Compound Bows vs. Crossbows vs. Rifles

[The Hedgehog]

I've got 7 pins, can't make myself move to a slider. 20, 40, 60 in green. The dead center of my sight is a 70 yard red pin, then 80, 90, 100, all green. The 100 for my bow now is just above the level bubble on my bracket. Watch the olympic guys shooting almost 80 yards with fingers from a recurve. release and compound is cheating.

 

[timmy]

I've got 7 pins, can't make myself move to a slider. 20, 40, 60 in green. The dead center of my sight is a 70 yard red pin, then 80, 90, 100, all green. The 100 for my bow now is just above the level bubble on my bracket. Watch the olympic guys shooting almost 80 yards with fingers from a recurve. release and compound is cheating.

Sheesh some people wake up in the morning and piss compound bow excellence!

 

[Irrelevant]

I've got 7 pins, can't make myself move to a slider. 20, 40, 60 in green. The dead center of my sight is a 70 yard red pin, then 80, 90, 100, all green. The 100 for my bow now is just above the level bubble on my bracket. Watch the olympic guys shooting almost 80 yards with fingers from a recurve. release and compound is cheating.

I could cheat to my hearts content and I couldn't master a fraction of the skill they possess

 

[rogerthat]

I've got 7 pins, can't make myself move to a slider. 20, 40, 60 in green. The dead center of my sight is a 70 yard red pin, then 80, 90, 100, all green. The 100 for my bow now is just above the level bubble on my bracket. Watch the olympic guys shooting almost 80 yards with fingers from a recurve. release and compound is cheating.

Than why are archery success rates still so crappy? Why do the majority of bow hunters still come home empty handed? (I really don't think your the one to answer this.)

I think it's because archery hunting is a lot more than putting a pin on a critter and hitting the release trigger. 100 yard compound bows are not going to keep you from getting winded at 100 yards. Not too mention once you get past 50 yards thats just that much more time the animal has to move until your super accurate "giant laser" arrow arrives on target. that being said you are right. You weren't going to shoot like that very easily 40 years ago

 

[The Hedgehog]

My point is that above, is not much less than what a crossbow does. But I’ll admit I’ve never shot a crossbow

 

[Deleted member 18333]

Personally think the argument over which is sufficiently difficult a compound or a crossbow is wasted time. Neither one requires all that much dedication to become deadly enough. My only argument for not allowing crossbows in an archery season would be to reduce the number of hunters that are out in the field. The more broad definition of allowable equipment the more potential people are going to be out there. I would just rather not see other hunters regardless of what they are carrying around.

 

[Dakota79]

When I was 15 my mom bought me a bow for my birthday in November. I remember it like yesterday and it was a PSE Patriot It did have a site with 4 pins and five arrows with field tips but no release. I figured it was coming because I had begged many a times for it I had saved up enough money to buy some broadheads and a flimsy target. Come December 23 I had shot my first deer with it. It was a white tail buck that had already shed his horns. Up until I was paralyzed in a rodeo accident even this ranch kid was hitting targets out to 60 steps. Don't really know how far it was because I didn't have a rangefinder. In the 23 years since that the technology of bows is amazing to me. They're probably not quite as easy as a crossbow but not very damn hard to get going either. IMO

My family has hosted a couple of older gentleman that were pretty crippled up that used crossbows and to me they just like a PIA.. With that said if I can ever get one set up to use in my shooting rig out of my wheelchair I was sure do it.

 

[Irrelevant]

My point is that above, is not much less than what a crossbow does. But I’ll admit I’ve never shot a crossbow

As multiple people have pointed out, some people are just shooters and killers

I bet you'd make 200 yard chip shots all day with a xbow

 

[The Hedgehog]

Personally think the argument over which is sufficiently difficult a compound or a crossbow is wasted time. Neither one requires all that much dedication to become deadly enough. My only argument for not allowing crossbows in an archery season would be to reduce the number of hunters that are out in the field. The more broad definition of allowable equipment the more potential people are going to be out there. I would just rather not see other hunters regardless of what they are carrying around.

Well then let's make archery, traditional archery only. Should be even fewer out there..

The bigger problem is the politicians here creates the rules, seasons, mgt ideas.. We have a new 10 day season still during the late part of the deer rut, state wide, and throw in elk, just throw in some black powder that way. Now some politician with a limp wrist and bum shoulder, wants crosssbows.. It's endless and because we elect these people.

We'll have shoulder hunts half the year, and even on the USFS. Just watch. And it doesn't matter one bit what the public thinks of it..

What does the percentage look like to you on the public comment: https://fwp.mt.gov/binaries/content...season-adjustments/ess-public-lands_final.pdf

 

[BWALKER77]

@Greenhorn is spot on. It's not hard to shoot a bow out to and over 100 yards with modern equipment.
Kurt, the last bow I bought was also a Mathews Zmax.

 

[BWALKER77]

While I lean toward efficacy and success rates as the primary metric of interest in these things, it's hard to untangle it all from wounding loss across different user groups, weapon technologies, etc. Then you have success rate reports that are only as good as the data that goes in and I'm not sure we have much solid info to work with.
A lot of the archery hunters I know (I am not one, just shoot bags) wound and miss quite a bit. A lot of the rifle hunters I know wound and miss quite a bit. I know one crossbow hunter, and he only misses ha. Then you have the guys that spend the time, and kill with whatever you hand them.

I've read several studies on the subject of wounding rates for archery vs gun. They all concluded archers wound more and only disagreed on the extent.

 

[timmy]

I've read several studies on the subject of wounding rates for archery vs gun. They all concluded archers would more and only disagreed on the extent.

Now we are getting to the meat of it. How old was the study? Before the long range shooting craze? Let’s see this study. I see more people in the field and more people taking unethical shots with rifles. At least with bows there is a range limit, a lot of idiots can’t even get within 100 yards of an animal. Rifle and scope technology is an issue that has changed “hunting” more than anything the last 10-20 years.

 

[rogerthat]

Now we are getting to the meat of it. How old was the study? Before the long range shooting craze? Let’s see this study. I see more people in the field and more people taking unethical shots with rifles. At least with bows there is a range limit, a lot of idiots can’t even get within 100 yards of an animal. Rifle and scope technology is an issue that has changed “hunting” more than anything the last 10-20 years.

That's an ethics thing. Just like killers gonna kill. Wounders gonna wound. The weapon doesn't matter. Anyway I'm out. I'm going to go get ready to kill another 400" bull with my super accurate "giant laser" compound bow

 

[MTLabrador]

Now we are getting to the meat of it. How old was the study? Before the long range shooting craze? Let’s see this study. I see more people in the field and more people taking unethical shots with rifles. At least with bows there is a range limit, a lot of idiots can’t even get within 100 yards of an animal. Rifle and scope technology is an issue that has changed “hunting” more than anything the last 10-20 years.

And don’t forget the idiots flock shooting elk whenever a herd crosses some state section on a county road.

 

[Deleted member 18333]

Well then let's make archery, traditional archery only. Should be even fewer out there..

I would fully support that

you are correct that MT has much bigger problems than whether xbows are allowed or not. A large reason why I stopped hunting MT almost entirely. It sure was a fun place to hunt from ‘98 to 2004. Seemed a lesser experience every year after that I went. Good luck in your battle. You have a hell of a hill to climb.

 

[MTelkHuntress]

This thread as well as part of the other thread has got me reflecting.
I shoot compound but I practice a lot....and I don't really shoot those long ranges..I can't really see the small dot at those distances.
For hunting I limit my range quite a bit and I know a couple traditional archers that shoot farther than I do. So maybe certain methods of take do limit you but I can't help but notice that some people will take it farther. There is certainly a difference between traditional and compound though as well as a difference between compound and crossbow.

I guess what I think about most is where is the line drawn. Crossbows have the advantage in holding the arrow to be shot (I actually know someone that shot themselves in the leg with their bolt while they were walking after an animal....seems kind of dangerous to do so).

I can probably hold my compound longer than someone shooting traditional...but I kind of get tired relatively quickly and I don't know how long others can hold and wait for a shot.

Technology gets brought up a lot too. Where do we draw the line there? We have binoculars, range finders, trucks, bicycles, scopes, fancy phones with maps, boots that don't wear out very fast, and more. I know an older gentleman that makes his own bow, arrows, tips and feather fletchings. Seems there are some technology differences there too (such as bow strings and what arrow tips are made out of today).

The wounding rates seems like an interesting argument as well. My question is how do we get accurate numbers on that. People don't exactly go around talking about or reporting that. Rifle hunting last year near Dillon and watching one guy shoot 4 elk, 2 of them in the butt, made it clear that rifle hunters can wound multiple animals pretty quickly.

I enjoy reading the different perspectives on this thread though. Makes me think about aspects I didn't ever think about before.....and also how bad of a shot I might actually be!

 

[timmy]

This thread as well as part of the other thread has got me reflecting.
I shoot compound but I practice a lot....and I don't really shoot those long ranges..I can't really see the small dot at those distances.
For hunting I limit my range quite a bit and I know a couple traditional archers that shoot farther than I do. So maybe certain methods of take do limit you but I can't help but notice that some people will take it farther. There is certainly a difference between traditional and compound though as well as a difference between compound and crossbow.

I guess what I think about most is where is the line drawn. Crossbows have the advantage in holding the arrow to be shot (I actually know someone that shot themselves in the leg with their bolt while they were walking after an animal....seems kind of dangerous to do so).

I can probably hold my compound longer than someone shooting traditional...but I kind of get tired relatively quickly and I don't know how long others can hold and wait for a shot.

Technology gets brought up a lot too. Where do we draw the line there? We have binoculars, range finders, trucks, bicycles, scopes, fancy phones with maps, boots that don't wear out very fast, and more. I know an older gentleman that makes his own bow, arrows, tips and feather fletchings. Seems there are some technology differences there too (such as bow strings and what arrow tips are made out of today).

The wounding rates seems like an interesting argument as well. My question is how do we get accurate numbers on that. People don't exactly go around talking about or reporting that. Rifle hunting last year near Dillon and watching one guy shoot 4 elk, 2 of them in the butt, made it clear that rifle hunters can wound multiple animals pretty quickly.

I enjoy reading the different perspectives on this thread though. Makes me think about aspects I didn't ever think about before.....and also how bad of a shot I might actually be!

I think there is a misconception that you need to be successful when you hunt and we stack the odds in favor of hunters and don’t realize it’s ok to have animals on the landscape. It’s ok to read sign and not run trail cameras. It’s fun to sneak close to an animal, the closer the better. That is where I struggle with crossbows and rifles. Especially when often we are using rifles the times the animals are most vulnerable.

 

[Pucky Freak]

“While most studies clearly show a difference between traditional and modern archery equipment, the Ohio study also seems to suggest there isn’t an appreciable difference between crossbows and compounds.”

Trad shooters have the highest wounding rate.

Do Crossbows Wound More or Less Deer? - Petersen's Bowhunting

How do crossbows stack up against compound bows when it comes to wounding rate?

www.bowhuntingmag.com

 

[Pucky Freak]

I’ve shot rifles, a recurve, and a compound.

I spent about 25 total hours becoming proficient in rifle-shooting. I can hit a softball-size target at 200 yards in moderate weather conditions. I find that the skill is not very perishable. Shooting x3-4/yr. is sufficient to maintain my proficiency.

I spent about 200 hours attempting to become proficient using a recurve. With regular and disciplined practice I can hit a softball-sized target at 10 yards. My max range to shoot at deer was 15 yards. I find the skill to be highly perishable. I hung it up after wounding and not recovering two does back to back.

I could hit a softball-sized target at 25 yards with a compound out of the box, never having shot one before. I shoot about 60-75 days a year in order to extend this distance to 35 yards. Apparently I’m doing something terribly wrong hearing from all you shooters driving tacks at 60-70 yards!

I asked a crossbow hunter if he was going to practice before deer season. He laughed, and said you just look through the scope, point and shoot. Basically a rifle with no recoil.

It’s not so much that crossbows don’t belong in archery season with compounds, but rather that compounds and crossbows don’t belong in archery season.

#bringbackstickbows
#makebowhuntinghardagain

 

[BWALKER77]

Now we are getting to the meat of it. How old was the study? Before the long range shooting craze? Let’s see this study. I see more people in the field and more people taking unethical shots with rifles. At least with bows there is a range limit, a lot of idiots can’t even get within 100 yards of an animal. Rifle and scope technology is an issue that has changed “hunting” more than anything the last 10-20 years.

The problem with archery is even with "ethical" shots its very easy for an animal to jump the string.
I had a video of me shooting a whitetail once that showed this. Shot was at 25 yards and Inwas aiming for the heart. The arrow actually struck the deer 6 inches higher. After reviewing the video it was easy to see why. The deer ducked at the shot before spring up to run. No big deal because I took put both lungs. However had I aimed higher I may have shot over it's back in a best case scenario or in a worse scenario perhaps hit under the spin, which provides for a very scant blood trail.