Are Fast Arrows Less Forgiving?

The internet is full of anecdotes about fixed-blade broadheads becoming less forgiving once you get over 290 or 300 fps.

The thinking goes that these broadheads are more likely to 'plane off' as the speed increases.

To test this, we shot several vanes and broadheads under two protocols:

• Standard-speed: 28″ draw length, 70# draw weight, ~450gr arrows, ~290 fps
• High-speed: 29″ draw length, 80# draw weight, ~390gr arrows, ~325 fps

All shots were fired indoors out of the Easton Precision Shooting Machine at 70 yards.

We looked at overall mean radius, group sizes, and the lateral drift between a fixed-blade broadhead and field point under simulated shooter error.

To compare standard-speed and high-speed head-to-head we use the parity scatters below. Each has one dot per build configuration, with its standard-speed value on the X axis and its high-speed value on the Y axis. The dashed line is y = x. Dots above the line performed worse on the high-speed rig; dots below got better. Dots that hug the line are unaffected by speed. We only show configurations that ran under both protocols (12 vane configurations and 9 broadheads in this dataset).

In short:

• Dots above the dashed line = standard speed performed better
• Dots below the dashed line = high speed performed better

For full details on the test methods, group capture, and analysis processes, check out the Methods page.

Hover over the dots in any plot to see the build configuration and results details.

We lead with group size plots because they are intuitive and relatable, but statistically speaking, mean radius is the better metric to compare.

For any plots referencing group sizes, fixed-blade drift, etc., you can click on the dots to see the group photos annotated with mean radius and 95% confidence intervals.

First, we shot groups of 6 arrows from a tuned bow with various broadheads (fixed-blade and mechanical) and compared group sizes (and the more statistically robust mean radius).

A few broadheads performed slightly better at slower speed, and some performed slightly worse. Overall, there does not appear to be a systematic difference in group size or mean radius between standard speed and high speed.

As part of our restorative-lift test protocol, we shot two groups of 3 arrows (n=6) from an intentionally torqued bow for each vane build, with Iron Will Wide fixed-blade broadheads, and compared group sizes and mean radius.

In this case, the high-speed groups were actually a bit better for most of the builds.

Remember, this is an Iron Will Wide broadhead, torqued to a ~1in paper tear at 15ft, fired at ~325fps at 70 yards... and they still grouped right in there with the ~290fps builds.

Group sizes out of a shooting machine are cool and all, but what about when I make a bad shot with my broadhead?

This is where our restorative-lift protocol comes in.

We simulated archer error in a repeatable way via a lateral torque. This is just like the torque you might apply in the heat of the moment.

We shot Iron Will Wide broadheads and field points under this same torque condition, and then looked at how far the broadheads hit from the field points.

Results in the parity scatter below.

Inside the speed range we tested, 28″/70# at ~290 fps vs. 29″/80# at ~325 fps, speed does not seem to be a meaningful driver of accuracy or forgiveness. The same components (vanes and broadheads alike) performed about the same on both rigs, by every metric we measured: mean radius, group size, and torque-induced broadhead drift from field point.

Accuracy and forgiveness do not appear to be reasons to avoid fast arrows.

A few caveats:

• The arrow shafts were different between these two protocols.
• This test used different bows. (An 80# draw weight bow vs. a 70# draw weight bow, both Hoyt AX3 33s.)