• The SH Membership has gone live. Only SH Members have access to post in the classifieds. All members can view the classifieds. Starting in 2020 only SH Members will be admitted to the annual hunting contest. Current members will need to follow these steps to upgrade: 1. Click on your username 2. Click on Account upgrades 3. Choose SH Member and purchase.
  • We've been working hard the past few weeks to come up with some big changes to our vendor policies to meet the changing needs of our community. Please see the new vendor rules here: Vendor Access Area Rules

My 3D micro arrow penetrate target harder, why?

HuumanCreed

HuumanCreed

Well-Known Member
SH Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2020
Messages
3,040
Location
Westminster Maryland
With my hunting setup all dial in, I decided to play around and make a 3D arrow. But I was really surprised how much more penetration the 3D arrows were getting compared to my hunting arrows. I'm not talking about a few inches, I'm talking almost half an arrow length different in results. All arrows fly bullet holes at 20 yards paper tuned. Broadheads and fieldpoints hitting the same.

Bow:
Mathew V3 27, 27.5 DL, 60#


Arrows:
Old setup: Easton Bloodline, .244 diameter, 28in, 400 spine, 100gr tip, 25gr insert, TAW 425gr.
3D arrow: Bloodsport Onyx .166 micro. 26in, 500 spine, 100gr tip, 60 gr insert, TAW 390gr.
Heavy Hitter current arrow: Axis 5mm, 28.5in, 340 spine, 200gr tip, 35gr insert, TAW 542gr.
1697712822810.png

This is at 20 yards, aim at the corner of the tape for heavy hitter since that is what the sight is tuned for, no surprise that the lighter arrow was higher due to speed, so I aim lower for the last arrow. All hit down the center but the micro arrow got A LOT more penetrations.
1697713166994.png
1697713233756.png

This is out to 30 yards. 3D micro arrow completely disappeared into the target block. Was even more impressed by the 3D arrow because the block was at an angle due to the heavy hitter moving the block to off center at impact. So the heavy hitter packed a punch, but the 3D arrow still penetrated better.
1697713273427.png
1697713298555.png

So out of curiosity, I put practice broadheads on them and test it out. G5 Montec and Magnus Stingers for the lighter arrows and Iron Will Wide 200 gr for the heavy hitter. I didn't take pictures of the broadheads test because the 3D micro arrow were getting complete pass-through! The result were similar to field points except more penetrations on average.

So based on result, I'm not sure I want to stay on the Ranch Fairy wagon anymore if the micro arrow wagon is getting me to places faster and with better penetration.

But I assume that there is an issue of KE that I'm not considering? That result on target block does not reflect the same result on a deer anatomy? That high FOC arrows allow for bone crushing, which I don't quiet agree with. I don't like that voice in the back of my head telling me "its ok to make a bad shot, the arrow will compensate for your mistake".

This was not a well planned out Youtube level test, just interesting observation from my backyard. Can someone please educate me on some important aspect that I'm missing? If not, I'm seriously considering switching from a 542grain high FOC arrow to a light 390gr micro arrow for my next hunt. Didn't ask this over at archerytalk because its has been argued to death and most of the time it turn ugly, just wanted to have a casual conversation with a smaller crowd. I'm aware that there is a lot of ways to kill a deer, and its all personal choice, but are you surprised by my test result?
 
It looks like the terminal end of your 3d arrows is significantly larger in diameter than the shafts.

If that’s the case, the hole is closing up slow relative to arrow travel through the target, and you’re getting better penetration because of lower friction along arrow shaft.

The phenomenon will still occur in an animal. But your inconsistent media of a live animal will make it harder to observe. More variables.

Smaller diameter arrows, especially those with a terminal end that is larger in diameter, will outpenetrate larger diameter arrows, all other things equal.

Welcome to the “adult arrows is an oversimplification” world!
 
Do you happen to have KE numbers?

I think Kyle has an excellent point, and the larger terminal end is one of Ashbys 12 points too.

I'm guessing you have speed nocks(?) On your string right? Whatever the weights are that are shrink wrapped. I think that's a much overlooked factor when we're talking modern compound bows and an Ashby/RF arrow. I can't look it up at the moment but Dudleys podcast with Joel Maxfield was pretty interesting on this point.

I think KE may reign supreme
 
kyler1945 said:
It looks like the terminal end of your 3d arrows is significantly larger in diameter than the shafts.

If that’s the case, the hole is closing up slow relative to arrow travel through the target, and you’re getting better penetration because of lower friction along arrow shaft.

The phenomenon will still occur in an animal. But your inconsistent media of a live animal will make it harder to observe. More variables.

Smaller diameter arrows, especially those with a terminal end that is larger in diameter, will outpenetrate larger diameter arrows, all other things equal.

Welcome to the “adult arrows is an oversimplification” world!
Click to expand...
Interesting. To be fair, I just threw on field points of the same weight from my bucket of random fieldpoints. So if I used the same style of fieldpoints, I might see different results?
 
As previously mentioned, lower shaft drag from the smaller diameter shaft following the larger diameter head in a homogenous media is most probably the reason. Shaft drag in synthetic, homogenous targets is the main thing that robs arrows of penetration in tests, and that makes things like ballistics gel, etc. really meaningless unless you just want and apples to apples test of shaft drag. Ballistic gel is great for bullets, not arrows, unless you are hunting giant amoebas.

I like the idea of smaller diameter shafts for hunting with a larger diameter head but after looking into it, I decided that the smaller diameter inserts were going to be a point of weakness and probably failure if bone was encountered. I did think about getting some one piece stainless glue on inserts from Ethics and get some arrows and really wring them out on some pretty tough bones (cow femurs, scapula, etc.) and see how they performed. That idea took a backseat to many other projects and now actual hunting season.

I think there is a balance to be had between shaft diameter and material strength and at this point I would only be guessing.
 
HuumanCreed said:
So based on result, I'm not sure I want to stay on the Ranch Fairy wagon anymore if the micro arrow wagon is getting me to places faster and with better penetration.
Click to expand...

I’d say just go try it and see what happens. The reality is, we can find arguments to support any viewpoint, that’s why it gets debated ad nauseum. If there was one right answer everybody would do it.
 
I never understood the micro shaft theory of less drag going through a deer. Doesn't your broadhead open a hole big enough for a shaft 5 times that size to go through with very little friction anyway? In your target the foam seals right back up to the shaft and creates the friction to stop the arrow as designed.
 
I read a detailed study years back that used the term “Lubrosity.” Don’t know if it’s a real word or not, but the point of these experiments said that the hole cut by your broadhead is the main factor in animal penetration (barring all the other many factors). The shaft friction was negligible in an animal.
 
Living hide is under tension so when it is cut it pulls open, and so does not generally slow penetration much, and as the broadhead is cutting tissues it is releasing pressurized blood from thousands of tiny capillaries and often several large veins and arteries and this blood lubricates the arrow's shaft as it moves along the path cut by the broadhead milliseconds before. The blood released from the living animal lubricates the arrow shaft.
 
Seems like you should take a stiffer micro diameter shaft and build a heavy hitter and see how that penetrates. My guess is that @kyler1945 is correct and the diameter difference between the point and the shaft allows for a significant reduction of drag allowing the better penetration. Increasing mass should make it even more pronounced. One of the things Ashby and RF have talked about with adult arrows is making sure the shaft is smaller than the point/head for this very reason. Maybe instead of hopping off the wagon you need to change your seat on the wagon lol.
 
kyler1945 said:
It looks like the terminal end of your 3d arrows is significantly larger in diameter than the shafts.

If that’s the case, the hole is closing up slow relative to arrow travel through the target, and you’re getting better penetration because of lower friction along arrow shaft.

The phenomenon will still occur in an animal. But your inconsistent media of a live animal will make it harder to observe. More variables.

Smaller diameter arrows, especially those with a terminal end that is larger in diameter, will outpenetrate larger diameter arrows, all other things equal.

Welcome to the “adult arrows is an oversimplification” world!
Click to expand...
Absolutely correct. This is one of the Ashby's principles.. No matter what your arrow mass is.
 
HuumanCreed said:
With my hunting setup all dial in, I decided to play around and make a 3D arrow. But I was really surprised how much more penetration the 3D arrows were getting compared to my hunting arrows. I'm not talking about a few inches, I'm talking almost half an arrow length different in results. All arrows fly bullet holes at 20 yards paper tuned. Broadheads and fieldpoints hitting the same.

Bow:
Mathew V3 27, 27.5 DL, 60#


Arrows:
Old setup: Easton Bloodline, .244 diameter, 28in, 400 spine, 100gr tip, 25gr insert, TAW 425gr.
3D arrow: Bloodsport Onyx .166 micro. 26in, 500 spine, 100gr tip, 60 gr insert, TAW 390gr.
Heavy Hitter current arrow: Axis 5mm, 28.5in, 340 spine, 200gr tip, 35gr insert, TAW 542gr.
View attachment 93044

This is at 20 yards, aim at the corner of the tape for heavy hitter since that is what the sight is tuned for, no surprise that the lighter arrow was higher due to speed, so I aim lower for the last arrow. All hit down the center but the micro arrow got A LOT more penetrations.
View attachment 93045
View attachment 93046

This is out to 30 yards. 3D micro arrow completely disappeared into the target block. Was even more impressed by the 3D arrow because the block was at an angle due to the heavy hitter moving the block to off center at impact. So the heavy hitter packed a punch, but the 3D arrow still penetrated better.
View attachment 93047
View attachment 93048

So out of curiosity, I put practice broadheads on them and test it out. G5 Montec and Magnus Stingers for the lighter arrows and Iron Will Wide 200 gr for the heavy hitter. I didn't take pictures of the broadheads test because the 3D micro arrow were getting complete pass-through! The result were similar to field points except more penetrations on average.

So based on result, I'm not sure I want to stay on the Ranch Fairy wagon anymore if the micro arrow wagon is getting me to places faster and with better penetration.

But I assume that there is an issue of KE that I'm not considering? That result on target block does not reflect the same result on a deer anatomy? That high FOC arrows allow for bone crushing, which I don't quiet agree with. I don't like that voice in the back of my head telling me "its ok to make a bad shot, the arrow will compensate for your mistake".

This was not a well planned out Youtube level test, just interesting observation from my backyard. Can someone please educate me on some important aspect that I'm missing? If not, I'm seriously considering switching from a 542grain high FOC arrow to a light 390gr micro arrow for my next hunt. Didn't ask this over at archerytalk because its has been argued to death and most of the time it turn ugly, just wanted to have a casual conversation with a smaller crowd. I'm aware that there is a lot of ways to kill a deer, and its all personal choice, but are you surprised by my test result?
Click to expand...
You just proved one Ashby's principles. Your shooting a foam target so I wouldn't jump ship just yet. I would suspect your results would change on a animal. Especially if you hit bone.
 
Friction- as everyone has said, the target stops the arrows not by holding the head back, but by squeezing the shaft as it passes through.

Man there's some troubling wording in there.

Wondering if this also shows up in a "seat of the pants" type experiment when pulling the arrows out of the target- if two arrows are inserted to the same depth, my hypothesis is that thr the micro diameter arrow would be easier to pull out of the target than the hunting arrow because of this difference in friction.
 
thedutchtouch said:
Friction- as everyone has said, the target stops the arrows not by holding the head back, but by squeezing the shaft as it passes through.

Man there's some troubling wording in there.

Wondering if this also shows up in a "seat of the pants" type experiment when pulling the arrows out of the target- if two arrows are inserted to the same depth, my hypothesis is that thr the micro diameter arrow would be easier to pull out of the target than the hunting arrow because of this difference in friction.
Click to expand...
Sounds reasonable to me but what do I know, I'm just some saddle hunter on the internet :tearsofjoy:
 
Sipsey said:
I read a detailed study years back that used the term “Lubrosity.” Don’t know if it’s a real word or not, but the point of these experiments said that the hole cut by your broadhead is the main factor in animal penetration (barring all the other many factors). The shaft friction was negligible in an animal.
Click to expand...
“Lubricity” is the term you’re looking for. Loosely defined as “oily smoothness”.
 
This arrow behavior largely goes away on animals. The thin arrow experiences less friction in a foam target. A broadhead opens up the hole so that any shaft goes through and the inside of an animal is slick. Microshafts might help with bone penetration (less likely to jam up in there) and also might decrease wind drift at longer ranges.


I hunt whitetail from a stand, so I'll be rocking standard arrows for the foreseeable future.
 
Last edited:
@HuumanCreed glade your looking at it openly. You understand by going lighter you will probably loose some bone breaking ability  if needed. I go with the shoot what gives you the most confidence if your gonna let one go, and know what it is capable off.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top