Main Discussion Area > Arrows
Wanted "bird point" article feedback...
billy:
Hey everyone,
The newest issue of PA is hot off the press and in it is my most recent article, Putting Bird Points to the Test. If you're a subscriber it should be arriving in your mailbox very soon.
I just wanted some feedback from ya'll as to your opinions on the article. Was it clear and easy to understand? Did you find it interesting? Did you have any additional questions after reading it?
Honestly I really enjoyed conducting the test and writing the article, and I hope everyone enjoys reading it. I try to write stuff that is interesting and will teach readers something new. I definitely learned a LOT after I conducted the test, and I wanted to pass it along to everyone. Hope ya'll enjoy it and if you have any additional questions, send me a personal message and I'll respond. I don't have internet at my place so I might not get back to ya immediately, but I promise to write back to everyone who contacts me.
Thanks!
Billy
hawkbow:
Billy, I loved the article and the information was great... sorry brother but I was really turned off by the disrespectful testing on the dead deer.. you could have done the penetration test on something else in my opinion, everyone to their own thing but i am almost certain you will be getting some less than nice responce to the test subject. your research and info in the article was great... Hawk a/ho
Hillbilly:
I liked it, quite informative. I didn't notice the dimensions of the points listed anywhere, though (I may have overlooked it). Personally, I think the deer carcass was the most realistic test you could use- it's pretty hard to beat a dead deer as a test for seeing how well arrows will penetrate a deer.
billy:
I didn't give the birdpoint dimensions because I took the photos with a penny for size comparison. Most of the bird points were about as long as the diameter of a penny, so around 1/2 to 5/8 of an inch in length, and 1/8-to 1/4 of an inch in width.
And as far as being disrespectful to the deer, I don't see it that way. This was conducted as a test with scientific value. Prehistoric hunters were not shooting foam, ballistic gel or de-boned slabs of beef with bird points, which is why I chose not to test them on those materials. I think those are unrealistic and don't give accurate results. Deer are the most widespread big game animal in the country so it made sense to test them on the real thing. Archaeologists have conducted penetration tests of stone tipped spears on dead elephants to determine if Clovis points were capable of felling mammoths. I know because I've read the articles. But I've never read any literature on someone testing arrows tipped with stone birdpoints, so I decided that I'd be the one to do it. I stand behind the test and everything I wrote because I think it was important, informative, and it has archaeological value. But I appreciate your input and opinions! Keep 'em coming.....
Ryan_Gill_HuntPrimitive:
i havent recieved my new issue yet but i look forward to it.
i have tested stone points on a dead deer before. it tought me much more than i knew before. 2-3 shots into the rib cage gave me a good schooling. the way i see it, you use one dead deer to work out the bugs instead of wounding live deer. as much as i respect and appriciate hawkbow's opinion, i feel i can respect deer more by realistic testing my gear before experimentation if needed. again, no dis-respect to your beliefs hawkbow, just a different outlook i suppose. - Ryan
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
Go to full version