Main Discussion Area > Shooting and Hunting
stone point trauma pics...
hawkbow:
For twenty thousand years the stone worked just fine.. I have taken lots of animals with stone points and can only say that shot placement is the key to a harvest.. most guys don't practice with their stone points enough to be confident with their equipment.. but stone points are deadly if shot into the kill zone.. in my opinion. The biggest problem with hunters trying stone is they use too big of a point and the point doesn't penetrate deep enough... Just my opinion ;D but with the exception of a few glancing off shots on turkey wings the stone has proven extremely deadly even on a variety of game species.. Hawk
Ryan_Gill_HuntPrimitive:
I see where you are coming from eddie, and i agree with you. obsidian is sharper than steel, that is true, but that is a one moleculat edge piece that is used, surgical scalpels are not knapped. in other words no one is taking a ragged obsidian arrow points and cutting open a heart with it, its just used in a different manor. as you know being a good knapper, when you make an arrow head, even if its very very thin, the cutting surface has a lot more surface area that a steel cutting surface, and the more surface area the the mor drag and the less efficient the cut is. just like we stated how if i take a flake of obsidian it would slice deep into my arm with little effort, but a knapped obs point may cut a bit but it wont slice as deep and clean and easily like a flake will.
i think we all agree that if you hit the lungs or heart or arteries, the animal will die, no question about it, but a lot of times the stone pushed those organs out of the way instead of doing the maximum damage that a fine razors edge will. a field point to the heart will kil a deer, but if you liver shoot a deer with a field point there is a great chance you will lose it but if you liver shoot with a broadhead, the hemmorage is too great and you most likely will find it within 100 yards.
so i think what is being stated is, steel is more efficient and more forgiving. its less likely to break and will penetrate more without any question and will have a greater chance of recovering on a not so perfect shot.
and yes i have shot dead deer with stone to get examples as well as live deer, and yes a stone point will destroy a rib bone, but if you hit a rib bone going in, you lose a lot of energy with a stone point that you wouldnt lose with a steel point. that has been proven over and over, me and ryano both have had enough experience in shooting stone to know that getting out both sides of deer is tough to do with stone points, but easy to do with steel.
so its not in question does stone work, we all know it does, but what is being discussed more than anything is are you at a handicap with shooting stone.
Ryan_Gill_HuntPrimitive:
Hawk i agree withyou, small points are a lot better when it comes to stone, and not to sound rude like, and i never have had a probelm with you, so please dont feel like i am attacking you. but isnt it illegal to hunt big game where you live with stone points? and i am not questioning your legality, but more so questioning if you have lots of experience in shooting deer\elk\bear, or large hogs with stone points? that is more of what is at question here i think. also fiberglass bows do have potentially more power than selfbows pound for pound, and i have noticed in lots of pictures of folks who shoot stone with success actually shoot them off of fiberglass bows. anyone else every pick up on that? and no that wasnt a dig on glass bows, i was just making an observation.
i am afraid of irritatiing people with all that i write and i dont want to make any enemies, i honestly do think i have lots of experience in this matter and i have a grasp on what it takes to use stone successfully and its somting i am passionate about. not super successful...but passionate just the same. i WANT stone to work just as well as steel b\c its what i want to hunt with...but fact is its just really not as good. also as mike said, a turkeys wing bone is a tough thinkg to shoot through, and i know for a fact that a wing is like armor especially for a stone point. i already proved that one too. turkeys are best shot in the back or drumsticks and head\neck with stone points.. so again you are kinda handicapping yourself with stone.
Dax:
Mullet, are you saying that these fellows who have actual experience shooting animals with stone are just not capable of making good, ethical shots? That's a pretty big assumption to make. Do you have some examples you can show of their shot angles so we can feel better about digesting your assumptions? Perhaps you have some of your own pics to provide that exhibit your prowess at producing surgically sharp obsidian broadheads and the damage that they are capable of producing....I'd like to see some of this stuff. You haven't misspelled Georgia "Alabama" again have you???
billy:
Below are pictures of the lungs from the deer I killed this past October. The first photo is taken looking down on both lungs as though you were standing directly over the deer's back. You'll notice the hole in the rear lobe of the right lung, but it was the cutting of the major artery (the bruise just to the left of the hole) that I think killed the deer so quickly.
The next picture is the underside of the lung, showing the long wound where the stone point angled upward and cut through the lung. Note that the wound was toward the rear of the lung, but it didn't push it aside or even appear to move it at all, at least from what I could tell when I examined it. If a stone point were to push the lungs aside, I would think the rear of the lung is where that would be most susceptible of happening.
I'm not trying to discredit anyone's opinion, just sharing what I have seen and experienced.
[attachment deleted by admin]
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version