Crossbows - just amazing

Six-GunSix-Gun Senior MemberPosts: 7,041 Senior Member
Last season was the first time I killed a deer with my Parker Tornado F4 crossbow. The hole it left in that deer was impressive, and this year I wanted to get another deer with it before the season was up.

Last night, I took it out again to a private land spot I have permission on to see if I could blood it again. Sure enough, with 3 minutes left in legal daylight, a buttonbuck waltzed under my stand at 18 yards. It's late season, and not much time left to be picky. *THWACK* A couple of rolls and he was dead.

Because the deer was feeding facing me with very little daylight left, I had to make a precise spine shot, being careful not to clip a shoulder blade, which would surely take a lot of the sauce out of the arrow. The Red Hot crossbow scope mounted on the weapon has a 5-level illuminated reticle that is perfect at its lowest setting for a last-light shot; once again, it didn't disappoint.

Upon inspection of the kill, I was again floored by just how accurate and powerful such a simplistic weapon can be. It punched right through the spine, out the belly and tore an enormous hole that literally partially gutted the deer before I was even out of the tree! All of this with complete passthrough...

Ohio%20Buttonbuck%20at%20Norman%20Farm%20-%20deer%20down_zpsxn93svdz.jpg

Ohio%20Buttonbuck%20at%20Norman%20Farm%20-%20viscera%202_zpsxrmjgehb.jpg

Ohio%20Buttonbuck%20at%20Norman%20Farm%20-%20viscera_zpslmoqbbc3.jpg

The shot went exactly where intended: directly behind the shoulder blades and right *on* the spine. I know this particular crossbow is extremely accurate and at 20 yards can split its own shots if you're unlucky when shooting a group. As long as I did my part, I knew it would do its job. The entrance wound can be seen easily in the deer's back, both externally and internally:

Ohio%20Buttonbuck%20at%20Norman%20Farm%20-%20outside%20hole_zpscasak4mx.jpg

Ohio%20Buttonbuck%20at%20Norman%20Farm%20-%20inside%20hole_zps5sme6shw.jpg

I don't normally get too wrapped around the specifics of how the deer died, but I thought this was pretty danged impressive for a weapon that sends an arrow at just 340 fps.
Accuracy: because white space between bullet holes drives me insane.
«1

Replies

  • earlyearly Senior Member Posts: 4,950 Senior Member
    My Dad uses them. I don't know anything about them, but I'm not the least bit surprised at the terminal damage.

    Imagine how much penetration of armor etc the big ones would have done defending the castle ramparts. Probly pin soldiers and horses right to the ground.
    My thoughts are generally clear. My typing, not so much.
  • Six-GunSix-Gun Senior Member Posts: 7,041 Senior Member
    I have thought about that. When you get into the sizes they were using back then, the kinetic energy and penetration with an enormous broadhead....yeah, it had to be amazing.
    Accuracy: because white space between bullet holes drives me insane.
  • Gene LGene L Senior Member Posts: 9,738 Senior Member
    early wrote: »
    My Dad uses them. I don't know anything about them, but I'm not the least bit surprised at the terminal damage.

    Imagine how much penetration of armor etc the big ones would have done defending the castle ramparts. Probly pin soldiers and horses right to the ground.

    The powerful war crossbows were expensive and powerful (to penetrate plate armor) and were slow to wind up. The more powerful ones required a windlass to cock them. They had no sights I know of and because to elevate them would pretty well obscure the target, the effective range was very limited.

    In every contest when opposed by the longbow, the longbow won. Firepower (or arrowpower) ruled. The range for a longbow was greater than the heavier crossbow which threw a much heavier bolt for a shorter distance.

    With modern materials and compound pulleys, one might get a false impression of the Medieval crossbow and defending castles and such. I would judge that a longbow could get off 10-20 arrows to each bolt fired by a crossbow, and at longer range.

    Not an X bow fan....:)
    Not too many problems you can't fix
    With a 1911 and a 30-06
  • ZeeZee Senior Member Posts: 19,969 Senior Member
    That'll work!
    "To Hell with efficiency, it's performance we want!" - Elmer Keith
  • earlyearly Senior Member Posts: 4,950 Senior Member
    I think I saw a documentary that stressed the skill and effectiveness of the long bow.

    Also read the the plains Indians could unleash tremendous short range fire power from horse back by steerin with their legs, freeing both hands.

    Probly the modern steel broadhead and straight shaft as much as the 340fps that did the job here.
    My thoughts are generally clear. My typing, not so much.
  • Six-GunSix-Gun Senior Member Posts: 7,041 Senior Member
    No doubt that the modern materials and loading tools help a lot. A modern rope cocker makes drawing a 165 lb. pull weight crossbow an easy, 1-second procedure. Even a woman can draw with it with ease. The big advantage of the compound crossbows is the short limb length. Excalibur has done a fine job of making a modern recurve bow that is well-built, but they suffer from the enormous limbs that their Medieval counterparts had in order to get comparable draw weights to their compound equivalents. That can make for a nightmare in a blind with two guys in it, or a treestand with a lot of nearby obstructions.

    As for the projectiles, the carbon fiber arrows we use today are lighter and stiffer than the old, wooden bolts. The modern fletching makes for a much more accurate shot compared to a bare-shaft bolt, as well. Tipped with the same 125 gr. Slick Trick Magnum broadhead that I've been using forever with my standard compound bow, the penetration is amazing.

    All of that said, even the modern crossbows are not all created equal. I had a Horton Team Realtree Ultralight that I hated because it simply wasn't very accurate. I wouldn't trust it past 20 yards and eventually traded it toward a new vertical compound bow. The Parker crossbow I own now is a whole different world and superbly trustworthy out to 60 yards. On a close shots like I had yesterday, you can hit a quarter with it all day long. That's the only reason I had faith that I could make the shot I chose: accurate platform and a stationary target.
    Accuracy: because white space between bullet holes drives me insane.
  • Gene LGene L Senior Member Posts: 9,738 Senior Member
    Medieval crossbows were short, sinew backed and horn bellied. They were (the strong ones) three or four hundred pounds, and some had steel bows. The bolts were extremely heavy compared to modern bolts, since they were designed to pierce steel plate armor and not deer. Because they were expensive and specialized, mercenary companies arose to employ them. The Swiss were noted for this, I believe. (William Tell, for example.)

    I've often thought about making a Medieval X bow. I've got everything but the horn and could find it, but as a Primitive Archer, I'm kinda forbidden that route. I don't condemn then for modern usage, do what you gotta do. I'm also not an in-line muzzle-loader fan, being a traditionalist in that regard, too. Different strokes.
    Not too many problems you can't fix
    With a 1911 and a 30-06
  • shootbrownelkshootbrownelk Senior Member Posts: 2,000 Senior Member
    Not so fast, Crossman has just come out with the "Air-Bow", a compressed air powered weapon that shoots arrows.
  • earlyearly Senior Member Posts: 4,950 Senior Member
    Not so fast, Crossman has just come out with the "Air-Bow", a compressed air powered weapon that shoots arrows.

    Flechette?
    My thoughts are generally clear. My typing, not so much.
  • Six-GunSix-Gun Senior Member Posts: 7,041 Senior Member
    Gene L wrote: »
    Medieval crossbows were short, sinew backed and horn bellied. They were (the strong ones) three or four hundred pounds, and some had steel bows. The bolts were extremely heavy compared to modern bolts, since they were designed to pierce steel plate armor and not deer. Because they were expensive and specialized, mercenary companies arose to employ them. The Swiss were noted for this, I believe. (William Tell, for example.)

    I've often thought about making a Medieval X bow. I've got everything but the horn and could find it, but as a Primitive Archer, I'm kinda forbidden that route. I don't condemn then for modern usage, do what you gotta do. I'm also not an in-line muzzle-loader fan, being a traditionalist in that regard, too. Different strokes.

    Very cool history on that, Gene. I'm admittedly ignorant to their use beyond images in museums and a few TV shows discussing their use in fleeting context.

    As for using them in the modern day for hunting, I'm definitely a pragmatist. I have found that in certain settings, a crossbow (or inline, for that matter) simply fills the bill for the occasion.
    Accuracy: because white space between bullet holes drives me insane.
  • shushshush Senior Member Posts: 6,260 Senior Member
    Gene L wrote: »
    ....In every contest when opposed by the longbow, the longbow won. Firepower (or arrowpower) ruled. The range for a longbow was greater than the heavier crossbow which threw a much heavier bolt for a shorter distance.........


    Ask the French.







    early wrote: »
    Not so fast, Crossman has just come out with the "Air-Bow".......

    Flechette?

    SKU142983-07.JPG

    Blowpipe?

    cjp wrote: »..... Oh dear God, I've admitted to liking something Limey.I'll never hear the end of this.

    Jayhawker wrote: »...But seriously Shush....

    Big Chief wrote: ».........walking around with a greasy butt ain't no fun, though!

     


     

  • Gene LGene L Senior Member Posts: 9,738 Senior Member
    To each his own. I've shot exactly one crossbow about ten years ago, maybe 5 times. It wasn't a overly powerful one, maybe 75#. It wasn't accurate with me shooting it.*

    I'm definitely NOT a pragmatist. If I were interested in feeding people, I'd go with a 30-06. For me, relating to my past through side hammer MLs and "traditional" bows means more to me than filling a tag. My hunting bud has killed a ton of deer with longbows and recurves, and just as dead and with just as much penetration (through and through). Another friend killed an elk with a 50# hickory bow, and while he didn't get through penetration, he also didn't have to follow the elk for a long way. Took him two days to pack the meat out.

    So I no longer opposed X bows in bowhunting season, that ship has sailed. I think a person should hunt or not hunt with things he feels connected to without feeling the need to make excuses for it.

    Edit: Actually, in 1969 I shot a Montagnard crossbow. All wood, arrows fletched with some kind of leaf, arrows were made from split bamboo. The bow was a dark wood. Montagnards used them to shoot small game.
    Not too many problems you can't fix
    With a 1911 and a 30-06
  • cpjcpj Senior Member Posts: 38,842 Senior Member
    Not so fast, Crossman has just come out with the "Air-Bow", a compressed air powered weapon that shoots arrows.

    https://www.crosman.com/airbow



    That's badass.
    There is a Swiss maker of air guns that sells one similar, but it also has an interchangeable pellet barrel. But it's $2500.
    Only drawback to that crossman is the air supply.
    "I'm here for the guns, hunting, and skirt wearing men."
    Zee
  • Six-GunSix-Gun Senior Member Posts: 7,041 Senior Member
    Gene L wrote: »
    To each his own. I've shot exactly one crossbow about ten years ago, maybe 5 times. It wasn't a overly powerful one, maybe 75#. It wasn't accurate with me shooting it.*

    I'm definitely NOT a pragmatist. If I were interested in feeding people, I'd go with a 30-06. For me, relating to my past through side hammer MLs and "traditional" bows means more to me than filling a tag. My hunting bud has killed a ton of deer with longbows and recurves, and just as dead and with just as much penetration (through and through). Another friend killed an elk with a 50# hickory bow, and while he didn't get through penetration, he also didn't have to follow the elk for a long way. Took him two days to pack the meat out.

    So I no longer opposed X bows in bowhunting season, that ship has sailed. I think a person should hunt or not hunt with things he feels connected to without feeling the need to make excuses for it.

    Edit: Actually, in 1969 I shot a Montagnard crossbow. All wood, arrows fletched with some kind of leaf, arrows were made from split bamboo. The bow was a dark wood. Montagnards used them to shoot small game.

    I actually used to be opposed to crossbows during bow season, too. Then they made it legal to use them in Nebraska during bow season and I still resisted. When I finally actually fired a modern crossbow, I found that they have their own advantages (e.g. no draw required at the moment of truth) and disadvantages (e.g. incredibly loud to the point of being counterproductive on longer shots) that perhaps leveled the playing field when compared to the modern vertical bows that were already legal. Truthfully, I treat the crossbow as something of a novelty that I enjoy using as a "change of scenery" measure more than anything else. When I want to go retro for the sake of the challenge involved in going retro, I get out during muzzleloader season and make use of the flinter. In that regard, I totally understand the appeal of using primative weapons, both firearms and archery tackle.

    EDIT: from the pragmatic perspective, I should add that when it comes to flinging arrows, I find that there's no better tool for hunting in an exposed spot than a crossbow. I've sat right on the edge grass of a path where the deer walked and gotten the shot away. That's where I find it can really shine.
    Accuracy: because white space between bullet holes drives me insane.
  • cpjcpj Senior Member Posts: 38,842 Senior Member
    I've got nothing against them, they just aren't for me. If I'm bow hunting, then I want to be....bow hunting. Would my percentage of kills go up? Heck yeah. There's no waiting for the deer to take that extra step so his eyes are behind the tree so that I can draw. Would it be a sure thing? Nope. That doesn't even happen during rifle season.
    The one reason I've sorta considered it would be so that my daughter could bow hunt with me. She's not strong enough to pull a bow that I would feel comfortable with to kill a deer. But then again, she's getting close.
    I heard rumor that crossbows are now legal for archery season in MO. Before you could only use them with a Drs note stating you couldn't draw a standard bow back due to injury.
    "I'm here for the guns, hunting, and skirt wearing men."
    Zee
  • HAWKENHAWKEN Senior Member Posts: 1,679 Senior Member
    Congratulations Luis, you are mazing...........robin
    I don't often talk to people that voted for Obama, but when I do I order large fries!
    Life member of the American Legion, the VFW, the NRA and the Masonic Lodge, retired LEO
  • Six-GunSix-Gun Senior Member Posts: 7,041 Senior Member
    Not so fast, Crossman has just come out with the "Air-Bow", a compressed air powered weapon that shoots arrows.

    While it's not quite the same, Parker actually makes a crossbow (called the Concorde) that uses a CO2 canister to silently cock itself at the push of a button. You get up to 50 draws on a single filling. It comes that the expense of added weight and slower speeds, but for someone with a physical condition, it seems like a real nice feature:

    http://parkerbows.com/crossbows.html?action=detail&detailsku=1109
    cpj wrote: »
    I've got nothing against them, they just aren't for me. If I'm bow hunting, then I want to be....bow hunting. Would my percentage of kills go up? Heck yeah. There's no waiting for the deer to take that extra step so his eyes are behind the tree so that I can draw. Would it be a sure thing? Nope. That doesn't even happen during rifle season.
    The one reason I've sorta considered it would be so that my daughter could bow hunt with me. She's not strong enough to pull a bow that I would feel comfortable with to kill a deer. But then again, she's getting close.
    I heard rumor that crossbows are now legal for archery season in MO. Before you could only use them with a Drs note stating you couldn't draw a standard bow back due to injury.

    I understand that they aren't for everyone and definitely appreciate the fine art of drawing a bow with an animal nearby. That said, it's actually muzzleloader season here right now, so I'm technically under...uh...under-gunned. Yes. As for your daughter, a guy that hunts on base set his daughter up on a really nice early season 8-point buck that she smoked with her youth crossbow at 23 yards. She was absolutely elated and I think your little girl would love the experience. Hopefully, MO followed Nebraska's path and made crossbows legal during bow season.
    HAWKEN wrote: »
    Congratulations Luis, you are mazing...........robin

    Thanks a lot, Robin! When your weapon is shooting this well, it makes life a lot easier.
    Accuracy: because white space between bullet holes drives me insane.
  • woodsrunnerwoodsrunner Senior Member Posts: 2,725 Senior Member
    Crossbows are outlawed for modern warfare by the Geneva Accords. Why? I don't know, but I think its tied to the devastation of tissue that's involved on penetration of a living body.

    Some years ago now, maybe 25-30, I had the opportunity of seeing and holding original English Longbows recovered from an English Warship--was it the Mary Rose?--that sank on her maiden voyage before she cleared the harbor. These bows were very carefully made, and you could see where small amounts of wood had been scalloped out in various places along the bow to even out the pull to a uniform pressure. These bows were brought to the Florida Archaeological Restoration & Preservation Lab here where I live, and the archaeologist who was in charge of the preservation called me down to see what had been sent from England for preservation. This archaeologist was one of the 4 of us who were squirrel hunting this past weekend! He is a wealth of information on early weapons from matchlocks through caplocks, and is considered to be THE authority on Indian pottery chards and projectile points/blades from the very beginning right through the mid-1800's.
  • Gene LGene L Senior Member Posts: 9,738 Senior Member
    Yes, it was the Mary Rose that sank in plain view of Henry VIII, who was watching the battle against the invading French fleet. The Mary Rose was the first ship designed to fire a broadside, and when it first fired a broadside, it sank in fairly shallow water. Reasons for its sinking are still debated. The English had the technology to raise the sunken ship, but delayed raising it for a while to fight off the French invasion. When all that matter had cleared up, silt had infiltrated into the hull making it impossible to raise. But which preserved a lot of artifacts.

    Including a lot of bows. Replicated, these bows pulled about 85-110 pounds. A few were preserved with something like anti-freeze which removed the water and silt, and were able to be shot, but most of these few broke.

    Some of the sculpting woodsrunner saw may have been the "tillering nocks" for adjusting the tiller before the working horn nocks were put on, since the weight of a 100# pull bowstring would damage the softer yew wood. All bows had these indicating signs of horns, but the horns had all rotted away, except for one which was preserved beneath a coil of tarred rope.
    Not too many problems you can't fix
    With a 1911 and a 30-06
  • cpjcpj Senior Member Posts: 38,842 Senior Member
    I can't imagine pulling a 100 pound bow. Those dudes were tough.
    "I'm here for the guns, hunting, and skirt wearing men."
    Zee
  • woodsrunnerwoodsrunner Senior Member Posts: 2,725 Senior Member
    My squirrel hunting buddy, the archaeologist working with the recovered longbows said skeletons of long bowmen were easy to identify due to the enlarged bone structure on the pulling side of the string caused by the exercise of pulling the bow. I've read that the British government required longbow archers to practice some number of hours a week, and this, over time, distorted the skeleton structure. Wonder if the British government covered them with insurance and retirement payments in their old age.....what about it, shush? :jester:
  • Gene LGene L Senior Member Posts: 9,738 Senior Member
    Edward I passed the laws requiring weekly archery practice, but it was almost out of practice by Henry VIII's time. Henry was an excellent archer, BTW. As was his daughter Elizabeth 1. They definitely were identifiable because of bone structure, but a lot of laborers back then had heavier bones due to hard work. Archers developed in a different way.

    Back when I was with the magazine "Primitive Archer," we focused on (IIRC) Roy King, who pulled 120# English bow copied from one of the Rose bows. He pulled it back past his ear, which is what the English archers did. (Roy King may have been the bowyer who made the bow...can't remember.) They got the yew from Oregon; it's protected in England and most of Europe, I believe.

    Edit: Roy King was the bowyer, Simon Stanley was the archer. Sadly, Roy King died in 2009 at 65 YOA. A great bowyer. He did an article for the magazine, "The Mystery of Side Nocks," I believe.
    Not too many problems you can't fix
    With a 1911 and a 30-06
  • FisheadgibFisheadgib Senior Member Posts: 5,343 Senior Member
    cpj wrote: »
    I've got nothing against them, they just aren't for me. If I'm bow hunting, then I want to be....bow hunting.

    My first hunting bow was a Bear Kodiak Magnum that I bought at the BX in 1976 for 35.00. It was a 55lb recurve and I cold draw it effortlessly. I've got arthritis pretty bad in my shoulders now and can barely pull back a 35lb bow. With my crossbow I get a few more weeks of hunting season. I don't consider it true archery hunting though, it's more like hunting with an open sighted handgun. (which I also do a lot of)
    snake284 wrote: »
    For my point of view, cpj is a lot like me
    .
  • Jeff in TXJeff in TX Senior Member Posts: 1,353 Senior Member
    This was the first year in over 25 years I hunted with a bow, the new my Barnett crossbow my boys got me for Christmas in 2015. To be honest at first I wasn't sure I was going to like the crossbow. It sighted in relativity quickly with field points. I made the mistake of not shooting a broad head but was shooting the same weight broad head as field point. I know bone headed on my part. I missed a doe clean at 30 yards on the second or third night out with it. I had a rock solid rest and I wasn't close to hitting the deer. The next morning I shot a field tip and it was dead on. Next I shot one of my Wasp broad heads, it hit 6" low and 7" right. I shot another one 7" low and 5" to the right. I backed up to 50 yards as the arrow too fast for me and my buddy to see. At 50 yards the arrow was pin-wheeling or rotating in a circular motion in what looked to be a good 8" circle.

    My buddy had an extra pack of Swacker broad heads so I made the switch. Those shot exactly like the field tips. I did move up from 100 gr to 125 gr. That evening I shot a button buck at 25 yards. The arrow went in just behind his front shoulder and out the other side just behind the front shoulder. The button buck ran maybe 30 yards and piled up. The blood trail was impressive though I didn't need it. To this day and I still keep looking every now and then I'm not sure where my arrow went. I was in a ground blind shooting across a food plot with the woods 20 yards behind. One day I'll find it.

    To sum this all up, bow hunting with my crossbow is one of the coolest things I've done. My lesson make sure your broad heads shoot the same as your field tips!
    Distance is not an issue, but the wind can make it interesting!

    John 3: 1-21
  • cpjcpj Senior Member Posts: 38,842 Senior Member
    Fisheadgib wrote: »
    My first hunting bow was a Bear Kodiak Magnum that I bought at the BX in 1976 for 35.00. It was a 55lb recurve and I cold draw it effortlessly. I've got arthritis pretty bad in my shoulders now and can barely pull back a 35lb bow. With my crossbow I get a few more weeks of hunting season. I don't consider it true archery hunting though, it's more like hunting with an open sighted handgun. (which I also do a lot of)
    I'd like to go back to 1976 and buy a few hundred of those at $35.
    I've got an older browning recurve, I really need to practice and bow hunt this year.
    "I'm here for the guns, hunting, and skirt wearing men."
    Zee
  • Six-GunSix-Gun Senior Member Posts: 7,041 Senior Member
    Gene L wrote: »
    Yes, it was the Mary Rose that sank in plain view of Henry VIII, who was watching the battle against the invading French fleet. The Mary Rose was the first ship designed to fire a broadside, and when it first fired a broadside, it sank in fairly shallow water. Reasons for its sinking are still debated. The English had the technology to raise the sunken ship, but delayed raising it for a while to fight off the French invasion. When all that matter had cleared up, silt had infiltrated into the hull making it impossible to raise. But which preserved a lot of artifacts.

    Including a lot of bows. Replicated, these bows pulled about 85-110 pounds. A few were preserved with something like anti-freeze which removed the water and silt, and were able to be shot, but most of these few broke.

    Some of the sculpting woodsrunner saw may have been the "tillering nocks" for adjusting the tiller before the working horn nocks were put on, since the weight of a 100# pull bowstring would damage the softer yew wood. All bows had these indicating signs of horns, but the horns had all rotted away, except for one which was preserved beneath a coil of tarred rope.

    You definitely needed to be a serious stud to make use of a bow with that high of a draw. I know that some guys who hunt dangerous game with modern bows will go up to 100# draw, but I haven't heard of anyone going much higher these days. From the little I have even heard of it, longbowmen were also used for high volume, distance firing, so I'd imagine that stout draw would help a lot in that context.
    Jeff in TX wrote: »
    This was the first year in over 25 years I hunted with a bow, the new my Barnett crossbow my boys got me for Christmas in 2015. To be honest at first I wasn't sure I was going to like the crossbow. It sighted in relativity quickly with field points. I made the mistake of not shooting a broad head but was shooting the same weight broad head as field point. I know bone headed on my part. I missed a doe clean at 30 yards on the second or third night out with it. I had a rock solid rest and I wasn't close to hitting the deer. The next morning I shot a field tip and it was dead on. Next I shot one of my Wasp broad heads, it hit 6" low and 7" right. I shot another one 7" low and 5" to the right. I backed up to 50 yards as the arrow too fast for me and my buddy to see. At 50 yards the arrow was pin-wheeling or rotating in a circular motion in what looked to be a good 8" circle.

    My buddy had an extra pack of Swacker broad heads so I made the switch. Those shot exactly like the field tips. I did move up from 100 gr to 125 gr. That evening I shot a button buck at 25 yards. The arrow went in just behind his front shoulder and out the other side just behind the front shoulder. The button buck ran maybe 30 yards and piled up. The blood trail was impressive though I didn't need it. To this day and I still keep looking every now and then I'm not sure where my arrow went. I was in a ground blind shooting across a food plot with the woods 20 yards behind. One day I'll find it.

    To sum this all up, bow hunting with my crossbow is one of the coolest things I've done. My lesson make sure your broad heads shoot the same as your field tips!

    Jeff -

    You just highlighted the kiss of death that many archers of all forms have met in the field as far as not knowing how your broadheads compared to your fieldpoints. Years back, when I was still very green to this whole hunting thing, I went bow hunting for turkey with a compound bow not realizing there was even a potential difference between field tip/broadhead flight. I shot at a bird and literally missed a good 4 inches over the entire bird! When I went to go shoot a broadhead at my target, it sailed clean over the target at just 20 yards. Lesson learned. I have since learned how to properly tune my bow to make the flight identical between my field tips and broadheads on my compound, but I still verify my zero neurotically throughout the season.

    With the crossbow, there's just no substitute: you absolutely have to shoot your broadheads to know what it will do it flight.
    Accuracy: because white space between bullet holes drives me insane.
  • Gene LGene L Senior Member Posts: 9,738 Senior Member
    I used to pull 70# easily, but not any more. Age gets to us. I once had a 90# bow, but couldn't pull it over 25". Most of my self bows are/were 65#, but I can no longer pull them. I can do about 45# now, but that's about it.
    Not too many problems you can't fix
    With a 1911 and a 30-06
  • terminator012terminator012 Senior Member Posts: 3,457 Senior Member
    cpj wrote: »
    https://www.crosman.com/airbow



    That's badass.
    There is a Swiss maker of air guns that sells one similar, but it also has an interchangeable pellet barrel. But it's $2500.
    Only drawback to that crossman is the air supply.

    Watched a video on that last night. It does look impressive. Can't legally hunt with it here yet but would love it for some Zombies as long as my compressor worked.
  • cpjcpj Senior Member Posts: 38,842 Senior Member
    Watched a video on that last night. It does look impressive. Can't legally hunt with it here yet but would love it for some Zombies as long as my compressor worked.

    It ain't your regular compressor. It's a high pressure one. Like 3000 PSI. Best way to fill them is with a scuba tank.
    "I'm here for the guns, hunting, and skirt wearing men."
    Zee
  • terminator012terminator012 Senior Member Posts: 3,457 Senior Member
    cpj wrote: »
    It ain't your regular compressor. It's a high pressure one. Like 3000 PSI. Best way to fill them is with a scuba tank.

    Oh. I missed that.
«1
Sign In or Register to comment.
Magazine Cover

GET THE MAGAZINE Subscribe & Save

Temporary Price Reduction

SUBSCRIBE NOW

Give a Gift   |   Subscriber Services

PREVIEW THIS MONTH'S ISSUE

GET THE NEWSLETTER Join the List and Never Miss a Thing.

Get the top Guns & Ammo stories delivered right to your inbox every week.