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.

[Poggins]

I've been shooting one that weighs just over 100g , but I have it on a wildrose shaft that has a taper to it so that adds some weight up front also .
I know of a few hunters that match weight on three or more hunting arrows by drilling a small hole in the end of their shaft and inserting enough lead wire or small shot to add weight and match the points , usually in the range of 145-175g .

[JackCrafty]

Yeah. I've inserted copper into the front portion of shafts to get the weight desired for some of the arrows I've sold.

[JackCrafty]

No other opinions?   

[Sasquatch]

I wanted to give my opinion.  The points that i make and use are thick, Im still working on the thinning.  But if i could have it my way they would be thin,  for sharpness, because thin points can be sharperon edges. They would also be about 1 in wide.  1 in is still enough width to do alot of damage as it passes the vitals, yet wont effect arrow flight by having a set of wings on the front of the arrow.  As a result of the two parameters(1in and thin)  The point would also be light (50-75Gr).  My experience with killing deer is that the size of the hole going through the vitals doesn't matter. A .22 cal will kill a deer if you put it through the heart.  It is more important to have the accuracy needed to hit vitals and penetration to go all the way through the animal.  More penetration will kill the animal faster(2 lungs v's 1 lung), and with a better chance of recovery.   

On another note I think that the public has misconceptions( their not good enough anymore) about stone points because there is a huge push in modern archery for wider broad heads( 2" cutting diameters, etc) I think that this wider is better has pushed into primitive archers.  Maybe people that shoot big points on arrows are doing it for the extra width. 

Lessons learned from modern archery:  I have shot compounds for 15 years before PA.  One lesson that i learned and still applies is that you cant put sails on the front of the arrow and expect pinpoint accuracy( unless the bow is perfectly tuned).  Thats why they invented the expandable broadheads, and we know how popular those are.  the evidence doesnt lie. If you have pinpoint accuracy and maximum damage to the animal, then you will be more successful.     

[caveman2533]

Here is the reply I got from Ralph:

In the beginning I didn't know what type to start with so  I started with a corner notched point similar in shape to a steel Zwickey.  It worked very well.  Over time and many styles, I've come to realize several things about stone points and self bows.
 
Weight  isn't as important as size and placement of shot .
 
I've settled on triangle  points such as the Cahokia due to ease of making and hafting, controllable dimensions, and most important of all the penetration.  Self bows are generally slow in comparison to modern fiberglass bows and shot placement and penetration are paramount for good success rate.  When making an arrowhead for hunting we aren't concerned with art, but function.  I make my points 7/8th of an inch to 1 inch wide at the bottom and about 1.75 to 2 inches long.  The thickest place on the point should be just above the ending arrow shaft.  I like to end the shaft no less than 1/4 of an inch above the notches.
 
Weight wise, mine weigh about 120 grains plus pitch glue and sinew wrapping.  I did do some experimenting a few years back and found that at 20 yards, I could shoot an 80, 100, 120 grain head within 2 inches of each other inside an 8 inch circle.  Weight really doesn't matter to me as much as getting the head on straight.   
 
Softer and cooked materials.... make the points slightly thicker.   Raw material can be a little thinner.
 
 
Hope this helps.       Ralph

[JackCrafty]

Thanks for your opinions guys!

Sasquatch, I wasn't aware of the "very wide broadhead" culture.  2" wide blades?  If this is creeping into stone arrowpoint mentality we are doomed...

Caveman, thanks for that reply.  Good to see his experimentation results at 20 yards especially.

[JoJoDapyro]

I'll chime in as a newbie. Don't we use a heavy head to drag the arrow? When I hunted with a wheelie bow back in the day I shot the same weight broadhead as I did target tips. I got the same performance out of a broadhead as I did a target point. Why would a stone point be any different than a metal point? Billy Berger has a video of the difference in penetration between stone and metal, with very little difference. 50 seems light to me, kinda like the difference between a .22 and a .44 mag. Also just my .02.

Utah is also 7/8ths

[JackCrafty]

JoJo, yeah, a heavy point puts a lot of weight forward and many archers are accustomed to heavy points on lightweight shafts.  The system works for many people who have gotten used to it.

Some say a heavy front end makes the arrow more "stable".  I don't know exactly what that means but tests have shown that speed is decreased on projectiles when the front is very heavy.  The tail end of the arrow tends to rise up during flight and create more drag than an arrow with evenly distributed weight.

[JoJoDapyro]

But speed isn't as important on a heavy arrow than it is on say a 24 inch carbon arrow that is lighter. From my understanding a heavy, slow arrow will have the same penetration as a light fast one. Like I said before, I am still learning. Topics like this are nice to see two sides to the argument, and take what others have learned and mold it into something that works for you.

[Sasquatch]

Jackcrafty:  Yep 2".