Hard to argue with dead. In his hands it looks like it works, in another persons hands it may not be an elk cartridge.
Old news bubba. One thing about it is Wayne VanZwoll is more than just a good writer 
. Put just about any slug in the vitals and you have one dead critter laying on the ground.
. Put just about any slug in the vitals and you have one dead critter laying on the ground.
It certainly wouldn't be my first choice.
Have to say in 28 years of elk hunting the only elk I've seen go that far with a broadsie hit was with a .243 Win at close range.
Kudos to Wayne for getting the job done, not so much for what I consider a stunt.
Have to say in 28 years of elk hunting the only elk I've seen go that far with a broadsie hit was with a .243 Win at close range.
Kudos to Wayne for getting the job done, not so much for what I consider a stunt.
It is a misleading question in my book. It's really a matter of if the hunter is up to making a 600 yd. shot under the conditions present.
Saw a nice 6 pt bull last year. The hunter hit it too far back right at the end of legal light. By the time he found it the next day, it's meat was unedible.
The rifle used was a .300 Magnum. E
Saw a nice 6 pt bull last year. The hunter hit it too far back right at the end of legal light. By the time he found it the next day, it's meat was unedible.
The rifle used was a .300 Magnum. E
Originally Posted by Coyote_Hunter
It certainly wouldn't be my first choice.
Kudos to Wayne for getting the job done, not so much for what I consider a stunt.
Kudos to Wayne for getting the job done, not so much for what I consider a stunt.
For you it would be a stunt. A man has to know his limitations.
For Wayne, not so much a stunt.
Hard To Fault a Man That Can Shoot...Be it a 22LR Or 700 Nitro.
Originally Posted by JohnBurns
Originally Posted by Coyote_Hunter
It certainly wouldn't be my first choice.
Kudos to Wayne for getting the job done, not so much for what I consider a stunt.
Kudos to Wayne for getting the job done, not so much for what I consider a stunt.
For you it would be a stunt. A man has to know his limitations.
For Wayne, not so much a stunt.
"not so much a stunt" or "not a stunt"?
Was it possible to get closer or was the shot taken for the story?
I'm guessing "Yes" on both counts, hope I'm wrong.
Originally Posted by Coyote_Hunter
Originally Posted by JohnBurns
Originally Posted by Coyote_Hunter
It certainly wouldn't be my first choice.
Kudos to Wayne for getting the job done, not so much for what I consider a stunt.
Kudos to Wayne for getting the job done, not so much for what I consider a stunt.
For you it would be a stunt. A man has to know his limitations.
For Wayne, not so much a stunt.
"not so much a stunt" or "not a stunt"?
Was it possible to get closer or was the shot taken for the story?
I'm guessing "Yes" on both counts, hope I'm wrong.
You know if John Burns has anything to do with it, its going to be long range. Wayne probably would have been more than happy to sneak up a little closer even though he is a damn good marksman
I personally believe that caliber is to light for bull elk! If that was the only caliber in a rifle I had, yes I would use it but also use good common sence as to NOT try and shoot an elk at anything over 300 yards with that caliber rifle.
Also let me say this once again, shooting a bull elk at 600 yardss is not piece of cake elk hunters. Only those who practice at that type of yardage should even attempt that kind of a shot. To me a .300 RUM is more in tune for that type of yardage using a 190 or 200 grain bullet. I sure would not attempt that shot with my .338-win mag....not me folks.
Also let me say this once again, shooting a bull elk at 600 yardss is not piece of cake elk hunters. Only those who practice at that type of yardage should even attempt that kind of a shot. To me a .300 RUM is more in tune for that type of yardage using a 190 or 200 grain bullet. I sure would not attempt that shot with my .338-win mag....not me folks.
The universal answer = "It depends on the shooter and the situation.".
JEff
JEff
I think Jeff hit the nail on the head. I have never shot an Elk so that was one of the reasons I asked here. I have had people tell me that a .25-06 is too small at any range (and again this is from someone who has never shot one) to which I say is BS. I always thought a .25-06, .260 and 7mm-08 would be fine to 400 yards and since the 6.5 is a little smaller I was wondering if he was stretching it too far. I am sure someone out there regularly whacks them with a .22-250 AI at 500 plus yards.
Originally Posted by JohnBurns
Originally Posted by Coyote_Hunter
It certainly wouldn't be my first choice.
Kudos to Wayne for getting the job done, not so much for what I consider a stunt.
Kudos to Wayne for getting the job done, not so much for what I consider a stunt.
For you it would be a stunt. A man has to know his limitations.
For Wayne, not so much a stunt.
Clay pigeons at 600 yards are a favorite target of mine. Managed to hit two just before last elk season, one each with my .300 Win Mag and one of my .30-06's, five shots total.
I don't think hitting an elk at 600 is much of a problem.
Originally Posted by pacecars
I think Jeff hit the nail on the head. I have never shot an Elk so that was one of the reasons I asked here. I have had people tell me that a .25-06 is too small at any range (and again this is from someone who has never shot one) to which I say is BS. I always thought a .25-06, .260 and 7mm-08 would be fine to 400 yards and since the 6.5 is a little smaller I was wondering if he was stretching it too far. I am sure someone out there regularly whacks them with a .22-250 AI at 500 plus yards.
I am a little confused because the results are right there on the video.
Shoot a bull elk in the vitals at 600yds with a good bullet in the 6.5 CM and he will fall over dead.
Are we worried that Hornady made up some �Extra Power� ammo for Wayne??
I know some of you guys shoot 600 yards with ease at the range and semi controlled atmospheres..I have seen people do it right here in Idaho but I have also seen them encounter the unseen winds that can and do happen in the deep canyons of idaho.
Anyone who has fought forest fires or fell timber for a period of time will tell you,atleast here,it comes and goes without warning and un noticed until it is upon you.600 yards accross a canyon from the hunter,it can be snowing/raining or semi windy with much different weather than where your at.
Awe heck..Shoot away but don't tell me every 600 yard shot is spot on in true very steep,hunting country.It's fooled more than one fool.
Jayco
Anyone who has fought forest fires or fell timber for a period of time will tell you,atleast here,it comes and goes without warning and un noticed until it is upon you.600 yards accross a canyon from the hunter,it can be snowing/raining or semi windy with much different weather than where your at.
Awe heck..Shoot away but don't tell me every 600 yard shot is spot on in true very steep,hunting country.It's fooled more than one fool.
Jayco
...and it got an exit hole...a nice one at that...at 600 yards. Wayne burns more powder in a year than 99% of the guys on here. He can and will make the shot. It isn't a stunt.
John, he should have used more gun. The evidence is clear....too small of bullet, not enough penetration and a dead elk. Yup, should have used something "up to the task"
Flinch
John, he should have used more gun. The evidence is clear....too small of bullet, not enough penetration and a dead elk. Yup, should have used something "up to the task"
Flinch
"Nope" not only nope but hell nope !
Why tone down the 6.5 (264WM) to the Creedmoor when the 264WM will do all that the Creedmoor can and a lot more with a better trajectory and more energy. 800yrd elk gun? Maybe Wayne could test that on camara. Recoil is mild also.
I am a little confused because the results are right there on the video.
Shoot a bull elk in the vitals at 600yds with a good bullet in the 6.5 CM and he will fall over dead.
Are we worried that Hornady made up some “Extra Power” ammo for Wayne??
[/quote]
No confusion at all. Its kind of like the old "If so-and-so jumped off a bridge would you? argument.
Shoot a bull elk in the vitals at 600yds with a good bullet in the 6.5 CM and he will fall over dead.
Are we worried that Hornady made up some “Extra Power” ammo for Wayne??
[/quote]
No confusion at all. Its kind of like the old "If so-and-so jumped off a bridge would you? argument.
Quote
I am a little confused because the results are right there on the video.
Shoot a bull elk in the vitals at 600yds with a good bullet in the 6.5 CM and he will fall over dead.
Are we worried that Hornady made up some �Extra Power� ammo for Wayne??
Shoot a bull elk in the vitals at 600yds with a good bullet in the 6.5 CM and he will fall over dead.
Are we worried that Hornady made up some �Extra Power� ammo for Wayne??
This video only shows that a very skilled shooter can under the right conditions make a perfect shot and kill an animal at long range. I am really suprised at Wayne doing this, in my coversations with him, he most always promotes getting in as close as possible for his shots. As he also does in his presentations.
Can any hunter do this , nope, will any hunter wait for the broad side shot, nope. What this proves is that it can be done. Can it be done by most, cleanly and ethically, probably not. How many wounded and unrecovered animals will result in a poorly prepared shooter attempting this shot because he saw somone do it on TV. Too many !
Elkman, people that are unethical are always going to be unethical. They will lob bullets and critters, shoot across roads, spray and pray, then walk away. That is just the reality of it all.
Watching a guy make a long range shot on T.V. isn't going to change the way they think. They would have taken that shot no matter what. Why, because they just don't care and animals are just targets. The hunting fields are full of these people and we have all seen them. They brag about how far they shot at a critter, but never go check to see if they hit it. It's too much work. They would rather brag about shooting at it or "hitting" it, than recovering it. Slob hunters are slob hunters and no T.V. show will ever change that. Flinch
Watching a guy make a long range shot on T.V. isn't going to change the way they think. They would have taken that shot no matter what. Why, because they just don't care and animals are just targets. The hunting fields are full of these people and we have all seen them. They brag about how far they shot at a critter, but never go check to see if they hit it. It's too much work. They would rather brag about shooting at it or "hitting" it, than recovering it. Slob hunters are slob hunters and no T.V. show will ever change that. Flinch
Originally Posted by pacecars
No confusion at all. Its kind of like the old "If so-and-so jumped off a bridge would you? argument.
Your question was not about jumping off bridges, it was about the 6.5 and 600yd elk.
You are free to not believe your own lying eyes.
What strikes me as funny is that you seem to doubt what you saw on the video in an effort to cling to old perceptions. You clearly state you have never killed an elk and after watching the video where the 6.5 performs perfectly you still seem to feel it won�t work.
Ego is such a barrier to learning.
If you already know that the 6.5 won�t kill an elk at 600yds and nothing (including a videoed demonstration) will change your mind, then what was the point of the post??
To answer the OP's question, yes. Kind of hard to argue with reality. The real question is, are you a 600yd elk hunter?
I have been hunting big game in Montana since the mid-1960's, and there have always been a bunch of unskilled hunters who figure the purpose of a bolt handle and a bunch of cheap ammo is to fling lead at any visible animal, regardless of range. I have seen this many times over the years, along with the results of such flinging.
The vast majority of these nitwits fling lead not because of any TV show or magazine articles. Probably the major influence is their fathers. I once had a paperboy, all of 13 years old, who told me he shot at a bull elk 700 yards away, with a .257 Roberts and factory round-nosed 117-grain bullets. He had no idea of the range (this was before laser range-finders), and even less idea where to aim. But his father had told him that any time he saw a bull elk to start flinging lead, no matter what the distance.
On another occasion I was walking back to my pickup on a gravel road after a long elk hike, and a pickup pulled up beside me. Inside were a guy in his 50's and his son, maybe 20. The father said they'd "gotten some shooting" that morning, at a bunch of elk 600 yards away. (Again, before rangefinders.) He also said that he used a .300 Winchester Magnum, because "it always knocks them on their ass." And since none of the elk fell on their ass, neither he nor his son bothered to walk over there and look for blood.
Just two examples among many.
Wayne didn't fling lead, he precisely aimed, with a rifle that was capable of putting the bullet in exactly the right place. That's hardly unethical, in fact it might just be a shining example of how to do it right.
As for Wayne normally advocating getting as close as possible, one peculiar thing about being a gun writer is that the general public expects you to have experience in EVERYTHING. Now, if somebody asks a question about long-range hunting, Wayne has some first-hand perspective. Knowing him very well, however, I would guess that he'll now go back to getting closer.
The vast majority of these nitwits fling lead not because of any TV show or magazine articles. Probably the major influence is their fathers. I once had a paperboy, all of 13 years old, who told me he shot at a bull elk 700 yards away, with a .257 Roberts and factory round-nosed 117-grain bullets. He had no idea of the range (this was before laser range-finders), and even less idea where to aim. But his father had told him that any time he saw a bull elk to start flinging lead, no matter what the distance.
On another occasion I was walking back to my pickup on a gravel road after a long elk hike, and a pickup pulled up beside me. Inside were a guy in his 50's and his son, maybe 20. The father said they'd "gotten some shooting" that morning, at a bunch of elk 600 yards away. (Again, before rangefinders.) He also said that he used a .300 Winchester Magnum, because "it always knocks them on their ass." And since none of the elk fell on their ass, neither he nor his son bothered to walk over there and look for blood.
Just two examples among many.
Wayne didn't fling lead, he precisely aimed, with a rifle that was capable of putting the bullet in exactly the right place. That's hardly unethical, in fact it might just be a shining example of how to do it right.
As for Wayne normally advocating getting as close as possible, one peculiar thing about being a gun writer is that the general public expects you to have experience in EVERYTHING. Now, if somebody asks a question about long-range hunting, Wayne has some first-hand perspective. Knowing him very well, however, I would guess that he'll now go back to getting closer.
A shining example of doing it right would be to tell the "general public" and sponsors to go to hell and hunt/write how you always have.
John Burns,
Was the elk shot with the 129 gr Hornady? I guess I expected that you would have loaded some VLD's.
Was the elk shot with the 129 gr Hornady? I guess I expected that you would have loaded some VLD's.
Originally Posted by Mule Deer
As for Wayne normally advocating getting as close as possible, one peculiar thing about being a gun writer is that the general public expects you to have experience in EVERYTHING. Now, if somebody asks a question about long-range hunting, Wayne has some first-hand perspective. Knowing him very well, however, I would guess that he'll now go back to getting closer.
John,
Wayne hunted elk with us again this year down at Milligan Brand in Chama. He used a lever gun (uhggg) and the shot was less than 150yds.
Doubletap,
I set the gun up using the 129gr SST factory load as we wanted to see how factory loads in this caliber performed.
Originally Posted by BuzzH
A shining example of doing it right would be to tell the "general public" and sponsors to go to hell and hunt/write how you always have.
Watching the video it cetainly appears getting closer was an option and that a HUNTER could easily have done so. It also seems to me that the story and video were the primary concern, which makes it a stunt IMHO.
I guess you would call me old school, as I was brought up with the idea that hunting an animal was a task and that task was to get as close as possible in order to place your shot into the vitals.
Most people in my hay day would never shoot over 300 yards at an animal, it just was not considered the correct thing to do. Now days we have better rifle scopes and superior rifles, bullets and even powder to some extent. Also nobody back in those days knew how to hit an animal at 700 or 800 yards, unless they had a magic wond. No one went to school and no scopes or range finders either.
Yes, times have changed and their are hunters who have the skills to pull such a task off using their high dollar tech equipment. I guess very similar to our military sniper, who spend a lot of time in class and hours on the range perfecting thier skills. 30 years ago I would have never guessed that someone could make a shot over a mile and half away. Progress is at our front door and it includes hunting big game also.
Most people in my hay day would never shoot over 300 yards at an animal, it just was not considered the correct thing to do. Now days we have better rifle scopes and superior rifles, bullets and even powder to some extent. Also nobody back in those days knew how to hit an animal at 700 or 800 yards, unless they had a magic wond. No one went to school and no scopes or range finders either.
Yes, times have changed and their are hunters who have the skills to pull such a task off using their high dollar tech equipment. I guess very similar to our military sniper, who spend a lot of time in class and hours on the range perfecting thier skills. 30 years ago I would have never guessed that someone could make a shot over a mile and half away. Progress is at our front door and it includes hunting big game also.
On the 'too light a caliber'....it's interesting as the topic is a 129gr .264 bullet, likely better bc and sd than the 130gr .277 that many never question for game thru elk. JOC did not, though he did use Partitions alot, as you can in the Creedmoor - 125 or 140s.
The round is 'light' though not 'too light' or that elk would not have died.
That said, I agree with many posters above, alot of hunters have no business shooting that far -
"Monkey see what an expert can do (LR video), Monkey thinks he is an expert!" Not so...the arrow does the killing, but the indian makes the shot - thru vitals....or misses vitals and possibly wounding hit.
I also agree, that a perfect scenario by an expert marksman who undoubtedly spent alot of range time learning that one rifle and load combo, and optic, was his key to success. A lesson in the 'beware of the man w/one gun' quote. Learn your gear and apply that knowledge.
YET, Perfect conditions are not always to be had, and caution has to be used when going long. Often shots may have to be passed up, else 'a risky shot' resulted in wounded animals will be a worst case scenario. Most hunt for sport, not survival, so I'd pass on any shot I am not comfortable with taking, unless my life depends on eating that animal.
EVERY hunter/shooter must know their gear, limits, and whether taking a shot is humane/ethical, and if the odds are in good favor....IMHO.
The round is 'light' though not 'too light' or that elk would not have died.
That said, I agree with many posters above, alot of hunters have no business shooting that far -
"Monkey see what an expert can do (LR video), Monkey thinks he is an expert!" Not so...the arrow does the killing, but the indian makes the shot - thru vitals....or misses vitals and possibly wounding hit.
I also agree, that a perfect scenario by an expert marksman who undoubtedly spent alot of range time learning that one rifle and load combo, and optic, was his key to success. A lesson in the 'beware of the man w/one gun' quote. Learn your gear and apply that knowledge.
YET, Perfect conditions are not always to be had, and caution has to be used when going long. Often shots may have to be passed up, else 'a risky shot' resulted in wounded animals will be a worst case scenario. Most hunt for sport, not survival, so I'd pass on any shot I am not comfortable with taking, unless my life depends on eating that animal.
EVERY hunter/shooter must know their gear, limits, and whether taking a shot is humane/ethical, and if the odds are in good favor....IMHO.
Here is the facts directly from Wayne. Why speculate.
Larry, thank you for your note. The long shot with the Creedmoor was unusual for me. Had I not fired that rifle extensively at 500-yard steel, and had conditions not been perfect, I'd have declined the shot. Closer is always better, in my view, but closer wasn't an option in this case. I've passed many opportunities well inside 600 yards! As for the .264 Winchester, I share your fondness! As you know, it's a cartridge with much more potential than is evident in factory ballistics tables. I can drive 140-grain bullets 3,300 fps with no pressure signs from my M70 with 26-inch barrel. It's essentially a 7mm
Remington Magnum with bullets of higher ballistic coefficient. The 6.5 Creedmoor (and .260 Remington and 6.5x55) are all much more pleasant to shoot -- but there's no question the .264 Winchester Magnum has more muscle. Given the proper twist for the barrel, it can also deliver fine accuracy. Best..... Wayne
Larry, thank you for your note. The long shot with the Creedmoor was unusual for me. Had I not fired that rifle extensively at 500-yard steel, and had conditions not been perfect, I'd have declined the shot. Closer is always better, in my view, but closer wasn't an option in this case. I've passed many opportunities well inside 600 yards! As for the .264 Winchester, I share your fondness! As you know, it's a cartridge with much more potential than is evident in factory ballistics tables. I can drive 140-grain bullets 3,300 fps with no pressure signs from my M70 with 26-inch barrel. It's essentially a 7mm
Remington Magnum with bullets of higher ballistic coefficient. The 6.5 Creedmoor (and .260 Remington and 6.5x55) are all much more pleasant to shoot -- but there's no question the .264 Winchester Magnum has more muscle. Given the proper twist for the barrel, it can also deliver fine accuracy. Best..... Wayne
I am a person, hunter who has always believed in using a heavy bullet on large game animals. However, the video to me is more about knowing your rifle and how to use your scope first off, then the next is sheer "marksmanship" and I damn well know that not just anybody with a rifle and scope in that video can pull that kind of a long range shot off to kill a bull elk. One must be a superior rifle shot, not a Johnny come lately with his or her gear. I admire great marksmanship simply put! It makes no difference if it is a coyote or a 7 x 7 Bull Elk.
264wm �
Thank you for the explanation. The video doesn�t show the time you spent practicing with that rifle or your willingness to hold off in less than perfect conditions.
After running the ballistics, I can't say I wouldn't have taken the shot under similar (perfect) circumstances, given adequate practice with the rifle and load. I do think the range was at the max limit at which I'd take the shot under any circumstances.
Thank you for the explanation. The video doesn�t show the time you spent practicing with that rifle or your willingness to hold off in less than perfect conditions.
After running the ballistics, I can't say I wouldn't have taken the shot under similar (perfect) circumstances, given adequate practice with the rifle and load. I do think the range was at the max limit at which I'd take the shot under any circumstances.
There was a series of articles a few years ago in one of the magazines (I cannot remember which) that four or five outdoor writers went through a series of tests involving about all sorts of shooting "deer targets" under various hunting conditions. I do remember Wayne Van Zwoll being a particicipant. One of the test was to shoot at a deer target 400 yards away. Each writer could pick his rifle/scope combo. He chose a Winchester M70 (pre-'64 I believe) in 270 WCF and a fixed 2.5x scope. He was the ONLY one that hit the first shot in the vitals and I believe all of his consecutivie shots. This was prone off of a back pack. Now some could argue about what this has to do with shooting and elk 600 yards away with whatever tackle and so on. Others might say, this guy has his stuff wired tight. I have no illusions of trying this as well....I know I just ain't wired as tight.
I guess it was around 15 years ago or so, I was reading an article written my Mr. Carmicheal, who stated that shooting elk at over 400 yards was mostly "Barber Shop BS" in fact. I never gave it much thought as back then I never heard of anyone taking deer or elk at 600,700 or 800 yards.
All I can say is if you have the skills and the proper gear to go along with such a shot, the more power to you. I am not going to hmmmm or haw about hunting ethics or what is or what is not. I am simple amazed at someone who can hit a target at those yardages weather it be steel plate or a big bull elk. My hat is off to those marksmen hunters indeed.
All I can say is if you have the skills and the proper gear to go along with such a shot, the more power to you. I am not going to hmmmm or haw about hunting ethics or what is or what is not. I am simple amazed at someone who can hit a target at those yardages weather it be steel plate or a big bull elk. My hat is off to those marksmen hunters indeed.
Mr. Carmichael didn't have the equipment/range finders, data, array of bullets or the desire to use them beyond 400 yards. There are many "gun writers" and gun "cranks" that feel that way. Good for them. Just like many people feel that hunting animals with any kind of firearm isn't "challenging". Some only hunt with archery equipment and feel gun hunting is unethical. I know many of them. I also know several others that think ONLY rifle hunting should be legal and bow and muzzle loader hunting should be banned. We all have our likes and dislikes or fee "our way" is the only way or best way.
There are FAR more animals wounded and killed at well under 100 yards each year than at long range. So should we outlaw short range hunting? It is all in how you look at it. Nobody's method is wrong or right. If a guy can get his animal with a bow every year, great, more power to him. If another guy chooses to knock his animals over at 800 yards and has the skills, great, more power to him as well.
There are slob archery hunters, muzzle loader hunters and rifle hunters. That is just the way it is and nobody's opinion is going to change that. We all choose to do things differently, with different weapons and ranges, which is just fine. We shouldn't cut a man down for developing the skills and having the knowledge and equipment to get it done right. Flinch
There are FAR more animals wounded and killed at well under 100 yards each year than at long range. So should we outlaw short range hunting? It is all in how you look at it. Nobody's method is wrong or right. If a guy can get his animal with a bow every year, great, more power to him. If another guy chooses to knock his animals over at 800 yards and has the skills, great, more power to him as well.
There are slob archery hunters, muzzle loader hunters and rifle hunters. That is just the way it is and nobody's opinion is going to change that. We all choose to do things differently, with different weapons and ranges, which is just fine. We shouldn't cut a man down for developing the skills and having the knowledge and equipment to get it done right.
Flinch
Couldn't agree with you more. Every hunter has individual skill levels. This year is a good year for me because I am recovered from back surgery and I drew a milti season deer tage here in WA. That means I can hunt archery, muzzle loader and modern fire arm seasons untill I bag my deer. So I can hunt deer from Sept 1 thru the end of Dec. I have never taken anything over 400 yrds or tried even though I am confident that with a little practice I could as I have shot 800 yrd metal targets with a M1 Garand sniper rifle. I have been told buy a forum member that I am reckless and irresponsable for making head shots on coyotes, deer, elk and bear.
Shooting animals at 600+ yards isn't hunting. It takes alot of practice, ammo, and money to hit at those ranges consistantly, but don't call it hunting.
Originally Posted by Tonk
I guess you would call me old school, as I was brought up with the idea that hunting an animal was a task and that task was to get as close as possible in order to place your shot into the vitals.
Most people in my hay day would never shoot over 300 yards at an animal, it just was not considered the correct thing to do. Now days we have better rifle scopes and superior rifles, bullets and even powder to some extent. Also nobody back in those days knew how to hit an animal at 700 or 800 yards, unless they had a magic wond. No one went to school and no scopes or range finders either.
Yes, times have changed and their are hunters who have the skills to pull such a task off using their high dollar tech equipment. I guess very similar to our military sniper, who spend a lot of time in class and hours on the range perfecting thier skills. 30 years ago I would have never guessed that someone could make a shot over a mile and half away. Progress is at our front door and it includes hunting big game also.
Most people in my hay day would never shoot over 300 yards at an animal, it just was not considered the correct thing to do. Now days we have better rifle scopes and superior rifles, bullets and even powder to some extent. Also nobody back in those days knew how to hit an animal at 700 or 800 yards, unless they had a magic wond. No one went to school and no scopes or range finders either.
Yes, times have changed and their are hunters who have the skills to pull such a task off using their high dollar tech equipment. I guess very similar to our military sniper, who spend a lot of time in class and hours on the range perfecting thier skills. 30 years ago I would have never guessed that someone could make a shot over a mile and half away. Progress is at our front door and it includes hunting big game also.
You think you are old school, but evidently you've never heard of Keith....
Originally Posted by dmsbandit
Shooting animals at 600+ yards isn't hunting. It takes alot of practice, ammo, and money to hit at those ranges consistantly, but don't call it hunting.
Ok, what is hunting? 200 yards and less with a scoped deer rifle?
Quote
Shooting animals at 600+ yards isn't hunting. It takes alot of practice, ammo, and money to hit at those ranges consistantly, but don't call it hunting.
It never ceases to amuse me to see these stupid comments that show up here about once a year.
"Killing game at at 40 yards isn't hunting.....",said the guy with the atlatl to the guy with the new long bow.....
"Shooting game at 250-400 yards isn't hunting....."said the guy with the iron sighted 45-70 to the other guy with the 270 Winchester and 2.5x Lyman Alaskan.....
"Shooting game at 250-400 yards isn't hunting....."said the guy with the iron sighted 45-70 to the other guy with the 270 Winchester and 2.5x Lyman Alaskan.....
"Shooting game at 35 yards is TOUGH!" said the guy with a 7X57.
Originally Posted by BobinNH
"Killing game at at 40 yards isn't hunting.....",said the guy with the atlatl to the guy with the new long bow.....
"Shooting game at 250-400 yards isn't hunting....."said the guy with the iron sighted 45-70 to the other guy with the 270 Winchester and 2.5x Lyman Alaskan.....
"Shooting game at 250-400 yards isn't hunting....."said the guy with the iron sighted 45-70 to the other guy with the 270 Winchester and 2.5x Lyman Alaskan.....
Originally Posted by Royce
"Shooting game at 35 yards is TOUGH!" said the guy with a 7X57.
That'll leave a mark...
Dober
Originally Posted by rost495
Originally Posted by dmsbandit
Shooting animals at 600+ yards isn't hunting. It takes alot of practice, ammo, and money to hit at those ranges consistantly, but don't call it hunting.
Ok, what is hunting? 200 yards and less with a scoped deer rifle?
In that video, the elk was used as nothing more than a living target to prove a cartridge/rifle combo. Thye clearly could have closed the distance to at least 300-400yds, but chose to sit on the bluff and use the elk to sell a rifle.
That's not hunting.
Originally Posted by dmsbandit
Originally Posted by rost495
Originally Posted by dmsbandit
Shooting animals at 600+ yards isn't hunting. It takes alot of practice, ammo, and money to hit at those ranges consistantly, but don't call it hunting.
Ok, what is hunting? 200 yards and less with a scoped deer rifle?
In that video, the elk was used as nothing more than a living target to prove a cartridge/rifle combo. Thye clearly could have closed the distance to at least 300-400yds, but chose to sit on the bluff and use the elk to sell a rifle.
That's not hunting.
Neither is any gun hunting. Bowhunting is the only real hunting, those that use a rifle as a crutch for any distance are just humoring themselves to be hunters.
Bottom line WTF do you care? I"ve said if its legal, WGAF anyway or why should they? Just to feel superior to someone else? Its crap like this that divides the sport and lets the antis feed freely.
I"m almost surprised your handle isn't dsmf instead.
I also bowhunt, muzzleloader hunt, hunt with open sights, hunt with scopes, hunt with handguns, and rifles.
If ethics and methods don't matter, why does B&C and P&Y place limits on the manner and place of taking an animal?
If ethics and methods don't matter, why does B&C and P&Y place limits on the manner and place of taking an animal?
Originally Posted by 264wm
Couldn't agree with you more. Every hunter has individual skill levels. This year is a good year for me because I am recovered from back surgery and I drew a milti season deer tage here in WA. That means I can hunt archery, muzzle loader and modern fire arm seasons untill I bag my deer. So I can hunt deer from Sept 1 thru the end of Dec. I have never taken anything over 400 yrds or tried even though I am confident that with a little practice I could as I have shot 800 yrd metal targets with a M1 Garand sniper rifle. I have been told buy a forum member that I am reckless and irresponsable for making head shots on coyotes, deer, elk and bear.
What?? I thought I was being ethical and responsible, they never knew what his them.....yote 176 yds later LRF, #1 Ruger Kepplinger trigger, 6BR, 105 Amax.....never complained after I squeezed....not even a whimper.....as the doe at a mere 45 yds...at dusk in woods so as not to risk possible losing or trailing a deer w/a 'target bullet' (same gun/load) I was 'shot placement conscious' and did my due diligence
They were both facing me, and I imagine they saw a bright light as they transported into another world. Quick, humane, what not to like? Granted, THESE shots have to be selected, but when everything is right, they are effective....and efficient.![[Linked Image]](http://i573.photobucket.com/albums/ss178/65BR/HuntWills110706024.jpg)
![[Linked Image]](http://i573.photobucket.com/albums/ss178/65BR/HuntWills120606006.jpg)
BR: Nice shot 
My young man, Elmer Keith I did know and I'll never forget his ability with a .44 magnum pistol shooting at big game animals!
I have several articles that Elmer wrote years ago, I do have a fairly decent library of writers, such as Peter H. Capstick, Finn Aaagard, Ruark, Col. Adkins, Jack O'Conner, Skeeter Skelton, John Wooter, Jack Lott, John Lachuk, Bob Milek, Payton Miller, Rick Jamison, Bob Hagel, Pete Bello, Grits Gresham, Jeff Cooper, Bill Jordan, John Barness, Warren Page, Craig Boddington and Jim Carmicheal. I dare say, that none of these writer hunters would or did shoot 600, 700 or 800 yards at any big game animals.
I have several articles that Elmer wrote years ago, I do have a fairly decent library of writers, such as Peter H. Capstick, Finn Aaagard, Ruark, Col. Adkins, Jack O'Conner, Skeeter Skelton, John Wooter, Jack Lott, John Lachuk, Bob Milek, Payton Miller, Rick Jamison, Bob Hagel, Pete Bello, Grits Gresham, Jeff Cooper, Bill Jordan, John Barness, Warren Page, Craig Boddington and Jim Carmicheal. I dare say, that none of these writer hunters would or did shoot 600, 700 or 800 yards at any big game animals.
Originally Posted by Tonk
.......... Peter H. Capstick, Finn Aaagard, Ruark, Col. Adkins, Jack O'Conner, Skeeter Skelton, John Wooter, Jack Lott, John Lachuk, Bob Milek, Payton Miller, Rick Jamison, Bob Hagel, Pete Bello, Grits Gresham, Jeff Cooper, Bill Jordan, John Barness, Warren Page, Craig Boddington and Jim Carmicheal.....
Who?
Originally Posted by dmsbandit
I also bowhunt, muzzleloader hunt, hunt with open sights, hunt with scopes, hunt with handguns, and rifles.
If ethics and methods don't matter, why does B&C and P&Y place limits on the manner and place of taking an animal?
If ethics and methods don't matter, why does B&C and P&Y place limits on the manner and place of taking an animal?
So DMS tell us what shots you will take? And where all do you hunt on a regular basis?
You do stand hunting? If so, if a deer is bumped and runs by will you shoot it?
How do you feel about running shots on whitey's?
What kind of elk hunting experience do you have?
Do you hunt guided and or DIY?
When hunting yotes (if you do) do you use dogs, a mouth call, an E call?
Your mzl loader a traditional or an in line? And with round ball or what, and with open sights or scoped?
Bow, recurve, long bow or compound? Fingers or release? Sights or instinctive?
Do you fish? If so with bait or fly fish only?
Just trying to get a feel for what your ways are is all.
Dober
Good luck. I don't think he'll get the point though.
Originally Posted by Tonk
My young man, Elmer Keith I did know and I'll never forget his ability with a .44 magnum pistol shooting at big game animals!
I have several articles that Elmer wrote years ago, I do have a fairly decent library of writers, such as Peter H. Capstick, Finn Aaagard, Ruark, Col. Adkins, Jack O'Conner, Skeeter Skelton, John Wooter, Jack Lott, John Lachuk, Bob Milek, Payton Miller, Rick Jamison, Bob Hagel, Pete Bello, Grits Gresham, Jeff Cooper, Bill Jordan, John Barness, Warren Page, Craig Boddington and Jim Carmicheal. I dare say, that none of these writer hunters would or did shoot 600, 700 or 800 yards at any big game animals.
I have several articles that Elmer wrote years ago, I do have a fairly decent library of writers, such as Peter H. Capstick, Finn Aaagard, Ruark, Col. Adkins, Jack O'Conner, Skeeter Skelton, John Wooter, Jack Lott, John Lachuk, Bob Milek, Payton Miller, Rick Jamison, Bob Hagel, Pete Bello, Grits Gresham, Jeff Cooper, Bill Jordan, John Barness, Warren Page, Craig Boddington and Jim Carmicheal. I dare say, that none of these writer hunters would or did shoot 600, 700 or 800 yards at any big game animals.
Could it be that none of the others listed had the ability? Long Range ability isn't behind every bush....Yet given the right situation and conditions a clay target is toast at 600 every shot that comes out of the barrel. I"m pretty much figuring thats dead every time....
Tonk,
There are at least a few writers on that list who could (and would be willing to) kill a big game animal at 600 yards. In fact I know that John Wootters shot at least one animal at around 600--before there were laser rangefinders and all the rest of the stuff that helps a lot these days.
There are at least a few writers on that list who could (and would be willing to) kill a big game animal at 600 yards. In fact I know that John Wootters shot at least one animal at around 600--before there were laser rangefinders and all the rest of the stuff that helps a lot these days.
I greedily take what the mountain gives me without complaining, whether it's 40 yards or 600. As long as it's within my abilities, I just say "thanks for that", and start packing meat.
Originally Posted by Mule Deer
Tonk,
There are at least a few writers on that list who could (and would be willing to) kill a big game animal at 600 yards. In fact I know that John Wootters shot at least one animal at around 600--before there were laser rangefinders and all the rest of the stuff that helps a lot these days.
There are at least a few writers on that list who could (and would be willing to) kill a big game animal at 600 yards. In fact I know that John Wootters shot at least one animal at around 600--before there were laser rangefinders and all the rest of the stuff that helps a lot these days.
.....And Warren Page wrote of doing it at least a couple of times on elk,and on a Kudu in Africa as well. Also O'Connor with that punk 270
and John Jobson with a 270 on a big Alaskan-Yukon bull moose....Elmer was also not above stretching things with the 300H&H or the 280 Dubiel.
Originally Posted by rost495
Good luck. I don't think he'll get the point though.
No, you don't get it. In that video, THAT elk was shot TO SELL A GUN and cartridge. People who do that sort of thing are not people to be looked up to. They are no different than the slob hunters that get all the bad press and they do more to hurt hunting than help it.
I wonder what else in life you have no problems with, "because it's legal"? Should 14 yr olds be marrying 40 yr olds? Just because something is legal, doesn't mean it should be promoted.
Originally Posted by Mark R Dobrenski
Originally Posted by dmsbandit
I also bowhunt, muzzleloader hunt, hunt with open sights, hunt with scopes, hunt with handguns, and rifles.
If ethics and methods don't matter, why does B&C and P&Y place limits on the manner and place of taking an animal?
If ethics and methods don't matter, why does B&C and P&Y place limits on the manner and place of taking an animal?
So DMS tell us what shots you will take? And where all do you hunt on a regular basis? New York and North Carolina
You do stand hunting? [Yes] If so, if a deer is bumped and runs by will you shoot it? I have and will shoot moving deer.
How do you feel about running shots on whitey's? In the woods of New York, it's not uncommon. It's no different than shooting a duck or goose on the fly.
What kind of elk hunting experience do you have? None
Do you hunt guided and or DIY? Semi-Guided in NC, on my own in NY
When hunting yotes (if you do) do you use dogs, a mouth call, an E call? I shoot them while small game hunting and deer hunting. No calls or dogs used.
Your mzl loader a traditional or an in line? And with round ball or what, and with open sights or scoped? Yes to both. Savage MKII with 3-9x40, and T/C Renegade with patched round ball.
Bow, recurve, long bow or compound? Fingers or release? Sights or instinctive? 70-80 pound draw weight Compound with fingers or release with sights, and 60% letoff.
Do you fish? If so with bait or fly fish only? Not lately, but spincast fish with worms and lures depending on the fish.
Just trying to get a feel for what your ways are is all.
Dober
Originally Posted by dmsbandit
Originally Posted by rost495
Good luck. I don't think he'll get the point though.
No, you don't get it. In that video, THAT elk was shot TO SELL A GUN and cartridge. People who do that sort of thing are not people to be looked up to. They are no different than the slob hunters that get all the bad press and they do more to hurt hunting than help it.
dms: Not to disparage,but don't you think you're splitting the hairs kinda fine here?
I mean,let's face it.....when the State of NY offers you a seperate ML tag, they are "merchandising" something and the "killing" is part of it....Nosler, leupold, Ruger, Hornady, Swaro.....all of them,have promotional efforts in TV shows, magazine adds,gunwriter reviews,etc in which people are hunting and using their products in a demonstrable fashion to merchandise their wares and demonstrate their value to hunters....I have no doubt these folks are actually "hunting",and those animals are killed with the sale of certain products being the consequence.
I really fail to see how GB Precision and Wayne VZ somehow sunk to new levels of moral depravation because they killed the elk at 600 yards;demonstrating what a GB rifle and a 6.5 CM were capable of in skilled hands(?).....would it have been "OK" if WVZ had shot it at 200 yards instead?
I notice you shoot moving game....nothing wrong with that, if a guy knows how.Hitting moving game is a skill set just like LR shooting;it must be tempered by knowing when to hold off,and is as much a part of the reality of hunting eastern thickets as LR shooting is in the more open terrain of the West.
In that regard, it is much the same with LR shooting.....there are those skilled at it...and those who aren't due to inclination, lack of opportunity,etc,but the best of them understand what they are doing...and are good enough at it that they fully understand when "not" to do it.
Originally Posted by dmsbandit
Originally Posted by rost495
Good luck. I don't think he'll get the point though.
No, you don't get it. In that video, THAT elk was shot TO SELL A GUN and cartridge. People who do that sort of thing are not people to be looked up to. They are no different than the slob hunters that get all the bad press and they do more to hurt hunting than help it.
I wonder what else in life you have no problems with, "because it's legal"? Should 14 yr olds be marrying 40 yr olds? Just because something is legal, doesn't mean it should be promoted.
14 year olds can marry in NY?
You are dealing with ethics in your head. Ethics are different for everyone. Legality has to be followed by everyone. BIG difference there.
My ethics may say you are a slob because you don't use a handmade bow and shoot instinctively like I do. But I long ago realized I was wrong. And therefore as long as no laws are broken....
BTW I 'm not even close to seeing how that can be a slob hunter. Easy chip shot for those that shoot. Bang. Dead. Big deal.
DMS you must be a slob hunter sitting in your tree stand waiting for a driven deer to come so close you cant miss. Why a real hunter would lung out of that stand with knife clenched in teeth bulldog that 10 point and slit his neck bleeding him out and not ruined a oz of meat. Yeeeee Hawwww
Maybe you should come out west and try to sneak on deer or elk on the flat land or real mountians. It can be done but takes a whole lot more hunting skill than sitting on your can in a tree stand you bought at wally world be a man and climb that tree and sit on a limb. My point is don't through stones if you live in a glass house. I respect all methods of hunting and each to there own method as long as they are legal and safe.
Maybe you should come out west and try to sneak on deer or elk on the flat land or real mountians. It can be done but takes a whole lot more hunting skill than sitting on your can in a tree stand you bought at wally world be a man and climb that tree and sit on a limb. My point is don't through stones if you live in a glass house. I respect all methods of hunting and each to there own method as long as they are legal and safe.
Originally Posted by 264wm
Here is the facts directly from Wayne. Why speculate.
Larry, thank you for your note. The long shot with the Creedmoor was unusual for me. Had I not fired that rifle extensively at 500-yard steel, and had conditions not been perfect, I'd have declined the shot. Closer is always better, in my view, but closer wasn't an option in this case. �. Best..... Wayne
Larry, thank you for your note. The long shot with the Creedmoor was unusual for me. Had I not fired that rifle extensively at 500-yard steel, and had conditions not been perfect, I'd have declined the shot. Closer is always better, in my view, but closer wasn't an option in this case. �. Best..... Wayne
I don�t really care that Wayne took the shot, I might have done the same myself under similar circumstances. In spite of Wayne�s claims that �closer wasn't an option in this case �, however, repeated viewing of the video fails to provide adequate clues as to why this was the case as there were certainly a plentitude of trees and sage for cover.
While Wayne might have been able to get closer, the problem might well have been to drag along the 3-4 people accompanying him without spooking the elk. Given what is visible in the video, I can�t shake the feeling that the decision to take the shot at 600 yards was made primarily for the sake of the video, its promotional value and the stories that could be written about the experience. One has to ask - isn�t that what they were all there for?
Perhaps Wayne has physical issues at the time that prevented his getting closer? I�ve been there and could understand that reason. Perhaps there was a concern that a suitable shooing position would not be available closer in, although that seems unlikely. I can also understand the promotional value of a 600 yard shot versus a shot at 200-300 yards and can�t help but think the difference was the major factor in the decision making.
John Burns or Wayne, you were there � tell me I�m wrong. Why wasn�t it possible to get closer?
I have to agree with Coyote Hunter. It looks to me like they could of gotten closer. Growing up, we used to shoot at targets long range, and shoot a lot, so that you were ready for any shot available. That being said, I was always taught to get as close as possible, because the further away you are, the more that can go wrong, such as the animal taking a step as you squeeze off the shot, a gust of wind, another animal moving in the way, etc.
So obviously Wayne was comfortable with the shot and made a good shot, but it looks like he could of gotten a lot closer and eliminated a few more variables in the shot.
So obviously Wayne was comfortable with the shot and made a good shot, but it looks like he could of gotten a lot closer and eliminated a few more variables in the shot.
Originally Posted by 264wm
DMS you must be a slob hunter sitting in your tree stand waiting for a driven deer to come so close you cant miss. Why a real hunter would lung out of that stand with knife clenched in teeth bulldog that 10 point and slit his neck bleeding him out and not ruined a oz of meat. Yeeeee Hawwww
Maybe you should come out west and try to sneak on deer or elk on the flat land or real mountians. It can be done but takes a whole lot more hunting skill than sitting on your can in a tree stand you bought at wally world be a man and climb that tree and sit on a limb. My point is don't through stones if you live in a glass house. I respect all methods of hunting and each to there own method as long as they are legal and safe.
Maybe you should come out west and try to sneak on deer or elk on the flat land or real mountians. It can be done but takes a whole lot more hunting skill than sitting on your can in a tree stand you bought at wally world be a man and climb that tree and sit on a limb. My point is don't through stones if you live in a glass house. I respect all methods of hunting and each to there own method as long as they are legal and safe.
I've probably killed more deer still-hunting than stand hunting. Hunting on a stand doesn't mean you're having animals driven to you. I can and have killed deer and other critters in numerous fashions. Drives, stand hunting, spot-n-stalk, still-hunting, in the rain, in the snow, hot weather, cold weather, frozen ground, dry ground. Killing Shots have been from 20feet to over 250yds [offhand].
Maybe that's why I've filled my freezer every year except one since 1984 and only lost 2 deer in all that time.
Again, I'll greedily give up a few yards in favour of a better and more steady shooting position. Perhaps this was a factor here...
I wonder how many guys have tried those long shots(600+) and found out because of unseen winds or this or that,it didn't work and crippled or lost there animal?
We will never here those tales,will we?
Jayco
We will never here those tales,will we?
Jayco
Well LOGCUTTER, I am one of those 650 yard shooters! Yep, I tried hitting an elk once back in 1962 with a .270 Winchester. Never had a range finder, just going off the land marks. I used a straight 6 x 40 Weaver scope in those days. My rifle was zeroed in at 200 yards dead on the bullseye. I was using the 130 grain bullet.
I didn't know squat about ballistics either! I figured if I aimed somewhere about 2 feet over him I would nail it smack dab in the heart. I remember I fired several times and that bull just trotted around a little with its head up smelling the air. I never came real close to the animal, I was hitting low I found out later. I was told by an older hunter that I would have had to aim 5 ft or more above its backside. Ummmmmm how could that be I thought to myself.
I didn't know squat about ballistics either! I figured if I aimed somewhere about 2 feet over him I would nail it smack dab in the heart. I remember I fired several times and that bull just trotted around a little with its head up smelling the air. I never came real close to the animal, I was hitting low I found out later. I was told by an older hunter that I would have had to aim 5 ft or more above its backside. Ummmmmm how could that be I thought to myself.
"Killing Shots have been from 20feet to over 250yds [offhand]."
Off hand shots at running game at 250 yards is a stunt and unethical. I like how you had to throw in the "offhand". Talk about a bragart and stunt shooter. You were doing nothing more than using that living animal as a target. You did it for no other reason than to brag, just like you are now. Why didn't you get a rest? How many have you wounded shooting off hand? You probably don't know, because they didn't drop at the shot. Now the shoe is on the other foot. Flinch
Off hand shots at running game at 250 yards is a stunt and unethical. I like how you had to throw in the "offhand". Talk about a bragart and stunt shooter. You were doing nothing more than using that living animal as a target. You did it for no other reason than to brag, just like you are now. Why didn't you get a rest? How many have you wounded shooting off hand? You probably don't know, because they didn't drop at the shot. Now the shoe is on the other foot.
FlinchOriginally Posted by logcutter
I wonder how many guys have tried those long shots(600+) and found out because of unseen winds or this or that,it didn't work and crippled or lost there animal?
We will never here those tales,will we?
Jayco
We will never here those tales,will we?
Jayco
I dunno, it's never happened to me.
When it comes to longer-range shots, I try to find my shooting weaknesses on steel, and then fix them and become proficient, before trying such shots on game.
Not exactly DRT.
I enjoyed the video and I am impressed by the rifle but it didn�t make me want to run out and swap what I�m using now.
I have huge respect for Wayne but that they did this as a promotion creeps me out a little.
Is there like a trend now toward light calibers at long range? It seems like it invites trouble.
I enjoyed the video and I am impressed by the rifle but it didn�t make me want to run out and swap what I�m using now.
I have huge respect for Wayne but that they did this as a promotion creeps me out a little.
Is there like a trend now toward light calibers at long range? It seems like it invites trouble.
Originally Posted by Flinch
"Killing Shots have been from 20feet to over 250yds [offhand]."
Off hand shots at running game at 250 yards is a stunt and unethical. I like how you had to throw in the "offhand". Talk about a bragart and stunt shooter. You were doing nothing more than using that living animal as a target. You did it for no other reason than to brag, just like you are now. Why didn't you get a rest? How many have you wounded shooting off hand? You probably don't know, because they didn't drop at the shot. Now the shoe is on the other foot. Flinch
Off hand shots at running game at 250 yards is a stunt and unethical. I like how you had to throw in the "offhand". Talk about a bragart and stunt shooter. You were doing nothing more than using that living animal as a target. You did it for no other reason than to brag, just like you are now. Why didn't you get a rest? How many have you wounded shooting off hand? You probably don't know, because they didn't drop at the shot. Now the shoe is on the other foot.
FlinchThis is almost as bad as manufacturing a story about a well known person in the hunting industry and posting it as if its factual information on a public message board and worded in a way to turn people away from the mans business. And then, when called to provide any sort of fact to the outlandish BS story that you made up you decide to go back and edit all of your posts instead of being a man about it and apologizing for being a dumbass. Yeah Flinch, your the right guy to "call people out" on ethics issues. GFY
Drummond
I am a little amused at the notion that getting closer was a good option on that shot.
1. We were on a ridge that had no cover to move down to the level of the elk.
2. There were elk within 300yds of us and moving down the hill would have unquestionably spooked the herd.
3. The elk were in head high sage and there was only one elk in a group of 35 that Wayne could shoot.
4. New Mexico shooting hours end at sunset and when Wayne shot there was only about 8 Min of legal hunting time left.
5. The wind was very low and unpredictable and the odds of not getting busted by one of the 35 or so noses in the valley would be a long shot indeed.
I really do find it interesting that a few would watch the video and conclude the smart thing would be to try and climb down a bare ridge into head high sage to attempt to sort out one bull in a herd of 35.
What kind of shot would there have been at 300yds in that tall sage??
Seems simpler to use the terrain, prone position and lack of wind to your advantage and simply shoot the bull.
Now I personally would have shot from there just because I like to do that kind of thing, but I promise you Wayne really would have preferred to get closer if there was any reasonable chance, but those that have much elk hunting experience can see the best option was shoot or pass for the evening and not blow the herd out of the country on a bad stalk where the elk have all the advantages.
The closer is always better is a silly argument because it always applies until we actually make contact with the bull with our muzzle. Until that point you could always get closer.
Real hunters understand you simply stalk to the best situation and take the shot or pass based on your proven abilities. Some guys have more range than other guys because they work harder and are more dedicated to improving their abilities.
Wayne works pretty hard and is not your average Joe hunter and his shooting skill reflects that effort.
1. We were on a ridge that had no cover to move down to the level of the elk.
2. There were elk within 300yds of us and moving down the hill would have unquestionably spooked the herd.
3. The elk were in head high sage and there was only one elk in a group of 35 that Wayne could shoot.
4. New Mexico shooting hours end at sunset and when Wayne shot there was only about 8 Min of legal hunting time left.
5. The wind was very low and unpredictable and the odds of not getting busted by one of the 35 or so noses in the valley would be a long shot indeed.
I really do find it interesting that a few would watch the video and conclude the smart thing would be to try and climb down a bare ridge into head high sage to attempt to sort out one bull in a herd of 35.
What kind of shot would there have been at 300yds in that tall sage??
Seems simpler to use the terrain, prone position and lack of wind to your advantage and simply shoot the bull.
Now I personally would have shot from there just because I like to do that kind of thing, but I promise you Wayne really would have preferred to get closer if there was any reasonable chance, but those that have much elk hunting experience can see the best option was shoot or pass for the evening and not blow the herd out of the country on a bad stalk where the elk have all the advantages.
The closer is always better is a silly argument because it always applies until we actually make contact with the bull with our muzzle. Until that point you could always get closer.
Real hunters understand you simply stalk to the best situation and take the shot or pass based on your proven abilities. Some guys have more range than other guys because they work harder and are more dedicated to improving their abilities.
Wayne works pretty hard and is not your average Joe hunter and his shooting skill reflects that effort.
Originally Posted by Flinch
"Killing Shots have been from 20feet to over 250yds [offhand]."
Off hand shots at running game at 250 yards is a stunt and unethical. I like how you had to throw in the "offhand". Talk about a bragart and stunt shooter. You were doing nothing more than using that living animal as a target. You did it for no other reason than to brag, just like you are now. Why didn't you get a rest? How many have you wounded shooting off hand? You probably don't know, because they didn't drop at the shot. Now the shoe is on the other foot. Flinch
Off hand shots at running game at 250 yards is a stunt and unethical. I like how you had to throw in the "offhand". Talk about a bragart and stunt shooter. You were doing nothing more than using that living animal as a target. You did it for no other reason than to brag, just like you are now. Why didn't you get a rest? How many have you wounded shooting off hand? You probably don't know, because they didn't drop at the shot. Now the shoe is on the other foot.
FlinchWho said the deer was running?
As I said, I've only lost 2 deer in nearly 30yrs of hunting. I know how to track and trail deer. I grew up hunting the Adirondack Mountains with my father. I was hardly big enough to follow him thru the deep snow when I started learning about hunting.Hayfields don't have trees to rest the gun on. Incase you where wondering, I practice with my 22LR bolt gun at 200yds OFFHAND at a 10" steel plate.
Originally Posted by dmsbandit
[Hayfields don't have trees to rest the gun on. Incase you where wondering, I practice with my 22LR bolt gun at 200yds OFFHAND at a 10" steel plate.
I have a sneaking suspicion that Wayne could shoot better at 600yds prone than you could offhand at 200yds.
Just my guess.
Hint. I have personally seen Wayne hit Berger bullet boxes at 500yds from prone with just a sling (got the video too). And not just once.
Seen him shoot at a mile too. Seen him shoot a lever gun to 600yds and he darn sure could have killed that bull with that gun. Got all that video also.
Guys who work hard can do things other cannot do and should not try. Just the facts of life.
Well said John!
Some people just gotta try to micro mgt a game in which they never even set foot on the court on...
Or as Bobby Knight once said "I've got a guy that with 2 seconds left can kick a field goal from 63 yds out, and I've got a guy who with a full count and bottom of the 9th of the last game in the world series and with bases loaded can grip it and wrip it to win the game, and I've got a guy who can step to the free throw line with no time left and hit two to win the NCAA, only problem is to get the SOB to put down his beer and dog and come out of the stands and do it....
Dober
Some people just gotta try to micro mgt a game in which they never even set foot on the court on...
Or as Bobby Knight once said "I've got a guy that with 2 seconds left can kick a field goal from 63 yds out, and I've got a guy who with a full count and bottom of the 9th of the last game in the world series and with bases loaded can grip it and wrip it to win the game, and I've got a guy who can step to the free throw line with no time left and hit two to win the NCAA, only problem is to get the SOB to put down his beer and dog and come out of the stands and do it....
Dober
A little off topic, but that is a great quote Mark.
Originally Posted by Mark R Dobrenski
Well said John!
Some people just gotta try to micro mgt a game in which they never even set foot on the court on...
Or as Bobby Knight once said "I've got a guy that with 2 seconds left can kick a field goal from 63 yds out, and I've got a guy who with a full count and bottom of the 9th of the last game in the world series and with bases loaded can grip it and wrip it to win the game, and I've got a guy who can step to the free throw line with no time left and hit two to win the NCAA, only problem is to get the SOB to put down his beer and dog and come out of the stands and do it....
Dober
Some people just gotta try to micro mgt a game in which they never even set foot on the court on...
Or as Bobby Knight once said "I've got a guy that with 2 seconds left can kick a field goal from 63 yds out, and I've got a guy who with a full count and bottom of the 9th of the last game in the world series and with bases loaded can grip it and wrip it to win the game, and I've got a guy who can step to the free throw line with no time left and hit two to win the NCAA, only problem is to get the SOB to put down his beer and dog and come out of the stands and do it....
Dober
Beautiful!
I sat next to Coach Knight on a flight from Phoenix to Lubbock one time and I really enjoyed the conversation. That's another story for another time though
Drummond
J-the point was that there's always people willing to tell people what they should be doing when in fact they don't have experience doing it.
Someone bitching about a 600 yd shot on an elk and such and yet they've never hunted elk at all.
So yeah, kind of off topic but not really...or at least that's the way I see it.
Dober
Someone bitching about a 600 yd shot on an elk and such and yet they've never hunted elk at all.
So yeah, kind of off topic but not really...or at least that's the way I see it.
Dober
Originally Posted by JohnBurns
I am a little amused at the notion that getting closer was a good option on that shot.
1. We were on a ridge that had no cover to move down to the level of the elk.
2. There were elk within 300yds of us and moving down the hill would have unquestionably spooked the herd.
3. The elk were in head high sage and there was only one elk in a group of 35 that Wayne could shoot.
4. New Mexico shooting hours end at sunset and when Wayne shot there was only about 8 Min of legal hunting time left.
5. The wind was very low and unpredictable and the odds of not getting busted by one of the 35 or so noses in the valley would be a long shot indeed.
I really do find it interesting that a few would watch the video and conclude the smart thing would be to try and climb down a bare ridge into head high sage to attempt to sort out one bull in a herd of 35.
What kind of shot would there have been at 300yds in that tall sage??
Seems simpler to use the terrain, prone position and lack of wind to your advantage and simply shoot the bull.
Now I personally would have shot from there just because I like to do that kind of thing, but I promise you Wayne really would have preferred to get closer if there was any reasonable chance, but those that have much elk hunting experience can see the best option was shoot or pass for the evening and not blow the herd out of the country on a bad stalk where the elk have all the advantages.
The closer is always better is a silly argument because it always applies until we actually make contact with the bull with our muzzle. Until that point you could always get closer.
Real hunters understand you simply stalk to the best situation and take the shot or pass based on your proven abilities. Some guys have more range than other guys because they work harder and are more dedicated to improving their abilities.
Wayne works pretty hard and is not your average Joe hunter and his shooting skill reflects that effort.
1. We were on a ridge that had no cover to move down to the level of the elk.
2. There were elk within 300yds of us and moving down the hill would have unquestionably spooked the herd.
3. The elk were in head high sage and there was only one elk in a group of 35 that Wayne could shoot.
4. New Mexico shooting hours end at sunset and when Wayne shot there was only about 8 Min of legal hunting time left.
5. The wind was very low and unpredictable and the odds of not getting busted by one of the 35 or so noses in the valley would be a long shot indeed.
I really do find it interesting that a few would watch the video and conclude the smart thing would be to try and climb down a bare ridge into head high sage to attempt to sort out one bull in a herd of 35.
What kind of shot would there have been at 300yds in that tall sage??
Seems simpler to use the terrain, prone position and lack of wind to your advantage and simply shoot the bull.
Now I personally would have shot from there just because I like to do that kind of thing, but I promise you Wayne really would have preferred to get closer if there was any reasonable chance, but those that have much elk hunting experience can see the best option was shoot or pass for the evening and not blow the herd out of the country on a bad stalk where the elk have all the advantages.
The closer is always better is a silly argument because it always applies until we actually make contact with the bull with our muzzle. Until that point you could always get closer.
Real hunters understand you simply stalk to the best situation and take the shot or pass based on your proven abilities. Some guys have more range than other guys because they work harder and are more dedicated to improving their abilities.
Wayne works pretty hard and is not your average Joe hunter and his shooting skill reflects that effort.
Thanks for the clarification on the video, this definitely clears it up and shows that he took the proper shot and obviously was well prepared to take the shot(which is the huge key).
Thanks John I had already figured it was a daylight and terrain problem. I can't imagin that hunters haven't had similar decissions to make weather long or short range and some times last day of the hunt. My son lives in Pine Bluffs WY and is a lineman. We are planning a Oct OTC elk hunt in northern CO. Does Wayne visit 24hr forum?
I didn't mean to imply that you were off topic Mark, only that I was in addressing you. Sorry for the confusion.
I agree with you, if a person doesn't have experience on the matter, then they really shouldn't comment
I agree with you, if a person doesn't have experience on the matter, then they really shouldn't comment
Originally Posted by Tonk
I sure would not attempt that shot with my .338-win mag....not me folks.
A properly set up .338 WM is a very good 600-yard rifle, at least in terms of hitting chit. I can only guess about the terminal effects.
I guess they'd be sufficient.
Originally Posted by JohnBurns
I am a little amused at the notion that getting closer was a good option on that shot.
1. We were on a ridge that had no cover to move down to the level of the elk.
2. There were elk within 300yds of us and moving down the hill would have unquestionably spooked the herd.
3. The elk were in head high sage and there was only one elk in a group of 35 that Wayne could shoot.
4. New Mexico shooting hours end at sunset and when Wayne shot there was only about 8 Min of legal hunting time left.
5. The wind was very low and unpredictable and the odds of not getting busted by one of the 35 or so noses in the valley would be a long shot indeed.
I really do find it interesting that a few would watch the video and conclude the smart thing would be to try and climb down a bare ridge into head high sage to attempt to sort out one bull in a herd of 35.
What kind of shot would there have been at 300yds in that tall sage??
Seems simpler to use the terrain, prone position and lack of wind to your advantage and simply shoot the bull.
Now I personally would have shot from there just because I like to do that kind of thing, but I promise you Wayne really would have preferred to get closer if there was any reasonable chance, but those that have much elk hunting experience can see the best option was shoot or pass for the evening and not blow the herd out of the country on a bad stalk where the elk have all the advantages.
The closer is always better is a silly argument because it always applies until we actually make contact with the bull with our muzzle. Until that point you could always get closer.
Real hunters understand you simply stalk to the best situation and take the shot or pass based on your proven abilities. Some guys have more range than other guys because they work harder and are more dedicated to improving their abilities.
Wayne works pretty hard and is not your average Joe hunter and his shooting skill reflects that effort.
1. We were on a ridge that had no cover to move down to the level of the elk.
2. There were elk within 300yds of us and moving down the hill would have unquestionably spooked the herd.
3. The elk were in head high sage and there was only one elk in a group of 35 that Wayne could shoot.
4. New Mexico shooting hours end at sunset and when Wayne shot there was only about 8 Min of legal hunting time left.
5. The wind was very low and unpredictable and the odds of not getting busted by one of the 35 or so noses in the valley would be a long shot indeed.
I really do find it interesting that a few would watch the video and conclude the smart thing would be to try and climb down a bare ridge into head high sage to attempt to sort out one bull in a herd of 35.
What kind of shot would there have been at 300yds in that tall sage??
Seems simpler to use the terrain, prone position and lack of wind to your advantage and simply shoot the bull.
Now I personally would have shot from there just because I like to do that kind of thing, but I promise you Wayne really would have preferred to get closer if there was any reasonable chance, but those that have much elk hunting experience can see the best option was shoot or pass for the evening and not blow the herd out of the country on a bad stalk where the elk have all the advantages.
The closer is always better is a silly argument because it always applies until we actually make contact with the bull with our muzzle. Until that point you could always get closer.
Real hunters understand you simply stalk to the best situation and take the shot or pass based on your proven abilities. Some guys have more range than other guys because they work harder and are more dedicated to improving their abilities.
Wayne works pretty hard and is not your average Joe hunter and his shooting skill reflects that effort.
A lot of elk hunting can be that way.....just the nature of the animals and the country they inhabit...pals and I can recall some instances where yawning canyons seperated us from a big bull,and crossing to the other side brought us close,but in thick cover (it never looks the same once you get over to the other side),and the more prudent move would have been the long shot at a stationary animal....
Years back I made the decision to cross the canyon on a big Arizona bull and it cost me the only crack I have ever had on a B&C-sized 6x6....closing the gap is not always an option,nor a good idea.
Originally Posted by Mark R Dobrenski
J-the point was that there's always people willing to tell people what they should be doing when in fact they don't have experience doing it.
Someone bitching about a 600 yd shot on an elk and such and yet they've never hunted elk at all.
Dober
Someone bitching about a 600 yd shot on an elk and such and yet they've never hunted elk at all.
Dober
Shooting an elk at 600yds isn't the issue. Shooting any big game animal at those ranges just to sell a rifle/cartridge combo is.
So, in your opinion, at what range does it become acceptable to shoot an animal to promote a rifle/cartridge combo??
Originally Posted by JohnBurns
I am a little amused at the notion that getting closer was a good option on that shot.
1. We were on a ridge that had no cover to move down to the level of the elk.
2. There were elk within 300yds of us and moving down the hill would have unquestionably spooked the herd.
3. The elk were in head high sage and there was only one elk in a group of 35 that Wayne could shoot.
4. New Mexico shooting hours end at sunset and when Wayne shot there was only about 8 Min of legal hunting time left.
5. The wind was very low and unpredictable and the odds of not getting busted by one of the 35 or so noses in the valley would be a long shot indeed.
I really do find it interesting that a few would watch the video and conclude the smart thing would be to try and climb down a bare ridge into head high sage to attempt to sort out one bull in a herd of 35.
What kind of shot would there have been at 300yds in that tall sage??
Seems simpler to use the terrain, prone position and lack of wind to your advantage and simply shoot the bull.
Now I personally would have shot from there just because I like to do that kind of thing, but I promise you Wayne really would have preferred to get closer if there was any reasonable chance, but those that have much elk hunting experience can see the best option was shoot or pass for the evening and not blow the herd out of the country on a bad stalk where the elk have all the advantages.
The closer is always better is a silly argument because it always applies until we actually make contact with the bull with our muzzle. Until that point you could always get closer.
Real hunters understand you simply stalk to the best situation and take the shot or pass based on your proven abilities. Some guys have more range than other guys because they work harder and are more dedicated to improving their abilities.
Wayne works pretty hard and is not your average Joe hunter and his shooting skill reflects that effort.
1. We were on a ridge that had no cover to move down to the level of the elk.
2. There were elk within 300yds of us and moving down the hill would have unquestionably spooked the herd.
3. The elk were in head high sage and there was only one elk in a group of 35 that Wayne could shoot.
4. New Mexico shooting hours end at sunset and when Wayne shot there was only about 8 Min of legal hunting time left.
5. The wind was very low and unpredictable and the odds of not getting busted by one of the 35 or so noses in the valley would be a long shot indeed.
I really do find it interesting that a few would watch the video and conclude the smart thing would be to try and climb down a bare ridge into head high sage to attempt to sort out one bull in a herd of 35.
What kind of shot would there have been at 300yds in that tall sage??
Seems simpler to use the terrain, prone position and lack of wind to your advantage and simply shoot the bull.
Now I personally would have shot from there just because I like to do that kind of thing, but I promise you Wayne really would have preferred to get closer if there was any reasonable chance, but those that have much elk hunting experience can see the best option was shoot or pass for the evening and not blow the herd out of the country on a bad stalk where the elk have all the advantages.
The closer is always better is a silly argument because it always applies until we actually make contact with the bull with our muzzle. Until that point you could always get closer.
Real hunters understand you simply stalk to the best situation and take the shot or pass based on your proven abilities. Some guys have more range than other guys because they work harder and are more dedicated to improving their abilities.
Wayne works pretty hard and is not your average Joe hunter and his shooting skill reflects that effort.
John -
Thank you. Much of what you say does not show up clearly in the video, if at all. The footage at 2:33 in shows what looks to be more than adequate cover for a closer approach, but the angle could be deceiving. And I�ve no idea where the elk are that wee within 300 yards. The head-high sage would definitely pose a problem as you dropped lower.
I took my largest bodied bull, a 6x5, a few minutes before the end of legal shooting hours after having watched the herd for 5-1/2 hours at around 600 yards, unable to get closer because of open terrain. When the elk started moving off their knoll at dusk I was able to close the gap to 350 yards by pushing myself the last 100 yards through snow-covered cactus and sage, head first on my back. At that point I faced an open slope and could go no further. Sitting up for the shot alerted the elk and they started grazing away, giving me a then-or-never opportunity, with only one shootable bull, the 6x5, in range. That is still my longest shot. Last fall my son-in-law took his first elk at 363 yards with a shot directly into the setting sun. I didn�t like it but there was nothing else we could do except pass.
The details of Wayne�s opportunity were different but it sounds like there are a lot of similarities. Trading a prone position for what would likely have been a less stable sitting position (at best) in exchange for a few yards wouldn�t have made sense to me either. Wayne says he spent a lot of time with the rifle at 500 and, while that isn�t 600, I�ve had Daughter #3 dancing around clay pigeons at 600 with her first shots at that range. Wayne�s experience and your guidance with the equipment significantly reduced the chances of an undesirable ending, although nothing can eliminate that possibility.
Last fall my son-in-law took his first elk at 363 yards with a sitting shot from a slightly forward slope, directly into the setting sun. I didn�t like it but there was nothing else we could do except pass. I think Wayne�s shot at 600 was less of a risk.
Thanks again for the explanation.
Originally Posted by dmsbandit
Originally Posted by Mark R Dobrenski
J-the point was that there's always people willing to tell people what they should be doing when in fact they don't have experience doing it.
Someone bitching about a 600 yd shot on an elk and such and yet they've never hunted elk at all.
Dober
Someone bitching about a 600 yd shot on an elk and such and yet they've never hunted elk at all.
Dober
Shooting an elk at 600yds isn't the issue. Shooting any big game animal at those ranges just to sell a rifle/cartridge combo is.
I wasn't there John and Wayne were. They had a call to make, take the shot or walk away. I would of done the exact same thing. Thinking when you get some experience with hunting elk in the rocky mtn west then you'll have a better informed position from which to form an opinion. But, dats just the way I see it.
Sounds to me like you don't even hunt elk so why chime in on an elk forum with an opinion when you have no expierience with said matters...
Dober
Originally Posted by Jeff_O
Originally Posted by Tonk
I sure would not attempt that shot with my .338-win mag....not me folks.
A properly set up .338 WM is a very good 600-yard rifle, at least in terms of hitting chit. I can only guess about the terminal effects.
I guess they'd be sufficient.
If I had a well set up 338 that I was intimate with I'd take that shot in a heart beat. Heckola if I had turrets on my 338/06 I'd take it with that.
For the prepared 600 yds on an elk isn't exactly a toughy..
Dober
Quote
Thinking when you get some experience with hunting elk in the rocky mtn west then you'll have a better informed position from which to form an opinion. But, dats just the way I see it.
I have some experience hunting the Rocky Mountains for Elk and I somewhat agree wit
h him..Not wanting to start a brawl but I have seen more than one shot at 600 yards and plus on Elk..Most and I emphasis most,were good shots by Military marksmen that worked with my dad and hunted with us every year,but I have also seen boo boo's just for the simple fact of the unseen winds/the animals moves at ignition or a host of other things that just happen and without notice in our little part of the world shooting across and at angles that far.Ofcourse you don't here about those much for obvious reasons but it happens..I always like the guys or gals that say that could never happen to me...Yeah right...
Like everything else,once you think you know it all and are 10 feet tall and bullet proof,here comes John Doe just to prove you wrong...
Everyone has an opinion based on experiences and yours nor mine are right all the time based on, guess what..Different experiences!!!!
Naw..Can't be can it?
Jayco
Not wrong, just different is what my Dad always said.
Just my experience but I feel that elk taken at long range by the practiced will hit the turf far faster than the unpracticed even at distances half as far.
I've seen some terrible situations where unpracticed were shooting at long range and I've seen the same where the unpracticed where shooting at close animals (say 300 or less). And often times the elk were on the move.
Guess my point in a long about way is I'd bet on the practiced taking elk out at long range easier and with less muss and fuss than joe average elk hunted banging away at animals far closer.
Just me and my way but I'd take a well set up long range shot everyday over one that was tons closer where I wasn't well set up and or animals were moving.
In the ideal world people would know their ability's and stay within them. Note how I said ideal world..
Just my way
Dober
Just my experience but I feel that elk taken at long range by the practiced will hit the turf far faster than the unpracticed even at distances half as far.
I've seen some terrible situations where unpracticed were shooting at long range and I've seen the same where the unpracticed where shooting at close animals (say 300 or less). And often times the elk were on the move.
Guess my point in a long about way is I'd bet on the practiced taking elk out at long range easier and with less muss and fuss than joe average elk hunted banging away at animals far closer.
Just me and my way but I'd take a well set up long range shot everyday over one that was tons closer where I wasn't well set up and or animals were moving.
In the ideal world people would know their ability's and stay within them. Note how I said ideal world..
Just my way
Dober
And heck we've not had a good E brawl for a time around here anyway...grin
Have a super weekend all! I'm gonna be watching my 11 yr old G-son play in his first All Star tourney for the year so I'm stoked!
Dober
Have a super weekend all! I'm gonna be watching my 11 yr old G-son play in his first All Star tourney for the year so I'm stoked!
Dober
The only thing more I have to say is busting gongs or paper at the shooting range in controlled circumstances is quite different than busting bubba Elk way out there across a nasty canyon with 45 degree slopes......Quite different especially for a guy from tim buck two hunting Elk out here.
You have fun with that little one...
Jayco
You have fun with that little one...
Jayco
Will do, he's so stoked, the lil dude even got his number (99) clipped into the side of his hair. That's even ok with this old redneck..grin (could be worse right..?)
And as for practice yepper it is different than real life. But, from my experience to the savvy ones (IE ones that can learn and stay within their ability) it will teach them when to be dropping the hammer and when not to.
On another thread some bubba said that all 300 yd shots are chip shots, I didn't agree with him as it's been my experience not all shots are created equal.
I passed on a nice buck a couple years ago in a blizzard @ 198 yds or so. Couldn't get comfy that I could kill it cleanly so I went without that year. That's better to me than to let the critter suffer just so I could maybe feed an ego that I filled a tag.
Once again, just my way and it don't have to be anyone elses.
Dober
And as for practice yepper it is different than real life. But, from my experience to the savvy ones (IE ones that can learn and stay within their ability) it will teach them when to be dropping the hammer and when not to.
On another thread some bubba said that all 300 yd shots are chip shots, I didn't agree with him as it's been my experience not all shots are created equal.
I passed on a nice buck a couple years ago in a blizzard @ 198 yds or so. Couldn't get comfy that I could kill it cleanly so I went without that year. That's better to me than to let the critter suffer just so I could maybe feed an ego that I filled a tag.
Once again, just my way and it don't have to be anyone elses.
Dober
I would bet Wayne Van Zoll could shoot a tighter group at 600 yards than the average shooter could at 300 under the same conditions
The problem is all those John Doe's out there from far away places reading this chit chat and may or may not shoot 600 yards at there bench rested range under the controlled environment and think it is the same as in the field with know sandbags or time enough to put up the sticks or a place too and huff'n and puff'n let alone any adrenaline flowing.
It's like saying I saw Mike Tyson knock out .........so I can too but never been in a fist fight...
I also passed a couple of years ago on a couple bulls on the move across a canyon up hill with wind gust..I went back the next year with a freezer box (marked for a kill zone) and laser finder and saw it was only 400 yards and my .300 Win Mag (without wind) put 'em close enough to have done the job but using a stump as a rest I didn't notice before with them ready to crest the ridge with little time to get 'er done.
Jayco
It's like saying I saw Mike Tyson knock out .........so I can too but never been in a fist fight...
I also passed a couple of years ago on a couple bulls on the move across a canyon up hill with wind gust..I went back the next year with a freezer box (marked for a kill zone) and laser finder and saw it was only 400 yards and my .300 Win Mag (without wind) put 'em close enough to have done the job but using a stump as a rest I didn't notice before with them ready to crest the ridge with little time to get 'er done.
Jayco
Originally Posted by Mark R Dobrenski
�
Just my experience but I feel that elk taken at long range by the practiced will hit the turf far faster than the unpracticed even at distances half as far.
I've seen some terrible situations where unpracticed were shooting at long range and I've seen the same where the unpracticed where shooting at close animals (say 300 or less). And often times the elk were on the move.
Guess my point in a long about way is I'd bet on the practiced taking elk out at long range easier and with less muss and fuss than joe average elk hunted banging away at animals far closer.
Just me and my way but I'd take a well set up long range shot everyday over one that was tons closer where I wasn't well set up and or animals were moving.
�
Dober
Just my experience but I feel that elk taken at long range by the practiced will hit the turf far faster than the unpracticed even at distances half as far.
I've seen some terrible situations where unpracticed were shooting at long range and I've seen the same where the unpracticed where shooting at close animals (say 300 or less). And often times the elk were on the move.
Guess my point in a long about way is I'd bet on the practiced taking elk out at long range easier and with less muss and fuss than joe average elk hunted banging away at animals far closer.
Just me and my way but I'd take a well set up long range shot everyday over one that was tons closer where I wasn't well set up and or animals were moving.
�
Dober
Agreed.
Given adequate familiarity with my equipment and low winds, I�d much rather settle in and take a broadside shot at 600 than a rushed 100 yard shot at a running animal. Been there too many times at 100 and less with coyotes and the results were not always good.
logcutter
true words- There is a lot more that goes into shooting 600 yards in the field than a lot of seem to realize.
true words- There is a lot more that goes into shooting 600 yards in the field than a lot of seem to realize.
Yeah but CH..That country you hunt is like a golf course compared to the steep crap we hunt around here..
Not the same thing or even close.I might shoot a couple miles where you hunt.
Jayco
Not the same thing or even close.I might shoot a couple miles where you hunt.
Jayco
Originally Posted by Royce
logcutter
true words- There is a lot more that goes into shooting 600 yards in the field than a lot of seem to realize.
true words- There is a lot more that goes into shooting 600 yards in the field than a lot of seem to realize.
And dats one of the rubs, if one's gonna learn how to make 3 pointers one has to practice behind the line a lot. Same same with long range rifle work, or shorter range offhand work or running shots or whatever.
Comes down to in the ideal world one would know their limitations and stay within them.
Dober
Quote
Comes down to in the ideal world one would know their limitations and stay within them.
Agreed but most don't because they read it on the net..If John Doe can do it,so can I.....How many out of State people even know how it is to shoot cross canyon in Idaho 600 yards out?
Gotta know the country/terrain and winds if you will and have done 'er or saw it up close and personal....
Jayco
I agree with that to an extent, but I also feel that while a few read the net and go forth I do feel that percentage is small comp'd to those that just go and do it.
Point being I feel that there are a lot more people out there who will do it whether they read about it on the Net or not.
Though I feel the same is true for other shots as well, bull in the dark timber going away, or the bull on the run @ 275 yds or the bull that's standing @ 600.
And I'll also add that I feel that theres a lot of people who have lil or no concern for the intended victum. Meaning they don't care as much as they perhaps should about how they take their game down. And, if the game doesn't go down and moves off well then they don't get too concerned with it.
Dober
Point being I feel that there are a lot more people out there who will do it whether they read about it on the Net or not.
Though I feel the same is true for other shots as well, bull in the dark timber going away, or the bull on the run @ 275 yds or the bull that's standing @ 600.
And I'll also add that I feel that theres a lot of people who have lil or no concern for the intended victum. Meaning they don't care as much as they perhaps should about how they take their game down. And, if the game doesn't go down and moves off well then they don't get too concerned with it.
Dober
Hey Dober...
You know you Montana boys are just Idaho rejects.....
![[Linked Image]](http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v652/jaycocreek/Idahoterritory.jpg)
Jayco
You know you Montana boys are just Idaho rejects.....
Jayco
Oh well, wasn't the first time I was rejected...grin
Dober
Dober
So what you are saying is your a Washington reject.
Drumbdumn....shhh....the men are talking. Flinch
Originally Posted by Flinch
Drumbdumn....shhh....the men are talking. Flinch
Flinch, your not a man, a man doesnt do or say the things you did and said. Your pathetic
Originally Posted by 264wm
So what you are saying is your a Washington reject.
And proud of it..Spokane is our local channel and Washington sux compared to Idaho for individual freedoms.
Hows your freedom?
![[Linked Image]](http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v652/jaycocreek/Statefreedomranking.jpg)
http:/
Jayco
My freedom is fine. Do what ever I want. I can sit on my back poarch and shoot all I want. Once fell a 4 ft DBH pine with a chain saw that had a 12" bar.lol Which would start a new thread on which is the right saw to use for felling trees like 6.5 Creedmoor for 600yrd elk which in the right hands works just like the 12 inch bar works in the righ hands. lol
I love how a conversation about using a 6.5 Creedmoor on elk somehow turned into a debate about people's personal freedom, ranked by state
Quote
Once fell a 4 ft DBH pine with a chain saw that had a 12" bar.lol Which would start a new thread on which is the right saw to use for felling trees like 6.5 Creedmoor for 600yrd elk which in the right hands works just like the 12 inch bar works in the righ hands. lol
Actually, I am glad you brought that up because it is a prime example of shooting Elk at 600 yards.As far as the 12" saw goes on a 4ft diameter tree....
It's harder on the saw and bar and way more prone to "error" which could lead to loss of limb or permanent disability, or even death. They make saws for falling large tree's that do it with ease with less chance of error.
Error and the odds of it are whats at stake for the normal Joe, shooting,or trying to,Elk at 600 yards.To me it is a stunt/bragging rights or showing off,not hunting but that is my opinion growing up and having seen it done a few times and saw what can happen "even to the best"......Which is far less likely at shorter ranges as is trying to fall a 4" diameter tree with a 12" bar.One should pass on both!
But that's just my opinion based on seeing it done over the years more than just a couple times."error" can happen to you or anyone, know matter how good they think they are.Shooting 600 yards at the shooting range is far different than shooting across a deep and steep Idaho canyon with winds you can't see or detect.
Do you know how many experienced loggers have been hurt from winds from know where, and there out there every day or helicopters and fixed winged downed by sudden shifts or gust in wind totally unexpected?
Maybe thats where a guy wounds one at 600 yards and it runs over the hill and someone else shoots it,not knowing it was hit,and the party starts as to who's Elk is it?
Jayco
Originally Posted by JohnBurns
Originally Posted by dmsbandit
[Hayfields don't have trees to rest the gun on. Incase you where wondering, I practice with my 22LR bolt gun at 200yds OFFHAND at a 10" steel plate.
I have a sneaking suspicion that Wayne could shoot better at 600yds prone than you could offhand at 200yds.
Just my guess.
Hint. I have personally seen Wayne hit Berger bullet boxes at 500yds from prone with just a sling (got the video too). And not just once.
Seen him shoot at a mile too. Seen him shoot a lever gun to 600yds and he darn sure could have killed that bull with that gun. Got all that video also.
Guys who work hard can do things other cannot do and should not try. Just the facts of life.
Hello John,
Tell us more about Waynes lever gun...
I just hope it isn't a POS BLR !!!
As Jack O'Connor wrote and Chuck Hawks summed up....
Clearly, Jack O'Connor was right when he wrote that (to paraphrase) not once in a blue moon was a hunter justified in shooting at a big game animal over 300 yards away.
There are always exceptions, of course. Jack O'Connor himself killed big game animals at over 300 yards, and other masters like Bob Hagel, Warren Page, Elmer Keith, Pete Brown, Francis Sell, and Townsend Whelen did likewise. But these men had the skill and the experience to justify such shooting. They lived at a time when game was much more plentiful than it is today, and when bag limits were generous or nonexistent. As full-time professional gun writers, they had the opportunity to shoot an enormous amount of ammunition through a very wide variety of rifles, and to spend a great deal of their time hunting. Such opportunities were rare then, and are almost nonexistent now. The times have indeed changed, and not always for the better.
Jayco
Clearly, Jack O'Connor was right when he wrote that (to paraphrase) not once in a blue moon was a hunter justified in shooting at a big game animal over 300 yards away.
There are always exceptions, of course. Jack O'Connor himself killed big game animals at over 300 yards, and other masters like Bob Hagel, Warren Page, Elmer Keith, Pete Brown, Francis Sell, and Townsend Whelen did likewise. But these men had the skill and the experience to justify such shooting. They lived at a time when game was much more plentiful than it is today, and when bag limits were generous or nonexistent. As full-time professional gun writers, they had the opportunity to shoot an enormous amount of ammunition through a very wide variety of rifles, and to spend a great deal of their time hunting. Such opportunities were rare then, and are almost nonexistent now. The times have indeed changed, and not always for the better.
Jayco
How many people here feel they fall into this category of hunters??????
Jack O'Connor himself killed big game animals at over 300 yards, and other masters like Bob Hagel, Warren Page, Elmer Keith, Pete Brown, Francis Sell, and Townsend Whelen did likewise.
Speak up!!!!!!Then how many of those that think they do have killed "Several Dozen Elk" at 600 yards and as John Barsness said right here on this forum::::
In my experience, a dozen animals is a start on learning what a cartridge will do, but several dozen is a much better number. Four or five doesn't tell us much at all.
So who here has shot "several dozen Elk" at 600 yards??????????????????
Jayco
Jack O'Connor himself killed big game animals at over 300 yards, and other masters like Bob Hagel, Warren Page, Elmer Keith, Pete Brown, Francis Sell, and Townsend Whelen did likewise.
Speak up!!!!!!Then how many of those that think they do have killed "Several Dozen Elk" at 600 yards and as John Barsness said right here on this forum::::
In my experience, a dozen animals is a start on learning what a cartridge will do, but several dozen is a much better number. Four or five doesn't tell us much at all.
So who here has shot "several dozen Elk" at 600 yards??????????????????
Jayco
So a comment that started off as shooting a few dozen ANIMALS, has turned into a few dozen ELK AT 600 YARDS. Interesting. It's like the telephone game that we used to play as kids...
What? You shot dozens of elk at 600 yards with archery gear?
I call BS. Anything over 500 yards is unethical. Unless you're using a crossbow.
I call BS. Anything over 500 yards is unethical. Unless you're using a crossbow.
The crowd speaks............
Answer this..How many Elk have you shot at 600 yards or personally seen, to have an opinion at all?
Jayco
Answer this..How many Elk have you shot at 600 yards or personally seen, to have an opinion at all?
Jayco
Originally Posted by logcutter
So who here has shot "several dozen Elk" at 600 yards??????????????????
Jayco
Jayco
I fit that bill... Although not with a 6.5 Creedmoor...
It's about to get deep in here
Quote
It's about to get deep in here
'ya think...36+ Elk over 600 yards..Yeah right...
Jayco
Originally Posted by logcutter
Quote
It's about to get deep in here
'ya think...36+ Elk over 600 yards..Yeah right...
Jayco
Whats so hard to believe about that...
If 'ya have to ask.................
Jayco
Jayco
Then why ask if anyone here has done it...
Originally Posted by logcutter
Quote
It's about to get deep in here
'ya think...36+ Elk over 600 yards..Yeah right...
Jayco
Thats probably not even a small percentage of what this guy has done at that range or beyond.....you should be all ears when he says something. EHG is the real deal.
Quote
Thats probably not even a small percentage of what this guy has done at that range or beyond.....you should be all ears when he says something. EHG is the real deal
If that is true,he is far from the average hunter hunting in or on public ground ..How old is he to shoot over 36 Elk past 600 yards?
Was it for food or????Bragging rights????
Jayco
Originally Posted by logcutter
If that is true,he is far from the average hunter hunting in or on public ground ..How old is he to shoot over 36 Elk past 600 yards?
Was it for food or????Bragging rights????
Jayco
Was it for food or????Bragging rights????
Jayco
No where did I see the requirement of being an average hunter in or on public ground in your question... I am not an average hunter but most elk I kill are on public ground...
ETA: All the meat is donated to needy/low income/single parent families...
Originally Posted by scenarshooter
Thats probably not even a small percentage of what this guy has done at that range or beyond.....you should be all ears when he says something. EHG is the real deal
Thanks SS... I appreciate the kind words...
I believe EHG is the real deal too.
He is most definitely a man of his word and that goes a long way with me.
He is most definitely a man of his word and that goes a long way with me.
Saw the video and Wayne V.Z. should be ashamed of himself for televising that stunt. IMO it was a barefaced sales pitch for Graybull rifles. What if Mr. Van Zwoll had flinched, or something spooked the bull just as he shot, or a mini-dust devil kicked up - would they have shown the video of the bull with 1/2 his face shot off, or humped up from a bullet in the liver? No question there are rifles and loads that can do it under ideal conditions, as well as a good many hunters and shooters who can do it, but is it ethical to risk a marginal shot on an elk for the purpose of a promotional campaign? Not to me.
I saw this as a clever attempt to convince the average joe without much experience, that he really doesn't need to go through all the hard work of practicing from field positions with no rest and no spotter and no sighting shots, in all kinds of weather, and analyzing loads and targets, but rather, just buy that same rifle and bingo he is dialed in.
forepaw
I saw this as a clever attempt to convince the average joe without much experience, that he really doesn't need to go through all the hard work of practicing from field positions with no rest and no spotter and no sighting shots, in all kinds of weather, and analyzing loads and targets, but rather, just buy that same rifle and bingo he is dialed in.
forepaw
The real question is: In which state does he live, and is he a free man? If so, how free? Ranked. By state. *grin*
Really Jordan.....
How many have you shot at 600+?
Jayco
How many have you shot at 600+?
Jayco
Agreed..Money talks...
Jayco
Jayco
Originally Posted by logcutter
Was it for food or????Bragging rights????
Jayco
Jayco
What business is that of yours? You asked the question, the man answered.
That ain't good enough?
Originally Posted by logcutter
Agreed..Money talks...
Finish the quote. "Money talks, and Bullsh**.....asks stupid questions, then changes the subject when they're answered."
Owe crap..Here comes Mr Experience Elk hunting withg his 10 years doing it..I am intimidated...
So Smokepole..How many Elk have you shot at 600+ yards?
I have a special place for you and your big mouth..I have a spot left on my fishing crew just for you..Come on out and I will teach you how to catch the good ones,on me.......
There biting......
![[Linked Image]](http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v652/jaycocreek/scan0003-1.jpg)
Jayco
So Smokepole..How many Elk have you shot at 600+ yards?
I have a special place for you and your big mouth..I have a spot left on my fishing crew just for you..Come on out and I will teach you how to catch the good ones,on me.......
There biting......
Jayco
From what I see there your idea of a elk gun is a rod and reel loaded with a hook and taking those funny looking antlerless elk with it is just plain un ethical and a promotional stunt to lure in the poor inexperienced funny looking elk hunters so you can sell your services. Just don't let PETA see that picture, them funny looking elk look like they suffered a tortured demise from the use of the wrong funny elk gun.
Originally Posted by logcutter
So Smokepole..How many Elk have you shot at 600+ yards?
Jayco
Jayco
How many elk did I say I've shot at 600 yards, Einstein?
You need to get a new hobby. Something to occupy your time other than cyber-stalking Mule Deer, quoting him out of context, and asking others to justify his quotes.
Are you really that envious of him, or what?
Originally Posted by logcutter
Really Jordan.....
How many have you shot at 600+?
Jayco
How many have you shot at 600+?
Jayco
Now take your time and really pay attention here....
Quote
In my experience, a dozen animals is a start on learning what a cartridge will do, but several dozen is a much better number. Four or five doesn't tell us much at all.
Nowhere in that phrase do I see the word ELK or the words 600 yards
You can thank me later.
Originally Posted by smokepole
Originally Posted by logcutter
So Smokepole..How many Elk have you shot at 600+ yards?
Jayco
Jayco
How many elk did I say I've shot at 600 yards, Einstein?
You need to get a new hobby. Something to occupy your time other than cyber-stalking Mule Deer, quoting him out of context, and asking others to justify his quotes.
Are you really that envious of him, or what?
Alcoholic?
I can't think of any other reason for his incessant babbling..
Originally Posted by forepaw
Saw the video and Wayne V.Z. should be ashamed of himself for televising that stunt. IMO it was a barefaced sales pitch for Graybull rifles. What if Mr. Van Zwoll had flinched, or something spooked the bull just as he shot, or a mini-dust devil kicked up forepaw
A mini dust devil?? Really??
You actually want to worry about mini dust devils??
What about a full blown tornado?? Earthquake?? Tsunami?? Heck the Yellowstone Caldera is due to blow sometime in the next 100,000 years so we got that to worry about also.
Mini dust devils. Really??
Gotta watch them dust devils and those gravity vortexes too.
I don't think the problem is a guy like Van Zwoll filming a shot like that. Personally, I enjoy seeing what the best are capable of.
The problem comes when "Joe-box-of-factory-ammo-a-year" thinks he's Wayne Van Zwoll. And that ain't Wayne's fault.
The problem comes when "Joe-box-of-factory-ammo-a-year" thinks he's Wayne Van Zwoll. And that ain't Wayne's fault.
The answer to the original question is no. Just because it can be done (sometimes) doesn't make it the proper tool for the job. I've seen guys trick shoot clay pigeons with a .22 but that doesn't make them a sporting clay gun. Same deal with the Creedmore pea shooter. Elk aren't armor plated but they aren't just big whitetail either. Do them some justice and use enough gun. Why some people are minimalists I just can't fathom when the right tools for the job cost about the same as less than proper ones. If you can't handle recoil then take up fishing.
Originally Posted by SteelyEyes
The answer to the original question is no. Just because it can be done (sometimes) doesn't make it the proper tool for the job. I've seen guys trick shoot clay pigeons with a .22 but that doesn't make them a sporting clay gun. Same deal with the Creedmore pea shooter. Elk aren't armor plated but they aren't just big whitetail either. Do them some justice and use enough gun. Why some people are minimalists I just can't fathom when the right tools for the job cost about the same as less than proper ones. If you can't handle recoil then take up fishing.
Have you seen the 6.5 CM fail on an elk at 600yds??
John,
These exsperts are just parroting some gun writer who doesn't know any better himself.
These exsperts are just parroting some gun writer who doesn't know any better himself.
Seems to be a common occurrence around here..
This is like someone saying archery is perfectly humane, but shooting an animal with a "small caliber" or "too far away" is inhumane. No matter how much first hand experience you thow at them they never go away. They never thought to think that they are killing an animal with a sharp stick.
Excellant choice of words.Most of us havent shot game over 400 yards just because that situation hasn't happened. Some of us are capable if the need were there. Just because I watched WVZ doesn't mean I am going to go out and search for a 600 yrd elk to prove I can. From what I have seen most hunters that belittle others for using there skills when need are are people that are not able to be skilled shooters. I have seen some hunters that could shoot good at 100 yrd targets but fall apart when faceing a elk at 20 yrds and miss. Hinting is a instinct some can take snap shots and be dead on and others can reach out with deadly accuracy.
I won't touch the aspect of the video that most are discussing, but the choice of bullet and the performance described brings to mind a question for ya'll:
Recently I hunted axis deer. Deer 1 was shot at about 180 yards broadside. 180gr Nosler Partition broke one shoulder and exited the off side.
Deer 2 was shot at about 80 yards with a 165 Hornady SST. Two shots in the chest, (missed the shoulder) about 2 inches apart. Both bullets recovered under the skin on the off side. One a perfect mushroom. The other had a blown core. Animal ran about 50 yards after the first hit, was hit a second time and ran another 50 yards after the 2nd shot. Albeit deer #2 was a bit bigger than #1.
WVZ shot his elk (bigger animal), at 600 yards (greater distance) and got a through and through with a 129gr SST (greater sectional density?). I'm loading this same bullet for a 260 Rem. I'm not confident with the 30 cal 165 SST's any longer and based on EHG's experiences with three semi trailers full of animals, and a partridge in a pear tree, am considering switching to Scirocco's for the 30's. Should I be considering similar for the 6.5's?
Recently I hunted axis deer. Deer 1 was shot at about 180 yards broadside. 180gr Nosler Partition broke one shoulder and exited the off side.
Deer 2 was shot at about 80 yards with a 165 Hornady SST. Two shots in the chest, (missed the shoulder) about 2 inches apart. Both bullets recovered under the skin on the off side. One a perfect mushroom. The other had a blown core. Animal ran about 50 yards after the first hit, was hit a second time and ran another 50 yards after the 2nd shot. Albeit deer #2 was a bit bigger than #1.
WVZ shot his elk (bigger animal), at 600 yards (greater distance) and got a through and through with a 129gr SST (greater sectional density?). I'm loading this same bullet for a 260 Rem. I'm not confident with the 30 cal 165 SST's any longer and based on EHG's experiences with three semi trailers full of animals, and a partridge in a pear tree, am considering switching to Scirocco's for the 30's. Should I be considering similar for the 6.5's?
Originally Posted by smokepole
I don't think the problem is a guy like Van Zwoll filming a shot like that. Personally, I enjoy seeing what the best are capable of.
The problem comes when "Joe-box-of-factory-ammo-a-year" thinks he's Wayne Van Zwoll. And that ain't Wayne's fault.
The problem comes when "Joe-box-of-factory-ammo-a-year" thinks he's Wayne Van Zwoll. And that ain't Wayne's fault.
Very well put.......
I couldn't agree more.
Originally Posted by smokepole
The problem comes when "Joe-box-of-factory-ammo-a-year" thinks he's Wayne Van Zwoll. And that ain't Wayne's fault.
Nor, I might add, is it Burns fault.....
Somebody already posted the following on this apparently live-forever thread a couple of weeks ago:
I have been hunting big game in Montana since the mid-1960's, and there have always been a bunch of unskilled hunters who figure the purpose of a bolt handle and a bunch of cheap ammo is to fling lead at any visible animal, regardless of range. I have seen this many times over the years, along with the results of such flinging.
The vast majority of these nitwits fling lead not because of any TV show or magazine articles. Probably the major influence is their fathers. I once had a paperboy, all of 13 years old, who told me he shot at a bull elk 700 yards away, with a .257 Roberts and factory round-nosed 117-grain bullets. He had no idea of the range (this was before laser range-finders), and even less idea where to aim. But his father had told him that any time he saw a bull elk to start flinging lead, no matter what the distance.
On another occasion I was walking back to my pickup on a gravel road after a long elk hike, and a pickup pulled up beside me. Inside were a guy in his 50's and his son, maybe 20. The father said they'd "gotten some shooting" that morning, at a bunch of elk 600 yards away. (Again, before rangefinders.) He also said that he used a .300 Winchester Magnum, because "it always knocks them on their ass." And since none of the elk fell on their ass, neither he nor his son bothered to walk over there and look for blood.
Just two examples among many.
I have been hunting big game in Montana since the mid-1960's, and there have always been a bunch of unskilled hunters who figure the purpose of a bolt handle and a bunch of cheap ammo is to fling lead at any visible animal, regardless of range. I have seen this many times over the years, along with the results of such flinging.
The vast majority of these nitwits fling lead not because of any TV show or magazine articles. Probably the major influence is their fathers. I once had a paperboy, all of 13 years old, who told me he shot at a bull elk 700 yards away, with a .257 Roberts and factory round-nosed 117-grain bullets. He had no idea of the range (this was before laser range-finders), and even less idea where to aim. But his father had told him that any time he saw a bull elk to start flinging lead, no matter what the distance.
On another occasion I was walking back to my pickup on a gravel road after a long elk hike, and a pickup pulled up beside me. Inside were a guy in his 50's and his son, maybe 20. The father said they'd "gotten some shooting" that morning, at a bunch of elk 600 yards away. (Again, before rangefinders.) He also said that he used a .300 Winchester Magnum, because "it always knocks them on their ass." And since none of the elk fell on their ass, neither he nor his son bothered to walk over there and look for blood.
Just two examples among many.
Originally Posted by oldslowdog
Originally Posted by smokepole
I don't think the problem is a guy like Van Zwoll filming a shot like that. Personally, I enjoy seeing what the best are capable of.
The problem comes when "Joe-box-of-factory-ammo-a-year" thinks he's Wayne Van Zwoll. And that ain't Wayne's fault.
The problem comes when "Joe-box-of-factory-ammo-a-year" thinks he's Wayne Van Zwoll. And that ain't Wayne's fault.
Very well put.......
I couldn't agree more.
+1 EXACTLY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Originally Posted by ChrisF
WVZ shot his elk (bigger animal), at 600 yards (greater distance) and got a through and through with a 129gr SST (greater sectional density?). I'm loading this same bullet for a 260 Rem. I'm not confident with the 30 cal 165 SST's any longer and based on EHG's experiences with three semi trailers full of animals, and a partridge in a pear tree, am considering switching to Scirocco's for the 30's. Should I be considering similar for the 6.5's?
Chris...I'm gettin right around 2960fps with 130gr Swift Scirocco II's from a 22" Rock Creek 1-8" barrel in plain Jane .260... Accuracy is excellent and the SS II advertised BC of .571 seems to be spot on...
I've used the SST on elk and never had a problem out to distance... Of the SST's that were recovered they preformed just fine...
I'm a Scirocco whore and of the many elk I've used them on I have NEVER had them not preform...
Personally I would lean to the Scirocco but thats just me...
Originally Posted by SteelyEyes
..... If you can't handle recoil then take up fishing.
Utter nonsense....
Anyone who shoots more rifle than he can manage(within reason),just to satisfy some inane theory about "killing power"....is stupid.
Those mesmerized by the toughness of elk should try shooting straighter;heavy recoil does not help with that for some folks.
And advise that they use a 300 Weatherby (for example)that they can't shoot for beans,in lieu of a 6.5 that they can,is unreasonable....and bad advise.
Badly hit with a 300 magnum, elk will go a long ways;maybe never recovered......properly hit with the 6.5 (270,7mm, etc), he will die pronto and anyone who has done much elk hunting knows this.
Hitting well can't be overemphasized when it comes to killing BG animals.
Bob,
A few years ago, after not drawing a moose tag in Montana after 30 years of applying, I booked a "cancellation" hunt in Alberta with an outfitter I've known for a long time.
He's one of those guys who firmly recommends a .300 magnum for elk and moose--mostly because that's what he shoots. I took a 7x57, and simply didn't mention it to him. When the guide asked what my rifle was chambered for, I said "7mm." He nodded, not really caring one way or the other.
Got a 41" bull on the second day. The first went through both lungs, just over the heart. The moose was standing there waiting to tip over, but then took a tentative step toward some thick brush and the guide asked me to shoot again, so we didn't have to pack him out of the brush. So I shot again, and then once again to make sure.
The moose didn't react to any of the three shots, though they were all within 4-5 inches of each other, and tipped over 19 yards from where he'd first been hit.
When we got back to the lodge that evening, the guide told the story, bragging about my shooting--which really wasn't extraordinary, since the moose was only 225 yards away. The outfitter nodded and said, "That's exactly what my bull did when I shot it with my .300!"
A few years ago, after not drawing a moose tag in Montana after 30 years of applying, I booked a "cancellation" hunt in Alberta with an outfitter I've known for a long time.
He's one of those guys who firmly recommends a .300 magnum for elk and moose--mostly because that's what he shoots. I took a 7x57, and simply didn't mention it to him. When the guide asked what my rifle was chambered for, I said "7mm." He nodded, not really caring one way or the other.
Got a 41" bull on the second day. The first went through both lungs, just over the heart. The moose was standing there waiting to tip over, but then took a tentative step toward some thick brush and the guide asked me to shoot again, so we didn't have to pack him out of the brush. So I shot again, and then once again to make sure.
The moose didn't react to any of the three shots, though they were all within 4-5 inches of each other, and tipped over 19 yards from where he'd first been hit.
When we got back to the lodge that evening, the guide told the story, bragging about my shooting--which really wasn't extraordinary, since the moose was only 225 yards away. The outfitter nodded and said, "That's exactly what my bull did when I shot it with my .300!"
Originally Posted by BobinNH
Originally Posted by SteelyEyes
..... If you can't handle recoil then take up fishing.
Utter nonsense....
Anyone who shoots more rifle than he can manage(within reason),just to satisfy some inane theory about "killing power"....is stupid.
Those mesmerized by the toughness of elk should try shooting straighter;heavy recoil does not help with that for some folks.
And advise that they use a 300 Weatherby (for example)that they can't shoot for beans,in lieu of a 6.5 that they can,is unreasonable....and bad advise.
Badly hit with a 300 magnum, elk will go a long ways;maybe never recovered......properly hit with the 6.5 (270,7mm, etc), he will die pronto and anyone who has done much elk hunting knows this.
Hitting well can't be overemphasized when it comes to killing BG animals.
Hitting well with enough energy to do the job EVERY TIME with the vagaries of field conditions can't be overemphasized. Learning to manage recoil is part of shooting a hunting rifle well. My .300 mag wild cat is a tack driver and both I and my 140 lb. wife can shoot it, recoil and all, plenty well enough to put an elk in the dirt with certainty.
I like to make sure I use the right tool for the job and do the job well. I will not use a marginal, at best tool, and hope that my skill can always make up for my less than adequate choice in weapon. When I muzzleload for elk I shoot a .54 cal., when I bow hunt I shoot a 75 lb. bow and best broadhead I can find that is surgically sharp. I don't think you need a magnum to kill elk. A 30-06 or even a .308 would be a fine choice if used within it's limitations in range and energy. If you want to reach far than at least have the concern for the beast you're killing to do it right and choose a weapon with enough energy to do the job well, every time.
I guess I kind of fall in line with Mark Twain when speaking about drinking. He said, "Too much of anything can be bad but too much bourbon is just enough". I feel the same about building things, shooting things, and life in general. Nothing I make will win awards for it's sweeping lines and lithe looks but it sure as hell will not fall down while I'm alive and nothing I shoot will limp away to die slowly if there is choice I can make to ensure that doesn't happen. Using enough gun is part of that choice as is learning to deliver the round where it needs to go. Seeing a video of one very accomplished marksman do it once isn't enough to convince me to trade in my rifle for something more dimunitive any time soon.
Goody for you....
Originally Posted by Mule Deer
Bob,
A few years ago, after not drawing a moose tag in Montana after 30 years of applying, I booked a "cancellation" hunt in Alberta with an outfitter I've known for a long time.
He's one of those guys who firmly recommends a .300 magnum for elk and moose--mostly because that's what he shoots. I took a 7x57, and simply didn't mention it to him. When the guide asked what my rifle was chambered for, I said "7mm." He nodded, not really caring one way or the other.
Got a 41" bull on the second day. The first went through both lungs, just over the heart. The moose was standing there waiting to tip over, but then took a tentative step toward some thick brush and the guide asked me to shoot again, so we didn't have to pack him out of the brush. So I shot again, and then once again to make sure.
The moose didn't react to any of the three shots, though they were all within 4-5 inches of each other, and tipped over 19 yards from where he'd first been hit.
When we got back to the lodge that evening, the guide told the story, bragging about my shooting--which really wasn't extraordinary, since the moose was only 225 yards away. The outfitter nodded and said, "That's exactly what my bull did when I shot it with my .300!"
A few years ago, after not drawing a moose tag in Montana after 30 years of applying, I booked a "cancellation" hunt in Alberta with an outfitter I've known for a long time.
He's one of those guys who firmly recommends a .300 magnum for elk and moose--mostly because that's what he shoots. I took a 7x57, and simply didn't mention it to him. When the guide asked what my rifle was chambered for, I said "7mm." He nodded, not really caring one way or the other.
Got a 41" bull on the second day. The first went through both lungs, just over the heart. The moose was standing there waiting to tip over, but then took a tentative step toward some thick brush and the guide asked me to shoot again, so we didn't have to pack him out of the brush. So I shot again, and then once again to make sure.
The moose didn't react to any of the three shots, though they were all within 4-5 inches of each other, and tipped over 19 yards from where he'd first been hit.
When we got back to the lodge that evening, the guide told the story, bragging about my shooting--which really wasn't extraordinary, since the moose was only 225 yards away. The outfitter nodded and said, "That's exactly what my bull did when I shot it with my .300!"
What bullet John?
Super long throat on my rifle..
Originally Posted by SteelyEyes
Hitting well with enough energy to do the job EVERY TIME with the vagaries of field conditions can't be overemphasized. Learning to manage recoil is part of shooting a hunting rifle well. My .300 mag wild cat is a tack driver and both I and my 140 lb. wife can shoot it, recoil and all, plenty well enough to put an elk in the dirt with certainty.
I like to make sure I use the right tool for the job and do the job well. I will not use a marginal, at best tool, and hope that my skill can always make up for my less than adequate choice in weapon. When I muzzleload for elk I shoot a .54 cal., when I bow hunt I shoot a 75 lb. bow and best broadhead I can find that is surgically sharp. I don't think you need a magnum to kill elk. A 30-06 or even a .308 would be a fine choice if used within it's limitations in range and energy. If you want to reach far than at least have the concern for the beast you're killing to do it right and choose a weapon with enough energy to do the job well, every time.
I guess I kind of fall in line with Mark Twain when speaking about drinking. He said, "Too much of anything can be bad but too much bourbon is just enough". I feel the same about building things, shooting things, and life in general. Nothing I make will win awards for it's sweeping lines and lithe looks but it sure as hell will not fall down while I'm alive and nothing I shoot will limp away to die slowly if there is choice I can make to ensure that doesn't happen. Using enough gun is part of that choice as is learning to deliver the round where it needs to go. Seeing a video of one very accomplished marksman do it once isn't enough to convince me to trade in my rifle for something more dimunitive any time soon.
I like to make sure I use the right tool for the job and do the job well. I will not use a marginal, at best tool, and hope that my skill can always make up for my less than adequate choice in weapon. When I muzzleload for elk I shoot a .54 cal., when I bow hunt I shoot a 75 lb. bow and best broadhead I can find that is surgically sharp. I don't think you need a magnum to kill elk. A 30-06 or even a .308 would be a fine choice if used within it's limitations in range and energy. If you want to reach far than at least have the concern for the beast you're killing to do it right and choose a weapon with enough energy to do the job well, every time.
I guess I kind of fall in line with Mark Twain when speaking about drinking. He said, "Too much of anything can be bad but too much bourbon is just enough". I feel the same about building things, shooting things, and life in general. Nothing I make will win awards for it's sweeping lines and lithe looks but it sure as hell will not fall down while I'm alive and nothing I shoot will limp away to die slowly if there is choice I can make to ensure that doesn't happen. Using enough gun is part of that choice as is learning to deliver the round where it needs to go. Seeing a video of one very accomplished marksman do it once isn't enough to convince me to trade in my rifle for something more dimunitive any time soon.
Are you talking about shooting elk in the ass?
That is the only sense I can make out of your argument.
Take a 6.5 Creedmoor or a .270, or something similar, load it with a heavy Barnes X, and any elk short of an ass shot is going to be dead. Those bullets WILL break elk shoulders, you know...
It always amazes me how a cartridge can kill an elk with one shot and people will still claim it is inadequate.
Screw the cartridge. It's all about the bullet. Especially the place where said bullet impacts...
Originally Posted by ChrisF
I won't touch the aspect of the video that most are discussing, but the choice of bullet and the performance described brings to mind a question for ya'll:
Recently I hunted axis deer. Deer 1 was shot at about 180 yards broadside. 180gr Nosler Partition broke one shoulder and exited the off side.
Deer 2 was shot at about 80 yards with a 165 Hornady SST. Two shots in the chest, (missed the shoulder) about 2 inches apart. Both bullets recovered under the skin on the off side. One a perfect mushroom. The other had a blown core. Animal ran about 50 yards after the first hit, was hit a second time and ran another 50 yards after the 2nd shot. Albeit deer #2 was a bit bigger than #1.
I'm not confident with the 30 cal 165 SST's any longer and based on EHG's experiences with three semi trailers full of animals, and a partridge in a pear tree, am considering switching to Scirocco's for the 30's. Should I be considering similar for the 6.5's?
Recently I hunted axis deer. Deer 1 was shot at about 180 yards broadside. 180gr Nosler Partition broke one shoulder and exited the off side.
Deer 2 was shot at about 80 yards with a 165 Hornady SST. Two shots in the chest, (missed the shoulder) about 2 inches apart. Both bullets recovered under the skin on the off side. One a perfect mushroom. The other had a blown core. Animal ran about 50 yards after the first hit, was hit a second time and ran another 50 yards after the 2nd shot. Albeit deer #2 was a bit bigger than #1.
I'm not confident with the 30 cal 165 SST's any longer and based on EHG's experiences with three semi trailers full of animals, and a partridge in a pear tree, am considering switching to Scirocco's for the 30's. Should I be considering similar for the 6.5's?
Granted I've only killed 3 deer with the 30cal 165gr SST, but all three went straight down when shot by my '06. Two were about 100-120yds away, and the other was about 20yds away. 3 shots, 3 dead deer.
Originally Posted by bellydeep
Originally Posted by SteelyEyes
Hitting well with enough energy to do the job EVERY TIME with the vagaries of field conditions can't be overemphasized. Learning to manage recoil is part of shooting a hunting rifle well. My .300 mag wild cat is a tack driver and both I and my 140 lb. wife can shoot it, recoil and all, plenty well enough to put an elk in the dirt with certainty.
I like to make sure I use the right tool for the job and do the job well. I will not use a marginal, at best tool, and hope that my skill can always make up for my less than adequate choice in weapon. When I muzzleload for elk I shoot a .54 cal., when I bow hunt I shoot a 75 lb. bow and best broadhead I can find that is surgically sharp. I don't think you need a magnum to kill elk. A 30-06 or even a .308 would be a fine choice if used within it's limitations in range and energy. If you want to reach far than at least have the concern for the beast you're killing to do it right and choose a weapon with enough energy to do the job well, every time.
I guess I kind of fall in line with Mark Twain when speaking about drinking. He said, "Too much of anything can be bad but too much bourbon is just enough". I feel the same about building things, shooting things, and life in general. Nothing I make will win awards for it's sweeping lines and lithe looks but it sure as hell will not fall down while I'm alive and nothing I shoot will limp away to die slowly if there is choice I can make to ensure that doesn't happen. Using enough gun is part of that choice as is learning to deliver the round where it needs to go. Seeing a video of one very accomplished marksman do it once isn't enough to convince me to trade in my rifle for something more dimunitive any time soon.
I like to make sure I use the right tool for the job and do the job well. I will not use a marginal, at best tool, and hope that my skill can always make up for my less than adequate choice in weapon. When I muzzleload for elk I shoot a .54 cal., when I bow hunt I shoot a 75 lb. bow and best broadhead I can find that is surgically sharp. I don't think you need a magnum to kill elk. A 30-06 or even a .308 would be a fine choice if used within it's limitations in range and energy. If you want to reach far than at least have the concern for the beast you're killing to do it right and choose a weapon with enough energy to do the job well, every time.
I guess I kind of fall in line with Mark Twain when speaking about drinking. He said, "Too much of anything can be bad but too much bourbon is just enough". I feel the same about building things, shooting things, and life in general. Nothing I make will win awards for it's sweeping lines and lithe looks but it sure as hell will not fall down while I'm alive and nothing I shoot will limp away to die slowly if there is choice I can make to ensure that doesn't happen. Using enough gun is part of that choice as is learning to deliver the round where it needs to go. Seeing a video of one very accomplished marksman do it once isn't enough to convince me to trade in my rifle for something more dimunitive any time soon.
Are you talking about shooting elk in the ass?
That is the only sense I can make out of your argument.
Take a 6.5 Creedmoor or a .270, or something similar, load it with a heavy Barnes X, and any elk short of an ass shot is going to be dead. Those bullets WILL break elk shoulders, you know...
It always amazes me how a cartridge can kill an elk with one shot and people will still claim it is inadequate.
Here's a snippet from the Colorado Division of Wildlife about cartridge choice, energy, and killing elk.
Quote
When you have an elk in your sights you should concentrate on the heart- lung area of the chest cavity just behind the front leg. Head and neck shots are NOT recommended. You will need to penetrate into the tissue with enough destructive force to destroy those vital organs to insure a clean one shot kill. Cartridges that deliver 1,000 foot-pounds of energy are sufficient on deer species because they are smaller, thin-skinned and have a much lighter skeletal structure. The general consensus is that for a broadside shot on an elk you need 1,200 foot-pounds of energy and at least 2,000 foot-pounds for any quartering shot. A quartering shot when the animal is partially facing you is the most challenging shot. You have to penetrate heavy, dense muscle tissue and the heavy bone structure of the shoulder and then still have enough bullet and energy left to destroy the vital organs.
I ran the ballistics for a hot load in the 6.5 Creedmoor with the heaviest bullet on the list, the 142 Matchking. At 600 yards it's packing a whopping 903 ft/lb of KE, about 3/4 of what they recommend. They may or may not be experts and I'm sure their recommendations are like the pirate's code, more of a guideline than a carved in stone law. Their recommendations do fall in line with what lots of outfitters and other folks that see elk get shot by a variety of weapons have to say about it as well. I've yet to see anyone with a broad depth of experience recommend the bare minimum or a marginal one as their favored choice.
If your idea of a challenge is waiting for a broadside shot over a quartering one, with the wind steady enough, and the moon in the perfect alignment to slip a low energy bullet in a bull's ribs at a third of a mile then have at it. It's still mostly a free country.
That said each person is responsible for themselves and their own ethical choices. I've helped a few folks like that attempt to find an animal they've shot or shot at and have yet to see it work out with a celebration at the end but your milage may vary.
Originally Posted by SteelyEyes
Originally Posted by bellydeep
Originally Posted by SteelyEyes
Hitting well with enough energy to do the job EVERY TIME with the vagaries of field conditions can't be overemphasized. Learning to manage recoil is part of shooting a hunting rifle well. My .300 mag wild cat is a tack driver and both I and my 140 lb. wife can shoot it, recoil and all, plenty well enough to put an elk in the dirt with certainty.
I like to make sure I use the right tool for the job and do the job well. I will not use a marginal, at best tool, and hope that my skill can always make up for my less than adequate choice in weapon. When I muzzleload for elk I shoot a .54 cal., when I bow hunt I shoot a 75 lb. bow and best broadhead I can find that is surgically sharp. I don't think you need a magnum to kill elk. A 30-06 or even a .308 would be a fine choice if used within it's limitations in range and energy. If you want to reach far than at least have the concern for the beast you're killing to do it right and choose a weapon with enough energy to do the job well, every time.
I guess I kind of fall in line with Mark Twain when speaking about drinking. He said, "Too much of anything can be bad but too much bourbon is just enough". I feel the same about building things, shooting things, and life in general. Nothing I make will win awards for it's sweeping lines and lithe looks but it sure as hell will not fall down while I'm alive and nothing I shoot will limp away to die slowly if there is choice I can make to ensure that doesn't happen. Using enough gun is part of that choice as is learning to deliver the round where it needs to go. Seeing a video of one very accomplished marksman do it once isn't enough to convince me to trade in my rifle for something more dimunitive any time soon.
I like to make sure I use the right tool for the job and do the job well. I will not use a marginal, at best tool, and hope that my skill can always make up for my less than adequate choice in weapon. When I muzzleload for elk I shoot a .54 cal., when I bow hunt I shoot a 75 lb. bow and best broadhead I can find that is surgically sharp. I don't think you need a magnum to kill elk. A 30-06 or even a .308 would be a fine choice if used within it's limitations in range and energy. If you want to reach far than at least have the concern for the beast you're killing to do it right and choose a weapon with enough energy to do the job well, every time.
I guess I kind of fall in line with Mark Twain when speaking about drinking. He said, "Too much of anything can be bad but too much bourbon is just enough". I feel the same about building things, shooting things, and life in general. Nothing I make will win awards for it's sweeping lines and lithe looks but it sure as hell will not fall down while I'm alive and nothing I shoot will limp away to die slowly if there is choice I can make to ensure that doesn't happen. Using enough gun is part of that choice as is learning to deliver the round where it needs to go. Seeing a video of one very accomplished marksman do it once isn't enough to convince me to trade in my rifle for something more dimunitive any time soon.
Are you talking about shooting elk in the ass?
That is the only sense I can make out of your argument.
Take a 6.5 Creedmoor or a .270, or something similar, load it with a heavy Barnes X, and any elk short of an ass shot is going to be dead. Those bullets WILL break elk shoulders, you know...
It always amazes me how a cartridge can kill an elk with one shot and people will still claim it is inadequate.
Here's a snippet from the Colorado Division of Wildlife about cartridge choice, energy, and killing elk.
Quote
When you have an elk in your sights you should concentrate on the heart- lung area of the chest cavity just behind the front leg. Head and neck shots are NOT recommended. You will need to penetrate into the tissue with enough destructive force to destroy those vital organs to insure a clean one shot kill. Cartridges that deliver 1,000 foot-pounds of energy are sufficient on deer species because they are smaller, thin-skinned and have a much lighter skeletal structure. The general consensus is that for a broadside shot on an elk you need 1,200 foot-pounds of energy and at least 2,000 foot-pounds for any quartering shot. A quartering shot when the animal is partially facing you is the most challenging shot. You have to penetrate heavy, dense muscle tissue and the heavy bone structure of the shoulder and then still have enough bullet and energy left to destroy the vital organs.
I ran the ballistics for a hot load in the 6.5 Creedmoor with the heaviest bullet on the list, the 142 Matchking. At 600 yards it's packing a whopping 903 ft/lb of KE, about 3/4 of what they recommend. They may or may not be experts and I'm sure their recommendations are like the pirate's code, more of a guideline than a carved in stone law. Their recommendations do fall in line with what lots of outfitters and other folks that see elk get shot by a variety of weapons have to say about it as well. I've yet to see anyone with a broad depth of experience recommend the bare minimum or a marginal one as their favored choice.
If your idea of a challenge is waiting for a broadside shot over a quartering one, with the wind steady enough, and the moon in the perfect alignment to slip a low energy bullet in a bull's ribs at a third of a mile then have at it. It's still mostly a free country.
That said each person is responsible for themselves and their own ethical choices. I've helped a few folks like that attempt to find an animal they've shot or shot at and have yet to see it work out with a celebration at the end but your milage may vary.
I've still never heard about a 150gr Barnes X failing to penetrate an elk sufficiently when fired from a .270. A 140gr Barnes from a 6.5 Creedmoor should be no different. Quartering or not, elk will die. Colorado DOW writes that stuff for idiots who shoot core-lokts and bore-sight their rifles the night before opener. John Burns has pretty much shown that the whole "2000 foot-pounds required to kill an elk" thing is a myth.
On the other hand, I have heard about lots of people losing elk with big magnums, probably because they can't shoot them well, but of course they won't admit that when they tell me their stories.
Originally Posted by Mule Deer
Bob,
A few years ago, after not drawing a moose tag in Montana after 30 years of applying, I booked a "cancellation" hunt in Alberta with an outfitter I've known for a long time.
He's one of those guys who firmly recommends a .300 magnum for elk and moose--mostly because that's what he shoots. I took a 7x57, and simply didn't mention it to him. When the guide asked what my rifle was chambered for, I said "7mm." He nodded, not really caring one way or the other.
Got a 41" bull on the second day. The first went through both lungs, just over the heart. The moose was standing there waiting to tip over, but then took a tentative step toward some thick brush and the guide asked me to shoot again, so we didn't have to pack him out of the brush. So I shot again, and then once again to make sure.
The moose didn't react to any of the three shots, though they were all within 4-5 inches of each other, and tipped over 19 yards from where he'd first been hit.
When we got back to the lodge that evening, the guide told the story, bragging about my shooting--which really wasn't extraordinary, since the moose was only 225 yards away. The outfitter nodded and said, "That's exactly what my bull did when I shot it with my .300!"
A few years ago, after not drawing a moose tag in Montana after 30 years of applying, I booked a "cancellation" hunt in Alberta with an outfitter I've known for a long time.
He's one of those guys who firmly recommends a .300 magnum for elk and moose--mostly because that's what he shoots. I took a 7x57, and simply didn't mention it to him. When the guide asked what my rifle was chambered for, I said "7mm." He nodded, not really caring one way or the other.
Got a 41" bull on the second day. The first went through both lungs, just over the heart. The moose was standing there waiting to tip over, but then took a tentative step toward some thick brush and the guide asked me to shoot again, so we didn't have to pack him out of the brush. So I shot again, and then once again to make sure.
The moose didn't react to any of the three shots, though they were all within 4-5 inches of each other, and tipped over 19 yards from where he'd first been hit.
When we got back to the lodge that evening, the guide told the story, bragging about my shooting--which really wasn't extraordinary, since the moose was only 225 yards away. The outfitter nodded and said, "That's exactly what my bull did when I shot it with my .300!"
John I have seen the rug jerked from elk with 300's and the usual other over 30 cal magnums...no denying their effectivness. But thinking back on it over the years the bullets were very well placed....and in those instances when they were not well placed, those cartridges truthfully did not do any better than smaller cartridges..lesson learned is that a 270/7mm in the right place will do what a poorly placed 30/338 mag,will not.....
Given the 6.5mm range of bullets and track record on other large animals, I can't imagine a 6.5 Creedmoor doing anything but pulping an elk's chest to shreds....once that happens he is simply going to die;and it has nothing to do with energy numbers and various Knock Out values.....he just can't breathe anymore.
End of game!
I recall an article you did a few years back about "tough game",where you said that tough game is often a problem some hunters create for themselves....
I see people that can't shoot well all the time, or used to when I shot a lot. I've mostly hunted with my bow for the last 8 years. It doesn't matter if you shoot a magnum or a .270 the markmanship skills are exactly the same and the key is practice. Most people don't practice and most people are really pretty crappy marksmen because of it.
If you want to shoot well consistantly at more than 100 yards it takes a bit more than a few days at the range. The thing I found that makes the biggest difference is a good trigger that you don't have to wrestle and learning to squeeze it without torquing the rifle off line with the intended aim point.
Recoil is an issue with any rifle and learning to deal with that isn't rocket surgery either. I see people flinching when they shoot .22s because they've made it a habit. Believe it or not people flinch when they shoot bows too and they don't recoil anything like a rifle.
Truth be told most archery hunters don't practice enough or have their bow tuned properly either. Maybe they don't think they have the time or it's not important to them.
If you want to shoot well consistantly at more than 100 yards it takes a bit more than a few days at the range. The thing I found that makes the biggest difference is a good trigger that you don't have to wrestle and learning to squeeze it without torquing the rifle off line with the intended aim point.
Recoil is an issue with any rifle and learning to deal with that isn't rocket surgery either. I see people flinching when they shoot .22s because they've made it a habit. Believe it or not people flinch when they shoot bows too and they don't recoil anything like a rifle.
Truth be told most archery hunters don't practice enough or have their bow tuned properly either. Maybe they don't think they have the time or it's not important to them.
Originally Posted by SteelyEyes
I've yet to see anyone with a broad depth of experience recommend the bare minimum or a marginal one as their favored choice.
I've yet to see anyone with a broad depth of experience recommend foot-pounds of energy...
Quote
I've yet to see anyone with a broad depth of experience recommend foot-pounds of energy
Is that why Craig Boddington said he would prefer 2000 Ft Lbs at impact over 1500 lbs on Elk but also preferring bullet weight to energy...Not that I agree with either statement.
Jayco
Quote
Granted I've only killed 3 deer with the 30cal 165gr SST, but all three went straight down when shot by my '06. Two were about 100-120yds away, and the other was about 20yds away. 3 shots, 3 dead deer
dmsbandit, can you tell me if you recovered any bullet? ...or did they pass through?
I don't often recover bullets, especially at close range, but I got two out of that last deer with the SST's.
Shot placement by far trumps everything else...
Second would be bullet construction...
A distant third would be head stamp...
Just sayin...
Second would be bullet construction...
A distant third would be head stamp...
Just sayin...
Originally Posted by elkhuntinguide
Shot placement by far trumps everything else...
Second would be bullet construction...
A distant third would be head stamp...
Just sayin...
Second would be bullet construction...
A distant third would be head stamp...
Just sayin...
Originally Posted by SteelyEyes
I ran the ballistics for a hot load in the 6.5 Creedmoor with the heaviest bullet on the list, the 142 Matchking. At 600 yards it's packing a whopping 903 ft/lb of KE, about 3/4 of what they recommend.
Not really sure why you would run the numbers on a different bullet at a different altitude?
The load that killed the elk was the factory 129gr SST at 2975fps.
The altitude was 7500ft and 50deg Temp.
Not that it is really important but you will find that the bull got hit with more than 1200ft/lbs.
We had all agreed at the beginning of the hunt to limit any shots to 600yds and I do think that is the max range I would ever use the Creedmoor on elk.
It obviously worked but the wound channel was small enough that I would not be willing to push any further.
Energy plays its part as nothing happens without it.
For myself, I would rather have excess than too little or marginal amounts. A friend of mine used to guide and carry a .250 Savage. It worked but he admits he would prefer something bigger and used it at the time because it was what he had. I sometimes hunt elk with my .30-30, .44 Mag and Roberts but there is no way I would take shots with them -- much as I enjoy carrying them and even if I could hit as well at longer ranges with them -- that I would happily take with my .308/.30-06/.300, 7mm RM, .45-70, etc.
For myself, I would rather have excess than too little or marginal amounts. A friend of mine used to guide and carry a .250 Savage. It worked but he admits he would prefer something bigger and used it at the time because it was what he had. I sometimes hunt elk with my .30-30, .44 Mag and Roberts but there is no way I would take shots with them -- much as I enjoy carrying them and even if I could hit as well at longer ranges with them -- that I would happily take with my .308/.30-06/.300, 7mm RM, .45-70, etc.
It's a stunt.
I see my NRA Hunter has a lengthy article on the Creed. I'll have to read it and then catch up on all these pages too.
Originally Posted by ChrisF
Quote
Granted I've only killed 3 deer with the 30cal 165gr SST, but all three went straight down when shot by my '06. Two were about 100-120yds away, and the other was about 20yds away. 3 shots, 3 dead deer
dmsbandit, can you tell me if you recovered any bullet? ...or did they pass through?
I don't often recover bullets, especially at close range, but I got two out of that last deer with the SST's.
Complete pass thru on all three deer. One hit at the neck/shoulder junction, one in the white patch under the chin, and one hit thru the middle of the neck.
Originally Posted by logcutter
Quote
I've yet to see anyone with a broad depth of experience recommend foot-pounds of energy
Is that why Craig Boddington said he would prefer 2000 Ft Lbs at impact over 1500 lbs on Elk but also preferring bullet weight to energy...Not that I agree with either statement.
Jayco
Craig said a lot of things for a lot of years about elk and elk guns. I think he's changed his tune a bit recently. He wrote on and on about how a .270 was a marginal elk round and how he would limit his shots to 200 yards with one, blah blah blah
Then after the Accubonds came out he went down to NM and dumped his first bull he ever killed with a .270. If I remember correctly, he killed it somewhere out around 400 yards. Recent bullet technology has changed the killing power of cartridges...but the prevailing "knowledge" is much slower in catching up.
My answer was in reply to "I've yet to see anyone with a broad depth of experience recommend foot-pounds of energy" and that was clearly wrong...I also said "not that I agree"...
I'm the last one to argue energy and it's effects/the definition of or.....But energy has to have some effect on game,especially larger game or the 6.5 Creedmore would be legal in Africa for dangerous game.So if you defined energy as knockdown power it would be like Mike Tyson(375 H&H) fighting Suger Ray Leanord (6.5 Creedmore)..Both excellent fighters in there day but not even close to being in the same league of actual power...
I have seen smaller calibers than the 6.5 take Elk at that range and I have seen mistakes in judgment/wind/distance/grade and movement at ignition result in bad shots that never should have been taken.
One thing about so called long range marksmen,there sure not short on testosterone and there abilities and there also quick to tell you how good they are but we don't here about there boo/boo's as I got to see first hand with a few Military sharpshooters.
There kinda the Second Lieutenant's of the hunting world...
Jayco
I'm the last one to argue energy and it's effects/the definition of or.....But energy has to have some effect on game,especially larger game or the 6.5 Creedmore would be legal in Africa for dangerous game.So if you defined energy as knockdown power it would be like Mike Tyson(375 H&H) fighting Suger Ray Leanord (6.5 Creedmore)..Both excellent fighters in there day but not even close to being in the same league of actual power...
I have seen smaller calibers than the 6.5 take Elk at that range and I have seen mistakes in judgment/wind/distance/grade and movement at ignition result in bad shots that never should have been taken.
One thing about so called long range marksmen,there sure not short on testosterone and there abilities and there also quick to tell you how good they are but we don't here about there boo/boo's as I got to see first hand with a few Military sharpshooters.
There kinda the Second Lieutenant's of the hunting world...
Jayco
Show me that what I said was clearly wrong.
Energy gives bullets the ability to do what they do. Nothing more.
Energy gives bullets the ability to do what they do. Nothing more.
Lil Logcutter,
I think we can all agree that you and the guys you hunt with should absolutely not attempt any long range shooting.
I commend you on knowing your limits but I would question why it took so many bad shots on elk for you to learn this long range thing is just not your cup of tea??
I think we can all agree that you and the guys you hunt with should absolutely not attempt any long range shooting.
I commend you on knowing your limits but I would question why it took so many bad shots on elk for you to learn this long range thing is just not your cup of tea??
Lil John,
I always like the guys that think there invincible and are beyond mistakes... Like Mary Poppins..Perfect in every way..
You had to have been a Second Lieutenant in the service,right?Your to good to be just maybe, an E-5...
Have a good one John Burns....
Jayco
I always like the guys that think there invincible and are beyond mistakes... Like Mary Poppins..Perfect in every way..
You had to have been a Second Lieutenant in the service,right?Your to good to be just maybe, an E-5...
Have a good one John Burns....
Jayco
Originally Posted by logcutter
Lil John,
I always like the guys that think there invincible and are beyond mistakes... Like Mary Poppins..Perfect in every way..
You had to have been a Second Lieutenant in the service,right?Your to good to be just maybe, an E-5...
Have a good one John Burns....
Jayco
I always like the guys that think there invincible and are beyond mistakes... Like Mary Poppins..Perfect in every way..
You had to have been a Second Lieutenant in the service,right?Your to good to be just maybe, an E-5...
Have a good one John Burns....
Jayco
E-3.
Interesting that we don't hear the boo/boo's of "short range" hunters....... Or bow hunters.
But yet they are so quick to say- "don't shoot past 201 yards because you could wound one!"
I think that the ideal elk weapon would have to be the TOW missle with a effective range of 3000 meters, tripod mounted, no recoil and so much energy they will kill a tank. Great penitration and destroys everything inside. They are loads of fun to shoot and if a loud mouth comes along to hassel you just have him stand behind it while you fire. He will vanish in a cloud of smoke. LOL
I think Boddington used a 150 Nosler partition for that bull.
Originally Posted by BobinNH
I think Boddington used a 150 Nosler partition for that bull.
It was!
Originally Posted by GSSP
Originally Posted by BobinNH
I think Boddington used a 150 Nosler partition for that bull.
It was!
57 of R22 and 411 yds or something close to that, said something to the effect of he'd not seen a bull go down quicker b4.....
Dober
Sure could have been. Its been a few years since I read the story. All I remember is, the ol .270 surprised him a bit
If the Creedmoor is an elk rifle, the 30-06 is a Kodiak Brown Bear cartridge. That settles that!
Things will suprise all of us from time to time, when we actually try them... 
Dober
Dober
You could rule the entire hunting world with a
6.5x55 and a 9.3x62.
6.5x55 and a 9.3x62.
Or a 22/250 and a 375 H&H....grin
Dober
Dober
264WM, 30-06 and 338 Federale (ooops we don't want to go there again)
Originally Posted by Mark R Dobrenski
Or a 22/250 and a 375 H&H....grin
Dober
Dober
Or a 270 and a 375 H&H....Fixed it for ya Dober
Originally Posted by BobinNH
Originally Posted by Mark R Dobrenski
Or a 22/250 and a 375 H&H....grin
Dober
Dober
Or a 223AI and a 375 H&H....Fixed it for ya Dober
there..fixt it for ya Bob...
You rascal.....you are at it again.... LOL!
LOL!
Originally Posted by bigwhoop
If the Creedmoor is an elk rifle, the 30-06 is a Kodiak Brown Bear cartridge. That settles that!
Well, I'm pretty sure Phil Shoemaker would say the -06 is a KBB cart.
Alan
Originally Posted by SU35
You could rule the entire hunting world with a
6.5x55 and a 9.3x62.
6.5x55 and a 9.3x62.
That's why my main hunting battery I had built this past year is a 6.5x47 running 140 Part @ 2865, 140 VLD's @ 2950 and a 9.3x62 running 250 AB's @ 2606.
Alan
Originally Posted by Formidilosus
Interesting that we don't hear the boo/boo's of "short range" hunters....... Or bow hunters.
It is. I have a longbow and recall reading an article by one of the most respected traditional bowhunters out there. His standard for effective range and accuracy (if I recall correctly and I'm pretty sure I do) was that a trad bowhunter should be able to put 8 out of 10 arrows into a target the size of the vitals of a deer at his maximum range.
And IMHO, making a good hit with a traditional bow, no sights, finger release, and so on is just as complicated (if not moreso) with just as many variables or things that can go wrong as as a long-range shot with a scoped modern rifle.
Somehow 20% is an acceptable failure rate in that case, but not for long-range rifles.
Originally Posted by smokepole
Originally Posted by Formidilosus
Interesting that we don't hear the boo/boo's of "short range" hunters....... Or bow hunters.
It is. I have a longbow and recall reading an article by one of the most respected traditional bowhunters out there. His standard for effective range and accuracy (if I recall correctly and I'm pretty sure I do) was that a trad bowhunter should be able to put 8 out of 10 arrows into a target the size of the vitals of a deer at his maximum range.
And IMHO, making a good hit with a traditional bow, no sights, finger release, and so on is just as complicated (if not moreso) with just as many variables or things that can go wrong as as a long-range shot with a scoped modern rifle.
But somehow 20% is an acceptable failure rate.
I agree 100%. Peoples preception of what is ethical or acceptable is everything to them and may have nothing to do with reality.
I am not against archery hunting in any way, however I have seen far more animals lost and wounded by archery hunting than I have rifle hunting.
The argument often comes into play about having enough energy to kill your game animal. How much energy does a broadhead fired from a compound bow have? I can tell you it's not much and far less than the average rifle used for hunting at even the extreme ranges. What about a knife used by hound hunters on pigs? How much energy does it have?
What about the size of your projectile? A broadhead's size is fixed once it hits it's target. The right bullet can literally explode into the vitals and still exit.
What about distance to target? Archery equipment uses crude, rudimentary sights for shoting out to 60 yards and beyond. Long range hunters use high precision scopes along with other tools to make 1000 yard shots or beyond. I would take the quality scope, steady rest, known ballistic flight pattern, and a wind meter any day for precision over a post and peep archery sight.
Originally Posted by chicoredneck
I am not against archery hunting in any way.....
Me either. Just pointing out the double standard.
Also I have seen a lot more hunters have deer get away after being shot with a muzzle loader round ball.
Only problem there is that when they get away you're never really sure how good the shot was.
Well we seen a video of John Burns dumping an elk with a 140 Berger from a 264 WM at 686 yards on another thread...
..anyone wanna run the numbers and tell us how much "better" the 264 is at 686 than the 260 is at 600 with the same bullet?
I would think bullet structure and placement will play into it more than anything else.
..anyone wanna run the numbers and tell us how much "better" the 264 is at 686 than the 260 is at 600 with the same bullet?
I would think bullet structure and placement will play into it more than anything else.
Originally Posted by BobinNH
I would think bullet structure and placement will play into it more than anything else.
agreed...
Originally Posted by BobinNH
..anyone wanna run the numbers and tell us how much "better" the 264 is at 686 than the 260 is at 600 with the same bullet?
The .264 is most definitely more devastating, due to the overwhelming preponderance of Kinetic Energy (note the capitals). It kills 'em DRT, like the hammer of Thor (also capitalized).
smokepole: Faster....
I was just wondering at what distance the 264 sorta becomes a 6.5 Creedmoor.
I was just wondering at what distance the 264 sorta becomes a 6.5 Creedmoor.
You can't measure that far, it's the distance to the little sideways "8" on your parallax adjustment.
That's how much kinetic energy is conferred by virtue of the term "magnum" in the cartridge name. DRT!!
That's how much kinetic energy is conferred by virtue of the term "magnum" in the cartridge name. DRT!!
Bob,
By my calculations the 6.5 Creedmoor hit Wayne�s bull with a little over 1200ft/lbs. I generated the numbers using a G1 BC and so 2087 fps terminal velocity is a little optimistic but it gives us a good idea.
The 264 Win Mag load that I killed the 668yd bull with drops to slightly over 1200ft/lbs at 1100yds at the same altitude and temp conditions that Wayne killed his bull.
The much better BC of the 140 VLD is a big deal when we really try and stretch the distance. (The extra 250 fps helps some)
It isn�t twice as far but it darn near to twice.
By my calculations the 6.5 Creedmoor hit Wayne�s bull with a little over 1200ft/lbs. I generated the numbers using a G1 BC and so 2087 fps terminal velocity is a little optimistic but it gives us a good idea.
The 264 Win Mag load that I killed the 668yd bull with drops to slightly over 1200ft/lbs at 1100yds at the same altitude and temp conditions that Wayne killed his bull.
The much better BC of the 140 VLD is a big deal when we really try and stretch the distance. (The extra 250 fps helps some)
It isn�t twice as far but it darn near to twice.
That is impressive but everyone knows it takes 2,000 ft-lbs to kill an elk. I read that in a book by a famous gunwriter so I know it's true.
I'm not ragging on the 264 either, I can't because I have a barrel on order.
I'm not ragging on the 264 either, I can't because I have a barrel on order.
Smokepole what barrel contour and what action is it going on.
It's a 26" Krieger #3 going on a pre-64 Action and into this stock (the top one):
![[Linked Image]](http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p46/cpwatts_2006/DSCN1085.jpg)
Originally Posted by JohnBurns
�
Are we worried that Hornady made up some �Extra Power� ammo for Wayne??
Are we worried that Hornady made up some �Extra Power� ammo for Wayne??
That never occurred to me and I doubt it is the case.
That said, your calculations are more optimistic than mine.
Originally Posted by JohnBurns
Bob,
By my calculations the 6.5 Creedmoor hit Wayne�s bull with a little over 1200ft/lbs. I generated the numbers using a G1 BC and so 2087 fps terminal velocity is a little optimistic but it gives us a good idea. �
By my calculations the 6.5 Creedmoor hit Wayne�s bull with a little over 1200ft/lbs. I generated the numbers using a G1 BC and so 2087 fps terminal velocity is a little optimistic but it gives us a good idea. �
Hornady factory ammo, 6.5 Creedmoor, 129g SST, 2950fps MV, B.C. .485
Point Blank calculator, 1.8a
600 yards = 1935fps, 1072fpe
To get 1200fpe at 600 I have to jump the muzzle velocity to 3093fps.
John: Thanks. That's really good for a small cartridge at 600 yards.
The 264 is indeed impressive....I recall the "smacks" and dust flying at 1200
THAT was fun!
The 264 is indeed impressive....I recall the "smacks" and dust flying at 1200
THAT was fun!
Originally Posted by Coyote_Hunter
Originally Posted by JohnBurns
�
Are we worried that Hornady made up some �Extra Power� ammo for Wayne??
Are we worried that Hornady made up some �Extra Power� ammo for Wayne??
That never occurred to me and I doubt it is the case.
That said, your calculations are more optimistic than mine.
Originally Posted by JohnBurns
Bob,
By my calculations the 6.5 Creedmoor hit Wayne�s bull with a little over 1200ft/lbs. I generated the numbers using a G1 BC and so 2087 fps terminal velocity is a little optimistic but it gives us a good idea. �
By my calculations the 6.5 Creedmoor hit Wayne�s bull with a little over 1200ft/lbs. I generated the numbers using a G1 BC and so 2087 fps terminal velocity is a little optimistic but it gives us a good idea. �
Hornady factory ammo, 6.5 Creedmoor, 129g SST, 2950fps MV, B.C. .485
Point Blank calculator, 1.8a
600 yards = 1935fps, 1072fpe
To get 1200fpe at 600 I have to jump the muzzle velocity to 3093fps.
The muzzle velocity on Waynes rifle with the factory ammo was 2975fps (26 inch barrel) and the real G1 BC of the 129 SST is 0.460.
1248 Ft/Lbs at 600yds and 2087fps retained velocity.
I tend to lean to the hunting side vs shooting.
Originally Posted by kawi
I tend to lean to the hunting side vs shooting.
The shooting side fills the feezer.
Originally Posted by kawi
I tend to lean to the hunting side vs shooting.
I live for all of it...
Originally Posted by scenarshooter
Originally Posted by kawi
I tend to lean to the hunting side vs shooting.
I live for all of it...
Pat,
You're lucky! You get to work and live for it!
Alan
Originally Posted by JohnBurns
The muzzle velocity on Waynes rifle with the factory ammo was 2975fps (26 inch barrel) and the real G1 BC of the 129 SST is 0.460.
1248 Ft/Lbs at 600yds and 2087fps retained velocity.
If I set the altitude to 6000 feet I do get numbers similar to yours.
Originally Posted by Coyote_Hunter
Originally Posted by JohnBurns
The muzzle velocity on Waynes rifle with the factory ammo was 2975fps (26 inch barrel) and the real G1 BC of the 129 SST is 0.460.
1248 Ft/Lbs at 600yds and 2087fps retained velocity.
If I set the altitude to 6000 feet I do get numbers similar to yours.
We were at 7500ft and it was 50 degs.
The conditions play a pretty big part in retained velocity and energy.
Ok, so where are we at here? I can't wade thru 12 pages of discussion and fighting. Is it a viable elk cartridge at, let's say 400 yards? I take it that it has excellent accuracy potential
too?
too?
Well ok. the 250-3000,250sav,22-250? yes I have taken elk with these rounds. The Creedmoor is just a 6.5 mm .
A crap just trying to say that it is or was a varmint round.
Originally Posted by bigwhoop
Ok, so where are we at here? I can't wade thru 12 pages of discussion and fighting. Is it a viable elk cartridge at, let's say 400 yards? I take it that it has excellent accuracy potential
too?
too?
With the disclaimer that I never used it,common sense says "yes",it'll kill elk if the rifleman uses good bullets, and places them properly.
Originally Posted by kawi
Well ok. the 250-3000,250sav,22-250? yes I have taken elk with these rounds. The Creedmoor is just a 6.5 mm .
So is my 6.5-06AI. Tonight I loaded up another 50 fire-form loads, 140g A-MAX over 49.2g H4831SC for around 2760fps. At 600 yards, 7500 feet and 50 degrees it still has a calculated velocity of 2087fps with 1354fpe. Same conditions with a 130g Scirocco II at 3161fps and it retains a calculated 2412fps and 1679fpe. I don't plan to use that load for elk, but I bet one in the lungs would do the job with either load.
When I built the rifle I told my brother it was my "600 yard clay pigeon shooter". It is, and very easy on the shoulder, too.
Ahhhh, finally something useful here!
Coyote Hunter, I'm working on loads for my 6.5-06 AI and the S-II, what's your load for the bullet to get 3100+?? How accurate is that load for you?
I'm thinking that'll be a great elk load, but then I only plan on shooting out to 550.
Coyote Hunter, I'm working on loads for my 6.5-06 AI and the S-II, what's your load for the bullet to get 3100+?? How accurate is that load for you?
I'm thinking that'll be a great elk load, but then I only plan on shooting out to 550.
Smokepole if you go back to page 4 on this thread you will see that Wayne said that he can get a 140gr bullet to 3300fps from a 26" barrel in the 264 wm so I should be at 3400 with my 30" barrel. So plug them numbers in at 1000 yrds and 7500 elev and see where you are at.
Originally Posted by smokepole
Ahhhh, finally something useful here!
Coyote Hunter, I'm working on loads for my 6.5-06 AI and the S-II, what's your load for the bullet to get 3100+?? How accurate is that load for you?
I'm thinking that'll be a great elk load, but then I only plan on shooting out to 550.
Coyote Hunter, I'm working on loads for my 6.5-06 AI and the S-II, what's your load for the bullet to get 3100+?? How accurate is that load for you?
I'm thinking that'll be a great elk load, but then I only plan on shooting out to 550.
The load worked on an unlucky doe antelope but I haven't had an opportunity to try it on anything larger. Don't know if it will ever hunt elk unless close to the road as it is, by intent, a fairly heavy rifle even with the fluted barrel.
WW brass
CCI 200
58.5g IMR 7828SSC
130g Scirocco II
3161fps
Fireform loads are the same brass and primer but 49.0g or slightly over H4831SC with 140g A-MAX for 2750fps. My girls love these loads, as do I - they are wicked accurate at 600 and very easy on the shoulder.
Here are some pics taken before the scope was mounted:
![[Linked Image]](http://www.hunt101.com/data/500/IMG_06631.JPG)
![[Linked Image]](http://www.hunt101.com/data/500/medium/IMG_06622.JPG)
![[Linked Image]](http://www.hunt101.com/data/500/medium/IMG_06642.JPG)
And after:
![[Linked Image]](http://www.hunt101.com/data/500/medium/IMG_11194.JPG)
Thanks CH, but the pics aren't showing for me.
smokepole -
Don't know what to say - they show up for me on two different systems.
Don't know what to say - they show up for me on two different systems.
I see them just fine.
Alan
Alan
Had the 6.5-06AI, .280 Rem and .338 Win Mag at the range today. The wind wasn't helpful and hitting clay pigeons at 600 eluded me. The steel at 600 not so much, even with the slow-poke 6.5-06AI fire-form loads.