Primitive Archer
Main Discussion Area => Arrows => Topic started by: 1/2primitive on July 30, 2007, 03:01:49 pm
-
I would like to hunt deer, hogs and turkey this fall with stone points, but I'm not sure if my 47 lb bow, drawn 24" will have enough penetration with stone. I can't get my points very sharp, and I'm mainly modifying a few flakes, so they are not top quality, but hunting with stone is a thrill I want to experience! Do you think that the points will penetate enough to hunt? Or should I go with trade points which I can get razor sharp?
Sean
-
I'd go with the sharpest you have/can make. I've learned that one the hard way on a groundhog :-[.
-
Trade points, no question. With hogs you might even want to buy good two-blade broadheads if your trade points are not awesome yet. The best stone points can do amazing things but dull ones would not be suitable for big game.
J. D.
-
You really need sharp points. A sharp one will go clear through a deer sized animal. But dull anything is not ethical. I think the trade points would be great, as long as you get a good edge on them. You can buy a sharpener, or you can just use a knife sharpener. Justin
-
Thanks guys, I knew I needed them to be sharp, I just didn't want to give up my chance to take game with stone.
If I got some good quality stone points, 7/8" wide, sharp, do you think, for deer........?
Sean
-
If I got some good quality stone points, 7/8" wide, sharp, do you think, for deer........?
Oh, definitely. Good quality sharp stone points are better than steel points for hunting, despite what the steel broadhead manufacturers union would have you believe. They get better penetration (proven in several tests), and if they hit a bone and the tip snaps, the newly broken edge is razor sharp. I shot a groundhog with a big, not-especially-sharp stone point last year, and it opened a hole through it that looked like I had shot it with a 7mm mag, it never knew what hit it. for deer-sized game, just make sure they're sharp, smooth with no big lumps, and hafted well.
-
I'm with Hillbilly,except if you can't get your points sharp ,try using just a spalled off flake of obsidian without touching up the edge.I wouldn't hesitate to use it on a deer or turkey.But a hog is a whole different ballgame.After the hunt in June for hogs I've changed my mine about low weight bows and stone points on foreshafts.When I go back in December I'll be shooting 70#,and thin points weighing 120 to 140 3 1/4" long x 1 1/4" wide.I want every shot to be a pass through.
-
Suggestion, when making the stone points make the bulb of percusion the tip of the arrow point.
To sharpen raise the edge, then abraid and then presureflake from the raised edge. Do this in an up and down pattern from one side to the next. Makes a supper sharp edge. I was tought this by Steve Alleley. Makes a super sharp wavy edge!
D. Tiller
-
Hillbilly,
I'm not disagreeing with you, but from what I've read those test have been performed with trade points vs. ultra-sharp, perfect glass points (not flint) into soft tissue. If those are the tests you're referring to, I'm not sure that such test conditions provide proof that stone points are better big game points.
Properly powered steel points on heavy arrows can chop through two elk or moose ribs and bury into a tree on the other side. The way I see it is that even if steel points require bigger bows and arrows to achieve equal penetration, they offer more of a guarantee that the pass-through job will get done whether there is a rib shot or two ribs shot, or just soft tissue. I think that's the main reason why most well-known traditional archers (from Pope to Hill to the current guys) have gone with 60-80 lb. bows, heavy arrows and steel points.
If there were truly compelling proof for the superiority of stone points for big game hunting, I would think trophy hunters would be demanding stone points instead of the steel that is almost universally-favored. Although, I love the idea of there being a conspiracy perpetuated by the Wensel twins! :D Ha, ha. Anyway, I love the tradition of stone points and I am jealous of those of you who can knap, but I'm not yet convinced of the 'fact' that stone points are better big-game heads. (Open-minded though).
J. D.
-
J.D.,There was a show on the Discovery Channel not long ago about the cutting ability of Obsidian versus steel.It showed microscopic comparison of cuts made with each on artificial skin used by plastic surgeons for training.Stone made cleaner cuts hands down.The plastic surgeon said he would rather use obsidian the surgical steel.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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
-
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.
-
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
-
JD The only reason we stopped using stone points is that stone is more delicate than steal. With an iron or some type of mettle point if it bends you just pound it back into shape and resharpen it. With stone it breaks and thats it she wrote no more. Stone is as sharp or sharper than steal and thats pretty much a given. When it hits a bone and breaks it just sharpens itself and makes a sharper edge.
Plus steal and any type of mettle points can be made much more quickly than stone points can be. Prety much steal points can be made from sheet mettle with just a snip or a punch and then some sharpenning in much less time than a single stone point can be made.
David T
-
Plus steal and any type of mettle points can be made much more quickly than stone points can be. Prety much steal points can be made from sheet mettle with just a snip or a punch and then some sharpenning in much less time than a single stone point can be made.
David T
Depends on the experience level. And that is only if you buy the sheet metal. Justin
-
This is making for an interesting read, I enjoy seeing the pluses and minuses to the stone and metal. It gives me a more balanced view of the subject. Plus encouragement that I could take game with stone. :)
Sean
-
Yep! Sean I know what ya mean. I too will be making stone tipped arrows to hunt with when I get a chance. I just don't get much chance to knapp anymore. Just too little time. Also one of the draw backs in our modern age for flintknapping, no time! If you ever get a chance talk with someone like Steve Allelie of the "Bowyers Bible" he makes these cool little bird points that are supper sharp by the technique I mentioned earlier. The little barbs he puts on them are really cool. He showed me how its done. He puts the notches one the point early before finnishing out the point and then comes back and finnisehes the barbs and the rest of the point. There are a number of other knapper who do simmilar and make some really killer points. In fact that may be the only thing I will be making in the future. Just dont have much use for really big points.
David T
-
JD The only reason we stopped using stone points is that stone is more delicate than steal. With an iron or some type of mettle point if it bends you just pound it back into shape and resharpen it. With stone it breaks and thats it she wrote no more. Stone is as sharp or sharper than steal and thats pretty much a given. When it hits a bone and breaks it just sharpens itself and makes a sharper edge.
David T
The main reason most quit using stone is because of ADVERTISING. Steel is not always more resilient. I have seen the vented blades on broadheads shatter when hitting bone. Tempered steel can be quite brittle. Stone is not always sharper. It is only sharper when sharpened good. Justin
-
Justin,
I totally agree that it's difficult to compare two materials that are so different. The point I'm trying to make is that 99.9% of hunters use steel heads and the people who use stone heads passionatly and dogmatically insist that it's a 'fact' that stone is better. But it's not a fact--it's clearly debatable. I think it stands to reason that we as primitives should openly and honestly deal with the pros and cons of our equipment. The truth is, it is harder to hunt primitive. Our equipment requires more skill to master and offers fewer guarantees.
Man, I've got to get to work. I have more I want to say though. I enjoy hearing everyone's perspective on stone.
J. D. Duff
-
Justin,
I totally agree that it's difficult to compare two materials that are so different. The point I'm trying to make is that 99.9% of hunters use steel heads
J. D. Duff
Don't forget that 98.9% of hunters are stupid and LAZY. You could sell them a $10,000 heat seaking point if you got the right guy to get on TV and market it. Tell them it will help them get a monster buck and they are lining up. They have thousands of dollars of equipment that they don't even know how to use correctly. They don't even take the time to learn to shoot their compounds proficiently. The biggest reason the stone point is better is because of the dedication of the bowyer. It is like saying what constitutes a successful hunt. If it isn't the journey, you are waisting your time. In my ever so humble oppinion. ;D Justin
-
im likin this post. heres my 2 cents. the biggest misconception i hear all the time is getting a complete pass through. if you rely on blood to track then yes two holes are better than one. aboriginals had to be by nature amzing trackers. im no wheres near what they were but have found animals for other hunters that 4 guys walking a grid couldnt find and that was after they had stomped all over the place. not to sound wierd but its not just in the eyes its also in the spirit. every animal i have taken with stone has dropped fairly quickly and when opened up was nothing but blood soup on the inside. with the point still in the chest cavity there is a lot of damage going on after the shot. ive done my own penetration tests with stone and steel. as with anything there are good models and bad. i used a piece of moose rawhide that came from the hump on a moose for a target. a heavy shaft with a long triangular shaped stone point with no barbs always wins . peace
-
JD I'm talking more from the historical perspective when I talk about mettle points and stone. Most mettle points in history were quite bendable and easily bent and hammered back into shape. The modern stuff has way too high a carbon content on it. Takes a nice edge but when it hits something hard it shatters. The iron or soft steals the native americans and others from different times made their points from was a lot softer.
David T
-
Stone points aren't necessarily "delicate" or easily breakable either, despite the common misconception. Obsidian is brittle and easily broken, but people who are used to obsidian, dacite and such and have never worked with rhyolite, quartzite, good basalt or raw Texas flint don't realize just how durable a stone point can be. All these get sharp as the dickens too. I've seen a large rhyolite blade being used as throwing knife, stuck deep into trees and boards time and time again without breaking. James Parker once had a couple atlatl darts at a shoot that had nice thin rhyolite stemmed points hafted on them. Several of us played with them all weekend, throwing them over and over and sticking them into everything imaginable, and I don't think we ever broke either of them.
-
Those are all some good posts. Flint, quartz and other stone is much different from glass. The advantage of glass is of course the 'sharper than steel' thing. We all agree that points are only as sharp as you get them. Glass has the potential for the sharpest edge by far but steel can be a lot sharper than most of us bother to get them. I don't know how sharp flint can get but I don't think it has the capacity for a steel-sharp edge.
Justin is right too. People are lazy. Tell a guy who only shoots his bow during hunting season that he has to carefully haft a stone point on with sinew and he's already lost interest. There's a practical side to these things too. A taper tool and hot glue are major labor savers. But, they also offer more hope of a correctly centered head and good flight. Stone-tipped arrows must be evaluated on a case by case basis.
125 grains of steel or stone just doesn't seem to be enough for any guarantee against breakage or bending. I'm pretty comfortable shooting a Zwikey Eskimo at an Elk because I know that they have taken thousands of huge animals without failure. But, I had one practically bounce off the shoulder blade of a nice bull Elk last year and I nearly left my bow in the woods. If I were a confident flintnapper I would be glad to use large flint heads on Elk. Obsidian just doesn't seem up to the task for Elk or Moose to me.
Justin, you said 'when in Rome...' My hunting equipment doesn't follow ancient European or Native American design so a stone point would not 'match' so to speak. That wouldn't keep me from using them if I knew how to make them well enough.
J. D.
-
JD, yep, flint, rhyolite, and especially quartz will break to a razor-sharp edge (at least the better grades of them, some of the grainier stuff won't get razor sharp.) I don't know how many times I've been knapping these materials and cut myself badly, but the flake that did it was so sharp that I didn't even realize I was cut until blood started dripping off my hand. I totally agree with your thoughts that no matter what point material you're hunting with, you should take the time and effort to get it as sharp as you possibly can before you shoot it at an animal. Sharpness isn't the only determining factor-point size and shape, durability, the way it's hafted, shaft and point weight all affect how a point will perform, but sharpness sure helps.
-
I have never used stone points but it seems to me that there really isn't much differeance in killing power between
well crafted stone or metal points. Native Americans used stone until it was replaced by metal. Why? because it was as
effective and required less work to make and was more durable. IMHO the lethalness of an arrow is determined by
shot placement rather than what its made of.
-
IMHO the lethalness of an arrow is determined by
shot placement rather than what its made of.
So your saying that a well placed shot with a field point is better than a gut shot with a 7mm mag. HMMMM I guess I cant argue with that.
JD, I will let you know how obsidian does on elk this fall. I have complete confidence. If I was a real napper I would make some points from real stone. As it is, I just use the little kid rock. ;D Justin
-
"Obsidian just dosent seem to be up to the task for Elk or Moose for me." Now thats really interestin' ta me J.D. I wonder have ya ever hunted hawgs ?..........bob
-
JD,I've sat back and read these and tried to keep an open mind about where you are coming from.And it seems like trieing to explain religion to a born again religious fanatic.You seem to hear what you want and then go back to your same argument no matter what facts or information anybody volunteers.I was hunting hogs with Wendsels,and the hog I killed in the picture had the tip folded over where it hit the hip bone.
The way you seem to want to compare steel to Obsidian and not bring other stone into the factor is kinda flawed.Even though a proper obsidian point on a HAND THROWN shaft didn't have any trouble bringing down Mastodon,and Mammoth.And thats a fact also.Numerous Archaeologist sites have proven it.
With the logic behind your comparison's it would seem the only ethical way for all of us to hunt would be with powerful,compound bows with razor sharp steel,maybe retractable points? You know ,to better get by the ribs.And the make believe Indian toys we are hunting with should really be hanging on the wall.
-
Eddie, I think I see where he is coming from and that's not what he meant. I've never hunted with stone points, so I don't know how well they will hold up, and I think that's part of Josh's hesitancy to stand behind the effectiveness of stone.
Also, the 'sharpness' thing, there is not doubt about it, stone, particularly Obsidian, can break far sharper than steel can be. But as with my points, they are never as sharp as they could be, and so I think the steel points have an advantage for me at the moment (if I make the stone points) because my stone ones are not usually sharp enough. I need to work on how to sharpen them. ;)
Sean
-
Half,That's kinda the point I'm trying to get across.Too many factual sounding comments by people that haven't used stone points.And Elk and Moose is not the only tough big game animal.There ribs are just as far apart as they are wide.
-
Justin you know quite well what I meant don't twist it around. Stone vs. steel both well crafted, placed in the right spot are equally lethal. I think it comes down to a confidance issue if you have the confidence in yer equipment it does wonders to your mental outlook and and your own confidence. I don't think anyone can say stone points are more lethal than steel or vice versa. If their both well made and sharp and placed properly they will both kill efficiently. As to one being more primitive than the other there is no doubt stone preceeded metal but I'm willing to bet bone or ivory preceeded stone and a simple pointy stick preceeded all of them. And I do believe a field point(pointy stick) thru both lungs or the heart would prove as fatal as gut shooting them with a 7mm but neither would be efficient or ethical, Now if you choose to gut shoot your critters with a 7mm thats your choice. Over the years I've passed on many shots because I was doubtful of my ability to place the shot where I wanted but I could have flailed away hoping for the best like many do!
-
Justin, I wouldn't hesitate at all to fling a good obsidian point at an elk, except the only ones around here at the moment were released into the woods by the national park service and are all wearing radio tracking collars ;D Obsidian is maybe not quite as durable as some stone, but is still makes a deadly, effective scary sharp point, which even in the event that it does break on a heavy bone, now has new razor-sharp broken edges to slice and dice through tissue and organs. There's sure nothing wrong with your knapping either-I saw a few of your points this weekend. Looked lethal to me.
-
Nice points by the way! Just make sure you get someone to show you how to put a super sharp edge on them. Using antler also helps since it does not tend to dull the edge as much as you sharpen the point!
JD, I know a bunch of guys that use obsidian to hunt elk and when the connect with said animal its as good as bringing home the elk steak for dinner! But do hunt with what you feal most comfortable.
David T
-
David,Where did you learn that about sharpening stone points.When it comes to fine edge work I don't see how you can tell the difference between copper and antler.I've been teased by more than one person on here about my copper "Dental tools" I use for putting an edge on.
-
Dana, I wasn't twisting it around at all. I said I agree and I meant it. A cannon is no substitute for a good shot. I can guarantee a heart shot with a field point is fatal in under 60 seconds, and ethical. It is just not a guaranteed shoot, so we need to use stone points or broadheads to ensure a quick kill. The point is still, YOU ARE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT. NO AMOUNT OF POINT OR SIZE OF CANNON CAN MAKE UP FOR A MISPLACED SHOT. Justin
-
LOL, mymymy funny how folks(me included) get worked up when discussing hunting issues ;D
-
Dana,Yea,And what's funny you can be discussing anything and Ethic's always comes into the discussion.And everybody has their own opinion about what is good or bad.
-
Can't argue with you on that eddie, we agree to disagree all the time ;D
-
Mullet, I learned the sharpenning technique from Steve Allelie. Dont know why it seems to sharpen better but I think it has to do with the softness of the antler. The antler tends to crumble on its edges and takes of micro flakes when knapping. (?) I think the edge is not crushed as much when using the antler in the final sharpenning stages as copper would. To me though it just seem really sharp! ;D
David T
-
David, the ABO percussion tools are nice for obsidian because the super hard tools can put to much energy into the rock and work like a rock crusher. As for pressure tools, I don't think it matters. If you are finishing the edge, a nice sharp metal tool is about as nice as anything. You remove all the rock that the tool touches anyway, so it cant really dull the edge. Justin
-
Whose Steve Allelie ? Copper has the same consistency as fresh antler so it works the same on pressure flakin and ifn ya doin it correctly it dont crush the edge. ;)...bob
-
Hmmm! Not sure about that Justin but will take a look into it. Just seems that when I chip out a small arrowhead they do come out sharper with antler tines than with Copper.
-
David,I know when I switch to my little edge work tools I'm at the stage I'm not pulling flakes.Hillbilly can back me up on how small the points on my small tools are.When I get to the point of sharpening I'm really breaking a very small edge off,not running a flake.I have tools made of ground to a needle point,steel screw driver and very sharp copper nails.I've not been able to get bone or antler sharpened to as small a point as metal.David, read the thread Billy started about stone points and check out the info on the web sites on obsidian.Basically obsidian can't get any sharper than a fresh flake.
-
David, when I get to the stage of sharpening the edge, I am using that little tiny needle sharp point of the tool that Mullet is talking about. All of the thinning and running of flakes is done by now. It is straight down pressure, not back into the point. The flake that comes off is so small you can hardly see it. It rarely goes more than 1/16" back onto the point. Justin
-
I usually do the same thing with final sharpening-either a little tiny copper nail or a horseshoe nail filed to a tiny point, and make little micro-serrations down the edge. I pressure flake with antler quite often, and I find it harder to get a really fine sharp edge with, mainly because like Eddie said, you can't get the tip as sharp. The only thing that I can get noticibly sharper with antler is quartz/quartzite-it just doesn't seem to like copper at all at any stage in the process.
-
Hmm! Maybe I should get a bunch of dentil tools then. ;D Just seems I, personaly, get better flakes at the end with the deer antler instead of using copper. May just be me then?!? ???
David T
-
If you are after BIG flakes that run across the point, the antler is great. Justin
-
Nah! Its the short sharpenning flakes. I always seem to dull the edges when I make them with copper. Maybe I'm just using too large of a point on my copper tools?
-
David,one way I make mine smaller is by beating them flat.I use copper gound wire.You can harden it by twisting it or beating it on a flat metal surface.You can feel the heat in the copper after pounding it.Any way ,I flatten it and then file it to a fine edge.Or sharpen it to a very fine point.I think steel works better for this.