Fixed Blade Broadheads

[htoler]

Which is better for whitetail deer 2 blade 3 blade or 4 blade and why
read a post on another forum about the mutybusters shooting a crossbow with a 2 blade fixed broadhead and then with a 3 blade fixed broadhead shooting into ballastic wax and the 2 blade got deeper penetration which makes sense but would think with the power of todays bows getting a passthru shot on a deer should be no problem with 2,3,or 4 blade,, would think the 4 blade would giive you the best wound and bloodtrail..

whats everyones thoughts??

[Tom]

Htoler with todays crossbows (most of them) there is no need to worry about penertration. You will have more than enough KE to have a complete passthrough with a good hit on most north American animals.

IMO the 3 bladed heads are the best because they give you more cutting surface then the 2 bladed ones. There is also less of a chance that your blade will just pass by a main arttery or organ (not a straight line cut).

The two blade heads usually are a stronger head, they can use thicker steel because there is one less blade to keep same weight. Going to a 4 blade head, you usually have to give up one of two things over the 3 blade which are, the DIA of the head or thickness of the blades to maintain the same weight. Some 4 bladed heads like the Slick Tricks have shortened the head to try to lessen the weight so they can keep with a thicker blade. Doing this causes a more forcefull hit (needing more KE for a pass through) but with these bows, you have more then enough KE to do the job.

As for what is better, you could get into a very serious long debate with no real true winner on that topic. What I always tell people is to get a head that you are comportable with and which is pinpoint accurate, then you have a good ARROW/HEAD combination.

Hope I have helped you some and not confused you more .

[Moxie]

holter,,,,, I use a 3 blade and the buck I shot last October, traveled about 50 yards before expiring. the blade when in high behind the right shoulder and came out of the chest through the left left arm pit.

[Partikle]

Here's an article from Bill T. The 3rd article from the bottom "The Cutting Edge" talks about 2, 3 and 4 blade heads:

http://www.horizontalbowhunter.com/news/news.asp?ID=22

THE CUTTING EDGE

As crossbow hunters, we use a ton of different equipment. Our crossbows, camo, scents, stands, etc are all important to our success in our chosen sport. However, if you are brutally honest, they are all secondary to the one piece of equipment that "does the deed"... the broadhead. All the paraphernalia has but one purpose, and that is to give the leading edge of your broadhead’s blades a chance to slice through your game’s plumbing and shut down its circulatory system.

Whether that leading edge is on a traditional, fixed blade, or mechanical style head means nothing once your broadhead is penetrating through a critters vitals. The real issue at this point is how sharp it is and how much useful cutting it does.

The sharpness issue is critical. If a broadhead IS NOT sharp, it works against success in two ways. First, it causes the blood bearing vessels to be "pushed" out of the way of the blades as they travel through the animal. The amount of energy it takes to move them is less than dull blades can cut with.

The second problem with dull blades is that they damage too much tissue as they pass through it. Now this may seem to be a good thing, but paradoxically it stops blood flow. In reality, a very sharp blade will cut through one set of cells at a time and leave the surrounding tissue undisturbed, while a dull blade tears and damages a wide path.

This causes a release of enzymes that fire up the bloods clotting properties and shuts down both the blood flow and incidentally, your blood trail. Of these things, neither is good or conducive to filling your freezer! The lesson here is simple: If you can't shave with your broadheads stay home, only grief can come from using them!

The question about how much real effective cutting a broadhead does is more difficult to deduce. At a glance, this is easy. Given a similar cutting radius diameter the two-bladed head will cut 2/3 as much as a three-bladed head, and 2/4 as much as a four-bladed head, right? Sorry, wrong answer! I know that this is the direction that logical thought takes us, but reality is never that simple.

Here's the problem. You can only cut a blood vessel once and effect the amount of blood released. Multiple cuts will result in no more blood loss since the only place that blood will be lost is the furthest upstream cut where it is being pumped from the heart.

There is no harm in additional cuts, but no advantage either. The result is that as you add blades the additional real effect that will occur will be reduced (on a per blade basis). I know that this is a bit hard to get your head around but nobody ever said that life was easy!

Many years ago, I was taught a simple way to work out this confusing issue. All you need are two broadheads of the same cutting diameter, one 3 blade and one 4 blade, and a sheet of fine graph paper. You know, the stuff with all the little squares.

Now here’s what you do: First, tape the sheet of graph paper onto a piece of Styrofoam or similar material, then plunge both broadheads through it ten times at random.

Next, take two of the blades off your 4-blade broadhead and repeat with it as a 2-blade head. Now for the tough part, counting exactly how many lines on the graph are cut (remember, multiple cuts don't count!) by each entry.

My results for this are as follows:

Two blade -- 6,7,7,6,7,7,7,7,7,7. Average 6.2

Three blade -- 9,8,8,8,8,9,8,8,8,8. Average 8.2

Four blade -- 8,10,8,9,10,9,10,8,8,10. Average 9.0

Next, if you wish to know how many opportunities to cut lines were in each of the "wound channels" you created, simply draw, at random, a series of circles that are the same size as the cutting radius of your broadheads, in this case 1 3/16". An average of these was 10 lines total within or touching the circle. The result is that:

Two blades cut 62% of the available lines.

Three blades cut 82% of the available lines. 32% MORE than the 2-blade.

Four blades cut 90% of the available lines. 10% MORE than the 3-blade.

So what's "the moral" of this story? Simply this...more blades will create more bleeding and result in shorter and easier to follow blood trails, but as the number of blades increases past 3, the increased effect per additional blade will drop rapidly. In my own hunting, I will only shoot a 2-bladed head when I absolutely have to (such as in South Africa where they are legislated for use on dangerous game).

I generally shoot 3-bladed heads, as they tend to fly better than 4 blades do and are within 10% of the same cutting effect, while giving a full 32% more real effect than two bladed heads.

I hope that you've all wintered well and are ready to go play with the turkeys soon. Wireton Willie, the only true weather rodent, predicted on February 2nd there would be an early spring for us all so it should be a great month of May in Ontario with much less snow than now! Till then, good hunting...Bill Troubridge

[Moxie]

Partikle,,,,, A most interesting article. Thanks for sharing it.

[The Butcher]

Very interesting article, and quite a lot of work and shots went into it. I have my own ideas, which I think a lot of us have. I was a brand loyal customer, until I started experimenting. I shot Muzzy's period! After reading of all of the success of guys shooting Mechanical's (and the clain of field point accuracy), I tried them, till I hit the biggest buck I had ever shot at, (this was with a verticle bow) and the shot as it looked to me, hit about the last rib, and angled into the chest, hitting the shoulder on the opposite side. The arrow flew out, almost as fast as it went in This wias with a Oregan Bow, and it was set at 72#. The blades collapsed, and I'm sure it brought material or hair with it that plugged the hole. Very little blood and to make a long story short, lost deer. I went back to muzzy's, and killed the next 15 or so, with short, but great blood trails. After going to crossbows, and being on this site, I tried slick tricks. I will say, I don't think they fly "just like field points" as I feel the only thing that flies like a field point, is a field point. But they do fly very well, and I did kill a deer with one, and it worked well. I have since switched to a Phoenix, over my old ( 6 months) Exomax, and my trusty old muzzy's flew better out of the Phoenix. I killed a deer Christmas week, and 3 jumps and it was dead. I have always shot 3 blade muzzy's, and agree they fly better than 4 blade heads. Back in the old days, Zwickey's, proved to be very deadly, as long as you aligned them and spun them, to make sure they were in line with the shaft. I found with them, a 2 o'clock-7 o'clock alignment, seemed to work best (at least for me). I may give the G5 Montec a try, as I like to sharpen my own blades. But the price of them sends chills through my wallet. There, those are my findings. I would say, success has been had with many different types of broadheads. Find what hits the spot, keep it sharp, and success will be a short blood trail to follow. After 35 years of bowhunting, these are my findings. Butcher

[Partikle]

Like the article says, I think 3 and 4 blade heads both cut about the same amount of blood vessels. That being said I think the next most important thing is how well the broadhead flys. I have the slick tricks and at 20 yards they hit the exact same spot on my target that my field points hit. I have never tried the Muzzy's but all I've ever heard is good things about them. Why haven't I tried them? I would not call it brand loyalty, it's just because the broadhead's I'm using work well so if it ain't broke I don't fix it.

Partikle