I have a two part rant that I'm sure a lot of you guys can relate to, but thought I would share it none the less.

Rant #1. While taking lunch at work, a friend and I discussed the coming deer season. Him knowing I had Mickey Coleman build my last rifle asked with a puzzled look,

"Why spend that much money to build a 30-06?"

As if the 30-06 is so undeserving to take whitetails. Not wanting to get into the long pointless debate, I told him the truth. It's a splendid round to shoot, doesn't punish the shoulder, the 30-06 has proven its accuracy potential countless times, hits plenty hard to anchor the largest of whitetails, and for 400 yrds and less which is well beyond the average shooters ability to shoot and well beyond the range I'm likely to take whitetails in my area. Why not the 30-06?

Of course his standard answer to my question was as you all have heard before. "You need to shoot a magnum."

Just as I was preparing to roll my eyes, another guy whom was thinking he was lending credence to my argument piped in and made the statement that just makes me boil which brings me to

Rant #2 and I quote. "Me and dad was hunting in Minnesota on a family farm and I shot a buck with his 30-06 at about 700 yrds running and dropped him in his tracks".

Without thinking I shouted Bullshit! Three times in fact. Bullshit, bullshit, bullshit. Now normally I don't call someone out like that. I just shake my head to myself, and disengage from the conversation. But knowing what I know in the shooting world as limited as my knowledge truly is compared to some distinguished members of this board. I just couldn't let it go.

I find difficulty shooting @ 500 yards on a good day at times from a solid bench. Wind wrecks havoc on me when I think I have it whipped, and sometimes something as simple as losing track of how many clicks I actually dialed in on my elevation turrets humbles me. I will probably never get the opportunity to take a buck at such extended ranges. But I would like to know that one day if I get that chance I'll be ready. However I wouldn't think of it unless I was positive I could make it happen. The limiting factor isn't the round I choose to shoot. That I'm sure of.

Ok rant finished.

"Without thinking I shouted bullshit. Three times in fact."

Should've gone for at least four or five...........

Boy howdie.....

I'm of the opinion that many members of the crowd shooting 300 mags at deer have no business taking shots at distances where the 300 mag would have any real advantage over a 308.

bet he cain't shoot one worth a chit.

there's been a couple of folks on this LR forum who have stretched .300 mag-esque ballistics from the '06. don't make me back up that statement with cites, I'm too lazy.

Have hunted with and guided too many 'hunters' that use a magnum to make up for practice.

My longest shots on game have all been from a rest in calm weather. I wouldn't think of taking a '700 yard shot' at walking deer, much less a running deer. I have more respect for the game than that.

If you practiced shooting more often you might change your mind

I've been in the gun business for 20 years and constantly hear such claims. I long ago came to the conclusion that 90% of the dumbasses that claim to make such long shots have absolutely no concept of how far 500 yards (or 400, or 700) really is....

I had a sniper squad leader who told me he shot a doe running at 500m through the head. I also saw this guy shoot his personal gun at 300m one day and his version of sub-MOA and mine are MUCH different. After a while I determined he talked a lot more than he actually did things and if his lips were moving he was lying. Finally, I couldn't take it anymore and called him out as often as he told bullshit stories.

Nah... He struggles bad. Coming home from the hunt club he would complain about the deer he missed. He swore they had to be at least 400 yards away. Come to think of it, the club has 26 members and I don't think anyone has ever killed a deer under 300 yards there.

His next fix for the flinching blues is to purchase the lead sled so he can shoot from a bench and not have to deal with recoil. He also suspects his scope is junk (vx3 2.5x10x50mm) he is now awaiting the luepold tac with a 30mm tube in his words to gather more light.

Let the head shaking continue....

Recoil is his enemy and he's to proud to realize it. Shoving your finger inside the trigger guard pass the first knuckle doesn't do accuracy any favors either..

Well your first red flag is, he didn't know how far away they were. Just like the guy who shot at the running deer that was "about" 700 yards away,

Should have told him that if he would be a little more quiet, then deer wouldn't spook when he got within half a mile of them.

Just speaking for myself, I have practiced shooting quite a bit, but simply do not understand why some folks are infatuated with shooting animals at very long range.I'm not really against it;simply don't care about it.

The technology of LR rifle shooting fascinates me;it'a also fun plinking targets at great distance,and I "get" the intellectual stimulation of ballistic problem solving,and hitting a small target at great distance. I always figured that's what varmint hunting was for.

But sniping some unsuspecting BG animal at 1000 yards would leave me ambivalent.....at least that's how I felt on the handful of animals I've killed at 500 yards or so.It did not thrill me at all....kind of like not being involved in a "hunt".

I have gotten a far bigger thrill when the animals were a lot closer...Felt more involved in a pursuit, and less like a detached assassin.

Maybe that's why I got by with a 4X scope all those years.

I use to tell my wife she's going to have to whisper.... She would reply louder and even more agitated. "I am whispering!!!"

Why even hunt with a rifle then? Sounds like a recurve should be your hunting tool of choice.

I've done a little test the last two months and have proven to myself and others that a magnum launching high BC bullets puts other chamberings at a disadvantage

Had a guy tell me about a month ago that with the book minimum charge of H4895 and a 150 SST his drop @ 500yds was 20" with his rifle zeroed dead on @ 76yds from his 30/06. I got 2 bullchits out before his Dad chimed in and told me it was true. That got 2-3 more bullchits out, and a nice exchange of back and forths.

Funny when I invited them out to our 600yd spot they had other stuff to do and shooting that far is nothing but wasting ammo. I told him they would be wasting ammo because they would be lucky to hit the damn ground at that distance.

Had a fellow telling me how great a long-range shot he was.

Talked him into coming with me to the gun club. We set up on the firing line and I indicated the targets at 600 yards...

The realization of how far 600 yards is sank in right then and there...

We don't see ranges like that often in my neck of the woods.. 500 seemed to be as well as a mile when I first saw it. Having the skill to shoot twice that distance would be awesome as well as daunting to me.

In response, I shoot quite a bit. I work not only on trigger time but also in hunting situations, at least as much as the range rules allow. I agree with Bob's comment, shooting any BG animal at ranges of 600 + yards just doesn't appeal to me in the least. As I stated before, I have more respect for the animal than that.

And as far as 'use a bow', I do that as well. At least that I can practice shooting 'live' rounds in my back yard.

If you are interested in punching paper or ringing a gong at long ranges, I have no problem with that (except that currently the longest range I have access to is only 190 yards). I do go to a friend's place about an hour and a half away and shoot his 300 yard gong. I do enjoy that as a test bed for some of my loads and to better learn each rifle and load. And since I am limited in range yardage, I limit my shots.
I have seen videos on youtube etc that depict shooting a DRT elk or mule deer at some phenomenal range but I've always wondered how many videos were erased because they'd miss-judged the wind or some other factor. I'm sure the long range 'hunters' have their share of poor hits just as do any that limit themselves and do NOT practice other than half a box the day before season opens.

I get the " With my new XXX gun, I line it up dead on at 100, hold at the top of the back at 500 and it's dead." Or something to that effect all the time.

Or used to anyway.

Uncle bought some land of couple years ago, right out of town, that's easy to get to. Great place to shoot, 600 yards, can easily drive to targets, etc.

I've took a bunch of the "snipers" I've heard all the BS from up there. Some of the excuses I hear are almost unbelievable.

Funniest one I can remember, a guy shooting his .300 RUM...I swear the bullet must have hit the ground at least 10 feet in front of the steel I had set up at 500 yards. I'm waiting on a response, few seconds later I get "I'm pretty sure that would have hit a deer."

There have been a few though, that opened their eyes and turned into a good shooting buddy.

I've had some 'goobers' on my range and I stand them on the 300 yard line and ask them..."What's the distance to the steel plate hanging on the left?" It's a 20"x12" size and I've had quotes from 500 yards to 700 yards!

That's where these 1000 yard shots are coming from!!

Go here and LEARN just what a 30/06 is capable of:

http://riflemansjournal.blogspot.com/p/articles-index.html

I got magnums...


I just think there's a substantive difference between hunting an animal that at least has a chance of detecting me,and one that's so far away he doesn't stand a chance of knowing I'm around. I know not everyone feels this way.

Now why would someone who doesn't like recoil go to a link and watch a .30-06 video? They kick too hard for what they accomplish down range. Take a .270 for example......

You just have to keep a sense of humor.

You will only get a decent conversation/feedback about long range, if you are talking with another practitioner.

...if you really want to see a blank stare, ask if they were correcting for drop in MOA, or mils.

Excellent post Briguy. Sounds like you've set a maximum range for yourself at 400 yards. The good ol 30-06 will have absolutely no problems at that range. I would have also called bullshit as well. Good for you!!

Exactly...

Its like measuring fish or using the distance women think is six inches who get their idea of length from their husbands.

And it gets longer with each telling. If they can hit the black at 300 yards off the bench (or even on the bench) it is pretty rare. 700 is really good from a stable setup(but remember how long they think six inches are).

However, who cares? No one actually believes them, unless perhaps they can ring the gong waaaaaay out there while someone is watching. Otherwise, let them blow.

I was in a gunshop right after the A-Bolt came out. One of the yahoos was bragging on how accurate his was when he claimed he bore sighted one, then lit up a deer and a claimed 500 yards. Without actually zeroing the rifle.

I've done that before only slightly different. I had a guy tell me he busts rocks out to 1000 yards with his .270 win. I ask them a question that usually bust them right away. Usually I inquire about their scope, and then ask if they are using a 20 MOA canted rail or 30 MOA. Normally after hinting that 1000 yards normally would be beyond the adjustment range of their scope, I get the "I hold over about a foot."

I usually say something along the lines of "Hmmmmm well 130 grn .270 Win bullet drop out to 1000 yards is about 25 feet. So your dialing in 24 feet of elevation without having to cant the rails?" Awesome. I WANT THAT STANDARD HUNTING SCOPE!!!

I should add that although my math isn't technically correct, they get the point because they do not know better. Usually ends the bullshit right away.

Encountered a hunter once who had just taken a buck with a 264 Win Mag. Six hundred yards, aimed dead on, and drilled it through the neck.

I fail to see why most folks think snipers are such good shots.

They are GREAT at getting places undetected, and staying so, reporting data, taking and occasional shot here and there, generally at probably 600 or less yards, and thats an ok range for a practiced person.

But every one I saw come into a military highpower team, was easy to outshoot at the onset. Of course after much more practice they were tough to beat.

OTOH I know more than a few competitive military shooters that later went and qualified for sniper... and they were not to be reckoned with shooting wise.

That is the advantage of magnums--enough power so you don't have to fuss with all that scope stuff...

30-06 pushing a 180 Accubond at 2800 fps has a max pbr of about 292 yards. The 300 WinMag at 3100 fps has a max pbr of about 318 yards.

That's a 26 yard gain in max pbr by going magnum and adding 300 fps.

Even with a magnum, a laser and a turret might be useful.

That's nothing. I talked to one once who shot a doe at 350 with an open-sighted 35 Remington. He was able to do it because there was snow on the ground.

I worked in a gun shop for 6 years, and I totally agree about the dumbasses range estimation skills

A smith whom built my first rifle told me once that only a fool estimates yardage without some form of assistance, and then shoots it. After shooting my first 500 yard gong, and how easily it is to miss, I understood his statement clearly.

Gravities effect on bullets become super noticeable pass 300

It's amazing how so many peoples 700 yards measure 500 feet or less .

That right there is the truth.

A better than average range finder will not accurately judge a critter much past 500 yards. Some will not get close to 500.

If you ever deer hunt in Minnesota during rifle season, you will understand the kid in the OP. They looove their semi-auto remington 30-06s. Pull the trigger until the deer goes down or is out of view. If you gave them single shots most would starve to death. Public land there is a war zone during rifle season, especially opening day.

Just keep shooting until something happens.

I met a guy who said he shot his deer at 450 yards with a .223 AR15. Said he uses a 30 round clip and just walks his shots in until he gets one.

doubletap - "just walks his shots in until he gets one." This guy walks his rounds from the animals butt into his front end aka Texas Heart Shots. At least with an AR15 and hi cap mags he's able to poke many, many holes in the critter... feel really sorry for the deer however. Homesteader

RMulhern--thanks for posting that link.

Thanks Shane...I just may have an 06, laser, et al laying around here somewhere...:)

My Leicas do ok... but there is always terrain around...

BTDT on the 223 AR part. Over 500 a couple of times and with irons. But one shot only. Each time.

But most folks think 700 feet is 700 yards and don't have the ability to even break a clean shot off a bench much less in the field.

Have about 25yrs under my belt in northern MN as an out of state hunter...

Have met more savvy hunters with bolt actions than what you describe. And a couple of excellent tracker/stillhunters.

If a whitetail is still moving through the bush after you shot, have always been of the opinion that is reasonable to shoot it again--but always willing to learn something new about hunting & shooting...:)

I've seen some mighty impressive shots made by a 30-06 so its more than capable of doing all you ask and more. As for mr long range running shot. I live in country that is wide open, in fact trees don't get in our way, ever. So I have heard that statement
oh about three times a year for the past 40 years or so. I have a standard answer no matter what the caliber is I always say yea that's one flat shooting son of a bitch to witch they almost always reply flattest shooting gun there is. My thinking is if they want to be stupid why not just help them.

I like the way you think.

Hard to believe but there are some good,hard core hunters who are a bit naive ballistically. From a success standpoint they will hunt many sophisticated riflemen into the ground.

They are simple savages who know nothing more than Bluebox Federals in 30/06,308, or 270,and have never progressed beyond "hold dead on", and never kill anything much past 200 yards,if that. They don't need to because they understand how to hunt well and get close. Honestly many could not tell you if an animal was 300 or 700 yards away but none of it is important to them,as their shot judgement is pretty impeccable,and they tend to know when and what they can hit.

If you confuse them with the facts about shooting much past 200-250 yards, their eyes may glaze over but they fill freezers and hang horns on the wall every year.

Every time I see such people in action, or see another elk or deer hit the ground, I have to chuckle at myself and others who excruciate over a lot of this stuff and make it more complicated than it needs to be.

Most of us shoot longer ranges on gongs or paper for the sheer excitement. I limit myself to 400 or less because my rifle was built with those ranges in mind. Why do I need a magnum when a 30-06 flys fast enough to open my chosen projectile reliably and deliver enough energy at 400 yards cause sudden death?

I'm not taking anything away from your argument, or trying to make light of it. I agree with you that a savvy hunter is himself the most important tool he carries in the woods. For myself, and I speak only for myself I won't take a shot at quarry I'm not comfortable with taking and so far that's been well short of 400 yards. On the bench is a totally different story.

I'm sure I speak for most on this board when I say there is nothing as satisfying as the sweet sound of a gong singing back to you when you did all your calculations right, dialed in the proper elevation and windage corrections, settled in behind your firearm and gently squeeze the trigger until you feel it buck back against your shoulder. You patiently sit there for what feels like minutes when actually it's a fraction of a second and then you hear it.. That's what does it for me... Bliss

Well everything except the "buck back against your shoulder". All my rifles have brakes.

I guess everyone who has these ills has there own medicine for the cure.

I shot a 243 with a brake, and was amazed at how much recoil was missing. The blast on the other hand was very noticeable. If it weren't for the noise, I wouldn't mind it on my 06

I used to have a .30-06. It was just as noisy and any other rifle. Guns are loud! I would not consider firing one without hearing protection. I don't know anyone who hunts without some kind of electronic hearing protection. They turn off when you fire the gun and enhance hearing the rest of the time. You know, like binoculars for you ears.

And EVERYBODY knows that the 30/06 is an old worn out cartridge that is hard up to shoot accurately beyond 500 yards!!

LOL. Its so bad I just turned one of mine into a 338-06 hoping to help it. LOL

Then you don't know a lot of hunters. I wear them when shooting off the bench, but not while hunting. Most of the people I've hunted with over the past 24 years do not. Those whom I know that have tried them didn't like them and do not use them any longer. The largest complaint I've heard is they didn't like hearing every chirping bird, every rustling leaf on the ground magnified in their ears. Mine do not magnify sound, only cancel it once the noise level exceed a certain DB, but I do not wear them while afield. If hearing protection while on the hunt is ok with you, I'm certainly not the one to argue against it. It's just not for me.

As for the brake. The one thing I hate most about them is sharing a range with someone on each side of you using them. They may not be louder in your opinion, but in my opinion even with ear protection they are noticeably louder than a gun without a brake. Anything directing gas out and slightly to the rear to counter recoil also directs the report in the same direction. Not saying they're bad above that, again just not for me.

Personally I don't know many people. The problem you are describing is not adjusting the sound amplification. I turn mine so that it is about like normal hearing. Kinda like leaving a variable scope set on its highest setting.



At the range I use both plugs and the electronic muffs. That way I can turn the muffs on and hear those around me. Of course I have to turn them up.

LoL we are all different. Glad we aren't all the same otherwise we would have nothing interesting to talk about. Glad to hear your hearing protection works for you. Maybe one day I'll give your suggestion another go. Quiet sure the brake will never happen for me though. Just not a fan of the blast. the draw back for me far out weigh the benefits.

Long range shooting is within reach for those with the time, money, interest, place to do it, some knowledge and a plan.Don't even try to short-cut any of those. Those criteria do tend to eliminate most, but for those that are left its hardly rocket science. Just another skill-set that is in many ways easier than shooting offhand at close range.

I found that I spend far more money making my ammo than I did before reloading. Not that the ammo cost more, because it's cheaper per bullet cost however I shoot more often so I buy larger quantities of powder, primer, and bullets. In a years time I spend more money than I initially realized I would.

When I shot factory ammo, I didn't shoot nearly as much because the cost of ammo didn't foster the desire to spend. I got into reloading because first I wanted to save money. However that was a fantasy because sense I'm making the ammo, I may as well make the best ammo I possibly can for my rifles. Which leads to testing ammo, which leads to wanting to shoot more often. The savings are offset by the frequency in which I shoot so my cost actually went up. On the plus side I did improve my skill.

BobinNH Guess what you my friend have assumed way to much when you decided I wasn't a long range shooter. If its all the same to you I'll keep shooting long range(well over 1000 meters) till I get the BC thing figured out) and no one and I mean no one with impeccable judgment takes a 700 yard running shot. The guy with impeccable judgment waits till he stops. than ranges with his vector 21,(he has a vector 21 cause he has impeccable judgment) he reads the mirage and decides with his impeccable judgment if he has the skill knowledge and equipment to make that shot. But what do I know I am a savage who knows nothing about BCs.

That would be exactly how I'd deal with a 700 yard shot. Heck I'd prefer the animal to bed first...

no shame in sneaking up on stuff...although have had one or two times leaving gear behind and having a heck of a time finding it...:)

I did this once. Quite stressful.

and daylight's fading...

Wait until your powder order starts involving a fork-lift, and buying/building a 1/2 mile + range makes more sense than borrowing one all the time.

Let me make it clear I don't shoot animals at over 1000 meters but I do shoot at those ranges and I do it very often I get as close as I can I with every shot I take on a wild animal out of respect for the animal. I can totally relate to the guy who said he got into reloading to save a little money but all hell broke loose when he got into long range shooting. I got into reloading as a kid it was a gift from my father I started dabbling in long range shooting over 20 years ago with 300 win mag and what I thought was an expensive scope. Since that time I have several long range comp rifles that I have topped with scopes that really are expensive but the ammo is still the most expensive part. Briguy I can totally relate to setting your [bleep] down and than having to pull a search and rescue mission to find it. Point I learned is make sure its not so well camouflaged you cant see it either. BobinNH I didn't learn to shoot long range on the internet and by the way your Tie is crooked. I stand behind what I said a 30-06 is a fine rifle. I have a 308 I shoot it often in my opinion its a remarkable tool when learning to shoot long range cheap to shoot, great barrel life and the low bc makes you learn the art before you jump into the high bc calibers.

I would have a very difficult time justifying the cost to my wife. She already thinks I've gone nuts with the money I spend. It's all pointless until she runs out of ammo for her .243

After your last BS you should have asked him how he calculated for 10 feet of bullet drop while leading the deer by 20 feet (which is roughly the distance the running deer will cover in the time it takes the bullet to travel for approx. 1 second). In a mil-dot reticle that lead on the deer is approximately at the left/right post of the crosshair, and how are you going to estimate bullet drop on the fly with that running deer, which will be out of scope view...very hard to do. What's even better is he that he likely did it with a simple duplex, crosshair of some type. Like someone famous said, there's an idiot born everyday.

Presentation is everything. Bulk buying is "Being economical", buying a range is a "Real estate investment".

Good point

I'm definitely using the bulk buying comment even if it gets me in trouble (I've got some reloading to do anyhow)

Because I've seen my Dad shoot before his eyes started getting bad...and he always said he was the worst shot in his scout/sniper unit.

To the OP, why not a 30-06? You're right it's a great round and I've taken deer with both a 30-06 and a .300 Winnie, really didn't make any difference in getting the deer or not or making a quick kill.

My response is always "wow, how far does the bullet drop at that distance?"

The BS is even better then

It was a 70 yard shot with the usual numnutz multiplier ....

Why not for me? Because of fear of falling into a boredom induced comma?

This doesn't deal with shooting but it's pretty good. Was in the LGS the other day and same ol'dipchit is in there. A guy asks if I ever put out a mineral block for deer and we talk about his use of them.

Anyways, ol'dipchit chimes in......I used to use deer cocaine.........no one responds.

It worked pretty good....

Other guy responds, yeah I have never used it.

Ol'dipchit, worked good until they changed it, it used to have real cocaine in it.


That took us into another back and forth about his stupidity that ended in the store owner and another shopper nearly laying in the floor from laughter.

I can relate to that. I kept telling my wife that if she was a better teacher she wouldn't have to work those 12 hour days 6 days a week(plus brought home work), and her Sundays could be less than 8 hours... And she could actually take off those 6 weeks of "summer vacation"....

Good thing she got into Administration. Haven't seen her since, except for supper. I leave it warm for her...

I agree Bob, although I douse more X's and an elevation turret.

I've also guided enough to know that someone who can hit an antelope reliably at 300 yards is, well, to be kind, uncommon.

My feelings too. Sure, they might be able to kill an elk at 1,000 yards.

But can they find it afterward?

I've killed caribou out beyond 400 yards on the tundra tussocks- not a tree or bush in sight. The corpse is often smaller than the tussocks, and not that different in color.


I take a compass line, just to make it easy...

Bullets got to go somewhere, every now and then an animal gets in the way.

That's why I LOVE Sky Busting.................(grin)

The old 700 yard .30-06 story and many other miracles is EXACTLY why I hate the .30-06!

I can't count the number of times I've heard a tale of tales about magic shots with one!

All the fair weather/bandwagon Dale Earnhardt fans soured me on him as well and I think he was actually a good driver.

Mike

I found a few.

1000 yds.



1100 yds.



Heck there was the one time I even found a coyote that died at 4 digits on the range finder. (1017 yds for those that are somewhat slow)'

Gotta agree with BobinNH on the LR killing stuff. Even though I plink around doing it, when I get serious trying to kill something, I get a big thrill on sneaking in as close as I can comfortably get. Burns obviously knows what he's doing, but based on the hunters I've had, and 42 years of killing stuff, the vast, vast majority of people have no business trying to kill big game over 250 yards. Then there's the wind factor......which will baffle the best of the best lots of times.

Great shooters that snipe successfully and great hunters that are only average shooters are not one and the same. Bob has obviously been around more than a couple great hunters.

They both have their own set of bragging rights.

To say everyone falls into one category or the other would be a mistake.

Im sure someone has covered this angle ( didn't read the whole thread) but its up to the individual to do what he feels comfortable with. ( Granted many in all schools of thought feel comfortable loooong before they should)
If you have the right equipment,amount of practice, and mind set long range may be for you.
If you don't care for the idea and aren't comfortable shooting past 300 yards, then don't do it.


Its not rocket surgery...

Hell, it would be a mistake to say most fall into either of the two categories.

Time permitting I would appreciate one of the LR people taking me under their wing for a little bit. But give me a choice and I would rather hang with one who knows what the game is thinking and why and where they are thinking it.

Off subject for a second.

Ingwe: That Dog is coming along nicely. Thanks for the advice.

Extra funny,due your incredible CLUELESSNESS.

Bless your heart..............

I'm not a back up and spice to the program,type.

I'll happily take 10yd broadsides all day and every day,but it's hardly daunting to be tooled in accords,to connect the most dots.

Light done right and handy/dandy trumps all,if only because I've got 'em all............

My point is that if you're not capable of both, you are an incomplete hunter.

Kinda like Sporting.

If you get to a teal station and can't hit teal, you have a hole in your game.

I've called elk in so close I could have killed them with an axe.

Agree.

However, when it comes to the LR group it is rare for them to mention they spotted the game at x yards and then moved up to x-y yards because they could.

It's their game and the great ones are just that. Most have a hard time accepting that some can do things they can't, so they think most should do what they can.

I can hit teal until they get too far away.

For me.

I really don't know about that....you may be an incomplete shooter. But not an incomplete hunter.


BTW I have mentioned this before, but I shot with John Burns in Wyoming. He clearly knows what he is doing at distance,and is one of the very few people I have personally met who was capable at great distance. His kill record at the 1000 yard marker does not surprise me.

I killed a great mule deer after he left;after shooting with him to 1300 yards, the 340 yard shot seemed like a sneeze.

Shooting/hitting POA/POI correlations is the easiest part of any/all HUnts. If it isn't,you've dropped alotta balls along the way.

I get a kick out of The LR Crowd and their Distant Dinks................(grin)

Jeez, do we have to dredge up that thread again? LOL

Gotta run. This is a tough crowd to keep up with�.

Bob,

Got a tag for Bill place this year?



Rick,

I get what you are saying and continuing the logic we are all "incomplete" as hunters.

That, for me at least, is the fascination with hunting. There is always a skill set to improve, be it on the side of getting closer or on the side of adding reach.

I think some of the rub on the adding reach side is the equipment race. It takes the right tools, but just because a fellow spent a bunch of coin does not make him a LR killer. It just means he is ready to start practicing.

But you already knew all that and I am just preaching to the choir.

What stock do you shoot?

Laughing!.............

MegaDittos

Really? I know guys who only hunt with a bow, because that's how they want to hunt. They couldn't care less about long range hunting. They've hunted with rifles, but have moved on.

To call them incomplete hunters is just projecting your own personal ethic onto everyone else.

Now, if a guy wants to hunt long range, but can't hit at long range, then he has some work to do, and could be called "incomplete."

It's no different.

Guys are always trying to extend their effective range with archery as well.

Projecting personal ethics on others is what America is all about.


What ever tool you decide to use on a hunt should be mastered to a certain level of competency. I think folks should at least try to be as good as their equipment

You mean like the guys who choose to hunt with a traditional bow?

Yes, they practice so that they can maximize their range with that particular weapon.

To say they are pursuing "long-range" traditional bowhunting is laughable though.

Come to think of it, calling anything done with any kind of bow "long-range hunting" (which is what we're talking about) is laughable.

No doubt about that.

It's all relative.

I think there are long range shots with a bow, a pellet gun, a .22LR, etc...

Is stretching bow shots out to 100+ really that different? ( to keep the semantics out, I'm obviously talking about compound bows)

Ridiculous.

I go absent for a month or so and return to see this thread still kicking. Seems I've started a [bleep] storm. We may be accused of not having any common sense, any heart, or any clue but we'll never be accused of having no passion.

If you're driving a Bugatti that is capable of 240 mph top speed, but your driving skill only allows you to run it to 55 mph, you're an incomplete driver

Ridiculous argument rca.

I've seen the most competent, trained, snipers from here and abroad shoot thousands of rounds in the ever present TX Panhandle wind. These guys are as good as it gets, and their trainer is as good as it gets, period. The wind baffles them sometimes, and lots of times on shot #1. Why should I believe you or anyone else for that matter are more competent than they are?

You seem to think that if a shot is presented, be it 10 yards or 1000, it has to be taken.

At neither range is this the case

Not hardly. You're the one that said "if you're not capable of both, you're an incomplete hunter". I just pointed out why that is a ridiculous point of view, at least IMO, and stated why. You and nobody else on the planet are capable all the time. No headstamp, bullet, rifle, scope, wind meter, etc can come together to dope wind 100% of the time. That's my point. I have a rifle and ammo capable of 900yds easily with no wind.

Sure there are. Is that what you were talking about when you made the comment that I responded to? Bows and pellet guns?

If a hand fired projectile pokes a hole through clockwork.... and we get a dead critter post haste.... who gives a schitt how it got there... or from how far?

I think you need to be addressing SLM since he's the one who brought up archery

First, when rc made the statement I responded to, he was not talking about compound bows.

Second, I like RC, he seems like a good guy. I'd have no problem hashing this out over a cold beer or two, and I'm sure I'd learn something in the process.

But it's not just semantics. He made a sweeping general statement that I disagree with. I know guys who hunt with nothing but traditional archery gear. They are the most extreme example I can think of to refute his statement, so that's what I used. You may be talking about compound bows, but I'm not.

Third, even with compound bows, yes there is a difference. It's the difference between getting within 100 yards and getting within 800 or 1000. Or for most people, the difference between 60 yards ( a long shot with a bow) and 1000. There are a lot of guys who have absolutely no interest in taking a 700, 800, or 1000 yard shot with a rifle, but would take the 60 yard shot with a bow.

They are not incomplete hunters. That is my point.

Sh** storm? Hardly. This is barely a good fart, and it's breezy.

Actually, that was me but I do think I quoted you accurately, and you mentioned bows?

If I get a shot at 10 yards, I'll be driving the Bugatti at top speed

Obviously there is a difference between 800 YDS and 100. My point is people are always bashing long range with rifles but I don't see much difference in the guy that has worked to be proficient with a bow at extended range. Can't remember if it was you or Bob that brought up an animals comfort zone. If a person thinks a rutting bulls comfort zone is the same at 50 as it is at 100, they have not called in many elk. People will always try to hedge things in their favor, some will just hedge a little farther.

For the record I don't consider myself a long range shooter/hunter.


Eta; rc', did you see where the commission shafted us again on BH? LO authorizations soon to come.

My "incomplete hunter" statement was in regard to those who hunt with a rifle and are only able to use it effectively to ranges like 250 yards.

Rifles are effective (depending on cartridge and game) to much longer ranges and to be unable to capably use them from 250 yards to their maximum effective range, I consider "incomplete"


BTW,
Watched Western Extreme with Jim Burnworth. Watched him shoot his bow and make one-shot hits on a target from 100 to 180 yards.

He has killed prairie dogs with his bow at 121 yards.

He shoots softballs at 150 yards and baseballs at 100 yards.

I don't bash long range, I have rifles more capable than I am, and I'd be better at long range if it was important to me. But it's not that important to me. I can hit a vitals-sized target almost every time in good conditions out to about 600. That's good enough for me but the rifles could do better.

Does the fact that my rifle is more capable than me mean I'm an incomplete hunter? Hardly. People hunt for different reasons. Making a 700-800 yard shot on a big game animal is not one of the reasons I hunt. I like to hunt the early seasons, so if I had more time to spare I'd work on being a better bow hunter.

And that was me who brought up an animal's comfort zone. My point was, at some distance, the animal can know you're there but ignore you because you're not perceived as a threat. Because for millennia, as the animals evolved and adapted to being hunted by humans, humans at that distance were not a threat. Or maybe the hunter is far enough away that the animal has no real chance to see, hear, or smell him. That distance will vary with the location, season, weather, and individual animal, so you can't put a number on it and I'm not trying to. Just making the point that beyond that distance, a hunter is using superior technology to defeat the animal's senses. So taking those shots raises the issue of fair chase.

As far as a rutting bull at 100 yards, he may be so pre-occupied as to not notice your presence. But if he knows you're a human and he knows you're there within 100 yards, he's not going to stick around.

You can bring up all the other technology hunters use like tree stands, "scent-lok" clothes, and all that. So let me take those off the table by saying, yes, those are examples of using technology to defeat the animal's senses too.

That doesn't mean that shooting from long distance isn't.

And I'm not saying the distance a hunter chooses to take a shot at is anyone's business but his own (provided he can make the shot), or that it should be regulated in any way. It can't be.

Just acknowledging a fact that no one seems to want to talk about.

I don't know if this is the Long Range Hunting Forum's first bow kill entry but...




84 yards
Jennings Carbon Extreme
Gold Tip with a 125 grain Thunderhead

So you've never encountered anyone who chooses to hunt with an open-sighted lever action rifle?

Hell, back east where I grew up hunting whitetails in the hardwood forests, I never even had an opportunity at a 250 yard shot.

I'm not afforded the ranges most people out west are. I live in the south east. I do rather enjoy hitting targets at 400 yards. What people fail to realize is 400-500 to people like me is about all we'll get the pleasure to shoot.

We never really get the experience to see what 1000 yards look like, but those of us whom never get to see 1000 yard ranges are awe struck the first time we finally do. So In my opinion being a complete, or incomplete hunter based on whether or not it's achievable to me is moot if 400-500 is the maximum I'm likely to ever see. 1000 yards in my state is very possible in the eastern part of our state. But the north west is going to be more difficult.

I can say without any doubt at all that even my 30-06 is more capable than I of reaching farther ranges lethally. In perspective it's relative to what you have to work with in equipment and range. Why do I not shoot a 300 WM? Because I simply do not need it.

I concentrate my time on what's important to me. Making my 30-06 shoot as accurately as possible at the ranges I'm likely to shoot. I will not ever see a need to shoot any bullet heavier than 180gn accubond in my location at 400 yrds. I'm confident it will kill with lethality and authority at that range.

I take no credibility away from anyone's opinion at all when it comes to their experience at longer ranges, because I have no experience to do so. I know what works for me so far.

Before I forget, I'll toss this out there, and this falls into the category of keeping things in perspective. My buddy and I were at our local Gander Mountain looking at different factory ammo as they keep it out on the floor for ppl to pilfer through. He picked up a box of 338 lapua ammo and said "screw it! I'm just going to buy a 338 lapua." My response was if you can't make deer hit the ground with your 300 Winny, that 338 Lapua really isn't the answer to your problems. Practice, and a rifle you can shoot comfortably is. He looked at me like I slapped his mother.

In Pittsburgheze; Glad to see younze are still at it�.

The real question is-

How many do you hit that you don't find?

Course not!

John, yes....mule deer. You gonna be in the neighborhood?

Absolutely.

That is what makes hunting so interesting. We all have a bunch of room to improve and we choose the areas or skillsets to work on based on our interests and desires.

The "Complete Hunter" would be able to run in cross country mountain races and win.

He would know the biology, habits, food resources, ect of his quarry and all other plants and animals in the area at a level that would allow a PHD dissertation.

He would know the topography of the hunting area, including landownership, to such a level that he could draw accurate, useful maps for those of us with out that level of dedication.

He would be able to shoot all manner of weapons to the ragged edge of the weapons reach in all condition and under time pressure.

Ricks analogy with sporting clays was pretty good. The objective of a good target setter is to find the holes in a shotgunners game and make him pay. If a springing teal stumps you do not expect to win much.

I got a bunch of holes in my hunting game (conditioning is one that is staring me right in the face this September) but have put in some time on the shooting side of things. We tend to invest more in things we enjoy and skimp on other things that don't spark our interest. Human nature.

Seem to recall the first target on the old archery field course was eighty yards...of course that was before compounds...and ethics...:)

Staying in Art Laha's bowcamp (complete with bar and restaurant) in Wisconsin, did spend a little time as a pup riding around in a truck on Wisconsin's logging roads with some old boys who used to shoot those field courses across the country, here and there, with Howard Hill--Hill was a few years before my time...:)

I had Laha's American Arms recurve and the old boys either had long bows or recurves. Art Laha was a lesser known competitor to Fred Bear and far more colorful.The interesting thing to me was any deer that looked "a ways off" was gauged in terms of that 80 yard target. Then the next guy up on the offside would get out as the truck kept rolling and take a shot.

The biggest deal was a buck at the longest range for those two-track hunts. That was something and that was the topic of note. Some of those guys were amazing shots at amazingly long ranges well past 80 yards. Most were not. Like I said, that was before ethics...and before range finders.

Nobody talked about what they missed or didn't find, and no one took pictures of a woods setting with a missing deer to brag to their buddies.

"Look Tom", Art said to me with a grin to clarify the issue, "it's not bullshitt, it's promotion"

Or you could say we tend to value the things we're good at over all else. That's human nature. That's why guys who are good long range shooters think other guys who have zero interest in it are "incomplete."

Your list above of what comprises a "complete hunter" sounds like a competition. That "competition" attitude is one of the things I think is wrong with hunting today, especially as it's depicted on TV shows. A 1,200 yard shot is somehow "better" than a 1,000 yard shot. It's all in the numbers. Where's Dick Vitale when you need him, "Johnnie B. is going looooooooong baybeeeee!!!!"

For lots of guys, it's not a competition. In any case, a "complete hunter" is not yours to define.

I'm not a very good squirrel hunter. You may think that makes me "incomplete." But that's just your opinion, it's not a fact.

Anyone who is any good at anything had to put hard work, time, blood, sweat and tears into becoming good.

Do you think JohnBurns came out of the womb with a .264 with verified drop data to a mile?

Lots of people who have "zero interest" in certain activities have tried them, realized they have zero natural ability and zero work ethic to do the work to master them.

You seem to keep missing the sort of Zenish point that all hunters are incomplete. There is always room for improvement. Or maybe you feel you are a "complete hunter" with nothing left to learn and no room for improvement?



Yet here you are "competing" in a debate on a forum about Long Range Hunting.



Sure it is, you just don't have to agree with my definition.

Or do you feel only you can define a "complete hunter". That seems pretty competitive.



Did you really just now figure that out? All the drivel I post here is just an opinion, usually mine but sometime I quote somebody else opinion. See Below.



Most with "zero interest" don't regularly post in forums dedicated to that "interest".

I guess I should add IMHO.

John,

I was going to post something about smokie's arrogance but you did a better job. He makes statements as though they are the final thought on the subject.

No, I didn't miss that point at all. Did you see me say I'm a complete hunter, or that someone else is not?

I was simply responding to someone who labeled a whole class of hunters as incomplete. And I'm the arrogant one, huh?

You said physical conditioning is a weakness for you. It's not for me.

But I'm not the labeling you an incomplete hunter because of your lack of conditioning. Because it's none of my business and not my place.



Nice try, but I'm not the one defining "the complete hunter" or labeling others as "incomplete;" that would be you.

Get it now? You and Ringman make a good pair.

Throw in Dick Vitale, and you've got the trifecta!!!!

And by the way "long range hunting" is not a proper noun, you don't need to capitalize it, even though you kneel before it.

Never disputed that, and never criticized long-range shooting or hunting. You guys seem a little defensive.




No, but I bet he did come out with the perm and spray tan.




That may be true, but let's not make long-range shooting out to be something it's not. It's not akin to hitting a major league fastball or casting a fly line 100 feet with your bare hinds like Lefty Kreh. With the equipment available today lots of guys have the "natural ability" to pull it off and become proficient. As a matter of fact, some people on this very thread make a living selling that equipment to the average "Joe Hunter" under the premise that the equipment will help make him a long-range hunter. Far fewer have the interest, desire, or level of comittment it takes to be really good.

And many do in fact have zero interest.

Now we have an English teacher on the Long Range Hunting forum. How can things get any better than this?

You could make a point.

Hey you forgot to add "IMHO" at the end of your post.

No, I didn't forget, it's just that nothing in that post was an opinion.

And by the way, thanks for your contributions here on long-range shooting and hunting.

You sure spend a lot of time on a subject that is not important to you.

I like long-range shooting. When I said there were guys with zero interest in it, I wasn't talking about myself.

You spend a lot of time commenting on my posts, are you up for moderator?

Yes, I'm shooting for Travis's job.

You need more GFY's then.

Seriously, I appreciate guys like Burns and rc sharing their knowledge. Both are guys who are not afraid to throw out opinions, and JB especially takes a lot of crap from guys like me and does it with good humor. I can appreciate that. On technical stuff, obviously I can't hang with them, so I just listen. But on the other stuff like whether you need to be proficient at "long range" to be a "complete hunter," I will speak my mind. I don't think a little disagreement on stuff like that is remarkable.

At least it's better than "which cartridge is best" threads.

My pops is one of those such guys. Know's little to not a whole lot about ballistics and other such stuff. Back when I was a younger kid, we were shooting his new to him Browning 30-06. I pleaded with him (I read the gun rags that knew everything) he had to try some Federal Premium's with the 180 Nosler in order to kill everything (used to run 180 Core Lokt's with his old 30-06).. Well, the Federals shot well, he bought a case of the stuff, still has a few boxes left and commenced to taking moose, elk, deer, black bear and everything. We zeroed his rifle at 250 yards, and I don't think he hardly touches the scope from year to year, just takes a shot or two and still commences to killing animals. Great hunter and an excellent trapper. Ballistics talk brings the glazed over look Bob mentioned.

His 30-06 was so effective it was boring to me, so when I had the chance I bought a Model 70 7mm Rem Mag... Little did I know how close both of them were at the ranges we hunted..