Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters Generally accepted truths about hunting, ballistics, gear etc. 1980 vs 2021

Jerry,

My experience is that better bullets have made the most difference--along with factory rifles being bedded better. Have gotten well under sub-inch accuracy with quite a few older rifles using today's bullets, though I sometimes had to "adjust" the bedding--which was often as easy as free-floating the barrel with a plastic bread-bag clip behind the recoil lug.

It's a hackneyed expression- but it's all good. We chase our own dreams, select the gear that suits our needs/dispositions, and (hopefully) stand united against the forces that would deny us our pursuits.

Keep on keeping on.

Like almost everyone on this thread, I've been an active shooter during all of the years in question, including hunting, military service, working in the industry, and competition. In that time, I’ve seen a ton of major changes for all shooters. The biggest is the internet, which lets us exchange information directly instead of hearing only what various marketing departments want us to hear. That alone has changed the market far more than any other single factor.

The second is the Global War on Terror. Various governments have put a lot of R&D money into gear, learning, and skill development. We now have a couple of generations of people who REALLY know how to shoot when the chips are down, and who know what gear they need. Some of those folks are teaching the trade and classes cost a lot less than you'd think. Combine that expertise with the internet and a lot of old legends just don't stand up any more.

Beyond that, and as pertains to rifles:

1. Rifles and ammunition are more accurate. The road to 1 MOA was long and costly in 1981. Now you can get 0.5 MOA with cheap rifles and factory ammo. A lot of machinery will get worn out making guns and ammo in the next few months. Manufacturers will replace it with better machinery and accuracy will improve even more.

2. Bullets are more consistent, so groups are smaller. Bullet companies have also refined BC figures to make getting hits at long range more predictable. Wind permitting, a beginner can get hits at distances that were once limited to experts. Smart folks won't use this to extend their maximum range, but to increase the chance of success at mid-range.

3. Bullets perform better on target. You can choose light monomentals to reduce recoil and increase penetration or much heavier jacketed bullets for higher BCs and better long-range performance but you still can't get both.

4. Propellants are temperature-insensitive so they’re more consistent, which helps to shrink groups. We've also filled in some gaps in the burn-rate chart so there are now far more shades of gray between 4350 and 4831 than there were in 1981.

5. Optics are better. People shoot a LOT more than they did in 1981. They have better rifles and ammunition so they shoot at longer range. Many folks have stopped holding over and started dialing so optics must track—and many of them do. We'll soon have a generation of shooters who have only known dialing. I suspect that the non-dialing scope will eventually go the way of the fixed 4x.

6. Rifles are lighter. In 1981, the only way to get a rifle as light as a Kimber Montana was to spend $2-3,000 on a custom. Now the Montana is a mid-price item and their Mountain Ascent—even lighter than the Montana—costs about what the Montana did (adjusted for inflation) when it was introduced. Plenty of other rifles are almost as light as the Montana at half the price.

7. Everything is cheaper. Obviously not so much during the pandemic, but certainly just before and hopefully again soon.



All together, these things have redefined standards for distance, precision, and weight. But we still have problems:

1. High-BC bullets and scopes that track have made flat trajectory less relevant but people still focus on the wrong things. They used to focus on velocity instead of on bullet construction and shot placement. Now they focus on BC instead of on bullet construction and shot placement.

2. We need better ways to understand terminal performance, especially with monometal bullets. A medium-sized wound channel end-to-end plus an exit is all the penetration we can use. Does energy still matter with a wound channel like that? How do we quantify the role of frontal area? Does something like the 358 Winchester with a 180-grain TTSX at 2,600 fps become the new giant killer?

The biggest issue is that while we easily dial elevation, most of us still can’t read wind.


Okie John

Rangefinders are the single best improvement for my hunting. Still using same guns and calibers that I did 30yrs ago, but I have upgraded the optics on a couple to allow longer range target practice. Since their introduction I've used Leupold's B&C or LRD reticles and truly wish I'd have bought more when they were readily available. Those reticles, coupled with a good rangefinder have allowed me to shoot past my old comfort zone on many occasions, but still not even close to what some consider long range today. I still like horse power and will never adopt the Creedmore or similar cartridges for my hunting. The 270 and 30/06 are mild enough for me!

nothing has changed the game more than the affordable electronic rangefinder.