Mechanical broadheads....

[grundy53]

So mechanical broadheads were brought up in another thread and I didn't want to jack the thread so I will ask here. What is the reason the state gives for not allowing them? Is it because if they don't open up it would be like shooting an animal with a feild point or is it because they do make as big of an entrance wound as regular broad heads or.....? Obviously I'm new to bow hunting and don't know about this stuff. I'm just wondering and trying to learn.

[Button Nubbs]

Here we go again... I think my popcorn is just about done!

[Machias]

     

[1bugman]

I'm not a bow guy, but have always wondered the same thing.

[carpsniperg2]

There is not really any reason why. They have said that they will not kill as well as a fixed blade head. Between not opening and smaller entrance wounds and etc. There are mechanical heads out there like the rage and t3 that are rear deploying broadheads. They open to the rear and leave huge entrance wounds and are very reliable.

[DBHAWTHORNE]

Well if you talk to opponents they would say that the bow harvest would jump incredibly and that we are losing the heritage of bowhunting. In reality there is no logical reason that they shouldn't be allowed.

[GoldTip]

They do not penetrate nearly as well as a fixed blade head (front or rear deploying) and by being mechanical that fact in an of itself makes them more prone to failure, although I will agree they have gotten very good.  Also, they offer absolutely no advantage to a fixed blade broadhead from a even fairly well tuned bow.

[grundy53]

Well if you talk to opponents they would say that the bow harvest would jump incredibly and that we are losing the heritage of bowhunting. In reality there is no logical reason that they shouldn't be allowed.

I understand this isn't your point of view but using that logic. If you were to hit a deer in the exact same spot with a Regular broadhead and a mechanical broad head and the deer hit with the mechanical dies where as the one hit with the regular broad head is just wounded. Wouldn't that make an argument that the mechanical is more ethical? Also I bet if you were to aim an arrow tipped with one or the other it's going to hit the target probably about the same amount of times therefore if one is more effective a killing as apposed to wounding then you would think it would be more ethical. then again like I said, I'm new to this and don't know what I'm talking about.  

[grundy53]

They do not penetrate nearly as well as a fixed blade head (front or rear deploying) and by being mechanical that fact in an of itself makes them more prone to failure, although I will agree they have gotten very good.  Also, they offer absolutely no advantage to a fixed blade broadhead from a even fairly well tuned bow.

That makes sense.

[DBHAWTHORNE]

They do not penetrate nearly as well as a fixed blade head (front or rear deploying) and by being mechanical that fact in an of itself makes them more prone to failure, although I will agree they have gotten very good.  Also, they offer absolutely no advantage to a fixed blade broadhead from a even fairly well tuned bow.

 

I can't deny any of that. However, I have killed a lot of animls with mechanicals over the years and never had one fail. I believe the failure rate would probably be less than the numebr of guys that are shooting Fixedblade broadheads with poorly tuned bows (which I see all the time). Not that mechanical broadheads alleviate a guy from having to tune his bow....just the opposite...its infinitely more important.

I personally prefer fixed blade cut-on-contact broadheads and see no reason to change but I am certainly not against mechanicals.

[DBHAWTHORNE]

Well if you talk to opponents they would say that the bow harvest would jump incredibly and that we are losing the heritage of bowhunting. In reality there is no logical reason that they shouldn't be allowed.

I understand this isn't your point of view but using that logic. If you were to hit a deer in the exact same spot with a Regular broadhead and a mechanical broad head and the deer hit with the mechanical dies where as the one hit with the regular broad head is just wounded. Wouldn't that make an argument that the mechanical is more ethical? Also I bet if you were to aim an arrow tipped with one or the other it's going to hit the target probably about the same amount of times therefore if one is more effective a killing as apposed to wounding then you would think it would be more ethical. then again like I said, I'm new to this and don't know what I'm talking about. 

I personally haven't seen a difference in effectiveness in dispatching an animal. However, I believe a cut-on-contact, fixed blade broad head is without a doubt more effective. LIke GoldTip said you aren't going to get the same penetration with a mechanical (however I believe penetration is sufficient in all but less than ideal situations (and in those situation the extra penetration given by a cut-on-contact/fixed will probably make a difference in only few instances). On the same token the Chisel tip broadheads just aren't going to get the the penetration that a cut-on-contact will. In addition to all of this I by far prefer cut-on-contact for quartering away shots.[/quote]

[Gringo31]

I'm told that it is the same reason for no scopes on muzzleloaders.  It keeps the "primitive" weapon a bit more primitive.  I know, I know, but where do you draw the line?

[Skillet]

It has more to do with keeping the seasons set aside for "primitive weapons" as primitive as possible. Same old argument as used against lighted nocks, lighted bowsights, rocket propelled grenades, etc.

Just noticed Gringo said the same thing I did.  He's pretty smart! 

[JimmyHoffa]

They do not penetrate nearly as well as a fixed blade head (front or rear deploying) and by being mechanical that fact in an of itself makes them more prone to failure, although I will agree they have gotten very good.  Also, they offer absolutely no advantage to a fixed blade broadhead from a even fairly well tuned bow.

Most of the mechanical broadheads I've encountered had a significantly larger cutting width (upon and assuming full opening) than the fixed ones.  So based on the physics of it, I wouldn't expect it to penetrate as deeply.  If a fixed broadhead makes a pass through on an animal and only has a width of 1" vs a mechanical broadhead that barely makes it across the vitals with a 2" width, then I'm not sure the penetration mattered as much because one has the chance to cut (and be slowed down by) more stuff in there.
I think I would agree that the main reason they aren't allowed is as a previous poster said it is more deviation from the traditional aspect.

[Machias]

I believe the failure rate would probably be less than the numebr of guys that are shooting Fixedblade broadheads with poorly tuned bows (which I see all the time).  I personally prefer fixed blade cut-on-contact broadheads and see no reason to change but I am certainly not against mechanicals.

Great answer!

I also believe there is some questions regarding their effectiveness on elk.