JeffB

Arthur,

Holt could very likely be using nib points and different fletchings (he does prefer feathers though) to get those weights.

And I' ve got to agree with Corey. All this mom. vs. KE is pretty much splitting hairs for North American game save perhapas a Bison, or Musk ox.

I see arthur' s point in limiting equipment by KE levels, and agree that' s a poor way to set regulations.

I think KE/Mom are only rough guidelines. I' ve had my low KE/low Momentum arrows zip through whitetails w/out a hitch, and I' ve had heavier, faster arrows hang up at the fletchs on the other side. Is drag taken into consideration? shaft diameter? blade sharpness?

Way too many variables in equipment, anatomy, and hunting situations to say X or Y is the defacto indicator of penetration value.

IMO, of course.

Arthur P

Jeff, Holt says he used a 128 grain bullet point on both arrows, not nibbs. He might could have saved a couple inches of arrow length by using carbon insert instead of aluminum, but I don' t think we had carbon inserts when he did his little experiment. Too bad he keeps running the same old worn out story when he could very easily update with carbon arrows and keep things more consistent between the 400 and 600 grain arrows. Must be nice to be able to keep drawing a paycheck on the same story, over and over and over again.

Frankly, I put more stock in Ashby' s Natal Study - commissioned by the Republic of South Africa and conducted over several months on actual game animals - than I do on someone shooting two different arrows 9 shots each into a block of foam rubber and comparing the results. When the study says momentum and the backyard experiment says KE...

And I also agree that too much is being made of this momentum vs KE thing, but only to a point. There are two reasons I keep pounding this issue whenever it comes up. First is because of the threat it poses. Second is because putting too much emphasis on KE is doing a disservice to bowhunting. People with light energy bows and too light arrows could very well be causing wounded and unrecovered animals.

The typical hoss shooting a 70 pound supermongo cam that' s putting out 77 foot pounds of energy with a 350 grain arrow... he' s putting more momentum into his arrow than I get with my logs out of my longbow. For people with setups that deliver low KE though, knowing how to maximize momentum while keeping some kind of decent trajectory is critical to give them a clean killing rig.

They' ve also got to realize the low energy they have puts limits on their effective hunting shot distances. Even if they have the skill to hit a ping pong ball every time at 50 yards, their arrows won' t have enough oomph when they get their for a certain clean kill. A reasonable person wouldn' t attempt a shot at that kind of distance, so they don' t need light arrows for super flat trajectory beyond 30 yards or so.

Frankly, I' d really like to see all states institute a 350 grain minimum arrow weight just to force those folks with low energy rigs to shoot enough arrow. 400 grains would be even better, but I' m afraid too many of the mongo bow crowd would get pissed off because of being robbed of a few insignificant fps. Far be it from me to suggest that they should make personal sacrifices for the good of bowhunting.[X(]

Maybe Dr Ashby' s new study with ' modern' equipment will give us a more defined view of the whole issue but, until it' s results are in, I think his Natal study is by far the best resource to look at.