Unbreakable shafts and " bone-busting" broadheads
]
08-03-2003, 05:22 PM
#32
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Sturgis, SD
Posts: 1,983
RE: Unbreakable shafts and " bone-busting" broadheads
c, your reply to my last post was expected. So what is the " test" that broadhead manufactures use? When does a test qualify as being verified? When does a test qualify as being just for the hell of it. I' m assuming you have seen 5-shots setup or at least talked extensively with him on how he conducts his tests to be making these claims. You seem to waiver a little between scientific method and anecdotal evidence. You assume 5-shots test are unverified, what ever that is, and therefore no good. A better test would be bowhunters turning in results? Now that sounds scientific, very controlled and blinded as well. That would be called anecdotal evidence, those of us that look to scientific method on a daily basis can tell you that anecdotal evidence is at best highly innaccurate and no conclusions can be based upon it. Take your stand on one side or the other my friend, don' t mix the two.
08-03-2003, 06:26 PM
#33
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Illinois
Posts: 1,862
RE: Unbreakable shafts and " bone-busting" broadheads
Mez:
I am still not clear of what it is you are trying to say. However, after reading your post several times, I may have realized the gist of what your main point is. However, I may still be wrong.
In reference to your spiel about scientific tests, I will simply answer by sayings; broadheads are not designed to kill plywood, steel, and reinforced hard rubber. Therefore, if a broadhead fails any or all of the tests does not mean that the broadhead cannot perform well, even superbly, when being used for what it was actually designed to do.
As for " anecdotal evidence," sometimes anecdotal and scientific evidence work hand in hand. Example:
Ten bowhunters using different broadheads report to you that they each have had personal success with accuracy and killing capability using an " X Brand." That for many seasons all 10 bowhunters have made clean kills using their " X-Brand" broadhead. However, you are aware that the ten different broadheads received low scores or failed a battery of tests when one person shot the broadheads into plywood, steel, and hard rubber, and provided evaluative data based on just his interpretation of individual and comparative performance.
I don' t know about you, but I' ll go with the " anecdotal evidence."
I am still not clear of what it is you are trying to say. However, after reading your post several times, I may have realized the gist of what your main point is. However, I may still be wrong.
In reference to your spiel about scientific tests, I will simply answer by sayings; broadheads are not designed to kill plywood, steel, and reinforced hard rubber. Therefore, if a broadhead fails any or all of the tests does not mean that the broadhead cannot perform well, even superbly, when being used for what it was actually designed to do.
As for " anecdotal evidence," sometimes anecdotal and scientific evidence work hand in hand. Example:
Ten bowhunters using different broadheads report to you that they each have had personal success with accuracy and killing capability using an " X Brand." That for many seasons all 10 bowhunters have made clean kills using their " X-Brand" broadhead. However, you are aware that the ten different broadheads received low scores or failed a battery of tests when one person shot the broadheads into plywood, steel, and hard rubber, and provided evaluative data based on just his interpretation of individual and comparative performance.
I don' t know about you, but I' ll go with the " anecdotal evidence."
08-03-2003, 08:07 PM
#34
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Port Hope Ontario Canada
Posts: 493
RE: Unbreakable shafts and " bone-busting" broadheads
Alright what brand of broadheads did 5 shot give a bad rating to that you love
. Isn`t it funny that the broadheads that fail 5 shots tests also are the ones that we hear lots of horror stories about. And the advice he gives is well informed and although his tastes may be different then mine (Muzzy over Thunderheads) he also helps new bowhunters pick a decent head that won`t let them down. Tell me one broadhead that he has given a bad score to that you feel is a good head. If you can`t find any errors in his test results than that speaks volumes.
. Isn`t it funny that the broadheads that fail 5 shots tests also are the ones that we hear lots of horror stories about. And the advice he gives is well informed and although his tastes may be different then mine (Muzzy over Thunderheads) he also helps new bowhunters pick a decent head that won`t let them down. Tell me one broadhead that he has given a bad score to that you feel is a good head. If you can`t find any errors in his test results than that speaks volumes.
08-04-2003, 04:33 AM
#35
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 3,903
RE: Unbreakable shafts and " bone-busting" broadheads
Alright what brand of broadheads did 5 shot give a bad rating to that you love
I was wondering the same thing.Tell us c903! What broadhead is it that you use once and then retire to your box of broadheads used once...never to be used again collection?
08-04-2003, 05:50 AM
#36
Boone & Crockett
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Fredericksburg Virginia USA
Posts: 13,672
RE: Unbreakable shafts and " bone-busting" broadheads
c903 I have a lot of respect for your generally well thought out positions, but for the life of me unless you are simply looking to stir a pot, I do not understand how you can find fault with 5 shots test. I agree they are not scientifically comparable to shooting deer or any other animal, but they do demonstrate the strength & penetration capability in media that any average joe can understand.
If 5 shot had fresh deer or similar sized animal carcass to use for his test would you also have an issue with this?
When independent crash test are done on cars without real passengers and a sled instead of another car do you dispute these results also?
Would you rather have your point of reference on a broadhead come from the manufacturer or a paid representative?
If 5 shot had fresh deer or similar sized animal carcass to use for his test would you also have an issue with this?
When independent crash test are done on cars without real passengers and a sled instead of another car do you dispute these results also?
Would you rather have your point of reference on a broadhead come from the manufacturer or a paid representative?
08-04-2003, 09:20 AM
#37
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Sturgis, SD
Posts: 1,983
RE: Unbreakable shafts and " bone-busting" broadheads
c, you make some valid points, however science and anecdotal evidence can' t go hand in hand, one or the other. So you have ten different bowhunters shooting ten different broadheads. Right off the start you have bias, they all think their head is the greatest to start with. They likely all shoot different bows set at different poundages using different arrows, rests, sights etc. This is why we do controlled experiments, with all of the variables involved you can not draw any conclusions nor can you do any kind of comparison between them.
If you are going to use field reports you would also need qualified people to look at wound channels and tissue damage to really figure out if the broadhead did its job. You can have a very quick kill with broadhead failure. The broadhead did its job and you may think it preformed flawlessly and you only got lucky.
So what is the industry standard for testing broadheads? How do the companies do it? It has been my experience that companies that get upset about independant testing are companies that know they have a marginal product and don' t want you to know that. It is starting to look like that is what is going on with you here. I am not aware of any industry standard, nor have I ever seen any company talk about how they test their broadheads, other than a few pictures of dead game. So what. When their is no standard, when the industry does not police themselves it is up to someone to do it.
Enter 5 shot. He came up with the tests, he does them, he interprets them. That does make him an expert on the subject. None of us were born knowing anything, I wasn' t anyway. Someone has to be first and if they come up with a system they are usually considered the one in the know so to say. So 5 shot tests broadheads and subjects them to conditions much harsher than what they are going to see in the field, if they hold up to that you can be reasonably sure they will hold up to hunting purposes. As long as he does all the tests the same using the same equipment you can use the infomation on a comparative basis. Myself, I would rather pick a broadhead that has withstood more than I am going to throw at it over one that ten guys said, " hey this is a good one."
An example for you. A person with a potentially terminal disease has a choice between two drugs. One has been extenively tested and proven safe and effective at doses way beyond what this person will be taking. The doses tested have no application here, but safe none the less. The other ten people have been taking and they say they feel better and think they are getting better, this stuff really works. I know what I would do.
If you are going to use field reports you would also need qualified people to look at wound channels and tissue damage to really figure out if the broadhead did its job. You can have a very quick kill with broadhead failure. The broadhead did its job and you may think it preformed flawlessly and you only got lucky.
So what is the industry standard for testing broadheads? How do the companies do it? It has been my experience that companies that get upset about independant testing are companies that know they have a marginal product and don' t want you to know that. It is starting to look like that is what is going on with you here. I am not aware of any industry standard, nor have I ever seen any company talk about how they test their broadheads, other than a few pictures of dead game. So what. When their is no standard, when the industry does not police themselves it is up to someone to do it.
Enter 5 shot. He came up with the tests, he does them, he interprets them. That does make him an expert on the subject. None of us were born knowing anything, I wasn' t anyway. Someone has to be first and if they come up with a system they are usually considered the one in the know so to say. So 5 shot tests broadheads and subjects them to conditions much harsher than what they are going to see in the field, if they hold up to that you can be reasonably sure they will hold up to hunting purposes. As long as he does all the tests the same using the same equipment you can use the infomation on a comparative basis. Myself, I would rather pick a broadhead that has withstood more than I am going to throw at it over one that ten guys said, " hey this is a good one."
An example for you. A person with a potentially terminal disease has a choice between two drugs. One has been extenively tested and proven safe and effective at doses way beyond what this person will be taking. The doses tested have no application here, but safe none the less. The other ten people have been taking and they say they feel better and think they are getting better, this stuff really works. I know what I would do.