From: dasaxe@milton.u.washington.edu (Daniel Perreault)
Newsgroups: alt.archery
Subject: Re: CARBON ARROWS
Date: 13 Oct 92 06:03:08 GMT
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle

In article <1bcp8oINN2h5@charnel.ecst.csuchico.edu> dsleeper@OAVAX.CSUCHICO.EDU writes:
>
>>I shoot a 60 lbs.  compound, and might buy a new bow later on, but
>>don't want to go any higher than about 65 lbs.  Any comments you could
>>provide would be appreciated.  In particluar, I would like to hear
>>about :
>>
>>1) general comments about carbon vs. aluminum arrows
>>   (ie. are they worth it?)
>    After using carbons for 6 months, I believe they are worth it.  I
>    can build a dozen carbons for $60.00, about twice the cost of
>    aluminum.  But the carbons will last 4 to 1, vs aluminum.  It takes
>    5 pounds of pressure to bend an alumium arrow and 28 pounds to
>    break a carbon (shatter).  Carbons do not bend.  Currently there are two
>    major manufactors, AFC and Beman, both use the same material.  A concern
>    with carbons is the splinters when broken, they are not poisonous as
>    we we first told to believe by Easton, but they have a directional
>    barb effect.  Carbon is an inert element that is not poisonous.
>>2) lengths of arrows (I shoot a 29" 2117 now).
>    I shoot a 75lb bow at 29" with great results. I have taken two caribou, a
>    hog and deer, this year.  All shots, with the exception of a spine shot
>    were pass-throughs.  Penetration is unbelievable. I could have killed
>    two or three caribou if they were standing side by side.
>>3) comments about brands of carbon arrows
>    It's your choice, AFC or Beman.  I shoot Bemans for hunting, 3-D, and
>    indoor tournaments.  I personally believe within 2 years, half the
>    folks in archery will be shooting carbons.  They are a better
>    arrow.  Look at the Olympics, most teams shot carbon.
>>4) what size (weights) of broadhead/points to use on them.
>>   (I currently use 125 grain tips)
>    I use the Beman 60/80 shaft with a 75lb bow at 29", and 125
>    grain Thunderheads.
>
>>5) do I need any other special equipment?
>>      (such as rest, fletchings, etc.)
>       I use a New Archery Products Centerrest with flipper and shoot with
>       a release.  Most folks use something like the TM hunter that can
>       be adjusted for the smaller shaft.  No change in fletching.
>>      ---------------------------------------------------------
>>Chris Barnes
>>cbarnes@tamvm1.tamu.edu
>>(409) 846-3273 (home)
>>(409) 845-4437 (work)
>
>***************************************************************************
>DON SLEEPER, CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, CHICO I PLANT OPERATION
>DSLEEPER@OAVAX.CSUCHICO.EDU                     I DEPT 925, CHICO, CA 95929


Ok, here is the other side. Actually it just depends on what is important
to you. As a target arrow I agree they are excellent. Particularly for lighter
poundage shooters who need more speed. The problems with them as a hunting
arrow is as described, they can shatter on impact(like bone) in which case
they ruin the meat because they essentially act like shrapnel. I have seen
Beamen's shatter in this fashion. To me it is a poor risk to shoot carbon,
because I shoot around 90# and the odds that a bad shot is going to shatter
the arrow increases. Now AFC makes an aluminum arrow with a carbon jacket
that gets many of the advantages of carbon, without the problem of splintering.
However, they are very expensive-on par or more than Beaman's.

My personal opinion is to stay away from them for hunting. I shot Easton X7's
for target which work fine, but I have no qualms about shooting carbon's for
targets. The only irritation there is that on a very regular basis they will
blow through a target even at low wieghts on the compound because of the 
way the tips are designed--at least on Beamans. Others will simply due to the
speed.

Dan Perreault
dasaxe@u.washington.edu