Uncle Lou wrote:I think with bows laceration or slicing tissue kills. Energy, speed, momentum just don't mean a lot, accurately slicing the right organs kills them .
I once documented the death of about 12 +/- pigs on a trip with a group (15 yrs ago, not pigfest). Lots of different weapons were shot. Guns with big heavy bullets knocked them down, especially when an off shoulder was hit to soak a little more energy from the bullet. Straight pass through with bullets had most pigs run quite a while.
Back then, to me pass through is wasted energy (ie: I liked big heavy slow). Then I started documenting bow kills of the pigs, many heavy slow arrows just stuck in and the animals were running around and more arrows started hanging out. Then a couple fast bows just zipped these pigs clean and they started dumping. I was dumbfounded, it was opposite the bullets.
I disagree with part of what your saying Lou. Energy dose mean a lot. You can't get to or through the right organs to make a quick clean kill without enough energy. Especially when your factor in an archery hunters number one enemy for penetration... Bone. I'm not saying that you need to have gobs of kinetic energy, but I think it's important to have plenty of it available at impact. Ideally, IMHO, to get a complete pass through and let the air out of their lungs.
On the other hand, I agree that outside of the increased forgiveness for range estimation speed by itself doesn't necessarily mean much. Where it dose mean something to me is when you do a speed comparison between bows
with all else being equal. If you have two bows, one shooting 300 fps and one shooting 340 fps, both set up the same (same rest, arrow, etc) the 340 fps will have significantly more energy and penetration power.
magicman54494 wrote:If faster bows wound more deer then pencils misspell words and guns kill people.
Point taken magic, but I think that was assumed and part of Darin's point was that because faster bows make it easier to shoot accurately at longer range people are trying to take advantage of that without realizing that just because you can do it on a target doesn't mean you should do it on a deer. Targets don't move, targets don't get your heart pounding, your mucles aren't stiff and cold from sitting still for long periods, etc. Plus, looking at some of the poor shots seen on TV that are passed off as good shots leads me to believe that some people are not understanding why they lose a deer when they put a "good shot" on him.
JoeRE wrote:Actually guys, Lou what you describe is exactly why KE is a great measure of knock down power of a bullet (where most tissue damage is caused by the "shock" transferred from the bullet to whatever it hits). Arrows depend on the ability to continue to travel in a straight line against resistance from the tissue and bone it is slicing - the definition of linear momentum - to achieve complete penetration, unless your arrow has about 1,000 ft-lbs of KE with your arrow (that is how much is often recommended for deer size game from a bullet) the "knock down power" associated with KE isn't really important. A lighter fast arrow can have more momentum than a slower heavy arrow if it is a lot faster, but weight has an equal say in the matter. KE is more effected by speed.
I think out of a bow kinetic energy is more affected by weight because a bow transfers energy to a heavy arrow more efficiently than a lighter one.
JoeRE wrote:...I don't mean to come off as a smart-donkey...
I don't think I have heard that before.
Just my four cents worth.