pam cooking spray for broadheads..

[lokidog]

Rad, thanks for posting your Catalina/Texas results.  That is quite interesting.  It might help explain why I didn't seem to get a good blood trail when double lunging, and loosing, a cow elk on Long Island after a week and a half hunt, which I'm sure included splashing salt water on my bow/arrows.   

What about using something like RustGuard if a person wasn't worried about a few chemicals?

[Jonathan_S]

After 3 day elk hunt this year, i set mym bow back up on the wall. About 3 or 4 days later i went to go to the range and i literally had light orange colored rust all over my blades. guess itd just me.

After a wet hunt, I just stuck the business end of my quiver in front of the truck floor heater.  When I've got them in storage, I have a satchet of rice in the tupperware with the broadheads to keep moisture from dwelling on the steel.

[NOCK NOCK]

Does anyone besides Smossy throw away blades after one hunt?  I never have thought that the rust on my blades would be enough to damage the sharpness within a 2-3 day period.

All my blades from this year are now practice blades but I thought that a one-and-done approach sounded a little overkill (expensive too) 

 

Depends on where you are hunting.  Early on in my Savora days we tested stainless vs carbon on Catalina Island and the YO Ranch in Texas.  The cross over point where stainless began performing as well as carbon was much more pronounced on Catalina than it was at the YO.  While each day led to longer blood trails with both blade materials the environment of Catalina really accelerated the difference each new day brought to the results.

On Catalina first day results with carbon on goats was recovery average of just over ten yards.  On day five the average goat recovery was almost 80 yards.  Day four carbon and stainless recoveries were the same.

At the YO first day goat results were the same as Catalina.  But day five results were still only 45 yards with carbon.  And in that five day test at the YO stainless never did catch up to the average recovery distances of carbon. 

I expect if we had been closer to Houston the Catalina and Texas results would have been much closer due to similar humidity and salinity.

Rad, First off I do not doubt your knowledge at all, But am wondering about using recovery distances as a reasoning for broadhead steel degradation from rust. Blade sharpness, along with shot placement, animal size and health, terrain, etc., all have effects on recovery distance.(maybe I'm not understanding your testing )
Not to downplay the importance of sharp blades, but for the average bowhunter this seems to be a trivial issue with microscopic rusting on blades.
Personally, I have never treated my broadheads with any type of rust preventive, nor have I ever seen any type of rust on my Thunderheads,(lots of blood on em though)
 I just buy broadheads and proceed to shoot them thru animals(30 some deer, 12 elk, 3 bears)  and have never had a problem with the broadhead being un-effective. 

Here is a T-head from a deflected shot in 1994'ish, This is why I am a Thunderhead guy.

[RadSav]

Rad, thanks for posting your Catalina/Texas results.  That is quite interesting.  It might help explain why I didn't seem to get a good blood trail when double lunging, and loosing, a cow elk on Long Island after a week and a half hunt, which I'm sure included splashing salt water on my bow/arrows.   

What about using something like RustGuard if a person wasn't worried about a few chemicals?

My experience with rust guard was that is became sticky in my quiver.  When I pulled an arrow I would get bits and pieces of the quiver foam stuck to the blades.  Nothing worse than having an animal standing there watching you try and get foam off your blades before you can shoot   It's good stuff for protection though.  I treat all our molds with the stuff after each use.  About eight years on the same molds and most look almost new today.

[MLBowhunting]

I had to do the same after hunting in the thick nasty Smossy.      it only takes a min to change blades but new Sharp blades produce killer bloodtrails. 

[RadSav]

Rad, First off I do not doubt your knowledge at all, But am wondering about using recovery distances as a reasoning for broadhead steel degradation from rust. Blade sharpness, along with shot placement, animal size and health, terrain, etc., all have effects on recovery distance.(maybe I'm not understanding your testing )
Not to downplay the importance of sharp blades, but for the average bowhunter this seems to be a trivial issue with microscopic rusting on blades.
Personally, I have never treated my broadheads with any type of rust preventive, nor have I ever seen any type of rust on my Thunderheads,(lots of blood on em though)
 I just buy broadheads and proceed to shoot them thru animals(30 some deer, 12 elk, 3 bears)  and have never had a problem with the broadhead being un-effective.

One of the many reasons for testing on goats is they are nearly all the same size.  So that puts a pretty solid base line for comparison.  Savora always followed the test parameters they used in Africa in the Chapinda Pools testing.  X amount of animals this day shot in this part of the anatomy.  X amount of animal shot the next day in the same area.  Shots and data separated by shot location within the vitals. 

Say you have six goats killed day one with liver shots.  The average distance traveled is X yards.  Next day same number of animals taken with similar shots and the average distance traveled is XX yards.  Next day XXX yards....and so on.  How can the progressively longer distances animals travel be effected by anything more than blade sharpness when all the other variables remain the same?   Same little island, same sized goats, same time of year, same equipment.  Only difference being is each days test broadheads were assembled and set out exposed to the environment during the course of the testing period.  Same thing can also be asked as to why in the first few days carbon steel always averaged fewer recovery yards than stainless.

That microscopic edge difference was enough that after the C.Pools testing the Rhodesian government was going to reinstate legal bowhunting as long as stainless blades were not used.  It took some doing for Savora to convince them that while not as effective stainless was still exceeding the criteria.  It was the overall variance between the two when placed on paper that made it difficult for the government to agree.

You are right that the average bowhunter is probably going to find it trivial.  Most bowhunters don't really care.  In fact the vast majority of bowhunters take up the sport because they get to shoot does and cows (not that there is anything wrong with that).  But that shouldn't have any baring on us who try to educate.  And it definitely should not effect a manufacturer from trying to produce the very best if at the same time the product can still create sales and pay the bills.

After I won the Super-2 award back in the 80's the owner of the company approached me and said, "34 animals, three Pope & Young animals and the biggest bull elk in the competition!  You must really like this broadhead?"  My future with the company came to an abrupt halt when I responded, "No, not really.  I had to blood trail every single one of these animals.  Every single one!  The first elk I shot four times, the second elk I shot four times, the Big elk I shot a second time the following day.  While I successfully harvested every single animal I shot this year none of the kills were overly efficient.  We've got some work to do if I am going to continue shooting and promoting this product."  Guess he figured the product was good enough and my attitude was not.  Maybe, just maybe, that's why I'm still in the industry and he is not  

Because of the stainless structure of the Thunderhead and other well constructed stainless broadheads once that initial loss in sharpness has been done the damage progresses very slow.  Especially if kept in a good environment outside of the quiver foam.  But, the most effective results you are ever going to experience with any blade will be in the first few days they are out of the package.  If not replacing the blades some sort of treatment is better than none.  It won't return them to new, but when trying to maintain the highest efficiency for the longest period of time it's good insurance. Not sure PAM is my first choice due to the amount of water in it, but I do like to see guys at least trying to keep their broadheads as sharp as possible.

[TONTO]

 Never lubed up my heads. Of course I haven't hunted the same heads two consecutive years either. I've only bow hunted the last 5 years and have changed to different braod heads each year. Last few years I've been shooting stainless, buzz cuts this last year.
 Anyhow as far as putting something on them how about Bore Butter? Protects a muzzle loader from rust, it's food grade, and got a nice minty smell the deer may even like

[RadSav]

Anyhow as far as putting something on them how about Bore Butter? Protects a muzzle loader from rust, it's food grade, and got a nice minty smell the deer may even like

Hmmm.  I've never even thought about that!  Might be time to break out the scope and do some more lab testing.  Seriously got my interest with that one 

[snarkybull]

One of the many reasons for testing on goats is they are nearly all the same size.  So that puts a pretty solid base line for comparison.  Savora always followed the test parameters they used in Africa in the Chapinda Pools testing.  X amount of animals this day shot in this part of the anatomy.  X amount of animal shot the next day in the same area.  Shots and data separated by shot location within the vitals. 

Say you have six goats killed day one with liver shots.  The average distance traveled is X yards.  Next day same number of animals taken with similar shots and the average distance traveled is XX yards.  Next day XXX yards....and so on.  How can the progressively longer distances animals travel be effected by anything more than blade sharpness when all the other variables remain the same?   Same little island, same sized goats, same time of year, same equipment.  Only difference being is each days test broadheads were assembled and set out exposed to the environment during the course of the testing period.  Same thing can also be asked as to why in the first few days carbon steel always averaged fewer recovery yards than stainless.

nice.  i like the basic design of your study.  i will caution you, however, not to get married to conclusions so early.  there are always many factors that could influence the results without proper repetitions (preferably with different animals of differing size).  for instance, were the animals selected in a truly random manner?   or did size/behavior/findability/patterns play a factor?  how was the weather?  any little changes can alter animal behavior.  and of course the biggest variable of all is usually human.  bias can creep into even the most guarded places.

again, nicely done and a solid hypothesis   i just feel nitpicky today

[RadSav]

These were not my studies and not by my design.  They were the design and studies of Duke Savora and the government of Rhodesia (while in Africa tests were overseen by the chief provincial warden of Chapinda Pools, Victoria ). I was simply one of the primary field testers during the Catalina and Texas studies due to my extensive experience and success in these venues and my relationship with Duke Savora. 

When one test in Africa, two tests on Catalina and one test in Texas all produce equivalent results I think we can start looking past slight variables and accept results as reasonable foundation if validity.  These tests were conducted over many years and with the assistance of the government of Rhodesia when in Africa before the province name change. So I'm not sure where we might have married to conclusions too early. 


Then you factor in multiple printed studies in regards to metallurgical testing and medical/clinical testing and you can begin to narrow the focuses even further.  The science of coagulation and effects upon the formation of blood platelets and the body's reaction to trapped white blood cells and the introduction of oxygen and other related triggers has been well documented in the medical field over the course of many decades.  You combine that with the expansive reports of metallurgical compositions and the way each material reacts to different environmental contaminants one can be comfortable in finding base lines for what should be expected in field studies.  Then when those field studies do reflect what the hypothesis of the sciences tells you is expected you can find reasonable certainty in your results.

As with all scientific studies the rule is, Only when we know all of the questions can we come up with some of the answers.  By keeping an open mind and utilizing questions and answers from multiple levels of the related sciences testing can be relied upon with a degree of certainty.  But a test group must always be aware that for results to have a chance of reflecting a reasonable amount of reality ALL answers and results must be accepted.  Not just those that support the conjecture and supposition of the human disposition that created it.

[NOCK NOCK]

Rad, Thank you for sharing your knowledge

[MLBowhunting]