Post by: poohdog on January 16, 2010, 12:38:59 PM
Thanks.
Post by: Oneshot1Kill on January 16, 2010, 12:56:51 PM
Post by: bowhuntin on January 16, 2010, 02:05:32 PM
Post by: bearhunter99 on January 16, 2010, 11:58:08 PM
Post by: carpsniperg2 on January 17, 2010, 12:09:51 AM
Post by: carpsniperg2 on January 17, 2010, 12:12:22 AM
Post by: poohdog on January 17, 2010, 01:59:11 PM
Post by: rooselk on January 17, 2010, 02:09:26 PM
Post by: konrad on January 17, 2010, 09:46:52 PM
This begs the question: If most deer are killed at 20 yards, why is flatter shooting so important when the kill zone is an 8 to 10 inch diameter circle? It is common knowledge that pass-through (complete arrow penetration) is nearly a given when using a stoutly constructed, sharp broadhead at 20 yards with any arrow material shot at modern compound speeds.
The very best carbon shafts have a high initial purchase price and it is true that they will return to their original shape well after making a glancing blow. However, they are susceptible to filler/binder cracking and fiber separation from tip/side impact and nock end damage. Manufacturers of carbon shafts suggest flexing and rolling of the shaft under tension after every shot to reveal fiber/binding filler damage and prevent shaft explosion upon the next firing. It is doubtful many archers practice this precaution but none the less this reflects manufacture’s concerns about prevention of injury to archers and standers by (read that lawsuits). Carbon composite shafts may also become abraded at the point end from being shot into rough targets such as hay. Abrasion can, over time, weaken both shaft strength and spine quality. Today’s hard anodizing of alloy shafts just polishes to a high gloss.
I have used wood, carbon and alloys in archery. I would never consider carbon again without some sort of nock protection (here we are again with the $$$). I have damaged a number of shafts due both nock and point end damage.
For me, nock end damage is more tolerable (it means I’m doing something right, consistently) rather than worrying about shafts collapsing on the point end or being eroded from target friction. That’s it, laugh…hay will do it!
I now use Easton premium alloy shafts with nock end protection i.e. Easton Super Uni Bushing. The Super Slam shafts are spine retention and straightness guaranteed for 2 years and the X-7’s straightness is unparalleled in carbon unless you are prepared to spend more than twice the money. Those who tout alloy “loosing its spine” should think carefully about metallurgy. Flexing metals get harder with time, not more soft. Logic says those alloy shafts should be gaining stiffness not loosing and Easton Technical confirms my theory. They, by the way, sell a lot of carbon shafts.
It is my contention that the technology needed for composite shaft production is much easier to obtain than for alloy shafts. Therefore more companies are now in the market. Archers are no more resistant to advertising than any other group and so the perceived need to “upgrade” to composite shafts seems imperative. I also believe carbon technology should produce less expensive arrows but advertising hype and archer’s herd mentality has pushed pricing (and profit margins) higher.
I guess if I had corporate sponsorship or was independently wealthy, I would have the most expensive of everything and not be concerned with replacement price. But I still have to work for a living.
Meanwhile, I will content myself with a little longer time of flight, a quieter shot, greater durability and lower replacement cost.
Besides, I like shooting the straightest, cheapest arrow on the firing line!
Post by: 724wd on January 23, 2010, 08:42:32 PM
Post by: seansfire on January 23, 2010, 10:07:08 PM
Post by: Shootmoore on January 23, 2010, 10:15:06 PM
xx75 2115's for the stick
I like my metal. It bends or breaks. Carbon makes me nervous because of the reasons provided by Konrad. Besides with my shooting skills I would burn $40 or $50 a shooting session if I was shooting carbon :hello:
Shootmoore
Post by: Todd_ID on January 24, 2010, 07:31:24 AM
My input is that I shoot carbon because I like the fact that the arrow is either good or broke; there is no middle ground. To get good broadhead flight, you have to have a straight arrow, and many of the problems we had in the past were from slightly bent arrows that looked ok and spun in our fingers ok but wouldn't group with the rest. You have to hit something pretty solid to ruin an Easton Axis arrow, and whatever it was that you hit to ruin it would surely have ruined an aluminum arrow as well. I like the new carbons; aluminum is without a doubt more accurate right out of the box, but 500 shots later is when the carbons shine. The best target archers in the world shoot aluminum because of this and the fact that they don't have to buy their arrows, somebody else is paying for them; most of us don't have that luxury, so we need durability, and carbon wins that match.
Post by: xXx Archery on January 24, 2010, 12:15:52 PM
X7's are great arrows ...but if you shoot groops with your arrows they will dent and bend
if you had a bow with a IBO rating of 320 fps at 28" of draw and shooting 70lbs.
shooting Aluminum
Total Arrow Weight: 540
Bow IBO Speed: 320
Adjustment for Draw Length: -20
Adjustment for Draw Weight: 0
Adjustment for Arrow Weight: -63
Adjustment for Weight on String: -3
Calculated Speed: 234 fps
Kinetic Energy: 65.67
now with Carbon
Total Arrow Weight: 410
Bow IBO Speed: 320
Adjustment for Draw Length: -20
Adjustment for Draw Weight: 0
Adjustment for Arrow Weight: -20
Adjustment for Weight on String: -3
Calculated Speed: 277 fps
Kinetic Energy: 69.87
you can gain 40+ in speed and over 4flbs of Kinetic Energy
that is way most guys like Carbon...but bolth arrows are good and will do the job
Post by: konrad on January 28, 2010, 09:35:28 PM
Large, heavy projectiles of stout construction have a much better chance of actually penetrating heavy resistance, continuing in a straight line and then damaging vital organs.
Many hunters who read a lot of stories about killing Jumbo with a 7 X 57 mm Mauser proved the fallacy of high velocity/kinetic energy theory with the loss of their lives.
Now, we see the same marketing strategy in the archery industry.
It is true that Whitetails don’t require a 375 Holland and Holland Belted Rimless Nitro Magnum and many have fallen to the venerable 22 rim fire; however, when I am hunting, I rest more comfortably in the thought that should I have the chance to fire, I will be dragging a carcass in short order.
I would rather punch a small hole all the way through than a large one in a shoulder muscle.
If you need to “shoot to forty yards with one pin”, my feeling is you need a range finder.
All this begs the question, if the vast majority of deer are slain within 20 yards, why are we so obsessed with shooting at deer at 60 yards? Even if the bow could do that, I don’t believe the majority of archers (I know, I know, I too can shoot a 5 inch group at 50 yards…on the range) are competent to be attempting those shots at game we are supposed to respect.
The race for speed is interesting but essentially irrelevant when one is concerned with killing at close range.
Penetration is paramount in this game.
In my humble opinion…
KL
PS I only gave $50 a dozen for my X7 shafts.
Post by: xXx Archery on January 29, 2010, 10:53:24 PM
why do I need a range finder? I know what is under forty..the last 3 bull have all been under 25 yards. with 1 pin I never aim with the wrong pin...50.00 for X7's im sure you did not get them new as we as dealers have Min pricing as what we can sell for and that is less than I as a Dealer pay.
Post by: poohdog on January 30, 2010, 01:39:07 PM
Post by: xXx Archery on January 31, 2010, 10:18:31 AM
Just a question xXx what bow do you shoot and are you a few inches high under 40 yards. Thanks
Yes I shoot a PSE Omen 28" draw at 60lbs shooting 301fps with a 410 grain arrow ...I set my sight for 32 yards and Im 2" high at 20 and about 5-6 low at 40
Most your shots and Elk on the WET side are 40 and under...it is so nice to just aim with one pin..Black Gold can out with a NEW sight this year a 0ne pin slider and a 3 pin slider...for 149 and 159...great price ...that will be my new sight this year.
Post by: konrad on January 31, 2010, 11:51:10 AM
It sounds like you really have it nailed.
I can only wish I were so proficient. I'm still on the starting end of that bell curve as my rig only chugs my 490 grain arrow at 240 fps.
Maybe I should consider PSE next time?
Post by: carpsniperg2 on January 31, 2010, 12:04:44 PM
Post by: xXx Archery on January 31, 2010, 01:11:02 PM
Way to go XXX!
It sounds like you really have it nailed.
I can only wish I were so proficient. I'm still on the starting end of that bell curve as my rig only chugs my 490 grain arrow at 240 fps.
Maybe I should consider PSE next time?
PSE...no ...we all know that there are a bunch of great bows ...as for me being so proficient ..YES.. I have a combo that works for ME....and it sound like YOU have things working to. ...you and I both know that any bow and any arrow will kill...it's still up to US the hunter...Just remember Im NOT saying you are wrong...its OK if YOU dont like what I shoot.. :hello:
Post by: Intruder on February 02, 2010, 02:01:11 PM
I agree with you in the argument regarding KE, Konrad. It is a measurement that can be very misleading and gets thrown around way too much (firearms and bows). People have tried to equate it to killing power, knock down power, etc, etc. For the most point it's hogwash. Putting holes in vital organs is the way you kill things.
Where I tend to disagree or maybe should I say agree with XXX is in the superiority of carbon when it comes to being able to shoot flatter... essentially achieve a higher margin of error if you will. To some degree, it's like shooting a bullet w/ a better BC.
Without turning this into a long range archery debate it suffices to say that Konrad's point about shooting a deer are perfectly accurate. It doesn't really matter.... just like it doesn't matter if you shoot a deer at 100 yards w/ a 243 or a 338. You put the bullet where it belongs... result: dead deer.
However, things change when you start talking stretching those distances out to 40 yards. With carbon a guy is able to shoot out to a farther distance with a higher margin of error because that arrow is shooting flatter, arriving there quicker, being influenced less by wind and (theoretically, although I've never seen any data to support this) doing it quieter than you could w/ aluminum.
Post by: longstevo on August 17, 2014, 08:55:37 PM
So the general feedback that I'm reading between carbon vs aluminum arrows boils down to this:
Carbon:
More expensive
Better performance
Somewhat fragile once the arrows loses its shape
Aluminum:
Cheaper
Lesser performance
More durable, able to bend back to shape once imperfections take place
Does that sound about right?
I'm a brand new archery shooter, although I'm not hunting archery this year. I know next to nothing about arrows.
Post by: coachcw on August 17, 2014, 09:18:22 PM
i am right with XXX i shoot my pse x force 83lbs with my normal goldtips with montec at 425 at about 318fps i shoot one pin to 40 yards. about 2" high at 20 and 3.5" low at 40 is great i shoot 5 pin matrix but other than 3d shoots i have yet to use my 2nd pin. when i shoot me 3d setup i run around 335fps. great bow i am a huge pse fan.your a little light carp. :chuckle: I have shoot from 100th lbs and 750 grain aluminum to 62 lbs and 420 carbons. With today's bow technology a 420 grain carbon at 310 fps out of a 70 lbs bow is wicked deadly.
Post by: Fullabull on August 17, 2014, 09:19:54 PM
Post by: Jellymon on August 17, 2014, 09:29:32 PM
Post by: Fullabull on August 17, 2014, 09:38:25 PM
Post by: longstevo on August 18, 2014, 10:09:28 AM
So aluminum it is then.
Post by: Band on August 18, 2014, 10:42:29 AM
I can say that from my aluminum experience of yesteryear they were easily bent and not fixable for straightness. If you ever missed the target you could kiss your arrow good bye. My experience with carbon has been far better in terms of durability.
Post by: longstevo on August 18, 2014, 10:48:31 AM
I guess its kind of like the argument of .45 ACP vs. 40 cal pistols...
Post by: h20hunter on August 18, 2014, 10:51:31 AM
Post by: dreamingbig on August 18, 2014, 11:17:49 AM
Post by: dscubame on August 18, 2014, 11:33:23 AM
Post by: Rainier10 on August 18, 2014, 12:03:30 PM
Post by: Fullabull on August 18, 2014, 01:19:43 PM
Post by: longstevo on August 18, 2014, 07:22:35 PM
Chevy or Ford?
Haha, right? :chuckle:
Post by: zike on August 18, 2014, 10:02:57 PM
How do you bend aluminum arrow back into shape? Can't imagine you can get any arrow to spin true after any damage! I shot aluminum when younger and shooting recurve bow. But now with the new technologies, I shoot the fmj and love it's performance! Get better penetration than anyone I see at the range.
When I shot target archery in the 70's, we had a jig with a dial indicator to check arrows and it was easy to straighten the ones that needed it.
Post by: blackveltbowhunter on August 19, 2014, 09:20:12 AM
Carbon all the way. Performance is outstanding compared to aluminum. I'd like to hear from Rad on this.....what would, if any, benefit be from using alum instead of carbon.
:yeah: I am sure RAD would have some great info :tup:
My experience is that aluminum wins the specs to money ratio every time. Comparing XX75 (.002 straightenss ) to Easton Axis (.003 ) and doing a quick sweep through ebay. On average it appeared that the XX75 were roughly 1/2 the price of Axis. So with aluminum it seems you get the tightest arrow for your money. The question is do you need that tight of spec out of a hunting arrow? Who knows.. each individual must decide that. My personal arrow is .001 straightness and IMO the difference shows. They also cost 3x as much as aluminum. Not as big of a deal to me now, as it would of been when first taking up bowhunting as back then I went through arrows seemingly 3x as fast. :chuckle:
Post by: acorn on August 28, 2014, 06:55:01 AM