Oh man. I was hoping you would break out the 200 grain monolithic 3 blade for the third whack test. Fred Bear admitted to hitting three different big game animals on the OPPOSITE SIDE as they reacted to the sound of the bow and did a180 degree spin to exit the area, so, head, gut, and hip shots apply. I am jealous of your seemingly endless supply of "test subjects".
My first archery deer kill was a doe at 35 yards and she done just that. Did a 180 before the arrow go to her and somehow it hit perfectly. She might have made it 40 yards
@@RanchFairyThe head, shoulder, guts, and hips are not PREFERRED targets, but they are most certainly realistic. If the preferred target, your "vital v", moves after lauch, the other targets may be in its place. Nothing could be there as well, which is why long range shooting on live game is a suboptimal activity. I do not bow hunt, but if I did, I would use the sturdiest "bullet", i.e. a fixed broadhead. Really enjoy the channel.👍👍
If that doesnt change the "other guys" minds, its because they dont want to change...lol One thing about your comment about "unrealistic" shots is that they are very realistic...Animal jumps the string, moves at the last second, deflection from a twig/branch...Keep up the testing...Love watching your content!
JD does not speak for all of us target guys. I have been doing unknown 3D for 25 years plus. My gaming arrows for my tournament bow weigh 395 grains. Since 2016, my hunting arrows have been 700+ grains, currently 715 grains. Last year, I even entered some unknown events with my hunting rig and shot surprisingly well. You are breaking through. Keep it up.
ballistic gel is good for testing rotation. Blade deployment off mechs, amazing how few deploy, some deploy and close in the gel, crazy to see in that regards
@@user-nx8vp5sy5d Agree - I was surprised how many didn’t deploy. But I think that’s the gel again. Not a fair medium. It’s incredibly heavy and dense for its size
Vortex Nation similarly brought up a great point on bullet construction. If we could design a bullet that recognized that it would be going into a softer part of the target it would expand dramatically and cause lots of soft tissue damage. On the contrary if it hit something hard it would drive through and cause structural damage to bones and other hard objects and still go through the target. Therein lies the problem, we hunters are not going to look at our quarry and go “ this one needs the structure breaker or this one needs the soft tissue damager” and rechamber a round. What’s the solution? - use the more robust round and place the round/ arrow where it counts regardless if there’s hard stuff in the way… just like you are teaching. Great stuff.
@@nicolaalberti7736 a heavier constructed round such as a monolithic copper would be the more robust round as you could go through bone structure while retaining a lot of mass and going through more of an animal after encountering that bone structure
Switched to a adult arrow a few years ago when I first dove into this stuff. Happy I did. Haven’t had a issue with penetration since. Also been better on my strings. Also love steel broadheads can mr go wrong w good steel and a sharp edge
I always had respect for dudley until i saw what he was trying to doto you on his podcast. I thought it was digusting. I get no satisfaction by picking on people and trying to make them look stupid, unless they are attempting to do the same. Rock on #RanchFairy
Shot my last doe of the season. I was 15' up she was 15 yards out. It was pretty straight down. I broke the front scapula, drove down through lungs, clipped the top of the heart, and broke the opposite side front leg bone. It was a bit too far forward... It was NOT a pass through. However, the animal was dead. That would have NEVER worked with a light setup and a mechanical. I shoot 525 grains. A single bevel Iron Will 125 grain broadhead with bleeders and a 100 grain insert. The arrow is an Apollo. This is my whitetail hammer and I will never go back. No I don't shoot past 35 yards, ever. I don't need to.
Those happen all the time. Next to no penetration lots of wounded animals and once in a while a pass through. See any bow hunting show. Count how they only get 3-6 inch penetration on no bone shots. Not trying to be condescending or rude but that test is everywhere.
@@vfonte218 I don’t know maybe I tune arrows and bolts equally I like mechanical for the bigger cuts. You have a 550 grain arrow or bolt flying perfect makes no difference what you use fixed or mechanical they all break through bones. Fixed might be better but i personally don’t care for that a passthrough all the time is what matters to me.
@@RanchFairy fast and light with no momentum sweet. I do predict the fixed will do better than mechanical just from simply not losing momentum or KE to open. But this will be an awesome test.
I hunt outside in the fall and winter, so I need outside testing comparison. I shoot adult arrows. I found that I get deeper penetration at 30 yards compared to 20 yard's.
I'm a subscriber and enjoy your perspective on broadheads it is excellent data to consider, for me on deer (never shot a pig) I have had great success with a 400 fps plus crossbow shooting a 290 grain 20 inch bolt with a Swhacker 2" cut 100 grain broadhead (true field point accuracy for me & it's been a tough broadhead for me/has never come apart), total arrow weight 390 grains, minimal arrow arc path to target (keeps me more accurate less drop to consider, I can't afford an Oracle X), maximum speed retention (less deer reaction time to shot), many deer killed with this set up & always an exit wound, I keep my shots more in the forward triangle area as you refer to. -W. Liggett
Be sweet to see a test between identical profile broadheads in a vented light weight version and a non vented heavier version with some extra insert weight behind it and see how much the weight matters vs just having a good sharp broadhead
@@YoureSoVane there is no way to make a perfect test but comparing one style of broadhead to another and only considering the weight and not the design of the head is what almost all tests are. May as well just test a 100 grain field tip against a 200 grain 3 to 1 single bevel and just comment on how the heavy weight is what made it penetrate
@@pennyontrack The point is to stop saying that any one factor is true for all targets and all broadheads, but that it's true for similar broadheads on similar targets. Certain target media will favor some designs more than others. Certain broadhead designs favor different speeds and the target media will react differently based on speed. There's very few things that are 100% true across all designs and all media. Sharpness matters. More gradual taper matters. Smoother transitions matter. Lower friction coefficient matters. Lower frontal area matters. Stronger designs matter. Mass either helps or does nothing. Pretty much everything else is dependent on the target media. Single bevel doesn't help in hide if you isolate the variables, but it helps in bone. Three blades can be better in hide but worse in bone. It's all dependent on the media, so we can't take the media out of the conversation. It's literally the basic idea of "the target defines the test" in that different variables are just optimizing for the test. Isolate your variables if you want to identify a pattern.
I love all the tests.I think the dumpster test was the best i really thought that it would have been same had foam, what happened? I can't figure... but i am from Virginia keep up the good work
After switching from 400 spine 100gr rage heads to 250 spine full length arrows with 100gr outserts and a 200gr single bevel…I haven’t had a single deer run (brisk walk) farther than 20 yards in 2 years. The last deer I shot with the first setup it bounced off. 70# compound with both setups.
Wait... all this time, I thought broadheads were meant for harvesting foam. You should see my trophy room... all 4 walls are completely padded. Not 1 square inch is left uncovered.
Great test! Yes, animals are a variable medium to shoot into. They are not homogenous like foam or gel. + sharp broadheads penetrate differently from each other based on shape, length, width/size of cut, thickness and weight. How fast were the arrows moving out of the test bow?
Troy I am so sorry people don’t understand what you’re talking about and actually “proving “how the perfect set up is…well so close to perfect even with a buck fever shot I really do believe that anyone who doesn’t want a “pass through “should Never be allowed to hunt with archery equipment ! Seriously,if that’s your intention of not passing through, you are a child with OUT experience
Now test it against a flapper 380-400ish grain front deploy broadhead and rage. Then show the exact shot comparison side by side to the heavy arrow and heavy FOC
Some people just don't have common sense Troy. Carry on brother trying to apply knowledge and understanding to those who seem to be living in a box. BTW, Merry Christmas to you and your family, may God bless you and remember, without Christ, there would be no Christmas
Worksharp precision adjust It's a knife sharpener too! I have a "sharpening single bevel broadheads video" See that Follow the same procedure but don't change the angle since it's a double bevel. Sharpen like a knife.
Crazy that a Foam target that is built to stop arrow/bolts stops them . Why would they use foam as a test medium thats koo koo. Foam Hunters thats funny . Great video keep it up .
Why ammo manufactures use ballistic gel to evaluate penetration, expansion, and other characteristics of their bullets and loads is koo koo too... Defenders against ballistic gel !!
Maybe you explained this and I didn’t understand; but what is the purpose of the field point vs broadhead testing? It’s interesting but I’m not sure I understand what this data means.
there are some "very SELF important" individuals "testing" field points on foam and bashing on Ed Ashby due to "more efficient bows...." (throw physics out, that's just old information!!!). They test on foam and allude to the fact that the penetration in foam with field points is equivalent to hunting arrows. One of them is a well established "archery oligarch" and knows all things. Well, I figured I'd show that field points and broadheads, on meat, have different results.
@@RanchFairy wow. That’s… amazing. And stupid. Thanks for making this make sense for me, or rather not make sense. I mean, the way foam stops an arrow is by the heat and friction it generates on the arrow shaft, right? That’s why they make broadhead targets out of foam? That’s not what happens in a meat target, and I would have thought that would be obvious. Thanks for making the obvious outcome indisputable I guess.
@@kurtisb100 I think this is sarcasm. Ok. So if you see a test with field points stating some penetration results. IN FOAM, gel, multiple layers of cardboard, car hoods, water jugs, etc. The target defines the test with field points. So field point into a target do not simulate on meat with a broadhead. BUT the clickbait guys who claim "ultimate arrow penetration test" or "heavy vs light, with field points".....then claim it will replicate on meat with a broadhead are completely lost or intentionally rigging the test. Well, that video shows the difference.
@@RanchFairy no, I didn’t mean it sarcastically. Sarcasm isn’t beneath me, but this time I meant what I said literally. I haven’t seen these other ‘tests’ you’re referring to. However, I can see why you might think it was sarcastic, now I look at my comment and read it back to myself.
Awesome as always Troy. Cant wait to see the other tests between mechanical and fixed on pigs. Side note: I really think people get the idea of the Ashby study wrong they are so focused on the grains not the statement “the heaviest projectile you can get going as fast as it can in a trajectory that is suitable for you.” I know you don’t care about the kinetic energy machine i understand why it makes sense why but I think that plays a factor for selection charts. I tested and tried 350-650 grains and it was surprisingly astonishing that 600 and 560 performed the exact same with momentum and fps but the KE was vastly different. 101 with 560 88 with 600 275 fps both 0.8 slugs of momentum both at start 0.7 at 50 yards both. I now decided that I get the absolute best at 520 grains with trajectory and speed and momentum with ke. I think that’s what the crossbow likes to eat the best. And this is the point draw weight, draw length mechanical assistances or not all play factors to what works the best. 3X the draw weight plus for my crossbow was in diminishing returns. Yes there was benefit to way less sound on shot but it was the same for 560s the 17” ish power stroke with no mechanical assistance will be different than a bow. People need to shoot their machines test their machines and see what works the best.
I don't know about the momentum on 600 and 560 exactly the same. My data does NOT show that at all from 388-715 grains progressively more momentum. I am going to do some more in-depth "trajectory" work this year. INITIAL observations. When you zero multiple pins for a 600 grain arrow the trajectory issue goes away. With a slider - zero trajectory issues. It's a slider. But when you shoot pins with a 500 grain arrow and THEN shoot 600 grains. But using the faster arrow pin set - it APPEARS to be a horrible rainbow. This is because the trajectory curves are different. The 600 grain trajectory curve is more like a rainbow. The lighter arrows actually look like a comma on its side. flat, initially, then rapidly dropping off. I do know, 400-500 grain arrows, the pins progressively open up as you get past 40 yards. Again, if a slider, not an issue. But the heavier arrow tends to have much more consistent gaps. This is plain and simple Aerodynamic drag increases X velocity squared. I'll keep tinkering and stay tuned - I have been wrong before!!! But I am Gonna go find out. As I started - INITIAL observations are not final facts.
@@RanchFairy I agree with your analysis as well and to be really fair I did not consider the differences of compounds vs recurves. I also think there is factors too with length of the machines and so much. I wouldn’t be surprised at all if you main bow gave results and a second bow that was slightly shorter didnt give different results. The science of archery is fun and progressive lol.
I might have missed it, but just curious about total arrow weight, and did you change the broadhead after each shot? Cause it would really be impressive if you didn't after the head shot.
Something that your test didn't show. Edge sharpness would have eroded after each broadhead shot. The obvious conclusion would be even greater performance with a fresh sharp blade. Great test as always. The haters have an unknown agenda. I don't know what their end game is in defaming Dr. Ed's work. I suppose that every time we show them qualitative results, they get attention. They probably need that to satisfy their diminishing libido.
"He" doesn't care because "he" has killed, on video, multiple pigs with 40#@26" draw compound to 70#. So it literally doesn't matter. Well, it does matter, because the faster you go the more DRAG you impart on the flying object, in the air and after impact into the meat (which is significantly more dense). But no one wants to hear that. It's all logic and "stuff" So, to answer - 60# at 28.5"
Love the straight up facts it amazing me how many hunters no matter how much proof they are shown an proven still will use x brands because some sponsored hunter uses so called setup they will use it no matter what.You would think that hunters would want a proven setup that would offer maximum penetration at any angle an shoot the animal when a shot presents itself
@@RanchFairy The ones I've read so far describe some really keen qualitative observations, but I haven't yet found any statistical analysis. What specific statistical tools does he use?
@@ThirdLawPaircommon sense ones. At no time do I recall him mentioning any stat significance. You would need way too many data points. If one arrow penetrates 2 inches and another passes thru you will omly helieve it if some stats package says it significantly different? Shame.
@@african7498 There are plenty of statistical tools that work with lower number of data points. What you are describing with the comparison of a skin-deep wound versus a total pass through is a common method when doing pilot studies before committing your time and resources to a more rigorous study. You can make a rough comparison and find out which measurements are even worth it to do a in a more in-depth investigation. Even then, it's still practical to compare 3 or 4 shots of each to get a sense of how much variance there is. If you compare 2 arrows with only 1 data point each, and say that one penetrated 26% more than the other, you have no way of knowing if each of them tend to vary by that much anyway. Even by standards for preliminary unpublished pilot studies, that's just so weak.
the less data points the bigger the difference needs to be to be statistically significant at a given confidence level - or put another way - smaller differences can be stat significant with enough data points. But this is not a boring stat page. @@ThirdLawPair
I just watched a 2-1/2 hour podcast with you and Dudley. Podcast made me really like you. I know you already know this, but don’t ever talk to him again. Podcast made me subscribe, to you!
Ya you were talking to god himself I guess? god with small g. He made 100% sure I’ll never watch another of his videos. I sure won’t comment on his podcast because what I’d say would not be nice, so I’ll just shut up about this. Thank you for all your help. I’m increasing FOC slowly now. Can’t imagine the total weight and FOC I shot 40 years ago with 200 grain Rothaar Snuffer and my Black Widow with 2219’s. Actually FOC might not have been that high because of heavy 2219. I know it took 4 huge feathers to make it fly right but dang those arrows hit hard out of my slow recurve. That set up killed a lot of bucks from 1980 to about 2004. Got older and weaker and now I shoot Mathews VXR. Talk about culture shock. But Thank you.
you are right and always will be. asberry forgot more then those fools you are talking about.when a man has done that much shooting and killing of huge tuff animals the other people should LISTEN to him.
So glad Troy is going after the target guys. Dudley and crew have zero ability to get outta their little box. They truly believe they own the right to say what's right and isn't right. They can't take the fact that someone else, from outside their little target community, is guiding people in the proper direction.
@@RanchFairyDoes Dudley know that? Didn't look like it to me. I like his advice on how to shoot. Not so much on what to shoot. FOC works because the animal gets a vote and it never stops moving.
@@RanchFairy the interview with Dudley was very painful to watch and not from your side but his. I like a lot of what he puts out but man he wasn’t even trying to discuss what you have found in testing. I really appreciate the content you have put out Troy. The one thing I would like to see is testing on fixed blades with the same shape and cutting edge but different weight overall arrows. A vented vs non vented head of the exact same design and more insert weight behind the heavier non vented head to make the weight difference more. I think the heavier broadheads are generally a lot better design than lighter heads and they may be penetrating better just based on how bad ass the head is more so than the weight of the arrow. Keep up the good work you are very appreciated in the community
Troy, thank you and Ed Ashby and others for all the testing that is changing the world of bowhunting. The more I learn about arrow lethality and follow you the more success I have.
You know I realized my problem with Ranch fairy isn't Troy, he seems like a perfectly nice guy. My problem is his following takes in the OPINIONS he says like its oxygen and then goes to every other video on RUclips and talks down to everyone like they're go stupid
I appreciate your analysis, we'd sure get along in deer camp. But brother, that video is literally me shooting a pig with a field point and a broadhead. Oh don't forget KE and Momentum at launch and 60 yards Speed erosion over distance Vanes and speed erosion Arrow tuning, Bare shaft tuning, broadhead sharpening, MULTIPLE demonetized videos with detailed necropsies showing internal organ damage, broken bone, detailed organ videos showing the broadhead path. The list goes on. Where's the opinion?
A target is built to be consistent, so that if you hit it at the top, bottom, center, outer ring, whatever, the target will stop the arrow. Regardless of where the arrow hits the target is the same. Why would someone think that an animal would be consistently the same from top, bottom, center, shoulder blade etc.? That seems like kind of a stupid thing to make an argument on... "If I shoot this target with my kid's bow or my bow, the arrow will penetrate about the same with field points, regardless of the arrow" well yeah... no sh*t...
@@RanchFairy it just seems bananas to me. Is there an inherent assumption that they are hitting the same spot on every animal so “their” targets “aren’t” changing? Even so, an elk is different than a white-tail is different than a blackbear is different than a hog… I can’t square how they can present that as science in my head.
Troy, I know you don’t run with an X-Bow however do to injury I do My question is….do you know of any “ANY “ target that can stop an adult X-bow arrow with fixed blade broad heads?? Right now I’m passing through 2 big shot targets and 3 brick house targets all set in a single row with a 3/4”rubber mat behind Them and hard wood pallet boards in the very back! Nothing seems to be able to stop my setup 🤷🏼♂️even after dulling the b. h.’s with a file I will not hunt with out testing ALL my equipment and dialing them all in! Thanks Mike
@@MichaelLakota-vc4tk right on. It might be worth checking out some x-bow reviews of those targets then. I've got a Mathew's V31 65# 28.5" draw with 626gr arrows with GrizzlyStik Alaskan 200 broad heads 25% FOC. I haven't measured but it's calculated around 220 fps and the target takes it like a champ. It's small and expensive but well worth it imo.
Have you invited them to test their set ups on real meat targets instead of foam ? If they truly believed what they were saying, surely they would accept an invitation to the ranch to shoot their fast set ups in side by side comparison on the same targets.
how dare you show real stuff and speak facts lol we all know what really matters is how your arrow choice makes you feel and look to your buds...my arrow is moving 1800 fps weight 250 grains with a 15 blade 10 inch cut flipper and will pass through elephants...
The testing Troy is talking about, and he is misleading in his comments, is about mass, ke, and momentum. Tests like this have to be controlled. That is just how scientific tests are done. The test has zero correlation to penetration depth in an animal. In the foam test, which is a consistent resistance target. One of the tests was to look at several different bows and draw weight. It showed that as we increased draw weight, we saw an increase in penetration. (This should be obvious) Next, we did a matching KE between two arrows of unequal mass. What we saw was a very minimum penetration difference. (This is due to the target being an equal resistant target) Although the heavy did out-perform. Next, we added a hard-impact target. This was PVC. The PVC does not represent bone or any part of an animal. When we shot with equal KE, the heavy outperformed, and it was obvious it outperformed. So, at this point, we see the same thing that Ashby saw. This includes some testing by ttroy. The heavy arrow outperformed. This is what should happen. At this point of testing, we need to look at what gives us penetration. We know the main factor is mass. Increasing mass increases penetration. Again, this is what Ashby saw. But we don't know if it's KE or momentum. (we actually do; physics already tells us the answer) So, the next test was to match the momentum at the target between two different weight arrows. What we saw is that the lighter arrow outperformed. Here we are back to the same issue about a equal resistant target. So we added PVC to the target. Again this is to have a hard impact. what we saw was that the heavy arrow with matching momentum did not break the PVC. What that shows is momentum and mass don't outperform mass and KE. (we don't really need to test this either, as all you need to do is look at trad vs compound bows, and we can see a lighter arrow with a greater amount of KE over a heavy arrow with less KE even though it has more momentum. There is a guy with a physics background who talks about this and explains what gives us penetration. You can look him up on RUclips. Jared Spencer, Ph.D. Again, the test only looked at physics with mass, KE, and momentum. The test and the amount of penetration depth have ZERO CORRELATION to an animal. Our outcome matched what Ashby saw when you add weight to an arrow being shot from the same bow. The next test that needs to be done is the same setup with a broadhead and shooting animals. Test one would be to match the KE at the animal. Test two is to match the momentum at the animal. This would take the data set to the next step.
You showed up!!!! troll#1. For all watching and reading. The appearance of foam fondling second tier worshipper #1 is here. The animals are not consistent. Therefore CONTROLLING the test medium is 100% intentionally controlling the "test". You are rigging the test with a medium you know will give you the results you wish to see. Then YOU ALLOW the general public to believe they will see the exact same results with a hunting arrow. No discussion of: 1. Arrow tune 2. Spine 3. Arrow flight 4. Broadhead type 5. Sharpness and durability of the cutting edge You and your buddies just say "with the foam fondling fellas magic system you can shoot any arrow, any broadhead, and your results will be the same with any arrow system, any mass, any steel, even the edge of a beer can will work". If you're not saying that. Then you need to say it. But you can't, because then you have to burn all your reports. Guess I have more videos to make. Literally, the field point in this video did not perform anywhere near the broadhead. By the way, those arrows were tuned and flight maximized. Time to break out the mechs and hit some hard things I guess!!
Would you rather try and stop a 285# linebacker running 10mph or a 185# linebacker running 15mph lol Also would you rather get hit on your driver door by a motorcycle doing 80mph, a car doing 70mph, or a dodge ram 3500 doing 60mph. Remember your on the other side of that door
irrelevant. in ALL jurisdictions with wild boar, broadheads with the proper minimum citting diameter or greater) are legal for hunting. Fieldpoints are NOT legal ANYWHERE for hunting.
Oh man. I was hoping you would break out the 200 grain monolithic 3 blade for the third whack test. Fred Bear admitted to hitting three different big game animals on the OPPOSITE SIDE as they reacted to the sound of the bow and did a180 degree spin to exit the area, so, head, gut, and hip shots apply. I am jealous of your seemingly endless supply of "test subjects".
Oh, its on the list.
I can die happy now. @@RanchFairy
My first archery deer kill was a doe at 35 yards and she done just that. Did a 180 before the arrow go to her and somehow it hit perfectly. She might have made it 40 yards
@@RanchFairyThe head, shoulder, guts, and hips are not PREFERRED targets, but they are most certainly realistic. If the preferred target, your "vital v", moves after lauch, the other targets may be in its place. Nothing could be there as well, which is why long range shooting on live game is a suboptimal activity.
I do not bow hunt, but if I did, I would use the sturdiest "bullet", i.e. a fixed broadhead.
Really enjoy the channel.👍👍
If that doesnt change the "other guys" minds, its because they dont want to change...lol One thing about your comment about "unrealistic" shots is that they are very realistic...Animal jumps the string, moves at the last second, deflection from a twig/branch...Keep up the testing...Love watching your content!
JD does not speak for all of us target guys. I have been doing unknown 3D for 25 years plus. My gaming arrows for my tournament bow weigh 395 grains. Since 2016, my hunting arrows have been 700+ grains, currently 715 grains. Last year, I even entered some unknown events with my hunting rig and shot surprisingly well. You are breaking through. Keep it up.
It isn't dudley
@RanchFairy oh, JM it is then.
My test kit arrives today in the mail! Awesome vids, love the content and appreciate the help.
Best argument for sharp broadheads i have seen.
Appreciate you Ranch 🧚♀️, been listening for years. Have a Merry Christmas!! 🏹💘🦌👍
That was pleasing to watch, looking forward to the mechancicals vs fixed test.
Love your testing!!!
The Foam Bowhunters 😂😂😂
except for the wind noise, great testing, keep it real and telling the truth, looking forward to more, hope you have a good xmas
Just as I figured. Keep up the great work
ballistic gel is good for testing rotation. Blade deployment off mechs, amazing how few deploy, some deploy and close in the gel, crazy to see in that regards
@@user-nx8vp5sy5d
Agree - I was surprised how many didn’t deploy. But I think that’s the gel again. Not a fair medium. It’s incredibly heavy and dense for its size
Nice testing, real life animal . Thank YOU!
looked dead to me. haha
Vortex Nation similarly brought up a great point on bullet construction. If we could design a bullet that recognized that it would be going into a softer part of the target it would expand dramatically and cause lots of soft tissue damage. On the contrary if it hit something hard it would drive through and cause structural damage to bones and other hard objects and still go through the target. Therein lies the problem, we hunters are not going to look at our quarry and go “ this one needs the structure breaker or this one needs the soft tissue damager” and rechamber a round. What’s the solution? - use the more robust round and place the round/ arrow where it counts regardless if there’s hard stuff in the way… just like you are teaching. Great stuff.
What is the more robust round ? The one that penetrates more in ballistic gel or the one that expandes more in the same ballistic gel?
@@nicolaalberti7736 a heavier constructed round such as a monolithic copper would be the more robust round as you could go through bone structure while retaining a lot of mass and going through more of an animal after encountering that bone structure
@@mattp9574
Yes, of course, but, point is, to compare bullets to each other, they use ballistic gel because it is a constant and homogeneous medium.
Switched to a adult arrow a few years ago when I first dove into this stuff. Happy I did. Haven’t had a issue with penetration since. Also been better on my strings. Also love steel broadheads can mr go wrong w good steel and a sharp edge
Rf and Ashby speaking the truth on the matter!
I always had respect for dudley until i saw what he was trying to doto you on his podcast. I thought it was digusting. I get no satisfaction by picking on people and trying to make them look stupid, unless they are attempting to do the same. Rock on #RanchFairy
Dudley- Cam Hanes and the whole slew of them hunt right on ranch’s where it’s easy pickings- they are the furthest thing from being a hunter.
Shot my last doe of the season. I was 15' up she was 15 yards out. It was pretty straight down. I broke the front scapula, drove down through lungs, clipped the top of the heart, and broke the opposite side front leg bone. It was a bit too far forward... It was NOT a pass through. However, the animal was dead. That would have NEVER worked with a light setup and a mechanical. I shoot 525 grains. A single bevel Iron Will 125 grain broadhead with bleeders and a 100 grain insert. The arrow is an Apollo. This is my whitetail hammer and I will never go back. No I don't shoot past 35 yards, ever. I don't need to.
Can you do this same test but along side of a lightweight setup with a fixed blade 100 grain head. That would be a awesome test in my mind.
Those happen all the time. Next to no penetration lots of wounded animals and once in a while a pass through.
See any bow hunting show. Count how they only get 3-6 inch penetration on no bone shots.
Not trying to be condescending or rude but that test is everywhere.
@@chrisruzsa2798 usually with a un tuned set up also. Most guys that shoot mechanical heads can't get a fixed head to fly
@@vfonte218 I don’t know maybe I tune arrows and bolts equally I like mechanical for the bigger cuts.
You have a 550 grain arrow or bolt flying perfect makes no difference what you use fixed or mechanical they all break through bones.
Fixed might be better but i personally don’t care for that a passthrough all the time is what matters to me.
I may get out some 400 spine arrows that fly half assed and some punch point broadheads or mechs. But they'll be fast.
@@RanchFairy fast and light with no momentum sweet. I do predict the fixed will do better than mechanical just from simply not losing momentum or KE to open. But this will be an awesome test.
I hunt outside in the fall and winter, so I need outside testing comparison. I shoot adult arrows. I found that I get deeper penetration at 30 yards compared to 20 yard's.
Makin em look like idiots since day one... - Mr. Fowler for the win once again. 🤘🏻
I'm a subscriber and enjoy your perspective on broadheads it is excellent data to consider, for me on deer (never shot a pig) I have had great success with a 400 fps plus crossbow shooting a 290 grain 20 inch bolt with a Swhacker 2" cut 100 grain broadhead (true field point accuracy for me & it's been a tough broadhead for me/has never come apart), total arrow weight 390 grains, minimal arrow arc path to target (keeps me more accurate less drop to consider, I can't afford an Oracle X), maximum speed retention (less deer reaction time to shot), many deer killed with this set up & always an exit wound, I keep my shots more in the forward triangle area as you refer to. -W. Liggett
Your figure on the broadhead gutshot did not disappoint.
🤣🤣🤣
Great stuff ! You’re hysterically funny 😆 and I love it 🥰‼️
Merry Christmas to you and your family 🎄🎁🍻
God Bless 🙏😇❤️🇺🇸😎🎯💪
Be sweet to see a test between identical profile broadheads in a vented light weight version and a non vented heavier version with some extra insert weight behind it and see how much the weight matters vs just having a good sharp broadhead
Different form factors will favor weight more than others. It won't be a perfect test across all arrows, just representative for the tested arrow.
@@YoureSoVane there is no way to make a perfect test but comparing one style of broadhead to another and only considering the weight and not the design of the head is what almost all tests are. May as well just test a 100 grain field tip against a 200 grain 3 to 1 single bevel and just comment on how the heavy weight is what made it penetrate
@@pennyontrack The point is to stop saying that any one factor is true for all targets and all broadheads, but that it's true for similar broadheads on similar targets. Certain target media will favor some designs more than others. Certain broadhead designs favor different speeds and the target media will react differently based on speed.
There's very few things that are 100% true across all designs and all media. Sharpness matters. More gradual taper matters. Smoother transitions matter. Lower friction coefficient matters. Lower frontal area matters. Stronger designs matter. Mass either helps or does nothing. Pretty much everything else is dependent on the target media. Single bevel doesn't help in hide if you isolate the variables, but it helps in bone. Three blades can be better in hide but worse in bone. It's all dependent on the media, so we can't take the media out of the conversation.
It's literally the basic idea of "the target defines the test" in that different variables are just optimizing for the test. Isolate your variables if you want to identify a pattern.
keep up the good work troy.
I love all the tests.I think the dumpster test was the best i really thought that it would have been same had foam, what happened? I can't figure... but i am from Virginia keep up the good work
After switching from 400 spine 100gr rage heads to 250 spine full length arrows with 100gr outserts and a 200gr single bevel…I haven’t had a single deer run (brisk walk) farther than 20 yards in 2 years. The last deer I shot with the first setup it bounced off. 70# compound with both setups.
Heck Yeah!!
Wait... all this time, I thought broadheads were meant for harvesting foam. You should see my trophy room... all 4 walls are completely padded. Not 1 square inch is left uncovered.
That’s amazing 🤩,how are you able to type in your straight jacket?🧥🤪🤣😂👍🍻💯
Merry Christmas 🎄🎁
God Bless you and your sense of humor!🙏😇🤣🤪
@@anthonyforfare7223 with my mind. People don't believe I can do it, which is ironically what put me in here
@@PersonalBestOutdoors 👍🤣😂🍻🤪 you still got it 🥰😆‼️🤩❤️🍻
13:04 thanks for real world testing
More of this!
Great test! Yes, animals are a variable medium to shoot into. They are not homogenous like foam or gel. + sharp broadheads penetrate differently from each other based on shape, length, width/size of cut, thickness and weight.
How fast were the arrows moving out of the test bow?
Troy I am so sorry people don’t understand what you’re talking about and actually “proving “how the perfect set up is…well so close to perfect even with a buck fever shot
I really do believe that anyone who doesn’t want a “pass through “should Never be allowed to hunt with archery equipment ! Seriously,if that’s your intention of not passing through, you are a child with OUT experience
Oh boy, Here come the ranch dude, I'm going to learn something today
Heck of a 3d target!
Now test it against a flapper 380-400ish grain front deploy broadhead and rage. Then show the exact shot comparison side by side to the heavy arrow and heavy FOC
Big heavy car vs light heavy car which one do you want be in when accident happens ?
Some people just don't have common sense Troy. Carry on brother trying to apply knowledge and understanding to those who seem to be living in a box.
BTW, Merry Christmas to you and your family, may God bless you and remember, without Christ, there would be no Christmas
Great videos as always.
Really enjoyed your Dumpster target. 😂😂
Will there ever be RF Dumpster target coming out on the market? 😉🤪🤣
It might just be
Did you resharpen after that first shot?
What jig do you recommend for magnus stinger buzzcut
Worksharp precision adjust
It's a knife sharpener too! I have a "sharpening single bevel broadheads video"
See that
Follow the same procedure but don't change the angle since it's a double bevel. Sharpen like a knife.
Whats the bows poundage?
Arrow weight?
Etc?
Thanks
Im not sure if its the camera angle but that bow seems slow..
I could be wrong.
Probably because it is slow. That's a 600+ grain arrow. It'll be around 200ft/s
because the bow is slow it looked like a switchback
Crazy that a Foam target that is built to stop arrow/bolts stops them . Why would they use foam as a test medium thats koo koo. Foam Hunters thats funny . Great video keep it up .
Why ammo manufactures use ballistic gel to evaluate penetration, expansion, and other characteristics of their bullets and loads is koo koo too... Defenders against ballistic gel !!
Maybe you explained this and I didn’t understand; but what is the purpose of the field point vs broadhead testing? It’s interesting but I’m not sure I understand what this data means.
there are some "very SELF important" individuals "testing" field points on foam and bashing on Ed Ashby due to "more efficient bows...." (throw physics out, that's just old information!!!).
They test on foam and allude to the fact that the penetration in foam with field points is equivalent to hunting arrows. One of them is a well established "archery oligarch" and knows all things.
Well, I figured I'd show that field points and broadheads, on meat, have different results.
@@RanchFairy wow. That’s… amazing. And stupid. Thanks for making this make sense for me, or rather not make sense.
I mean, the way foam stops an arrow is by the heat and friction it generates on the arrow shaft, right? That’s why they make broadhead targets out of foam? That’s not what happens in a meat target, and I would have thought that would be obvious. Thanks for making the obvious outcome indisputable I guess.
@@kurtisb100 I think this is sarcasm. Ok. So if you see a test with field points stating some penetration results.
IN FOAM, gel, multiple layers of cardboard, car hoods, water jugs, etc.
The target defines the test with field points.
So field point into a target do not simulate on meat with a broadhead.
BUT the clickbait guys who claim "ultimate arrow penetration test" or "heavy vs light, with field points".....then claim it will replicate on meat with a broadhead are completely lost or intentionally rigging the test.
Well, that video shows the difference.
@@RanchFairy no, I didn’t mean it sarcastically. Sarcasm isn’t beneath me, but this time I meant what I said literally. I haven’t seen these other ‘tests’ you’re referring to.
However, I can see why you might think it was sarcastic, now I look at my comment and read it back to myself.
No worries man. It's hard, I realized you weren't just kicking me in the nuts!!!@@kurtisb100
I shoot 200grain tips. But wanted to see the difference with a 100-125. I wish you would shoot those lighter ones to compare
Awesome as always Troy.
Cant wait to see the other tests between mechanical and fixed on pigs.
Side note:
I really think people get the idea of the Ashby study wrong they are so focused on the grains not the statement “the heaviest projectile you can get going as fast as it can in a trajectory that is suitable for you.”
I know you don’t care about the kinetic energy machine i understand why it makes sense why but I think that plays a factor for selection charts.
I tested and tried 350-650 grains and it was surprisingly astonishing that 600 and 560 performed the exact same with momentum and fps but the KE was vastly different.
101 with 560 88 with 600 275 fps both 0.8 slugs of momentum both at start 0.7 at 50 yards both.
I now decided that I get the absolute best at 520 grains with trajectory and speed and momentum with ke.
I think that’s what the crossbow likes to eat the best.
And this is the point draw weight, draw length mechanical assistances or not all play factors to what works the best.
3X the draw weight plus for my crossbow was in diminishing returns. Yes there was benefit to way less sound on shot but it was the same for 560s the 17” ish power stroke with no mechanical assistance will be different than a bow.
People need to shoot their machines test their machines and see what works the best.
I don't know about the momentum on 600 and 560 exactly the same. My data does NOT show that at all from 388-715 grains progressively more momentum.
I am going to do some more in-depth "trajectory" work this year. INITIAL observations.
When you zero multiple pins for a 600 grain arrow the trajectory issue goes away.
With a slider - zero trajectory issues. It's a slider.
But when you shoot pins with a 500 grain arrow and
THEN shoot 600 grains.
But using the faster arrow pin set - it APPEARS to be a horrible rainbow. This is because the trajectory curves are different.
The 600 grain trajectory curve is more like a rainbow. The lighter arrows actually look like a comma on its side. flat, initially, then rapidly dropping off.
I do know, 400-500 grain arrows, the pins progressively open up as you get past 40 yards.
Again, if a slider, not an issue.
But the heavier arrow tends to have much more consistent gaps. This is plain and simple
Aerodynamic drag increases X velocity squared.
I'll keep tinkering and stay tuned - I have been wrong before!!! But I am Gonna go find out.
As I started - INITIAL observations are not final facts.
@@RanchFairy I agree with your analysis as well and to be really fair I did not consider the differences of compounds vs recurves. I also think there is factors too with length of the machines and so much.
I wouldn’t be surprised at all if you main bow gave results and a second bow that was slightly shorter didnt give different results. The science of archery is fun and progressive lol.
I might have missed it, but just curious about total arrow weight, and did you change the broadhead after each shot? Cause it would really be impressive if you didn't after the head shot.
630 grains
We didn't change the broadhead. Im planning a sharpness test similar to this.
What jig do you recommend for magnus stinger buzzcut
@@cgamingoutdoors6843 I use a worksharp. Same broadheads. I just take the bleeders off and do those seperate
How much for that jug of green gold above your left shoulder?
Is there any point into changing the diameter of the arrow leaving everything else the same? Love this stuff and makes me want to go tinker.
So, sort of. But if arrow flight is compromised, poor energy use broadhead platforms, etc. It doesn't matter.
You forgot all of those super accurate, ultra conclusive ballistic gel tests. Ballistic gel is good for one thing…..showing a POTENTIAL wound channel.
Thankyou
Bow weight?
65#
Velocity - 255
Mass 630 grains - 18% FOC
Nock tuned bare shaft arrow
Broadhead stropped to face shaving sharp.
Fixed versus mechanicals? I did test field point versus fixed with a recurve on deer, a shocking huge difference in pentration with a 40 pound bow.
Something that your test didn't show. Edge sharpness would have eroded after each broadhead shot. The obvious conclusion would be even greater performance with a fresh sharp blade. Great test as always. The haters have an unknown agenda. I don't know what their end game is in defaming Dr. Ed's work. I suppose that every time we show them qualitative results, they get attention. They probably need that to satisfy their diminishing libido.
You should do it with 125 grain single bevel...or others
My favorite music channel right there. Suck it MTV
What poundage is he shooting?
"He" doesn't care because "he" has killed, on video, multiple pigs with 40#@26" draw compound to 70#. So it literally doesn't matter.
Well, it does matter, because the faster you go the more DRAG you impart on the flying object, in the air and after impact into the meat (which is significantly more dense).
But no one wants to hear that. It's all logic and "stuff"
So, to answer - 60# at 28.5"
Love the straight up facts it amazing me how many hunters no matter how much proof they are shown an proven still will use x brands because some sponsored hunter uses so called setup they will use it no matter what.You would think that hunters would want a proven setup that would offer maximum penetration at any angle an shoot the animal when a shot presents itself
Science and Fairies, things that never equivocate. 🏹💪🏼
What is arrow weight and speed?
You can account for the variability in the target animal by taking more data points. That's why scientific measurements use basic statistical methods.
Ashby Bowhunting Foundation. Natal Study.
That's exactly what Ed Ashby did for multiple decades. Nice comment.
@@RanchFairy The ones I've read so far describe some really keen qualitative observations, but I haven't yet found any statistical analysis. What specific statistical tools does he use?
@@ThirdLawPaircommon sense ones. At no time do I recall him mentioning any stat significance. You would need way too many data points. If one arrow penetrates 2 inches and another passes thru you will omly helieve it if some stats package says it significantly different? Shame.
@@african7498 There are plenty of statistical tools that work with lower number of data points. What you are describing with the comparison of a skin-deep wound versus a total pass through is a common method when doing pilot studies before committing your time and resources to a more rigorous study. You can make a rough comparison and find out which measurements are even worth it to do a in a more in-depth investigation. Even then, it's still practical to compare 3 or 4 shots of each to get a sense of how much variance there is. If you compare 2 arrows with only 1 data point each, and say that one penetrated 26% more than the other, you have no way of knowing if each of them tend to vary by that much anyway. Even by standards for preliminary unpublished pilot studies, that's just so weak.
the less data points the bigger the difference needs to be to be statistically significant at a given confidence level - or put another way - smaller differences can be stat significant with enough data points. But this is not a boring stat page. @@ThirdLawPair
My wife calls me the meat hammer
😂🎉
For sure do the 3 blade one sometime
On the list
😉👍
I just watched a 2-1/2 hour podcast with you and Dudley. Podcast made me really like you. I know you already know this, but don’t ever talk to him again. Podcast made me subscribe, to you!
It was something.
Ya you were talking to god himself I guess? god with small g. He made 100% sure I’ll never watch another of his videos. I sure won’t comment on his podcast because what I’d say would not be nice, so I’ll just shut up about this. Thank you for all your help. I’m increasing FOC slowly now. Can’t imagine the total weight and FOC I shot 40 years ago with 200 grain Rothaar Snuffer and my Black Widow with 2219’s. Actually FOC might not have been that high because of heavy 2219. I know it took 4 huge feathers to make it fly right but dang those arrows hit hard out of my slow recurve. That set up killed a lot of bucks from 1980 to about 2004. Got older and weaker and now I shoot Mathews VXR. Talk about culture shock. But Thank you.
you are right and always will be. asberry forgot more then those fools you are talking about.when a man has done that much shooting and killing of huge tuff animals the other people should LISTEN to him.
Please do this again with an average flipper flapper
Oh, there's much to do.
As Ed always said. You can never over kill an animal.
So glad Troy is going after the target guys. Dudley and crew have zero ability to get outta their little box. They truly believe they own the right to say what's right and isn't right. They can't take the fact that someone else, from outside their little target community, is guiding people in the proper direction.
It's not John.
Who are these other people?
He’s got a beef with Dudley and Joel maxfield
Not Dudley.
@@RanchFairyDoes Dudley know that? Didn't look like it to me.
I like his advice on how to shoot. Not so much on what to shoot. FOC works because the animal gets a vote and it never stops moving.
@@RanchFairy the interview with Dudley was very painful to watch and not from your side but his. I like a lot of what he puts out but man he wasn’t even trying to discuss what you have found in testing. I really appreciate the content you have put out Troy. The one thing I would like to see is testing on fixed blades with the same shape and cutting edge but different weight overall arrows. A vented vs non vented head of the exact same design and more insert weight behind the heavier non vented head to make the weight difference more. I think the heavier broadheads are generally a lot better design than lighter heads and they may be penetrating better just based on how bad ass the head is more so than the weight of the arrow. Keep up the good work you are very appreciated in the community
Troy, thank you and Ed Ashby and others for all the testing that is changing the world of bowhunting. The more I learn about arrow lethality and follow you the more success I have.
That childrens laugh was a little creepy 😂
No, it is not the same and it does not prove the point you're you're right on that ranch
You know I realized my problem with Ranch fairy isn't Troy, he seems like a perfectly nice guy. My problem is his following takes in the OPINIONS he says like its oxygen and then goes to every other video on RUclips and talks down to everyone like they're go stupid
I appreciate your analysis, we'd sure get along in deer camp. But brother, that video is literally me shooting a pig with a field point and a broadhead.
Oh don't forget
KE and Momentum at launch and 60 yards
Speed erosion over distance
Vanes and speed erosion
Arrow tuning, Bare shaft tuning, broadhead sharpening, MULTIPLE demonetized videos with detailed necropsies showing internal organ damage, broken bone, detailed organ videos showing the broadhead path.
The list goes on.
Where's the opinion?
In a foam block I get same penetration with FP or BH......40'' of penetration on a frontal shot on a moose.......Fairy is right 100%
SHHHHHH LOGIC....is not allowed.
Im sure I know what idiots you speak of haha, can’t stand them, keep the great content coming troy
A target is built to be consistent, so that if you hit it at the top, bottom, center, outer ring, whatever, the target will stop the arrow. Regardless of where the arrow hits the target is the same. Why would someone think that an animal would be consistently the same from top, bottom, center, shoulder blade etc.? That seems like kind of a stupid thing to make an argument on... "If I shoot this target with my kid's bow or my bow, the arrow will penetrate about the same with field points, regardless of the arrow" well yeah... no sh*t...
You'd be surprised. The "foam fondling fellas" say otherwise!!
@@RanchFairy it just seems bananas to me. Is there an inherent assumption that they are hitting the same spot on every animal so “their” targets “aren’t” changing?
Even so, an elk is different than a white-tail is different than a blackbear is different than a hog…
I can’t square how they can present that as science in my head.
@@hunt_trap_fish And yet, they do.
@@RanchFairy we live in a **wild** world
2005 called, they want their bow back
Troy, I know you don’t run with an X-Bow however do to injury I do
My question is….do you know of any “ANY “ target that can stop an adult X-bow arrow with fixed blade broad heads?? Right now I’m passing through 2 big shot targets and 3 brick house targets all set in a single row with a 3/4”rubber mat behind Them and hard wood pallet boards in the very back! Nothing seems to be able to stop my setup 🤷🏼♂️even after dulling the b. h.’s with a file
I will not hunt with out testing ALL my equipment and dialing them all in! Thanks
Mike
Rinehart 18-1 is one of the best for stopping fixed blades.
I use the MORRELL HIGH ROLLER FOAM TARGET for my compound. It's rated to 450fps crossbows.
@@pennyontrack Thanks, I’ll give that a try
@@Engrave.Danger thanks for the reply! Just to let you know I’m shooting a 520 gr. arrow at over 400 fps with my Ravin x-bow and Magnus K B’s
@@MichaelLakota-vc4tk right on. It might be worth checking out some x-bow reviews of those targets then. I've got a Mathew's V31 65# 28.5" draw with 626gr arrows with GrizzlyStik Alaskan 200 broad heads 25% FOC. I haven't measured but it's calculated around 220 fps and the target takes it like a champ. It's small and expensive but well worth it imo.
They are slow and that is a nice way to say
Have you invited them to test their set ups on real meat targets instead of foam ? If they truly believed what they were saying, surely they would accept an invitation to the ranch to shoot their fast set ups in side by side comparison on the same targets.
absolutly.
And move the stand back 20 yards 😂
And move the stand back 20 yards 😂
the pig looked to be 20 yards
@@michaelsilva8854
how dare you show real stuff and speak facts lol we all know what really matters is how your arrow choice makes you feel and look to your buds...my arrow is moving 1800 fps weight 250 grains with a 15 blade 10 inch cut flipper and will pass through elephants...
Snarky remark required... this test is invalid you used the same broadhead which was constantly degraded on each subsequent shot😂
The testing Troy is talking about, and he is misleading in his comments, is about mass, ke, and momentum. Tests like this have to be controlled. That is just how scientific tests are done. The test has zero correlation to penetration depth in an animal. In the foam test, which is a consistent resistance target. One of the tests was to look at several different bows and draw weight. It showed that as we increased draw weight, we saw an increase in penetration. (This should be obvious) Next, we did a matching KE between two arrows of unequal mass. What we saw was a very minimum penetration difference. (This is due to the target being an equal resistant target) Although the heavy did out-perform. Next, we added a hard-impact target. This was PVC. The PVC does not represent bone or any part of an animal. When we shot with equal KE, the heavy outperformed, and it was obvious it outperformed. So, at this point, we see the same thing that Ashby saw. This includes some testing by ttroy. The heavy arrow outperformed. This is what should happen. At this point of testing, we need to look at what gives us penetration. We know the main factor is mass. Increasing mass increases penetration. Again, this is what Ashby saw. But we don't know if it's KE or momentum. (we actually do; physics already tells us the answer) So, the next test was to match the momentum at the target between two different weight arrows. What we saw is that the lighter arrow outperformed. Here we are back to the same issue about a equal resistant target. So we added PVC to the target. Again this is to have a hard impact. what we saw was that the heavy arrow with matching momentum did not break the PVC. What that shows is momentum and mass don't outperform mass and KE. (we don't really need to test this either, as all you need to do is look at trad vs compound bows, and we can see a lighter arrow with a greater amount of KE over a heavy arrow with less KE even though it has more momentum. There is a guy with a physics background who talks about this and explains what gives us penetration. You can look him up on RUclips. Jared Spencer, Ph.D. Again, the test only looked at physics with mass, KE, and momentum. The test and the amount of penetration depth have ZERO CORRELATION to an animal. Our outcome matched what Ashby saw when you add weight to an arrow being shot from the same bow. The next test that needs to be done is the same setup with a broadhead and shooting animals. Test one would be to match the KE at the animal. Test two is to match the momentum at the animal. This would take the data set to the next step.
You showed up!!!! troll#1.
For all watching and reading. The appearance of foam fondling second tier worshipper #1 is here.
The animals are not consistent. Therefore CONTROLLING the test medium is 100% intentionally controlling the "test". You are rigging the test with a medium you know will give you the results you wish to see.
Then
YOU ALLOW the general public to believe they will see the exact same results with a hunting arrow.
No discussion of:
1. Arrow tune
2. Spine
3. Arrow flight
4. Broadhead type
5. Sharpness and durability of the cutting edge
You and your buddies just say "with the foam fondling fellas magic system you can shoot any arrow, any broadhead, and your results will be the same with any arrow system, any mass, any steel, even the edge of a beer can will work".
If you're not saying that. Then you need to say it.
But you can't, because then you have to burn all your reports.
Guess I have more videos to make. Literally, the field point in this video did not perform anywhere near the broadhead. By the way, those arrows were tuned and flight maximized. Time to break out the mechs and hit some hard things I guess!!
From all hunters, I probably wish the most worse things in life to bowhunters. They disgust me the most.
Thanks for nothing.
I think that pig was already dead before you started this test so....
Would you rather try and stop a 285# linebacker running 10mph or a 185# linebacker running 15mph lol
Also would you rather get hit on your driver door by a motorcycle doing 80mph, a car doing 70mph, or a dodge ram 3500 doing 60mph. Remember your on the other side of that door
irrelevant.
in ALL jurisdictions with wild boar, broadheads with the proper minimum citting diameter or greater) are legal for hunting.
Fieldpoints are NOT legal ANYWHERE for hunting.
...thats not the point?
You missed the point of the video. In Texas, wild hogs are non-game animals, so you can shoot them with anything.
additionally, the point is to illustrate that the TARGET VARIES when it's an animal, and foam DOES NOT VARY at all...
Cmon man, use your brain wrinkles a little
LOL...