Some people call and request that we make one. Some call and thank us for not. Engineers think it is an intriguing concept, but realize the numerous and inherent faults. Progress that does not further bowhunting success is in reality no progress at all. The only change which is true progress is change which further dignifies the sport that we love.
It was no decision at all. There are, in the mechanical world things that are very predictable. Not accepting the reality of basic laws of physics will only lead to frustration. A mass at rest tends to stay at rest. A mass in motion tends to stay in motion. No two points are the same. Between any two points there exists an infinite number of points. Harder materials tend to wear out softer ones. All of these facts are hard to dispute. Time spent arguing about these truths will result in wasted time. Time is valuable and should not be wasted. Basic, simple thinking.
Muzzy's decision not to make an open-on-impact broadhead is simple. We want bowhunters to have the highest degree of success possible, especially when using Muzzy broadheads. Bowhunting is not like driving a nail; in bowhunting, you only get one swing. If a product lowers the bowhunter's chances at success, we will absolutely not market it, especially if we have a superior product to offer.
The most popular design of an open-on-impact head has a fulcrum (pivot point) at the rear and the blades lay forward along the broadhead body angled slightly from its axis (center line). Theorectically and practically, the two blades will never open at the same time, even when the shot is perpendicular to the target. This difference is further exaggerated when the angle of impact is changed by any degree. One blade will always begin to open before the other. As it does, it will encounter resistance to opening, applying force to one side of the shaft and drastically reducing the penetrating ability of the arrow.
Example. An arrow is traveling in a path and makes contact with its intended target. The initial blade movement is in direct opposition to the linear direction of travel. This motion presents a major problem for the penetration ability of the arrow. Only true linear alignment of the mass of the arrow allows it to penetrate to its maximum potential. Any contact, even to the point of the arrow, causes the linear alignment to be compromised, thereby diminishing the ability of the arrow to penetrate. The shock from a blade opening from its initial position to perpendicular to the line of travel is awesome at times. This shock is always variable from shot to shot and, might I add, unpredictable.
When one blade starts its rotation, there is a blow delivered to that side of the arrow. Theoretically, when both blades open simultaneously, the blow will be delivered along the axis of the arrow. This will allow open-on-impacts to penetrate at their best, which is still inferior to any quality fixed blade broadhead.
There are recommendations of a minimum of 55 ft/lb of kinetic energy for a two-blade model. To us at Muzzy, this is evidence of a penetration problem. Further, there are now three-blade models. I can only imagine the increase in recommended kinetic energy needed for the addition of this problematic third blade!
Further, what happens to the bowhunter in freezing conditions? What about taking your equipment from warm to sub-32 degrees? This may cause some metal to sweat and freeze. What about moisture? This will and can cause oxidation and rust.
There are too many variables for Muzzy to feel responsible telling bowhunters that mechanical heads are a viable alternative to any quality conventional head. It is my opinion that through time and experience, bowhunters will reject current designs, as they have historically rejected similar designs in the past. For these reasons, we respectfully decline to participate in this market. Good hunting! John Muzzy Jr., Your bowhunting friend!
Muzzy Products Corp.
Bad To The Bone®
110 Beasley Rd., Cartersville, GA 30120
Toll Free 800-222-7769 E-Mail gomuzzy@aol.com
