wordpress-seo
domain was triggered too early. This is usually an indicator for some code in the plugin or theme running too early. Translations should be loaded at the init
action or later. Please see Debugging in WordPress for more information. (This message was added in version 6.7.0.) in /home/outdoorblog/outdoorblog.net/wp-includes/functions.php on line 6114<\/a>August 2015 update:<\/strong>\u00a0In the spirit of integrity and full disclosure, I am updating this post. \u00a0At the time I conducted this review and ran the tests herein, I had no affiliation or relationship with Wac’em Archery Products. \u00a0Since this review, I made a\u00a0personal decision (without compensation) to use this particular broadhead going forward. \u00a0I have\u00a0recently\u00a0entered into a formal relationship with Wac’em Archery Products. \u00a0I am updating this post to highlight changes and benefits to consumers but I have not<\/span>\u00a0altered the original testing results or my original\u00a0analysis. \u00a0I am updating packaging images, product naming convention, pricing details, and a further clarification about shaft materials in my testing procedure for clarity.<\/em><\/p>\n \u00a0– Tom Ryle,\u00a0<\/em>FreshTRAX Outdoors<\/em><\/p>\n When it comes to business of broadheads, I’ve always preferred 3-blade designs mainly because I like to open up a triangular shaped hole in the hide of big game. \u00a0Wide, two-blade cut-to-the-tip designs are proven as well and I\u2019ve used them plenty. \u00a0Four-blade broadheads have always interested me, especially since the trend toward smaller aspect ratios took hold several years ago. \u00a0With shorter blade length, you lose valuable cutting surface (cutting edge length). \u00a0So that additional blade equates to more cutting opportunity of vital tissues.<\/p>\n Over the years I have experimented with a variety of 4-blade models and have always experienced some level of windplaning or accuracy issues. \u00a0While I often enjoy micro-tuning my gear to perform, let’s face it – out of the box accuracy is optimal. \u00a0Given the opportunity to review Wac\u2019em Archery’s 4-blade broadhead (formerly the “Exit” model), I was genuinely interested in testing their claim of “True Field Tip Accuracy<\/em>\u201d.<\/p>\n Let’s get to it.<\/p>\n Assembly<\/strong><\/p>\n Compared to other smaller form-factor broadheads, I found the Wac’em 4-blade heads to be a tad more difficult to assemble. \u00a0But to be fair, I am comparing them to similar sized 3-blade heads, which, by design, provide more room to work when installing blades. \u00a0After I installed the blades of the first head, the rest were pretty easy. \u00a0The learning curve has more to do with technique than anything else.<\/p>\n Specifications<\/strong><\/p>\n Price<\/strong><\/p>\n UPDATE: Wac’em Archery Products is under new ownership. \u00a0Along with a new marketing campaign, including branding and packaging, they now offer hunters an even better value. \u00a0Previously, a 3-pack of 4-blade broadheads would have cost $38.99. \u00a0Now you can purchase a 4-pack<\/strong> for $37.99, and this pricing applies to their entire line up of broadheads, shown here:<\/p>\n <\/a><\/p>\n Sharpness<\/strong><\/p>\n While I do not have a scientific approach to measuring sharpness at my disposal, I did examine the blades of the 4-blade broadhead under 20x power magnification and compared them with blades from two other popular broadheads. \u00a0They appear to be mechanically stropped to create a much smoother cutting edge than grinding alone can produce.<\/p>\n Specifications aside, the rubber meets the road in the field. \u00a0So to the woods I went with a quiver of Wac\u2019em 4-blade tipped arrows. \u00a0On November 9th, I crossed paths with an old battle-scarred Columbian Blacktail buck that was intent on mounting a hot doe. \u00a0One fleeting shot opportunity through the ferns paid off. \u00a0As you can see in the lower photo, the pass-through exit hole was impressive!<\/p>\n <\/a><\/p>\n <\/a><\/p>\n Shootability &\u00a0<\/strong>Wind-planing<\/b><\/p>\n When installing the Wac’em 4-blade Broadheads I did not rotate my inserts to achieve consistent relational alignment with my fletchings. \u00a0I just installed them onto my hunting arrows and started shooting. \u00a0My first shots were at 15-20 yards to look for anything obvious. \u00a0Then I moved back to 30, then 40, and finally 50 yards, shooting three arrows at each distance, twice. \u00a0I saw no porpoising or fish-tailing whatsoever. \u00a0In short, the Wac’em 4-blade easily earns the label of true-flying broadheads!<\/p>\n I can finally make the statement my broadheads and field points do in fact<\/em> shoot the same under normal field conditions. \u00a0No tuning, sight pin adjustments required for my set-up!<\/p>\n Durability & Penetration<\/strong><\/p>\n My favorite part of any product review is what I call “destructive testing\u201d. \u00a0As a manufacturer, you can learn a lot about materials, design, manufacturing processes, etc. \u00a0As a consumer, you can learn so much about quality, performance, and value by simply putting a product through extreme conditions, whether they replicate real use cases or not. \u00a0Part of the objectivity in product testing is the reality that I will often ruin an otherwise brand new product in a matter of seconds. \u00a0And that’s the whole point! \u00a0Nobody is going to spend their hard-earned money on a product just to find out if it’s going to hold up. \u00a0Instead, we buy blindly and hope for the best. \u00a0 The broadheads installed on the front of your arrows are arguably the single-most important piece of equipment you take afield. \u00a0After all, your broadheads are what kill game. They simply must perform and “hope” isn\u2019t good enough.<\/p>\n For each test I shot both carbon and an aluminum shafting. \u00a0The purpose in using two different shaft materials is to evaluate any noticeable differences based on shaft design\/material. \u00a0While each shaft responded differently to the destructive test, the observed differences of results to the broadhead itself were negligible.<\/p>\n TEST #1 \u2013 Destructive Test<\/strong><\/p>\n SAFETY NOTE: AUTHOR ASSUMES NO RESPONSIBILITY FOR INJURY OR DAMAGE(S) SUSTAINED BY DUPLICATING THIS DESTRUCTIVE TEST PROCEDURE. \u00a0DO NOT ATTEMPT TO REPLICATE THESE TESTS.<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n Target: (1) 2″x12″x12″ concrete paver brick<\/p>\n Bow:\u00a0LimbSaver Proton (62#, 27.25″ draw)<\/p>\n Arrow #1 Easton aluminum 2117, 4″ plastic vanes (3-fletch).<\/p>\n Total Arrow Weight: 514 grains<\/p>\n Arrow #2 Gold Tip XT Hunter 5575 carbon arrow, NAP Quickfletch (3-fletch).<\/p>\n Total Arrow Weight: 457 grains<\/p>\n Shot distance: 10 feet<\/p>\n\n