• 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

Who has snorted the Fairy Dust?

1simplemann said:
Excellent. That where you'll kill them the majority of your career. At least that's been the case for me.. Don't over think it. Guys have been killing them for years w/ recurve bows. speeds in the 100'. Slow as heck. The old timers really knew what worked. They just didn't know why. heavy arrows, heavy BH's, 2 blade, feathers so most likely a higher FOC. quiet bows. And guess what? they were blowing through them. Maybe not bone but at least the deer weren't running off with most of the arrow hanging out like you see on TV all the time.
Click to expand...

How do you know the old timers experienced better penetration across the board with crappier equipment?

It’s entirely possible they’re penetration stunk because of improperly spined arrows alone.

Penetration alone also leaves aside the material difference in precision from stick bow to compound.

It’s not a complete picture.

I’m all for maximizing efficiency of a system. But to pretend that the good ole boys in the good ole days had it figgered better than we do today is lacking a pile of evidence to support the notion.
 
kyler1945 said:
How do you know the old timers experienced better penetration across the board with crappier equipment?

It’s entirely possible they’re penetration stunk because of improperly spined arrows alone.
Click to expand...
Dad joined the hunting club I grew up in back in 1968. Ten members, bow only. I cant say for sure all were but most of them were tournament archers before becoming bowhunters. Not much using untuned equipment back then because most folks that were bowhunting were serious archers to start with unlike today. They averaged killing 30 deer a year as a group. I distinctly remember having conversations with a couple of the guys when I wanted to get a new bow and up my draw weight from 50 to 65. They just sorta laughed and said son, get your arrow flying right and put a good sharp broadhead on it and you can kill every deer you shoot with 35-40 pounds and you will shoot through most of them. They didnt talk about light vs. heavy because there was only heavy relative to now.
 
1simplemann said:
No. You have to have some energy behind it. I'm not sure of my Momentum but I'm sure it's at least .7 or more. My old set up was .4-.5 ish. 1st you have to build an arrow that incorporates as many of the 12 Ashby principles as you can. ( I have most but not all). Then you need to tune the Crap out out of that arrow. You also need a a bow w/ some decent speed, heavy draw weight, and a decent draw length AND the animal has to be close. Energy loss, down range rarely gets talked about. IMO a 52lb bow and 27"draw length and 650 grain arrow doesn't cut it but it's a start. If you do happen to hit that shoulder then You at least have a chance to get through it. I doubt you would get thru both shoulders. Anyway if you have the RIGHT set up then yes nothing is off limits. If not, then don't try it.

Since the RF is now affiliated w/ the Ashby Foundation I don't think he would ever say publicly to Aim for the shoulder. He would get roasted on social media, AT, etc.. However I know for a fact he's not scared to shoot a pig quartering to him. He's done it many times. He told me so himself. He's a good dude that genuinely wants to help people. Many people do not care for his style but personally I love that he's straight forward in his opinions. Most people these days are not. He also told me that he once talked to a Grizzly Stik pro staffer that shoots elk full frontal and the arrow comes out their butt. They don't publicly advocate that shot but they are not hesitant to take that shot if that's the only shot they have. It's lethal! Seen myself 1st hand. Only for close range. 20 and under.
Click to expand...
@Jimdude he actually covers it
Warning multi part series

 
kyler1945 said:
How do you know the old timers experienced better penetration across the board with crappier equipment?

It’s entirely possible they’re penetration stunk because of improperly spined arrows alone.

Penetration alone also leaves aside the material difference in precision from stick bow to compound.

It’s not a complete picture.

I’m all for maximizing efficiency of a system. But to pretend that the good ole boys in the good ole days had it figgered better than we do today is lacking a pile of evidence to support the notion.
Click to expand...
Because I am an old timer or least feel like it. My beard says I am ! LOL Seriously though. Back in the day, there was no internet, there was no youtube. If you were a young guy bit w/ the bowhunting bug and you wanted to kill deer w/ a bow then you to learn. To learn anything about bowhunting you had to either read Bowhunter magazine, hunt and make a ton of mistakes or to speed up the process you had to hunt w/ an experience bowhunter. I did all 3. I base what I said because one of my main early mentors was an "old timer" and other 2 gentlemen also helped me early on. These guys hunted during the recurve days(60's & 70's) and grew from there. The one thing they all had in common was that they killed deer consistently and AND they competed in NFAA. These guys could get their crap tuned and hit what they were shooting at. Unlike me! So my Old timer sample size was exactly 3 guys plus the the obvious guys like Fred Bear, Tom Jennings etc. Those guys Killed crap w/ recurves efficiently. Penetration was not an issue. Not sure about the rest of the Old timer group but those guys definitely did know what they were talking about. I owe them a lot.
 
Looks like there's new arrows from G5 as well as Victory ( rip ss) that might appeal to you heavy arrow guys
 
I'm the said old timer you speak of and I actually shoot a lighter arrow now than I did back in the day. I've always launched logs at deer simply because archery is a short range sport and trajectory has always taken a back seat to penetration in my book.
 
1simplemann said:
Because I am an old timer or least feel like it. My beard says I am ! LOL Seriously though. Back in the day, there was no internet, there was no youtube. If you were a young guy bit w/ the bowhunting bug and you wanted to kill deer w/ a bow then you to learn. To learn anything about bowhunting you had to either read Bowhunter magazine, hunt and make a ton of mistakes or to speed up the process you had to hunt w/ an experience bowhunter. I did all 3. I base what I said because one of my main early mentors was an "old timer" and other 2 gentlemen also helped me early on. These guys hunted during the recurve days(60's & 70's) and grew from there. The one thing they all had in common was that they killed deer consistently and AND they competed in NFAA. These guys could get their crap tuned and hit what they were shooting at. Unlike me! So my Old timer sample size was exactly 3 guys plus the the obvious guys like Fred Bear, Tom Jennings etc. Those guys Killed crap w/ recurves efficiently. Penetration was not an issue. Not sure about the rest of the Old timer group but those guys definitely did know what they were talking about. I owe them a lot.
Click to expand...

I trust your credentials. But they don’t matter, really, when discussing evidence.

What evidence do you have that as a group, bow hunters missed/wounded superficially/wounded fatally and didn’t recover at a lower rate from, say 1960-1980, than they did from 2000-now?

I know Fred bear was a good hunter. What evidence do you have to support the idea that he recovered more of the animals he shot at than the average archer or above average archer today?
 
kyler1945 said:
What evidence do you have that as a group, bow hunters missed/wounded superficially/wounded fatally and didn’t recover at a lower rate from, say 1960-1980, than they did from 2000-now?
Click to expand...
No hard evidence but as I mentioned as did @1simplemann, there werent as many "avg archers" bowhunting back then. Most bowhunters were also competitive tournament shooters as well. Folks that were not good with archery equipment didnt bowhunt because deer populations were not nearly what they are now and you had to be highly confident in your ability to bowhunt. I would guess there is a strong correlation between what you consider todays above avg bowhunters and the avg bowhunter of the time period you mentioned as far as killing effectiveness.
 
kyler1945 said:
I trust your credentials. But they don’t matter, really, when discussing evidence.

What evidence do you have that as a group, bow hunters missed/wounded superficially/wounded fatally and didn’t recover at a lower rate from, say 1960-1980, than they did from 2000-now?

I know Fred bear was a good hunter. What evidence do you have to support the idea that he recovered more of the animals he shot at than the average archer or above average archer today?
Click to expand...
Truthfully, none. Just my observations from then till now. No one was doing a study or taking notes. TMK, Ashby was the 1st to do that. What I find interesting is that in a way we've come full circle. When these guys started they had heavy wooden arrows, then heavy fiberglass arrow (micro flite's) and then heavy aluminum arrows. They had heavy self sharpening BH's because replaceable blade BH's didn't exist and feathers. Vanes were new when I started. These guys that mentioned earlier had walls full of antlers. Mostly plaques. spikes, Y bucks etc w/ some big ones mixed in. To me then I was in awe cause I had only killed a 32lb button buck. Anyone who had killed a buck w/ a bow was a hero to me and these guys had lot's of them. They were obviously successful so I soaked in everything they were willing to teach and listened to their stories. I killed my 1st buck w/ Jim and Cliff. They were mostly responsible. However No penetration but it was good shot. I still remember trying to find that buck. He didn't go far but we had issues. Anyway, Cliff looking at my BH after we pulled it out of the buck. " you got the wrong BH there kid , you want these!" he showed me his quiver and they were Bear Razor Head 145's. I was shoot Rocky Mountain 125s w/ a conical tip. I don't think he knew why they worked just that they did. he was also shooting Micro Flite's. I was shooting probably something like a Easton 2016. So basically I had penetration issues right off the bat. I corrected that a little later. However, what I was trying to say was that trajectory was not an issue for these guys. They were Lobbing them in there. If there was branch in the way, they didn't take the shot. They were patient and waited till everything was just right. Every year they got deer. Usually multiple deer. They had ancient compounds and I doubt they were going 150 fps maybe 165 fps tops. My Dad's Jennings Model T was 165fps. He killed a deer every year as well. All his shot were 20 yds. He never had issues about not being able to kill a deer due to trajectory. Back then 200 fps was possible but mostly unattainable. 300 fps was a pipe dream. So when I hear someone say that 250 is too slow I just laugh because they have no idea what slow really is. With that said, these guys did miss occasionally. Mostly due to range estimation. Speed was definitely a factor on the longer shots like 30 yds. It was just part of the game. However w/ today's bow's and a range finder that part of the game can be eliminated.
 
Never take human error out of bow hunting Range finder or not Deer moving will change distances in a hurry and this is the beauty of finding that setup that is a compromise Delivering adequate penetration and good trajectory Unfortunately my old beard is a lot grayer than it used to be and because of that I aint going backwards
 
1simplemann said:
Truthfully, none. Just my observations from then till now. No one was doing a study or taking notes. TMK, Ashby was the 1st to do that. What I find interesting is that in a way we've come full circle. When these guys started they had heavy wooden arrows, then heavy fiberglass arrow (micro flite's) and then heavy aluminum arrows. They had heavy self sharpening BH's because replaceable blade BH's didn't exist and feathers. Vanes were new when I started. These guys that mentioned earlier had walls full of antlers. Mostly plaques. spikes, Y bucks etc w/ some big ones mixed in. To me then I was in awe cause I had only killed a 32lb button buck. Anyone who had killed a buck w/ a bow was a hero to me and these guys had lot's of them. They were obviously successful so I soaked in everything they were willing to teach and listened to their stories. I killed my 1st buck w/ Jim and Cliff. They were mostly responsible. However No penetration but it was good shot. I still remember trying to find that buck. He didn't go far but we had issues. Anyway, Cliff looking at my BH after we pulled it out of the buck. " you got the wrong BH there kid , you want these!" he showed me his quiver and they were Bear Razor Head 145's. I was shoot Rocky Mountain 125s w/ a conical tip. I don't think he knew why they worked just that they did. he was also shooting Micro Flite's. I was shooting probably something like a Easton 2016. So basically I had penetration issues right off the bat. I corrected that a little later. However, what I was trying to say was that trajectory was not an issue for these guys. They were Lobbing them in there. If there was branch in the way, they didn't take the shot. They were patient and waited till everything was just right. Every year they got deer. Usually multiple deer. They had ancient compounds and I doubt they were going 150 fps maybe 165 fps tops. My Dad's Jennings Model T was 165fps. He killed a deer every year as well. All his shot were 20 yds. He never had issues about not being able to kill a deer due to trajectory. Back then 200 fps was possible but mostly unattainable. 300 fps was a pipe dream. So when I hear someone say that 250 is too slow I just laugh because they have no idea what slow really is. With that said, these guys did miss occasionally. Mostly due to range estimation. Speed was definitely a factor on the longer shots like 30 yds. It was just part of the game. However w/ today's bow's and a range finder that part of the game can be eliminated.
Click to expand...
AND they practiced religiously, I know my dad when he still bowhunted was also in an archery club and had several "Robin hood's" to the point of just being mad about losing a good arrow. When I first got into it and asked if he'd want to join, he refused because he didn't have the time to practice as much as he felt was necessary. Which, according to him, was as close to daily as possible with a pie plate on a round bale.
 
Buckhole75 said:
Never take human error out of bow hunting Range finder or not Deer moving will change distances in a hurry and this is the beauty of finding that setup that is a compromise Delivering adequate penetration and good trajectory Unfortunately my old beard is a lot grayer than it used to be and because of that I aint going backwards
Click to expand...
What's adequate penetration to you? For me, it's when I have 2 holes in the deer every time. Not just some of the time. Sadly, earlier in my bowhunting career that was not always the case. Still found them most of the time but sometimes it was a chore. Now I have eliminated that problem. Knock on wood.

What's good trajectory? For me, it 's when my bottom pin is still in the sight housing at my maximum range. 50 yds and that only because I hunt elk. I truthfully could hunt whitetails w/ only 1 pin. 30 yds and under. The closer they are, the more you take animal reaction and human error out of the equation. Then you add a rangefinder which most bowhunter's have these days then you really take a lot of human error out of it. Not all but most. I could tell a couple stories about rangefinder errors but it would take too long. If you KNOW the range, then a flatter trajectory gives you no advantage. On the IBO 3 D course it does though. To be competent in the deer woods EVERY bowhunter should know the difference between 10, 20 and 30 yds. IMO anything beyond that should either ranged or not taken at all. Sadly range estimation is a skill many new bowhunter's are not developing. On the outdoor NFAA course, some of the best scores EVER shot were done w/ some of the slowest setups. They knew the range and just pounded the X from 15' out to 80yds. Lobbed them in there. At Vegas, most of these archers are shoot light weight slow set ups w/ big wide heavy arrows. They pound the X. While that's not the deer woods, the same applies IMO. If you know the distance then you should hit what your shooting at. Every tree I hunt, I try to know the distance to every trail AHEAD of time. That way at the moment of truth I can take the guess work out of it.

Lastly, what's backwards? To me, backwards is not retrieving what your shooting at. Years ago, I started medium heavy and recovered most of what I had opportunities at. Then I went lighter and noticed a slight decline in recovery. Then I went to 5 grs per lb light and I REALLY started noticed a decline. Terrible IMO. Then I went Heavy and my success went up and critters that normally I wouldn't have been able to kill, they also started taking rides in my truck. For me, The pro's of a heavy Ashby Style arrow FAR outweigh the one and ONLY con. (Trajectory)
 
1simplemann said:
What's adequate penetration to you? For me, it's when I have 2 holes in the deer every time. Not just some of the time. Sadly, earlier in my bowhunting career that was not always the case. Still found them most of the time but sometimes it was a chore. Now I have eliminated that problem. Knock on wood.

What's good trajectory? For me, it 's when my bottom pin is still in the sight housing at my maximum range. 50 yds and that only because I hunt elk. I truthfully could hunt whitetails w/ only 1 pin. 30 yds and under. The closer they are, the more you take animal reaction and human error out of the equation. Then you add a rangefinder which most bowhunter's have these days then you really take a lot of human error out of it. Not all but most. I could tell a couple stories about rangefinder errors but it would take too long. If you KNOW the range, then a flatter trajectory gives you no advantage. On the IBO 3 D course it does though. To be competent in the deer woods EVERY bowhunter should know the difference between 10, 20 and 30 yds. IMO anything beyond that should either ranged or not taken at all. Sadly range estimation is a skill many new bowhunter's are not developing. On the outdoor NFAA course, some of the best scores EVER shot were done w/ some of the slowest setups. They knew the range and just pounded the X from 15' out to 80yds. Lobbed them in there. At Vegas, most of these archers are shoot light weight slow set ups w/ big wide heavy arrows. They pound the X. While that's not the deer woods, the same applies IMO. If you know the distance then you should hit what your shooting at. Every tree I hunt, I try to know the distance to every trail AHEAD of time. That way at the moment of truth I can take the guess work out of it.

Lastly, what's backwards? To me, backwards is not retrieving what your shooting at. Years ago, I started medium heavy and recovered most of what I had opportunities at. Then I went lighter and noticed a slight decline in recovery. Then I went to 5 grs per lb light and I REALLY started noticed a decline. Terrible IMO. Then I went Heavy and my success went up and critters that normally I wouldn't have been able to kill, they also started taking rides in my truck. For me, The pro's of a heavy Ashby Style arrow FAR outweigh the one and ONLY con. (Trajectory)
Click to expand...
Well said sir! I agree 100%.
 
Any one try a high foc set up with those tri-spine arrows from carbon express/feradyne? I'm not really an adult so I don't want full on adult arrows just 15%+ foc. Trajectory matters to me and I've put 2 holes in everything I've shot so far.
 
1simplemann said:
What's adequate penetration to you? For me, it's when I have 2 holes in the deer every time. Not just some of the time. Sadly, earlier in my bowhunting career that was not always the case. Still found them most of the time but sometimes it was a chore. Now I have eliminated that problem. Knock on wood.

What's good trajectory? For me, it 's when my bottom pin is still in the sight housing at my maximum range. 50 yds and that only because I hunt elk. I truthfully could hunt whitetails w/ only 1 pin. 30 yds and under. The closer they are, the more you take animal reaction and human error out of the equation. Then you add a rangefinder which most bowhunter's have these days then you really take a lot of human error out of it. Not all but most. I could tell a couple stories about rangefinder errors but it would take too long. If you KNOW the range, then a flatter trajectory gives you no advantage. On the IBO 3 D course it does though. To be competent in the deer woods EVERY bowhunter should know the difference between 10, 20 and 30 yds. IMO anything beyond that should either ranged or not taken at all. Sadly range estimation is a skill many new bowhunter's are not developing. On the outdoor NFAA course, some of the best scores EVER shot were done w/ some of the slowest setups. They knew the range and just pounded the X from 15' out to 80yds. Lobbed them in there. At Vegas, most of these archers are shoot light weight slow set ups w/ big wide heavy arrows. They pound the X. While that's not the deer woods, the same applies IMO. If you know the distance then you should hit what your shooting at. Every tree I hunt, I try to know the distance to every trail AHEAD of time. That way at the moment of truth I can take the guess work out of it.

Lastly, what's backwards? To me, backwards is not retrieving what your shooting at. Years ago, I started medium heavy and recovered most of what I had opportunities at. Then I went lighter and noticed a slight decline in recovery. Then I went to 5 grs per lb light and I REALLY started noticed a decline. Terrible IMO. Then I went Heavy and my success went up and critters that normally I wouldn't have been able to kill, they also started taking rides in my truck. For me, The pro's of a heavy Ashby Style arrow FAR outweigh the one and ONLY con. (Trajectory)
Click to expand...

Do NFAA targets react to sound or sense an object approaching them and move?

I'm all for 2 holes through a deer and that good stuff. But there are more factors to consider in hunting scenarios than knowing distance and sending an arrow to a bullseye, and dismissing the merits of flat trajectory and short time to target is shortsighted imo.

I agree with the poster (@Buckhole75) who thinks compromise is necessary, cut the cake how you will.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top