Who has snorted the Fairy Dust?

[NMSbowhunter]

@Guff Dawg has

That's the only one of the 12 factors I haven't incorporated into my setups. I also haven't bought any premium brand arrow shafts. I'm mostly looking for lower numbers on the GPI (grains per inch) while still maintaining correct spine. I'm running about 400 grains up front and that puts me in the 25%+ FOC. Running feather vanes also makes a huge difference. Just a few extra grains way out on the end of that fulcrum arm (Shaft) will really rob you of some FOC.

 

[MNFarmHunter]

You're really reaching there. And you're making a big inference which is simply untrue.

I shared my thoughts, opinions and observations which are, again, inline with the subject of this thread.

Very surprised to see trigger warning cards being thrown out here by me simply voicing a contrary opinion.

Thicker skins.

For the record, my arrows come from the bulk bin at the shop with an aluminum insert glued in and 100gr. broadheads and I still find this thread fascinating. This thread is no different than discussing the latest bow, saddle, climbing method, platform, camo, call, scent control, release, IBO, ATA or anything else. Learn from what others are doing and find ways to improve yourself...or not.

 

[Allegheny Tom]

So back to the fairy dust... Anyone try some of the tapered arrows out there to help get a little higher FOC?

Me.

 

[Allegheny Tom]

Lol. Good to know that my countless number of pass throughs and about 97% recovery rate over the past decade alone only gets a grade of a "D".

This has almost reached a cult-level status. People just gulp that kool-aid and spend that money and keep clicking and clicking and clicking. Exactly what these people want.

Apparently, you know very little about Dr Ed Ashby.
He has not, does not and will not profit from his studies on arrow lethality.
The Ashby Bowhunting Foundation is non profit.
There is nobody (including the Ranch Fairy) that has conducted more real world studies and analysis of arrow lethality.
He has reached his current conclusions on heavy arrows because that is where his extensive studies have lead him.
To insinuate that he is in this for the money is insulting.

 

[Plebe]

Indeed, what has RF brought to the table that Dr. Ahsby hasn't said already?

As I look through posts of self proclaimed dust snorters, excepting the few folks like @wyetterp, I can't necessarily say I understand what the "dust snorting" threshold is.

At least Dr. Ashby figured 650gr.

But why shoot heavier than that?

 

[Lowg08]

I have a weird take on arrow weight. Or. Rather what weight we decide to shoot. 1. It really doesn’t matter to me. I have tried a heavy arrow. Did not like it. Not for me. The trajectory fall off just turns me off. I ask myself these questions. What am I trying to accomplish? What am I comfortable shooting? What do I have confidence in? I am trying to simplify my set up. At the time it matter I want to be able to have a set pin at 25yd and it cover me out to 30. So speed is important to me answers the second. Lastly. I’m a big boy. 6’2” 230 I can pull an 80# bow no problem. Not an issue but I can slowly and methodically pull 55-60 in awkward positions without making quick alarming movements. This is important to me. Now I like a light fast micro diameter arrow with a razor sharp 2 blade single bevel with low profile four fletch on a 2* right helical. I Total weight around 400. I get free speed from my draw length at 30.5” If you answer those questions and it means you like a heavy arrow and heavy draw weight. Have at it. Or like heavy arrow and low draw weight or whatever. We are all looking at the same desired outcome. Maybe try the opposite one time just to see. I tried it. Not a fan but we are all different individuals. All hunters with like mindedness on our outcome. How we get there is different. Just my 2 cents.

 

[jiwhite86]

Apparently, you know very little about Dr Ed Ashby.
He has not, does not and will not profit from his studies on arrow lethality.
The Ashby Bowhunting Foundation is non profit.
There is nobody (including the Ranch Fairy) that has conducted more real world studies and analysis of arrow lethality.
He has reached his current conclusions on heavy arrows because that is where his extensive studies have lead him.
To insinuate that he is in this for the money is insulting.

Didn’t Dr. Ashby do basically all of his studies on carcasses?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Allegheny Tom]

Didn’t Dr. Ashby do basically all of his studies on carcasses?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Live animals and carcasses.
He was originally asked by African game departments to demonstrate the feasibility of bowhunting, which was not legal in most African countries at the time. They wanted hard evidence of an arrow's lethality.
And they were not concerned with taking only perfect shots. They wanted ALL types of shot angles attempted in order to show all aspects of a variety of wounds. All shots had rifle shooters backing up the non lethal hits. All animals were quickly dispatched and immediately autopsied by veterinarians. And yes some carcasses were repeatedly shot in order to farther quantify data. As I recall, they had thousands of shots.
These Ashby studies are the main reason so many African countries legalized bowhunting.
Ashby did this on his own dime and he allowed hard evidence lead him along the search for finding the most effective arrow.

 

[Allegheny Tom]

Indeed, what has RF brought to the table that Dr. Ahsby hasn't said already?

As I look through posts of self proclaimed dust snorters, excepting the few folks like @wyetterp, I can't necessarily say I understand what the "dust snorting" threshold is.

At least Dr. Ashby figured 650gr.

But why shoot heavier than that?

Ashby does not say 650 is a requirement. He has proven that 650 gr is the threshold for breaching heavy bone. He is not advocating to shoot heavy bone on purpose but he does know that eventually every bowhunter will hit heavy bone. Plan for a worst case scenario.
He has said countless times...Shoot the heaviest arrow with which you can still accept the trajectory.
Some guys (like me) shoot trad gear and rarely over 20 yards. For us, trajectory is less of a concern than maximizing penetration is.

 

[Horn]

@Allegheny Tom, I was hoping to hear some thoughts on the tapered arrows. If it's been discussed can someone send me a link or search suggestions. I admit I haven't searched for that information but this seemed like an active, relevant thread to ask about them. I'm just curious, and possibly ignorant. I meant no offense, just an attempt at humor and a touch of trying to steer the conversation.

 

[Plebe]

Ashby does not say 650 is a requirement. He has proven that 650 gr is the threshold for breaching heavy bone. He is not advocating to shoot heavy bone on purpose but he does know that eventually every bowhunter will hit heavy bone. Plan for a worst case scenario.
He has said countless times...Shoot the heaviest arrow with which you can still accept the trajectory.
Some guys (like me) shoot trad gear and rarely over 20 yards. For us, trajectory is less of a concern than maximizing penetration is.

So 650+ breaches the heavier than bone stuff too? Jk, jk.

I'm remembering that DIY Sportsman video showed that once arrows start to get heavy and slower, at some point momentum increases more with smaller losses in speed, thus likely the trajectory delta between 650+ and 850+ isn't very great. So why not 850+ then. I can understand that.

 

[NMSbowhunter]

A little bit about Dr. Ashby.

Dr Ashby hunted from an early age. As a teenager he was a member of one of Texas' first archery only hunting clubs and hunted with Fred Bear and Ben Pearson. As an adult he was an Optametric Surgeon (someone who operates on people's eyes). He was in the Air Force as his job and later worked for the government as a doctor on Indian reservations. His job took him to places where he could hunt, and he requested to be stationed near good hunting locations. He also took a few trips to Africa during this time to bowhunt.

While in Africa he met the game head game warden of South Africa who was working on getting a study together to prove that archery hunting was a viable method of taking African Game. They needed a professional scientist and hunter to help put the study together. The idea was to get every type of archery setup available they could get their hands on and just test them and see what worked. This would serve as a base line to determine what game laws there should be regarding archery hunting in South Africa. They shot many animals and vets autopsied them and recorded the findings. From this study bowhunting was legalized in South Africa. Many other African nations soon followed.

When Dr. Ashby retired, he moved to Zimbabwe and used his retirement money to purchase a ranch. He hunted 300 days a year and did some guiding for friends who were PH's (professional hunters). He planned to live out his years there, but fate had other plans. A socialist government under Robert Mugabe took over the country and they forced all non-nationals to leave the country on short notice and the Zimbabwe government seized his ranch and house and all personal property except his guns. He was forced to leave with very little. Under international law this was totally illegal, but the UN looked the other way.

Though he lost his home and much of his life savings, Dr. Ashby dusted himself off and moved to Australia. There he decided to continue the work he had started in Africa with the Natal Study. He tested mostly on Asiatic Water buffalo since by this point, he had refined what worked for penetrating game and needed a big animal. This testing was summarized into reports that were published free to all and came to be known as The Ashby Reports. Dr. Ashby told it like it was. He took no money from any sponsors. Much of what he found was not favorable to big archery companies, especially broadhead manufacturers. He has always made a special point to not take money for his work. For instance, when Alaska Bowhunting Company asked him if they could name their broadhead after him he said they could only do so if they made it plain that none of the money from the sales went to him, that he had no financial interest. Even money from his book, NOW, Ramblings from the old derelict bowhunter, all profits go to The Fisher House Foundation, a nonprofit that helps families of severely wounded soldiers.

Dr. Ashby is now retired due to health problems and lives in Texas. Dr, Ashby felt that taking anybody's money compromised the work, and the work was his legacy. It had to be correct, and it had to be available so that anyone else could do the same tests and get the same results. That is just good science.

Today, the Ashby Foundation works to continue the work Dr. Ashby started and followed up on what the data means in an attempt to give bowhunters the best factual information to help them maximize arrow lethality.

When people talk about the "fairy dust" they really need to understand that there are decades of documented science behind these findings.

 

[MattMan81]

Love FOC debate.. hehehe.
As far as the price of those broad heads, I think the Ol RF really nailed that one. Guys won't bat an eye at new 1200+ bow every year or other year. Deck out with sitka gear for 1000+. Drive a brand new truck. 500+ for a saddle or tree stand. Cell trail cams. Not to mention everything else guys have invested in. Yet they will grab a $10 broadhead off the shelf. The thing that actually kills the deer. Not gonna argue it doesn't work. They do.
But you can't baulk at the price if your spending big $$$ on other stuff. Also if you watch more than 1 show of the RF. Has said many times to tune your bow. You don't need extrema FOC to kill animals. But good arrow flight sure helps.
High FOC is not an instant kill no matter where you hit them. A bad shot, is a bad shot.
Penetration into a block of gel is not the same as a chest cavity. Everyone agrees a deer is going to be moving before and during the impact. It's not a solid mass stationary.
Every hunter needs to know what their equipment is capable of. What ever that is.
I believe the HFOC over all has been good for bow hunting. Guys are tuning their bows. Spending more time dialing in their equipment is a good thing!!
What ever your flinging. Send em strait.

 

[jiwhite86]

Live animals and carcasses.
He was originally asked by African game departments to demonstrate the feasibility of bowhunting, which was not legal in most African countries at the time. They wanted hard evidence of an arrow's lethality.
And they were not concerned with taking only perfect shots. They wanted ALL types of shot angles attempted in order to show all aspects of a variety of wounds. All shots had rifle shooters backing up the non lethal hits. All animals were quickly dispatched and immediately autopsied by veterinarians. And yes some carcasses were repeatedly shot in order to farther quantify data. As I recall, they had thousands of shots.
These Ashby studies are the main reason so many African countries legalized bowhunting.
Ashby did this on his own dime and he allowed hard evidence lead him along the search for finding the most effective arrow.

According to the Ashby foundation…

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[jiwhite86]

And here…

Dr. Ed Ashby's Bio

www.grizzlystik.com

Quote: “Four years later, Dr. Ashby and his team published what has come to be known as the “Natal Study.” The research was based not on scientific method but outcome driven research. Arrow penetration test were conducted on hundreds of freshly culled animals and results were meticulously recorded and documented.

All of Dr. Ashby's arrow penetration research was conducted on carcasses if freshly killed Asiatic buffalo.”

 

[jiwhite86]

I’m not saying that there is anything wrong with wanting to snort the fairy dust, or getting E-foc’d… whatever works for you.

But all of his actual studies that folks preach as the gospel were done on dead animals. He’s said it so himself in several podcasts I’ve listened to.

And I agree 100% that some extra weight forward and getting over that 450gr mark can definitely makes a difference.

But I also agree that a well-tuned 400gr arrow out of a 60lb bow with a 28” draw with a really sharp COC broadhead(2, 3, or 4 blade) is going to kill a large majority of everything on 4 legs this side of a buffalo(American, Cape, or Asiatic).

Everything in moderation, including moderation…


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Petrichor]

This is only a viable discussion if the mech opens; consider the pot stirred muahahahah.

 

[Weldabeast]

And here…

Dr. Ed Ashby's Bio

www.grizzlystik.com

Quote: “Four years later, Dr. Ashby and his team published what has come to be known as the “Natal Study.” The research was based not on scientific method but outcome driven research. Arrow penetration test were conducted on hundreds of freshly culled animals and results were meticulously recorded and documented.

All of Dr. Ashby's arrow penetration research was conducted on carcasses if freshly killed Asiatic buffalo.”

There is more than 1 study....the asiatic buffalo were in Australia with culls...Africa was a combination of live and cull....there obviously is a difference between a moving animal that's alive and a stationary dead 1 but the info is still valuable

 

[Allegheny Tom]

According to the Ashby foundation…

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I've heard several Ashby podcasts where he discussed the African studies in which they purposely took shots from less than ideal angles in order to gather data on every senario. In those cases, they would have rifle back-ups in order to quickly dispatch the critter on these marginal hits.
I'm 100% positive that I've heard him say that they were shooting live animals. He also insisted the carcass shots had to be done on FRESHLY killed animals because after rigormortous sets in the results would not be consistent with live animals or fresh carcasses.

 

[Allegheny Tom]

@Allegheny Tom, I was hoping to hear some thoughts on the tapered arrows. If it's been discussed can someone send me a link or search suggestions. I admit I haven't searched for that information but this seemed like an active, relevant thread to ask about them. I'm just curious, and possibly ignorant. I meant no offense, just an attempt at humor and a touch of trying to steer the conversation.

The main reason I gravitate towards Ashby findings is because of the extent of HIS research. I use tapered shafts, but not because I've personally tested dozens of shaft styles on thousands of real world shots. None of us in this discussion have quantified our results to the extent Ashby has. Our positions are largely anectotal based on a relatively small sample. I'm relying on his tests and data and he says tapered shafts penetrate better than parallel shafts. Barreled shafts penetrate the worst.