Hunting Washington Forum
Washington State Hunting Forum and Northwest Resource Site
Please
login
or
register
.
1 Hour
1 Day
1 Week
1 Month
Forever
Login with username, password and session length
News:
Free:
Contests & Raffles
.
Home
Help
Calendar
Advertise
Login
Register
Hunting Washington Forum
»
Big Game Hunting
»
Bow Hunting
»
Which is Better?
Advertisement
Advertise Here
« previous
next »
Print
Pages: [
1
]
Go Down
Author
Topic: Which is Better? (Read 4150 times)
Nice Racks
Political & Covid-19 Topics
Trade Count:
(
0
)
Sourdough
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 1123
Location: Spanaway, WA
Groups: McChord AFB Archery Club
Which is Better?
«
on:
August 07, 2014, 10:35:55 PM »
I didn't want to thread jack a different topic, so I started this one. It seems that most people (including myself) desire a complete pass through on an animal when shooting them with an arrow. My question is: Can an arrow that doesn't pass through, but had enough penetration to get into the chest cavity end up having a quicker kill? It seems as it will cause more internal damage as the animal is running off going as fast as it can.
Logged
Advertise Here
bowjunkie
Trade Count:
(
0
)
Hunter
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 243
Location: The Skagit
Re: Which is Better?
«
Reply #1 on:
August 08, 2014, 08:30:12 AM »
pass through better in my opinion arrows cause damage by cutting not by shock like a bullet plus a much better blood trail.
Logged
grundy53
Global Moderator
Trade Count:
(
0
)
Explorer
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 12860
Location: Lake Stevens
Learn something new everyday.
Re: Which is Better?
«
Reply #2 on:
August 08, 2014, 08:40:39 AM »
In my opinion two holes are better then one.
sent from my typewriter
Logged
Molôn Labé
Can you skin Grizz?
The opinions expressed in my posts do not represent those of the forum.
bearpaw
Family, Friends, Outdoors
Administrator
Trade Count:
(
+10
)
Legend
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 38496
Location: Idaho<->Colville
"Rather Be Cougar Huntin"
Groups: NRA, SCI, F4WM, NWTF, IOGA, MOGA, CCOC, BBB, RMEF, WSTA, WSB
Re: Which is Better?
«
Reply #3 on:
August 08, 2014, 08:51:16 AM »
I think the recovery efforts are more successful with pass through hits, the extra blood on the trail most definitely helps.
Logged
Americans are systematically advocating, legislating, and voting away each others rights. Support all user groups & quit losing opportunity!
http://bearpawoutfitters.com
Guided Hunts, Unguided, & Drop Camps in Idaho, Montana, Utah, and Wash. Hunts with tags available (no draw needed) for spring bear, fall bear, bison, cougar, elk, mule deer, turkey, whitetail, & wolf!
http://trophymaps.com
DIY Hunting Maps are also offered
yajsab
Trade Count:
(
+1
)
Longhunter
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 658
Re: Which is Better?
«
Reply #4 on:
August 08, 2014, 08:53:01 AM »
It depends. I had pass through and it went hundreds of yards. Then at times the nock stuck out and it went 40 yards.
I say don't worry too much about it. Just put the arrow in the zone and call it good.
Logged
blackveltbowhunter
Non-Hunting Topics
Trade Count:
(
+9
)
Frontiersman
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 4108
BLAM
Re: Which is Better?
«
Reply #5 on:
August 08, 2014, 09:10:24 AM »
IMO The benefits of having a passthrus outweigh the "constant cut" theory on all hits archers want and consider quick kill shots. That said, if the arrow ends up in the "quartered" scenario and has not cut the big 2 (double lung/heart), I do think having the "possibility" of the arrow continuing to cut can be a factor.
Logged
Fullabull
Trade Count:
(
0
)
Longhunter
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 792
Re: Which is Better?
«
Reply #6 on:
August 08, 2014, 10:51:57 AM »
I have shot two bulls with my arrow going into the chest with no pass through. The nice thing about no pass through is if you get an arrow into the chest, when the bull takes off that arrow and broad head is getting moved hard back and forth within the elks chest because of their own movement, causing massive damage. One bull went about 15 yards pumping blood out of the one hole in his chest. The second bull went about 30 yards and collapsed after chocking out lots of blood.
If you get a solid chest hit with good penetration, the elk is not going far whether its a pass through or not. It's on the lesser hits that you want a pass through for sure so there are two holes to bleed out of. This definitely helps with recovery of an elk who can run 100's of yards. Remember, the longer the arrow is inside the elks body, the more damage it's going to do!
Logged
DoubleJ
YAR Nutcracker
Political & Covid-19 Topics
Trade Count:
(
0
)
Old Salt
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 8550
Location: Shelton, WA
Re: Which is Better?
«
Reply #7 on:
August 08, 2014, 11:54:03 AM »
If it goes in and doesn't come out, and by chance the arrow breaks, just ve VERY carefull when gutting
Logged
Come Get Some
Business Sponsor
Trade Count:
(
+9
)
Longhunter
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 559
Location: Roy
Re: Which is Better?
«
Reply #8 on:
August 08, 2014, 07:00:42 PM »
I prefer 2 holes that leak not 1. It all depends on the arrow placement. I have shot bulls quartering towards me at 50 yds that did not take a step, Got the heart,lungs and liver. Depends on terrain and adrenalin in the animal. If they are relaxed and you call exactly when you shoot ,they will usually take a step or 2 and look around before dropping over dead. Pass thru or not if it is in the boiler room they do not do well
Logged
sakoshooter
WFW Board of Directors
Trade Count:
(
+1
)
Frontiersman
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 3597
Location: Puyallup
Groups: Life Memberr NRA, Life Member Sumner Sportsmans Association
Re: Which is Better?
«
Reply #9 on:
August 08, 2014, 09:43:04 PM »
A couple schools of thought on this: 1) A complete pass thru cut everything it could plus you've got blood coming out onto the ground from two holes.
2) A broadhead stuck in an animal usually keeps cutting as the shaft hits trees and limbs as the animal runs off untill it gets broken. And even then it will continue to do damage as internal organs bounce up and down over the broadhead when the animal is running.
Logged
Rhinelander, WI
Home of the Hodag
RadSav
Political & Covid-19 Topics
Trade Count:
(
+5
)
Explorer
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 11342
Location: Vancouver
Re: Which is Better?
«
Reply #10 on:
August 09, 2014, 05:16:08 AM »
IMO it really depends on shot placement. If major vitals are cut with both shots an exit would accelerate the rate at which blood is lost by helping to eliminate the creation of a vacuum. Similar to the use of a breather hole to assist emptying of a barrel through a bung hole.
If either scenario destroys the Autonomic Plexus between the heart and lungs death will be equally rapid regardless of vacuum and/or rapid loss of blood.
One of the scenarios where confusion arises is in the use of two blade broadheads. Most choose such a blade for it's ability to create both an entrance and exit wound from lighter draw weight bows. However, the design leaves potential to miss major vessels within the diameter path. And further more it leaves potential when cutting solid tissue to split the fibers without leaving a wound crossing the fibers resulting in very minimal blood loss. So it could be increasingly beneficial that a two blade broadhead not exit as it really is the blade style that imparts the most internal damage if left within the cavity for secondary cutting.
On shot placements where major vessels and tissues are missed or hit with minimal damage over-penetration can be detrimental. Where leaving the broadhead inside the cavity or in contact with the tissue can impart additional damage greater than the benefits of eliminating vacuum.
For recovery of animals by the tracking challenged or the tree stand hunter an exit wound is generally the preferred scenario as blood trails will be stronger and easier to follow. On level ground or uphill shots it really is a matter of where you hit and what you hit.
Sooner or later in bowhunting you will find yourself in a situation where you had too much penetration or not enough. Unfortunately, you can't have both!
«
Last Edit: August 10, 2014, 08:06:48 PM by RadSav
»
Logged
He asked, Do you ever give a short simple answer? I replied, "Nope."
demontang
Trade Count:
(
0
)
Frontiersman
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 3412
Location: Selah
Re: Which is Better?
«
Reply #11 on:
August 10, 2014, 08:05:30 PM »
Good info radsav
Logged
Advertise Here
Print
Pages: [
1
]
Go Up
« previous
next »
Hunting Washington Forum
»
Big Game Hunting
»
Bow Hunting
»
Which is Better?
Advertisement
Advertise Here
Quick Links
Front Page
Donate To Forum
Advertise on H-W
Recent Posts
Articles
Forum Rules
Recent Topics
Pocket Carry
by
Sakko300wsm
[
Today
at 05:11:59 PM]
Leupold Display fade
by
Stein
[
Today
at 04:10:05 PM]
Survey in ?
by
hdshot
[
Today
at 03:12:07 PM]
Encouraging on e side
by
hdshot
[
Today
at 02:54:51 PM]
E scouting for bears
by
Ac04
[
Today
at 02:14:25 PM]
506 Willapa Hills Late Season Antlerless Tag
by
Fast Rider
[
Today
at 12:48:55 PM]
Lund Fisherman 1800 info/advice
by
Stein
[
Today
at 11:46:54 AM]
Knotty duck decoys
by
goosegunner
[
Today
at 11:45:58 AM]
Public Land Sale Senate Budget Reconciliation
by
dwils233
[
Today
at 11:36:36 AM]
AKC lab puppies! Born 06/10/2025 follow as they grow!!!
by
scottfrick
[
Today
at 09:21:15 AM]
Sheep Ewe - Whitestone Sheep Unit 20
by
geauxtigers
[
Today
at 07:42:37 AM]
Any info on public land South Dakota pheasant hunts?
by
bornhunter
[
Today
at 07:19:46 AM]
Can’t fish for pinks area 8-2?
by
blackpowderhunter
[
Today
at 06:36:49 AM]
2025 Quality Chewuch Tag
by
Schmalzfam
[
Today
at 05:36:10 AM]
idaho hunt 1001
by
MackDaddy509
[
Yesterday
at 08:37:03 PM]
SimplePortal 2.3.7 © 2008-2025, SimplePortal