Swhacker Broad Heads

[CouesBuckhunter]

It is hard to determine what someone means in just the words that they wrote. There are so many different ways to write the same sentence and it can be interpreted several different ways. No big deal. Easiest to understand when someone is talking in person.

 

PERFECTLY broadside shots rarely occur, at least from what I have seen. Any sort of difference in degrees from a perfectly broadside deer perpendicular to the shooter will result in a bigger entrance, c.s. I have even shot a deer head on at 17 yards and had a 2 inch entrance, no exit. The blood wasn't too obvious on the trail but after the shot I watched him only run 30 yards before piling up. The extreme damage is on the inside. If it is perfectly broadside anyone should get a pass through. Unless you hit it I'm the hard leg joint or in the spine, but that's just bad shot placement anyways.

[Flatlander]

Local or national I still feel like Swhacker should support this site, as this site has supported their product over and over again. Just my .02. I am still glad they aren't a sponsor cause I still had 2 bad experiences with their product.

[AZLance]

/>Local or national I still feel like Swhacker should support this site, as this site has supported their product over and over again. Just my .02. I am still glad they aren't a sponsor cause I still had 2 bad experiences with their product.

I see more posts about Remington 700s than Swhacker but no one is asking Remington to sponsor???

[AxisWorks LLC]

I have never seen a product get so much attention here on cwt than swhacker broad heads from family and friends. I agree and think they are a good product but how ironic is it that they are getting all this free publicity without being a sponsor here. Swhacker is engineered and designed right here in Az and is affiliated with numerous tv shows, personalities, and businesses but not a sponsor here on coueswhitetail.

 

Just saying.

 

TJ

I'm confused on why we feel "free publicity" is OK since we just found out it's a thriving national company. However if they were a small local business we feel as if you should sponsor or we won't share our experience with your product or service? Am I way off on how I interpreted this? If so please dis regard.

Speedygoss, my intent was never to make someone feel they had to be a sponsor nor would I ever suggest we ignore a small business of their product or services just because they weren't a sponsor.

 

I am so wrapped up in this site that I just can't imagine everyone with a product or service not wanting to jump on here as a sponsor. I apologize if I made it sound any other way.

 

I personally didn't mean any disrespect towards Rick Forrest or his broadhead.

 

My wife is always telling me I often say things others wouldn't understand what it is I'm trying to say. Heck, I understood it. lol Those who know me know I have a different vocabulary for words and should start my own dictionary called "Redneck Dictionary".

 

Speedygoss........thanks for sharing your interpretation. Made me rethink on what I said. I need that once in a while. Good luck on all your hunts and thanks for all your contribution in the forum here on cwt.

 

TJ

TJ,

Thanks for the clarification. I have read many of your posts and the way I misinterpreted this one didn't seem in your character. I might have been a little on edge about it since I am in the process of starting a small business with cash. No loans, no credit cards no debt. etc. Word of mouth is the only form of growing a business in theses early stages and seeing so many helpful products being shot down because someone wants to play forum cop rubs me wrong every time. Don't get me wrong I don't agree with a business advertising on a forum they do not sponsor but keeping members from discussing a product??? Thank you for taking the time to straighten me out on this one. Good luck on your your hunts this year as well.

[bigorange]

I agree with speedygoss here and not even sure what the rules are exactly regarding this...is there an actual rule or is it an "unwritten rule" that can easily turn into an issue of "forum cops" as mentioned above? I think (and I've been wrong before..so someone please correct me) that the intent of such a rule would be to prevent blatant advertisement on the site by the company without being a sponsor.

 

I agree if something works or doesn't work I want to hear about it from others...sponsor or not. If those others are friends or family of the inventor, so be it. As long as it's not blatant advertising for sake of advertising...which I honestly haven't seen in the past couple years with Swhacker. What I've seen and noticed doesn't seem to be advertisement as much as responding to specific questions about what works and doesn't work and why...or what was used in a particular hunt. Sure some of it was info based on what happened in testing of the product before it was widely marketed and bought by Hank Parker's company.

 

Maybe it's the local ties of the inventor that cause more attention for Swhacker...I don't know. Heck PSE is local too...should we not mention them in any discussions about preferred bows or latest equipment?

 

I guess I shouldn't have started this thread http://www.coueswhitetail.com/forums/topic/30163-cool-new-gadget-by-a-local-company/ about a gadget by a local company under the same rules...although I did talk to the company about becoming a sponsor and mentioned that in the thread. By no means was I advertising...I just wanted to let folks know about the product who might be interested.

 

AZLance is spot on too...I think I see more posts about Remington, Swarovski, Vortex, and all kinds of other products who aren't sponsors. Rage, G5, and Muzzy seem to always come up in any broadhead discussion. Heck lately I think I've seen as many posts about Mossback and GSO (although maybe not so positive)...are they sponsors? I don't know...

 

Speaking of sponsors, maybe I should contact Apple. It just occurred to me that my ipad is probably going to make this one long run-on paragraph even though I spaced it out nicely for easier reading. Maybe not...we'll see. (yep...run-on paragraph the first time using "fast reply" trying again with "full reply"...looks good in preview!)

 

Just my 2 cents here...someone point me in the right direction if I'm off-base. Nothing against the original post or TJ either...I understand exactly where you're coming from, just not sure how clear the rules are and how well-known.