Does anyone know what bullet he used? Range? Just curious.

Saw a pic of he and his elk and the rifle used, but no details.

He used the 129gr SST factory load and the shot was 603yds

LOL, I don't know what to think about that, welcome to the Fire sir.

WVZ is probably a 1% shooter who has the skill to make that shot, but the problem is that somewhere there will be a 99%er who lacks the skill, but who will take the shot, wound an elk, which is then likely to be lost.

Jeff

Will post the video when we get caught up on our editing.

I can promise you he did not take the shot lightly and had been diligently practicing with the rifle before the hunt.

It was a custom Rem 700 in a Greybull stock with one of our custom Leupolds setup just to test the Creedmoor on elk.

Wayne is a very fine shot but in my experience that is not exactly a 1% shot.

We were on a low hill overlooking the elk with no wind. There was really no concern about making a good hit but we were somewhat worried about bullet performance.

I would say that is as far as one should shoot a bull with that bullet. It opened up well with a hit right behind the shoulder and exited the other side. The bull ran about a 50yd circle and piled up about where he was at the shot.

I do know this is the farthest Wayne has ever shot a big game animal and he certainly would not have done it without knowing he could place the shot with absolute precision.

I shot the rifle to get the data for the turret and it really was fun to shoot. It almost seemed to be �softer� than a .243 Win with the 105s at 3000fps. Basically it would shoot the factory load in 1 hole if you could manage the trigger.

I think the 140gr AMAX would be a better hunting load but Hornady only had 129SST loaded at the time.

Ok, sounds legit, thought you were pulling my leg. I can believe it, perhaps that is why details were not given, many would NOT believe it, or try replicating it.

No doubt the Creed is there with other 6.5s and a 129 SST likely did about what a 270/130 would have done. I'd guess an SST bullet would be better for long distance, but not ideal for close shot encountering heavy bone, but just a hunch. Long range is where a bullet like this and the Amax strut their stuff, esp. on lungs broadside.

I have no doubts about WVZ skill.

Thanks John.

Wayne has come out and hunted with us on several occasions. He is very conservative about shooting at long range on game.

We will be hunting with him again this year here in Wyoming and another elk hunt in New Mexico with Milligan Brand.

I think he will use one of our 243 Wins with the 105 VLD for both hunts. Hornady is sending out a guy to hunt on the elk hunt so we may have to set something up to shoot a Hornady bullet.

He was here this June and we did a lot of long range shooting (out to 1 mile) on steel.

He had one of our 2.5-8s on a Marlin Lever Gun in .338 and shot that out to 600yds. It was really kinda cool but I personally prefer a good bolt gun. That silly lever would shoot the factory ammo into an inch at 100yds.

Regarding the 140 AMAX or 129 SST on an elk shoulder I personally think it would be no problem even at very close range. The Creedmoor isn�t a real high velocity round. The factory stuff was 129 SST at 2990 fps.

John,

Are you pretty much a VLD shooter or have you used any other types at long range? Any Lapua Scenars?
They seem to have a high BC.

No offense but I disintegrated a 145 BTSP at 30 yds from a 7mag on my first WT deer, on the Shoulder knuckle. That was using an older Speer book load that was supposed to be 280 speeds, yet Speer revised the data, as the test gun was not showing normal speeds, and the load was hot/max. That deer was facing me at an angle, and I was up about 12 feet in a stand.

I would have to do bullet test to get comfortable steering one into a Bull Elks shoulder at close range, but you may be right.

Thanks John.

I doubt that more than 1% of hunters have any business shooting game at 600+ yards and probably not more than 5% have any business shooting game at over 300 yards. At least that is the disillation of my range/hunting experience.

Jeff

SU35,

I personally don�t have any firsthand experience with the Scenars. The reported BC, while high, is slightly lower than the VLD and I don�t know how well they will perform on game.

If Lapua came out with a high BC version I would be interested in testing them fist in media then on game. I do know other guys are reporting good result on game and have no reason to doubt the reports.

65BR,

I only base my opinion on shooting other AMAXs and while they don�t hold together they will get through and the real important stuff is directly behind the shoulder.

260Remguy,

I don�t want to act like a shot at 600yds doesn�t require the right equipment and a competent shooter but under a no wind condition with a rifle zeroed at 600yds and a solid prone position it is something that is within the ability of any hunter willing to practice.

With yhat said you could use about anything over a 243 for elk

You list some pretty ridged rules there for a mountain hunting trip, not to mention that is a very light caliber at 600 yards..

Sorry and no offense but I believe in doing my hunting before I shoot and I can normally close that 600 yard distance to at least 300 yards with a little luck, and if not I'll just pass..

It just doesn't take much of an error to shoot the front legs or guts at that range and I have seen too many long range shooters with short memories..

I have come to the conclusion that a really good shot will hit game at about any range, but where he hits them is the question..A lousy shot will simply miss..Therefore I don't belive in long range shooting on big game.

But inasmuch as its legal, to each his own, and I only hold myself to my self imposed standard or 400 yards as max under perfect conditions with a rest, and mostly I stay withing 300 yards max..

I have not always held myself to this standard, I imposed it on myself about 50 years ago after I had a couple of bad tracking jobs and lost a couple of game animals because of my shooting at very extended ranges.

My last long shot ( I backslided from my sworn oth) was in 1993 on a Black Wildebeest at 800 yards running at the insistence of PH Phillip Price, who thanks I can't miss, (have it on film) and I hit him 3 out of 5 times one pretty shallow and two pretty good hits..He went about 2 or 3 miles but due to a great tracker and a PH that knew his country we got him. Found two bullets, neither was expanded and could have been reloaded. I had some guilt on that hunt and swore never to backtrack again. I have lived up to that so far..

Just a different opinnion and the reasoning as to why..

Ray,

What was legitimate 50yrs ago and what is today are very different.

Big areas of improvement:

1. Laser rangefinders
2. VLD bullets that perform at all reasonable ranges
3. Reliable optics that allow the shooter to zero the rifle for the exact range
4. Reticles that allow for precise wind compensation
5. Skilled spotters
6. Improvements in shooting techniques
7. Software that allows the hunter to accurately predict wind drift and trajectories under varying conditions
8. Stock designs that allow the hunter to get close to the accuracy potential of the rifle from field positions
9. Light weight portable shooting rest like bipods and tripods
10. Reliable triggers that allow repeatable safe trigger weights down to 1lb or even below
11. Rifles that are extremely accurate using reliable hunting ammo

I do applaud you on knowing your limits even if you backslide once in awhile.

Getting closer is great if possible but at some point we all decide we are close enough to make the shot and moving closer is either not possible or not a good idea.

The reason we all hunt is a very personal thing and I don�t take offense at anyone sharing a well thought out opinion.

Thanks

I agree with all those things that have been significantly improved over the years. However, the most important of all, the shooter, has not, that I can tell, improved all that much over the same time span.

TT

Wayne I agreee with the above but that is mostly equipment.

Conditions of the shot still matter.

IMHO, the most important aspects of the success of the shot Van Zwoll made were-

1) Wayne is an excellent shot.

2) He had a rifle he knew well and had practiced with/had confidence in.

3) There was little wind.

4) The Elk was not moving.

5) There was time to get in a solid shooting postion and range/take the shot.

Here's a pic taken through a spotter showing a 4" clay bird in the upper right at 950 yards.

We are hitting within inches of the orange clay bird with
mountain rifles in 260 Rem and 6.5x284. Due to a range finder and good trigger job, nothing more.

It's not that difficult as many here make it out to be.

I would disagree that shooter have not improved over the last 50yrs.

In about any type of competition a score that would win a match 50yrs ago is not even remotely competitive today.

The really cool thing about human performance is the ability to continuously improve. It was once considered impossible to run a 4 minute mile but now days more than a few runners seem able to do just such a feat.

The same holds true as far as shooting is concerned. I can tell you I am a much better shooter than I was even 3 years ago and a lot of that is in not accepting conventional limits on how well I can actually shoot from field positions.

The biggest limit is always in our minds and if we see what other guys are doing we learn that things we once thought impossible might not be and our limits are sometimes just self imposed.

SU, first of all go back and read the list again at the bottom of my last post.

You can have the best equipment in the world and if the conditions are poor, some shots are low percentage affairs.

And when the wind is up, there are no "chip shots" at long range. Period.

And darn sure not on living breathing target with legs under them that can move when the trigger is pulled..

And not taking shots at game that is running also helps..LOL

It has been my experience that hunters who pay significant sums of $$ to hunt out of state, with or without a guide, are more likely to practice then the guy who buys a tag, a box of ammo, and a 12-pack of Coors the night before opening day of deer season in Abilene, KS, Morrisville, VT, or Bridgeton, ME. If there are, as Mule Deer recently stated, 15M hunters in the US, that means that there are probably less than 150K, 1%, who are competent to shoot an elk at 600 yards. Overall, I don't think that hunters have become better shooters in the past 50 years, but I do think that technology has improved and since fewer people are hunting, the subset of those competent to shoot at longer ranges is a larger percentage of a smaller universe.

Jeff

Fellas like Mr. Van Zwoll and Mule Deer who make their living shooting rifles ain't the general hunting public.

I've seen a hat full of muffed shots at 50 yds. I don't have a great deal of confidence in most of us being able to pull that shot off without 2 or 3 tries.

Problem is, you only have one.

Best,

JM

In most ways we are all victims of our experiences. In my experience I have never seen anyone who could not have had a very high probability of making that shot using that rifle with a small amount of practice.

Do you have a hard time hitting a 3 inch dot at 100yds from a rested prone position? That is the same shot from a marksmanship standpoint.

Understand Wayne is a much better shot from field positions than most but this shot was simply not a great test of marksmanship.

That is why I said earlier in this thread that WVZ is a 1% hunter, but some people who aren't that good, the 99%ers, will read about him making a 600 yard shot and attempt to duplicate it with less skill and, perhaps, lower quality equipement. No criticsm of WVZ for taking and making the shot, just the thought that there is likely to be a downstream effect of less skilled people attempting to duplicate his shot with less favorable outcomes when shooting at critters that are more than 1/3 of a mile away.

Jeff

I can't hit a barn with a shotgun lately. Lol.

Not to turn this away from the elk that WVZ took but..

I do feel that shooters today are more talented than those of yesterday past. Especially at the longer ranges, woods ranges heck no I'd not wanna try to compete with my fam passed on who kicked azz at woods ranges.

But, when the ranges go beyond the woods and start to stretch things out a bit I do feel that our shooters or today are way more talented especially when one considers the equipment we have today that they didn't have then.

Once one undertands reading conditions and has the proper training and time behind the butt then making long range hits isn't all that tough. As long as...the conditions allow it.

As for the 12 pack bubbas and such when I was guiding from Montana to Sonora I saw some people very competitent with the gun and I saw some that were understanding of their gun but not neccessarily competitant. Especially as ranges got long, pressure was on (either time or crowd). Some could get it done very well and quickly and a lot just couldn't kill on demand and right now.

Point being, I see some very sharp gunners that are on guided hunts and I see some that are not. And with the guys that don't travel out of state I see some that are very in tune to their guns and some that are not..

Just some rambling thoughts.

Dober

(side note, practicing teaches one what their ability's are and if they pay attention and stay within those disciplines they generally do very well. Practicing long also makes the closer shots seem like slam dunks. Case in point, just started working with a young fella (he's 11) and he's doinking the gongs @ 300/400 quite often and he mentioned the other night that it's good for him to practice long cause it makes the shots he's more likely to take seem easy...grin)

They better stop having NASCAR on TV. before someone tries taking a left turn at 180 MPH. LOL.

Having been involved in this type of shooting it is my opinion that more hunters will use that as a reason to get to the range and start practicing.

It is so much fun learning what your limits are and working on techniques and equipment that will extend those limits.

I believe the folks who fancy themselves crack shots but aren't, would be taking pokes at critters beyond their capability whether Mr. Van Zwoll shot his elk or not.

Those kind don't need much encouragement; a distant animal is usually sufficient.

(Not a knock on the folks who are capable of shooting game at those ranges)

I hope those who are pre-disposed to distance shooting read WVZ's article: they'll realize how tough it is, and how important ideal conditions are to the success of the shot.

The guys I worry about when it comes to long-range hunting are those that can't/won't read articles about it.

One other thing, just cause right now there is only 1% or whatever capable of a shot like that doesn't mean that if more of the 15M practiced and had the proper coaching and equipment that the # would stay @ 1%..

Just like a lot of people can't bench 250 lbs but that's cause they've not trained to do so, not cause most can't..

Make a sense?

Dober

I agree Mark. I shot W3 gun and everyone improves with practice. However, some hit a wall and get no better while others continue cutting their times down lower and lower.

I don't feel that long distance shooting is as stressfull or complicated as 3 gun, but the mental aspect is just as important.

When I guided I could look at a guy getting ready to take a shot and read him. Some did it like they were drinking a glass of water.

And then some gave me the "Oh Schit" feeling. Practice is one thing. Stick a trophy animal in front of a practiced shooter under pressure in the field and some just don't perform well.

The skills are easy enough to master, mastering the mental aspect of going "Live" seems to be the real difficulty for alot of folks.

ie: Pressure discombobulates them.

Practice makes perfect. You just have to go out and shoot a bunch of animals!

In lieu of actual animals, I've found that animal crackers make interesting, and challenging, reactive targets. You need a good scope, however, to differentiate the animal cracker from its background--their color blends well with dirt berms.

If you have the Dinkonator, you will never have to shoot past 40 yds again!

Problem solved!

Dang, JM, you almost made me spit out some valuable moonshine!

I hope you are kidding...if you showed up at my range with a box of animal crackers and started shooting the I would leave.

Laffin'

I swear I would name it that if it was worth a nickel.

I'd just like to say "nice shot".

I know a fair amount of shooters who under Ideal wind conditions and exact range figures would make a 600 yard boiler room shot on en elk sized animal look pitifully easy with an iron sighted rifle!

I know this isn't a long range hunting thread but let's not make a mtn out of a mole hill either!

I prefer "woods" hunting and closer ranges but that is because of the style of hunting in my area and the woods experience..

Mike

I shoot frequently at a thousand meter range; targets at 300, 600, 800, and a 1,000 meters. I can't say that I'd ever take a shot at an animal at 800. If, as others have said, conditions were perfect, I'd squeeze a shot at 600.

I agree with the concept of proving to yourself "it can be done". It happened to me, and I've watched several shooters get very good, after the initial "man, that's a long way!".

Gear doesn't have to be outrageous either, .30's, 6.5's, and .284's in very modest platforms work well. Consistant, concentric ammunition is a must.

Laugh away; and, no, I wouldn't shoot them at a formal range. They're plinking targets and were found the way most plinking targets are found--by being in the truck during a plinking trip.

I am assuming Mule Deer�s post is somewhat tongue in cheek but it does bring up an important point in the discussion.

If extending your hunting limits is something you are interested in at some point you have to take your range practice into the hunting field. Steel rocks and paper never move and always give a hunter an unlimited amount of time to set up.

Using various antlerless tags and coyotes and other varmints will show a hunter holes in his technique.

Not that a doe is any less important that a buck or bull tag but if the situation starts to overwhelm the hunter he or she can just stop without the add pressure of a trophy animal.

The first time a hunter shoots at 600yds probably should not be at the buck/bull of a lifetime.

Wayne had used the same basic system on paper/rocks/steel/coyotes/whitetail does all before he took that shot at 603 yds.

John Moses point is very true ie: Pressure discombobulates

Time pressure and long distance do not mix well

One of the most important skills in long range shooting is to learn to just say not today.

The fun of it all is you don�t lay in the sleeping bag that night second guessing on passing up a shot if you put the time in to know what you can do on demand and what is a shot you have no business even attempting.

You're making my point for me.

NASCAR drivers are even a smaller subset of the universe then hunters competent to shoot an elk at 600 yards. If you randomly selected 100 people who fall within the demographics of the current pool of NASCAR drivers, put them into the cars and told them to go 180 mph, you would probably have a large number of serious accidents and that would be within a controlled environment, a race track. Most people are smart enough not to drive beyond their skills because failure can mean injury or even death, but young men quite often kill themselves when they are looking for and fail to recognize the limits of their skills.

Jeff

I'm certainly not against long range hunting. I'm for any hunting that is legal and get's folks in the sport.

The thing I'm most proud of is that I have never lost a buck or a doe. I bow hunted for 29 years and hunted with a rifle or shotgun for 36.

I was blessed to own several good dogs that found animals I never would have.

I want to make it out of this life without losing an animal, just a little challenge with myself.

So if it ain't right I don't shoot, that doesn't mean I haven't taken hard shots, I just believed I could make them.

Same with guys who pop critters along way off, most know they can make the shot.

Just one man talking about his goofy ways. YMMV.

Best,

JM

You're presenting a "what if" scenario. The truth is that most people can't bench 250 lbs. 'cause they don't consider that skill/ability as being a particularly important asset, plus they don't want to put out the effort to go to the gym, learn the proper technique, and practice/do the reps. Likewise, the vast majority of the 15M hunters in the U.S. don't go to the range and practice on a regular basis, 'cause they don't want to allocate the time/$$ and many figure that technology will do the heavy lifting for them. As Vince Lombardi, Jr. once told a leadership class that I was in, "Most American men think that they are born with an innate ability to drive a car, shot a gun, and coach a team, but the truth is that they aren't.".

Jeff

Yepper people can do a lot if they train to do it..

Guess my point was that I feel more than 1% are capable of learning to shoot at long range, not that only 1% of the people can ever do it. Capice?

Dober

Agreed, more than 1% COULD, but they won't, 'cause it takes too much effort.

Jeff

One of the most important skills in long range shooting is to learn to just say not today.

The fun of it all is you don�t lay in the sleeping bag that night second guessing on passing up a shot if you put the time in to know what you can do on demand and what is a shot you have no business even attempting._________________________

Very well said, sir!

John Burns,

Yes sir, I recognize an AMAX has the ability to do well, but reducing impact speed at longer range helps. Case in point:

My then #1 Ruger in 6mm BR, 105 AMAX 2850 mv, 200 yd buck, spine shot, bullet COMPLETELY disintegrated in 1-2", dropped deer DRT.

I placed that shot there, as I KNEW the bullet was not going deep at that range.

Less than 10-15 seconds, I had reloaded, set the Kepplinger trigger for it's 8 oz pull, threw my 6-24x mil dot 4200 on another deer, a doe at 400 yds on the edge of a field, the landowner had LRF'd, having practiced to the furthest of the rifle range I shoot at, 415 yds, I knew where to hold, and quickly dropped an Amax thru the center both lungs of that deer, died w/in 20 yds or so of the hit.

Having practiced, I honestly have to say with THAT rifle, scope, and light caliber made that truly a 'chip shot' for me as I had both forarms tight down on the window ledges shooting out of the corner of a blind. An Elk, ALOT larger animal, say 3x or more the size, at 1.5x the distance, it's not hard to believe, given as MY shots, having little to zero wind, a known range, and using a rifle you had been practicing alot with, yet I tend to be like Ray and self impose my limit at around 400 yds.

That rifle above was not my typical hunting rifle, which often has a 4x or 6x scope, vs. the target/varmint set up I carried that day. I would not have ever thought of shooting a deer at 400 with that rifle before that day, but when it played out, it was w/o thought, and instinct took over. My range practice/training. I had ZERO doubt I was putting an AMAX right thru that deers lungs, before I squeezed, otherwise, I never would have taken the shot.

If I had an opportunity, at a nice animal at a KNOWN distance, and had shot extensively with the rifle in my hand, w/little wind, I might consider such a shot, but I can repect how it concerns some that hear of these reports, as it might encourage those who have no business doing it, and wounding an animal.

Something I share like Ray and likely many others here, I respect my game, and want a clean kill.

Regardless of skill, and equipment, each hunter IMHO has a personal responsibility to the animal, and our sport to KNOW their limits and not take too great of risk as the race car analogy above.

As much as I endorse 6.5mm's, and feel a 600 yd shot on deer is well in their capability IF the rifleman is, I DO agree above, it's light on ELK past 300-400 yds, regardless of bullet. Using a bullet that will expand at slow speeds, and putting it thru the lungs, was not much risk to my mind of a clean kill. Not by the likes of a good shooter, who has practiced much, though most agree he is more the exception than the rule when it comes to marksmanship of the every day hunter.

There was a time in college, and a few years later, where I had the opportunity to do ALOT of shooting, inc. in the field. No prairie dogs here but we got creative, we shot various birds, i.e. sparrows, red wing black birds, crows, etc. as well as a few coyotes. When you shoot 50-200 rounds a day, over a period of weeks or more, you learn you can pull off shots that astound you. Shooting small long range targets with rifles you can shoot and learn w/o flinching (222/223/22-250/Swift/243/6mm) made larger targets seem easy. It also taught us about wind drift, not by computing in an electronic gadget, just by hit/miss/correct.

That's where the skill and confidence intersect and allow one to take a shot further than normal, when needed, if conditions are right, and you choose to take it.

I agree a VERY small percentage of hunters across the board get that practice in, for whatever reason. But those willing to invest the time, can do good work when called upon. I am sure WVZ felt the same way when he leveled on that elk that I did on the above deer w/my 6BR.

I was shooting last Sunday with 6 other guys that could for sure put a bullet thru an Elks ribs at 600 yards.

You have some good friends, careful who you hunt with, they might get theirs before you have a shot

As long as I get some steaks, it's allright.

LOL. I am with you on that one! Last one I ate put any beef to shame.

I"m probably not the most qualified to post on this thread.. BUT IMHO, given that the rifle, load, trigger, beddign, zeroing etc... were supposedly all taken care of ahead of time, and the weapon was primo and accurate... and you are on the ground prone with something like a bipod or over a backpack( I personally prefer the pack method for hunting) there should never be a question of a great hit.

Especially with the notation that there were NO conditions...

Personally, even with my mediocre ability, I"d be totally ashamed not to punch the first round right in the middle of those vitals given the same exact setup.

DOesn't mean its for everyone... but no offense, all WVZ did was limit the movement of the rifle to nil, via a solid 3 point plus prone rest, and activate the trigger without disturbing the sight picture....

I appreciate much of what has been said. I too believe that with practice, the right equipment, and experience, amazing things can be done in the field.

For me personally, I like hunting. Hunting is time in field, knowledge of animals, and getting close. It is so much fun to get close. When I rifle hunt, I like using the terrain, the wind and stealth to get as close as possible.

It is a pure adrenalin rush to get under 100, even 50 yards with a rifle and cleanly take whatever animal you are hunting.

In no way am I denigrating what Mr. Van Zwoll did, or anyone else that has put in the time to seriously practice and has shouldered the cost to have expensive top notch equipment.

But, they almost seem to be two different sports. One focused on getting as close as possible, under 200 yards, and one that stresses shooting skill, 500 to 1000 yards.

I see the same thing in bowhunting. A lot of my friends that shoot the latest compound, have sights set out to 100 yards. With a longbow or recurve, 30 to 35 yards is pretty much my max.

I've enjoyed your posts...thanks.

The most heart pounding 'hunting' I have done is when game is 30 yes and less, whether rifle or handgun, and I intend to use my long bow someday. I have a compound that was given to me, but no sights, and no plans. I like the sport w/no sights on a bow having grown up shooting small game with slingshots instinctively.

No doubt, there is shooting, and there is hunting and everyone decides how they want to enjoy it.