighed 50 grains more so it was 473 grains vs 423 grains...


Nice test. Your making me more and more a believer.

You don't happen to have an anarchy to try do you? I'd like to see what they would do. 

If you don't hit the bone square in the middle, towards one side, will they still split it. Or glance off? (And maybe bend)


----------



## harrywrash (Aug 6, 2014)

What are you calling ibo? 350 gn arrow! How fast is your rig slinging the 423 and 473 grainers at that thick leg?


----------



## sinko (Dec 1, 2004)

I work as a sub contractor with Darton and Tim Strickland is on their staff so I recently met him and looked over the broadhead line at the ATA show. I am seriously impressed.


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

harrywrash said:


> What are you calling ibo? 350 gn arrow! How fast is your rig slinging the 423 and 473 grainers at that thick leg?


My bows ibo is 343

290 fps with 423 grains
278 fps - 473
259fps- 530


----------



## bambikiller (Feb 27, 2004)

bhutso said:


> Lol I could be wrong (it happened once in 87). But I'm pretty sure if you reread the thread, the guy you are calling out quoted Seth, was agreeing with Seth, and was implying that Seth said it way nicer than he would have to the guy pushing vpa. I don't think anyone agreed that single bevel was hype


Then I completely misread it . If that's the case


----------



## hunterhewi (Jun 12, 2010)

harrywrash said:


> What are you calling ibo? 350 gn arrow! How fast is your rig slinging the 423 and 473 grainers at that thick leg?


Ibo is ibo. Its all figured the same


----------



## bambikiller (Feb 27, 2004)

hunterhewi said:


> Ibo is ibo. Its all figured the same


True dat!!!


----------



## DnH_Scents (Sep 3, 2014)

bambikiller said:


> Single bevel is hype they say ! Weaker edge they say ! Won't split bone as well they say! Oh and to DHscents please tell me in a "not so nice way" as you said . That double bevel are superior in every way .... Sponsor propaganda debunked . I love it .


  What? I think you have me confused with somebody else. When did I say that? If your going to attirbute a comment to somebody, please provide the context because I am a fan of single bevel heads. Now Im wondering you you really meant to call out.


----------



## hunterhewi (Jun 12, 2010)

I always chuckle when people ask that question! Sethro i was thinking of getting some of the vpa heads. I thought they would be a lot tougher than that. Maybe ill just stick with my 170 grain spitfires.


----------



## bhutso (Jan 4, 2007)

bambikiller said:


> Then I completely misread it . If that's the case


That's how I took it, as stated I've been wrong before. On the other hand I bet there is a vpa sponsor out there that wishes he wouldn't have called single bevels "hype" just to try to sell more heads lol


The results do all the talking


----------



## Elite fanboy (Dec 11, 2011)

I just ordered 6 of the 125 grain Helix this morning and the sharpener...I'm glad you did't steer me wrong!!!:darkbeer:


----------



## DnH_Scents (Sep 3, 2014)

bambikiller said:


> Then I completely misread it . If that's the case


Yes, you sure did and when you do that sort of thing, its the adult thing to apologize or make amends. You messed up and called me out when you had it bass ackwards.


----------



## 0nepin (Sep 16, 2009)

I am not a single bevel guy but I have known for a long time the bone busting and durability advantages of the single bevel broadheads.no suprize from these results for me.even with the foc and weight advantages the double bevel can't hang with the single bevel


----------



## bhutso (Jan 4, 2007)

DnH_Scents said:


> Yes, you sure did and when you do that sort of thing, its the adult thing to apologize or make amends. You messed up and called me out when you had it bass ackwards.


How about thanking the guy that pointed it out and stood up for you too lol. It was a misread statement nothing more. No need for it to get out of hand. That's why I spoke up. Bambikiller is a good guy. Now let's all make up


----------



## River420Bottom (Jul 21, 2008)

Awesome test if I would go to a fixed it would be the helix for sure, was surprised with the tests actually, thanks sethro


----------



## bambikiller (Feb 27, 2004)

DnH_Scents said:


> Yes, you sure did and when you do that sort of thing, its the adult thing to apologize or make amends. You messed up and called me out when you had it bass ackwards.


If you'd scroll down I did , however talking down to me like a child isn't going to advantages in your favor !


----------



## DnH_Scents (Sep 3, 2014)

bhutso said:


> How about thanking the guy that pointed it out and stood up for you too lol. It was a misread statement nothing more. No need for it to get out of hand. That's why I spoke up. Bambikiller is a good guy. Now let's all make up


Thank you. I dont know how he got it so horribly wrong but Im glad he is the only one that screwed it up and got it wrong. Im a single bevel fan. I thought I made that clear.


----------



## bambikiller (Feb 27, 2004)

DnH_Scents said:


> Thank you. I dont know how he got it so horribly wrong but Im glad he is the only one that screwed it up and got it wrong. Im a single bevel fan. I thought I made that clear.


I misread when reading that other thread as stated 2-3 posts later . Again no need to get all bass awkwards yourself ... Love this test back on topic


----------



## DnH_Scents (Sep 3, 2014)

Close enough.

Thanks for the op for posting this info.


----------



## snapcrackpop (Nov 15, 2010)

Thanks guys. I'm going to try these next year. My boy pulls about 40 pounds, would a 100gr helix be in order for him too?


----------



## B3AV3R (Apr 19, 2006)

I'd like to try out these Helix heads. Sure would be nice to see someone put the Deep 6 versions to the test to see if they stood up as well as the standard versions.


----------



## mdewitt71 (Jul 20, 2005)

WOW.....
Guess I am gonna have to order me some Helix heads and give em a try. 
Thanks for posting. :darkbeer:


----------



## 0nepin (Sep 16, 2009)

My son was shooting the 100gr helix from a 50lb chaos and blowing through deer like butter.the helix would be the absolute best Choice for your son IMHO .


snapcrackpop said:


> Thanks guys. I'm going to try these next year. My boy pulls about 40 pounds, would a 100gr helix be in order for him too?


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

Don Beaver said:


> I'd like to try out these Helix heads. Sure would be nice to see someone put the Deep 6 versions to the test to see if they stood up as well as the standard versions.


I tested those two years ago and did great.


----------



## nick060200 (Jul 5, 2010)

awesome, sticking with helix.

later this year i do want to see helix vs cutthroat!


----------



## bowtech2006 (Apr 1, 2006)

Awesome test Seth. My wife has the helix in her quiver for stag. Very impressive with penetration
On the helix.


----------



## TRex18 (Oct 3, 2013)

Now ......this was impressive.....I don't want to leave my new 125 grains Exodus and go with Helix.......so...I guess ....I'll shot both!


----------



## HoosierArcher88 (Jan 10, 2013)

Sweet test, thanks for sharing Sethro.


----------



## crankn101 (Jan 26, 2007)




----------



## jewalker7842 (Aug 15, 2011)

A Rage would have cut that bone in half. That's nothing. 

I'm gonna have to try some of those Helix heads. They have definitely peaked my interest.


----------



## crankn101 (Jan 26, 2007)

423 is LIGHT!!


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

crankn101 said:


> 423 is LIGHT!!


Yea definately not what I hunt with


----------



## bambikiller (Feb 27, 2004)

sethro02 said:


> Yea definately not what I hunt with


Wonder what my 570 grain footed fmj burning out of the XRCIST would have done !!!!!


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

bambikiller said:


> Wonder what my 570 grain footed fmj burning out of the XRCIST would have done !!!!!


It would have made my wife mad making holes in the wall


----------



## hunterhewi (Jun 12, 2010)

bambikiller said:


> Wonder what my 570 grain footed fmj burning out of the XRCIST would have done !!!!!


Probably woulda just bounced off!


----------



## henro (Oct 9, 2007)

I should try shooting something like that with my setup soon. My Abowyer heads shipped today.


----------



## Rolo (Dec 16, 2002)

So...the lighter arrow out penetrated the heavier arrow in test 1...:mg::tongue::set1_rolf2::banana::behindsof


----------



## landon410 (Aug 20, 2014)

what role did the open box of artillery shells on the floor play? because thats sounds like it could have been a fun experiment


----------



## bambikiller (Feb 27, 2004)

Rolo said:


> So...the lighter arrow out penetrated the heavier arrow in test 1...:mg::tongue::set1_rolf2::banana::behindsof


The helix weighed exactly the same except for the very first shot . Helix out penetrated regardless


----------



## goathollow (Jun 18, 2008)

My motto is overkill is way underrated....I'd would be shooting them for sure if they weren't $50 per 3.  

Seth: How do they fly? Same as the VPA 3 blade? 

I may splurge and buy 3 of them anyway before I go in my bear hunt in May.


----------



## bambikiller (Feb 27, 2004)

goathollow said:


> My motto is overkill is way underrated....I'd would be shooting them for sure if they weren't $50 per 3.


But clearly They can be re use over and over again as long a you find your arrow .. So I guess look at it that way


----------



## Rolo (Dec 16, 2002)

bambikiller said:


> The helix weighed exactly the same except for the very first shot . Helix out penetrated regardless


Right...the lighter arrow out penetrated the heavier one in the first test like I said. :wink:


----------



## goathollow (Jun 18, 2008)

bambikiller said:


> But clearly They can be re use over and over again as long a you find your arrow .. So I guess look at it that way


I already use broadheads that can be re-sharpened. So the multiple use thing, while totally valid, is kind of moot in my case. Please don't read my original post as putting them down; I think they are a great broadhead. I just wish they didn't cost so darn much. I grimace at $39 for three too.


----------



## harrywrash (Aug 6, 2014)

That's awesome your 423 gn at 290 fps is hitting that bigass thick bone like a mack truck!


----------



## bambikiller (Feb 27, 2004)

goathollow said:


> I already use broadheads that can be re-sharpened. So the multiple use thing, while totally valid, is kind of moot in my case. Please don't read my original post as putting them down; I think they are a great broadhead. I just wish they didn't cost so darn much. I grimace at $39 for three too.


Are yours All 100% American made ?


----------



## TimmyZ7 (Aug 11, 2010)

I actually sharpened one up that was already used in Seth's last test and it is ready to kill. Pay the money once and each time you use it again pays you back.


----------



## cooperjd (Aug 18, 2009)

ive been going back and forth about which heads to take to south africa in august. i'll be building ~630gr GTkinetic 200's for the trip with an 80# destroyer 350. i was concerned about what seems to be a thick ferrule on the 2 blade helix. it looks like i need not be concerned! thank you for the testing, looks like i have to place an order soon.


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

Rolo said:


> So...the lighter arrow out penetrated the heavier arrow in test 1...:mg::tongue::set1_rolf2::banana::behindsof


Actually it shows something more important. Obviously if both arrows and broadheads were identical then the heavier would have penetrated better. But this is showing the mechanical advantage benefits of this broadhead since it was on a lighter total weight arrow. If the Vpa was a helix then the heavier helix would have done better. So basically the 2 blade single bevel exerts way less energy to penetrate compared to a wedge design


----------



## bambikiller (Feb 27, 2004)

sethro02 said:


> Actually it shows something more important. Obviously if both arrows and broadheads were identical then the heavier would have penetrated better. But this is showing the mechanical advantage benefits of this broadhead since it was on a lighter total weight arrow. If the Vpa was a helix then the heavier helix would have done better. So basically the 2 blade single bevel exerts way less energy to penetrate compared to a wedge design


And boom goes the dynamite !


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

harrywrash said:


> That's awesome your 423 gn at 290 fps is hitting that bigass thick bone like a mack truck!


I have some videos of it but I have to get it edited and done first. My camera went dead so had to use phone so I have a bunch of small 20 second videos lol. It's very loud


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

goathollow said:


> I already use broadheads that can be re-sharpened. So the multiple use thing, while totally valid, is kind of moot in my case. Please don't read my original post as putting them down; I think they are a great broadhead. I just wish they didn't cost so darn much. I grimace at $39 for three too.


I understand your concern Aaron. Obviously as sales goes up their will be potential to decrease price I assume but as I'm told, the grinding process on the blade takes time. Doing the backside and sides of main blade. So as you know time is money. Also the quality of American steel and aluminum. 420c hardened to 50-51. Also yes they fly great. I'll be conducting a side by side test with field points out if a xbow ( no it's not mine lol)


----------



## opie20wv (Dec 29, 2009)

Thanks for posting another great telling thread Sethro02 of what a single bevel is capable of - this is why the Helix is always in my quiver. I love the 150 grainers and I'm going to run 125 deep six versions this year as well and see how they do. A lot of people claim there is no advantage to single bevel heads and I totally disagree. Alot of that is based on shooting foam or gel target medium and their results sometimes reveal that "x" double bevel head outpenetrated "x" single bevel head and therefore the single bevel head is inferior due to such results. When you take a head that is rotating as fierce as the helix in a foam or dense gel target it undoubtedly impedes it's penetration a tiny bit. You put that same fierce spinning blade through internal organs of the animals we hunt (which is way softer than foam) it blows a tunnel through them and turns them into mashed potatoes - and if you encounter bone on the way to internal organs you have the best bone splitter on the front of your arrow that will use minimal energy to pass through bone, thus retaining energy, on the way through the vitals. It's like using the right tool for a particular job: you don't use a wood drill bit to install tapcon screws in masonry, you use a masonry bit. In this case bone is masonry and a good single bevel is your masonry bit and a standard .025-.035" thick bladed double bevel is your wood bit.


----------



## JDS-1 (Nov 15, 2007)

Any way you can test out some DRT heads too?


----------



## cooperjd (Aug 18, 2009)

if you can test the drt i'll send you one if needed.


----------



## crankn101 (Jan 26, 2007)

Where are the 1-1/2" heads at...


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

crankn101 said:


> Where are the 1-1/2" heads at...


With my test setup it wouldn't have been enough arrow weight to shoot 150 helix. That big of a cut I would have had to test with heavier arrows and the ones I had with brass inserts coupled with 150 grains was too weak of spine, sorry


----------



## Rolo (Dec 16, 2002)

sethro02 said:


> Actually it shows something more important. Obviously if both arrows and broadheads were identical then the heavier would have penetrated better. But this is showing the mechanical advantage benefits of this broadhead since it was on a lighter total weight arrow. If the Vpa was a helix then the heavier helix would have done better. So basically the 2 blade single bevel exerts way less energy to penetrate compared to a wedge design


Don't recall saying otherwise. What it does demonstrate is that arrow weight alone is not a complete predictor of penetration performance, and a lot of other factors contribute, so much to the point that a lighter arrow out penetrated the heavier one. Largely due to a superior broadhead design, further established by the test with equal arrow weight. And I agree the Helix head is a darned good one. 



bambikiller said:


> And boom goes the dynamite !


Not really sure where the Boom comes from...I thought everyone knew that arrow weight alone is not the sole predictor of penetration potential.


----------



## 07commander (Dec 22, 2010)

cooperjd said:


> if you can test the drt i'll send you one if needed.


I'd like to see the anarchy tested. I have one I could also send. I realize this testing Takes time. Thanks for your work.


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

07commander said:


> I'd like to see the anarchy tested. I have one I could also send. I realize this testing Takes time. Thanks for your work.


I tested it last time , it was the thinner blade. The ferrule split the bone but ferrule was bent , and blade was destroyed. It poked out the other side.


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

I did this test to merely prove a point.


----------



## LetThemGrow (Apr 2, 2004)

Awesome test. Now let's watch people remove their foot from their mouth.....

Seriously considering these for 2015...


----------



## crankn101 (Jan 26, 2007)

sethro02 said:


> With my test setup it wouldn't have been enough arrow weight to shoot 150 helix. That big of a cut I would have had to test with heavier arrows and the ones I had with brass inserts coupled with 150 grains was too weak of spine, sorry


Helix makes a 1.5"? 

If so 90% sure I'll make the switch.


----------



## bhutso (Jan 4, 2007)

sethro02 said:


> I did this test to merely prove a point.


Mission accomplished lol 

Although I think the majority already knew what this outcome would be 

Sad you must go to such lengths to prove a point that has been proven over and over but glad you did I got a chuckle out of it.

And I still really like the anarchy but only because I don't hunt cows


----------



## bhutso (Jan 4, 2007)

crankn101 said:


> Helix makes a 1.5"?
> 
> If so 90% sure I'll make the switch.


1 5/16 for the 150 grain and 225 I believe


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

crankn101 said:


> Helix makes a 1.5"?
> 
> If so 90% sure I'll make the switch.


1 5/16"... Close but not quite. Still big for a single bevel.


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

Sorry bhutso didn't see the post


----------



## bhutso (Jan 4, 2007)

sethro02 said:


> Sorry bhutso didn't see the post


No worries didn't mean to speak for you 

Keeps the thread up top anyway


----------



## grander (Mar 19, 2009)

Nice!
Thanks for doing the test.


----------



## bambikiller (Feb 27, 2004)

Rolo said:


> Don't recall saying otherwise. What it does demonstrate is that arrow weight alone is not a complete predictor of penetration performance, and a lot of other factors contribute, so much to the point that a lighter arrow out penetrated the heavier one. Largely due to a superior broadhead design, further established by the test with equal arrow weight. And I agree the Helix head is a darned good one.
> 
> 
> 
> Not really sure where the Boom comes from...I thought everyone knew that arrow weight alone is not the sole predictor of penetration potential.


Like I said boom goes the dynamite sorry if you can't comprehend what I'm getting at


----------



## Larry brown (Aug 17, 2013)

That's pretty interesting right there. I didn't know this so I guess I am kinda behind. I thought that big cut mechanicals were far superior!!!! Thanks for the test and info on the helix sethro02. I watched a ashby video today that showed how the single bevels do more damage than you can see because of the design it is pretty interesting for sure.


----------



## rayzor43 (Apr 8, 2011)

Did my post actually get pulled?


----------



## be_the_arrow (Jul 7, 2014)

This bull went down fast with a Helix. Total arrow weight was right at 400. Upping my weight by 50 grains this year.


----------



## bambikiller (Feb 27, 2004)

rayzor43 said:


> Did my post actually get pulled?


What did it say?


----------



## yotehunter243 (Aug 12, 2013)

I've actually been considering the 150 grain Helix this year. Good test Seth


----------



## meatmissile (Oct 26, 2009)

rayzor43 said:


> Did my post actually get pulled?


Ive every post and havent seen the one you wrote.


----------



## 0nepin (Sep 16, 2009)

Lol where did all of the double bevel guys go ?


LetThemGrow said:


> Awesome test. Now let's watch people remove their foot from their mouth.....
> 
> Seriously considering these for 2015...


----------



## 0nepin (Sep 16, 2009)

I never seen it .


rayzor43 said:


> Did my post actually get pulled?


----------



## dtrkyman (Jul 27, 2004)

Helix is Impressive, Seth how much penetration is that? First one looks to be 20 inches plus!


----------



## bhutso (Jan 4, 2007)

rayzor43 said:


> Did my post actually get pulled?


Must have forgot to hit send


----------



## TimmyZ7 (Aug 11, 2010)

These Helix can really take an edge. I further polished the edge over 2000 grit wet sanding paper and did some more stropping. If people took the time to sharpen these single bevels right they would be very impressed. Wow, just pushing it through computer paper by hand it twists and cuts an S shape with ease.


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

dtrkyman said:


> Helix is Impressive, Seth how much penetration is that? First one looks to be 20 inches plus!


16"


----------



## chaded (Jan 15, 2011)

TimmyZ7 said:


> These Helix can really take an edge. I further polished the edge over 2000 grit wet sanding paper and did some more stropping. If people took the time to sharpen these single bevels right they would be very impressed. Wow, just pushing it through computer paper by hand it twists and cuts an S shape with ease.
> 
> View attachment 2138941
> View attachment 2138942



Looks like a pretty thick broadhead.


----------



## Olink (Jan 10, 2003)

Sethro02 - If I am looking at your photos correctly, I see one possible flaw with your test. The blade of the Helix hit parallel to the length of the bone and the VPA hit perpendicular to the bone. Like wood, there is a grain in bone, and it is much easier to split if your blade strikes parallel to the grain. 

To make a fair comparison, I would like to see one of the heads shot again so that it hits with the same orientation as the other head.


----------



## tminc (Mar 2, 2013)

helix's are an awesome head


----------



## TimmyZ7 (Aug 11, 2010)

chaded said:


> Looks like a pretty thick broadhead.


It is. This is the old 100gr Seth beat down in another test. I put some work into the main edges. You can see the difference from the back edge and main edges. It's sharp and meaty. I shot this, and a few others from my FT and all were spot on over 315fps.


----------



## jhill56 (Jul 22, 2014)

Great test


----------



## sawtoothscream (Apr 19, 2008)

Really considering these heads.


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

Olink said:


> Sethro02 - If I am looking at your photos correctly, I see one possible flaw with your test. The blade of the Helix hit parallel to the length of the bone and the VPA hit perpendicular to the bone. Like wood, there is a grain in bone, and it is much easier to split if your blade strikes parallel to the grain.
> 
> To make a fair comparison, I would like to see one of the heads shot again so that it hits with the same orientation as the other head.


That's really nit picking

This is from the Vpa in the first test... Pretty much up and down. I understand about the knuckle but a single bevel would work either way. Maybe next time I'll get lucky for that to play out but that would take hours and a ton of product and still may not hit bone like you want


----------



## brokenlittleman (Oct 18, 2006)

Don't know if this was asked or not but what is the cutting diameter on the VPA versus the Helix?


----------



## Ryjax (Mar 3, 2014)

I was stuck in the fence between the Helix and Solid heads for 2015, but I am seriously leaning toward the Helix now.
Have you tested Solid heads?


----------



## dtrkyman (Jul 27, 2004)

This is not the first test he has proven the design of this head!


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

brokenlittleman said:


> Don't know if this was asked or not but what is the cutting diameter on the VPA versus the Helix?


Vpa 1 1/8
Helix 1 1/8


----------



## dtrkyman (Jul 27, 2004)

brokenlittleman said:


> Don't know if this was asked or not but what is the cutting diameter on the VPA versus the Helix?


both 1 1/8th


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

Ryjax said:


> I was stuck in the fence between the Helix and Solid heads for 2015, but I am seriously leaning toward the Helix now.
> Have you tested Solid heads?


Yea 3 years ago. No bone testing though. They claim to have good blade retention but I didn't really agree with that. It was good but they claim great blade retention. Also and this is just my opinion since you asked me, I like straight blades on broadheads , not how the solids are and German kinetics, some claim benefits to that design and I have yet to see it vs competitors


----------



## 07commander (Dec 22, 2010)

sethro02 said:


> That's really nit picking
> 
> This is from the Vpa in the first test... Pretty much up and down. I understand about the knuckle but a single bevel would work either way. Maybe next time I'll get lucky for that to play out but that would take hours and a ton of product and still may not hit bone like you want


Have you ever hit off center on the bone? Wonder if they will still split or glance off.


----------



## dtrkyman (Jul 27, 2004)

I also believe the taper design of the helix is a large factor for penetration as well, has a great mechanical advantage!


----------



## brokenlittleman (Oct 18, 2006)

sethro02 said:


> Vpa 1 1/8
> Helix 1 1/8


Thanks didn't know what the VPA was. I am shooting the 125gn Helix this year and it is an awesome head.


----------



## bambikiller (Feb 27, 2004)

brokenlittleman said:


> Don't know if this was asked or not but what is the cutting diameter on the VPA versus the Helix?


Exact same .. That's why he had to go 100/150 and add a 50 grain brass insert to equal weight out


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

07commander said:


> Have you ever hit off center on the bone? Wonder if they will still split or glance off.


If you catch the side with any head then your arrow breaks and you put holes in your garage wall. I have like 12 holes and dozens of broken arrows to prove it lol. It did leave a nice "s" cut in the drywall though


----------



## bambikiller (Feb 27, 2004)

sethro02 said:


> If you catch the side with any head then your arrow breaks and you put holes in your garage wall. I have like 12 holes and dozens of broken arrows to prove it lol. It did leave a nice "s" cut in the drywall though


I assume te wife was gone and dry wall mud was handy?


----------



## boonerbrad (Nov 30, 2006)

Seth I love reading your tests and know all the heat you take even though you are just trying to help. So here is my question on these type heads you have tested. The Solid head was mentioned and was wondering about the Samurai style blades vs the VPA and the Helix. Has anyone that you have seen done actual testing on bone to see if the Samurai style blades do indeed penetrate better? Lots of good reading and historical proof as to why the curved blades are suppose to be better. I have seen a few nasty wicked looking holes from the Solid heads in big African game. Just wondering if you have any data to add is all.


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

bambikiller said:


> I assume te wife was gone and dry wall mud was handy?


She doesn't know...gonna post a couple "impact videos " while I'm editing


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

Boonerbrad said:


> Seth I love reading your tests and know all the heat you take even though you are just trying to help. So here is my question on these type heads you have tested. The Solid head was mentioned and was wondering about the Samurai style blades vs the VPA and the Helix. Has anyone that you have seen done actual testing on bone to see if the Samurai style blades do indeed penetrate better? Lots of good reading and historical proof as to why the curved blades are suppose to be better. I have seen a few nasty wicked looking holes from the Solid heads in big African game. Just wondering if you have any data to add is all.


Not those particular heads have ever been tested side by side on this kind of bone impact. I'd be happy to shoot a solid if I had one or a German kinetic to show this. I understand my broadhead test a few years ago people didn't like the mediums used but it was fair across the board and those types of heads didn't do so great. I had to send those heads back to original owners so didn't have opportunity on more real world type testing sorry


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

https://vimeo.com/117351019
Vpa vs knuckle impact , 530 grains


https://vimeo.com/117351080

Helix vs knuckle impact 530 grains


It's all in slow motion so you may want to fast forward...


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

Sorry for not trimming it down but not much time tonight to work on it. Crank up the volume it's loud


----------



## bambikiller (Feb 27, 2004)

The thing I over looked is the amount of penetration . Even through the bone and into the target


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

Yea it's a little more dense of a target at the top. The middle was beat up though


----------



## opie20wv (Dec 29, 2009)

I like the slow mom video - nice!!! The best overall head I've found to date is the helix. However there is one that I've tried that is the best penetrator I've seen (not saying I'm right just saying what I've experienced). It is the badger broadhead. just out of curiosity have you messed with any of them Seth?


----------



## opie20wv (Dec 29, 2009)

Damn auto correct - meant slow mo video


----------



## Bowtechforlife (Apr 17, 2014)

Wait! What? How? But I thought single bevel was a gimmick?! Lol thanks Seth for proving you were right! Wonder if he will pay up or at least acknowledge that the helix splits bones better!?


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

opie20wv said:


> I like the slow mom video - nice!!! The best overall head I've found to date is the helix. However there is one that I've tried that is the best penetrator I've seen (not saying I'm right just saying what I've experienced). It is the badger broadhead. just out of curiosity have you messed with any of them Seth?


I haven't had a chance to shoot them. The blades are like .045" I think and the point doesn't look like a tanto style tip but not for sure. May have to look into it. Not sure how they'll hold up on this.


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

Bowtechforlife said:


> Wait! What? How? But I thought single bevel was a gimmick?! Lol thanks Seth for proving you were right! Wonder if he will pay up or at least acknowledge that the helix splits bones better!?


I'm hoping because I'm pretty sure he mentioned it would have to be a substantial amount for him to wager...I may be rich!


----------



## Ryjax (Mar 3, 2014)

sethro02 said:


> Yea 3 years ago. No bone testing though. They claim to have good blade retention but I didn't really agree with that. It was good but they claim great blade retention. Also and this is just my opinion since you asked me, I like straight blades on broadheads , not how the solids are and German kinetics, some claim benefits to that design and I have yet to see it vs competitors


Your opinion was what I was looking for lol 
Thanks for the heads up on the blade retention


----------



## bambikiller (Feb 27, 2004)

sethro02 said:


> I'm hoping because I'm pretty sure he mentioned it would have to be a substantial amount for him to wager...I may be rich!


Are we talking about Beendare ? I believe we are


----------



## Rolo (Dec 16, 2002)

bambikiller said:


> Like I said boom goes the dynamite sorry if you can't comprehend what I'm getting at


Ah, I see...the: "It is what it is because I say what it is, and since I get to say what it is, I don't have to tell anyone what it is" response. 

Of course, we could have a rational discussion about why the lighter arrow with a differing head penetrated more, or at least likely penetrated more based on the design of the head, and the directional force involved, but I guess not.

One thing that is confusing...I don't understand why the energy and momentum numbers went down with the 530 grain arrow. Assuming the same bow, the numbers I am getting for KE and MO for the 530 is a lot closer to the 423 than the 473. The 473 has the most...which should defy the laws of physics...


----------



## opie20wv (Dec 29, 2009)

sethro02 said:


> I haven't had a chance to shoot them. The blades are like .045" I think and the point doesn't look like a tanto style tip but not for sure. May have to look into it. Not sure how they'll hold up on this.


I'll send you a PM and send you a 150 and let you introduce it to some bone


----------



## bambikiller (Feb 27, 2004)

Rolo said:


> Ah, I see...the: "It is what it is because I say what it is, and since I get to say what it is, I don't have to tell anyone what it is" response.
> 
> Of course, we could have a rational discussion about why the lighter arrow with a differing head penetrated more, or at least likely penetrated more based on the design of the head, and the directional force involved, but I guess not.
> 
> One thing that is confusing...I don't understand why the energy and momentum numbers went down with the 530 grain arrow. Assuming the same bow, the numbers I am getting for KE and MO for the 530 is a lot closer to the 423 than the 473. The 473 has the most...which should defy the laws of physics...


Seth already explained .. Hence my quote an boom goes the dynamite keep up


----------



## bambikiller (Feb 27, 2004)

Rolo said:


> Ah, I see...the: "It is what it is because I say what it is, and since I get to say what it is, I don't have to tell anyone what it is" response.
> 
> Of course, we could have a rational discussion about why the lighter arrow with a differing head penetrated more, or at least likely penetrated more based on the design of the head, and the directional force involved, but I guess not.
> 
> One thing that is confusing...I don't understand why the energy and momentum numbers went down with the 530 grain arrow. Assuming the same bow, the numbers I am getting for KE and MO for the 530 is a lot closer to the 423 than the 473. The 473 has the most...which should defy the laws of physics...


Online calculator I assume ?


----------



## Rolo (Dec 16, 2002)

bambikiller said:


> Online calculator I assume ?


Nope, using the numbers provided in the thread from the person who provided them. Keep up...online calculators are junk. :wink:


----------



## Rolo (Dec 16, 2002)

bambikiller said:


> Seth already explained .. Hence my quote an boom goes the dynamite keep up


Oh, you mean the part that I didn't disagree with. Gotcha. Nonetheless, a lighter arrow with less foc out penetrated a heavier arrow with more foc in this very limited circumstance...which demonstrates that heavier is not always 'better' and that weight alone is a poor thing to rely on...


----------



## bambikiller (Feb 27, 2004)

Rolo said:


> Nope, using the numbers provided in the thread from the person who provided them. Keep up...online calculators are junk. :wink:


Lol you misunderstood .. Good talk tho . Did you happen to go back and read what was wrote and why I quotes what I did


----------



## bambikiller (Feb 27, 2004)

[Q UOTE=Rolo;1072142346]Oh, you mean the part that I didn't disagree with. Gotcha. Nonetheless, a lighter arrow with less foc out penetrated a heavier arrow with more foc in this very limited circumstance...which demonstrates that heavier is not always 'better' and that weight alone is a poor thing to rely on...[/QUOTE] wrong it shows how the efficiency of the helix trumps a wedge design at 50 grains less ! Fact remains . Had both shot first and been at equal the heavier weight the helix would have penetrated even more . More momentum . Period


----------



## gregcoya (May 9, 2009)

chaded said:


> Looks like a pretty thick broadhead.


Timmy you mind my asking what you used to sharpen. I mean what manufacturer sharpener. I used wicked edge on my German Kinetics to get that shine.The 2000 grit was towards the end of sharpening process I take it?


----------



## Rolo (Dec 16, 2002)

bambikiller said:


> Lol you misunderstood .. Good talk tho . Did you happen to go back and read what was wrote and why I quotes what I did


Well...I'm pretty sure you said:



bambikiller said:


> Online calculator I assume ?


Than I said:



Rolo said:


> Nope, using the numbers provided in the thread from the person who provided them. Keep up...online calculators are junk. :wink:


So, I think we're back to you keeping up. :secret: The speed and weight numbers provided demonstrated an anomaly...the heavier arrow's KE and MO went down. Full disclaimer...I used Widgeon's calculator to arrive at the numbers (it requires actual weight and speed) and has proven to be accurate when cross referencing with long form calculations.


----------



## Bowtechforlife (Apr 17, 2014)

sethro02 said:


> I'm hoping because I'm pretty sure he mentioned it would have to be a substantial amount for him to wager...I may be rich!


Yes if memory serves me correct then it was a very big amount of money! I just remembered though, he blocked you and Henro and maybe me I'm not sure. So I don't know if he can even see this?


----------



## Bowtechforlife (Apr 17, 2014)

TimmyZ7 said:


> These Helix can really take an edge. I further polished the edge over 2000 grit wet sanding paper and did some more stropping. If people took the time to sharpen these single bevels right they would be very impressed. Wow, just pushing it through computer paper by hand it twists and cuts an S shape with ease.
> 
> View attachment 2138941
> View attachment 2138942


These pictures make me feel all warm inside.... And I fear for your fingers those look DANGEROUS!!!! Love me some shiny helix!!!


----------



## Rolo (Dec 16, 2002)

bambikiller said:


> wrong it shows how the efficiency of the helix trumps a wedge design at 50 grains less ! Fact remains . Had both shot first and been at equal the heavier weight the helix would have penetrated even more . More momentum . Period


Wait...what? I'm fairly certain a lighter arrow with less foc out penetrated a heavier arrow with higher foc. Not really sure how that is wrong. 

But yeah, the reason it did (though a limited sample) was because of, at least in part, the design of the head and the directional force that it applied. What is do friggin hard to understand about the fact that lighter can actually out penetrate heavier when all else is not equal...the not equal part being the mechanical advantage (directional force) one head has over the other. 

Physics ain't that difficult,especially when its simple physics...but a discussion of why a single bevel has a mechanical advantage and can out penetrate when lighter and less foc is a little more complies than just saying "mechanical advantage" at least if a person wants to discuss the finer points of the physics. 

As you said...sorry you can't comprehend that...

And just so I'm clear...I agree that a heavier arrow is generally better (all else the same) and love me the Helix heads...been shooting them for quite awhile now. :mg:


----------



## opie20wv (Dec 29, 2009)

Bowtechforlife said:


> Yes if memory serves me correct then it was a very big amount of money! I just remembered though, he blocked you and Henro and maybe me I'm not sure. So I don't know if he can even see this?


Ugh oh...., I've "beendare done that" and had to $ up... It ain't fun but it's life.....


----------



## bambikiller (Feb 27, 2004)

Rolo said:


> Wait...what? I'm fairly certain a lighter arrow with less foc out penetrated a heavier arrow with higher foc. Not really sure how that is wrong.
> 
> But yeah, the reason it did (though a limited sample) was because of, at least in part, the design of the head and the directional force that it applied. What is do friggin hard to understand about the fact that lighter can actually out penetrate heavier when all else is not equal...the not equal part being the mechanical advantage (directional force) one head has over the other.
> 
> ...


So now your agreeing with me .. Awesome . Argument over .!


----------



## bambikiller (Feb 27, 2004)

Much like Timmy did I sharpened a 125 a while back to mirror finish they take an edge with ease . I used 1000/6000 grit water stones .






sorry go the crappy pic I need a new phone . It isn't all that hard to sharpen on stones of you are familiar with them and take some time . Otherwise the sharpener is a great route to o and is essentially fool proof ! Then I'd strop them after personally.. I should also note I stroping after sharpening I feel it's important to hit both sides of the blades . A very fine burr will form if you only do the bevel . So a few passes on the back side is also important. This head had been through a lot before sharpening


----------



## Rolo (Dec 16, 2002)

bambikiller said:


> So now your agreeing with me .. Awesome . Argument over .!


Ah...I see you're back to defining what "is" is...but not sure where I ever disagreed with you...but hey, if that makes you feel all warm and fuzzy inside, have at it. :wink: But, can you tell me where I disagreed with you?


----------



## seiowabow (Dec 19, 2010)

Nice test sethro. Very impressive. These and the anarchy 1.5" are on my short list to try.


----------



## rayzor43 (Apr 8, 2011)

I'm not sure if thread owner was referring to comments I have made about single bevels versus in the in the past or not?? Anyone that knows me also knows, no matter my opinion, I don't bash brands. There are plenty of good broadheads on the market and any of them through the heart and/or both lungs will prove fatal fast. The Helix is appears one of the good broadheads. I don't buy into the whole single bevel thing and make no big secret of it. I have no problem with people using them, if that what they like, I just say take the whole thing with a grain of salt as there is more than one way to skin a cat. Sure the reports people are always referring to were based on years of study and hundreds of kills, but they are still the opinions and conclusions drawn by the author based on the products he sampled available on the market at the time all those years ago. He says that himself early on. We have a Prostaffer, Adam Greentree, who has killed over 500 big game animals on 3 continents in the past 3 years alone with our double bevel 2 blades. (some of which are No.1s, top 5s, Top 25s and a pending world record). Most were taken with the 150s like you see in this test, but a few of them were with the 175s. Our design apparently works well. I have several emails with pics and a couple videos from various hunters showing bones split or shattered with our heads where the head came out unscathed, spinning true and being used on multiple kills. Will that always be the case? We make no claims of that. No head is indestructible, ours and the "preferred" head in this test included. Although this is a nice tough test with interesting results, it is far from definitive and doesn't really prove anything about single vs double bevel. It does show a good example of one thing i have said in the past. "Our" double bevel design does a good job of splitting and breaking bones and holding together as it was intended too. Looks to me like it did a pretty darn good job of that. I wish the shafts had been footed. It may have kept the shaft from splitting behind our head, which had some effect (drag surely and possible weak joint??) on how much of the shaft was out the backside of the bone. How much who knows. Of course, I would have prefered the tip of that head not to curl, but curl or not it still did exactly what we designed it to do.... Split the bones, be tough enough to hold together and reach the vitals. In a test with variables you can claim a winner if you want, but to truly have a test with definitive results it has to be controlled with no variances other than the things you are comparing. Shape of the target, angle of entry, variance in density and thickness and broken shafts are all variables. Although most of the the things may have been kinda similar in this test but there are variables.


My statements about single bevel vs double bevel edge strength has not been proven wrong. What I have said is "With equal metallurgy" a double bevel sharpened head will have tougher edges than the single bevel. Its not a big claim, or any sort of propaganda, its math. At any given distance from the edge the wider total angle of a double bevel sharpened head will have more area. The only way that would not be correct is if the double bevel was shapened at an angle much shallower that what any of they typically are or the single bevel was ground at an angle much wider than they typically are. It's all in the angle. Double bevel sharpening angle is measured from the centerpoint of the blade so the total angle is twice the sharpening angle. They typically range from 15-22deg on sharpening angle giving them a total of 30-44 degrees total. Single bevels rarely go more than 25 degrees. As noted, at any given distance from the edge a tyical double bevel blade will have more area in the crooss section than the typical single bevel. If the metallurgy is equal, the wider angle with larger area will be less likely to chip or break.


----------



## bambikiller (Feb 27, 2004)

rayzor43 said:


> I'm not sure if thread owner was referring to comments I have made about single bevels versus in the in the past or not?? Anyone that knows me also knows, no matter my opinion, I don't bash brands. There are plenty of good broadheads on the market and any of them through the heart and/or both lungs will prove fatal fast. The Helix is appears one of the good broadheads. I don't buy into the whole single bevel thing and make no big secret of it. I have no problem with people using them, if that what they like, I just say take the whole thing with a grain of salt as there is more than one way to skin a cat. Sure the reports people are always referring to were based on years of study and hundreds of kills, but they are still the opinions and conclusions drawn by the author based on the products he sampled available on the market at the time all those years ago. He says that himself early on. We have a Prostaffer, Adam Greentree, who has killed over 500 big game animals on 3 continents in the past 3 years alone with our double bevel 2 blades. (some of which are No.1s, top 5s, Top 25s and a pending world record). Most were taken with the 150s like you see in this test, but a few of them were with the 175s. Our design apparently works well. I have several emails with pics and a couple videos from various hunters showing bones split or shattered with our heads where the head came out unscathed, spinning true and being used on multiple kills. Will that always be the case? We make no claims of that. No head is indestructible, ours and the "preferred" head in this test included. Although this is a nice tough test with interesting results, it is far from definitive and doesn't really prove anything about single vs double bevel. It does show a good example of one thing i have said in the past. "Our" double bevel design does a good job of splitting and breaking bones and holding together as it was intended too. Looks to me like it did a pretty darn good job of that. I wish the shafts had been footed. It may have kept the shaft from splitting behind our head, which had some effect (drag surely and possible weak joint??) on how much of the shaft was out the backside of the bone. How much who knows. Of course, I would have prefered the tip of that head not to curl, but curl or not it still did exactly what we designed it to do.... Split the bones, be tough enough to hold together and reach the vitals. In a test with variables you can claim a winner if you want, but to truly have a test with definitive results it has to be controlled with no variances other than the things you are comparing. Shape of the target, angle of entry, variance in density and thickness and broken shafts are all variables. Although most of the the things may have been kinda similar in this test but there are variables.
> 
> 
> My statements about single bevel vs double bevel edge strength has not been proven wrong. What I have said is "With equal metallurgy" a double bevel sharpened head will have tougher edges than the single bevel. Its not a big claim, or any sort of propaganda, its math. At any given distance from the edge the wider total angle of a double bevel sharpened head will have more area. The only way that would not be correct is if the double bevel was shapened at an angle much shallower that what any of they typically are or the single bevel was ground at an angle much wider than they typically are. It's all in the angle. Double bevel sharpening angle is measured from the centerpoint of the blade so the total angle is twice the sharpening angle. They typically range from 15-22deg on sharpening angle giving them a total of 30-44 degrees total. Single bevels rarely go more than 25 degrees. As noted, at any given distance from the edge a tyical double bevel blade will have more area in the crooss section than the typical single bevel. If the metallurgy is equal, the wider angle with larger area will be less likely to chip or break.


I don't think there is a test out there that didn't have variables . If so I've never seen one . Also this is the 2nd-3rd time Seth has done this very same test with the same results . The single bevel split the bone better and got more penetration . Every time . That's not a coincidence . I wish vpa still made single bevel because they are not hype . Or a gimmick and clearly have their place in archery .


----------



## mikehoyme (Nov 3, 2012)

rayzor43 said:


> I'm not sure if thread owner was referring to comments I have made about single bevels versus in the in the past or not?? Anyone that knows me also knows, no matter my opinion, I don't bash brands. There are plenty of good broadheads on the market and any of them through the heart and/or both lungs will prove fatal fast. The Helix is appears one of the good broadheads. I don't buy into the whole single bevel thing and make no big secret of it. I have no problem with people using them, if that what they like, I just say take the whole thing with a grain of salt as there is more than one way to skin a cat. Sure the reports people are always referring to were based on years of study and hundreds of kills, but they are still the opinions and conclusions drawn by the author based on the products he sampled available on the market at the time all those years ago. He says that himself early on. We have a Prostaffer, Adam Greentree, who has killed over 500 big game animals on 3 continents in the past 3 years alone with our double bevel 2 blades. (some of which are No.1s, top 5s, Top 25s and a pending world record). Most were taken with the 150s like you see in this test, but a few of them were with the 175s. Our design apparently works well. I have several emails with pics and a couple videos from various hunters showing bones split or shattered with our heads where the head came out unscathed, spinning true and being used on multiple kills. Will that always be the case? We make no claims of that. No head is indestructible, ours and the "preferred" head in this test included. Although this is a nice tough test with interesting results, it is far from definitive and doesn't really prove anything about single vs double bevel. It does show a good example of one thing i have said in the past. "Our" double bevel design does a good job of splitting and breaking bones and holding together as it was intended too. Looks to me like it did a pretty darn good job of that. I wish the shafts had been footed. It may have kept the shaft from splitting behind our head, which had some effect (drag surely and possible weak joint??) on how much of the shaft was out the backside of the bone. How much who knows. Of course, I would have prefered the tip of that head not to curl, but curl or not it still did exactly what we designed it to do.... Split the bones, be tough enough to hold together and reach the vitals. In a test with variables you can claim a winner if you want, but to truly have a test with definitive results it has to be controlled with no variances other than the things you are comparing. Shape of the target, angle of entry, variance in density and thickness and broken shafts are all variables. Although most of the the things may have been kinda similar in this test but there are variables.
> 
> 
> My statements about single bevel vs double bevel edge strength has not been proven wrong. What I have said is "With equal metallurgy" a double bevel sharpened head will have tougher edges than the single bevel. Its not a big claim, or any sort of propaganda, its math. At any given distance from the edge the wider total angle of a double bevel sharpened head will have more area. The only way that would not be correct is if the double bevel was shapened at an angle much shallower that what any of they typically are or the single bevel was ground at an angle much wider than they typically are. It's all in the angle. Double bevel sharpening angle is measured from the centerpoint of the blade so the total angle is twice the sharpening angle. They typically range from 15-22deg on sharpening angle giving them a total of 30-44 degrees total. Single bevels rarely go more than 25 degrees. As noted, at any given distance from the edge a tyical double bevel blade will have more area in the crooss section than the typical single bevel. If the metallurgy is equal, the wider angle with larger area will be less likely to chip or break.


The Helix is 40 degrees.


----------



## opie20wv (Dec 29, 2009)

I think the 40 degree bevel on the helix combined with its .062 (85, 100, & 175grain models) and .072 (125, 150, 200, & 225 grain models) with knife grade steel make the head perform as good as it does.


----------



## Rolo (Dec 16, 2002)

rayzor43 said:


> There are plenty of good broadheads on the market and any of them through the heart and/or both lungs will prove fatal fast.


Yep.



rayzor43 said:


> The Helix is appears one of the good broadheads.


Refreshing honesty about a competitor. :thumbs_up



rayzor43 said:


> I don't buy into the whole single bevel thing and make no big secret of it. I have no problem with people using them, if that what they like, I just say take the whole thing with a grain of salt as there is more than one way to skin a cat.


Wait what? There's no hard and fast rules? Who knew. :wink:



rayzor43 said:


> Our design apparently works well. I have several emails with pics and a couple videos from various hunters showing bones split or shattered with our heads where the head came out unscathed, spinning true and being used on multiple kills. Will that always be the case? We make no claims of that. No head is indestructible, ours and the "preferred" head in this test included.


Yes they do..and more refreshing honesty. :thumbs_up:thumbs_up



rayzor43 said:


> In a test with variables you can claim a winner if you want, but to truly have a test with definitive results it has to be controlled with no variances other than the things you are comparing. Shape of the target, angle of entry, variance in density and thickness and broken shafts are all variables. Although most of the the things may have been kinda similar in this test but there are variables.


And the crux of the issue...while a nice test...it should not be mistaken for anything remotely close to being scientifically reliabile (especially considering the apparent loss of efficiency with a heavier arrow). Can reasonable assumptions be drawn, absolutely...rules and laws...not so much. Way, way too many uncontrolled variables...


----------



## opie20wv (Dec 29, 2009)

I guess we need to defer all AT broadhead tests to Bill Nye the Science Guy in a controlled laboratory??? I think all the OP was trying to show, and by no means am I speaking/posting on his behalf, is that a well made single bevel like the helix is awesome on bone and penetration and supports the historical data on sturdy single bevels and bone that many want to call hogwash cause it isn't an industry standard or norm at the present. There are numerous ways to skin a cat and a VPA head is one of the best ways to do so - awesome, tough, easily resharpenable heads as is the helix too.



Rolo said:


> Yep.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Rolo (Dec 16, 2002)

opie20wv said:


> I guess we need to defer all AT broadhead tests to Bill Nye the Science Guy in a controlled laboratory??? I think all the OP was trying to show, and by no means am I speaking/posting on his behalf, is that a well made single bevel like the helix is awesome on bone and penetration and supports the historical data on sturdy single bevels and bone that many want to call hogwash cause it isn't an industry standard or norm at the present. There are numerous ways to skin a cat and a VPA head is one of the best ways to do so - awesome, tough, easily resharpenable heads as is the helix too.


I'm not sure I have said anything differently (I like the single bevels over the doubles for that reason myself...at least the Helix that is...others, not so much) but random tests are not scientifically reliable and should not be thought of as such. Combine the the weird bow efficiency results, and there are additional questions regarding the methodology. Not sure why people get all bent out of shape when the methodology is discussed...science is based on question. Then there is the calcification of bone that begins upon death that may influence test results. I'm also fairly certain there are a number of pictures showing the damage that VPA doubles have done to bone on live animals.

So, while there is valuable information that can be gleaned from this test, that does not mean this test or others are the final word, or the be all end all, especially when there is data that suggests alternative results. Folks need to quit taking questions so freaking personally...


----------



## opie20wv (Dec 29, 2009)

Trust me I'm not taking anything personal and freely admit I didn't take the time to look at your historical posts to gain your stance/opinion on single bevel heads - from your posts you're obviously a knowledgable archer - not saying that sarcastically either. All I was trying to say is its cool that guys here on AT post tests like these and take their personal time to show how legitimate products out there in the industry work so we don't have to rely on overhyped products a lot (not all) of tv shows and industry d-bags claim are so awesome and camo couch potatoes drink the kool-aid and swear by because they seen it on tv or know a "guy?" that used it...



Rolo said:


> I'm not sure I have said anything differently (I like the single bevels over the doubles for that reason myself...at least the Helix that is...others, not so much) but random tests are not scientifically reliable and should not be thought of as such. Combine the the weird bow efficiency results, and there are additional questions regarding the methodology. Not sure why people get all bent out of shape when the methodology is discussed...science is based on question. Then there is the calcification of bone that begins upon death that may influence test results. I'm also fairly certain there are a number of pictures showing the damage that VPA doubles have done to bone on live animals.
> 
> So, while there is valuable information that can be gleaned from this test, that does not mean this test or others are the final word, or the be all end all, especially when there is data that suggests alternative results. Folks need to quit taking questions so freaking personally...


----------



## opie20wv (Dec 29, 2009)

And for the record I think VPA heads are awesome and own several and in fact when a fellow archer mentions they want to try a montec or hellrazor I casually inform and steer them to VPA


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

Rolo said:


> Nope, using the numbers provided in the thread from the person who provided them. Keep up...online calculators are junk. :wink:


Unfortunately I only gt to chrono the lighter arrow last week. I had to use junky online calculators to give you an estimate and I doubt it's too far off


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

Rolo said:


> Well...I'm pretty sure you said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Once again they went down because of online calculator... I'm sure it's close give or take a few fps


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

Rolo said:


> Yep.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Please come up with something more reliable then hitting the exact same diameter bone in damn near the same spot. Everybody can say what they want but "it's hype" "Vpa will split bone just as good or better" " they get dull" is all a bunch of crap. Did the Vpa split the bone, no it sliced through, if it would have split it, which it can't it would have done a lot better. I've said in the last I liked Vpa heads and no what they can do. But a double bevel head vs a single bevel head in splitting bone is going to favor the single bevel. You can pick it apart all you want because that's how some of you are wired to do. But the bottom line is it's as about as controlled as you can get, or i should say it's as controlled enough to show the affects which I did...


----------



## bambikiller (Feb 27, 2004)

Rolo said:


> I'm not sure I have said anything differently (I like the single bevels over the doubles for that reason myself...at least the Helix that is...others, not so much) but random tests are not scientifically reliable and should not be thought of as such. Combine the the weird bow efficiency results, and there are additional questions regarding the methodology. Not sure why people get all bent out of shape when the methodology is discussed...science is based on question. Then there is the calcification of bone that begins upon death that may influence test results. I'm also fairly certain there are a number of pictures showing the damage that VPA doubles have done to bone on live animals.
> 
> So, while there is valuable information that can be gleaned from this test, that does not mean this test or others are the final word, or the be all end all, especially when there is data that suggests alternative results. Folks need to quit taking questions so freaking personally...


This dude jus likes to argue in circles


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

rayzor43 said:


> I'm not sure if thread owner was referring to comments I have made about single bevels versus in the in the past or not?? Anyone that knows me also knows, no matter my opinion, I don't bash brands. There are plenty of good broadheads on the market and any of them through the heart and/or both lungs will prove fatal fast. The Helix is appears one of the good broadheads. I don't buy into the whole single bevel thing and make no big secret of it. I have no problem with people using them, if that what they like, I just say take the whole thing with a grain of salt as there is more than one way to skin a cat. Sure the reports people are always referring to were based on years of study and hundreds of kills, but they are still the opinions and conclusions drawn by the author based on the products he sampled available on the market at the time all those years ago. He says that himself early on. We have a Prostaffer, Adam Greentree, who has killed over 500 big game animals on 3 continents in the past 3 years alone with our double bevel 2 blades. (some of which are No.1s, top 5s, Top 25s and a pending world record). Most were taken with the 150s like you see in this test, but a few of them were with the 175s. Our design apparently works well. I have several emails with pics and a couple videos from various hunters showing bones split or shattered with our heads where the head came out unscathed, spinning true and being used on multiple kills. Will that always be the case? We make no claims of that. No head is indestructible, ours and the "preferred" head in this test included. Although this is a nice tough test with interesting results, it is far from definitive and doesn't really prove anything about single vs double bevel. It does show a good example of one thing i have said in the past. "Our" double bevel design does a good job of splitting and breaking bones and holding together as it was intended too. Looks to me like it did a pretty darn good job of that. I wish the shafts had been footed. It may have kept the shaft from splitting behind our head, which had some effect (drag surely and possible weak joint??) on how much of the shaft was out the backside of the bone. How much who knows. Of course, I would have prefered the tip of that head not to curl, but curl or not it still did exactly what we designed it to do.... Split the bones, be tough enough to hold together and reach the vitals. In a test with variables you can claim a winner if you want, but to truly have a test with definitive results it has to be controlled with no variances other than the things you are comparing. Shape of the target, angle of entry, variance in density and thickness and broken shafts are all variables. Although most of the the things may have been kinda similar in this test but there are variables.
> 
> 
> My statements about single bevel vs double bevel edge strength has not been proven wrong. What I have said is "With equal metallurgy" a double bevel sharpened head will have tougher edges than the single bevel. Its not a big claim, or any sort of propaganda, its math. At any given distance from the edge the wider total angle of a double bevel sharpened head will have more area. The only way that would not be correct is if the double bevel was shapened at an angle much shallower that what any of they typically are or the single bevel was ground at an angle much wider than they typically are. It's all in the angle. Double bevel sharpening angle is measured from the centerpoint of the blade so the total angle is twice the sharpening angle. They typically range from 15-22deg on sharpening angle giving them a total of 30-44 degrees total. Single bevels rarely go more than 25 degrees. As noted, at any given distance from the edge a tyical double bevel blade will have more area in the crooss section than the typical single bevel. If the metallurgy is equal, the wider angle with larger area will be less likely to chip or break.


I was referring to you on the hype and blade retention part, which what you say is false. Helix is a 40 degree bevel for a reason. We know your product kills animals. I wasn't trying to prove otherwise. I guess you can say your head did it's job on the first shot because it may have touched one vital. But on the second shot it didn't. Also not footing the shaft and it breaking is the broadheads fault. It should have broken on the helix the. If that was a concern but it didn't break....because a single bevel head uses less energy to split bone thus penetrating farther , thus relieving some of the stress applied to the shaft at impact. If I do it again I'll foot just for you though but it will have a similar outcome. Also the Vpa had a slight advantage that nobody is talking about! How about 50 grains of extra steel on that broadhead to beef it up. So really a fair comparison is if they made a 150 grain 1 1/8 helix. I understand you have a product to sell and I know you didn't bash any certain brands but I felt the need to show the exact affects that a single bevel can cause, hype or not it has been doing this for centuries. Controlled or uncontrolled is your guys' opinion but we could argue that with every test ever done. It's pretty close comparison and nothing was way out of line to not be fair. I hit that knuckle portion in the exact same spot.


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

Rolo said:


> Wait...what? I'm fairly certain a lighter arrow with less foc out penetrated a heavier arrow with higher foc. Not really sure how that is wrong.
> 
> But yeah, the reason it did (though a limited sample) was because of, at least in part, the design of the head and the directional force that it applied. What is do friggin hard to understand about the fact that lighter can actually out penetrate heavier when all else is not equal...the not equal part being the mechanical advantage (directional force) one head has over the other.
> 
> ...


It out penetrTed the heavier one for one reason. The mechanical advantage, it is actually that simple. Put a heavier helix with all things equal and the heavier will do better. Yes heavy is better in most cases. Pick broadhead, build setup around it. This isn't a heavy vs light thread, also I don't want this thread jumbled with arguments but I guess I can't control that. If it was a 150 penetrator vs 100 penetrator then the heavier would have done better.


----------



## bambikiller (Feb 27, 2004)

sethro02 said:


> Once again they went down because of online calculator... I'm sure it's close give or take a few fps


I already told this guy that . He just want to argue ..


----------



## bambikiller (Feb 27, 2004)

sethro02 said:


> It out penetrTed the heavier one for one reason. The mechanical advantage, it is actually that simple. Put a heavier helix with all things equal and the heavier will do better. Yes heavy is better in most cases. Pick broadhead, build setup around it. This isn't a heavy vs light thread, also I don't want this thread jumbled with arguments but I guess I can't control that. If it was a 150 penetrator vs 100 penetrator then the heavier would have done better.


Told him that too ... See maybe rolo is an alter ???


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

https://vimeo.com/117379278

It seriously looks brand new


----------



## TRex18 (Oct 3, 2013)

This thread has been a great first read at work this morning.......Jerky and Coffee, Bambi and Rolo, Helix and VPA.....Seth vs whoever the hype guy is..........oh ya........and if you don't know .....now you know.....


"Boom goes the Dynamite"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W45DRy7M1no 
(Its at the 2:20 mark)


----------



## bambikiller (Feb 27, 2004)

TRex18 said:


> This thread has been a great first read at work this morning.......Jerky and Coffee, Bambi and Rolo, Helix and VPA.....Seth vs whoever the hype guy is..........oh ya........and if you don't know .....now you know.....
> 
> 
> "Boom goes the Dynamite"
> ...


That's awesome my friend


----------



## cooperjd (Aug 18, 2009)

why is bambi and rolo taking up half the responses in this thread to argue? are you both 14? you want to argue, do it over p.m., or, as my best friend use to say.. "why dont you two just F and get it over with" (the F is not for fight...)
bambi would you actually look rolo in the eye over a beer (if you're actually 21) and tell him definitively "boom goes the dynamite"?? really? probably not. lets pretend we're actually talking to another human being here, and stop hiding behind a keyboard and acting like you invented physics. and yes, i would say that to you over beer, not aggressively like we're fighting, but just to chill everybody out. we're here to learn folks.


thank you seth for the test. why can't we just keep from arguing, and actually discuss what is being tested and what the results are?


----------



## crankn101 (Jan 26, 2007)

cooperjd said:


> why is bambi and rolo taking up half the responses in this thread to argue? are you both 14? you want to argue, do it over p.m., or, as my best friend use to say.. "why dont you two just F and get it over with" (the F is not for fight...)
> bambi would you actually look rolo in the eye over a beer (if you're actually 21) and tell him definitively "boom goes the dynamite"?? really? probably not. lets pretend we're actually talking to another human being here, and stop hiding behind a keyboard and acting like you invented physics.
> 
> 
> thank you seth for the test. why can't we just keep from arguing, and actually discuss what is being tested and what the results are?



I know you are but what am I...


----------



## deadquiet (Jan 25, 2005)

Rolo said:


> So...the lighter arrow out penetrated the heavier arrow in test 1...:mg::tongue::set1_rolf2::banana::behindsof


I get you are probably joking but that's apples and oranges. You can take a 400 grain arrow with a good COC and it will out penetrate a heavier arrow with a mechanical.......that's common sense and why I try to tell folks shooting light tackle to look CLOSER at the head they choose. 

But if you take the same head and same arrow the heavier one will win every time.


----------



## bambikiller (Feb 27, 2004)

cooperjd said:


> why is bambi and rolo taking up half the responses in this thread to argue? are you both 14? you want to argue, do it over p.m., or, as my best friend use to say.. "why dont you two just F and get it over with" (the F is not for fight...)
> bambi would you actually look rolo in the eye over a beer (if you're actually 21) and tell him definitively "boom goes the dynamite"?? really? probably not. lets pretend we're actually talking to another human being here, and stop hiding behind a keyboard and acting like you invented physics. and yes, i would say that to you over beer, not aggressively like we're fighting, but just to chill everybody out. we're here to learn folks.
> 
> 
> thank you seth for the test. why can't we just keep from arguing, and actually discuss what is being tested and what the results are?


Better question what gives you the right and or authority to tell others what to do especially on an open forum . Pot meet kettle . An I assure you I'm old enough to drink . If you don't like what I have to say don't read it .. Also there is an ignore feature you may use . Id suggest that ! Have a good day and boom goes the dynamite . Great test Seth


----------



## trapper.robi (Jul 9, 2011)

..... a simple thanks to Sethro. 

Im in college studying mech. Engineering and an archery
nut. I absolutely love all these tests. So thank you Sethro. Wish i had the time and money to test myself. 

Quick thing on drama. Im 21 in a fraternity and surrounded by sorority girls all the time. I think I have found more drama on debates on AT lmao.

Just hope you guys are mature bout it. Personally I am a very relaxed person and dont stress anything but I hope you guys dont do anything stupid to get in big trouble. 

When in doubt, laugh it out &#55357;&#56842;


----------



## bambikiller (Feb 27, 2004)

Seth maybe in the future you could try a 350 or 5 grain per lb arrow against the heavier one (all specs equal other than weight ) that may end another debate . Also no ones trying to act like they wrote the book on physics . I just grow tiresome from hearing light arrows penetrate just as well or better ect ect . That actually defies the laws .. Copperjd must have not caught the fact I was defending physics . It's cool . Like he said some of us maybe 14 . Perhaps his reading comp is great yet ! I'll donate cash for light vs heavy test !


----------



## snapcrackpop (Nov 15, 2010)

Try to avoid the leg bones in the first place and then most of the heads on the market will perform as expected.


----------



## crankn101 (Jan 26, 2007)

If I were worried about staying light and fast I would be shooting a helix at 380 total grains.


----------



## landon410 (Aug 20, 2014)

really, no one else noticed the box of explosives on his garage floor?


----------



## yotehunter243 (Aug 12, 2013)

I have a Velocity pro and a Pro hunter 300 spines I can send with extra screw in weights so you can do a light vs. Heavy comparison. Basically exact same arrow


----------



## nick060200 (Jul 5, 2010)

seth call tim and tell him he needs to consider selling replacement blades only.


----------



## Bowtechforlife (Apr 17, 2014)

sethro02 said:


> https://vimeo.com/117379278
> 
> It seriously looks brand new


But but but but but aluminum ferrels are junk and won't hold up! This test has to be wrong! Everyone knows aluminum ferrels aren't as strong as steel!!!!


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

snapcrackpop said:


> Try to avoid the leg bones in the first place and then most of the heads on the market will perform as expected.


Oh I had no idea thanks!!!!!!!


----------



## jakep567 (Feb 19, 2014)

Theres been studies out there about single bevel for a couple years on how great they are on bone. Videos of pushing tissue up and away from blade 
growing energy as it hits the bone. There far superior than double bevel. My wife hit shoulder at 25 yards helix broadhead amazing results.


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

landon410 said:


> really, no one else noticed the box of explosives on his garage floor?


Hey bro I'm country, I set stuff on fire and blow **** up


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

nick060200 said:


> seth call tim and tell him he needs to consider selling replacement blades only.


I'll work on that. I bug him about it.


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

yotehunter243 said:


> I have a Velocity pro and a Pro hunter 300 spines I can send with extra screw in weights so you can do a light vs. Heavy comparison. Basically exact same arrow


That could be of some use for sure


----------



## crankn101 (Jan 26, 2007)

sethro02 said:


> Hey bro I'm country, I set stuff on fire and blow **** up


Attention FBI....


----------



## snapcrackpop (Nov 15, 2010)

sethro02 said:


> Oh I had no idea thanks!!!!!!!


Things were getting a little heated about this or that broadhead.. just trying to make the inferior brand guys feel better! Lol. This helix is on my purchase list.


----------



## mez (Feb 22, 2010)

The single bevel heads may have "split" the bone better in the test but you really can't equate that over to a live animal/hunting situation. The reaction of bone that is hydrated and living, covered in normal muscle and connective tissue, anchored in place by attachments and bearing the weight of the animal is going to react far differently than the bone in this test. 

You also have a visual and measured difference in penetration, no question. Is there a statistically significant difference in that penetration is now the question. There appears to be but without the math you don't know. If there isn't a difference, then over time with hundreds of rounds of the same test then there would be no discernible difference. That is why to draw factual conclusions you need to repeat the test hundreds of times and apply the math. If you don't, it is simply an opinion based on a perceived trend. 

Science is great but also must be understood if things are to be taken as and stated as fact. That isn't nit picking, that is science. Shooting a bone a couple times with different arrows isn't science. Most people, when they really get into correct science don't much care for the discipline as it is generally doesn't agree with their biases, and things are much more difficult to "prove" than they would like. 

Don't have problems with your test and on the surface it would appear that they support your claim. But, lets call a spade a spade, it isn't a scientific test.


----------



## aeasley10 (Oct 24, 2013)

Do any of you single bevel guys mind giving a "detailed how to sharpen" tutorial or video. Maybe listing what tools you use, angles, strokes etc. 

Bought some this year and having tough time sharpening. 
Thanks guys


----------



## TRex18 (Oct 3, 2013)

aeasley10 said:


> Do any of you single bevel guys mind giving a "detailed how to sharpen" tutorial or video. Maybe listing what tools you use, angles, strokes etc.
> 
> Bought some this year and having tough time sharpening.
> Thanks guys


Check Broadhead discussion board....TimmyZ does one I believe maybe even Sethro....it wasn't to long ago...


----------



## TRex18 (Oct 3, 2013)

mez said:


> The single bevel heads may have "split" the bone better in the test but you really can't equate that over to a live animal/hunting situation. The reaction of bone that is hydrated and living, covered in normal muscle and connective tissue, anchored in place by attachments and bearing the weight of the animal is going to react far differently than the bone in this test.
> 
> You also have a visual and measured difference in penetration, no question. Is there a statistically significant difference in that penetration is now the question. There appears to be but without the math you don't know. If there isn't a difference, then over time with hundreds of rounds of the same test then there would be no discernible difference. That is why to draw factual conclusions you need to repeat the test hundreds of times and apply the math. If you don't, it is simply an opinion based on a perceived trend.
> 
> ...



True to your statements as well.....with all things equal it is not a exact same variable scientific test. However.....
The question was....Single vs Double Bevel....

This Single Bevel Broadhead went through a cow bone.
That Double Bevel Wedge Broadhead did not go through the cowbone. 
Single Bevel Wins. 
Merica.


----------



## Rg176bnc (Dec 13, 2004)

mez said:


> The single bevel heads may have "split" the bone better in the test but you really can't equate that over to a live animal/hunting situation. The reaction of bone that is hydrated and living, covered in normal muscle and connective tissue, anchored in place by attachments and bearing the weight of the animal is going to react far differently than the bone in this test.
> 
> You also have a visual and measured difference in penetration, no question. Is there a statistically significant difference in that penetration is now the question. There appears to be but without the math you don't know. If there isn't a difference, then over time with hundreds of rounds of the same test then there would be no discernible difference. That is why to draw factual conclusions you need to repeat the test hundreds of times and apply the math. If you don't, it is simply an opinion based on a perceived trend.
> 
> ...


http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=2397765&page=2&highlight=helix

Page 2 half way down is all I need to see.


----------



## bambikiller (Feb 27, 2004)

aeasley10 said:


> Do any of you single bevel guys mind giving a "detailed how to sharpen" tutorial or video. Maybe listing what tools you use, angles, strokes etc.
> 
> Bought some this year and having tough time sharpening.
> Thanks guys


I can later tonight shoot me a pm to remind me


----------



## snapcrackpop (Nov 15, 2010)

mez said:


> The single bevel heads may have "split" the bone better in the test but you really can't equate that over to a live animal/hunting situation. The reaction of bone that is hydrated and living, covered in normal muscle and connective tissue, anchored in place by attachments and bearing the weight of the animal is going to react far differently than the bone in this test.
> 
> You also have a visual and measured difference in penetration, no question. Is there a statistically significant difference in that penetration is now the question. There appears to be but without the math you don't know. If there isn't a difference, then over time with hundreds of rounds of the same test then there would be no discernible difference. That is why to draw factual conclusions you need to repeat the test hundreds of times and apply the math. If you don't, it is simply an opinion based on a perceived trend.
> 
> ...


So, where's your test?


----------



## crankn101 (Jan 26, 2007)

Seth posted a YouTube vid on sharpening them with the helix carbide sharpener


----------



## bhutso (Jan 4, 2007)

U


TRex18 said:


> True to your statements as well.....with all things equal it is not a exact same variable scientific test. However.....
> The question was....Single vs Double Bevel....
> 
> This Single Bevel Broadhead went through a cow bone.
> ...


X2 Merica


----------



## salmon killer (Jun 19, 2011)

First of all Im a COC 2 blade guy .Second I like single bevel broadheads been shooting them off and on for years Zwicky used to sell unsharpened broadheads and you could apply any bevel you wanted is the first single bevel I had, and I worked the single bevel with a file it worked then as it does now.Helix is a fine head.So is the API penetrator.As far as broadheads it shows the rotation effect on bone.Is the test scientific no just a bowhunter shooting bones in his garage and he controls the test.But it is good entertainment and makes for debate.


----------



## mez (Feb 22, 2010)

Like I said, most people neither understand nor like true science.


----------



## Olink (Jan 10, 2003)

mez said:


> Like I said, most people neither understand nor like true science.


You got that right.


----------



## bambikiller (Feb 27, 2004)

mez said:


> Like I said, most people neither understand nor like true science.


Look call me old fashioned but if I want to know how a broadhead splits bone .. I don't need to be a scientist to come to the conclusion that I need to shoot bone ! I would love for you to come up with a more "scientific " way and report back .!


----------



## bowtech2006 (Apr 1, 2006)

I see the double bevel guys finally are starting to try and pick apart the test, it took them long enough to think of things to come up with. 

To be honest I have all double bevel heads in my quiver and exodus, but the wife has a single in hers and I'm not afraid to say the single has more positive then the doubles in my quiver.


----------



## bambikiller (Feb 27, 2004)

Also one other thing worth noting is this test wasn't a one off test . Seth has done this very same test with the two heads multiple times and the out come has been the same . So you scientific guys from your hypothesizes however you'd like , come up with a better test if possible and I'd wager the out come is the same .


----------



## crankn101 (Jan 26, 2007)

mez said:


> like i said, most people neither understand nor like true science.


durrr


----------



## bhutso (Jan 4, 2007)

An extremely tough well built double bevel head doesn't do as well on bone as an extremely tough well built single bevel. The results don't lie, they are repeatable over and over and any logical person can easily wrap there mind around the reason why,

There isn't an augument against it or a test that says otherwise. 

Why are rainbows good?
Why is a tree good?

It just is


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

mez said:


> The single bevel heads may have "split" the bone better in the test but you really can't equate that over to a live animal/hunting situation. The reaction of bone that is hydrated and living, covered in normal muscle and connective tissue, anchored in place by attachments and bearing the weight of the animal is going to react far differently than the bone in this test.
> 
> You also have a visual and measured difference in penetration, no question. Is there a statistically significant difference in that penetration is now the question. There appears to be but without the math you don't know. If there isn't a difference, then over time with hundreds of rounds of the same test then there would be no discernible difference. That is why to draw factual conclusions you need to repeat the test hundreds of times and apply the math. If you don't, it is simply an opinion based on a perceived trend.
> 
> ...


What's scientific is that single bevels have split bones for longer than we have been around.... Proven, factual data all over the internet...I just confirmed it....again , like a lot of other folks have. I think it's funny you guys are still reaching for some type of excuse. They are not hype I proved it, they have great blade retention.... I proved that. Say what you want, it splits bone whether it's attached to the animal or not.


----------



## bambikiller (Feb 27, 2004)

sethro02 said:


> What's scientific is that single bevels have split bones for longer than we have been around.... Proven, factual data all over the internet...I just confirmed it....again , like a lot of other folks have. I think it's funny you guys are still reaching for some type of excuse. They are not hype I proved it, they have great blade retention.... I proved that. Say what you want, it splits bone whether it's attached to the animal or not.


Perhaps the tendons have a deal with double bevel shooters that we are unaware of and allow the bone to split differently while attached to an animal ... But only for double bevel not single bevel? Idk I'm trying to think outside the box like a scientist


----------



## Cj0n3s12 (Aug 28, 2012)

Hey, if your VPA tip curls but you still recover it. Send it back in and get new ones for free! Lifetime guarantee! Boom. Case closed :wink:


----------



## bambikiller (Feb 27, 2004)

Cj0n3s12 said:


> Hey, if your VPA tip curls but you still recover it. Send it back in and get new ones for free! Lifetime guarantee! Boom. Case closed :wink:


It's going to be awfully hard to send it back when that tip curls and doesn't split bone and the bh is never recovered because it fell short of vitals ... Just a thought !


----------



## wbates (Jul 24, 2010)

Cj0n3s12 said:


> Hey, if your VPA tip curls but you still recover it. Send it back in and get new ones for free! Lifetime guarantee! Boom. Case closed :wink:


Never heard of that before.


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

bambikiller said:


> Perhaps the tendons have a deal with double bevel shooters that we are unaware of and allow the bone to split differently while attached to an animal ... But only for double bevel not single bevel? Idk I'm trying to think outside the box like a scientist


Almost time to get the waders on...it's running deep in here


----------



## Aronnax (Nov 7, 2013)

mez said:


> The single bevel heads may have "split" the bone better in the test but you really can't equate that over to a live animal/hunting situation. The reaction of bone that is hydrated and living, covered in normal muscle and connective tissue, anchored in place by attachments and bearing the weight of the animal is going to react far differently than the bone in this test.
> 
> You also have a visual and measured difference in penetration, no question. Is there a statistically significant difference in that penetration is now the question. There appears to be but without the math you don't know. If there isn't a difference, then over time with hundreds of rounds of the same test then there would be no discernible difference. That is why to draw factual conclusions you need to repeat the test hundreds of times and apply the math. If you don't, it is simply an opinion based on a perceived trend.
> 
> ...


I'm not on either side of the fence. I have not killed anything with a bow, and do not have any brand favorites. I take interest in these threads because I enjoy the intelligent discussion (sometimes more, sometimes less).

What mez is saying is true, as well as what rayzor43. I respect what Sethro and Henro have done as far as posting actual physical test results, which is way better than what most people do with all the speculation and citing ridiculous hypothetical situations, BUT, in a test with any uncontrolled variables, with a statistical sample of 1 the percentage of error is approaching infinity. 

No two bones are the same, no to shots can hit the exact same spot, in the exact same way. Not all is lost! You need to do many, many tests, and study the trends. If you even tested 10 of each head, I would think you could start to tell if the results are conclusive or not.

As it stands, it is an interesting observation.

It may be proven true that in every way the helix heads are better than the vpa's, and many of you have probably already accepted that conclusion, but it is not scenically conclusive.

BM


----------



## 0nepin (Sep 16, 2009)

This cover it pretty well.


bhutso said:


> An extremely tough well built double bevel head doesn't do as well on bone as an extremely tough well built single bevel. The results don't lie, they are repeatable over and over and any logical person can easily wrap there mind around the reason why,
> 
> There isn't an augument against it or a test that says otherwise.
> 
> ...


----------



## bambikiller (Feb 27, 2004)

Aronnax said:


> I'm not on either side of the fence. I have not killed anything with a bow, and do not have any brand favorites. I take interest in these threads because I enjoy the intelligent discussion (sometimes more, sometimes less).
> 
> What mez is saying is true, as well as what rayzor43. I respect what Sethro and Henro have done as far as posting actual physical test results, which is way better than what most people do with all the speculation and citing ridiculous hypothetical situations, BUT, in a test with any uncontrolled variables, with a statistical sample of 1 the percentage of error is approaching infinity.
> 
> ...


Again !! Come up with a better test method ! An report back ! I've never seen two bones the same in the wild either and back to a post a few back this isn't the first time Seth has had these two designs head to head. 100% of the time the single bevel wins .. Like it or not that is a fact . Is it a small sampling ? Yes! Is it repeatable ? Yes! So to me your argument is a moot point


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

Aronnax said:


> I'm not on either side of the fence. I have not killed anything with a bow, and do not have any brand favorites. I take interest in these threads because I enjoy the intelligent discussion (sometimes more, sometimes less).
> 
> What mez is saying is true, as well as what rayzor43. I respect what Sethro and Henro have done as far as posting actual physical test results, which is way better than what most people do with all the speculation and citing ridiculous hypothetical situations, BUT, in a test with any uncontrolled variables, with a statistical sample of 1 the percentage of error is approaching infinity.
> 
> ...


1st you haven't killed anything with a bow...
2nd this wasn't just a Vpa vs helix....it's to simply show a single bevel splits bone and maintains it's durability if well built...it's been proven thousands of times. I through in the Vpa because of comments from other threads which I proved them wrong no matter which way you look at it. No two shot are the same but they are close enough to draw conclusive evidence.


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

It'll never sink in with some of you. You could do an absolute perfect test but someone will come up with a excuse. And that's how it will always be. Was it entertainment? Yea , but it also proves they work, can't really argue with that since I have proof


----------



## GTM (Nov 19, 2007)

The only bad part about the Helix is trying to pull it out of my 18/1.


----------



## mikehoyme (Nov 3, 2012)

Since getting a bunch of cloned animals to stand in exactly the same position and shooting them with exactly identical arrows out of a Hooter Shooter isn't feasible, tests like Seth did are very good approximations of the real world for comparing broadheads. I'd love to cut all of the other variables out of the test, but that isn't realistic.


----------



## Aronnax (Nov 7, 2013)

bambikiller said:


> Again !! Come up with a better test method ! An report back ! I've never seen two bones the same in the wild either and back to a post a few back this isn't the first time Seth has had these two designs head to head. 100% of the time the single bevel wins .. Like it or not that is a fact . Is it a small sampling ? Yes! Is it repeatable ? Yes! So to me your argument is a moot point


Did you read what I wrote? The test method is fine- you just need to do a statistical analysis over a larger population sample in order to claim the test results are 100% conclusive. Otherwise it is only an interesting observation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statistics

BM


----------



## Rolo (Dec 16, 2002)

deadquiet said:


> *I get you are probably joking but that's apples and oranges.* You can take a 400 grain arrow with a good COC and it will out penetrate a heavier arrow with a mechanical.......that's common sense and why I try to tell folks shooting light tackle to look CLOSER at the head they choose.
> 
> But if you take the same head and same arrow the heavier one will win every time.


Glad someone figured that out...though I thought the multiple emos placed in that statement and the strategically placed ones in others would be a clue for the comprehensionally unchallenged. :wink: Not really sure it's an "apples and oranges" thing either.

However, the responses from some were predictable. Folks get all butt hurt when someone wants to go beyond the preconceived notions and biases. They assume that a simple statement is meant to be something else...they really don't want to analyze the statement for what it is...which can actually be used to help people determine what kind of head will likely provide the best penetration potential with low energy/low weight arrows. Really, go back and read my posts...that is what I have implied all along, same as you...:secret:

Those same folks are really good at regurgitating the work of others on the subject, but they cannot explain what and why, and then take the next logical step. Really...it is as simple as "mechanical advantage", but the basis of the mechanical advantage is not that simple, and the person testing makes no effort to define or discuss beyond the simple...or, what else can be learned from the results.

We have a guy doing a test...the results of which agreeably can lead to a theory...but the same guy doesn't understand scientific methodology, it's importance, and how it is used to get beyond theory...nor does the same guy want to peel the layers back and talk about the why behind the simplistic position of mechanical advantage. Ok...great, fairly obvious...but why and what creates that advantage? Why is that advantage magnified so much on a lighter projectile when compared to the heavier one? That's not as simple as "mechanical advantage"...but then again, when someone doesn't respect or understand science and methodology, they mentally can't get beyond the simple answer...thern they post information about their test that relies on calculations that are known to be false and unreliable, without telling anyone. No wonder the reliability and methodology of testing may be questioned...again, scientific stuff...

Even better is the lapdog guy who doesn't really have an original thought and has demonstrated the inability to understand what others are saying about an issue who swoops in with his $.02...and goes off on ome rant that folksare saying light arrows penetrate as well or better than heavier arrows when *all else is the same*. Of course, *the all else is the same* is the crucial part of that statement, and the requirement of science to test and prove the theory...when all else *is not* the same, then lighter may, and as shown can out penetrate the heavier arrow.

Here's the very basic irony...this "test" was intended (preconceived bias) to demonstrate something about single bevel broadheads compared to doubles. The problem was that the results of the "test" also demonstrated that a lighter arrow with a lower foc out penetrated the heavier one. This becomes problematic for the tester because of a preconceived bias about heavier arrows...and folks with preconceived biases really hate it when their own testing demonstrates results that are contrary to those biases. The reason the results were different, at least in theory and in large part was because of the difference in the head, and the mechanical advantage that arose from the head because of its: shape, point, material, direction, tip, _______, ________... 

The logical questions are: Why? & What? A discussion of which seems incapable for some simply because they perceive the questions to be a personal challenge. And because they perceive it as such, they don't even realize that the person asking the question agrees with the underlying theories. It's rather funny to watch...:darkbeer:


----------



## 0nepin (Sep 16, 2009)

What sethro test showed is the samething that has been proven time after time ,year after years of in the field use .the helix single bevel is a superior bone busting design that will all ways dominate double bevel heads when ever contact with heavy bone is made.you can either except that or just enjoy being wrong.


Aronnax said:


> I'm not on either side of the fence. I have not killed anything with a bow, and do not have any brand favorites. I take interest in these threads because I enjoy the intelligent discussion (sometimes more, sometimes less).
> 
> What mez is saying is true, as well as what rayzor43. I respect what Sethro and Henro have done as far as posting actual physical test results, which is way better than what most people do with all the speculation and citing ridiculous hypothetical situations, BUT, in a test with any uncontrolled variables, with a statistical sample of 1 the percentage of error is approaching infinity.
> 
> ...


----------



## TimmyZ7 (Aug 11, 2010)

Well this thread brought the bitz out of many. 

Real Housewives of A/T


----------



## Rolo (Dec 16, 2002)

Aronnax said:


> Did you read what I wrote? The test method is fine- you just need to do a statistical analysis over a larger population sample in order to claim the test results are 100% conclusive. Otherwise it is only an interesting observation.
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statistics
> 
> BM


Right...one-offs are great observations, but without repetition, especially in the case of testing where all the variables cannot be controlled (bone density for example) there is nutt'n more than theory...it really is that simple.


----------



## Rolo (Dec 16, 2002)

0nepin said:


> What sethro test showed is the samething that has been proven time after time ,year after years of in the field use .the helix single bevel is a superior bone busting design that will all ways dominate double bevel heads when ever contact with heavy bone is made.you can either except that or just enjoy being wrong.


The evidence would tend to support this *when all else is equal*...not so much when it is not...:mg:

Overly simplistic statements are just that...and their reliability suffers as a result...


----------



## bhutso (Jan 4, 2007)

Aronnax said:


> Did you read what I wrote? The test method is fine- you just need to do a statistical analysis over a larger population sample in order to claim the test results are 100% conclusive. Otherwise it is only an interesting observation.
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statistics
> 
> BM



It's been done before just look it up. All this was was a quick test to show the "hype" of single bevel broadheads. As some would call it, and the perception that a double bevel head when built a certain way would be supreroir. Is false as it relates to bone splitting ability and edge retention. This is shown in the test and 1000s more like it. So if you have access to the test that suggests otherwise we would like to see it?

I believe he covered all of your complaints about the scientific aspects of this test in post #1 if you care to go back and read it and save your aurgument because it's already been addressed


----------



## Olink (Jan 10, 2003)

Rolo said:


> The logical questions are: Why? & What? A discussion of which seems incapable for some simply because they perceive the questions to be a personal challenge. And because they perceive it as such, they don't even realize that the person asking the question agrees with the underlying theories. It's rather funny to watch...:darkbeer:


I don't know if its funny or sad... Lots of good, valid suggestions/observations being offered in this thread and they are being taken as a personal attack. In reality, they would probably do even more to confirm the advantages of the single bevel.


----------



## Aronnax (Nov 7, 2013)

sethro02 said:


> 1st you haven't killed anything with a bow...
> 2nd this wasn't just a Vpa vs helix....it's to simply show a single bevel splits bone and maintains it's durability *if well built*...it's been proven thousands of times. I through in the Vpa because of comments from other threads which I proved them wrong no matter which way you look at it. No two shot are the same but they are close enough to draw conclusive evidence.


There's the qualifier right there (in bold). This test is between VPA and Helix, not single bevel vs. double bevel. If you had done a test with the ABH Girzzly Stick broadheads, and the blades chipped or the tips broke off (as have been observed to happen in past test on older threads) or if the single bevel edge rolled, (as some also have done in older tests) what different conclusions might you have drawn? Or if you had a stronger double bevel that didn't bend?

For this to be an accurate test of single bevel vs. double bevel, you would need the two heads to be of equal design and build quality. This would be relatively simple with the removable blade design of the Helix heads. I don't know how much trouble it would be for Helix to take one of their blanks and do a double bevel grind on it, then do the identical heat treat process, but then you could honestly say this is a single bevel vs. double bevel test.

And it doesn't take bow hunting experience to understand when a test is apples vs. apples or not, or to identify a logical fallacy.

BM


----------



## Rolo (Dec 16, 2002)

bhutso said:


> It's been done before just look it up. All this was was a quick test to show the "hype" of single bevel broadheads. As some would call it, and the perception that a double bevel head when built a certain way would be supreroir. Is false as it relates to bone splitting ability and edge retention. This is shown in the test and 1000s more like it. So if you have access to the test that suggests otherwise we would like to see it?
> 
> I believe he covered all of your complaints about the scientific aspects of this test in post #1 if you care to go back and read it and save your aurgument because it's already been addressed


Personally, I'll take a double beveled VPA over a single beveled DRT any day, every day...and suggest that the build of the VPA is superior to the build of the DRT, for a number of reasons, including edge retention...


----------



## Rolo (Dec 16, 2002)

Olink said:


> I don't know if its funny or sad... Lots of good, valid suggestions/observations being offered in this thread and they are being taken as a personal attack. In reality, *they would probably do even more to confirm the advantages of the single bevel.*


Ding Ding Ding...

at least generally, but there are exceptions between specific pieces of equipment...my VPA vs. DRT example for instance.


----------



## bambikiller (Feb 27, 2004)

Rolo said:


> Glad someone figured that out...though I thought the multiple emos placed in that statement and the strategically placed ones in others would be a clue for the comprehensionally unchallenged. :wink: Not really sure it's an "apples and oranges" thing either.
> 
> However, the responses from some were predictable. Folks get all butt hurt when someone wants to go beyond the preconceived notions and biases. They assume that a simple statement is meant to be something else...they really don't want to analyze the statement for what it is...which can actually be used to help people determine what kind of head will likely provide the best penetration potential with low energy/low weight arrows. Really, go back and read my posts...that is what I have implied all along, same as you...:secret:
> 
> ...


You missed so much . First the light arrow was only shot once and then the 50 grain brass insert was added . Many of us have also went very In depth as to why Te single bevel penetrates bone better . Te what and why have been answered countless times . I think what you fail to see is this thread is a carry over from multiple other threads . Also like state numerous times . This test has been repeated multiple times with the same outcome . This is just the first time Seth documented it . It's a repeatable test time and time again . It's ok if you don't want to accept that


----------



## 0nepin (Sep 16, 2009)

Your grasping at straws bro !!! Let it go !!! Its ok your broadhead of choice has been proven less effective at penetrating and spliting heavy bone.im betting you even knew the single bevel would easily win . .


Rolo said:


> Right...one-offs are great observations, but without repetition, especially in the case of testing where all the variables cannot be controlled (bone density for example) there is nutt'n more than theory...it really is that simple.


----------



## bhutso (Jan 4, 2007)

Rolo said:


> Personally, I'll take a double beveled VPA over a single beveled DRT any day, every day...and suggest that the build of the VPA is superior to the build of the DRT, for a number of reasons, including edge retention...


Personally I would agree with you, vpa is better and more well built than a lot of other heads. Including drt. But that's not what this was about at all it was claims by a sponser that single bevel heads were not what they are built up to be. Some single bevel designs are not. 
You could probably put any popular head on the market in this test and get no better result than the helix and vpa did. This was extreme.

But Seth had said over and over and over on here what a true single bevel needs to be to be as effective as possible as far as blade thickness and bevel angle as well as tip style and overall length of the head. He just proved that at least one single bevel head "helix" does what it's claimed to do in a situation non of us will probably ever face.


----------



## Rolo (Dec 16, 2002)

bambikiller said:


> You missed so much . First the light arrow was only shot once and then the 50 grain brass insert was added . Many of us have also went very In depth as to why Te single bevel penetrates bone better . Te what and why have been answered countless times . I think what you fail to see is this thread is a carry over from multiple other threads . Also like state numerous times . This test has been repeated multiple times with the same outcome . This is just the first time Seth documented it . It's a repeatable test time and time again . It's ok if you don't want to accept that


No, I didn't miss a thing...this "test" demonstrated that this single bevel penetrated the bone better than a particular double...though as has been stated a conversation of why beyond the simplistic seems impossible to have with some. This "test" has not been repeated multiple times, and there is no evidence that it was repeated multiple times in a controlled environment. To have any reasonable scientific reliability the "test" would need to be performed hundreds of times under controlled situations. That's the requirement, that's the mundane. That's why the great Ashby's tests are scientifically unreliable, and would not be scientifically accepted...and before anyone reaches for the butt cream...that does not mean that Ashby's tests do not have good information and theory. 

But, here's a better explanation:



Aronnax said:


> There's the qualifier right there (in bold). This test is between VPA and Helix, not single bevel vs. double bevel. If you had done a test with the ABH Girzzly Stick broadheads, and the blades chipped or the tips broke off (as have been observed to happen in past test on older threads) or if the single bevel edge rolled, (as some also have done in older tests) what different conclusions might you have drawn? Or if you had a stronger double bevel that didn't bend?
> 
> For this to be an accurate test of single bevel vs. double bevel, you would need the two heads to be of equal design and build quality. This would be relatively simple with the removable blade design of the Helix heads. I don't know how much trouble it would be for Helix to take one of their blanks and do a double bevel grind on it, then do the identical heat treat process, but then you could honestly say this is a single bevel vs. double bevel test.
> 
> ...


----------



## Rolo (Dec 16, 2002)

0nepin said:


> Your grasping at straws bro !!! Let it go !!! Its ok your broadhead of choice has been proven less effective at penetrating and spliting heavy bone.im betting you even knew the single bevel would easily win . .


So, you're saying I need to trash my Helix heads? Did you even read the friggin thread, or did you simply read what you wanted to read and prove my point from above...

Wait...don't answer that, I know the answer already...but...Here's your sign:

I shoot Helix heads. :mg:


----------



## bambikiller (Feb 27, 2004)

Rolo said:


> Glad someone figured that out...though I thought the multiple emos placed in that statement and the strategically placed ones in others would be a clue for the comprehensionally unchallenged. :wink: Not really sure it's an "apples and oranges" thing either.
> 
> However, the responses from some were predictable. Folks get all butt hurt when someone wants to go beyond the preconceived notions and biases. They assume that a simple statement is meant to be something else...they really don't want to analyze the statement for what it is...which can actually be used to help people determine what kind of head will likely provide the best penetration potential with low energy/low weight arrows. Really, go back and read my posts...that is what I have implied all along, same as you...:secret:
> 
> ...


You missed so much . First the light arrow was only shot once and then the 50 grain brass insert was added . Many of us have also went very In depth as to why Te single bevel penetrates bone better . Te what and why have been answered countless times . I think what you fail to see is this thread is a carry over from multiple other threads . Also like state numerous times . This test has been repeated multiple times with the same outcome . This is just the first time Seth documented it . It's a repeatable test time and time again . It's ok if you don't want to accept that


----------



## 0nepin (Sep 16, 2009)

So why are you clogging up this thread with all of your nonsense ?


Rolo said:


> So, you're saying I need to trash my Helix heads? Did you even read the friggin thread, or did you simply read what you wanted to read and prove my point from above...
> 
> Wait...don't answer that, I know the answer already...but...Here's your sign:
> 
> I shoot Helix heads. :mg:


----------



## bambikiller (Feb 27, 2004)

Rolo said:


> Personally, I'll take a double beveled VPA over a single beveled DRT any day, every day...and suggest that the build of the VPA is superior to the build of the DRT, for a number of reasons, including edge retention...


I agree with this all the way . But as stated a single bevel needs to be .062 to reliable act as a single should .. Also a lot of guys want to talk about the what and why . Well this has been covered multiple times . But let's try this once more .. The single bevel works in sitting bone by pressure applied to the bevel which forces it to rotate . If the momentum and mechanical advantage of the single bevel are greater than that of the bone density it will split the bone (as you can see it's not a small split either it is rather long ) the design of the double bevel has to wedge it's way through similar to an ax . If the force applied isn't great enough it stops and is harder for that particular bh to split the bone (it's mechanical advantage is far less than that of a single bevel . I'm sure if I missed something , misspelled or misspoke it will be pointed out but ya that in a nutshell


----------



## Rolo (Dec 16, 2002)

bhutso said:


> Personally I would agree with you, vpa is better and more well built than a lot of other heads. Including drt.


Gotcha...but that is a lot different than the general statements I quoted from you above, true? 



bhutso said:


> But that's not what this was about at all it was claims by a sponser that single bevel heads were not what they are built up to be. Some single bevel designs are not.
> You could probably put any popular head on the market in this test and get no better result than the helix and vpa did. This was extreme.
> 
> But Seth had said over and over and over on here what a true single bevel needs to be to be as effective as possible as far as blade thickness and bevel angle as well as tip style and overall length of the head. He just proved that at least one single bevel head "helix" does what it's claimed to do in a situation non of us will probably ever face.


Here's a couple of the initial posts from the OP:



sethro02 said:


> So I had some time to get more bones and do some testing with various broadheads. Their has been concern floating around that single bevel is "hype", or single bevels blade retention is not as "good" as some double bevels. Since I'm a fan of single bevel broadheads I took this a little personal and even got challenged and bet money against! ( which he probably won't pay up). Anyhow I'm posting a few pics and I'll label them as I post them. This is for informational purposes only so don't tell me you don't hunt bones or that I need to make a perfect shot so I don't hit a bone. I'm not contracted by either companies I just felt like testing them against each other.
> Bow for testing
> Diamond deadeye 65#
> 343 ibo.
> ...





sethro02 said:


> Actually it shows something more important. Obviously if both arrows and broadheads were identical then the heavier would have penetrated better. But this is showing the mechanical advantage benefits of this broadhead since it was on a lighter total weight arrow. If the Vpa was a helix then the heavier helix would have done better. So basically the 2 blade single bevel exerts way less energy to penetrate compared to a wedge design



Not sure I would interpret those posts as meaning what you say they mean...


----------



## Rolo (Dec 16, 2002)

bambikiller said:


> You missed so much . First the light arrow was only shot once and then the 50 grain brass insert was added . Many of us have also went very In depth as to why Te single bevel penetrates bone better . Te what and why have been answered countless times . I think what you fail to see is this thread is a carry over from multiple other threads . Also like state numerous times . This test has been repeated multiple times with the same outcome . This is just the first time Seth documented it . It's a repeatable test time and time again . It's ok if you don't want to accept that


I assume you had a reason for the double post...though you didn't really expand on it...:wink:


----------



## Rolo (Dec 16, 2002)

0nepin said:


> So why are you clogging up this thread with all of your nonsense ?





Rolo said:


> Did you even read the friggin thread, or did you simply read what you wanted to read and prove my point from above...
> 
> Wait...don't answer that, I know the answer already...but...Here's your sign:





Olink said:


> Lots of good, valid suggestions/observations being offered in this thread and they are being taken as a personal attack. In reality, they would probably do even more to confirm the advantages of the single bevel.


But apparently in depth discussion of an issue, improvements in methodology, and other observations in an effort to better understanding, and emply the knowledge in certain circumstancesis frowned upon by some...sad really...:darkbeer:


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

Rolo said:


> Glad someone figured that out...though I thought the multiple emos placed in that statement and the strategically placed ones in others would be a clue for the comprehensionally unchallenged. :wink: Not really sure it's an "apples and oranges" thing either.
> 
> However, the responses from some were predictable. Folks get all butt hurt when someone wants to go beyond the preconceived notions and biases. They assume that a simple statement is meant to be something else...they really don't want to analyze the statement for what it is...which can actually be used to help people determine what kind of head will likely provide the best penetration potential with low energy/low weight arrows. Really, go back and read my posts...that is what I have implied all along, same as you...:secret:
> 
> ...


Maybe it is as simple as mechanical advantage...you keep preaching science but maybe you cannot comprehend simple physics and science yourself. I have no problem discussing any of the findings but I'm not going to waste my time with guys who simply question it to question it jut to see responses and the argue and go in circles about opinions that have no meaning to this thread. So .....what " why" and "what " questions do you have professor? And keep it short because everytime you post it becomes a book and like 10% of it is relevant thanks


----------



## henro (Oct 9, 2007)

Glad I've stayed outta this thread... lol so much stupid on AT and so little time... I should just send Seth one of my Kinetics with an Abowyer on it to demolish some bone... Maybe I'll just have to try it myself sooner than later. I do have VPA 250gr plus 5gr brass washers to add to come to same weight as the 260gr Abowyers... :darkbeer:


----------



## Rolo (Dec 16, 2002)

bambikiller said:


> I agree with this all the way . But as stated *a single bevel needs to be .062* to reliable act as a single should .. Also a lot of guys want to talk about the what and why . Well this has been covered multiple times . But let's try this once more .. The single bevel works in sitting bone by pressure applied to the bevel which forces it to rotate . If the momentum and mechanical advantage of the single bevel are greater than that of the bone density it will split the bone (as you can see it's not a small split either it is rather long ) the design of the double bevel has to wedge it's way through similar to an ax . If the force applied isn't great enough it stops and is harder for that particular bh to split the bone (it's mechanical advantage is far less than that of a single bevel . I'm sure if I missed something , misspelled or misspoke it will be pointed out but ya that in a nutshell


Who what...062 what?

But hey, you're finally getting to the point, and thanks for again telling me sumpin I already knew...of course there are other factors that are in play too...for example the tip design. :mg: 

It is interestign though that you introduced "force" into the discussion...force (ke) is what is required to break things..not so much momentum...which tails into another discussion from times past that bias obscured the view of the forest too...


----------



## Rolo (Dec 16, 2002)

sethro02 said:


> Maybe it is as simple as mechanical advantage...you keep preaching science but maybe you cannot comprehend simple physics and science yourself. I have no problem discussing any of the findings but I'm not going to waste my time with guys who simply question it to question it jut to see responses and the argue and go in circles about opinions that have no meaning to this thread. So .....what " why" and "what " questions do you have professor? And keep it short because everytime you post it becomes a book and like 10% of it is relevant thanks


Thought I already did...what is it about the single bevel design of the Helix (because we know others pale in comparison) that provides it with its mechanical advantage? Is it the bevel itself? the design of the head? the tip design? One or more? 

Why does this (these) provide the mechanical advantage?

Not hard questions at all.


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

Rolo said:


> Right...one-offs are great observations, but without repetition, especially in the case of testing where all the variables cannot be controlled (bone density for example) there is nutt'n more than theory...it really is that simple.


One off testings?? Are you not reading? These heads weren't invented yesterday. Seriously stop posting on this thread, it's not for you. You seriously just want to argue and have provided nothing of good use


----------



## mez (Feb 22, 2010)

Olink said:


> I don't know if its funny or sad... Lots of good, valid suggestions/observations being offered in this thread and they are being taken as a personal attack. In reality, they would probably do even more to confirm the advantages of the single bevel.


Bingo! 

The problem with logic, proof, and fact as defined in this sort of test is illustrated very well. Based on the prevailing attitude toward the test a very large omission in the thread is being made. VPA heads should not be paired with a carbon arrow as they will cause breakage of the shaft if they hit heavy bone. Scientifically proven, look at the pictures. The head clearly broke the shaft, there is no argument unless someone comes up with a better test.


----------



## henro (Oct 9, 2007)

mez said:


> Bingo!
> 
> The problem with logic, proof, and fact as defined in this sort of test is illustrated very well. Based on the prevailing attitude toward the test a very large omission in the thread is being made.  VPA heads should not be paired with a carbon arrow as they will cause breakage of the shaft if they hit heavy bone. Scientifically proven, look at the pictures. The head clearly broke the shaft, there is no argument unless someone comes up with a better test.


That's not a correct statement. The shaft should have a footing regardless of what head is on it.


----------



## Rolo (Dec 16, 2002)

sethro02 said:


> One off testings?? Are you not reading? These heads weren't invented yesterday. Seriously stop posting on this thread, it's not for you. You seriously just want to argue and have provided nothing of good use


Seriously...do you understand the difference between testing that has scientific validity and one-off testing? How many times have you shot those exact arrows with the exact same heads (style and build) from the exact same bow through similar bone structures? 

And really, go back and read what it is I posted...try to understand it...you see, I generally agree with your theory(s)...


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

Rolo said:


> Thought I already did...what is it about the single bevel design of the Helix (because we know others pale in comparison) that provides it with its mechanical advantage? Is it the bevel itself? the design of the head? the tip design? One or more?
> 
> Why does this (these) provide the mechanical advantage?
> 
> Not hard questions at all.


Not just a helix, any single bevel including a 3:1 ratio head has a higher mechanical advantage then the Vpa or similar heads....this is fact, not me making stuff up. I can post great links for you to read, but I doubt you will. You seem smart enough to search mechanical advantage and figure it out.. It's the tip, the length/width ratio, the bevel degree, the way the ferrule and blade are attached, and the thickness of the blade. You need at least .062" thick main blade to split bone conisistantly without damaging it....this is also proven....and not by me.


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

Rolo said:


> Seriously...do you understand the difference between testing that has scientific validity and one-off testing? How many times have you shot those exact arrows with the exact same heads (style and build) from the exact same bow through similar bone structures?
> 
> And really, go back and read what it is I posted...try to understand it...you see, I generally agree with your theory(s)...


At least 100 times or more...so next question


----------



## mez (Feb 22, 2010)

henro said:


> That's not a correct statement. The shaft should have a footing regardless of what head is on it.


The other shaft was not footed and it did not break. The difference was the broad head, the VPA broke the shaft.


----------



## Rolo (Dec 16, 2002)

mez said:


> Bingo!
> 
> The problem with logic, proof, and fact as defined in this sort of test is illustrated very well. Based on the prevailing attitude toward the test a very large omission in the thread is being made. VPA heads should not be paired with a carbon arrow as they will cause breakage of the shaft if they hit heavy bone. Scientifically proven, look at the pictures. The head clearly broke the shaft, there is no argument unless someone comes up with a better test.


Precisely...


----------



## mez (Feb 22, 2010)

sethro02 said:


> At least 100 times or more...so next question


What is the power?


----------



## henro (Oct 9, 2007)

mez said:


> The other shaft was not footed and it did not break. The difference was the broad head, the VPA broke the shaft.


Could've been luck or the fact it didn't hit at the same angle. Deflection is what causes the extra stress and shaft failure. The insert is obviously much stiffer than the carbon shaft so when it hits hard bone at any angle, what's going to flex more: the metal insert or the carbon shaft? That's what breaks the arrow shaft and this is where an external footing comes into play to protect this from happening. You can even double or triple foot the shaft to give it added protection.

I've showed results of these failures on other shafts as well in my shoulder penetration test: http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=1859108.


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

I agree about footing your arrows especially on HIT arrows but since both were not footed and due to the impact since that particular head couldn't split through as easy, the shaft took the brute of the impact as well as the tip. Which once again proves how much retained energy that setup kept through the splitting process and it got through "easier" due to it's MECHANICAL advantage!!!!!!!!


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

mez said:


> What is the power?


What?


----------



## Rolo (Dec 16, 2002)

sethro02 said:


> At least 100 times or more...so next question


Why not publicize the previous results? I'm really curious why you found it necessary to do a couple more shots with the exact same equipment to publish the findings, when you had already done it 100 times or more with the exact same equipment? Not sure what differing results you would have expected?


----------



## mez (Feb 22, 2010)

henro said:


> Could've been luck or the fact it didn't hit at the same angle. Deflection is what causes the extra stress and shaft failure. The insert is obviously much stiffer than the carbon shaft so when it hits hard bone at any angle, what's going to flex more: the metal insert or the carbon shaft? That's what breaks the arrow shaft and this is where an external footing comes into play to protect this from happening. You can even double or triple foot the shaft to give it added protection.



Or you could just use a Helix broad head as they obviously don't break arrow shafts. You can't design a perfect test, angles, deflections and things are not repeatable. All you have to do is look at the pictures if you want proof that Helix heads don't break shafts when they hit bone and VPA's do.


----------



## bhutso (Jan 4, 2007)

Rolo said:


> Why not publicize the previous results? I'm really curious why you found it necessary to do a couple more shots with the exact same equipment to publish the findings, when you had already done it 100 times or more with the exact same equipment? Not sure what differing results you would have expected?




Because somebody wouldn't take his word for it


----------



## mez (Feb 22, 2010)

sethro02 said:


> What?


Exactly.


----------



## henro (Oct 9, 2007)

mez said:


> Or you could just use a Helix broad head as they obviously don't break arrow shafts. You can't design a perfect test, angles, deflections and things are not repeatable. All you have to do is look at the pictures if you want proof that Helix heads don't break shafts when they hit bone and VPA's do.


This can and will happen with the Helix heads as well if you do more testing. The head design doesn't trump arrow shaft structural integrity. This needs to be paramount regardless of what head you shoot or the failure cannot be blamed to the head. This is #1 on Ashby's penetration enhancing factors: 

"Structural Integrity of the entire arrow system is the most important factor. It applies to every aspect of the arrow, from the broadhead's tip and edge strength to the nock. Even a tiny tip-bend results in an average penetration loss of 14%.
The key function structural integrity plays has been stressed through-out. Hopefully no further discussion of 'why' is needed. As for a sharp broadhead, structural integrity should be a 'given' requirement for every hunting arrow. It is a 'must have' arrow design feature, without which no other factor can be relied upon."


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

Rolo said:


> Why not publicize the previous results? I'm really curious why you found it necessary to do a couple more shots with the exact same equipment to publish the findings, when you had already done it 100 times or more with the exact same equipment? Not sure what differing results you would have expected?


Because I don't have time to argue on threads everytime I post something. And the last time I did this, I did post results....which were exactly the same from the helix, the other heads didn't fair as well. Sometimes I'm asked by certain people to do tests so I do them and keep it confidential....next question


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

mez said:


> Exactly.


Exactly...bye find another thread to contribute to


----------



## mikehoyme (Nov 3, 2012)

Rolo said:


> Why not publicize the previous results? I'm really curious why you found it necessary to do a couple more shots with the exact same equipment to publish the findings, when you had already done it 100 times or more with the exact same equipment? Not sure what differing results you would have expected?


Read this post. http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=2363865&page=4&p=1071676867#post1071676867


----------



## Rolo (Dec 16, 2002)

sethro02 said:


> Not just a helix, any single bevel including a 3:1 ratio head has a higher mechanical advantage then the Vpa or similar heads....this is fact, not me making stuff up. I can post great links for you to read, but I doubt you will. You seem smart enough to search mechanical advantage and figure it out.. It's the tip, the length/width ratio, the bevel degree, the way the ferrule and blade are attached, and the thickness of the blade. You need at least .062" thick main blade to split bone conisistantly without damaging it....this is also proven....and not by me.


And the material used to manufacturer and the treating, and the ____________. It seems we are finally getting somewhere...and Yeah, I've read a lot about mehanical advantage already...

But...can you tell me why tip design A provides a better design than tip design B, when all else is equal? What is the 'best' tip design for: splitting bone or flesh or arteries? Are they the same or different? 

When it comes to bowhunting and running sharp sticks through inncocent animals is one really that much better than the other, all else equal? Is one better than the other when all else is not equal?


----------



## mez (Feb 22, 2010)

henro said:


> This can and will happen with the Helix heads as well if you do more testing. The head design doesn't trump arrow shaft structural integrity. This needs to be paramount regardless of what head you shoot or the failure cannot be blamed to the head. This is #1 on Ashby's penetration enhancing factors:
> 
> "Structural Integrity of the entire arrow system is the most important factor. It applies to every aspect of the arrow, from the broadhead's tip and edge strength to the nock. Even a tiny tip-bend results in an average penetration loss of 14%.
> The key function structural integrity plays has been stressed through-out. Hopefully no further discussion of 'why' is needed. As for a sharp broadhead, structural integrity should be a 'given' requirement for every hunting arrow. It is a 'must have' arrow design feature, without which no other factor can be relied upon."


Say what you want there are pictures, proof positive, on page one that show the result. Where's you're test showing that VPA's don't break arrow shafts?


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

henro said:


> This can and will happen with the Helix heads as well if you do more testing. The head design doesn't trump arrow shaft structural integrity. This needs to be paramount regardless of what head you shoot or the failure cannot be blamed to the head. This is #1 on Ashby's penetration enhancing factors:
> 
> "Structural Integrity of the entire arrow system is the most important factor. It applies to every aspect of the arrow, from the broadhead's tip and edge strength to the nock. Even a tiny tip-bend results in an average penetration loss of 14%.
> The key function structural integrity plays has been stressed through-out. Hopefully no further discussion of 'why' is needed. As for a sharp broadhead, structural integrity should be a 'given' requirement for every hunting arrow. It is a 'must have' arrow design feature, without which no other factor can be relied upon."


All good points henro but in this case and even 3 years back when I was testing which were all completely straight on shots, some heads just aren't designed to withstand a hard bone hit,,,,or in this case of this testing the bone was just a little to much for that particular head. In this test neither deflected. They hit perfectly.


----------



## henro (Oct 9, 2007)

sethro02 said:


> I agree about footing your arrows especially on HIT arrows but since both were not footed and due to the impact since that particular head couldn't split through as easy, the shaft took the brute of the impact as well as the tip. Which once again proves how much retained energy that setup kept through the splitting process and it got through "easier" due to it's MECHANICAL advantage!!!!!!!!


Seth just to be clear, mechanical advantage only pertains to the profile of the head, not edge design. I know you know this but others may not. Comparing the VPA and Helix will probably net you similar MA due to the Helix's blade angle change as I have mentioned before. I'm not stepping in the middle of this arguement but just wanted to clear that up. Mechanical Advantage only displays how hard a broadhead has to work to cut based on it's overall blade profile and number of blades. http://tuffhead.com/education/formulas_mechanical_advantage.html


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

Rolo said:


> And the material used to manufacturer and the treating, and the ____________. It seems we are finally getting somewhere...and Yeah, I've read a lot about mehanical advantage already...
> 
> But...can you tell me why tip design A provides a better design than tip design B, when all else is equal? What is the 'best' tip design for: splitting bone or flesh or arteries? Are they the same or different?
> 
> When it comes to bowhunting and running sharp sticks through inncocent animals is one really that much better than the other, all else equal? Is one better than the other when all else is not equal?


Buy a helix and look at the tip straight on. It's tip induces twist right at the moment of impact, tanto style tips are incredibly durable. For any good single bevel to work , the tip is extremely important. It can't "not " rotate on impact. I'll take a drill over a hammer anyday so to speak. You can have a tanto tip style on a double bevel. But doesn't work the same as a single bevel because of the grind.


----------



## henro (Oct 9, 2007)

mez said:


> Say what you want there are pictures, proof positive, on page one that show the result. Where's you're test showing that VPA's don't break arrow shafts?


I haven't tested VPA's yet but I actually do own some that I will try to put against my Abowyer's when they ship. I've already tested other single bevel heads that did break the shafts as I posted. http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=1859108 What testing have you done on anything?

Btw, I'm a single bevel shooter not double bevel.


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

henro said:


> Seth just to be clear, mechanical advantage only pertains to the profile of the head, not edge design. I know you know this but others may not. Comparing the VPA and Helix will probably net you similar MA due to the Helix's blade angle change as I have mentioned before. I'm not stepping in the middle of this arguement but just wanted to clear that up. Mechanical Advantage only displays how hard a broadhead has to work to cut based on it's overall blade profile and number of blades. http://tuffhead.com/education/formulas_mechanical_advantage.html


Right I just started rambling why this head performs better. Their are distinct advantages that a helix or phathead single bevel or whichever has over short double bevels.


----------



## Rolo (Dec 16, 2002)

mikehoyme said:


> Read this post. http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=2363865&page=4&p=1071676867#post1071676867


Not sure what that thread had to do with the number of times the same heads were shot on the same arrow from the same bow into bone...that thread had more to do witha bet to see which would perform better with the equipment used in this thread. The results of that bet were what I would have predicted...:mg:


----------



## mikehoyme (Nov 3, 2012)

Rolo said:


> Not sure what that thread had to do with the number of times the same heads were shot on the same arrow from the same bow into bone...that thread had more to do witha bet to see which would perform better with the equipment used in this thread. The results of that bet were what I would have predicted...:mg:


I was just pointing out Seth's reasons for publishing his results this time.


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

Rolo said:


> Not sure what that thread had to do with the number of times the same heads were shot on the same arrow from the same bow into bone...that thread had more to do witha bet to see which would perform better with the equipment used in this thread. The results of that bet were what I would have predicted...:mg:


Which was a main reason for me posting this. Completely proved him wrong.


----------



## Rolo (Dec 16, 2002)

sethro02 said:


> *Buy a helix and look at the tip straight on.* It's tip induces twist right at the moment of impact, tanto style tips are incredibly durable. For any good single bevel to work , the tip is extremely important. It can't "not " rotate on impact. I'll take a drill over a hammer anyday so to speak. You can have a tanto tip style on a double bevel. But doesn't work the same as a single bevel because of the grind.


Seriously, have you only read what you wanted to read in my posts? This is not a trick question. Why would I run out and heads that I can walk to my basement and look at? 

Let me make this clear...again...I already own and shoot Helix heads because of the advantages that I believe they provide. I own and use other heads because of the advantages I believe they provide. Heck, I carry different heads in my quiver at the same time to use based on the circumstances...

But...since you like my 'circular' arguments...will you admit that my first post in this thread remains just as accurate now as it did then...the lighter arrow penetrated farther than the heavier one? I don't think you have answered that one yet...:darkbeer:

And because that answer is obvious...would you not also agree that arrow weight alone is not a reliable predictor of the likely penetration of the arrow itself into whatever medium you want to chose...including bone?


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

mikehoyme said:


> I was just pointing out Seth's reasons for publishing his results this time.


Thank you


----------



## Rolo (Dec 16, 2002)

sethro02 said:


> Which was a main reason for me posting this. Completely proved him wrong.


Gotcha...but you do have some data or results that support you statement that you have shot these same heads with these same arrows from the same bow through bone a 100 or so times, right?

50 per head, or 100 per head? Not all other heads combined?


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

Rolo said:


> And the material used to manufacturer and the treating, and the ____________. It seems we are finally getting somewhere...and Yeah, I've read a lot about mehanical advantage already...
> 
> But...can you tell me why tip design A provides a better design than tip design B, when all else is equal? What is the 'best' tip design for: splitting bone or flesh or arteries? Are they the same or different?
> 
> When it comes to bowhunting and running sharp sticks through inncocent animals is one really that much better than the other, all else equal? Is one better than the other when all else is not equal?





Rolo said:


> Seriously, have you only read what you wanted to read in my posts? This is not a trick question. Why would I run out and heads that I can walk to my basement and look at?
> 
> Let me make this clear...again...I already own and shoot Helix heads because of the advantages that I believe they provide. I own and use other heads because of the advantages I believe they provide. Heck, I carry different heads in my quiver at the same time to use based on the circumstances...
> 
> ...



Dude you asked about the tip and I told you! Also I've never said arrow weight alone is a determining factor. You must have a good broadhead. The ONLY reason the lighter arrow penetrated better was the head design


----------



## henro (Oct 9, 2007)

Rolo said:


> Seriously, have you only read what you wanted to read in my posts? This is not a trick question. Why would I run out and heads that I can walk to my basement and look at?
> 
> Let me make this clear...again...I already own and shoot Helix heads because of the advantages that I believe they provide. I own and use other heads because of the advantages I believe they provide. Heck, I carry different heads in my quiver at the same time to use based on the circumstances...
> 
> ...


Isn't this whole thread blowup because you're trying to make everyone think light arrows penetrate better than heavier ones when there were other factors involved (differing broadhead designs) that really led to the lighter arrow penetrating further in test 1? Am I missing something?


----------



## Rolo (Dec 16, 2002)

sethro02 said:


> Dude you asked about the tip and I told you! Also I've never said arrow weight alone is a determining factor. You must have a good broadhead. The ONLY reason the lighter arrow penetrated better was the head design


Well...you first told me to go buy something I already owned, which I already said I owned, but anywho...


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

Rolo said:


> Gotcha...but you do have some data or results that support you statement that you have shot these same heads with these same arrows from the same bow through bone a 100 or so times, right?
> 
> 50 per head, or 100 per head? Not all other heads combined?


Wow. The pics I did take I would send them to whoever it is that was having me do it, no I didn't really keep all of them sorry! I could shoot 500 bones and you'd still have somethjng to say.


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

Rolo said:


> Well...you first told me to go buy something I already owned, which I already said I owned, but anywho...


Seriously if you have helix and shoot them and like them then you should know how they work right? Therefore no need to keep posting right? Is ray paying you to be on here?


----------



## Rolo (Dec 16, 2002)

henro said:


> Isn't this whole thread blowup because you're trying to make everyone think light arrows penetrate better than heavier ones when there were other factors involved (differing broadhead designs) that really led to the lighter arrow penetrating further in test 1? Am I missing something?


Well...I'm really not trying to make anyone think anything...I think the test speaks for itself...the lighter arrow did out penetrate the heavier one...and that VPAs should not be used with the test arrows...


----------



## bambikiller (Feb 27, 2004)

Seth just stop feeding the troll


----------



## rayzor43 (Apr 8, 2011)

sethro02 said:


> I was referring to you on the hype and blade retention part, which what you say is false. Helix is a 40 degree bevel for a reason. We know your product kills animals. I wasn't trying to prove otherwise. I guess you can say your head did it's job on the first shot because it may have touched one vital. But on the second shot it didn't. Also not footing the shaft and it breaking is the broadheads fault. It should have broken on the helix the. If that was a concern but it didn't break....because a single bevel head uses less energy to split bone thus penetrating farther , thus relieving some of the stress applied to the shaft at impact. If I do it again I'll foot just for you though but it will have a similar outcome. Also the Vpa had a slight advantage that nobody is talking about! How about 50 grains of extra steel on that broadhead to beef it up. So really a fair comparison is if they made a 150 grain 1 1/8 helix. I understand you have a product to sell and I know you didn't bash any certain brands but I felt the need to show the exact affects that a single bevel can cause, hype or not it has been doing this for centuries. Controlled or uncontrolled is your guys' opinion but we could argue that with every test ever done. It's pretty close comparison and nothing was way out of line to not be fair. I hit that knuckle portion in the exact same spot.


You apparently didn't read the the part about narrow vs wide and "typical" angles or just ignored them because its not what you wanted to hear. Not sure why you interpret or want to change my words on "edge strength" in to claims of "blade retention". Two totally different things. I never have had one thing bad to say about Helix. Frankly, other than knowing what they look like, I have never given them much thought. If they have a 40 degree sharpening angle they wouldn't fall into what I call a typical. They apparently get the whole wider angle equals stronger thing. You dont even realize that saying "They use a 40 degree angle for a reason" actually supports what I have said when you are trying to disprove it. Just makes me shake my head. So, are you saying they are a "typical" single bevel? I kind of doubt it, but who knows with you. One minute you sing our praises and the next you make it your mission to make us look bad. Oh yeah, how with all that twisting motion, do those things use less energy??? Never mind. I'll just take your word for it.


----------



## Rolo (Dec 16, 2002)

sethro02 said:


> Wow. The pics I did take I would send them to whoever it is that was having me do it, no I didn't really keep all of them sorry! I could shoot 500 bones and you'd still have somethjng to say.


So...how many times did you shoot the individual heads (Helix 125 and VPA 150) each with the same arrow from the same bow into bone? 

And if you had actually shot each 500 times, I'd say your tests were a lot closer to scientific reliability than just doing it a few times, and the theory would be getting a lot closer to being proven, becoming a rule. (Of course, I would also expect that the VPA would have performed better than the Helix on a few occasions within the 500 shots each on a shot by shot comparison, but would also expect the Helix to perform much better over-all. But, that's my bias).



sethro02 said:


> Seriously if you have helix and shoot them and like them then you should know how they work right? Therefore no need to keep posting right? Is ray paying you to be on here?


Who's Ray?


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

rayzor43 said:


> You apparently didn't read the the part about narrow vs wide and "typical" angles or just ignored them because its not what you wanted to hear. Not sure why you interpret or want to change my words on "edge strength" in to claims of "blade retention". Two totally different things. I never have had one thing bad to say about Helix. Frankly, other than knowing what they look like, I have never given them much thought. If they have a 40 degree sharpening angle they wouldn't fall into what I call a typical. They apparently get the whole wider angle equals stronger thing. You dont even realize that saying "They use a 40 degree angle for a reason" actually supports what I have said when you are trying to disprove it. Just makes me shake my head. So, are you saying they are a "typical" single bevel? I kind of doubt it, but who knows with you. One minute you sing our praises and the next you make it your mission to make us look bad. Oh yeah, how with all that twisting motion, do those things use less energy??? Never mind. I'll just take your word for it.


My post you just quoted says " 40 degree bevel" so not sure where that comment came from. The 40 degree bevel allows for quicker rotation. But thanks for the lesson. How did I change what you said? You mentioned blade retention which is how well it holds it's sharpened edge after it gets used. It held it's edge just fine...oh and it's not twisting motion it's rotation


----------



## bambikiller (Feb 27, 2004)

rayzor43 said:


> You apparently didn't read the the part about narrow vs wide and "typical" angles or just ignored them because its not what you wanted to hear. Not sure why you interpret or want to change my words on "edge strength" in to claims of "blade retention". Two totally different things. I never have had one thing bad to say about Helix. Frankly, other than knowing what they look like, I have never given them much thought. If they have a 40 degree sharpening angle they wouldn't fall into what I call a typical. They apparently get the whole wider angle equals stronger thing. You dont even realize that saying "They use a 40 degree angle for a reason" actually supports what I have said when you are trying to disprove it. Just makes me shake my head. So, are you saying they are a "typical" single bevel? I kind of doubt it, but who knows with you. One minute you sing our praises and the next you make it your mission to make us look bad. Oh yeah, how with all that twisting motion, do those things use less energy??? Never mind. I'll just take your word for it.


Ray I believe it rubbed some people the wrong way when you posted in a "single bevel thread" that single bevel is hype and or a marketing gimmick . Then promoted vpa's design . Which is a very good head . I love the vpas but completely disagreed with what you posted in a single bevel thread . You didn't talk bad about the helix per say but single bevel as a whole . And I believe the title was what's the best single bevel .


----------



## henro (Oct 9, 2007)

Rolo said:


> Well...I'm really not trying to make anyone think anything...I think the test speaks for itself...the lighter arrow did out penetrate the heavier one...and that VPAs should not be used with the test arrows...


So would you say you don't understand that when trying to compare a single penetration enhancing factor, all else must be equal? Otherwise your point and all of this bs arguing you've created is ******ed.


----------



## mez (Feb 22, 2010)

henro said:


> I haven't tested VPA's yet but I actually do own some that I will try to put against my Abowyer's when they ship. I've already tested other single bevel heads that did break the shafts as I posted. http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=1859108 What testing have you done on anything?
> 
> Btw, I'm a single bevel shooter not double bevel.



Bio mechanics of equine fracture repair constructs/implants. 

I don't shoot either as of now. I like to try new things and have been impressed with what I've read and seen out of the Helix and plan on getting some to play with this winter. Likely what I'll be shooting next year. 

I was simply pointing out the duplicity in logic being used with "scientific proof/testing results." You can't assign dependent and independent variables based simply on opinion. Anecdotal evidence is not scientific and many times proven to be untrue.


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

Also ray the good thing about public forums is we can test or kill stuff or whatever and post our findings....and if you look back through my tests I never once talked bad about your product. I actually don't talk bad about hardly any products.....except ozonics! But when someone in another thread ( not you) says that their favorite head which was Vpa would outperform a single bevel...well I just have to take that challenge. If it was a Magnus then that owner would be on here.


----------



## henro (Oct 9, 2007)

mez said:


> Bio mechanics of equine fracture repair constructs/implants.
> 
> I don't shoot either as of now. I like to try new things and have been impressed with what I've read and seen out of the Helix and plan on getting some to play with this winter. Likely what I'll be shooting next year.
> 
> I was simply pointing out the duplicity in logic being used with "scientific proof/testing results." You can't assign dependent and independent variables based simply on opinion. Anecdotal evidence is not scientific and many times proven to be untrue.


Where's your evidence to your arguement? I posted mine already twice you just keep ignoring it.


----------



## mez (Feb 22, 2010)

Why would you talk bad about ozonics? Do you have any idea how many people have tested that thing in the woods and reported their findings on a public forum? You should read more of those threads, things flat work.


----------



## mez (Feb 22, 2010)

henro said:


> Where's your evidence to your arguement? I posted mine already twice you just keep ignoring it.


Pictures on page one. The VPA clearly broke the shaft whereas the Helix did not.


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

mez said:


> Why would you talk bad about ozonics? Do you have any idea how many people have tested that thing in the woods and reported their findings on a public forum? You should read more of those threads, things flat work.


Lol... I was trying to lighten the mood, glad that's all you got from that post. 
How about from now on just post about the thread itself...to everybody not just you.


----------



## henro (Oct 9, 2007)

mez said:


> Pictures on page one. The VPA clearly broke the shaft whereas the Helix did not.


Oh sorry I thought I was talking to someone that could test their own arguements. I showed you single bevel heads that broke the shafts but you obviously can't comprehend how it actually happens. Must be rough...


----------



## mez (Feb 22, 2010)

henro said:


> Oh sorry I thought I was talking to someone that could test their own arguements. I showed you single bevel heads that broke the shafts but you obviously can't comprehend how it actually happens. Must be rough...


There really is not argument, look at the pictures on page one. Now where were your pictures of the VPA heads that broke the shaft when you were testing them?


----------



## Rolo (Dec 16, 2002)

henro said:


> So would you say you don't understand that when trying to compare a single penetration enhancing factor, all else must be equal? Otherwise your point and all of this bs arguing you've created is ******ed.


No...I'm pretty sure I have emphasized the need for *"all else to be equal"* when trying to determine a single penetrating factor. But of course, relying on a single penetrating factor alone is a fool's errand. No?

And..

Have you actually read the entire thread? Did you not see all the emos on my first post? Did you not see the responses of folks reading what they wanted to read, and then going on about it? Did you not seethe emphasis that I placed on the need for things to be equal for scientific reliability?

Seriously...this entire thing goes away if 2 things happen...1: Lapdogs understand a little sarcasm. 2: The answer of: Yes the lighter arrow penetrated better because of.......... is given. Instead it turns into a long winded explanation of a question that was never asked, what is determined to be "more important" and shifting to an answer of equal arrow weight, and on from there. 

It's perfectly 'ok' to say that lighter arrows have more penetration potential than heavier arrows under certain circumstances when all else *is not* the same. No one will think any less of folks for saying it. Watching the mental gymnastics and intellectual hop-scotch that folks have to go through from saying that does provide a lot of amusement however...it is sad however that they also fail to see the forest...


----------



## henro (Oct 9, 2007)

mez said:


> There really is not argument, look at the pictures on page one. Now where were your pictures of the VPA heads that broke the shaft when you were testing them?


Explain this: What caused the shaft to break? What actually broke the shaft? What exact angle did it hit the shaft compared to the other arrows? Would it have broke if arrow was footed? Why did the single bevel designs I tested myself break the shafts? 

Are you really this stupid that you can't comprehend why the carbon shaft broke? Really?

Maybe you'll be able to retain some knowledge from this(sorry there's no pics) from Ashby on the Ultimate Hunting Arrow:

http://tuffhead.com/ashby_pdfs/Ashby_Ultimate_Hunting_Arrows.pdf

"The arrow system: all components. The number one factor; the single most important arrow feature; is the structural integrity of the arrow system: broadhead; shaft; and all shaft components. To reliably achieve effective, predictable penetration resulting in a lethal hit, the broadhead and the shaft must remain undamaged; regardless of tissues encountered or angle of impact with those tissues.
The broadhead is the single most important piece of bowhunting equipment one carries afield. It is the item that should be selected first; then the hunting arrow developed around the chosen broadhead. A broadhead that becomes damaged, even slightly, reduces penetration severely.
The “ideal broadhead” has several characteristics. These are: (1) reasonable metal thickness; (2) quality steel; (3) neither bends nor breaks on bone impact; (4) Rockwell hardness from 49 to 55; (5) tends to break before taking a bend; (6) long and narrow shape (high mechanical advantage); (7) long ferrule taper, fading smoothly into the blade; (8) no abrupt junctures anywhere; and (9) straight taper cutting edges. These criteria reflect the broadhead’s integrity, its capacity to take and maintain a sharp edge, and ability to maximize use of arrow impact force.
Though it is the broadhead which must ultimately perform, the shaft must remain undamaged to enable broadhead performance. The most common shaft failure is immediately behind the broadhead taper. It is at this critical junction that aluminum inserts and/or adaptors commonly give way. The farther impact angle deviates from perpendicular the more frequent this failure becomes. Such a failure effectively destroys the arrow’s penetration potential.
With synthetic shafts, using steel broadhead adaptors with aluminum inserts increases strength at this weak point. Additional strengthening is achievable by using brass or steel inserts. Longer inserts, extending farther into the shaft, provide even more strength. It is also at this junction that wood shafting is most frequently damaged on impact. Certain woods; either as primary shafting or as a footing; provide excellent integrity, increasing the penetration potential. Among these are: Forgewood; hickory; laminated birch; and several exotic hardwoods, such as ipe and purple heart."


----------



## bambikiller (Feb 27, 2004)

Rolo said:


> No...I'm pretty sure I have emphasized the need for *"all else to be equal"* when trying to determine a single penetrating factor. But of course, relying on a single penetrating factor alone is a fool's errand. No?
> 
> And..
> 
> ...


I do see one lap dog in this thread that's for sure !


----------



## henro (Oct 9, 2007)

Rolo said:


> No...I'm pretty sure I have emphasized the need for *"all else to be equal"* when trying to determine a single penetrating factor. But of course, relying on a single penetrating factor alone is a fool's errand. No?
> 
> And..
> 
> ...


No I admit that I didn't read every post on that forward because no one was picking up on the emoticons you posted so I suspected you had serious intent at some point later on. I figured somebody had to have covered that already. Now I get it and this thread was a waste of brain usage as I suspected lol.


----------



## mez (Feb 22, 2010)

henro said:


> Explain this: What caused the shaft to break? What actually broke the shaft? What exact angle did it hit the shaft compared to the other arrows? Would it have broke if arrow was footed? Why did the single bevel designs I tested myself break the shafts?
> 
> Are you really this stupid that you can't comprehend why the carbon shaft broke? Really?



Explain this: What caused the Helix to out penetrate the VPA on a single shot? Is there really only a single factor? What exact angle did the Helix hit the bone vs the VPA? What exact distance top to bottom and side to side on the bone did the two arrows hit? Would it have made a difference if these were all the same? What kind of device was the bone in to insure that movement or lack thereof was not an issue in the test? 

Are you really that stupid that you can't comprehend that this isn't a scientific test with a factual conclusion and one single dependent variable? 

Are you that stupid that you can't comprehend that there is no difference in saying that the Helix single bevel design is superior to the VPA double bevel design based on this test and saying that VPA heads break arrow shafts based on this test?


----------



## Rolo (Dec 16, 2002)

henro said:


> No I admit that I didn't read every post on that forward because no one was picking up on the emoticons you posted so I suspected you had serious intent at some point later on. I figured somebody had to have covered that already. Now I get it and this thread was a waste of brain usage as I suspected lol.


Wait what...individual bias prevents rational discussion of things because folks feel personally insulted whenever someone dares to say something that isnot comprehended and interpreted to challenge the personal bias? 

You don't say?

Maybe there was some serious intent on a couple of issues...


----------



## 0nepin (Sep 16, 2009)

Henro I believe your arrow broke because it had an outsert that bent right ?


----------



## henro (Oct 9, 2007)

mez said:


> Explain this: What caused the Helix to out penetrate the VPA on a single shot? Is there really only a single factor? What exact angle did the Helix hit the bone vs the VPA? What exact distance top to bottom and side to side on the bone did the two arrows hit? Would it have made a difference if these were all the same? What kind of device was the bone in to insure that movement or lack thereof was not an issue in the test?
> 
> Are you really that stupid that you can't comprehend that this isn't a scientific test with a factual conclusion and one single dependent variable?
> 
> Are you that stupid that you can't comprehend that there is no difference in saying that the Helix single bevel design is superior to the VPA double bevel design based on this test and saying that VPA heads break arrow shafts based on this test?


LOL stupid is as stupid does. That's exactly what you've been saying all along and you can't comprehend it... All of your "proof" is based off this one single test.



mez said:


> Or you could just use a Helix broad head as they obviously don't break arrow shafts. You can't design a perfect test, angles, deflections and things are not repeatable. All you have to do is look at the pictures if you want proof that Helix heads don't break shafts when they hit bone and VPA's do.





mez said:


> Say what you want there are pictures, proof positive, on page one that show the result. Where's you're test showing that VPA's don't break arrow shafts?


----------



## henro (Oct 9, 2007)

0nepin said:


> Henro I believe your arrow broke because it had an outsert that bent right ?


The VAP broke on impact from the outsert breaking the shaft, the Gold Tip did the same thing though.


----------



## henro (Oct 9, 2007)

Rolo said:


> Wait what...individual bias prevents rational discussion of things because folks feel personally insulted whenever someone dares to say something that isnot comprehended and interpreted to challenge the personal bias?
> 
> You don't say?
> 
> Maybe there was some serious intent on a couple of issues...


----------



## 0nepin (Sep 16, 2009)

Rolo and mez let it go and move on !!!!! Nobody care what you think !!!! the helix single bevel is far superior to the vpa's double bevel for penetrating heavy bone period .if you want some absolute test to verify for yourself have at it.i don't need to touch the fire to know it's hot .


----------



## bambikiller (Feb 27, 2004)

rolo and mez this ones for you ! I


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

henro said:


> The VAP broke on impact from the outsert breaking the shaft, the Gold Tip did the same thing though.


Maybe how the goldtip deflected slightly or caught the ball socket at a awkward angled and torqued it slightly? Or because it was a gold tip....jk


----------



## henro (Oct 9, 2007)

sethro02 said:


> Maybe how the goldtip deflected slightly or caught the ball socket at a awkward angled and torqued it slightly? Or because it was a gold tip....jk


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

This was last year... Same result


----------



## mez (Feb 22, 2010)

henro said:


> LOL stupid is as stupid does. That's exactly what you've been saying all along and you can't comprehend it... All of your "proof" is based off this one single test.


You get it but you don't.


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

And then this year.... Same damage


----------



## salmon killer (Jun 19, 2011)

Yep this thread has been reduced to name calling and meme insults typical from the same bunch .WOW!


----------



## bambikiller (Feb 27, 2004)

salmon killer said:


> Yep this thread has been reduced to name calling and meme insults typical from the same bunch .WOW!


Trolls bring out the meme's barrage


----------



## salmon killer (Jun 19, 2011)

bambikiller said:


> Trolls bring out the meme's barrage


LOL yep !


----------



## rayzor43 (Apr 8, 2011)

sethro02 said:


> My post you just quoted says " 40 degree bevel" so not sure where that comment came from. The 40 degree bevel allows for quicker rotation. But thanks for the lesson. How did I change what you said? You mentioned blade retention which is how well it holds it's sharpened edge after it gets used. It held it's edge just fine...oh and it's not twisting motion it's rotation


Edge "strength"....as in resistance to chipping and shearing along the edge. Nothing to do with blade retention or or edge sharpeness retention. That 40 degree edge/bevel/sharpening angle what ever you want to call it is much much stronger and more resistant to it than 20-25 irregardless of anything it has to do with rotation.


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

Ok great so it meets all criterias to bury the hype myth!


----------



## Bowtechforlife (Apr 17, 2014)

Wow.... Just wow.... Once again I have under estimated the power of AT.... I did not think an informative thread like this could turn SO stupid. I'm not even sure what some of the posters are arguing?! Some of these replies are just amazingly dumb. I almost have to sit back and think to comprehend just how stupid they are lol


----------



## Bowtechforlife (Apr 17, 2014)

And the weird thing is it is just a couple of the posters that managed to completely derail and make this thread stupid... Do they just want to argue?!


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

It happens everytime I post something... Almost everytime


----------



## mikehoyme (Nov 3, 2012)

This is nothing compared to the 2013 Real Deal test.


----------



## bambikiller (Feb 27, 2004)

mikehoyme said:


> This is nothing compared to the 2013 Real Deal test.


Your speaking the truth


----------



## Fortyneck (Oct 8, 2010)

Hey Sethro, 

I gotta hand it to you this thread has it all, passion, intrigue, bone-busting and unadulterated e-spastication. :set1_violent002: 

You and rayzor should go into business together manufacturing 100% steel made in the USA mini elf slippers. :toothy2:

On the real though, great test, great thread! :thumb:


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

Fortyneck said:


> Hey Sethro,
> 
> I gotta hand it to you this thread has it all, passion, intrigue, bone-busting and unadulterated e-spastication. :set1_violent002:
> 
> ...


You would role your ankle with my slippers because they would rotate to the right when you take a step


----------



## 07commander (Dec 22, 2010)

sethro02 said:


> You would role your ankle with my slippers because they would rotate to the right when you take a step


Have you ever broken the ferrule, like when you hit off center on the bone? Or does it just break the arrow shaft.


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

07commander said:


> Have you ever broken the ferrule, like when you hit off center on the bone? Or does it just break the arrow shaft.


Yea I've broken ferrules on just about every head. If you miss left or right and barely nick the bone it's brutal on broadheads.


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

sethro02 said:


> Yea I've broken ferrules on just about every head. If you miss left or right and barely nick the bone it's brutal on broadheads.


A lot of them broke shafts though too, just depends on how it hits and what breaks first


----------



## bgbowhunter (Oct 30, 2012)

This why read no further than 3 pages on any post


----------



## bambikiller (Feb 27, 2004)

bgbowhunter said:


> This why read no further than 3 pages on any post


There's good info throughs . You just have to weed out the trolling . There's sharpening info and info on how a single bevel works as I guess I was required to post in order to have an opinion . Also how the tips are different .. And you can also have a good look at the double bevel heros that refuse to see the proof in the pudding ! .. Well worth the debate


----------



## brad k (Jan 8, 2009)

hah..hah..haah


----------



## brad k (Jan 8, 2009)

4pm eastern...love you broadhead junkys!!! Rock on...


----------



## Ryjax (Mar 3, 2014)

brad k said:


> hah..hah..haah


Helix?


----------



## DustyRx (Jul 10, 2008)

GTM said:


> The only bad part about the Helix is trying to pull it out of my 18/1.


Pulls just fine out of mine as long as I rotate it the opposite direction that it rotated while penetrating.


----------



## opie20wv (Dec 29, 2009)

brad k said:


> hah..hah..haah


Please tell me this a helix 175's with the AV 3's that you tested on another thread? - thanks, opie20wv


----------



## w8indq (Dec 9, 2013)

sethro02 said:


> Dude you asked about the tip and I told you! Also I've never said arrow weight alone is a determining factor. You must have a good broadhead. The ONLY reason the lighter arrow penetrated better was the head design


Wow right from the start rolo was saying it was interesting that a lighter helix out perpetrated the heavier vpa, It was an observation that was meant to lead to thinking about the mechanical advantage of the helix over sheer brute force.....


mez said:


> Bio mechanics of equine fracture repair constructs/implants.
> 
> I don't shoot either as of now. I like to try new things and have been impressed with what I've read and seen out of the Helix and plan on getting some to play with this winter. Likely what I'll be shooting next year.
> 
> I was simply pointing out the duplicity in logic being used with "scientific proof/testing results." You can't assign dependent and independent variables based simply on opinion. Anecdotal evidence is not scientific and many times proven to be untrue.


Lol im fairly sure this man knows animal bones


----------



## lupe (Jan 15, 2015)

I feel even more confident using my "no mercy" single bevel zwickey now !


----------



## TRex18 (Oct 3, 2013)

Another interesting morning at work.........Similar to yesterday.....Coffee and Jerky....Helix and VPA....Sethro vs Bill Nye Science Guy, TeamOverkill vs Trolls......Tests vs Hypothesis....

Too bad thread got sidetracked. 

Once again....


----------



## grander (Mar 19, 2009)

Pure sweetness!


----------



## jakep567 (Feb 19, 2014)

Do you get the same results with either blade just going in tissue. Or is the helix designed more to hit bone and grow energy? 

Just wondering what kind of blood your gonna get in tissue


----------



## bhutso (Jan 4, 2007)

jakep567 said:


> Do you get the same results with either blade just going in tissue. Or is the helix designed more to hit bone and grow energy?
> 
> Just wondering what kind of blood your gonna get in tissue


If your just hunting whitetail, what a single bevel does to tissue is more of an advantage that it's bone breaking capability. If think about it the head is rotating through soft tissue. So the channel it creates is bigger than its actual cut. There are tons of pictures of lungs and hearts with single bevel cuts in them that are very impressive. Blood trails are dependant on a lot of factors but a single bevel destroys the vital organs In a way that a small cut double bevel head simply can't. You don't just get a 1 inch slit you get a spiral wound channel and a gathering/tearing effect on soft tissue


----------



## bambikiller (Feb 27, 2004)

bhutso said:


> If your just hunting whitetail, what a single bevel does to tissue is more of an advantage that it's bone breaking capability. If think about it the head is rotating through soft tissue. So the channel it creates is bigger than its actual cut. There are tons of pictures of lungs and hearts with single bevel cuts in them that are very impressive. Blood trails are dependant on a lot of factors but a single bevel destroys the vital organs In a way that a small cut double bevel head simply can't. You don't just get a 1 inch slit you get a spiral wound channel and a gathering/tearing effect on soft tissue


Here's a couple pick through soft tissue from the single bevel thread


----------



## bhutso (Jan 4, 2007)

bambikiller said:


> Here's a couple pick through soft tissue from the single bevel thread


Exactly!!!

The picture with the 50 cent piece in it looks like it was done with a spifire not a small two blade


----------



## TimmyZ7 (Aug 11, 2010)

Had that been a small double bevel you would only see small slits. Holes bleed better.


----------



## jakep567 (Feb 19, 2014)

Hey thanks guys im gonna get the hexli heads for my wife she needs that type of head for her setup very impressed


----------



## flinginairos (Jan 3, 2006)

What is the ferrule made of on these? Any noise in flight?


----------



## bhutso (Jan 4, 2007)

flinginairos said:


> What is the ferrule made of on these? Any noise in flight?


175 grain and up is steel, all lower weight is aluminum. They are quite in flight.

The head in this test was aluminum ferrule. As you can tell they are very tough


----------



## flinginairos (Jan 3, 2006)

bhutso said:


> 175 grain and up is steel, all lower weight is aluminum. They are quite in flight.
> 
> The head in this test was aluminum ferrule. As you can tell they are very tough


Thanks for the info. I shot DRT's last year and liked them but they are a little noisy in flight. I will be using them again but might try some of these as well!


----------



## 07commander (Dec 22, 2010)

bhutso said:


> 175 grain and up is steel, all lower weight is aluminum. They are quite in flight.
> 
> The head in this test was aluminum ferrule. As you can tell they are very tough


The aluminum ferrule was also what I was worried about. With the length of the head, it seems it would have a lot of leverage to snap the ferrule off if it hit bone off center. But, it clearly didn't here. 

I see you name anarchy heads in your sig. That's what I used this year. Only shot one deer, but I was kind of impressed. I thought the short overall length and steel ferrule would be more durable, even though I realize the blade isn't as thick. Now I'm thinking maybe I should go to these.


----------



## TimmyZ7 (Aug 11, 2010)

Here is a great example of the single bevel rotation posted on a friends site. It was done with a design similar to the Helix. On a side note, I would prefer the helix to this head because the helix has the same design but thicker steel and a larger diameter in 100 grains.

Broadhead









Entrance through the heart









Exit through the heart









Source: http://www.archeryaddix.com/forums/broadheads/32069-kudupoint-single-bevel-broadhead.html


----------



## bhutso (Jan 4, 2007)

07commander said:


> The aluminum ferrule was also what I was worried about. With the length of the head, it seems it would have a lot of leverage to snap the ferrule off if it hit bone off center. But, it clearly didn't here.
> 
> I see you name anarchy heads in your sig. That's what I used this year. Only shot one deer, but I was kind of impressed. I thought the short overall length and steel ferrule would be more durable, even though I realize the blade isn't as thick. Now I'm thinking maybe I should go to these.


Did you used the 1.5 or the 1 3/16? I actually didn't buy them till after the season. Been a mechanical user for a long time and the 1.5 inch cut is what made me go to anarchy. I feel like its a big enough cut to get good blood and penitration on deer. 
So if you have shot a deer with them you have more experience than me.

I had a great experience dealing with the owner of this company so I put them In my sig to support them. 

I do believe that they are everything I want in a briadhead but I have no live game to prove it.....yet  all hypodermic kills this year


----------



## salmon killer (Jun 19, 2011)

Me and sethro and his team have had heated debates over broadheads and how certain broadheads can help out arrow penetration weather light or heavy .And a single bevel is not a gimmick its the real deal.I have seen this over the years.I have done my own tests to .I believe a COC 2 blade is the best broadheads for penetration and you add a single bevel to that and it trumps a double bevel when bone is hit.As in his tests.I think trying to but science in a broadhead test a tough .Just look at his test and make your own conclusion.


----------



## Larry brown (Aug 17, 2013)

http://youtu.be/u6BLX3zlJkk This is link I posted in other thread


----------



## 07commander (Dec 22, 2010)

bhutso said:


> Did you used the 1.5 or the 1 3/16? I actually didn't buy them till after the season. Been a mechanical user for a long time and the 1.5 inch cut is what made me go to anarchy. I feel like its a big enough cut to get good blood and penitration on deer.
> So if you have shot a deer with them you have more experience than me.
> 
> I had a great experience dealing with the owner of this company so I put them In my sig to support them.
> ...


I used the 1.5". I only shoot 55#, do have 31" draw though. Shooting 260 fps with a 458 gr arrow. Shot a nice buck quartering away, in high ribs and out through the opposite shoulder. Don think it made any heavy bone contact, but seemed to sail right through in to the dirt. Blood trail not super heavy, but fairly easy to follow, deer went I'm gonna say 75-100yds.


----------



## salmon killer (Jun 19, 2011)

lupe said:


> I feel even more confident using my "no mercy" single bevel zwickey now !


I have some there a very good head take off the needle point with a file make it 1/8 th flat tip helps with curling (elf shoe).Sorry for the high jack just trying to give Lupe a tip.


----------



## River420Bottom (Jul 21, 2008)

TimmyZ7 said:


> Here is a great example of the single bevel rotation posted on a friends site. It was done with a design similar to the Helix. On a side note, I would prefer the helix to this head because the helix has the same design but thicker steel and a larger diameter in 100 grains.
> 
> Broadhead
> 
> ...


Now that's some proof.. I'm a mech guy too but wow


----------



## bhutso (Jan 4, 2007)

07commander said:


> I used the 1.5". I only shoot 55#, do have 31" draw though. Shooting 260 fps with a 458 gr arrow. Shot a nice buck quartering away, in high ribs and out through the opposite shoulder. Don think it made any heavy bone contact, but seemed to sail right through in to the dirt. Blood trail not super heavy, but fairly easy to follow, deer went I'm gonna say 75-100yds.


Good deal sounds like they performed well! Thanks


----------



## lupe (Jan 15, 2015)

Appreciate it salmon killer


----------



## Rolo (Dec 16, 2002)

salmon killer said:


> Me and sethro and his team have had heated debates over broadheads and how certain broadheads can help out arrow penetration weather light or heavy .And a single bevel is not a gimmick its the real deal.I have seen this over the years.I have done my own tests to .I believe a COC 2 blade is the best broadheads for penetration and you add a single bevel to that and it trumps a double bevel when bone is hit.As in his tests.I think trying to but science in a broadhead test a tough .Just look at his test and make your own conclusion.


And the advantages and benefits they potentially provide to people who use lighter equipment cannot be ignored either...:behindsof

Who knew...


----------



## henro (Oct 9, 2007)

Rolo said:


> And the advantages and benefits they potentially provide to people who use lighter equipment cannot be ignored either...:behindsof
> 
> Who knew...


The one thing that will be neglected in this statement by 99% of people is that to maximize penetration potential you must not ignore any of the penetration enhancing factors including mass weight in relation to the heavy bone threshold. Penetration isn't formulated from any one factor. Maximize everything you can while still keeping excellent arrow flight, proper spine and structural integrity. 

http://www.tuffhead.com/ashby_pdfs/ashby ours/2007 Update, Part 8.pdf


----------



## Rolo (Dec 16, 2002)

henro said:


> The one thing that will be neglected in this statement by 99% of people is that to maximize penetration potential you must not ignore any of the penetration enhancing factors including mass weight in relation to the heavy bone threshold. Penetration isn't formulated from any one factor. Maximize everything you can while still keeping excellent arrow flight, proper spine and structural integrity.
> 
> http://www.tuffhead.com/ashby_pdfs/ashby ours/2007 Update, Part 8.pdf


lol.


----------



## henro (Oct 9, 2007)




----------



## brad k (Jan 8, 2009)

This is a cool thread !!!


----------



## salmon killer (Jun 19, 2011)

Rolo said:


> And the advantages and benefits they potentially provide to people who use lighter equipment cannot be ignored either...:behindsof
> 
> Who knew...


For women and young boys/girls with low poundage setup a single bevel is always a good choice regardless of arrow weight.


----------



## Rolo (Dec 16, 2002)

salmon killer said:


> For women and young boys/girls with low poundage setup a single bevel is always a good choice regardless of arrow weight.


That was the point back on page 2...but some folks missed the forest on that...:wink:


----------



## bambikiller (Feb 27, 2004)

Rolo said:


> That was the point back on page 2...but some folks missed the forest on that...:wink:


No one missed the forest at all . You just have an argumentative arrogance about you . I think everyone on the thread can see how they would benefit lighter setups . You made it out to be more than it was and continued to over and over


----------



## henro (Oct 9, 2007)




----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

brad k said:


> This is a cool thread !!!


Was a cool thread....


----------



## 07commander (Dec 22, 2010)

henro said:


>


The best post yet!


----------



## Fulldraw1972 (Jan 6, 2012)

I have been a VPA guy for a few years now. They have performed flawlessly for me in that time. So when I seen Seth's results I have to say I was a little butt hurt that a head I shoot didn't have the outcome I would like to see. However I kept an open mind and read 15 pages of what guys had to say. 

I always knew a two blade broadhead was a better head for penetration. Just like I knew a single beavel head would out penetrate as well. There is a reason African PH's recommend them for the big boned/tuff hide animals. 

Anyways I am going to give the Helix head a try. I will have to learn how to sharpen them. My 3 blade VPA heads spoiled me in that department. To me they are a simple head to sharpen. 

If Seth had that good of penetration on his set up I would think a 500 grain arrow out of my new Hoyt Nitrum Turbo at 70 lbs and 30" draw should perform very well.


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

Fulldraw1972 said:


> I have been a VPA guy for a few years now. They have performed flawlessly for me in that time. So when I seen Seth's results I have to say I was a little butt hurt that a head I shoot didn't have the outcome I would like to see. However I kept an open mind and read 15 pages of what guys had to say.
> 
> I always knew a two blade broadhead was a better head for penetration. Just like I knew a single beavel head would out penetrate as well. There is a reason African PH's recommend them for the big boned/tuff hide animals.
> 
> ...


I made a sharpening video


Youtube helix broadhead sharpener


----------



## Fulldraw1972 (Jan 6, 2012)

sethro02 said:


> I made a sharpening video
> 
> 
> Youtube helix broadhead sharpener


I will check it out.


----------



## txcookie (Feb 17, 2007)

Instead Of being so nice to me on my thread:wink: You could have simply linked me to this. Would have been a better arguement!


Both heads certainly would have gotten into the heart with the clear edge going to the single. Of course this is arguable considering the density oof the POI could have been ever slightly so diffrence or a number of other things but I see it as rather convencing and has me wanting to try these heads specificaly.

How hard are they to sharpen. Double bevels are as easy as a pocket knife.


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

txcookie said:


> Instead Of being so nice to me on my thread:wink: You could have simply linked me to this. Would have been a better arguement!
> 
> 
> Both heads certainly would have gotten into the heart with the clear edge going to the single. Of course this is arguable considering the density oof the POI could have been ever slightly so diffrence or a number of other things but I see it as rather convencing and has me wanting to try these heads specificaly.
> ...


They are easy to sharpen, my video explains it


----------



## Ryjax (Mar 3, 2014)

sethro02 said:


> They are easy to sharpen, my video explains it


Wow that does look easy... I can make a scalpel blade dull, but I might actually be able to use that lol


----------



## bambikiller (Feb 27, 2004)

Ryjax said:


> Wow that does look easy... I can make a scalpel blade dull, but I might actually be able to use that lol


The sharpener is fool proof . Really easy . I prefer to use stones but the sharpener is a great tool for people who want quick easy no hassle


----------



## TRex18 (Oct 3, 2013)

Day 3.....

Single Bevel vs Double Bevel vs Cow Bone vs SCIENCE vs Variables vs Hypothesis vs Physics vs Apples vs BUFFOONS
and the winner is.....

THE SINGLE BEVEL HELIX....

Cant miss the opportunity.


----------



## cooperjd (Aug 18, 2009)

bambikiller said:


> The sharpener is fool proof . Really easy . I prefer to use stones but the sharpener is a great tool for people who want quick easy no hassle


question for you sharpeners as i'm new to sharpening single bevels. i have stones and a lansky system. when you're using stones whats the best way to hit the flat side of the blade as you get the roll over that direction? also, whats your preferred leather for stopping?


----------



## bambikiller (Feb 27, 2004)

cooperjd said:


> question for you sharpeners as i'm new to sharpening single bevels. i have stones and a lansky system. when you're using stones whats the best way to hit the flat side of the blade as you get the roll over that direction? also, whats your preferred leather for stopping?


With any single bevel your sharpening shd e about 95% on the bevel and 5% on the back side . So essentially a few passes on the flat side. I have several strops . One is double sided . Course and smooth . Each one also has a different strop compound as well . As you go to a smoother leather go to a smaller micron strop compound and it is very important to remember less pressure as you go .


----------



## henro (Oct 9, 2007)

cooperjd said:


> question for you sharpeners as i'm new to sharpening single bevels. i have stones and a lansky system. when you're using stones whats the best way to hit the flat side of the blade as you get the roll over that direction? also, whats your preferred leather for stopping?


My recommendation to people sharpening single bevels other than the Helix, buy a KME sharpening kit. They're the best out there IMO and what Abowyer actually recommends to sharpen their heads. If shooting the Helix use theirs. For strops, I use the stropblock. Nice piece and $20 shipped. Very informative website about it as well.


----------



## bambikiller (Feb 27, 2004)

henro said:


> My recommendation to people sharpening single bevels other than the Helix, buy a KME sharpening kit. They're the best out there IMO and what Abowyer actually recommends to sharpen their heads. If shooting the Helix use theirs. For strops, I use the stropblock. Nice piece and $20 shipped. Very informative website about it as well.


Do you know the micron of the strop compound imbedded in their strop?


----------



## henro (Oct 9, 2007)

bambikiller said:


> Do you know the micron of the strop compound imbedded in their strop?


No I don't sorry. You know more about the subject than I.


----------



## cooperjd (Aug 18, 2009)

i'll check out the KME and various strops i can find. thanks for the info. i was concerned a bit about the design of the helix with the ferrule not integrated into the blade from the tip, but just kind of "jutting" out mid body. but it appears that from the testing ive seen, it doesnt seem to be an issue. i have several 4 bladers, phantoms, steelforce, magnus, but i will switch to helix for my next bh purchases. anybody want some DRTs?


----------



## henro (Oct 9, 2007)

cooperjd said:


> i'll check out the KME and various strops i can find. thanks for the info. i was concerned a bit about the design of the helix with the ferrule not integrated into the blade from the tip, but just kind of "jutting" out mid body. but it appears that from the testing ive seen, it doesnt seem to be an issue. i have several 4 bladers, phantoms, steelforce, magnus, but i will switch to helix for my next bh purchases. anybody want some DRTs?


http://youtu.be/4h7I4A8GFlY


----------



## hoyt fo life555 (Jan 31, 2005)

Have not read all these posts and not trying to start or add to the argument. But it seems all the pic's the helix hit the bone verticly, (with the grain of the bone so to say) And the VPA looks as though it impacted horizonaly ( or accross the grain ) I dont know what else to call it other then grain of the bone, but if you hit leg bone with a hammer and chisel or srew driver it will split verticly much easier then horizontaly.


----------



## dtrkyman (Jul 27, 2004)

hoyt fo life555 said:


> Have not read all these posts and not trying to start or add to the argument. But it seems all the pic's the helix hit the bone verticly, (with the grain of the bone so to say) And the VPA looks as though it impacted horizonaly ( or accross the grain ) I dont know what else to call it other then grain of the bone, but if you hit leg bone with a hammer and chisel or srew driver it will split verticly much easier then horizontaly.


I believe the vpa hit it that way and had a melt down!


----------



## hoyt fo life555 (Jan 31, 2005)

dtrkyman said:


> I believe the vpa hit it that way and had a melt down!


Hit it what way, look at the pic it hit it horizontial. Instead of verticly like the helix, it shows both of them side by side in one of the pics. They hit opposite of one another.


----------



## bambikiller (Feb 27, 2004)

The only thing I don't like abou the KME is the pushing forward to sharpen . Prefer the stones . With a little learning curve you will see the difference. My goal Is to be able to do the hanging hair test on a blade . I'm getting close


----------



## bambikiller (Feb 27, 2004)

hoyt fo life555 said:


> Have not read all these posts and not trying to start or add to the argument. But it seems all the pic's the helix hit the bone verticly, (with the grain of the bone so to say) And the VPA looks as though it impacted horizonaly ( or accross the grain ) I dont know what else to call it other then grain of the bone, but if you hit leg bone with a hammer and chisel or srew driver it will split verticly much easier then horizontaly.


Already covered this . Made zero difference . As the vpa hit the same way as the helix did in previous test which pics were posted . Made Zero difference . Try again


----------



## B3AV3R (Apr 19, 2006)

I've always thought that discussing broadheads was like talking about politics or religion. This thread proves it. These discussions bring out the worst in people. It's ok to be passionate about what we believe in, but sheesh...


----------



## Olink (Jan 10, 2003)

bambikiller said:


> Already covered this . Made zero difference . As the vpa hit the same way as the helix did in previous test which pics were posted . Made Zero difference . *Try again*


Its that kind of attitude (whether intentional or not) that caused this thread to sour right from the start. People ask valid questions or point out discrepancies and right away you act like they are on a mission to discredit single bevel broadheads.


----------



## bambikiller (Feb 27, 2004)

Olink said:


> Its that kind of attitude (whether intentional or not) that caused this thread to sour right from the start. People ask valid questions or point out discrepancies and right away you act like they are on a mission to discredit single bevel broadheads.


It's just frustrating to go over this time and time again . How about before passing judgement read through the thread . ! Not trying to be a dick but it's usually the way things have happened . Also I am the way I am been that way my whole life . Straight to the point and abrupt . My wife can't change that so the opinions of forum members certainly won't . So in short read the thread. Yes there were pics posted and the question was asked right away and showed it didn't matter . Lengthwise or vertical . Helix has reined the victor time and time again !and I do believe there have been several poster just trolling and stirring up crap just to stir up crap . Hence the way I answered .


----------



## cooperjd (Aug 18, 2009)

Something we could all read from time to time. This place would be a little more friendly


----------



## Cj0n3s12 (Aug 28, 2012)

I'm curious if a single bevel like helix would spin properly with FOB fletchings..? I know with regular fletchings you get right or left bevel for certain fletched arrows, but would it matter or decrease the amount of penetration with FOBs?


----------



## bambikiller (Feb 27, 2004)

cooperjd said:


>


I've got plenty of friends . No worries


----------



## bhutso (Jan 4, 2007)

Don Beaver said:


> I've always thought that discussing broadheads was like talking about politics or religion. This thread proves it. These discussions bring out the worst in people. It's ok to be passionate about what we believe in, but sheesh...


It is and it's sad and I've been apart of it but. Holy cow the guy did a simple test, he shot two heads at the same thing and one did better. He further proved the point that single bevel heads do better on bone, only because he was challenged to do so.

Does that mean everyone who doesn't shoot that head or style of head is wrong? No I don't shoot helix and I have no complaints about this test. The results stand on there own, it's been done before, it will be done again and the result will not change.

whether you like it or not the helix did better in this test.

Doesn't mean you need to shoot it 
Doesn't mean you néed a single bevel 
Doesn't mean you need to bust up a huge ass cow bone 

It does mean the design isn't hype, it does what it says it does and has its benifits

To come here just to argue that or to say this test isn't this or isn't that was never even the point.

But that is what it always turns into 
Just an argument 
Ashby showed single bevel heads do better on bone than double bevels 
The harder the bone is the more they outperform a double bevel 
This test shows that exact same result again 
There is nothing to argue


----------



## bambikiller (Feb 27, 2004)

Cj0n3s12 said:


> I'm curious if a single bevel like helix would spin properly with FOB fletchings..? I know with regular fletchings you get right or left bevel for certain fletched arrows, but would it matter or decrease the amount of penetration with FOBs?


Yes the fob has an offset forcing it to spin in the same direction as a right bevel . They work in tandem as well


----------



## cooperjd (Aug 18, 2009)

Not directed directly at you Bambi. You seem quite knowledgeable on several useful topics. I agree it gets old trying to explain the same things to the seemingly same folks. Be it heavy vs light arrows, how broadheads "work" and cut, no different on other subjects on other forums discussing bullets and calibers. Same types of discussions eventually result. I'm sure if I went to a Nikon vs cannon camera forum the results would be the same.


----------



## Cj0n3s12 (Aug 28, 2012)

bambikiller said:


> Yes the fob has an offset forcing it to spin in the same direction as a right bevel . They work in tandem as well


So the right bevel is the proper bevel? Does it matter what direction the Fob is put on as far as the "vanes" go or will it just naturally fly properly because the off set ?


----------



## henro (Oct 9, 2007)

Cj0n3s12 said:


> So the right bevel is the proper bevel? Does it matter what direction the Fob is put on as far as the "vanes" go or will it just naturally fly properly because the off set ?


The bevel must match the direction the vane spins the shaft. Whether you choose right or left is purely up to you.


----------



## bambikiller (Feb 27, 2004)

Cj0n3s12 said:


> So the right bevel is the proper bevel? Does it matter what direction the Fob is put on as far as the "vanes" go or will it just naturally fly properly because the off set ?


Right bevel is the proper bevel for fobs and most fletching jigs . I have never actually fletched in left bevel . The fobs airfoils are offset which makes it rotate . It's natural doesn't matter how you put it on your arrow the offset stays the same . Simply take your nock off put the fob on out your nock back on .


----------



## KRONIIK (Jun 3, 2014)

FOBs cannot be installed backwards anyway. 
They have a stop that fits between the shaft and the nock.


----------



## Ryjax (Mar 3, 2014)

I've always been on the fence about the helix because of how the blade is attached the the ferrel. After this test I ordered a set, and wow am I pleased! I can't wait to actually see what kind of devastation and blood trails I get out of them. 
Thanks for posting this Sethro and thanks to all the helix guys backing the product. It helped me take the leap.


----------



## Cj0n3s12 (Aug 28, 2012)

KRONIIK said:


> FOBs cannot be installed backwards anyway.
> They have a stop that fits between the shaft and the nock.


It was hard to word it, but I didn't mean this. I mean when the FOB is on, if you had to twist it a certain way, but Bambi answered my question. Thanks!


----------



## Rob5589 (Apr 28, 2013)

Not surprised by the penetration difference. Seems obvious by the leading point of the Helix that penetration would be superior. The surprising part is how deformed the VPA was post impact. The Helix looks pretty wicked but damn they are spendy.


----------



## hoyt fo life555 (Jan 31, 2005)

bambikiller said:


> Already covered this . Made zero difference . As the vpa hit the same way as the helix did in previous test which pics were posted . Made Zero difference . Try again


Oh it does make a difference.


----------



## bambikiller (Feb 27, 2004)

hoyt fo life555 said:


> Oh it does make a difference.


Seth posted a vertical vpa too . Hence it makes no difference . Every time this test has been done regaurdless of impact direction of either head the helix wins .try again


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

Ryjax said:


> I've always been on the fence about the helix because of how the blade is attached the the ferrel. After this test I ordered a set, and wow am I pleased! I can't wait to actually see what kind of devastation and blood trails I get out of them.
> Thanks for posting this Sethro and thanks to all the helix guys backing the product. It helped me take the leap.


The way the blade seats into the ferrule is extremely nice, you'll see once you get them. When he assembles them he puts the blade in the ferrule and the ferrule is pressed together to ensure an even more snug fit.


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

bhutso said:


> It is and it's sad and I've been apart of it but. Holy cow the guy did a simple test, he shot two heads at the same thing and one did better. He further proved the point that single bevel heads do better on bone, only because he was challenged to do so.
> 
> Does that mean everyone who doesn't shoot that head or style of head is wrong? No I don't shoot helix and I have no complaints about this test. The results stand on there own, it's been done before, it will be done again and the result will not change.
> 
> ...


Pretty much sums it up


----------



## bambikiller (Feb 27, 2004)

sethro02 said:


> Pretty much sums it up


Will I post the vertical vpa hit next to the helix vertical hit when u get a second for those who haven't seen it


----------



## MSegal (Sep 26, 2008)

Olink said:


> Its that kind of attitude (whether intentional or not) that caused this thread to sour right from the start. People ask valid questions or point out discrepancies and right away you act like they are on a mission to discredit single bevel broadheads.


BinGoooooooooo!


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

hoyt fo life555 said:


> Oh it does make a difference.











Vpa 









Helix










Vpa after










Helix after


----------



## bambikiller (Feb 27, 2004)

MSegal said:


> BinGoooooooooo!


Sorry I thought I was talking to grown adults


----------



## Ryjax (Mar 3, 2014)

sethro02 said:


> The way the blade seats into the ferrule is extremely nice, you'll see once you get them. When he assembles them he puts the blade in the ferrule and the ferrule is pressed together to ensure an even more snug fit.


I actually expedited my order lol I can be impatient...
You are right they are very well made, fly like darts, penetrate like nothing I have ever seen (which you already proved) and absolutely destroy a target lol. I will have to stop shooting them into my rhino block...too dang expensive


----------



## bambikiller (Feb 27, 2004)

sethro02 said:


> Vpa
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Thanks


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

MSegal said:


> BinGoooooooooo!


Post 43 started it all with rolo. The. Escalated on page 7 by rolo....then just worse. If people would read the whole thread then they would see that questions were answered in a nice fashion....until page 7. Only so many arrogant and purposely trolling posts a man can take mmmmk? Kinda like you on the other single bevel thread which leads to believe you are rolo


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

Ryjax said:


> I actually expedited my order lol I can be impatient...
> You are right they are very well made, fly like darts, penetrate like nothing I have ever seen (which you already proved) and absolutely destroy a target lol. I will have to stop shooting them into my rhino block...too dang expensive


That's funny. Yes I go through targets like crazy


----------



## RuntCX2 (Oct 8, 2012)

I'm going to try the Helix Deep 6 this year.


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

RuntCX2 said:


> I'm going to try the Helix Deep 6 this year.


Fmj or injection


----------



## RuntCX2 (Oct 8, 2012)

sethro02 said:


> Fmj or injection


Injexion 330's at 431 grains finished weight


----------



## Rolo (Dec 16, 2002)

Because I'm bored...let's look at this a little...



sethro02 said:


> Post 43 started it all with rolo. The. Escalated on page 7 by rolo....then just worse. If people would read the whole thread then they would see that questions were answered in a nice fashion....until page 7. Only so many arrogant and purposely trolling posts a man can take mmmmk? Kinda like you on the other single bevel thread which leads to believe you are rolo


Here's #43:



Rolo said:


> So...the lighter arrow out penetrated the heavier arrow in test 1...:mg::tongue::set1_rolf2::banana::behindsof


Pretty simple non-confrontational statement which was absolutely true...with a lot of emos, which should be a clue.


Your next post:



sethro02 said:


> Actually it shows something more important. Obviously if both arrows and broadheads were identical then the heavier would have penetrated better. But this is showing the mechanical advantage benefits of this broadhead since it was on a lighter total weight arrow. If the Vpa was a helix then the heavier helix would have done better. So basically the 2 blade single bevel exerts way less energy to penetrate compared to a wedge design


The crux of this statement is that because of design the single uses less energy and is more efficient...with a side note that also results in better performance and penetration with a lighter arrow (though you didn't say that part)

And your boy's next post:



bambikiller said:


> And boom goes the dynamite !



So let's see...I responded to you and said that I did not disagree with anything you said, but that in addition to that stated that arrow weight alone is not the sole determining factor of penetration, and that I believed the penetration results of your test demonstrated a superior broadhead design, that allows great penetration with lighter arrows. Not sure waht is not 'nice' about any of that...I was agreeing with you...



Rolo said:


> Don't recall saying otherwise. What it does demonstrate is that arrow weight alone is not a complete predictor of penetration performance, and a lot of other factors contribute, so much to the point that a lighter arrow out penetrated the heavier one. Largely due to a superior broadhead design, further established by the test with equal arrow weight. And I agree the Helix head is a darned good one.
> 
> Not really sure where the Boom comes from...I thought everyone knew that arrow weight alone is not the sole predictor of penetration potential.


I also addressed the whole notion of the Boom thing...to which the following response was received:



bambikiller said:


> Like I said boom goes the dynamite *sorry if you can't comprehend what I'm getting at*


Not the bold...I asked what he was getting at prior to this, especially considering I agreed with the 'point' of the test, but instead got no explanation and told that I didn't comprehend...Where I come from, telling others they don't comprehend ,is not a 'nice' thing...mind you, this is long before page 7, and this guty is responding to a cobversation I was having with you, and was not adding a thing to it... 

My response to him was:



Rolo said:


> Ah, I see...the: "It is what it is because I say what it is, and since I get to say what it is, I don't have to tell anyone what it is" response.
> 
> Of course, we could have a rational discussion about why the lighter arrow with a differing head penetrated more, or at least likely penetrated more based on the design of the head, and the directional force involved, but I guess not.
> 
> One thing that is confusing...I don't understand why the energy and momentum numbers went down with the 530 grain arrow. Assuming the same bow, the numbers I am getting for KE and MO for the 530 is a lot closer to the 423 than the 473. The 473 has the most...which should defy the laws of physics...


first part, admittedly being a smartass...the rest, actually inviting a discussion about why the head performed better, and why it may be a good one to use with lighter equipment...nothing in any of this challenged your results or the information that could be gained from it. The only thing I wondered about wa the weird energy calculations because you had not at any time before this told anyone that you used an on-line calculator.



bambikiller said:


> Seth already explained .. Hence my quote an boom goes the dynamite keep up


Again...not explanation from this person who is debating me in your thread, apparantly about something we agree with...that advantages of the design of the head.



bambikiller said:


> Online calculator I assume ?


Does this mean my calculations came form an OL calculator..your's...what does it mean...it certainly does not mean: "I think the Op may ahve used on OL calc. to arrive at these numbers"...that would have been a nice thing to do, and a proper way to communicate a point...



Rolo said:


> Nope, using the numbers provided in the thread from the person who provided them. Keep up...online calculators are junk. :wink:


Obviously, I interpreted the statement to be one that assumed I used the OL calculator, responded accordingly, and used an emo too. Again, a clue.



Rolo said:


> Oh, you mean the part that I didn't disagree with. Gotcha. Nonetheless, a lighter arrow with less foc out penetrated a heavier arrow with more foc in this very limited circumstance...which demonstrates that heavier is not always 'better' and that weight alone is a poor thing to rely on...


Still responding to the ld...and again letting him know that I agreed with your general premise. Can you tell me how this is a 'trolling post' or that anything that I said in the post was not true? I know you like heaviy arrows, I like them too...but that does not change the result of your test, or how that information could be used in a valuable way. Sorry if agreeing and also recognizing that there was aditional information from your test that was valauble...even if that was not the point of your test...

And again...this is your boy who is part and parcel of this...



bambikiller said:


> wrong it shows how the efficiency of the helix trumps a wedge design at 50 grains less ! Fact remains . Had both shot first and been at equal the heavier weight the helix would have penetrated even more . More momentum . Period


So, I think by now we know that I have recognized the benefit of the head design...and no one disputes that if the first shot with the Helix had been done with a heavier arrow, it would have penetrated farther than it did with the lighter arrow...physics...of course what I said from the beginning remained true...



Rolo said:


> Wait...what? I'm fairly certain a lighter arrow with less foc out penetrated a heavier arrow with higher foc. Not really sure how that is wrong.
> 
> But yeah, the reason it did (though a limited sample) was because of, at least in part, the design of the head and the directional force that it applied. What is do friggin hard to understand about the fact that lighter can actually out penetrate heavier when all else is not equal...the not equal part being the mechanical advantage (directional force) one head has over the other.
> 
> ...


So..yet another response to ld that again lays it all out there...the lighter arrow penetrated farther largely and likely because of a better head design IMO...really not sure why this is not understood by one person, or what is the "trolling and arrogant" part of of my response...It doeagree with yoru premise, and only attempts to expand the discussion beyond your "point"...

I also think we're getting to page 7 now, so would really like you to explain your statement above because we have your boy with this:



bambikiller said:


> So now your agreeing with me .. *Awesome . Argument over .!*


I said I agreed with the premise back on page 3...the bolded part, yeah, I'd call the arrogant, and also uninformed...which I sorta did:



Rolo said:


> Ah...I see you're back to defining what "is" is...but not sure where I ever disagreed with you...but hey, if that makes you feel all warm and fuzzy inside, have at it. :wink: But, can you tell me where I disagreed with you?


Finally, your explanation for the numbers:



sethro02 said:


> Unfortunately I only gt to chrono the lighter arrow last week. I had to use junky online calculators to give you an estimate and I doubt it's too far off


And response to my comment about your test methodology:



sethro02 said:


> Please come up with something more reliable then hitting the exact same diameter bone in damn near the same spot. Everybody can say what they want but "it's hype" "Vpa will split bone just as good or better" " they get dull" is all a bunch of crap. Did the Vpa split the bone, no it sliced through, if it would have split it, which it can't it would have done a lot better. I've said in the last I liked Vpa heads and no what they can do. *But a double bevel head vs a single bevel head in splitting bone is going to favor the single bevel. You can pick it apart all you want because that's how some of you are wired to do. But the bottom line is it's as about as controlled as you can get, or i should say it's as controlled enough to show the affects which I did...*


Of course, I didn't say anything like that...just that the 'test' would not be considered scientifically reliable. But as to the bolded part, I had agreed with this on page 3, and was really having a hard time understanding why you were attempting to convince me to agree again. 

And again...



sethro02 said:


> It out penetrTed the heavier one for one reason. The mechanical advantage, it is actually that simple. Put a heavier helix with all things equal and the heavier will do better. Yes heavy is better in most cases. Pick broadhead, build setup around it. This isn't a heavy vs light thread, also I don't want this thread jumbled with arguments but I guess I can't control that. If it was a 150 penetrator vs 100 penetrator then the heavier would have done better.


So I ask again...please tell me how me agreeing with your premise, stating that I believed the single bevel was a better design, noting that the lighter arrow penetrated better likely because of the superior head design, and wanting to expand on that was "trolling and arrogant"? And yeah, IMO if people would read the whole thread, especially up to page 7, and see the responses I quoted above, not yours, in your thread, well, yeah..they do tell a lot IMO, not sure suggesting that someone cannot comprehend, or even bothering to answer a direct question would be considered "nice"...but I suppose to some, that's acceptable as long as they're on the same team...

I'd also suggest you chose your lapdogs more wisely...:wink:


----------



## primal-archery (Jun 25, 2011)

sethro02 said:


> Post 43 started it all with rolo. The. Escalated on page 7 by rolo....then just worse. If people would read the whole thread then they would see that questions were answered in a nice fashion....until page 7. Only so many arrogant and purposely trolling posts a man can take mmmmk? Kinda like you on the other single bevel thread which leads to believe you are rolo


To stay on topic. Nice test Seth. Looks like as solid of a broadhead as one can buy. Quick question for you. How long has Bambikiller had a man crush on you??? Or is he just trying to marry you for your broadheads?? I've heard of gold digging but broadheads??? Almost forgot....boom goes the dynamite!!!


----------



## bucco921 (Jan 2, 2012)

Rolo said:


> Because I'm bored...let's look at this a little...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Boom! there goes the dynamite...I couldn't resist. :mg:


----------



## opie20wv (Dec 29, 2009)

bhutso said:


> It is and it's sad and I've been apart of it but. Holy cow the guy did a simple test, he shot two heads at the same thing and one did better. He further proved the point that single bevel heads do better on bone, only because he was challenged to do so.
> 
> Does that mean everyone who doesn't shoot that head or style of head is wrong? No I don't shoot helix and I have no complaints about this test. The results stand on there own, it's been done before, it will be done again and the result will not change.
> 
> ...



Best post on this thread - thanks, opie20wv


----------



## bhutso (Jan 4, 2007)

:thumbs_up


----------



## Rolo (Dec 16, 2002)

sethro02 said:


> Post 43 started it all with rolo. The. Escalated on page 7 by rolo....then just worse. If people would read the whole thread then they would see that questions were answered in a nice fashion....until page 7. Only so many arrogant and purposely trolling posts a man can take mmmmk? Kinda like you on the other single bevel thread which leads to believe you are rolo


Had to go read through that whole thread...

You honestly think I and MSegal are the same? lol

I went from believing in the advantages of single bevels in this thread, and that one, recommending them for other folks, shooting them myself, to some guy who really doesn't like them and doesn't see their benefits? All in the same thread?

Seriously, get over yourself and quit taking yourself so friggin seriously...none of it is that important.


----------



## henro (Oct 9, 2007)




----------



## Rolo (Dec 16, 2002)

Speaking of taking themselves way to seriously...:doh:


----------



## MSegal (Sep 26, 2008)

bambikiller said:


> Sorry I thought I was talking to grown adults


Actually you are talking to an adult, which is why I haven't been calling anyone names like you guys have. This testing is the most bogus I have ever seen.


----------



## MSegal (Sep 26, 2008)

sethro02 said:


> Post 43 started it all with rolo. The. Escalated on page 7 by rolo....then just worse. If people would read the whole thread then they would see that questions were answered in a nice fashion....until page 7. Only so many arrogant and purposely trolling posts a man can take mmmmk? Kinda like you on the other single bevel thread which leads to believe you are rolo


No, I am not rolo and I hope he can forgive the association but dude this is like Nancy Pelosi stuff on you're part, all you do is dodge the questions. You don't answer questions in a "Nice fashion" you dodge them.


----------



## henro (Oct 9, 2007)

Rolo said:


> Speaking of taking themselves way to seriously...:doh:


Think you're missing the sarcasm....


----------



## bhutso (Jan 4, 2007)

MSegal said:


> Actually you are talking to an adult, which is why I haven't been calling anyone names like you guys have. This testing is the most bogus I have ever seen.


Your questions get ignored because they are redundant. 

Does a single bevel stop spinning on ribs?
No

Oh so your are saying they can't deflect ?

No But I did say it's less likely 

So is it possible? Can I see a link where is says they deflect less often?

Just on and on with you, you get exactly what you are asking for.

I called you a liar because I believe you are full of it on the other thread. Only other thing I've seen you called is arrogant and that's a pretty good decription of someone that completely ignores the restults in front of there face for no reason and no personal experience to back it up other than to say you didn't see it when you used the head. 
Try looking harder next time.

As for this being the most bogus test ever......yeah you might need to check out the schwacker video before you start throwing that stone around.

This test is straight forward and informational for those who haven't seen it 100 times before. Which since you claim to have seen the ashby report you shouldn't even need to see this test


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

Rolo said:


> Had to go read through that whole thread...
> 
> You honestly think I and MSegal are the same? lol
> 
> ...


Every question you asked got answered yet you keep saying I'm dodging a simple question??? *** is the question?


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

MSegal said:


> Actually you are talking to an adult, which is why I haven't been calling anyone names like you guys have. This testing is the most bogus I have ever seen.


Bogus? See this is what ruins a thread. Sorry your favorite broadhead didn't do what you wanted...bogus so like I photo shopped everything right? Your useless post count has grown considerably. This is why mods need to clean threads up like this and ban idiots to prove a point. This site WAS good. But people like you absolutely ruin it so all re newbies have to try to search through the BS to find the real information. Don't like my bogus test then piss off so their is less bs to read through , pretty simple huh? Is that easy to comprehend?


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

MSegal said:


> No, I am not rolo and I hope he can forgive the association but dude this is like Nancy Pelosi stuff on you're part, all you do is dodge the questions. You don't answer questions in a "Nice fashion" you dodge them.


Once again WHAT QUESTION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

So msegal and rolo keep saying I'm dodging questions and I'm not suppose to beeline your the same person??? You are he only 2 that has an issue with me dodging questions! Maybe I'm skimming through your bull**** posts and didn't know their was an actual question in there.....so I'll wait patiently for your question that I'm dodging.


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

And if your talking about the other jumbled single bevel thread them I posted a link that you may or may not read and will most likely not agree with it because it wasn't scientific enough


----------



## Rolo (Dec 16, 2002)

sethro02 said:


> Every question you asked got answered yet you keep saying I'm dodging a simple question??? *** is the question?





sethro02 said:


> So msegal and rolo keep saying I'm dodging questions and I'm not suppose to beeline your the same person??? You are he only 2 that has an issue with me dodging questions! Maybe I'm skimming through your bull**** posts and didn't know their was an actual question in there.....so I'll wait patiently for your question that I'm dodging.


Um...I wasn't asking you any questions, other than the whole lighter arrow penetrated farther then a heavier one, and inviting a discussion of why. You answered the simple why, but didn't really want to go beyond that, but eventually did.

Other than thst, I was pretty much agreeing with your thesis in this entire thread, which carried over to the other one too, because that is also generally my opinion. 

Sorry someone basically agreeing with you causes so much strife for you...it really isn't that important.


----------



## aeasley10 (Oct 24, 2013)

Sethro, nice test man thanks for sharing, just helps "some" people educate themselves before making buying decisions. Sad such an effort and informative thread can get so ridiculous!


----------



## Bowtechforlife (Apr 17, 2014)

Okay this thread is too the point where I don't even understand what they are arguing?! Are they seriously arguing why they arguing? It takes a special kind of stupid to understand some of these posts


----------



## bhutso (Jan 4, 2007)

Bowtechforlife said:


> Okay this thread is too the point where I don't even understand what they are arguing?! Are they seriously arguing why they arguing? It takes a special kind of stupid to understand some of these posts


Rolo just wants to talk about how the light arrow penitrated better than the heavy arrow, I believe it was mentioned....agreed apon....and duly noted early on that this was just another check mark for the helix since it's design overcame the disadvantage of being on a lighter arrow..... After that does it really pertain to this test? Was there a need to keep sayin it? Not really 

The other guy has a rare condition I've never heard of where his eyes refuse to notice rotation in pictures, or in his real life experiences.

That's the cliff notes


----------



## Michael Myers (Nov 13, 2008)

Great test and thanks for showing it..I have a question...Are any of you guys affiliated with Helix?...Seems like a great broadhead and a great choice for some...Cheers...Grizz


----------



## bambikiller (Feb 27, 2004)

Grizz Outdoors said:


> Great test and thanks for showing it..I have a question...Are any of you guys affiliated with Helix?...Seems like a great broadhead and a great choice for some...Cheers...Grizz


Nope no affiliation with any bh manufacturer


----------



## Michael Myers (Nov 13, 2008)

Is there any chance we could get a "new" Anarchy broadhead vs Helix broadhead test?...Both of those have my attention..I have heard and read great things on both broadheads...I am a broadhead junky myself....Grizz


----------



## bambikiller (Feb 27, 2004)

Grizz Outdoors said:


> Is there any chance we could get a "new" Anarchy broadhead vs Helix broadhead test?...Both of those have my attention..I have heard and read great things on both broadheads...I am a broadhead junky myself....Grizz


It was done last year I believe . (May have been old blades ) but the anarchy didn't hold up and it was actually the ferrule that split the bone not the blades . They are too thin to split heavy bone . Seth may still have pics from that test . The blades literally exploded


----------



## Tugman (Jun 22, 2013)

Cj0n3s12 said:


> I'm curious if a single bevel like helix would spin properly with FOB fletchings..? I know with regular fletchings you get right or left bevel for certain fletched arrows, but would it matter or decrease the amount of penetration with FOBs?


I shoot FOB's on my arrows with Anarchy broadheads. They are single bevel (right bevel) and are field point accurate. Two years ago when I decided to quit mechanicals and go back to fixed blade heads, I chose to go with two blade heads. After much research it came down to Anarchy and Helix. I ultimately chose Anarchy and have been happy. But I could never get the Helix out of my mind so I ordered some yesterday to try out.


----------



## Michael Myers (Nov 13, 2008)

bambikiller said:


> It was done last year I believe . (May have been old blades ) but the anarchy didn't hold up and it was actually the ferrule that split the bone not the blades . They are too thin to split heavy bone . Seth may still have pics from that test . The blades literally exploded


I believe that was with the older blades,i am interested in the newer thicker ones.I think i will order some from both and try them.I will hunt with both..I am shocked at the arguing about broadheads.....:wink:..Thanks...And thanks Seth for the tests,the one thing you do is try and help while others just don't...Grizz


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

bhutso said:


> Rolo just wants to talk about how the light arrow penitrated better than the heavy arrow, I believe it was mentioned....agreed apon....and duly noted early on that this was just another check mark for the helix since it's design overcame the disadvantage of being on a lighter arrow..... After that does it really pertain to this test? Was there a need to keep sayin it? Not really
> 
> The other guy has a rare condition I've never heard of where his eyes refuse to notice rotation in pictures, or in his real life experiences.
> 
> That's the cliff notes


This ....


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

aeasley10 said:


> Sethro, nice test man thanks for sharing, just helps "some" people educate themselves before making buying decisions. Sad such an effort and informative thread can get so ridiculous!


Thanks, all I was trying to do was educate


----------



## harrywrash (Aug 6, 2014)

Great thread Seth! Keep up the good bhead test work! We all love it. Never get around the sour dinx who will always be sour dinx even rotting in their graves! Haha


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

Grizz Outdoors said:


> I believe that was with the older blades,i am interested in the newer thicker ones.I think i will order some from both and try them.I will hunt with both..I am shocked at the arguing about broadheads.....:wink:..Thanks...And thanks Seth for the tests,the one thing you do is try and help while others just don't...Grizz


If you have a new one to send I'll shoot it.


----------



## Michael Myers (Nov 13, 2008)

sethro02 said:


> If you have a new one to send I'll shoot it.


When i order them,i will send you one to try.Not sure when it will be though...They will be either 100 or 125 gr as well....Thanks for the tests..Grizz


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

Grizz Outdoors said:


> When i order them,i will send you one to try.Not sure when it will be though...They will be either 100 or 125 gr as well....Thanks for the tests..Grizz


Cool, no prob


----------



## deadquiet (Jan 25, 2005)

sethro02 said:


> Thanks, all I was trying to do was educate


Don't get discouraged......I get beat up here all the time for telling the facts. Some people don't want to hear the facts......they just want to convince others that their decision is best for everyone and close their eyes to the facts. 

We see the good in the threads and tolerate the rest.


----------



## bhutso (Jan 4, 2007)

Grizz Outdoors said:


> When i order them,i will send you one to try.Not sure when it will be though...They will be either 100 or 125 gr as well....Thanks for the tests..Grizz


Grizz. I have both and my anachy are with the thicker blade. They are both awesome IMO but I like the bigger cut of the anarcy. I've shot one of them into my target about 40-50 times and the blade looks brand new. A quick strop and it is hunting sharp again.
I've even blown through my target and into various items in my basement, 2x4 s and Rubbermaid tubs to name a few. Nothing has damaged or rolled the cutting edge and they are still reasonably sharp. However. It's sureky not as tough as the helix, it doesn't have the mechanical advantage the helix has but for whitetail size game I think it's a perfect balance of everything.
I havent found anyone that has killed with them who isn't happy with them.

Don't think you can go wrong with either one


----------



## Michael Myers (Nov 13, 2008)

bhutso said:


> Grizz. I have both and my anachy are with the thicker blade. They are both awesome IMO but I like the bigger cut of the anarcy. I've shot one of them into my target about 40-50 times and the blade looks brand new. A quick strop and it is hunting sharp again.
> I've even blown through my target and into various items in my basement, 2x4 s and Rubbermaid tubs to name a few. Nothing has damaged or rolled the cutting edge and they are still reasonably sharp. However. It's sureky not as tough as the helix, it doesn't have the mechanical advantage the helix has but for whitetail size game I think it's a perfect balance of everything.
> I havent found anyone that has killed with them who isn't happy with them.
> 
> Don't think you can go wrong with either one


I will be using them moose hunting,i have whitetail broadheads already...Thanks...Grizz


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

deadquiet said:


> Don't get discouraged......I get beat up here all the time for telling the facts. Some people don't want to hear the facts......they just want to convince others that their decision is best for everyone and close their eyes to the facts.
> 
> We see the good in the threads and tolerate the rest.


Yea agreed , I'll be re doing it and getting better video quality on this too


----------



## Cj0n3s12 (Aug 28, 2012)

This test is FAKE!!!!







JK... Did I get anyone fired up? :wink:


----------



## LetThemGrow (Apr 2, 2004)

Cj0n3s12 said:


> This test is FAKE!!!!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


We are used to newbies...so no.


----------



## Beendare (Jan 31, 2006)

Sethro02, PM sent

Personally I doubt Sethro would "Fake" a test like this. It may not be scientific in the strictest sense- but how can anyone control every exact variable in animals, bone- its just not possible.

I am impressed with your test Sethro02....and apologize for some of my past insinuations to the effect that there is no worth to your testing. Not only is it entertaining but also informative.


----------



## brokenlittleman (Oct 18, 2006)

bambikiller said:


> Nope no affiliation with any bh manufacturer


Are you only speaking for yourself?


----------



## bambikiller (Feb 27, 2004)

brokenlittleman said:


> Are you only speaking for yourself?


Yup . Can't speak for another man .. Against the man law !!!


----------



## bambikiller (Feb 27, 2004)

brokenlittleman said:


> Are you only speaking for yourself?


However I don't see how an affiliation would change the outcome of a repeatable test .


----------



## brokenlittleman (Oct 18, 2006)

bambikiller said:


> However I don't see how an affiliation would change the outcome of a repeatable test .


Never said it would. Simply asking a question.


----------



## Cj0n3s12 (Aug 28, 2012)

I was teasing with my Fake post... Seth is showing what he is showing and take it for what it's worth. It's a good thread.. I just can't believe how much everyone has gotten their panties all up in a bunch from this thread..


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

brokenlittleman said:


> Never said it would. Simply asking a question.


If affiliation you mean work for then no. I have Tim's cell number and we talk often and I share results with him...I also talk often with a few others but it's me spending my money and doing it on my own...I just have certain products I personally like and share my results, those companies can take it for what it's worth and use the info or not.


----------



## 0nepin (Sep 16, 2009)

Are your trying to get out of the bet with being nice?


Beendare said:


> Sethro02, PM sent
> 
> Personally I doubt Sethro would "Fake" a test like this. It may not be scientific in the strictest sense- but how can anyone control every exact variable in animals, bone- its just not possible.
> 
> I am impressed with your test Sethro02....and apologize for some of my past insinuations to the effect that there is no worth to your testing. Not only is it entertaining but also informative.


----------



## brokenlittleman (Oct 18, 2006)

sethro02 said:


> *If affiliation you mean work for then no*. I have Tim's cell number and we talk often and I share results with him...I also talk often with a few others but it's me spending my money and doing it on my own...I just have certain products I personally like and share my results, those companies can take it for what it's worth and use the info or not.


You would have to ask that question to the person who actually asked the question. My questions was to ask if bambikiller was speaking for just himself.


----------



## bambikiller (Feb 27, 2004)

brokenlittleman said:


> You would have to ask that question to the person who actually asked the question. My questions was to ask if bambikiller was speaking for just himself.


And I answered .. Then Seth spoke for himself ! Pretty clear to me


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

brokenlittleman said:


> You would have to ask that question to the person who actually asked the question. My questions was to ask if bambikiller was speaking for just himself.


Sorry I got it confused thought you did.


----------



## brokenlittleman (Oct 18, 2006)

bambikiller said:


> And I answered .. Then Seth spoke for himself ! Pretty clear to me


Thanks for your answer to me. Seth asked if by affiliation I meant work for. I didn't ask that question which is why I told him he would have to ask the OP that actually asked that questions. Pretty clear to me as well.


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

Grizz Outdoors said:


> Great test and thanks for showing it..I have a question...Are any of you guys affiliated with Helix?...Seems like a great broadhead and a great choice for some...Cheers...Grizz


Not affiliated. Just know him and like the product, and a firm believer in single bevel


----------



## bambikiller (Feb 27, 2004)

brokenlittleman said:


> Are you only speaking for yourself?


Well this is kind of a run on question from grizz . So ya answered then correct ?


----------



## brokenlittleman (Oct 18, 2006)

bambikiller said:


> Well this is kind of a run on question from grizz . So ya answered then correct ?


This is why your involvement in threads turns sour many times. I asked you a simple question which was were you were speaking for yourself. You answered it, no need to continue trying to find something to argue about that isn't there.


----------



## bambikiller (Feb 27, 2004)

brokenlittleman said:


> This is why your involvement in threads turns sour many times. I asked you a simple question which was were you were speaking for yourself. You answered it, no need to continue trying to find something to argue about that isn't there.


Wasn't trying to argue at all. Just clarifying what you had said . I took it as you asked the same question as grizz and apparantly so did Seth ... Nothing more nothing less . You are the one becoming combative .


----------



## bambikiller (Feb 27, 2004)

I remember all the stuff you stirred up on the grave digger thread so I felt the need to clarify an be specific


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

https://vimeo.com/117679054
Here is a mishap I video'd ...I missed left, nicked the bone and arrow went into pieces

https://vimeo.com/117679095

Before you call me out on the BAR adapter ring this was my absolute last arrow and I tried to preserve it....but I missed so it didn't matter 









Still frame...you can see it barely hit and then the flex of the arrow


----------



## brokenlittleman (Oct 18, 2006)

Not combative. I just couldn't understand all the questions asked to me about a simple question of are you speaking for yourself. Apparently it was confusing for both you and Seth because you didn't read what was asked from either me or Grizz. My question was answered, carry on.


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)




----------



## henro (Oct 9, 2007)

brokenlittleman said:


> Not combative. I just couldn't understand all the questions asked to me about a simple question of are you speaking for yourself. Apparently it was confusing for both you and Seth because you didn't read what was asked from either me or Grizz. My question was answered, carry on.


Yeah you don't sound arrogant at all. I can't understand why they gave you attitude either?


----------



## bhutso (Jan 4, 2007)

sethro02 said:


> https://vimeo.com/117679054
> Here is a mishap I video'd ...I missed left, nicked the bone and arrow went into pieces
> 
> https://vimeo.com/117679095
> ...




Did you punch the trigger? My cousins uncle learned back tension and he never misses, he just won the ATA and lancaster archery warehouse store invitational. 

You should learn backtension, then you would never miss again.


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

bhutso said:


> Did you punch the trigger? My cousins uncle learned back tension and he never misses, he just won the ATA and lancaster archery warehouse store invitational.
> 
> You should learn backtension, then you would never miss again.


I didn't miss, I clearly hit it just not where I wanted lol...I shoot the ringer by no limit...but at twenty yards standing in the street shooting into my garage it's just a bit sketchy lol


----------



## Cj0n3s12 (Aug 28, 2012)

sethro02 said:


> I didn't miss, I clearly hit it just not where I wanted lol...I shoot the ringer by no limit...but at twenty yards standing in the street shooting into my garage it's just a bit sketchy lol



Hahah that's how I've been shooting.. Middle of the street with the target up against the side of the house. Gotta do whatcha gotta do!


----------



## bhutso (Jan 4, 2007)

sethro02 said:


> I didn't miss, I clearly hit it just not where I wanted lol...I shoot the ringer by no limit...but at twenty yards standing in the street shooting into my garage it's just a bit sketchy lol


That is sketchy, lol your wife is more understanding than mine

Lucky there is an empty lot across the street that backs up to woods. I can get 40 yards from the middle of the street, I get some dirty looks from the neighbors but they don't own me


----------



## brokenlittleman (Oct 18, 2006)

henro said:


> Yeah you don't sound arrogant at all. I can't understand why they gave you attitude either?


This might be the funniest post I have ever read on here, you calling someone else arrogant. Like I said before, back to the bone crushing.


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

bhutso said:


> That is sketchy, lol your wife is more understanding than mine
> 
> Lucky there is an empty lot across the street that backs up to woods. I can get 40 yards from the middle of the street, I get some dirty looks from the neighbors but they don't own me


I can do 50 in back yard but it was windy that day


----------



## Norwegian Woods (Apr 23, 2006)

Good test as usual 
And some jumping on a thread spreading crap as usual too.

I already knew what broadhead my kids and girlfriend will use and what I will use on bigger critters and this confirmed what I have known for a long time.
A high quality single bevel 2-blade broadhead is KING when it comes to penetration.
When people try to argue that, they just prove their lack of knowledge.


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

Norwegian Woods said:


> Good test as usual
> And some jumping on a thread spreading crap as usual too.
> 
> I already knew what broadhead my kids and girlfriend will use and what I will use on bigger critters and this confirmed what I have known for a long time.
> ...


Agreed!


----------



## Number17 (Jul 20, 2011)

bhutso said:


> Did you punch the trigger? My cousins uncle learned back tension and he never misses, he just won the ATA and lancaster archery warehouse store invitational.
> 
> You should learn backtension, then you would never miss again.


Your cousin's uncle??? You mean your Dad?
What is this back tension philosophy you speak of? Never heard of it.:secret:


----------



## bhutso (Jan 4, 2007)

Number17 said:


> Your cousin's uncle??? You mean your Dad?
> What is this back tension philosophy you speak of? Never heard of it.:secret:


lol you caught me

He really did win the ATA though, THAT part was true:wink:


----------



## wdtorque (May 5, 2011)

Enjoyed the comparison of the two broadheads. Mighty nice of you to take the time and energy.
Don't get all the thread cr[email protected] though? Lots of wasted posts IMHO.
I wish you hadn't done it though, I've got a large amount of $$$ tied up in traditional double bevels. :-(
Gonna get them sharp and try to keep them in the soft stuff.
My Best,
Dozier
Accuracy beats speed


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

wdtorque said:


> Enjoyed the comparison of the two broadheads. Mighty nice of you to take the time and energy.
> Don't get all the thread [email protected] though? Lots of wasted posts IMHO.
> I wish you hadn't done it though, I've got a large amount of $$$ tied up in traditional double bevels. :-(
> Gonna get them sharp and try to keep them in the soft stuff.
> ...


Thanks bud, I'm sure yours will do just fine! If not let me know lol


----------



## cooperjd (Aug 18, 2009)

Sethro are there other comparable single bevels in the price range anywhere nearly as good as helix?


----------



## henro (Oct 9, 2007)

cooperjd said:


> Sethro are there other comparable single bevels in the price range anywhere nearly as good as helix?


Abowyer, Steelforce, Grizzly, Tuffhead, Cutthroat to name a few.


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

cooperjd said:


> Sethro are there other comparable single bevels in the price range anywhere nearly as good as helix?


Few different heads in the price range like henro mentioned. IMO for what you get for the money I think the helix is a better package. The other heads use good materials as well and work great. All are very similar in performance IMO, I just like the 40 degree bevel, and the performance I've had with them is incredible on the kills I have. The steelforce phathead single bevel is nice but I think abowyer would be my second pick. Also depends what your looking for weight wise. Did you have a weight in mind?


----------



## cooperjd (Aug 18, 2009)

I was actually thinking to stay around 125gr. I could go up to 175-200 for my build, but I like the flexibility 125 gives me. I can then use the same heads for my other bow/arrows. And for our little whitetails I can play with frankenheads and big mechanicals on occasion. I looked up some of the others henro suggested. Some are too heavy for me. I didn't see a phathead single bevel on their site. Only the traditional series single. 

I like the tanto tip design of the helix versus some of the others. The only thing about them is the ferrule not being integral with the head slowly expanding from the tip to its full width seen in some of the larger heads. I guess your testing proves it's pretty much a non issue however. 

I have a pile of muzzy phantoms, stingers, buzz cuts, steel force premium and sabertooth. I have some drt single bevels as well. The helix just look so badass! And I think I like their design over the drt for a single bevel.


----------



## henro (Oct 9, 2007)

cooperjd said:


> I was actually thinking to stay around 125gr. I could go up to 175-200 for my build, but I like the flexibility 125 gives me. I can then use the same heads for my other bow/arrows. And for our little whitetails I can play with frankenheads and big mechanicals on occasion. I looked up some of the others henro suggested. Some are too heavy for me. I didn't see a phathead single bevel on their site. Only the traditional series single.
> 
> I like the tanto tip design of the helix versus some of the others. The only thing about them is the ferrule not being integral with the head slowly expanding from the tip to its full width seen in some of the larger heads. I guess your testing proves it's pretty much a non issue however.
> 
> I have a pile of muzzy phantoms, stingers, buzz cuts, steel force premium and sabertooth. I have some drt single bevels as well. The helix just look so badass! And I think I like their design over the drt for a single bevel.


Steelforce makes it in 100, 125, 145 titanium, 190, 225 and 300gr. You have to call to order most of them. 3Rivers sells most of them as well and has the 125 on their site. I'd go with the 145gr titanium blade in the lightweights for the stronger blade and it has a steel ferrule vs aluminum for the lighter heads.


----------



## cooperjd (Aug 18, 2009)

I see it on 3rivers. Thank you. I used some 180gr razor dobbs black death on a hog hunt last year. The blade thickness on those steel force was impressive. Couldn't even tell which head went thru the hog after cleaning


----------



## henro (Oct 9, 2007)

cooperjd said:


> I see it on 3rivers. Thank you. I used some 180gr razor dobbs black death on a hog hunt last year. The blade thickness on those steel force was impressive. Couldn't even tell which head went thru the hog after cleaning


I shot a 230lb boar last spring with a 190gr at 30 yards a little back with a full pass thru and the arrow stuck in a sapling 15 yards behind it. Head looked like new still after.


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

cooperjd said:


> I was actually thinking to stay around 125gr. I could go up to 175-200 for my build, but I like the flexibility 125 gives me. I can then use the same heads for my other bow/arrows. And for our little whitetails I can play with frankenheads and big mechanicals on occasion. I looked up some of the others henro suggested. Some are too heavy for me. I didn't see a phathead single bevel on their site. Only the traditional series single.
> 
> I like the tanto tip design of the helix versus some of the others. The only thing about them is the ferrule not being integral with the head slowly expanding from the tip to its full width seen in some of the larger heads. I guess your testing proves it's pretty much a non issue however.
> 
> I have a pile of muzzy phantoms, stingers, buzz cuts, steel force premium and sabertooth. I have some drt single bevels as well. The helix just look so badass! And I think I like their design over the drt for a single bevel.


Sounds like with what things you want , the helix is for you. The other heads are great as well but they are heVier and do not make 125's.


----------



## bambikiller (Feb 27, 2004)

henro said:


> Steelforce makes it in 100, 125, 145 titanium, 190, 225 and 300gr. You have to call to order most of them. 3Rivers sells most of them as well and has the 125 on their site. I'd go with the 145gr titanium blade in the lightweights for the stronger blade and it has a steel ferrule vs aluminum for the lighter heads.


They are discontinuing the 145 titanium !


----------



## Norwegian Woods (Apr 23, 2006)

sethro02 said:


> Few different heads in the price range like henro mentioned. IMO for what you get for the money I think the helix is a better package. The other heads use good materials as well and work great. All are very similar in performance IMO, I just like the 40 degree bevel, and the performance I've had with them is incredible on the kills I have. The steelforce phathead single bevel is nice but I think abowyer would be my second pick. Also depends what your looking for weight wise. Did you have a weight in mind?


I mostly agree 
For Big critters with thick hide and heavy bones like buffs, I prefer the Abowyer. The Ashby Single Bevel Broadhead is great too, but costs twice as much.
For any American critter, my choice would clearly by the Helix.

The Steelforce Phathead single bevel has to thin blades in my opinion(.050") and would not be my choice.

The Abowyer screw on only comes in 260 grains as far as I know.

So if someone wants to use a 125 grains high quality single bevel, then the Helix is the best choice in my opinion.


----------



## deadquiet (Jan 25, 2005)

cooperjd said:


> Sethro are there other comparable single bevels in the price range anywhere nearly as good as helix?


I ordered some of these.....they take a while to get across the pond but they look pretty good. 

http://outbackbroadheads.com.au/outback-supreme-125-grain


----------



## Norwegian Woods (Apr 23, 2006)

deadquiet said:


> I ordered some of these.....they take a while to get across the pond but they look pretty good.
> 
> http://outbackbroadheads.com.au/outback-supreme-125-grain


I have looked at that one, but I don't like the blades going backwards and outside the arrow shaft.
It at least screams for some proper footing to protect a carbon arrow.
The blades are also to thin for a single bevel in my opinion(0.047").
They should have made them 1.6 mm(0.062") thick instead of 1.2 mm thick.


----------



## dtrkyman (Jul 27, 2004)

deadquiet said:


> I ordered some of these.....they take a while to get across the pond but they look pretty good.
> 
> http://outbackbroadheads.com.au/outback-supreme-125-grain


That is a nice looking head, but 1.2 millimeter blades are not too thick, how bad was shipping cost?


----------



## henro (Oct 9, 2007)

bambikiller said:


> They are discontinuing the 145 titanium !


That sucks it's a tough head. I know Nick mentioned to me a few times the blade is really tough to grind though so that probably had something to do with it.


----------



## henro (Oct 9, 2007)

Norwegian Woods said:


> I mostly agree
> For Big critters with thick hide and heavy bones like buffs, I prefer the Abowyer. The Ashby Single Bevel Broadhead is great too, but costs twice as much.
> For any American critter, my choice would clearly by the Helix.
> 
> ...


Couple things to note. The Phathead blades are thicker than that, although they vary depending on weight. Single and double bevel use the same blades, listed here: http://www.steelforce.com/products/phatheads.html. 

You're correct about the Abowyer screw-in as they only come in 260gr. You can build the glue on version with a lot of different adapter weight and blade options too.


----------



## henro (Oct 9, 2007)

deadquiet said:


> I ordered some of these.....they take a while to get across the pond but they look pretty good.
> 
> http://outbackbroadheads.com.au/outback-supreme-125-grain


Ashby tested those and found the back of the blades to be a weak link as they bent or broke.


----------



## cooperjd (Aug 18, 2009)

thanks for the replies and opinions. right now in VA i only hunt whitetails. however, i'm going to south africa in august and want something a little tougher. it'll be a plainsgame hunt, and unless i come into a windfall of cash real soon, eland is unfortunately off the table. my package includes:
blue wildebeest
warthog
impala
other animals are on the table as i see fit to hunt/pay for them. i'd love a kudu, but they are overpriced at this place, and i can try to get a zebra and gemsbock for the price of a kudu. depending on budget, those will be my 5 animals i'll go after. of course, who knows what i'll do once i actually see something else in front of me . my plans are to build gold tip kinetic 200s with 100gr worth of insert, a 2" footer, and 125gr heads. 29.75" carbon to carbon, shot out of an 80# destroyer 350 at 30". i believe this will be very close to 625gr total. and i'm guessing somewhere around 275fps. i'll know in a couple weeks once i ask jerry a few questions and get him to put the arrows together for me.

i could potentially up the bh weight a bit, i just dont really think its necessary, and think the helix will perform well on any of the critters above. if i could afford a cape buff hunt i'd be building a slightly heavier arrow, but unfortunately, i can't swing that one just yet.

my other arrows will be for my 74# BT experience, and my 70# d340, both, at 30". i'm thinking BE carnivore .250s, 100gr worth of insert, with the 125gr heads. these will be my 'lightweight' setup at about 550gr.

i'm also moving to colorado this year (finally). so i'll be trying my best to chase antelope, elk, mulies, and bear. either of the two above setups should work, but also why i'd like to get all 125gr heads, so i can swap them between bows.


----------



## bambikiller (Feb 27, 2004)

[Q UOTE=cooperjd;1072207834]thanks for the replies and opinions. right now in VA i only hunt whitetails. however, i'm going to south africa in august and want something a little tougher. it'll be a plainsgame hunt, and unless i come into a windfall of cash real soon, eland is unfortunately off the table. my package includes:
blue wildebeest
warthog
impala
other animals are on the table as i see fit to hunt/pay for them. i'd love a kudu, but they are overpriced at this place, and i can try to get a zebra and gemsbock for the price of a kudu. depending on budget, those will be my 5 animals i'll go after. of course, who knows what i'll do once i actually see something else in front of me . my plans are to build gold tip kinetic 200s with 100gr worth of insert, a 2" footer, and 125gr heads. 29.75" carbon to carbon, shot out of an 80# destroyer 350 at 30". i believe this will be very close to 625gr total. and i'm guessing somewhere around 275fps. i'll know in a couple weeks once i ask jerry a few questions and get him to put the arrows together for me.

i could potentially up the bh weight a bit, i just dont really think its necessary, and think the helix will perform well on any of the critters above. if i could afford a cape buff hunt i'd be building a slightly heavier arrow, but unfortunately, i can't swing that one just yet.

my other arrows will be for my 74# BT experience, and my 70# d340, both, at 30". i'm thinking BE carnivore .250s, 100gr worth of insert, with the 125gr heads. these will be my 'lightweight' setup at about 550gr.

i'm also moving to colorado this year (finally). so i'll be trying my best to chase antelope, elk, mulies, and bear. either of the two above setups should work, but also why i'd like to get all 125gr heads, so i can swap them between bows.[/QUOTE]
Make sure to post up pics when you return . And let's see some autopsy pics of a single bevel helix in action !!!!!!


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

Yes detailed pics!


----------



## Norwegian Woods (Apr 23, 2006)

henro said:


> Couple things to note. The Phathead blades are thicker than that, although they vary depending on weight. Single and double bevel use the same blades, listed here: http://www.steelforce.com/products/phatheads.html.


I know.
I was thinking about their lighter heads when it comes to the thinner blades as *cooperjd* asked about 125 grain broadheads.


----------



## henro (Oct 9, 2007)

cooperjd said:


> thanks for the replies and opinions. right now in VA i only hunt whitetails. however, i'm going to south africa in august and want something a little tougher. it'll be a plainsgame hunt, and unless i come into a windfall of cash real soon, eland is unfortunately off the table. my package includes:
> blue wildebeest
> warthog
> impala
> ...


I'd recommend considering higher weight heads for the Kinetic 200s. They're 11.6gpi and it takes a lot of weight to bring the FOC up. I'm using a 29" carbon to carbon shaft with 384gr on the front end to be at 24% FOC. With such a heavy shaft you need to add more weight to keep the FOC up. In the .200 spine offerings unfortunately nothing right now is lighter gpi. Also with the footer on the 100gr HIT inserts if that's what you're going to use, you'll need 2.5" to have a 1/2" overhang to protect the shaft when it flexes.


----------



## cooperjd (Aug 18, 2009)

bambi y'all are going to be sick of me and my pics when i get back!


----------



## cooperjd (Aug 18, 2009)

henro said:


> I'd recommend considering higher weight heads for the Kinetic 200s. They're 11.6gpi and it takes a lot of weight to bring the FOC up. I'm using a 29" carbon to carbon shaft with 384gr on the front end to be at 24% FOC. With such a heavy shaft you need to add more weight to keep the FOC up. In the .200 spine offerings unfortunately nothing right now is lighter gpi. Also with the footer on the 100gr HIT inserts if that's what you're going to use, you'll need 2.5" to have a 1/2" overhang to protect the shaft when it flexes.



Agreed Henro. to get my FOC up there, i'd need a pretty heavy head. and honestly, i'm not sure what that would do to my trajectory, as some of the videos on alaska bowhunting show very little change in impact from adding weight to the front, due to the increased FOC's impact on the arrow flight. however, despite my love of heavy-ish arrows (not actual heavy arrows like 800+gr), i also love speed and flat trajectories. especially since i'm moving out west where the average shots are greater than my average 20 yard whitetail shot around here. i may order a test kit with heavier field points, and with some extra tuning steps in between, see how a heavier head works for the heavy bow trajectory wise. i'm trying to find that balance of a pretty heavy arrow, pretty flat trajectory, and still achieve a decent FOC. thanks for the note on the footer length. what kind of glue or epoxy do you use when putting your Al footers onto carbon shafts?


----------



## henro (Oct 9, 2007)

cooperjd said:


> Agreed Henro. to get my FOC up there, i'd need a pretty heavy head. and honestly, i'm not sure what that would do to my trajectory, as some of the videos on alaska bowhunting show very little change in impact from adding weight to the front, due to the increased FOC's impact on the arrow flight. however, despite my love of heavy-ish arrows (not actual heavy arrows like 800+gr), i also love speed and flat trajectories. especially since i'm moving out west where the average shots are greater than my average 20 yard whitetail shot around here. i may order a test kit with heavier field points, and with some extra tuning steps in between, see how a heavier head works for the heavy bow trajectory wise. i'm trying to find that balance of a pretty heavy arrow, pretty flat trajectory, and still achieve a decent FOC. thanks for the note on the footer length. what kind of glue or epoxy do you use when putting your Al footers onto carbon shafts?


I currently use Goat Tuff GT Impact glue for the footers. I may try something else in the future.


----------



## cooperjd (Aug 18, 2009)

just placed my order with jerry at southshore. 
GT kinetic 200, 29.75" carbon to carbon
50gr brass HIT installed behind 50gr black eagle rampage in/outsert
i'll play with footings when i get them. i decided against the ballistic collar offered by GT, since they are only about an inch long.
i cant' wait to chrono these things thru the 80# D350 and then slice through some south african mammals


----------



## henro (Oct 9, 2007)

cooperjd said:


> just placed my order with jerry at southshore.
> GT kinetic 200, 29.75" carbon to carbon
> 50gr brass HIT installed behind 50gr black eagle rampage in/outsert
> i'll play with footings when i get them. i decided against the ballistic collar offered by GT, since they are only about an inch long.
> i cant' wait to chrono these things thru the 80# D350 and then slice through some south african mammals


Fwiw, I've inquired with Easton about gluing a second HIT insert behind the front one and they recommended against it. They said it would probably end up breaking out from repeated hard impacts. Make your own footer out of an Easton Eclipse X7 2014 shaft which fits perfectly over the Kinetic 200. You can buy them in singles from Lancaster. Cut them to size with an arrow saw then bevel the edge with a power drill on a file. Simple and custom fit.


----------



## cooperjd (Aug 18, 2009)

i went back and forth on this one too. i just cannot get over having exposed carbon with the HITs, and i can't go with them as my primary insert. i asked jerry about it, and he said he has glued 3 100gr HITs for customers going on DG hunts wanting 900+gr arrows. if they start breaking, then i guess i'll have no choice but to go with the heavy HITs....or break down and pay the money for the firenock outserts with the weight system behind them. going to have to be one of those wait and see things.


----------



## henro (Oct 9, 2007)

cooperjd said:


> i went back and forth on this one too. i just cannot get over having exposed carbon with the HITs, and i can't go with them as my primary insert. i asked jerry about it, and he said he has glued 3 100gr HITs for customers going on DG hunts wanting 900+gr arrows. if they start breaking, then i guess i'll have no choice but to go with the heavy HITs....or break down and pay the money for the firenock outserts with the weight system behind them. going to have to be one of those wait and see things.


All I can say is if the HIT's lived through the testing this guy put them through, I don't know what more you could ask for? It's not going to be exposed at the end with a footing over it. http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=1607099


----------



## cooperjd (Aug 18, 2009)

you make a good point, and i had several emails with don about this. idk man, its just in my head. i dont think its the toughness of the system, what bothers me is if dirt, sand, etc. gets in between the point and the carbon, you screw them on, start grinding away on the carbon a little, creates small weak points, yadda yadda. i dont like the half ins half outs either. i wish they had a regular diameter 200 spine arrow!


----------



## henro (Oct 9, 2007)

cooperjd said:


> you make a good point, and i had several emails with don about this. idk man, its just in my head. i dont think its the toughness of the system, what bothers me is if dirt, sand, etc. gets in between the point and the carbon, you screw them on, start grinding away on the carbon a little, creates small weak points, yadda yadda. i dont like the half ins half outs either. i wish they had a regular diameter 200 spine arrow!


I hear what you're saying. The options are extremely limited as you get this stiff in arrow spine unfortunately... If I was building arrows I'd offer a lighter gpi .225 and .200 spine than what's currently offered as well for higher FOC builds. The skinny diameter shafts make it trickier limiting insert options like we have as well.


----------



## KRONIIK (Jun 3, 2014)

I've played around with six-inch-long sections of solid fiberglass fishing arrow, Sheldon Lathe-turned for a snug fit inside various carbon and Aluminum arrows for my solution to whatever strength problems may exist on high FOC builds.
I left them 5/16" at the largest diameter and tapered them out to a 5 degree taper at the tip for standard glue-on broadheads.

They worked very well, adding a lot of strength, a fair amount of FOC, (easily altered by varying the length of said "insert"), and completely eliminating the need for ANY other inserts or adaptors.
(I went that route because I didn't like the little bump and noise that aluminum external footers made on my drop-away rest during the draw cycle.)

Downside?
A royal PITA to make them! Fiberglass is messy to turn and you need to take extreme care to not breathe any of the dust.
I eventually just got tired of experimenting with it and went to Easton FMJ Dangerous Game .250's instead. 

Somebody needs to start a thriving business and make that kind of insert commercially!


----------



## bambikiller (Feb 27, 2004)

Pics


----------



## henro (Oct 9, 2007)

KRONIIK said:


> I've played around with six-inch-long sections of solid fiberglass fishing arrow, Sheldon Lathe-turned for a snug fit inside various carbon and Aluminum arrows for my solution to whatever strength problems may exist on high FOC builds.
> I left them 5/16" at the largest diameter and tapered them out to a 5 degree taper at the tip for standard glue-on broadheads.
> 
> They worked very well, adding a lot of strength, a fair amount of FOC, (easily altered by varying the length of said "insert"), and completely eliminating the need for ANY other inserts or adaptors.
> ...


How was arrow flight with the footing coming in contact with the rest? I had erratic grouping when this happened due the diameter change going across the rest on the shot. I keep the carbon shaft long enough so that the footing never touches the rest at full draw.


----------



## KRONIIK (Jun 3, 2014)

bambikiller said:


> Pics


 Sorry- nothing to see, really. 
All the ones I made are already glued into shafts with heads glued on. 

So try to imagine ... an arrow!

I'll see what I can scrounge up this weekend; if nothing else I'll post pics of my messy, fiberglass powder-covered lathe which I still need to clean up. 

(Dreading it!)


----------



## KRONIIK (Jun 3, 2014)

henro said:


> How was arrow flight with the footing coming in contact with the rest? I had erratic grouping when this happened due the diameter change going across the rest on the shot. I keep the carbon shaft long enough so that the footing never touches the rest at full draw.


 It probably varied somewhat for the reason you mentioned, but I never really had the time to tune any of them perfectly enough to notice. 
The ones that were made the same seemed to group together at least...

But I never shot any them much beyond about thirty yards either.


----------



## bambikiller (Feb 27, 2004)

KRONIIK said:


> Sorry- nothing to see, really.
> All the ones I made are already glued into shafts with heads glued on.
> 
> So try to imagine ... an arrow!
> ...


Wow a smart ass on AT .. Shocker .. I just wanted to see pics as I think it maybe a good idea . I do believe I know what an arrow is and that comment wasn't needed in the least... I wanted to see the finished arrow


----------



## KRONIIK (Jun 3, 2014)

Really?
I was in no way trying to ridicule you Bambi.

I'll get you pics, but as I said, you won't be able to see anything of the inserts.
Hence the description.

BTW, you calling me a smartass wasn't exactly what I needed right now either; I was only sharing something that I thought you guys might find of some interest.


----------



## huntography (Aug 2, 2010)

I love my 125 Gr deep six Helix with Easton Deep Six FMJ arrows. 

R


----------



## bambikiller (Feb 27, 2004)

KRONIIK said:


> Really?
> I was in no way trying to ridicule you Bambi.
> 
> I'll get you pics, but as I said, you won't be able to see anything of the inserts.
> ...


Maybe I read your comment of "try imagining arrow" wrong who knows . No disrespect of none was given from you I just took it that way


----------



## KRONIIK (Jun 3, 2014)

No problem; 
it's behind us, Bro!


----------



## enewman (Jun 5, 2007)

Boys play nice. Keep with the info


----------



## henro (Oct 9, 2007)

KRONIIK said:


> It probably varied somewhat for the reason you mentioned, but I never really had the time to tune any of them perfectly enough to notice.
> The ones that were made the same seemed to group together at least...
> 
> But I never shot any them much beyond about thirty yards either.


Ok good you had me worried it was just me! Lol


----------



## sethro02 (Jul 5, 2008)

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=dHn83HTauBk

I started a new thread but here is video


----------



## KRONIIK (Jun 3, 2014)

henro said:


> Ok good you had me worried it was just me! Lol


It raises a good point to keep in mind, though.
Arrows with footers of different outside diameters will angle somewhat differently off the string, depending on how the arrow lays on the rest, both vertically and horizontally. (Unless you leave the arrow long and don't draw the actual footer onto the rest, as you mentioned having done.)

Just one more factor to consider when tuning...


----------



## henro (Oct 9, 2007)

KRONIIK said:


> It raises a good point to keep in mind, though.
> Arrows with footers of different outside diameters will angle somewhat differently off the string, depending on how the arrow lays on the rest, both vertically and horizontally. (Unless you leave the arrow long and don't draw the actual footer onto the rest, as you mentioned having done.)
> 
> Just one more factor to consider when tuning...


Yup that's what I found and why I make sure the bare shaft always clears the rest. Can't get consistent flight the inconsistent shaft diameter when it changes as its shot. This also usually forces you to go to a stiffer shaft when it has to be longer, if not my arrow would be 2.5" shorter.


----------



## Dr.T (Oct 23, 2007)

Wow what a test! We here at Strickland's Archery love hearing the feedback and testimonials of our fellow bowhunters and customers. We designed The Helix to be accurate and deadly. Thanks for taking the time to share your findings on here, we really appreciate it. We know it's the off season for most but please share your success and kill photos with us on here and Facebook. Thank's to our customers for the support!


----------

