98Redline

My comment was not indended to single out the recurve guys as being the only source of the problem, only to point out that it does not matter what weapon you choose or how heavy your arrow is, you have to be diciplined enough to practice with your weapon of choice to be proficent with it. Recurves require a significant amount more practice to stay proficent than a compound. A compound requires more practice than a rifle.

The issue is you can't educate those who have no consideration for the game they hunt. For them, it is about the killing, not the hunt. Practicing and ensuring you equipment is in tune does not fall under anything but a waste of their time.

We have these guys on one end of the spectrum and you on the other.

According to your own statement, if I hunt with a compound, then in your eyes I am doing it wrong and should not be allowed during the archery season. If my arrow weighs less than 400gr then I am doing it wrong. In making statements like the one I quoted, you pass yourself off as a zealot. Your beliefs are so strong that you immediately dismiss any other idea as being wrong. All that does is reduce your credibility in spite of your vast experience.

You say that my arrow should be required by law to be over 400gr, yet in almost every scenario a 320gr arrow out of a modern compound has more momentum than any arrow coming out of just about any recurve. Going under that assumption, should there be a ban on recurve hunting bows based on the fact that they don't develop enough momentum? Of course not, however the argument could be made just as easily as your argument for a 400gr weight limit. It is not a black and white issue.

More regulations is not the answer, more education is.
It is a tough row to hoe but educating is the only way that it will happen.

Straightarrow

You mentioned something about rediculous comparisons. The stuff were discussing in this thread is so far off their radar, it's rediculous to even mention it.

This is an archery technical forum. What do you think we would discuss in here? Do you think bowhunters agree on everything? So, this isn't the appropriate place to discuss things like KE, momemtun, penetration and other technical aspects? Maybe it just isn't appropriate to disagree. Or could it just be that it's blasphemy to suggest bowhunters have a lot to learn in regards to proper arrow design. If you're expecting to see any of this on an anti-hunting poster, be prepared for a long wait.

bow_hunter44

I have to agree with you Redline. For a couple of reasons. First and foremost, I am an educator. I firmly believe that the evolution of any society is limitedby the understanding (education) of that society. Second, I do not like to be told how to think. Perhaps in many situations I should be told, butin either case,I DO NOT like it... Trying to modifyactionby regulation is kind of like legislating morality, it simply does not work.

bow_hunter44

Did you ever think that perhaps we like to debate issues like KE and momentum? And just because we do, it doesn't mean we would not support each other. I'm a heavy (relatively speaking) arrow kind of guy. Perhaps Redline is a light arrow, trajectory kind of guy. Apparently we have, at least at some level, a difference of opinion. On the other hand, from what I read that is authored by Redline, he would be welcome in my hunting camp anytime. There might even be a rousing debate over arrow weight over the campfire. But the next day when he had an animal down, I would be a more than willingparticipanton gut and drag crew! We might even have another debate over arrow weight that over the camfire that night too!

davepjr71

bow

There is nothing at all wrong with a good debate. However, there is a lot wrong with making comments about regulating arrow weight just because one person doesn't agree with someone else. That is craming it down someone's throat on how they should think. For years it was all about KE and what you need to kill this or that. I'm amazed our ancestors were even able to survive with the equipment they had? Also, I have yet to find a momentum chart that states the minimum for different game. I guess that's why I'm trying to figure out what this whole debate is about in the first place. Show me a chart and then let's discuss. That's how it worked for KE for manyyears.There was a chart and people debated about it.Yes, a heavier arrow has more momentum.However,for a certain sized animal is there enough differencebetween a lighterarrow to matter if a person takes a well placed shot after many hours of practice. It seem like everyone is trying to find a short cut for practice.Person A doesn't shoot at all and then wounds an animal.Person B convinces him that if he had a heavier arrow he would have killed that deer instead of wounding it. Since last year after no practice he put an arrow thru the shoulder blade of a doe. Leaving out the fact that if person A would have practiced then the arrow weight would not have mattered.

Straightarrow

It's nieve to think that anti's could not find a forum like this. But then state that they pay attention to the weight of the arrow a person used to shoot a deer.

Arthur P

I do believe I read your exact meaning in that comment, Redline. It was insulting to all traditional shooters and you owe them all an apology.

As for discipline, it doesn't take as much discipline tostay proficientwith a recurve or longbow as you think. It's enough fun that most all traditional shooters go out and shoot simply for the sheer enjoyment of it.

Many - if not most - compoundersseem to think practice is a chore to be avoided. And you've got the "I tuned up and sighted in last fall, so I'm all set to go this year too" crowd as well. So, if you limit your comment to THOSE guys, then I agree with you. That's a huge problem.

I'm not too worried about my credibility, dude. Maybe you should get to know me before you go making hare-brained comments like that.

bow_hunter44

I'm afraid I started the debate. Prior to writing the original postI had occasion to discuss penetration of an arrow 5 different times (both in person and via threads). That is not a bad thing. In fact it is a good thing. To make a long story short, all five of the people referenced only kinetic energy. They also referred to it (KE) out of context. Thus the post. I'm new to forums, and I quickly learned that they (threads) tend to take on a life of their own. But I love to read them. There are lots of people on this site (and I am sure other sites as well) that know a LOT about archery. I have learned a lot of late, got a few members down right annoyed with me, exchanged a few ideas, it has been fun.

bow_hunter44

OK, make that one vote for physics not being fun!! As I recall, when I wastaking physics in college I didn't think it was all that much fun either. Ialso seem to remember big time brain cramps!!

davepjr71

I'm sure thatI annoy people with my posts.My comment about the chart was not in jest. On an archerywebpageI found the guy goes into detail about momentum yet provides nothing to prove that there is a certain amount of momentum required for certain game. It's now peaked my curiosity and I think it would be great for someone with a great deal of knowledge to discuss.

KE was all anyone ever talked about because that's all that mattered with bows and a minimum was established by some "experts".

My concern is that people over analyze something like this and it gets a life of it's own with no known basis. I think it's great that you've brought up momentum as a factor. I'm only 36. However, it seems as if archery like every sport it seems, has been overtaken by people trying to find the easy way out of not having to practice. And I'm concerned that someone that has not thought things thru grabs a hold of your post and runs nuts with it without really thinking it through. Most momentum equations you read tell you to ignore outside influences and pretend like you are in a vacuum. During my college days many professors would say that too for my electrical engineering classes. However, once you get into the real world you find it doesn't work that way.

The 5% of penetration you gain in momentum may be reduced due to wind drag on a larger shaft and friction of the arrow during entry. These things need to be taken into consideration before someone states that a heavy arrow is the only way to go because of momentum.

AllenRead

davepjr71,

Your last post leads me to believe that you haven't read Dr Ashby's work.

Check this link and be ready for some really techincal reading:

http://tradgang.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=forum;f=24

You can also read a shorter synopsis in the most recent Traditional Bowhunter magazine.

Dr Ashby has quantified it, at least for Asian Buffalo. He selected this species because it is on of the tougher animals to kill in the world and large numbers of them are culled in his area. His research is based on many years and hundreds of archery kills on these buffalo.

Many of us may be overreacting to the data collected on buffalo and assuming that it applies to whitetail deer. However, I look at it that if a certain setup with heavy arrows will penetrate the ribs on one side of one of those critters, it will definitely take out any deer around here.

I want the margin of lethality that a heavy arrow provides. Obviously almost any arrow will take a whitetail with sufficient KE and good arrow placement. Unfortunately, I have a very short draw length and the fastest my arrows will be is about 260 fps even with 5 grains per pound arrows. If 12 to 14 grain per pound arrows can give me better lethality, I'm going to use them.