Main Discussion Area > Arrows
penetration with stone points
Hillbilly:
Man, I wonder how people survived for thousands of years all around the world without commercial broadheads? Poor guys- it's a wonder any of us are here today since our ancestors didn't have the opportunity to buy superior points off the shelf. :) But then again, we live in a world where the more something costs, (or the flashier the ad is) the better it automatically is. The reason Pope, Young, and Hill didn't use stone points is because they were ate up with terminal unconditional Anglophilia. Actually, Pope was one of the ones who published a test showing that stone points (made by Ishi) penetrated into a deer carcass better than his steel hunting points. Ishi didn't have Magnus broadheads keeping him alive in the woods for all those years, but I bet he was eatin' venison. As for the glass points, I would consider a glass point to be inferior to good flint, basalt, or rhyolite.
mullet:
The only reason I'm going to bigger Stone points and a heavier bow on the next hog hunt at the Alexacarrie Plantation is because of the thorn thickets and possible rain like last time.I want to drop them in a short distance.Hogs don't fall over dead like deer unless you make a very tight heart shot.And then they will still run for the thickest cover they can find.I've also got some drill like points for close head shots.Basically ,I want them to fall down when I hit them or make two ,big, squirting holes. :)I lost 3 too many last time.
Justin Snyder:
A chipped obsidian edge is the sharpest edge known to man. It is quite often one molecule wide. I can assure you it will go through both sides of the ribcage of a pronghorn. Mine flaked a ship no more than 1/8" off the tip when it cut through the ribcage, leaving a fairly large scar in the bone. If you doubt the durability on bone, look at the pictures of Marc's deer that he hit in the head. I have seen to many chisel point steel broadheads bend and deflect on a skull shot or penetrate and not get that penetration. Justin
duffontap:
Hey Hillbilly, Justin, and Mullet,
Thanks for the replies. I don't know if it's appropriate to call into question the superiority of stone on this site but the arguements that you are making in favor of stone do not answer the question 'is stone always better than steel for big game hunting?' I'm not saying that steel is better, just that you need better arguements.
For example:
Survival for thousands of years proves adequacy, not superiority to steel.
With some exceptions, technological progress tends to be just that (even though it may be at the cost of beauty or soul).
Sharper edges don't necessarily make better hunting points. The edge has to be strong enough to hold while being slammed into the side of an animal. Glass is used in surgery. My uncle develops medical research equipment (Sutter Insturments) that uses laser-breakers to make hollow points so small they can inject liquid into a single human cell. That's amazing, but that kind of sharpness doesn't necessarily translate to killing power. (Most people don't know this but there are still barbers in North America who offer shaves with obsidian edges).
The tests conducted by Pope used his trade points against Ishi's stone points. They were shot into a deer hide filled with livers. Bones would have skewed the results of course. While Pope did believe that Ishi's points penetrated soft tissue better than his points (30% better :o ), he wasn't convinced that they were always superior as hunting heads. Also note that Saxton Pope routinely achived penetration that today would be considered sub-par with his heads (i.e. steel heads have been improved since that particular test).
I read Marc's article and thought it was great, but again, it didn't prove the superiority of stone. That same season my friend made a 35 yard shot at a cow elk with a 53# longbow and his arrow bounced off a limb and hit the thing in the skull. Marc's stone point broke through the skull of a 85# deer and broke in the process. My friend's steel broadhead (Eclipse, two blade) broke through the thick skull of an 11 year old 700# elk, scrambled the brain and slipped out in perfect condition. Neither of these examples prove anything but adequacy.
The reason why I'm here is that I love this sport and the rich heritage we share. But, I believe in intellectual honesty, too. Primitive bows, arrows, and points are awesome and true technological advances to not take away from that. Compound bows have insane force-draw curves but they do not make Ishi's bows, or English warbows, or Pigmy bows any less amazing within their context. Our sport is one of heart and soul it doesn't have to have more killing power to be relevant. It's a much-needed refuge from the comfort and ease of modern life. I hunt primitive because I want to share in the struggle to live that people of the past delt with all the time. It doesn't have to be more effective to be better.
J. D.
Justin Snyder:
To really compare stone to metal is near impossible. I have seen brand name, chisel point broadheads not do what Marks point did. It was shot from the latest greatest compound at a higher fps than marks bow will shoot. I have shot many broadheads back in my compound days that when I missed, broke worse than any of my obsidian have. I have seen shoulder shots with steel that embedded in the bone and stopped, allowing the deer to run off. I haven't seen enough stone shots to really compare to steel. I will say though that on bigger animals, buffalo or something with heavy ribs, the two blade will out penetrate the 4 because it will slip between the ribs. I suspect that the same rules fallow on smaller, just not as obvious. We would have to bring the bows down to minimum weight to test to see failure to test. Not something I recommend. Regardless, most broadheads on the market are 4 blade. Why???? Not because it is better. Probably because it has more cutting area. But the flipside is we have to increase power to get penetration. If you cannot make a good shot you increase your odds of killing with a bad shot by increasing cutting edge. If you can make a good shot, the stone will perform at least as well as the steel. I have seen stone pass through shoulder blade, and both sets of ribs without breaking.
When in Rome, do as the Romans. We use primitive bows, so why not use stone points. Justin
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version