Post by: Buckrub on March 07, 2009, 04:52:35 PM
Anything I am missing? anyone know why they are not allowed?
What are your thoughts...for or against
Post by: bow-n-head on March 07, 2009, 05:24:41 PM
Post by: MIKEXRAY on March 08, 2009, 07:03:56 AM
Post by: Snapshot on March 08, 2009, 05:00:49 PM
Mechanical devices can fail on impact for various reasons. And until one can be made that never fails I don't think a responsible WDFW will allow them. They are completely unnecessary except to the manufacturers; manufacturers who happen to care less for game animals than they do their bottom lines.
Do the kids a real favor and teach them how to sharpen a well made fixed blade broadhead. Self reliance can't be store bought and will stay with them for a lifetime.
DS
Post by: Buckrub on March 09, 2009, 08:43:57 AM
My kids are taught safety from a very young age with any weapon.
I don't want any young person to learn the "hard way".
Not having any experience with expandables I was looking for input for myself more than anything else. They do appear to be a safer broadhead?? But from some input they are not failsafe..yet.
Thanks
Post by: BULLBLASTER on March 09, 2009, 09:27:31 AM
Post by: lokidog on March 09, 2009, 02:03:28 PM
Post by: Buckrub on March 09, 2009, 05:20:06 PM
broadhead cuts will heal with time. :dunno: every year starting in august i always seem to learn that... besides who needs a stinkin broadhead wrench. no real reason you would want to use expandables, especially with a young child shooting low poundage and kinetic energy, the expandable will only rob precious penetration ability. they should be using a good cut on contact head, like a stinger or muzzy phantom or like that.
Actually his bow shoots faster and harder than my Guardian...he is shooting a Martin @270 fps.
G5 Montecs make tuning easy but cut thumbs very easy...
Post by: RUTNBULL1 on March 09, 2009, 11:01:49 PM
Post by: Snapshot on March 09, 2009, 11:14:14 PM
Baloney! I hope you didn't take that bait and waste your money.
Post by: RUTNBULL1 on March 10, 2009, 09:00:12 PM
"they say they have the go head approval from ...the WDFW on this new expandable broadhead"
Baloney! I hope you didn't take that bait and waste your money.
No, don't worry my arrows fly just fine with G5 strikers leading the way! :chuckle:
Post by: BULLBLASTER on March 11, 2009, 07:58:27 AM
broadhead cuts will heal with time. :dunno: every year starting in august i always seem to learn that... besides who needs a stinkin broadhead wrench. no real reason you would want to use expandables, especially with a young child shooting low poundage and kinetic energy, the expandable will only rob precious penetration ability. they should be using a good cut on contact head, like a stinger or muzzy phantom or like that.
Actually his bow shoots faster and harder than my Guardian...he is shooting a Martin @270 fps.
G5 Montecs make tuning easy but cut thumbs very easy...
How much do his arrows weigh?
I shoot a 450 grain arrow at 300 fps and still like my stingers!
Post by: @RCHER on March 11, 2009, 09:39:23 AM
Arrows pulling out?? Okay, I want mine to stay in and mechs are easier to pull out anyway.
Anyway, loads of U.S. bowhunters use expandables and you can see for yourself on your favorite hunt vids or TV shows that they are wildly popular and equally effective.
I've shot expandables off and on for many years in AZ. I've killed deer, elk, bear, coyote, turkey, etc... with them. The only two negatives I have about them are...
1) With the wide cut (2"+) and drastic cut angles, shooting a faster bow (over 250-ish) is helpful to insure good penetration on thick skin/hide animals, like bear.
2) Once the arrow is stopped, inside of an animal, the expadables pretty much stop cutting as the blades tend to fold as the arrow backs out. Although I can't really relate this to the loss of any game I've shot.
Shooting at 270fps I've passed through deer, thinner skinned exotics, a bull elk turkey, coyote, etc. while also having trouble with penetration on a black bear, pigs, thick hair goats, and shots on bone.
[Rant to follow...] Much of the same from me...these broadheads are just tools to kill animals folks, and when the guys across the fence are all fat and happy using them and our team comes up with crap reasoning that doesn't stick, then I feel a bit like I'm reading Jim "Dumbo" Zumbo's blog about assault rifles. Come to the table with REAL objective data, that proves they are a bad choice, then work on getting the manufacturers to drop the products all together (like three-wheeled ATVs) - if they are proven and determined bad for killing wildlife. Otherwise, my reasons and experience are mine and you don't have to choose the same path. Use what works for you. I use what kills the best for me.
I care less about the fixed or expandable issue than I do about having folks driving the ship that don't know what the hell they are talking about. Every year it seems to be one Bozo descision after another.
Okay, I'm out.
Post by: BULLBLASTER on March 11, 2009, 11:25:16 AM
anyways, i have nothing against the mech heads, but do think that you need sufficient kinetic energy to use them effectively, it is a lot harder to push a 2" head through a deer than a 1" COC head.
i would try them if they were allowed here.
Post by: robb92 on March 11, 2009, 02:42:39 PM
Post by: coldsteel3d on April 09, 2009, 08:50:21 PM
Post by: PA BEN on April 10, 2009, 06:32:57 AM
g. It is unlawful to hunt big game animals with
a broadhead blade unless the broadhead
is unbarbed and completely closed at
the back end of the blade or blades by
a smooth, unbroken surface starting at
maximum blade width forming a smooth
line toward the feather end of the shaft and
such line does not angle toward the point.
Post by: EastWaViking on April 10, 2009, 06:53:31 AM
They took out the term "mechanical", they are legal now.
g. It is unlawful to hunt big game animals with
a broadhead blade unless the broadhead
is unbarbed and completely closed at
the back end of the blade or blades by
a smooth, unbroken surface starting at
maximum blade width forming a smooth
line toward the feather end of the shaft and
such line does not angle toward the point.
They may have deleted the word "mechanical" but the description of what broadhead is legal eliminates them from the legal category, as far as I can tell.
Post by: KillBilly on April 10, 2009, 07:11:01 AM
Sent a letter to the wildlife commission the other day questioning why Washington doesn't allow expandable broadheads....no reply as yet. I have a 13 yo just starting to bowhunt and they seem much safer.
Anything I am missing? anyone know why they are not allowed?
What are your thoughts...for or against
The reason is that expandable broadheads act like barbed hooks. Once they expand, they don't/won't pull out without doing further irrrepairable damage to the animal. In essence they are inhumane. What might bo only a minor wound couls result in death where the animal may survive when using the proper equipment.
That is the reason...
Post by: SpokaneSlayer on April 10, 2009, 07:42:04 AM
They took out the term "mechanical", they are legal now.
g. It is unlawful to hunt big game animals with
a broadhead blade unless the broadhead
is unbarbed and completely closed at
the back end of the blade or blades by
a smooth, unbroken surface starting at
maximum blade width forming a smooth
line toward the feather end of the shaft and
such line does not angle toward the point.
I saw that last night. From the way I read it, it seems that they are legal for small game such as turkey's. There was some great debate on another thread and I don't want to start another if they were legal before or not. WDFW was inconsistent with their answer when I called about them, but it now specifically says "big game animals".
Post by: Slider on April 10, 2009, 07:51:32 AM
Okay, I'm out.
Your job in life should be to take out the Bozo's!!! One at a time!!!........... :chuckle:
Post by: Buckrub on April 11, 2009, 07:50:58 PM
Post by: Bob on April 27, 2009, 05:01:18 PM
Mechanical broadheads remain unlawful for big game hunting in Washington State.) I hope this will help clear up the new rule.
Post by: Ray on April 27, 2009, 05:05:25 PM
I don't think they will change this part about the broadhead regulation (barbed). That is an opinion and I only base it upon my next sentence. I believe that it might have been put in place because unbarbed broadheads are more likely to work their way out of an animal and therefore it might be more likely for the animal to survive and recover from with less than lethal hits.
They are legal for turkeys.
Post by: Kain on April 27, 2009, 08:45:25 PM
Post by: caseyv21 on April 27, 2009, 08:52:58 PM
Post by: Kain on April 27, 2009, 09:01:33 PM
yes, and that judo does wonders on grouse
We use to use them when I was a kid they worked awesome. I havnt shot at a grouse or rabbit in a long time with my bow cause I didnt want to waist an arrow or loose it in the grass or dirt. Judo's kill em dead but dont into the ground and grab hold of the brush and grass. Alot of time they will stand your arrow right up so its easy to find.
Oh yeah they destroy opossums too.
Post by: Snapshot on April 30, 2009, 02:02:44 PM
Yes, any kind of point is legal for grouse, rabbits, squirrels, etc. I learned the hard way to only aim for the head of a grouse if shooting a judo because it'll penetrate (rather than bludgeon, like a blunt will) so the bird can take to the wing and sail off with the arrow in it. Without snow it's tough to blood trail a sailing grouse.
Post by: NW-GSP on May 02, 2009, 11:22:35 AM
I use them in Maryland and they work great, (https://hunting-washington.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi19.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fb189%2Frcacka3%2Fkids276.jpg&hash=83048efd243264bb929d8efc015b04a6f9d8b0e4)
The proof is in the picture. thats awesome! its always great to see what it does instead of hearing about it. great shot by the way!
Post by: robb92 on May 02, 2009, 03:57:43 PM
Post by: DOUBLELUNG on May 02, 2009, 05:16:04 PM
I use them in Maryland and they work great, (https://hunting-washington.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi19.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fb189%2Frcacka3%2Fkids276.jpg&hash=83048efd243264bb929d8efc015b04a6f9d8b0e4)
The proof is in the picture. thats awesome! its always great to see what it does instead of hearing about it. great shot by the way!
I agree, great shot. Of course, with that shot placement, a field point would have worked too!