Don't go away mad.........you got involved in one of those arguments where the opinions and feeling run pretty hot. I tend to type out a comment, I KNOW the intended tone of the comment, but when printed it doesn't come out the same way. Thats what happens here a lot.

You have good comments and something to offer here, so cool off and hope to see you later.

Frank N.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Todd E:
To everyone that says you need to sneak up on your prey. Try that hunting antelope. You have no cover except maybe a hill.
Todd E

---

I chose to stay out of this debate for the most part but I did know an old hunting guide in Wyoming who told me some interesting things about hunting antelope on the plains. He would spray his clothes with pine scent the night before hunting and put them in a trunk. Then when he located a herd his most important tactic was patience, he would do things to try to ease his way closer by making them curious, smoke a cigarette, eat a piece of grass and take a couple more steps. Slowly but surley he would work his way up to them but I dont recall what he considered close enough. His prefered weapon was a Sako 264 Win mag.

------------------
Ray Atkinson

ray@atkinsonhunting.com
atkinsonhunting.com

As for long range shooting of game out to 400yds all I'm going to state is it is done all the time out here in the West. Most Easterners are not conditioned to these ranges. I know many hunters who are fully capable of taking game out to 400yds, on the other hand I know several hunters who can't hit a paper plate at 100yds. As for the wind my general rule is to pass if the range is over 400yds(I use a rangefinder) and the wind is over 20mph. Sometimes you can move closer under these conditions.

I just got back from Idaho(unit 73A) where I took a good muley buck at 461yds with my 7mm08AI pushing 140gr Hornadys at 2950fps. The shot was downhill and the buck was bedded and no wind was present in that draw. Two other hunters were present to back me up. On that same trip I watched a young hunter miss 3 times as a buck he jumped bounded away at 50yds.

I guess what I'm trying to say is every person has his range limit which is based on his equipment, his shooting skills and the shooting conditions at the time. Learn to shoot before you come out West, non-resident licenses are not cheap and big mule deer are hard to come by.

sure-shot

[This message has been edited by ku-dude (edited 10-29-2001).]

[This message has been edited by ku-dude (edited 10-29-2001).]

I believe that these long range shots demands a magnum cartridge to keep bullet drop within reason and provide sufficient energy at 400 yds. I believe that of the long range magnums, the 7mm RemMag and 300 Win Mag (and its equivalents) are best choices because the will get the job done with the least amount of recoil and blast. Further, excellent loaded ammo and components are available for both.

Most importantly for long distance hunting, my rifles will shoot to less than a MOA with a hunting load that will deliver killing energy for the largest species I am hunting out to 500 yds. These rifles have good optics with which I am familiar.

I regularly use a rangefinder for determining exact range, and memorize the ballistic curve for my particular load. I will pass the shot if I do not feel totally comfortable taking it, and I will use sticks, stones, or any other support I can arrange together with a shooting sling for such shots.

Wind doping is absolutely critical for shots over two hundred yards if there is more than a 10 mph wind blowing. Therefore, I also remember the deflection data for my load out to 400 yds.

Lastly, I practice at ranges from 100 to 450 yards using the loads I will be hunting with and the rifles I will use. This is the acid test. And as I stated above, with all this, if I cannot get comfortable, I don't take the shot.

This practice and discipline have paid off, and I have never lost a animal that I have hit. In fact, I have never had to track a animal to bring it to bag. Half of my clean misses have been due to the bullet striking a branch before it reach the animal, and I have had remarkably view of these.

I think that the motto for the hunter faced with these conditions has got to be the second most famous line from Dirty Harry, "A man's got to know his limitations." Ku-dude

Just a thought.

quote:

---

Originally posted by p dog shooter:
BBBruce that why your seeing the ones like me that shoot long ranges use laser range finders mil dot scopes muti cross hair scopes ect to make the long shots no guess work on the range.

---

Right on! I subscribed to Varmint Hunter mag for a couple of years and really enjoyed it. I plan to go back once I get working again. They had some articles on laser range finders. I have a coincidence optical one but haven't really used it much. When you get out to 400 yards with it the etch marks on the dial are so far apart you're just guessing.

Cheers!

Vince
Ps-I was shooting a custom 7 STW. It does great on deer and Antelope at what most would call any reasonable range, and then some.

------------------
Regards

Richard

------------------
Ray Atkinson

ray@atkinsonhunting.com
atkinsonhunting.com

------------------
RAB

I would not take the shot if I didn't trust myself to make it. We all know that it is possible to miss a creature at 100y if the conditions are extremely adverse, so I don't think that anyone should put a static upper limit on the distance that people should shoot. It depends on too many factors.
Yes I would and have taken shots at 400m (sorry we're all metric down here), but only if I knew I had the same certainty of making the shot as I would if it were 150yards under other conditions.
No I would not take every shot presented at 400m or 300m or 200m or 100m or 50m if I felt that the shot could not be made.
I don't meen to sound like Yoda talking to Luke in the next line...but I do think that one has to "look inside" and be truthful to themselves about their limits.
I hope this makes sense, I have a tendancy to ramble........

[This message has been edited by Hunter - DownUnder (edited 10-31-2001).]

------------------
Ray Atkinson

ray@atkinsonhunting.com
atkinsonhunting.com

Others could not do it with a magnum rifle. It depends a lot upon the man and the circumstances.

Everyone will generally agree you can't separate shooting skills from all the other skills needed to be a successful hunter.

But now let's touch a nerve. Would it be fair to venture that many distance shooters tend to view the shot as the primary skill involved in the hunt? Understandably, they get very upset when some yahoo goes into the woods and cripples on an easy 100 yd. shot.

But they mount the best scope on the bedded action, float the barrel, work up loads, and go to no end of trouble to squeeze the smallest group of of their rifle.

Just as understandably, the stalkers get very upset when the shooters cripple at 400 yds because they didn't develop a very basic skill that will make groups even tighter. Stalking.

Making the shot shorter will tighten groups out of any firearm and reduce the chance of a cripple.

Here's my proposal for everyone. Stalkers and Shooters, get out the lifesize target with marked kill zone and go to the range. Shoot offhand. Shoot offhand braced against a post, shoot sitting. Shoot from hunting positions. Shoot in wind.

(Leave the sandbags in the truck! Every year at the range I see guys shoot anywhere from 1.5 to 8 inch groups off bags at 200 yds and confidently claim "I'm good for a 200 yd. shot". Gimme a break.)

I say Stalkers have a responsibility to know their shooting limitations.

But I also say Shooters, who generally already know their shooting limitations, have a responsibility to know their stalking limitations. I challenge the Shooters to use oportunities when hunting to practice stalking. If you see cows or does and there aren't any good bulls or bucks with them, stalk them anyway. Just to become a better hunter.

Then you'll begin to know the limitations of the stalk so when game is spotted and you are confronted with the ethical question-- "Can I make this shot more sure?"-- You'll know whether you can get closer, and how much closer, for a surer shot, or take the one you have.

Or pass on it altogether.

As far as range finders are concerned I find them useful to learn to estimate range. However I do not use them while hunting... just my preference. An excellent exercise is to go to an area you hunt or similar area(this will work almost anywhere) and pick out an object at unknown distance. Estimate (guess) the distance and write this number down on a pad of paper. Next laser the object for the actual distance and write this number down. Yeah, you'll probably be humbled at first but with regular practice anyone can greatly improve there ranging skills.

I think that there is a big difference between what the actual distance of the shot was and what it is claimed to be, especially in mountainous terrain. Hunters mistake the distance walked to downed game or where the game was shot as the actual shot distance. uneven terrain ampliphies this. This is simple vector(triangle in this case) math. The shot(bullet path) was from point A to point C. The hunter has to walk from point A to point B to point C thinking that this is the path the bullet traveled resulting in an error of distance traveled...

Back to the original question though. My
vote goes to the .300 Weatherby using a 200 grain bullet around 3050 fps. A 200 grain X-bullet has a bc. of @ .550!

One shot from a 44 mag. makes not a long range deer gun..nor does a few long range kills with a rifle, because hunters have a habit of remembering only the good shots, not the misses and wounding shots.

------------------
Ray Atkinson

ray@atkinsonhunting.com
atkinsonhunting.com

To stay on topic, I think any of the 300 Mags will do the job well, with premium bullets of 180 or 200 grains.

[This message has been edited by bearguide (edited 11-02-2001).]

Paper balistics seldom show up in the hunting fields, and many modern loads are loaded with 90 grs. of Hodgen BS Powder in an oversize case topped off with a counterfiet smart bomb, and the owner doesn't own a chronograph (a lie detector for gun nuts)...

------------------
Ray Atkinson

ray@atkinsonhunting.com
atkinsonhunting.com

I mostly hunt sagebrush flats when I can draw a tag and get away; for the most part, I shoot prone off a fanny pack and get similar results to the sandbag at the range. At longish ranges there is almost always plenty of time to prepare. When I have to shoot from sitting or kneeling or can't get directly upwind or downwind, I simply turn down longer shots. There's always tomorrow and I am not too upset by going home skunked anyway; it is always pleasant to get out of town and sleep on a river bluff for a few days.

I walked away from a undisturbed band of nice elk last year at about 600 yards, because I could not get closer in that canyon without breaking cover. I got one of them in a meadow ( from sitting ) the next day at 50 yards, and the carrying out was a lot shorter to boot.

The last few antelope were at ranges less than 200 yards, and so forth. The longer I hunt, the shorter the shots get.

Tom

quote:

---

Originally posted by steve y:
Okay, the water is hot enough, so I'll jump in....

---

Hoorayyyyyyyyyyyy 4 your whole post!!!

If we gunners don't stop shootin at each other we gonna end up real alone.

I hunted with a guy once who bragged that he had an old .300 WM with which he took a deliberate head shot on a walking whitetail doe at 1,200 yards using iron sights. He claimed that he was standing and shooting offhand. I looked at the rifle and the rifling was worn smooth as a baby's bum. I tried and tried to gently get him to admit that not only was the task beyond the rifle, but even identifying a whitetail doe at 1,200 yards without glass was impossible (we were both older than 40 at the time). He stuck to his story.

I never once directly called him a liar. Neither did I ever hunt with him again. I lost faith, trust or whatever you call it. I felt that either he was willing to bold face lie to me, or his grip on hunting realities such as range was untrustworthy. But I never ever did him the disservice of calling him a liar to his face or insulting him. I satisfied myself that there was no miscommunication, we both knew and were satisfied with what we'd spoken, then I shut up and left.

I still am not convinced that I did right. Maybe I should have been more "honest." But then maybe calling a man's word in his home in front of his wife isn't really proper either. At least by the time I left I was still welcome back. Still am as far as I know. I just didn't want to hunt with him any more. Which in a way is too bad, because he sure knew the country.

I tried to use the Golden Rule. I wish I saw more of it here, more often.

[This message has been edited by BBBruce (edited 11-15-2001).]

I like the theory of getting a better shot pattern with the basic skill of stalking but isnt this what makes hunting great? You just dont know what you may be faced with until your there and thats where the fever factor comes into play. In boxing it is a correct maxum that the best form of practice is the actual performing of the event. Its been my observation that this holds true with most all things.

The cartridge is not as important as the one would think. More important is the rifle&shooter accuracy, bullet selection, shot placement and willingness to pass on less than optimal presentations.

Either the 30-378 or 270 are fine, if you want to buy another rifle the suggested 300WM is a good choice as are many many others. If you don't plan on moving the distance(s) out past 500 yards you can easily use a factory (accurate version) rifle and standard accurate loads. IF you plan to move much past 500 yards then the better (nearly necessary) way is to opt for the larger, longer and higher BC bullets and this may require a faster twist barrel, something generally NOT selectable in a factory rifle. If you check the ballistics programs you'll see that in many cases a HIGH BC heavy bullet will begin to overtake the advantages of the light fast bullet. You'll still need significant energy at whatever distance you shoot but the marginal shot placement sometimes taken at short range is not an option for longrange shooting.

I'm curious as to the technique you desire to use. Do you plan to leave the scope sighted to one 'point blank' range and hold-over or do you figure to range the animal and adjust the scope to the determined distance? I'd say that if you're going for the hold-over method a faster flatter cartridge is warranted, if you elect to adjust the scope to the exact distance of the critter then nearly any cartridge will perform well at 400 yards (provided you select the proper placement).

Nearly all long range shooters I know adjust the scope for each shot at distance and with rare exception shoot for a double lung hit on non-moving animals.

Practice at distance, practice reading the wind and good luck.

[This message has been edited by Dave King (edited 11-15-2001).]

I am with ya man. But there are some arguments that you are never going to win.

I also shoot a 338 Lapua and love the long range capability. Althought whenever possible I will stalk my game as close as I can. But with some good judgement (animal position) and the right conditions (weather) I will take the 400-500-600yd shot. I have made them before and if you practice at that range you can kill at that range.

Rio12345,

That 270 wby of yours with the right bullet will perform just fine out to the range you are looking for.

I am knew to this site so I figure I might as well jump into the hottest discussion on the board.

Matt

[This message has been edited by Matt R (edited 11-15-2001).]

www.LongRangeHunting.com

Really, I can see both sides to the arguement. The reason I don't think anybody is right or wrong is because I'm guessing people are simply looking at the question from different perspectives based upon their own experiences. To somebody that hunts with slugs in the woods of the East, a 300 yard shot must seem absurdly long. To somebody in the West that's used to knocking off chucks at 450 from sitting position...the thought of hitting an elk at 400 using a big rock as a rest is child's play (under the same conditions).

So you don't think me preachy, let me first "confess." I've made some poor judgement calls as far as shooting at long range in the past. The first was about 15 years ago, I flung about 7 rounds at a muley buck and I swear he was laughing at me as he trotted over the hill.

The range was later measured at 270 yds. Yes, that was way too far for a 14 year old shooting a 30-30 that was lobbing 170 flat-noses...I thought it was only about 200 yards. What can I say, I was young and stupid.

Another time I cleanly missed a large whitetail buck in the brush. It turned out to be a 130 yd shot. I thought it was about 90 yds. Too much error for a 44 Magnum pistol.

I make no excuses. I was wrong for taking those shots. Live and learn. I'm more careful now.

See a trend here? There is no "magical maximum" range that is ethical. It depends upon the conditions. In the examples I gave above, I was hampered by inadequate equipment (as well as inexperience). But conditions such as wind, time allowed for the shot, movement of the game, etc are just as important.

To all of you that say "it is a horrendous sin to shoot at a game animal at more than 400 yards because you can't guarantee you'll hit it cleanly," I ask:

Have you never, ever missed? Not once? You have? Really? But I thought you didn't shoot unless you were 100% sure you could make the shot....?

The above examples I gave of poor judgement when shooting at distance pale in comparison to some of the misses I've had at close range.

The buck appears, he's running, you shoot...you don't lead him enough and you either miss or hit him in the ass. In my opinion, a moving animal at close range is even harder to hit than a stationary animal at long range. Not only do you have to estimate how fast he is moving, but you must also estimate the range exactly. You also must accurately determine the angle of his travel relative to you.

A deer strolling along at 7 mph comming from 11 o'clock @ 75 yards requires a much different lead than a deer strolling along at 10 mph comming from 9 o'clock @ 125 yards. But can you accurately tell the difference between the two with your naked eye?

But it's OK to shoot because he's less than 400 yards away, right? Yeah, sure.

Personally, I'd rather shoot at a stationary animal (assuming little/no wind) at 500 yards with a decent rest, time to put the rangefinder on it, think about it for awhile, etc than take a "spur of the moment" "quick draw" shot at a moving animal through the brush....

Yes, the "quick draw" shots are exciting...when the animal goes down...when they don't you get that sinking feeling of having to look for a blood trail through the brusht the rest of the night.... With most of the long-range shots I've taken there has been plenty of space around the animal (one of the reasons I took the shot in the first place--not much cover with which to sneak up on him) so you at least are pretty sure if you hit him or not before he goes out of site....

Anyway, I guess I'm trying to bring home a bigger point here:

When making the decision about whether or not a shot is ethical, range is only one consideration. If it's long range, you must know your capabilities with your rifle, you must be able to accurately estimate the range, there can't be much wind, etc....

But there are plenty of reasons that shots at half that range are even more risky. Too many people take these shots anyway simply because they feel justified in the fact that they're "below their 300 yd maximum" but they are being just as (maybe more) irresponsible than somebody that takes a shot at long range when the conditions are right.

That make any sense? Clear as mud?

It's late, I tried....

quote:

---

4. Shooting into a 4 inch circle at 400 100% of the time under field conditions is beyond my ability. The guy who can look in the mirror and say that he has that ability 100% of the time is an exceptional shot. More power to him.

---

This seems a bit "over the top" for me. To me, that makes no sense unless you're shooting at midget deer. The vital area of a deer is about 3 times that big. Of an elk? What, 5 times that big?

It would make sense if you said "from a bench"--in other words if you can't shoot that well from a bench you'll never be accurate enough in the field. But you say "under field conditions."

You mean if "under field conditions" I can only keep my shots in a 5" or 6" or even 8" circle at 400 yards...that I'm going to miss an Elk "under the same field conditions" at that range? What?

One of the best things I ever did many years ago was to make a "gong"--a 1.5" thick steel plate, 12" by 12" and practice, practice, practice. A decent whitetail buck in Monatana has a chest much larger than 12X12. When I practice, offhand, sitting, kneeling, prone from all sorts of different ranges, I know that if I make the gong ring I've made a lethal shot. That's on a deer, elk, of course are even much bigger.

Can you explain to me why hitting that gong isn't good enough? That I must hit in the center 1/3 of it in order to consider my shot lethal on real game?