Do you want a pass thru?

[cnelk]

Do you want a pass thru when you shoot an elk?
Why?

Personally I dont really care if I do or not. In fact, rarely do I get a pass thru. I love seeing my arrow buried right to the fletching.

This past fall both my elk [cow & bull] and my son\'s bull, we didnt have a pass thru. None of the elk went over 70yds. And we recovered all the arrows [not broken] and BHs.

Thats what I call performance

 

[elky McElkerson]

in a perfect world, i want a pass thru.

couple of reasons:
two holes bleed more than one
and my arrow has a better chance of not breaking. i love it when i see it drop out the other side of an animal, and fall to the ground.

 

[iccyman001]

Yes, I would prefer a pass through.


As cliff mentioned I want to holes bleeding instead of one.
This also leaves less blood in the cavity for when I\'m gutting it (if I am gutting it)

 

[Swede]

I prefer a pass through. Two holes are better than one, especially when the entrance hole is high from a tree stand shot. I agree that a broad-head in right place in the boiler room is a dead elk, regardless of it being a pass through or not.

 

[Bowfreak]

I have never shot an elk so I don\'t have a gauge as to how much oomph an archery setup should have. What setup are you guys using?

 

[iccyman001]

I have never shot an elk so I don\'t have a gauge as to how much oomph an archery setup should have. What setup are you guys using?

Nothing fancy here.

Z7 extreme at 60 lbs
Probably 415-425 grain arrow set up.

 

[bnsafe]

i dont care rather i get a pass thru or not either. to answer the other question i shot 65 lbs 28.5 inch draw at 292fps and a 100 gr slick trick standard. poor blood trail, but elk didnt go far.

 

[Deertick]

Well, I didn\'t need a pass-through on this one, and she didn\'t go far! (Frontal shot)

To ask the question, though, in a different way: Do you think that leaving a broadhead inside the animal does much more damage?

I\'ve heard the theory that it \"keeps on cutting\", so the total surface area of the \"cuts\" is greater when there is not a pass-through.

I don\'t believe it. I\'d rather have a pass-through, but I think the difference is negligible with a well-placed shot.

 

[bowhunter]

I would prefer a pass through to leave more of a blood trail.The last elk I shot was below me. I hit high and the arrow was just under the skin in the crease behind the front leg on the other side. I found a total of 12-15 drops of blood and it was sprinkling. I had to follow tracks 40 yards. I then saw him on his back just 20 more yards. If he had ran further the tracking would have been harder.

 

[Baby Huey]

I prefer a pass through as well - same reasons that have been mentioned: 2 holes, more of a blood trail.

One of my buddies has that \"keep the broadhead inside\" theory as well, but I don\'t subscribe to that line of thinking.

 

[F M]

I like a pass through all so. I hit one a couple of years ago from a high angle and hit low on the off shoulder. No exit hole and no blood trail. Still haunts me to this day.

 

[elky McElkerson]

the elk my buddy shot in ID. buried the broadhead, and it rotored the organs. devastating.

it was the scariest moment fishing for that broken tip in the puddle of GOO in the body cavity. broke the arrow off about 5 inches down, leaving the razor edge..i found it tip toeing thru the blood with my fingers.

 

[bowhunter]

Two holes on the lung cavity will cause more trouble with breathing than one also. When the diaphragm pulls back to bring air into the lungs if it is sucking air into the holes it is not getting into the lungs. This alone can cause the animal to expire.

 

[cohunter14]

I look at this from a different perspective than most of you (bullet versus broadhead), but for me, I have actually been more impressed when a bullet does NOT exit an animal. If you put the shot where it is supposed to be, the animal will die regardless of passing thru. But when I have had bullets drop all of their energy on an elk and not exit, the results have been a dead animal in a very short distance, compared with a bullet that exits. It would also be my theory that a shot that isn\'t perfect will have better results, again, if it drops all it\'s energy in the animal versus exiting. Arrows could be a different story, but the bottom line for me is that if you hit an animal where you should, a pass thru shouldn\'t matter.

 

[bowhunter]

I look at this from a different perspective than most of you (bullet versus broadhead), but for me, I have actually been more impressed when a bullet does NOT exit an animal. If you put the shot where it is supposed to be, the animal will die regardless of passing thru. But when I have had bullets drop all of their energy on an elk and not exit, the results have been a dead animal in a very short distance, compared with a bullet that exits. It would also be my theory that a shot that isn\'t perfect will have better results, again, if it drops all it\'s energy in the animal versus exiting. Arrows could be a different story, but the bottom line for me is that if you hit an animal where you should, a pass thru shouldn\'t matter.

Very true, If a bullet goes through it didn\'t expand and use up its energy in the animal.

 

[cnelk]

Thanks for the replies guys.

I figure if the arrow has penetrated 24in, not much more damage can be done.
Very seldom are my shots on elk are broadside, [meaning the arrow has the shortest distance to pass thru]
The slightly quartering to/away, frontal makes a further travel for the arrow to make to exit, but still resulting in death.

Im not sure about the broadhead cutting more if let in the animal. Some believe it does.
But, once I took an arrow and tried to stir up a gutpile to see what happened.
Not much.
But that wasnt a very good beta test

 

[WW]

Who cares! The important thing is a dead elk at the end of the blood trail. However, if I had to choose, I\'d pick complete penetration with the arrow sticking out the other side but not passing all the way through. As the animal walks or runs off, the arrow works back and forth keeping the wound channel open and causes massive blood flow out both sides of the body.

The exception with all shots is a high hit. Often, regardless of penetration, the bulk of blood will be internal resulting in a poor blood trail.

 

[elky McElkerson]

Bullet and broadheads kill very differently. I don\'t think you can compare the two in any way. IMO


Sent via Jedi mind trick.

 

[Tdiesel]

Derek me and you think a lot alike when it comes to rifles and bullets. for archery a pass through is neat but not necessary at all funny enough I usually end up hitting the opposite shoulder and have had fair luck breaking it that may help with my tracking jobs most haven\'t been 100 yrds

 

[Jaquomo]

I\'m pretty much with WW. For me, a pass through means I missed where I was aiming, since my shot should almost always result in the arrow lodging in the offside shoulder. If I hunted out of trees I would want two holes. But I don\'t.

A low to mid double lung pass through is unnecessary because the elk will die quickly whether one or two holes exist.

A gut pass through means you have two plugged holes with no blood trail wicking out from a protruding shaft. Ditto a high double lung. The hide pulls back over the holes and the bleeding is all internal.

A quartering away pass through hit too far back is good, because the entry wound will plug with gut or hide with no shaft protruding.

I know guys for whom a pass through is an ego thing, like having a Maserati to go to the grocery. I can\'t tell you how many elk I\'ve been involved in recovering where an arrow keeping the wound open led to the elk by wipes or drips. Ditto lost elk where a pass through left a poor blood trail that ended fairly quickly. That happened with an elk I helped track for a guy I met in the woods this year. I\'ve only been in on a little over 100 archery elk kills, so my experience is limited to those experiences.