Effective distance for a bow.

[nekred]

ok slap shot in hockey..... where do you practice it from..... your own blue line? Why would you do that, when are you going to take an accurate slap shot at the other net from your own blue line in a game

Two things about a slap shot, you want both bow and accuracy.....

in Archery the bow provides the power thus... shooting longer does not lead to accuracy....

precision comes through consistency, consistency comes through repetition of consistency, which means reduction of variability.

confidence comes through precision as well, if you are constantly pulling groups out of middle that is what you key brain into....

In hockey I teach getting a consistent shot, then all that is needed is to change location, body position, or angle to place shot where you want it... and I have them practice according to their position where their highest probability of shots will come from.... for a Right D... probably not from the left face off dot....

I believe the same for hunting practice.... if you are planning on shooting less than 50, then practicing at 70 is not as suitable as practicing at ranges you are more likely to actually shoot from.

it is kind of like playing lots of golf to be ready for hockey..... ask the Oilers how that works?

[Slash8]

Well you keep fighting the good fight Nekred.
My practice regime has worked for thus far and I don't plan on changing it. 50, 70 , 63, 21 yards. 800 meters walked, 20 meters walked 6 meters walked. Its irrelevant. It makes no difference to me which way you think is right or wrong. What really matters, is when it comes down to the second you let one fly and the metal meets the meat you better be on the pencil, pill or coffee lid. How you get there is up to you.

[catnthehat]

Lots of shooting sports participants practise at distances longer than they compete at, the big difference is in hockey you are using muscles to propel the puck but in shooting sports it is the cartridge that propels the bullet .
In archery the same amount of muscle is needed to draw the bow as well .
Cat

[nekred]

How about if those who "practice" at 70 yards not be so chicken as to say that they would actually shoot at that distance.... after all why practice it otherwise... I put all the fallacies/excuses to rest....

If you are practicing at 70 yards don't tell me you would not shoot at 70 yards....

[catnthehat]

Originally Posted by nekred

How about if those who "practice" at 70 yards not be so chicken as to say that they would actually shoot at that distance.... after all why practice it otherwise... I put all the fallacies/excuses to rest....

If you are practicing at 70 yards don't tell me you would not shoot at 70 yards....

The whole idea is to practise long and to hunt short so the shorter shots are made easier .
And no, I do not take long hunting shots if my gear is designed for short range, be it rifle or long bow
Cat

[nekred]

Originally Posted by catnthehat

Lots of shooting sports participants practise at distances longer than they compete at, the big difference is in hockey you are using muscles to propel the puck but in shooting sports it is the cartridge that propels the bullet .
In archery the same amount of muscle is needed to draw the bow as well .
Cat

But why?

The only real reason I heard was confidence: I already put that fallacy to rest, Shrink target size or increase distance: really it is the same...

However using a 30/30 as a long distance 1000 yard cartridge will do the job but am sure there are better ones out there...

In FITA which is 90m max completely different arrows are used that are much more ballistically suitable to long distance...

The whole shooting a bow at distances outside of what you will play is about as useful as wiping your arse with a hoola hoop

[catnthehat]

I wouldn't even take half the shots on a real animal that are used in a 3D match ,
And yes , some shooters shrink the target size or just score their shots if they are all the way inside a scoring ring instead of touching doesn't mean either way is wrong, just different .
Cat

[Okotokian]

Seems to me that perhaps much of this is missing the point. I think the OP accepts the part about practicing and being able to put the arrow where you aim it consistently. I THINK what he was asking was, assuming the shot is indeed accurate, at what range can a "Hoyt nitrum turbo with 65lbs draw weight, 340 grain Easton fmjs with a 100gr cut on contact broad head" quickly dispatch various types of game with a single shot? I'm no bow hunter but I assume the answer might be different for a bull elk vs a white tail, no? In any event, I think he was asking about lethality, not accuracy.

[Lefty-Canuck]

Originally Posted by Okotokian

Seems to me that perhaps much of this is missing the point. I think the OP accepts the part about practicing and being able to put the arrow where you aim it consistently. I THINK what he was asking was, assuming the shot is indeed accurate, at what range can a "Hoyt nitrum turbo with 65lbs draw weight, 340 grain Easton fmjs with a 100gr cut on contact broad head" quickly dispatch various types of game with a single shot? I'm no bow hunter but I assume the answer might be different for a bull elk vs a white tail, no? In any event, I think he was asking about lethality, not accuracy.

Oh well in that case....it is lethal from the time it leaves the bow till the time it hits the ground.

Because an arrow leaving a bow at over 300fps and a mass of 400+ grains can kill easily while it is airborne if the placement is correct....it carries enough momentum to penetrate far enough into any fleshy North American animal out past even unreasonable distances (200 yards). I personally know a hunter who killed a caribou with a clean pass through at 115 yards.

Hopefully this helps answer the question.

LC

[Mike_W]

Originally Posted by nekred

How about if those who "practice" at 70 yards not be so chicken as to say that they would actually shoot at that distance.... after all why practice it otherwise... I put all the fallacies/excuses to rest....

If you are practicing at 70 yards don't tell me you would not shoot at 70 yards....

You play the same tune every time this comes up...... many shooting errors are not noticeable at 20 and are exaggerated at greater distances.
When we are hunters a half inch off at 20 yards doesn't mean much.
Also facts are that shooting at 20 yards gets boring for me.
Why do you care how others practice? Whether its a half inch dot at 20 or a 2.5 inch dot at 100 makes no difference except small shooting errors are shown at greater distance anchor point release grip can all have effects barley shown at 20 yards.

[kujoseto]

Practicing at 70 always improves my shooting at 40 and under. I didn't think it would matter much until I started doing it. Huge difference! Immediately became more proficient at the shorter ranges. Undeniably.
Not even going to enter the discussion on why...because I don't fully know and it doesn't appear to be open for discussion for people to take on a new understanding of the subject. It appears the lines are drawn and sides are taken

[L.O.S.T.Arrow]

Originally Posted by Okotokian

Seems to me that perhaps much of this is missing the point. I think the OP accepts the part about practicing and being able to put the arrow where you aim it consistently. I THINK what he was asking was, assuming the shot is indeed accurate, at what range can a "Hoyt nitrum turbo with 65lbs draw weight, 340 grain Easton fmjs with a 100gr cut on contact broad head" quickly dispatch various types of game with a single shot? I'm no bow hunter but I assume the answer might be different for a bull elk vs a white tail, no? In any event, I think he was asking about lethality, not accuracy.

That bow given arrow is tuned to fly at any given distance...whether its a whitetail, moose or elk will expire the exact same time [given animal] if hit in exact same lethal spot in vitals...at 70 yards as it will from 20 yards.

A pass-thru arrow from razor sharp head and effective arrow regardless of reasonable distance will expire in same approx. time from time of impact.

Having said that... a lot can happen in those seconds from a difference of 20 yards to 70 yards, wind, obstacle's, animal movement etc

Some will argue an arrow is traveling so many FPS slower at 70 yards than 20...however a pass thru vitals is a pass thru vitals...which that bow is capable of...

good discussion...

Neil

[brendan's dad]

The reason I occasionally step out to 60 yards for practice is when my form at 20 and 30 yards gets lazy. Shooting at 60 requires me to pay close attention to my sight level, ensuring the bow straight up and down. I do this when I walk back tune so if the bow is not level when shooting at 60 yards the arrow is left or right up to 6-8 inches. After a few rounds at 60, I go back to 30 and I am punching loonies again.

[catnthehat]

The whole point of all these posts, for those that missed it, is that the bow itself is not the big factor in lethality at any range, but the archer them self .

One oerson's lethal distance may be shorter or longer than the next archer .
It all comes down to the individual and their choice.
Cat

[jcrayford]

Originally Posted by brendan's dad

The reason I occasionally step out to 60 yards for practice is when my form at 20 and 30 yards gets lazy. Shooting at 60 requires me to pay close attention to my sight level, ensuring the bow straight up and down. I do this when I walk back tune so if the bow is not level when shooting at 60 yards the arrow is left or right up to 6-8 inches. After a few rounds at 60, I go back to 30 and I am punching loonies again.

^Ding ding ding.... Winner winner, chicken dinner....

There's some good reasons why someone would want to extend their practice yardages.

Form flaws are magnified SO much at extended distances! Once these are determined at longer distances and corrected, they become virtually non-existent at "hunting" range.

Again, my theory is "practice at twice the distance you intend to hunt at"....

J.

[L.O.S.T.Arrow]

Originally Posted by catnthehat

The whole point of all these posts, for those that missed it, is that the bow itself is not the big factor in lethality at any range, but the archer them self .

One oerson's lethal distance may be shorter or longer than the next archer .
It all comes down to the individual and their choice.
Cat

Well said!!

[L.O.S.T.Arrow]

Originally Posted by brendan's dad

The reason I occasionally step out to 60 yards for practice is when my form at 20 and 30 yards gets lazy. Shooting at 60 requires me to pay close attention to my sight level, ensuring the bow straight up and down. I do this when I walk back tune so if the bow is not level when shooting at 60 yards the arrow is left or right up to 6-8 inches. After a few rounds at 60, I go back to 30 and I am punching loonies again.

My exact form and logic...lol...

Neil

[Okotokian]

Originally Posted by L.O.S.T.Arrow

That bow given arrow is tuned to fly at any given distance...whether its a whitetail, moose or elk will expire the exact same time [given animal] if hit in exact same lethal spot in vitals...at 70 yards as it will from 20 yards.

Thanks. so if it can reach the animal, it has enough energy to penetrate fully and kill. That's interesting. Then I wonder why are we rifle hunters so all fired up about choosing the best caliber and round for particular animals? Maybe we should be hunting grizz with that .243 a 600 yards. LOL

[Kurt505]

Originally Posted by Okotokian

Thanks. so if it can reach the animal, it has enough energy to penetrate fully and kill. That's interesting. Then I wonder why are we rifle hunters so all fired up about choosing the best caliber and round for particular animals? Maybe we should be hunting grizz with that .243 a 600 yards. LOL

Are you a bowhunter?

[Okotokian]

Originally Posted by Kurt505

Are you a bowhunter?

No. And I'm not arguing with you guys. I'm trying to understand. My last comment wasn't meant to suggest I disagree with the answers I got. I'm wondering if we gun hunters should be a little less hung up on questions of caliber, etc. Surprised that energy doesn't make that much difference between killing a lighter target or tougher at similar ranges. When I say "Interesting", I mean it.

[Kurt505]

Originally Posted by Okotokian

No. And I'm not arguing with you guys. I'm trying to understand. My last comment wasn't meant to suggest I disagree with the answers I got. I'm wondering if we gun hunters should be a little less hung up on questions of caliber, etc.

Well then, to answer your question, for the most part no.

A typical hunting arrow is 400gr with a razor sharp tip. A typical hunting bullet in a .243 is 95gr with a blunt (comparatively) tip.

Think about it this way, would you rather be hit with a 400gr razor tipped arrow travelling 30 mph or a lead from a 95gr bullet travelling 100 mph?

I'll take the lead every day of the week.

[Lefty-Canuck]

Too often archers blame poor penetration or poor results on the broad head, the bow, the arrow, the sight, etc....etc.

When in reality, the shot or shot angle taken was risky or poor...the biggest skill you can develop as a bowhunter beside your accuracy at reasonable ranges is knowing when to draw and knowing when to NOT take a shot IMHO.

LC

[L.O.S.T.Arrow]

Originally Posted by Okotokian

Thanks. so if it can reach the animal, it has enough energy to penetrate fully and kill. That's interesting. Then I wonder why are we rifle hunters so all fired up about choosing the best caliber and round for particular animals? Maybe we should be hunting grizz with that .243 a 600 yards. LOL

I will say yes...as 70 yards that 65 Lb bow...well tuned, right arrow, razor sharp head, placed correctly has every bit as much possibility to pass completely thru the animal as it does at 20 yards...same end results...

No one said if it can reach the animal, it has enough energy to penetrate fully and kill...bows can reach out to 300 yds...can it take an animal that far...possible...but no where as efficiently as out to 70 yards as was discussed...

Same as world record ...grizz as you used for example at one time was taken with a .22 cal...does that mean everyone is gonna grab a .22 and head out and hunt grizz...

Neil

[Okotokian]

Originally Posted by l.o.s.t.arrow

Neil

lol ok ok

[L.O.S.T.Arrow]

Originally Posted by Okotokian

lol ok ok

In good Humour...lol

[Okotokian]

Originally Posted by L.O.S.T.Arrow

In good Humour...lol

That's how I took it.

[32-40win]

As I remember, checking arrow speed on my chrono, a 365gr arrow @ 316 out of the bow, was still doing 290 @ 40. So, as to power, no issues there.
I have had passthrus on deer @ 52 & 55yds with 400gr arrows launched @ 290. Also had 490gr @ 285 not pass thru @ 30.
But, I took those shots, because I had the confidence in myself to do it and the conditions were ok. I also used to shoot 5-6 days a week, and I had a course set up at a farm, where I could set up difficult cover shots and learn about terrains and how to read them.
You have to get out and shoot, to develop that confidence, and find out what you are comfortable with, in your mind. Shooting some longer ranges, will teach you about wind effects on your setup, and about your form and technique. Shooting 3d's, be it a tournament or backyard practice, where there are what a lot terrain variations and covering scenarios, will teach you how to thread the needle, shoot up and downhill, animal angles, and what is or is not a makeable shot, for you and your equipt. And what will fool you on a shot.
Then you'll have to decide what range is your limit, according to your personal feelings about it.

[Mike_W]

Originally Posted by Okotokian

Thanks. so if it can reach the animal, it has enough energy to penetrate fully and kill. That's interesting. Then I wonder why are we rifle hunters so all fired up about choosing the best caliber and round for particular animals? Maybe we should be hunting grizz with that .243 a 600 yards. LOL

Arrows and bullets kill in different ways a bullet uses speed, expansion and energy to deliver shock that kills. Its not just the dime sized hole that kills.
A bow and arrow kills buy using energy to slice a sever killing by blood loss.
Bullets and rifles need to be properly proportioned to a animal and the distance as do bows and arrows.

Many factors come into play with a arrow too kenetic energy and momentum will directly effect penetration as will broadhead selection.
Expandable broadheads for instance will cause some loos of penetration due to the loss of energy while the broadhead expands. In addition a large cutting diameter broadhead might seem best but cutting surface also effects how much energy is lost.

I would never suggest a 45lb bow with a 25" draw shooting a 340 grain arrow at 230fps be used to shoot a moose with a 2 inch cutting diameter 3 blade expandable broadhead the same as I wouldnt suggest a 85grain 243 bullet be used. Are both capable? ......yes but under ideal circumstances where the animal is hit perfect.

I would sooned shoot a moose with a 180 grain bullet out of a 300 win mag as I would rather shoot a 70lb bow with a 30 inch draw with a 470 grain arrow at 290 fps with a fixed 3 blade broadhead and moderate cutting diameter of 1-1/4"

[backyard]

i talked to one guy and he said he used a 700 to 800(can not remember exact number) grain arrow and he didn't have a problem shooting shoulders (LOL) always a pass through according to him.... and to shoot 70 yards was just like a 400 grain arrow lol ... I just agreed with the gentleman, and said I would love to see his setup and never saw him again

[Lefty-Canuck]

Originally Posted by backyard

i talked to one guy and he said he used a 700 to 800(can not remember exact number) grain arrow and he didn't have a problem shooting shoulders (LOL) always a pass through according to him.... and to shoot 70 yards was just like a 400 grain arrow lol ... I just agreed with the gentleman, and said I would love to see his setup and never saw him again

Most sights would need 3x the adjustment range they have to accomplish that...my target arrows are 695gr and travel about 210-220fps LOL.

LC