In this review, I test a broadhead unlike any I’ve ever seen… the Toxic Broadhead from Flying Arrow Archery.
I love innovations and this broadhead definitely fits the bill.
Toxic Broadheads At First Glance
The Toxic broadhead has is six curved blades, each of which come together to form three different circles, and they call this the “meat worm technology.”
That’s a nasty-sounding name, but it describes how the head literally cuts three cores of tissue out of animals, leaving a devastating wound channel.
Each of the six blades on the Toxic come together at the top of the head, but there is a little space between them. They are single bevel blades, which is supposed to allow them to be able to flare out a little bit and go around bones, leaving a devastating wound channel. (I’ve seen them take down a moose, and it is definitely devastating).
The Toxic has a chiseled tip, which adds to its penetrating ability and toughness upon hard impacts. It also spins very true.
I wasn’t able to find any of the specs on the broadhead itself, the type of steel, and the thickness of the blades, and so forth. Usually, on most broadheads, I can find that information and supply that.
However, in this case I just had to gather information based on the test results themselves to test penetration, durability and penetration, durability, draining ability and flight.
Even though I had heard reports of the Toxic broadhead flying well, I had a hard time believing it. I was eager to find out for myself…
To test the overall penetration and durability, I started by shooting the Toxic into my medium which consisted of the following: a half-inch layer of MDF, surrounded by a third-of-an-inch of rubber foam matting, followed by clear ballistic gel.
I then shot it into a 22-gauge steel plate, with the intention of shooting it up to five times, as the blade will allow before they get seriously damaged. In this test, once serious damage occurs, I stop.
For each shot where they don’t get damaged, I give them 2 points for a maximum of 5 shots; a maximum of 10 points.
As in all my tests, I am shooting the Bowtech SR6, set at 72 pounds and 27-inch draw. I’m using a Bishop Archery FOC King Arrow, 460 grains and FOBs and a nockturnal nock.
Into MDF / Foam Rubber / Ballistic Gel Medium
In the penetration testing, the Toxic went a total of 6-3/4 inches into this medium. It was really cool to see the hole created by the “worm technology.” The wound channel created was incredible.
Into Steel Plate
As for the edge retention, which was what I was testing it for, the Toxic really could only handle one shot. After the shot, the tip looked pristine. I imagine it could have gone through steel a hundred times. It would probably stick in concrete as well.
The blades however, got pretty bent and the edges pretty mangled. I’ve had other heads do much better. I had to call the test complete after just one shot through the steel. So, I’ll give that 2 points.
So, the tip held up great. The edge retention? Not so good.
Water drain test
In the water bag drainage test, I was curious to see how quickly the Toxic would drain the water bag. I used this as a test to get an idea of what the wound channel would be like.
Shooting at distance
You might think, “Wow, the Toxic has over 4 inches of cut. That’s impressive!”
However, you might also assume that with 4 inches of cut, “there’s no way that’s going to fly well.”
But, it actually flew relatively well. I could readily pop balloons at 70 yards.
Some fixed-blade heads have flown better, that’s for sure. But, some have flown worse. So overall, a good flying head.
Toxic Broadhead Recap
So, what do you think of the Toxic broadhead?
I have to be honest. When the Toxic first came out and I read about it, I thought it was 100% gimmick. I didn’t see how it could fly well. I didn’t see how it could hold up or penetrate well.
However, after reading some of the reports and seeing some of the damage on animals, I finally got around to testing it. And I have to say, I was impressed.
The primary reason that I think it has done so well is the total cut size that you have as well as the total amount of tissue being cut (over 4 inches) as it passes through something.
The reason for this is the circumference of each of the blades that sort of curl into a circle if you will, is about 1.3 inches total. So, multiply that x3 and you’ve got over 4 inches of tissue being cut.
Compare that cut to some other heads:
Exodus broadheads: 1.875 total inches of cut
Rag: 2 inches of cut
Slick Trick: 1-inch diameter, and 2 inches of cut
GrizzTrick broadhead, 1.25 inches of diameter and 2.5 inches of cut
In terms of penetration, you would think, “Man, with 4 inches of cut, there’s no way that’s going to penetrate well through MDF and rubber foam mat and ballistic gel.” But it actually did. It didn’t penetrate as well as some broadheads, but for 4 inches of cut, it penetrated pretty well.
But the durability… not so good.
So, all of that means is that the blades are not super durable, and you saw that in the steel plate test, as they got pretty dinged-up and bent just in the 22-gauge steel plate. And, while I have certainly had broadheads do much better, I have not seen another broadhead do this poorly in a 22-gauge steel plate.
The Toxic may be a “one-and-done” broadhead. However, the amount of damage that you are going to get from that one shot could be really significant.
So, how would I feel hunting with this head? I would be a little cautious because I worry about the durability if I’m hitting a hard bone, especially if I hit a bone at an angle.
However, with the amount of cut that you get, the good flight and the way it has performed well even through a hard layer like MDF, I would definitely give it a whirl. If it can cut through that much tissue while it penetrates that much and flies that well, it’s definitely worth a look.
So this is certainly not a gimmick. Give the Toxic broadhead from Flying Arrow Archery a second look.
It is interesting that one of the most mystical elements of rifle-shooting (after buying a rifle scope) is getting a scope sight mounted correctly and, when done, finding out if the rifle will shoot straight after zeroing.
So, if you are not a pro on mounting a rifle scope, check out this guide below.
What You’ll Need
When mounting a rifle scope, the tools you’ll need can be as simple as a correctly sized screwdriver, and sometimes a small open-end wrench. (This all depends on the type of mounts being used, however, and yes, there are differences by the dozens).
A bench-rest system is a great way to install a scope. In some cases, an Allen wrench is also advised, or even required, to lock down ring screws. (However, in other situations, the full array of gunsmith tools are required when receiver bases and ring systems need installing).
When going to work on a rifle scope mounting job, it is nice to have a clean, clear space to do the work. Even the use of a gun vise or mount is a great idea, and can save both time and effort in the event parts fall away from the scope or rifle.
If you’re worried about mounting a scope being a difficult task, let me put your mind at ease; I mount scopes while watching my favorite hockey game at the same time!
There are some jobs that require tapping new screw holes, and advanced mounts that require more parts then the scope contains. However, in general, most mounts are field dirt simple to work with and figure out for yourself.
Step-by-step rifle scope mounting
Set scope in place
Currently, modern rifle scopes are making more use of the Weaver-style bases that carry a rail with notches cut into the upper surface. The rings are set up with matching cuts and all you need to do is drop the scope into the rail.
Be sure both rings are aligned with the correct notches, and set in place solidly. Once you have the rings in place, simply draw down the primary (large) compression bolt or nut.
Independent bases are a bit more work in that each is set on the pilot holes in the receiver, one at a time and with two screws In most cases, they are set in place and tightened down. The bases are always paired with a specific scope ring type. Be sure the rings and bases match. If you buy them as a set, this should not be an issue.
IMPORTANT: At times the base sets are not exactly the same height. Check each with care. In most cases (but not all), the higher base is forward, and the lower base is toward the rear. That is because the height of the receiver section is different. If bases were the same, you would have an issue there.
A suggestion here is to get new combination rings and base systems, often called cantilever bases and rings. All you do is this:
Using a Weaver-style (Picatinny-style) mounting rail, drop the whole system into place on the grooves, split the ring half sections, then set your scope onto the lower half of the ring group. (If you can’t do that, it is advised that you not shoot a gun either!)
Now, with the rings installed as above, it’s time to align the scope within the rings. Keep in mind that the crosshairs require leveling, so leave the rings with the installed screws loose enough to allow you to rotate the scope as required.
Also, be sure to check eye relief at this point. You’re may regret having leveled the scope, then tightened it down, and found that you’re stretching a mile to see through your scope.
Why do I know this?
Because it has happened to me more times then I should admit here.
When leveling the scope’s crosshairs, see the horizontal line and set the scope in a solid rest position.
Now look through the scope, again with the rings not turned very tight against the scope tube in order to allow that horizontal line to run level with an object that is of a known correct level. This can be the edge of a building, or some other related structure.
When I align my scope, I use a bubble-mounted system that long-range shooters use, or at times, I just wing it and go with my gut feeling as to a correct level. When I recheck my level after mounting, I am almost always right on the money. I guess that comes with experience, as there are some weeks when I mount five or six rifle scopes in as many days.
One thing is for sure, you don’t want to count on the person at the gun counter for all the help.
I have friends who who do work in gun shops and sure as heck know their stuff. However, some of the “help” needs a tune-up and could well take a course on scope-mounting and parts sales to be sure. So, don’t assume everything is correct because the person at the gun counter says so.
I have heard about hunters and shooters who went on “exclusive” and costly trips with a gun that was never checked beyond the gun counter. Not a good idea, as some have found out when a once-in-a-lifetime trophy walks out in front of them at 100 yards and they miss the shot because the scope is heading south when the shooter is looking west. (An exaggeration, but hopefully you get the point).
So if you’re deer hunting for example and your scope isn’t dialed in exactly right, you’re going to have an errant shot. Arguments about what caliber is best don’t really matter if you can’t hit what you’re aiming at!
Shoot for final zero
Remember, just because a salesman at a gun shop “bore-sights” your scope for you, that is only a starter adjustment in terms of locating the correct zero for the rifle and scope.
Bore sighting means getting a bullet some place on paper, with luck. After the rifle is bore-sighted, additional adjustments are necessary. In other words, shoot the rifle before ever counting on the correct sight adjustments on your new scope sight.
As a final note, always shoot a group of at least three rounds for a quick double-check in terms of your bullet’s impact accuracy. Also, don’t be alarmed if someone shooting your rifle hits a different zero point. We all shoot a bit differently, even with textbook training. What is your zero belongs to you.
Lapping Rifle Scope Rings
A word about lapping the scope rings. Lapping means taking any possible variation in roundness off the inside of the rings, so that you have as much contact between rings and scope as possible. Lapping the rings is a good idea if you’re shooting bench-rest or super accuracy group development.
I do not lap my rings because my good rifles and ammunition all shoot sub-½ MOA, and that is all anyone not shooting bench-style events needs. (Bench-rest is shooting for the smallest hole possible in the target. One hole groups win in many cases.)
In this article, I’m covering a re-test of the 125-grain Annihilator Broadhead.
When I originally tested this broadhead, it performed extremely well in terms of penetration, (i.e., draining a water jug) and in terms of the hole that it produced in a layer of MDF.
It also flew really well out to 50 yards. However, beyond 50 yards, there just seemed to be a drastic drop in velocity, causing an incredible drop in the point of impact.
However, after making a video of that test, I was contacted by some friends who had also tested this broadhead at longer ranges, but did not see the drastic results I had seen.
I then visited with the designers of the Annihilator broadheads at the Archery Trade Association (ATA) show. They also said that their tests had not shown the drastic drop. In fact, they had seen really consistent flight, even at longer ranges. So, I told them I would very gladly test it again.
The backstory to my original test of the Annihilator broadhead
The day of the re-test, it was sub-zero temperatures (with the wind chill). When I re-tested the head, I found that the people I had spoken to were exactly right. It flew extremely well, even at longer ranges.
I realized that in my original test, I had made a two-fold mistake.
My two mistakes
Before I tested the Annihilator broadhead the first time, I was talking to a friend about it. He told me that when he shot it at longer ranges, there was a really large drop due to the wind resistance of that big surface area that they have. And so, that was already in my mind.
So, then when I shot it and tested it and there was a big drop, and I thought, “Oh, this just confirms what my friend had said.” I didn’t retest it or question my test results enough. That was my first mistake. I shouldn’t have had that in my mind.
The second mistake that I made in the initial test is that I had made adjustments to my site tapes and I didn’t take that into consideration when I was testing the Annihilator.
So, I felt really badly. I went back and made the adjustments in my site tapes and… Boom! Dead on!
I feel really badly that I made both of those mistakes, and both of those mistakes adversely affected the reputation of Annilator (as well as my own reputation for doing a poor job in testing the broadhead).
I want to give a sincere apology to the makers of Annihilator broadheads, to their loyal fans, and especially to those who I turned off from these broadheads after my initial test, because it actually does fly very well even at longer ranges.
So, that’s why I wanted to do a completely new test. I’ve got new test mediums for 2020 that I’m using anyway. So it’s a good way to do those.
The Annihilator broadhead | The specifics
So, let me explain this broadhead just a little bit for those of you that aren’t familiar with it.
When I first heard about it, I wasn’t that interested in testing it because the cutting diameter is sub-1 inch. It’s 0.91 inches of cut. To me, that’s just so small.
I thought, “Why would I want to test the head that has that small of a cut?”
However, what I wasn’t understanding was the design has a “scoop” feature to it. So, while it has a small cutting diameter, when it presses through a medium like animal tissue, it actually displaces an incredible amount of it. (Note: As of the publishing of this article, I personally have not tested the Annihilator head on an animal).
So, the hole that it creates, and the tissue that’s displaced, is in theory far greater than if it was just 3 crossblades of 0.91 inches. It has an incredible surface area. (That showed in a test that I had done originally. The Annihilator drained a water jug in record time. It also put a big hole through MDF. And so, in the retest, I wanted to show that).
The Annihilator is designed to put a much larger hole than the head size suggests. The small surface area allows it to fly really well, but then displace a lot of tissue. And so, it makes a really nice hole.
Another cool thing about this head is that it’s a solid piece of 4140 tool steel. That is a really high quality of tool steel. So, it’s way more resistant to impact and much tougher than stainless steel, for example. It has a Rockwell hardness of 52, which is a pretty good balance of being soft enough to resharpen and hard enough to keep its edge.
You can just lay it flat on a flat stone or any kind of a flat edge surface and it is very easy to sharpen to a razor-like edge.
In my re-test, I used a half-inch layer of MDF surrounded by 1/3 of an inch of rubber foam mat. Beyond that was a gel block by Clear Ballistics, so you can see what happens to the broadhead once it enters the gel. (I will be doing this for all the broadheads I test this year).
Then, I shot it through a 22-gauge steel plate 5 times. (I like to shoot it through the steel plate until there begins to be significant damage to the blades. So, I basically see how many times it can be shot into the steel plate without facing significant damage. But, I stop at 5 because with some heads, I could keep going forever).
The Re-Test of the Annihilator
So let’s get into the test results and see how it did with long range flight, penetration and water drainage ability.
In the re-test I was able to pop a balloon at 70 yards with this head.
In terms of penetration through the MDF and gel, the Annihilator did very well. It did not do as well as some other broadheads I’ve tested, but it still had good penetration and made a nice hole in that MDF, as well as the gel.
Below, you can see the penetration of the Annihilator after going through the MDF and the rubber foam mats and into the gel. It penetrated 8-1/4 inches.
Below is a steel plate after I shot it 5 times with the same head. You can see the Annihilator really does make nice holes. Thus, it should displace a tremendous amount of tissue.
In terms of the durability of the edge (edge retention), the Annihilator is pristine. There is not a mark on it. It doesn’t quite shave hair, but it still bit into my fingernail… very impressive.
So, it’s durable as they come. It went through 5 layers of steel back-to-back-to-back with zero damage. That’s what that 4140 tool steel is going to do. It kept its edge really, really well.
Water drainage test
The water drainage test was just other otherworldly. I don’t know any other word to describe it. It drained the bag in .40 seconds!
The reason I used the water bag drainage test instead of a water jug drainage test is that I felt that in a water jug, because the plastic is pretty stiff, sometimes the plastic folds in, sometimes it comes out, sometimes it stays in place. And so, the results are very inconsistent. Even with one head, I get different results.
But with water bag drainage test, and I fill it up 10 cups the same amount that the line is the same in all the tests that I do, try to shoot it in the same spot every time. It’s much more consistent and much more like an animal because the bag is a little more nimble, like the tissue or the hide of an animal. And so, what you see is kind of what you’re going to get in terms of the drainage.
The Annihilator goes into the bag and displaced so much water so readily, it actually created a back-pressure to the water. When I looked at it in super slow motion, I could it make the hole and suck the water right out of the bag. It was just amazing to see that. It’s an indication of what may happen with blood-letting and tissue damage within an animal as well. I can’t wait to test it on an animal at some point in the future.
I’m really grateful that I was encouraged to retest the Annihilator, because I knew it was a great head before. It tested really well in all categories except long distance.
However, now knowing after the re-test that it actually flies extremely well, even at long distances, it has gone from a very good head to a phenomenal head.
So, now I have confidence in this head at longer ranges. It gets a 10 out of 10 in terms of accuracy at long range.
The Annihilator did excellent in all of the test categories. This is a winner of a head and it’s something to really consider for pretty much any animal you are going after. Give the Annihilator a look. Great job, Annihilator!