When time to get the shot off means success or failure simplified dialing is superior to a written dope chart/ generic turret combination & a calibrated reticle is faster still when pressured speed & adrenaline are involved
It’s faster? Ok, how much faster? I mean to state that would mean you’re equally skilled at both dialing and holding, and you’ve timed it enough to have something resembling data, right?
So say from standing, spotting the animal, ranging, getting into position and hitting a deer sized vitals, how much faster to a hit? Say 90% hits at uneven yardages (278, 367, 422, etc.).
Sighted in at 225 with flat shooting rifle 278 is point & shoot as is 367 hold below spine shoot. So several seconds faster than 100 yard zero & dial. At 422 yards it may only be 3-4 seconds faster depending on skill levels. Grazing deer middle of the meadow no big deal walking elk about to crest the ridge very big deal.
You need to assume the same zero for both methods for it to be a valid comparison.
You have a good point that it isn’t exactly apples to apples. More experienced (old) method hunting open country was a 200 yard zero with a 7mm or 300 to extend point blank range and make shots simpler for the hunter point & shoot for 300 + yards. I use 225 because that is as long as I have to place a target at my range at home & the math works fine for my calibers & reticles.
New method hunters (younger more technology) tend to zero their Creedmoor’s & 308’s at 100 yards & dial after checking with their Kestrels. Sorry if I’m relying on too many stereotypes.
