A little more broadhead testing heavy arrows

[kathy]

Ryan, the slicktrick has steep blades, I am not familiar with solid legend . the 3 blade VPA coc broadhead is long and slender 1 1/8' wide close to 3" long , like firehuntfish was saying not all broadheads penetrate the same. you can call VPA archery and talk to Ray , they have had many buffalo taken with a 2 blade & 3 blade VPA. Forrest

 

[dg2]

If you are shooting a modern fast compound bow there is no need for super heavy arrows anymore. I know a few bowhunters who have taken many big cape and water buffaloes and they are convinced that perfectly flying 600 gr (or even less) arrow out of 70+ pound compound bow (with reasonable draw length) is more than enough. A modern fast (345 AMO or something) will produce more than enough momentum or kinetic energy for the job.

I have used 1050 gr arrow with my 80#/29" longbow and I had no problems taking a big water buffalo. With slow bow you heavier arrow to get the momentum.

Last year I shot one big water buffalo with fast (345 AMO, 70#/30") compound with 700 gr arrow, but I think next time I'll drop arrow weight down to 600 gr.

Google Ricardo Longoria who has taken many water/cape buffaloes and elephants with bow, and after some iterations his preferred arrow weight for elephants is perfectly flying 800 gr arrow travelling over 225 fps.

 

[Ryan]

Ryan, the slicktrick has steep blades, I am not familiar with solid legend . the 3 blade VPA coc broadhead is long and slender 1 1/8' wide close to 3" long , like firehuntfish was saying not all broadheads penetrate the same. you can call VPA archery and talk to Ray , they have had many buffalo taken with a 2 blade & 3 blade VPA. Forrest

In a nutshell, why? With such heavy heads you and a few are suggesting, I would have to change to entirely different weight heads and arrows. No, thanks. I agree, not all broadheads penetrate and work the same, but you are assuming longer broadheads are the only answer. A lot of people mention the steeper angle of Slick Trick and a few other newer broadheads as being detrimental. But honestly it's not an amazingly oblique angle and it's for a shorter distance of length, so the steeper angle may be cancelled out with a lot less surface area of both the edge and side. The longer length to width heads have a lot more surface area and surface area is a factor concerning friction or drag. Of course it depends on what kind of surface it contacts. Flesh, perhaps not much, but something hard like bone possibly more so, which was a major factor in this test. Solid Legend and G5 Montecs have a lot more surface area compared to DRT Dirtnapper heads and in my initial testing the DRT's beat them both out. And the Slick Tricks beat all of those. Like it or not, I see a pattern. I've a little over 3 weeks until I leave, with my set up as it is I'm confident of the Slick Tricks as my primary and Solids as secondary broadheads and won't be changing.

 

[Ryno Botma]

I am also a big fan of the slick tricks and have used them a lot shot straight through wildebeest and oryx with 28.5" draw 256 ft
You don't need more on plains game

 

[firehuntfish]

In a nutshell, why? With such heavy heads you and a few are suggesting, I would have to change to entirely different weight heads and arrows. No, thanks. I agree, not all broadheads penetrate and work the same, but you are assuming longer broadheads are the only answer. A lot of people mention the steeper angle of Slick Trick and a few other newer broadheads as being detrimental. But honestly it's not an amazingly oblique angle and it's for a shorter distance of length, so the steeper angle may be cancelled out with a lot less surface area of both the edge and side. The longer length to width heads have a lot more surface area and surface area is a factor concerning friction or drag. Of course it depends on what kind of surface it contacts. Flesh, perhaps not much, but something hard like bone possibly more so, which was a major factor in this test. Solid Legend and G5 Montecs have a lot more surface area compared to DRT Dirtnapper heads and in my initial testing the DRT's beat them both out. And the Slick Tricks beat all of those. Like it or not, I see a pattern. I've a little over 3 weeks until I leave, with my set up as it is I'm confident of the Slick Tricks as my primary and Solids as secondary broadheads and won't be changing.

Ryan, your observation in regard the shorter compact broadheads with steeper blade angles actually being better penetraters is exactly what I have also found in my own backyard testing.... I originally went to these style heads as my preferred hunting heads because the longer length to width style heads fly terribly from my set-up. All of the short, steep style heads are field tip accurate for the most part. I have tried a few different styles including Shuttle T's, Slick Tricks, and Muzzy MX-3's, all of which have little if any planing issues. The fact that they also penetrate better is a nice added bonus. I like the Muzzy's because they are the least expensive of the bunch, but the Slick Trick is a nasty head!

They engineered these steep short styles with the idea that the steep blade angle was necessary to create a reasonable cutting diameter, while still being able to maintain a short compact ferrule. As you point out, they were also able to get rid of the excess surface of the longer blades and ferrules thus reducing a lot of friction. The steep angle is definitely not detrimental.... Keeping the cutting diameter within reason I believe is the key to the fine balance of penetration and accuracy that they were able to achieve with these compact head designs.

It's fun and interesting to debate the physics of it all, but it's hard to argue with the results. At the end of the day, I go with the results....

 

[Ryan]

Ryan, your observation in regard the shorter compact broadheads with steeper blade angles actually being better penetraters is exactly what I have also found in my own backyard testing.... I originally went to these style heads as my preferred hunting heads because the longer length to width style heads fly terribly from my set-up. All of the short, steep style heads are field tip accurate for the most part. I have tried a few different styles including Shuttle T's, Slick Tricks, and Muzzy MX-3's, all of which have little if any planing issues. The fact that they also penetrate better is a nice added bonus. I like the Muzzy's because they are the least expensive of the bunch, but the Slick Trick is a nasty head!

They engineered these steep short styles with the idea that the steep blade angle was necessary to create a reasonable cutting diameter, while still being able to maintain a short compact ferrule. As you point out, they were also able to get rid of the excess surface of the longer blades and ferrules thus reducing a lot of friction. The steep angle is definitely not detrimental.... Keeping the cutting diameter within reason I believe is the key to the fine balance of penetration and accuracy that they were able to achieve with these compact head designs.

It's fun and interesting to debate the physics of it all, but it's hard to argue with the results. At the end of the day, I go with the results....

Yep.
I keep as neutral point of view as I can but that possibilty was always there. I'm thinking I'll eventually do some comparisons between the short and long versions of similar heads that can be balanced out weight wise with the HIT inserts to keep everything equal. I know the 1-1/8" width VPA 3 blade comes in a shorter 125 and long 175 grain heads and I think they do the same with 2 blades too. So to balance things weight wise up front use the brass 75 grain HIT insert with the 125's and the 16 grain aluminum one with 3 Slick Trick washers (they weigh 3.4 grains each) behind the long head. And of course this could be used in comparing these longer heads on equal terms with all the regular 125's out there. Since all of those broadheads and arrows cost money I'd currently rather use on other things it will be a little while.

 

[kathy]

Ryan, I do like the test you have done, you had good results with the slicktrick . you are confident with slicktrick so I hope they serve you well on your hunting trip.
what I was saying about steep angle broadheads the are more inclined to glance off at a hard quarter away shot.
As far as wind planning with longer profile broadheads you need enough fletching & helical to steer the arrow broadhead and a proper tuned bow . Forrest

 

[Ryan]

Ryan, I do like the test you have done, you had good results with the slicktrick . you are confident with slicktrick so I hope they serve you well on your hunting trip.
what I was saying about steep angle broadheads the are more inclined to glance off at a hard quarter away shot.
As far as wind planning with longer profile broadheads you need enough fletching & helical to steer the arrow broadhead and a proper tuned bow . Forrest

Thanks, it's certainly not perfect but it's a reasonable test. Honestly I'd like a larger amount of shots per head, three is a pretty small population for stats, and some other materials shot into to get a better picture of things. And thanks for clariflying the angle concern, it makes sense now. Anyway, I hope this is useful for everyone and let's hope my quarry show up and offer good shots.