Advantage of 85 vs 100 grain broadheads?

[nw_bowhunter]

What are the advantages of using 85 vs 100 grain broadheads?

[ridgefire]

obviously a faster arrow but i would recommend the heavier head for better penetration im a fan of a 125 grain head

[Machias]

I am in the lighter broadheads are a disadvantage crowd, but I'm sure you will get lots of different opinions.  About the only animal I'd use that broadhead on is pronghorn...and actually I wouldn't use one that light even on a speed goat.

[MAVsled]

before you try, do the math & check your FOC results and percentages with that 85 gr tip versus what you currently use.

with my 29.5" draw, #70 lbs SBXT and matched arrows using a 125 gr tip; my best performing FOC on target and game is 11-13%.

[huntindoc]

I am a huge believer of heavier is better.  Give me a slow tree trunk that will drive completely through vs a tiny toothpick that doesn't penetrate.

I was fortunate enough to poke a hole in a rag horn Roose last year on the west side.  He was 35 yrds, quartering away more than 50 degrees.  I hit him just high through the last rib, all the way through the chest cavity, and still had enough energy to punch 5" through the off side scapula.  The arrow penetrated at least 40" of elk (going through at an angle).  Same on my deer this year.  Shot very close, about 10 yrds out of a tree stand, and the arrow went through the deer and stuck 6" in the ground.

Good luck and make the first shot count.

[rougheye]

Cant think of any advantages , speed is overated , heavier is better

[nw_bowhunter]

This is what I was thinking.. just wondering why someone would use an 85 grain broadhead. What exactly is FOC?

[ribka]

What is FOC?
If there's one variable of broadhead flight that's often overlooked, it's the arrow's front-of-center balance point, or FOC. In practical terms, FOC determines how much leverage the fletching has to correct the arrow's flight. The farther forward the balance point is from the center of the arrow--the FOC point--the longer the lever the fletching has to work with and the easier its job. The general recommendation for FOC is 12 to 15 percent for broadhead-tipped arrows. This compares to a recommendation of eight to 11 percent for field points (for pure target applications). The difference in suggested FOC is due, in part, to the longer length of a broadhead. It's also due, in part, to field points not having the ability to steer an arrow like a broadhead can.

Much prefer heavier arrows. With heavy 700 grain arrow and 55 lb longbow have shot thru many deer, wild boar, cariboo, one elk and bear. I chrono'd at 170 fps. Amazing what a slowier heavier shaft can do. Think speed is over rated . I 'll take a heavy stable, well tuned arrow moving at 200 fps over a light fast arrow moving at 300 fps any day for hunting applications. I do not shoot over 40 yds though

[ribka]

...And a heavier broadhead.  125 grns or more. Seems arrows, at least heavier,  shoot more stale with heavier broadhead.
I guess FOC explains this

[Hornseeker]

I"m with everyone else... I will not be shooting under 125 with my new wheel bow... With my trad gear I shot 175 to 260 grain broadheads...

I am setting up this alphamax with a stiff arrow, a 100 grain brass insert, then I can strap on a 125 on up to that 260... and have some MASSIVE FOC.. the arrow will likely be going about 220... But that is 40 fps faster than the same arrow out of my trad bow... so life will be Goood...

And yeah...it would not be ideal for longer shots unless you were very careful to range the shot and had a pin for that range...

[huntnphool]

I have taken several bull elk and a moose with 85gr. Thunderheads, its more about shot placement than broadhead size. Some guys feel the need for .338RUM in the lower 48 too.

[Ray]

125 is my minimum. I prefer 150 with another insert of either 50 or 75 grains. 125 works well on a pronghorn but if you hit a rib you'll want good FOC and weight. Not just speed. Will 85 work? Probably in many cases.

[D-Rock425]

I've passed though elk at 40 yards with a 75 grain broadhead.  I now shoot 85 grain wac'ems and slick tricks.  Its all about shot placement.  15 grains is not going to make a huge difference

[Ray]

Whether or not you hit a rib is sometimes luck. Not shot placement skill. If you hit a rib on some bigger boned animals the FOC arrow and solid broadhead are going to matter.

I must add.. I agree that 15 grains is not a large difference in matters.

[stickslinger]

the difference in kinetic energy between 85 gr. and 100 gr. at 315 fps is 4 more foot pounds with the 100 gr. broad head. and kinetic energy is what we all should be concerned about.  lets face it not every shot will end up in the perfect spot, after all we are human

[Ray]

Kinetic energy is a useful measure because it's all over the place and easy to determine but it does not always translate into greater tissue penetration capabilities. See reports in link at the bottom where some higher measures of KE were not translated into better penetration than lower KE tests.. One Point - Some broadheads will work better than others. 2 blade tend to penetrate with less resistance and will likely drive into flesh or bone farther than the 3 or 4 blade. The only advantage of the 3 or 4 blade is the so called "wound channel". Which can be achieved with a 2 blade single bevel and which to people like me is not really an advantage when you loose depth of penetration for a wound channel which might only be on a non-lethal part of the animal.

I don't pay a lot of attention to kinetic energy at all and I don't think it is what I should be concerned with as much as another measure of penetration which is termed "tissue penetration index" and another measure termed "slug feet per second" as well as "mechanical advantage" and even more imprtant than KE to me is "Momentum". Which are actual measurements or ratings that are applicable to the whole composition of the arrow and that can be translated into success a lot better than the simplistic kinetic energy. Kinetic energy does not necessarily equate to better penetration as quite often than not suggested to people. All things being equal it might be some measure worth looking into but often times people are not measuring exact same setups.

More notes for those who want to find out the science behind the terms

Full Reports and Science

[fishwhackin]

Depends on how heavy your arrow is, cutting diameter of the broadhead, what you are hunting and how good of a shot you are.  Light broadheads are great as long as you have a bow that puts out enough speed or energy to get the light arrow/broadhead into or through what you are wanting to take down.  If you are a good shot, shoot low poundage and shoot super light arrows.  If you know that you have a good chance of missing left or right on a regular basis then you better cover your @ss and shoot heavier arrow/broadhead combinations with a strong broadhead that will bust through that shoulder blade and or bones.  Important part of my advice is that if you are practicing and know that you can put your arrow in the vitals better than 90 percent of the time, the good and bad of each option just about even the two choices out under different circumstances.

[D-Rock425]

the difference in kinetic energy between 85 gr. and 100 gr. at 315 fps is 4 more foot pounds with the 100 gr. broad head. and kinetic energy is what we all should be concerned about.  lets face it not every shot will end up in the perfect spot, after all we are human

I think most of us on here cant shoot a hunt legal arrow at 315 fps.  so for most hunters it will be less then 4 foot pounds of kinetic energy.  If you geta quility 85 grain broadhead on a hunt legal arrow I thing it will do just fine.

[stickslinger]

sorry for that I just took my set up and took 17 fps off and figured that was a good number to throw out there. and yes that was with a 365 grain arrow. My point was that if you can get more energy out of an arrow that can equal better penetration with out loosing that much speed than why wouldn't you go with the heavier broadhead.

[carpsniperg2]

a few more fps with the 85 and a few more foot pounds of ke with the 100 usally the cutting diffrence between the 2 is like 1/16" bigger on the 100grain, so not to much diffrence between the 2 

[Intruder]

Kinetic energy is a useful measure because it's all over the place and easy to determine but it does not always translate into greater tissue penetration capabilities. See reports in link at the bottom where some higher measures of KE were not translated into better penetration than lower KE tests.. One Point - Some broadheads will work better than others. 2 blade tend to penetrate with less resistance and will likely drive into flesh or bone farther than the 3 or 4 blade. The only advantage of the 3 or 4 blade is the so called "wound channel". Which can be achieved with a 2 blade single bevel and which to people like me is not really an advantage when you loose depth of penetration for a wound channel which might only be on a non-lethal part of the animal.

I don't pay a lot of attention to kinetic energy at all and I don't think it is what I should be concerned with as much as another measure of penetration which is termed "tissue penetration index" and another measure termed "slug feet per second" as well as "mechanical advantage" and even more imprtant than KE to me is "Momentum". Which are actual measurements or ratings that are applicable to the whole composition of the arrow and that can be translated into success a lot better than the simplistic kinetic energy. Kinetic energy does not necessarily equate to better penetration as quite often than not suggested to people. All things being equal it might be some measure worth looking into but often times people are not measuring exact same setups.

More notes for those who want to find out the science behind the terms

Full Reports and Science

Well said.... couldn't agree more.  Much of that translates to firearms too.