Hey Buck, why would you get so insulting and personal here? Calling BS and that I'm contradicting the facts, that just not very THR like, and way out of context of what I so obviously stated. And I'm personally insulted to receive such a remark from a long time member, someone I respect. Maybe your having a bad day I guess, either way, it's unnecessary to get so personal with another long time member who often shares in these threads with you.
How is my calling your misinformation BS, any more of an insult than insulting my and other's intelligence here with such outlandish claims? Sharp arrows going more than 200 fps bouncing off deer? More deer and other big game live after being stuck, than are successfully shot and recovered? A good 90% of archery kills consist of having to track the animal for miles, and sometimes for a couple days?
I'm personally insulted that you think I am that unethical of a hunter, that I would knowingly use equipment which results with the majority of deer I stick with an arrow will be unrecoverable and lost. Just more BS. Same goes for the miles and days of tracking. Poor shots, not slow arrows. Wouldn't be any different if you shot them with a gun. If that is your experience, you need to find another sport, or practice more. I question your ethics as a hunter if you are using a method you are so damn sure is going to result in a wounded and lost animal. Over the half a century I have bow hunted I have lost my fair share of deer that were poorly hit. Still, they are very few and far between, compared to those animals hit and recovered. Out of those maybe one went for a mile and that was still recovered in less than a day and was because it was a poor hit, too far back and high. It was a kidney shot and the buck was pursued to quickly. The majority of my deer shot with a bow went less than 100 yards. Many of those died within sight or I heard go down. Many was the time with a good heart/lung hit, that I could see the blood trail from the tree. Many of those deer were shot with bows/compounds that produced less than 220 fps. The arrows didn't bounce off, many exited on the other side. These were deer hit in the heart/lung area, not the butt. I once went a stretch during my prime bowhunting years where I shot ten deer in 5 years using ten arrows from the same stand on a 120 acre farm. Not once did I have to ask permission from the neighbors to retrieve my deer. This with a early compound and heavy arrows that probably did not break the 230fps mark. This is not the exception for bowhunting, this is the norm. Knowledgeable archers know this. They also know trailing a deer for miles and for days is the exception and very, very rare.
My point here, is that with archery, faster is always better, not the other way around. Slow doesn't cut it with archery. Heavy low velocity bullets are one thing, with archery your already on the edge of the limits right from the get go. Consider the difference between a fast bow and slow bow is only 100 fps, I think that's pretty obvious right there.
Again....more misinformation. Read this from someone who knows more than either of us.
Momentum Beats Speed
That doesn't mean someone can't get lucky and slip one past a rib and into the heart or lungs, or maybe clip and artery, it happens. But generally speaking, more deer and other big game live after being stuck, than are successfully shot and recovered. Good shot placement and razor sharp broad heads mean nothing, if the shaft doesn't have enough velocity to defeat hide and bone, therefore reaching the vital organs.
It isn"t luck that generally drives an arrow between the ribs and into the heart and lungs, it's the skill of the archer. It's not shooting the deer in the high shoulder like one does with a rifle. It's waiting for a good shot to present itself, and picking a spot, not just flinging an arrow at the whole animal. Luck is hittin' a buck in the butt and retrieving it. Claiming it is the ideal archery hit, compared to a boiler room shot, is just more BS.
Here's a good way to make a fair comparison. Shoot multiple shafts from a bow that shoots 200 fps into an archery broad head target, use a top quality broad head of your choice. Then shoot the same shafts, same broad heads, but new and razor sharp as well, into the same target, but at 250 fps.. Now measure how many inches of penetration each produced, I rest my case. So, whether or not the shaft falls out a couple seconds after striking the deer, has no importance if it couldn't penetrate deep enough to reach vital organs.
GS
Take a 220 fps bow with any fixed blade broadhead and shoot it into a sand bag. Then take your favorite deer rifle(30-06 for example) with your favorite load and shoot into the same sandbag. Then come back and tell me which penetrates farther. I'm gonna bet on the 220 fps bow. Sooooooo, if the 30-06 has plenty of penetration to kill a deer, why not the 220 fps bow? Shoot the same bow using a light arrow that gives you 300fps and shoot it into your broadhead target and then shoot a heavier arrow giving you only 240 fps. Then compare the penetration. Odds are the heavier arrow will penetrate farther.......and not bounce off.
I'm not trying to be a dick here or trying to insult anyone. But when someone comes here asking for clear information and gets a bunch of malarkey instead, I gonna call BS. Simple. GS, I have respect for you and your hunting skills also, but have been very surprised by the remarks you have made here. You make it sound like bowhunting is a very irresponsible sport with remarks such as this......
I guess I've come to accept that archery is a very unreliable weapon
....and again I question why, as a responsible hunter you would continue to use a weapon that you consider "very unreliable"? You make us bowhunters sound like a bunch of unethical slobs leaving high numbers of deer running around in the woods with arrows sticking out of them like pincushions, with little chance of recovering them or putting them outta their misery. That is not so. It was no so back when I first started with a
SLOW recurve bow and it still was not true when I went back to using my
SLOW recurve bow. Most any modern bow/X-bow when used properly with good broadheads is capable of quickly and humanely killing a deer. Faster will get you more range and flatter trajectory. Even with the fastest bow available, one still needs to know it's limitations and their own limitations. Same as with any other weapon.
Bad as my right eye is, I might could have gotten a handicap permission to use one before they allowed it for the general public, but never bothered. Anyway, I appreciate the experience of this group.
Well, if THAT'S the case, archery isn't for me. Small places around here. I have permission on my neighbor's to track one that might go maybe 300 yards, but MILES? WAY too thick around here, anyway, to find an animal that goes that far. Much of this stuff growing around here is impenetrable by humans. I'd figured a 100 yard tracking job, maybe, but MILES? Sounds cruel, even. I mean, I'm a long way from a PETA type, but DAYS?
