Main Discussion Area > Flintknapping
Arrowhead Weight and Draw Weight
JackCrafty:
Eddie, sorry if I'm too cryptic on my reply. All I was trying to say is that if someone asks me what is "best" when it comes to stone points, I'm not going to tell him that: "If it kills the thing you're shooting at, it's good." I'm going to tell him that stone points are most effective if they are light in weight and the extra mass that you might need at the tip of the arrow should come from the foreshaft or extra wood at the tip. This "extra" wood might mean putting the fat end of a natural shoot forward or making the arrow longer, for example.
Steve, input from Ralph would be cool. He seems to be in the same boat with Eddie. "If it kills, it's good." I wonder if he has a favorite arrow and what the specs are.
Aaron, I've bareshafted arrows with arrowheads as small as 10 grains from a 50# bow. And I've bareshafted arrows with no points (just sharpened wood) that were intended to be used only for target practice. And I've bareshafted arrows with 100 grain stone arrowheads. Yes, all the different components work together and many different factors contribute to good flight. But the process does not have to be complex.
For me, it's all a matter of creating a shaft from heavy wood with a weak spine. There's always a few of those for every 20 shafts (or so) when gathering the materials together. And when I begin the process of bareshafting and tuning the arrows, I usually leave the arrow a little long and sharpen the wood tip slightly. I don't put the stone in place until the AFTER the arrows are tuned. I will cut back on the tip or sand down the diameter (or whatever I need) to get the final weight to match the "tuned" weight. Not only does this avoid the problem of "What target do I use for stone points?" but it also makes the process seem more true to historical methods.
TRACY:
Interesting thread Patrick . I find that most of the points I make for arrows fall into the 75-100 grain range with bases 7/8 to 1". I'm using cane shafts and feel like I have a generous spine range with this material and have not had an issue with flight when hafting points. Danzn bar has a slick method and spine tests shafts and does a quick glue on head in different weights to bare shaft them for best flight. Maybe he'll weigh in on this topic.
Tracy
JackCrafty:
Thanks Tracy. The 75-100 grain range is a hefty point (but not too hefty) and I've made those ranges for some people. I ship them without foreshafts and let them haft those on their own. They are a little thick for my taste. :)
JackCrafty:
Bob, I'm not ignoring you and I'm with ya on the narrow points. I've been thinking about hunting in Iowa (or some place with no broadhead restrictions) someday. I'm going to shoot everything I can with points that match the real things (Cahokia points, Scallorn, Jack's Reef, etc...)
JackCrafty:
To keep this thread going, here are some thought as to why I think we are all exposed to the "heavy point" arrow.
- How else do you solve the problem of building up to proper arrow weight when using light shafts (cedar) that are spined with the strongest or stiffest side opposing the bending force of the spine tester? These types of shafts have the least possible weight with the highest possible spine.
- Large, thick stone points are easier to make.
- Large points are "showy" and look deadly.
- Flint sellers make more money selling the large pieces of stone needed for the big points.
- It's easier for most people to simply replace a heavy steel broadhead with an equal weight stone point instead of making an entirely new arrow.
- The general public doesn't think small points are "real" arrowheads.
- The guys who use small points are weirdos.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version