![]() A couple mostly rolled the band around, and those are too dull. Most blades required a little pressure to pop the rubber band, which is acceptable. We did a quick blade-sharpness evaluation by first checking the edges with our thumbs, and then stretching 2-inch rubber bands to 3 inches, between a thumb and index finger, screwing the broadhead into an arrow, touching it against the taught rubber band, and seeing how much effort was required to sever it. Once we received a submission, we weighed each head from a package individually to gauge consistency. Long-time bow-test panel member Danny Hinton and I tested two new mechanical and five new fixed-blade broadheads for compound bow hunters. Read Next: Best Compound Bows How We Tested New Compound-Bow Broadheads ![]() I’d take any of the broadheads below deer hunting, and that’s good news for you. Some did fare better than others, though, and some did so at a lower cost, too. There were no dramatic failures of any sort. This year’s compound broadhead test was actually kind of boring, if you’re the type who is entertained by seeing stuff torn up and destroyed. Flight got pretty erratic at 400-plus feet per second. I tested it as a compound head (where it did very well), but I also shot it from a high-speed crossbow, just to see. This year’s Thunderhead 125, for example, is a big fixed-blade that’s advertised as being suitable for crossbows or compounds. ![]() Slower arrow speeds, like you get from a vertical bow, generally mean you can use a larger, more aggressive broadhead and still get true arrow flight, especially inside 40 yards. The difference in some crossbow and compound broadheads is only found in the packaging, but others have true distinctions beyond window dressing. Last week we revealed the results of the crossbow portion of our annual broadhead test. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |