What I am regurgitating is from listening to Dorge. He was talking about the differences of steering a shaft from the back vs the front. Interesting thing was that he said they both could be done. I thought he was not a fan of high FOC, yet he seemed to think that as long as you built it with the parameters that I mentioned above that it was a legitimate option. Interestingly enough he did not recommend any of his vane options for non-vented fixed blades with higher FOC.
Dorge will also laugh at you for hunting shoulder blades. Poor penetration on bone is your fault for bad aim. Bad shots aren't a thing that happens in the wild, they're the fault of a bad hunter.
He doesn't recommend his vanes for solid, fixed broadheads because they suck for solid, fixed broadheads. Even with a vented three blade, it'll go sideways after like 30 yards. This isn't conjecture, I've actually tested it.
Broadheads aren't designed to rotate like that. There's a rate of rotation where the broadheads stall and create a ridiculous amount of drag, and that's different per broadhead.
There are two schools of thought: what broadhead gets through the animal, and how do I make it accurate; the other is what setup hits where I'm aiming the fastest, and then how do I get through the animal?
Both *can* work in the right environment. I'll use AV2s for TAC arrows or similar target setups, but never with a broadhead.
Any solution is for a given problem, but if that's not the problem you have then the solution is not for you. If you need to change a lightbulb, you need a ladder and not a corkscrew. It's about solving the problems you have.
His selling point is that his arrows spin rate is so high that they transition from statically stable to dynamically stable, where gyroscopic stability plays a role. The issue this causes is that when gravity pulls the arrow by the center of gravity, the nock end resists more, and the point drops more than the nock. The inertia of its high spin resists that tilt, and deflects the rotation from the point going down to the point going left.
It's easy to be statically stable enough to resist the sideways deflection or dynamically stable enough to induce the deflection. If your FOC is lower, you get less deflection. Lower FOC is less statically stable, and can't resist the deflection as well.
There's also the claim that the arrow falls flat, in that it doesn't point down at all while gravity does its thing. Basically, the claim is the arrow is entirely dynamically stable. Because gravity does its thing, that means the arrow isn't pointing along the trajectory. If you follow the center of gravity, point, and nock, they do not all fall in line with each other. That means any real resistance upon impact will cause massive deflection of the shaft and poor penetration.
Most people just don't spin their arrows that fast and avoid this problem entirely.