After taking part in many posts and reading many others on these forums there seems to be three types of people here:
1)those that make judgements and assumptions based on theory
2)those that rely more on what they have seen with their own eyes
3)those that base their conclusions on heresay
This can range from which cartridge and bullet to use for hunting certain big game species to explaining terminal ballistics and bullet failures or successes.The theorists will tell you why you should use a certain cartridge and bullet and will bring up sectional density and impact velocity in order to justify decisions for themselves and to convince others of their theories validity.They blindly believe trajectory tables and claims by ammunition manufacturers.
Then there is the group of people that listen blindly to others with no experience or knowlege on the topic.If they are told a certain bullet will fail or that a certain cartridge is the best they believe it without really understanding why.They then proceed to pass on their opinion without ever having understood the theories or having any practical experience.
I like to think of myself as a person that will listen to the theory and to others stories but am most likely to make my decisions based on actual experiences that I have seen with my own eyes.If I want to know for sure how a bullet style or weight performs on game, I will test it myself (providing that I think it will kill cleanly).Even though I have trajectory tables ,I choose to test my loads at all distances that I intend to shoot.
From what I have seen there seems to be a fair number of each group with more and more becoming theorists while the group that lives on experiences seems to be shrinking.
Do you tend to agree or disagree with these statements?What is your opinion?

[ 06-09-2003, 03:35: Message edited by: stubblejumper ]

StubbleJumper,
Perhaps the group offering strong field experience really is shrinking? For the sake of sporthunting, I hope not.

If you have to experience everything personally and directly, then you will repeat a lot of other's mistakes and learn nothing from any of them. I doubt you actually learn only from your own experiences, most of us integrate information from a variety of sources - if we didn't we would pretty much be back in the cave scavanging carrion.

Personally, my kind of hunting requires a lot of reading and research. I will never be able to afford enough tags or time to reinvent my personal favorite wheels and very few folks know much about that sort of thing any more.

Personal experience is a great thing, but being able to take ideas, theories, and other experiences and integrate and generalize them is what intelligent people do every day. The successful folks are those that know how to separate the wheat from the chaff.

Brent

Brent-I never meant that I only learn from my own own experiences.I do research as well and have a large supply of reference materials available but I do like to experience thinks for myself whenever possible.Many of todays shooters depend totally on theory or what they have been told by others with no experience of their own to help then discover what is real and what is just theory or heresay.I would never be so bold as to condemn(or recommend) a rifle a cartridge or a bullet without actually using one myself whereas many people don't hesitate to do so strictly on what they have read or been told.

[ 06-09-2003, 05:27: Message edited by: stubblejumper ]

stubblejumper

I have not shot elk but I believe I could make a better judgement on how well a bullet/calibre combination would work on elk than could someone who had shot 3 elk but who also had poor gun knowledge.

One also needs to keep in mind that what one person considers a lot of experience another person or group of people would think the same amount of experience was very limited.

Take white tail deer and pig size animals. The keen Australian shooter would regard most Americans as very limited in experience on bullet/calibre performance. The American is shooting this animal size in the 10s whereas the keen Australian shooter is shooting them in the 100s and the 1000s. However I can think of different Americans who can pass on much more meaningful information from a small base of numbers than can some Australians with a large base of numbers.

Mike

Stubblejumper,

Interesting thread. Everyone makes good points.
I believe that Mike is correct about experience when it comes to the vast numbers of animals taken by some of our Australian mates. The guy with the three elk has a bit of gun knowledge, too. I think that Nick makes a good point on the group with strong field experience shrinking. I might add that particular group with quality field experience is shrinking. I'm sure that some would say that this may be caused by the constraints society places on a person. I would add that the choice is yours as to where you put your priorities. Personal experience is a great thing and it's out there if you're willing to make the sacrifice. Knowledge from research can only bolster what you learn through personal experience but if you choose to not make the sacrifices necessary, don't criticize the guy that does. Do what you do and live with it. No excuses.

Joe

A few jumbled thoughts, partly on topic...

I know a few people that have shot literally dozens of elk and can barely pronounce 7mm Rem Mag, let alone know anything about its trajectory, or the differences between the various bullets on the market. They shoot their 7mm a half dozen times a year (at one elk).

Experience is only part of the equation! What fills the 6" of space between your ears is a big part of that equation too.

I get pretty peeved by those that think since they have done something a few times, they automatically know more about than the guy who has only done it once, or even not at all. Before I'll accept the "experience trump card" the person playing it better demonstrate he's also been a close study.

Life is short...learn from the experiences of others so you don't have to make all the mistakes they did.

Cheers,
Canuck

Joe

I was not saying that the bloke who shot 3 elk was automatically without gun knowledge but rather he could shoot 3 elk (or 3 of whatever) and if he has poor gun knowledge his "reporting" might not mean much.

Over the years I have met quite a few Australians who have shot roos, pigs and goats in the 1000s with say the 243 or 308. However they have poor knowledge on guns/calibres etc and can't really apply the empirical evidence elsewhere.

Another issue that is a problem with accurate "reporting" is changing of components by manufactures such as Hornady etc. I think they are continually torn between making the most effective bullet Vs the bullet that best passes the shooting into some medium.

Mike

When I lived in Chetwynd,I worked with a keen hunter,when George said something I took it as a fact.If I pass on his wisdom and experience,that would be called hearsay.WE would certainly miss out on a great deal ,if we use too tight a blinder.

Everyone makes valid points.My pet peeve is when a person starts out with "I have heard" or "I have read" or "I was told" and then proceeds to tell you what bullet or cartridge you should or shouldn't use.Experience alone is not the only factor that earns credibility with me but I don't put a lot of faith in someones advice when they tell me that a certain bullet weight or type won't work when they have never used it but I have used it many times successfully.A person that may not have killed elk but has killed several moose or other large animals will probably give better advice on what to use for elk than a person whose entire hunting career has only resulted in killing a few deer or even a hunter that has killed one or two elk.I don't consider having killed two or three animals having a lot of experience but a hunter that has killed 50 or so big game animals is experienced to me.I am more likely to listen to a person that has owned a dozen or so different cartridges when he tells me why he prefers one or the other than to listen to a person that has only owned one or two tell me why his cartridge is the best there is.Then there is the individual that bought the best cartridge because his father and grandfather hunted with the same cartridge and they always got their deer.Overall I believe peoples busy lifestyles are resulting in them spending less time shooting and learning about ballistics and less time experiencing hunting.They are becoming far too dependant on advertising and trajectory tables and such.

stubblejumper

Another issue is that different people will rate the same performance differently, although this probably applies mostly to shooters from different countries.

As an example, Americans on deer size animals tend to select both heavier and harder bullets than do Australians. In our case we are basically varmint shooting and tend to be more impressed by a higher number of "drop on spot" shots than reliability and meat is not of importance.

The two animals that we both shoot a lot of in common would be the goat and pig. On these forums Aemricans will commonly complain that the xyz bullet in the abc calibre is no good because it expand too fast. On the other hand the Australia is more likely to complain because a bullet expands too slowly.

I think at the end of the day the customer does generally get it right and as such it is probably reasonable to say that the 22/250, 243, 270, 7mm Rem, 308, 30/06, 300 Win, 338 Win and 375 H&H using bullets or ammo put out by the major makers probably works quite well in a wide area of use.

Reporting of course also varies greatly depending on whether the "reporter" has a gun/calibre as a just a means to an end or if the "reporter" is a gun nut.

Mike

Mike,

Hell, Mike, what do I know? I shoot Remingtons and Ballistic Tips. I'm irresponsible and should be banned for life.

Joe

Nebraska-Bullseye-You have nailed it perfectly.Listen to what others say but be sure it is fact before you pass it on to others.If asked for actual experiences,try to limit yourself to actual experiences but hold back the opinions.If asked for opinions feel free to fire away.If a person sticks to these ideas you can be most helpful to both yourself and to others while still getting the opportunity to share your opinions and experiences with others.

Joe posted:

Hell, Mike, what do I know? I shoot Remingtons and Ballistic Tips. I'm irresponsible and should be banned for life.

The ban should be for life

Talking of Ballistic Tips, when they first came to Australia there were two reports you would get....real dynamite killers or....armour piercers. It was not inaccurate reporting but rather Nosler fiddling with the bullet.

A bullet I have used in the 1000s between about the late 60s when I first started shooting and up to about 1990 was the 130 grain Hornady 270. Over those years I have seen that bullet perform from like a real blow up bullet through to armour piercer and everything in between.

Mike

The ballistic tips I used when they first came out (100gr-.257" and 140gr-7mm)expanded more rapidly than desired.Recent bullets(140gr-7mm and 180gr-.308)are much tougher and hold together much better even with muzzle velocities from 3400fps to 3500 fps.Nosler claims to have made several changes to the ballistic tip over the years and my experieces with these bullets lead me to believe they did a good job of improving it.The problem is that many people that have only used the early versions (and many people that have never used them at all)continue to condemn them.

[ 06-09-2003, 09:06: Message edited by: stubblejumper ]

Nice observations, stubblejumper. I noticed the same thing years ago--on every internet board, no matter the subject it covers. That's the way people are in life, that's the way things will be on the internet.

However, I think you're a bit off here on the theorists:

quote:

---

Originally posted by stubblejumper:
They blindly believe trajectory tables and claims by ammunition manufacturers.

---

Anybody who takes the time to study the theory of exterior ballistics knows that a trajectory table is nothing more than a "good first guess" and a useful tool with which to see the differences between various "what if" scenarios. Only an AssClown would think he could accurately place his first shot at 500+ yards because of a trajectory table.

And claims by manufacturers are often worse than heresay! Anybody who takes the time to study how things work and why takes them with a large grain of salt. He is often the first and the most vocal to dispute and/or disprove a manufacturer's claim. They want not only sound theory, but usually test results as well.

You're also leaving out the theoretical thinkers that also have experience. Just because one is interested in how things work doesn't automatically mean he has zero experience. I'll give you an analogy:

When I go to a racetrack (roadcourse) in my Camaro, I'm never the fastest guy there (not yet, anyway). And most of the people there have more experience than I.

Does that mean everybody who is faster and/or has more experience knows more about suspension design than I do? No. Usually there's only one or two people there who can even carry on a conversation about roll centers, instant centers, swingarms, etc with me. Maybe that explains how I'm "almost as fast" in my less expensive car with much less horse power than the "fast guys" are running.

On the other hand, while there is no substitute for experience, experience alone is merely trial and error. Enough of it is most definatley valuable. But without attempting to learn why one sees the things he does and how it happens, much of it is simply spinning their wheels. Without trying to combine the "hows and whys" with your experience, you simply won't learn as efficiently. And the upper level of your potential knowledge is lower.

When I have successfull Pro Trans Am drivers asking me to explain a suspension design concept, it ain't by accident. People who have infinitely more experience and skill than I do sometimes have enough experience to know that I know what the hell I'm talking about....

Would you take ballistics advice from somebody who has killed 1,000 deer and elk? Even if every one of them was killed with the same 30-30 with the same factory load? While I'd certainly listen to the guy (you have to give respect where it is due), I wouldn't expect him to be able to tell me which bullet would be more accurate at 400 yds than a guy who shoots targets at 400 yds all the time but has never killed an elk.

Would you take advice on what to kill an elephant with from Bell? You don't think a 7X57 is big enough? Well, how many elephant have you killed?

Anyway, I want to make clear this wasn't specifically directed at you. I disagree with a few points you made and started to "ramble on...." That's all. Just my "opinion."

jonA -I take it you read only my original post on this thread.If you read my later ones you would see that I clarified(or attempted to) that I believe experience is most important but that it is not my only source of knowledge and information.The problem is that many people have only heresay and theory with little or no experience to back it up yet they think themselves to be well informed and in some cases authorities on the subject.For your information I have met people that have trajectory tables taped to their guns but have never fired at a target in excess of 100 yards.Some said they only had access to 100 yard ranges and others actually believed that the tables were close enough to trust a long range shot.

I welcome all input, hearsay, theory or otheriwse. It's up to the individual to process it & keep what you want & throw out what you don't as it fits your situation. I think it's important to understand as much as possible about as many different topics as possible. I can't "experience" everything, but I can research & talk to those that have so that I can decide things for myself.
I don't hunt big game w/ a .243, but have talked to enough guys whose opinions I respect & who have, along w/ the writings of many of the "experts" to know I don't want to. A guy could shoot 20 deer through the rib cage or neck @ 100yds & conclude the .243 is a great deer cart. for any deer in any circumstance, based on his numerous kills. The problem is not enough different situations to really qualify his experience.

Know what I hate more than "heresay?" Hearsay! And, don't even get me started on "heresy!"

In all seriousness, though, regarding those folks who do begin with "I have heard," "I have read," or "I have been told"...at least they're disclosing that fact up front. The more "dangerous" ones are those who don't mention it and carry on like they're Whelen, Ackley, Keith and O'Connor all rolled into one.

My $0.02,
RSY

Well, I can sorta agree with the general comments posted here, but were the essence of this thread followed the entire AR board would be a PRETTY SLOW place...

Just think, the entire 45-70 lever rifles and Dangerous Game thread(s) would never have happened (even though is was patently obvious that only Vincent really knew what he was talking about there were some 300+ posts on just one of those threads as I recall).

and no one posting such values on this thread will be posting in the handgun thread over on the Africa board right now.

Brent

[ 06-09-2003, 17:44: Message edited by: Brent ]

On trajectory tables.......I find the computer generated data such as that from software like PointBlank to be pretty close to actual trajectory........at least out to 4 or 500 yards......haven't checked it any farther than that . At least they seem to work out IF the bullet manufacturer hasn't exagerated the listed b.c. of the bullet .........

I am very happy to hear someone start a conversation with "I heard that...", "Someone told me that..." or "I read that...". That is great info and allows me to take the info in and apply the right amount of skepticism.

Too many jerk-wads "heard something from someone" but pass it off as their own. If you believed this, you would tend to apply more credence to the info than it deserved and could lead to trouble.

The biggest problem in communicating is not where the info comes from, but how it is presented.

Cheers,
Canuck

Plagiarism can be a double edged sword when someone who doesn't have a clue hangs on every word of a self proclaimed expert. I would rather someone say "I have read" or "I have heard" especialy when they give the source. To me this is being up front and honest, more or less a way of saying "I have know personal experience on this so take it for what it's worth".

I myself have never owned or shot any game with a 30-06 but I think it would be safe to say that from what I have heard it would be a good caliber for deer and I have read that IMR 4350 works well in this caliber.

Stubblejumper, I agree that life has changed somewhat in that people's lifestyles have changed how much time to actually experience testing, hunting etc. they have. But I also think the internet has some huge benefits that we didn't have a few years ago. Access to information is light years ahead of when we started hunting. However, like you say, you are going to get about 95 fillers to every 100 posts. I think that's just human nature. As far as experienced people goes, I think it is getting to be a smaller group. A lot of us baby boomers ain't as young as springtime no more.

three types of people here:
1)those that make judgements and assumptions based on theory
2)those that rely more on what they have seen with their own eyes
3)those that base their conclusions on heresay

I suspect that all of us (humans) fall into, and out of your categories from time to time.

Not to offend, but just because someone witnesses an event, or series of events doesn't mean that they can, or do, accurately interpret what happened. Your first two examples are valid learning methods, the third is probably not much better than gossip.

My experience is that Mike375 is spot on on choices of guns and bullets. IMHO most Americans choose too tough a bullet for deer sized animals, and speed seems to be the ultimate killer for some people. I think this is because the so called gun writers have been preaching speed and premium bullets for too many years.

One of my favorite gun writers, Jack O'Conner said that all shooters "pick thier expert". If you were an Elmer Keith fan, you favored large, heavy bullets. If you were a Roy Weatherby fan, you knew that high speed was the criterion for cartridge selection. Jack had a balanced view generally but did, in my opinion, overrate the .270Win. Sometimes the expert is your Dad, the oldest member of your hunting club or, heaven forbid, GUNS AND AMMO but we all do pick our expert because the fields of shooting and hunting are too wide and too subjective for anyone to truly be an expert based on experiance.

Jim Carmichal is my expert and favorite writer.

Stubblejumper -- I agree with your general premise. I hunted a lot for years, reloaded just enough for my son and I to get by, with excellent results. We killed a lot of game, Deer and Elk, Caribou and Brown Bear, never any bad misses, always got our animal. I was considered what you would call a local expert hunting big game. The last few years I have had the time and money to shoot as much as I want to, working on many different chamberings in rifles. Chronographing, reloading, shooting 2000 plus rounds per year, working up loads for my pet projects, getting ready for this or that hunt. Now grandsons are starting from scratch, doing my thing with my help. ------------ I just thought I knew something, until I started all this shooting. Now instead of a few shots in preparation for the years hunts, I have shot enough for the whole process to become instinctive, and I want those around me, kin or not to be prepared as well. It all have paid of handsomely, because now we are all better for it. --------- Before I did the hunting, reloading, shooting to an extent, and thought I was a pretty sharp all around hunter. Well I wasn't. Before it was a lot of theory, hoping it would work in the field, while no major mistakes were made, the potential was certainly there. Now, with the hours of shooting, reloading, and applying it all in the field, I unterstand the whole scope much better. --------- There is nothing I dislike more than the "Gunstore expert" behind the counter that has never applied his "expertise" in the field, but daily dishing out his advice to the general public. ----------- When I state something here and on other sites, I have learned it from many sessions or hunts and hopefully can repeat it.
I never expect to "know it all", and can always learn something new today or tomorrow. Good shooting.

[ 06-10-2003, 22:00: Message edited by: phurley ]

I think I can break a majority of what goes on at this site and other like it into 2 general statements. (Theories?)

1: There is a perfect cartridge that fires a perfect bullet that drops whatever game animal that bullet is fired at dead in its tracks every time.

2: There is a perfect rifle that chambers this cartridge and fires the bullet that drops the game animal in its track every time and it fires that bullet into one hole no matter what the range or conditions. If the animal even twitches after the shot, out comes a theory on bullet malfunction or not enough gun to explain the �failure�.

I think the mistake members of all three classes mentioned in the opening post of this thread is assuming that experience and theory are the same thing. Theory can lead to experience, but I�m wary of experience that leads to theory. In theory, a 338 kills elk better than a 270; in practice, it ain�t so.

On these boards, nobody flinches and nobody misses.

I have a theory. I believe that most �bullet failures� discussed here are really misses. A miss does not relate to bullet performance. They aren�t even bastard cousins.

A gut shot does not relate to bullet performance.

I learned my hunting and shooting skills by experience, but I also learned from those with more experience. I learned that our father�s and grandfather�s killed an awful lot of game with standard calibers long before the super magnums came along. That�s not theory, that�s fact.

One category left off the list that started this thread was those men that do things by chance or accident. My first big game rifle was an accident, not a choice or even a theory. That rifle was all the small hardware store had in stock when I went to buy my first at age 16. That accidental choice has guided my thinking since.

I spent a professional career dealing with gunshot wounds to humans. Based on that experience, I concluded a short time after arriving on this form, that expectations for bullet performance expressed here are unrealistic. A bullet fired at a human or a game animal is not a static, repeatable event. Firing one bullet is one event; firing a second in a different event and may be vastly different.

Here�s a theoretical question. You are a guide. You have a client come to camp with two rifles. You are after giant elk. One rifle is a 260. The client can shoot this rifle into a quarter size target at a 100 yards. He shoots the other rifle, his �elk� rifle, a 30-378, and he flinches so bad he can�t keep three shots in a foot at a 100 yards. Which rifle do you want him to use? But wait a minute. He read a story by Expert Shooter Hunter that elk are hard to kill. They take a tremendous amount of punishment before they die. He needs the power of the big gun.

My personal experience: Elk aren�t any harder to kill than a deer. Open a wound in an elk that drops blood pressure to zero and they fall in a few seconds. Hit them poorly and be prepared to track them across several counties. Trouble is, very few experts will admit they hit the animal poorly.

stubblejumper,

I'd like to add a fourth type to your list. The individual who has a freak experience and takes it as gospel. Example. I had a man working for me when I lived in Alaska. This man had never hunted before in his life. After tasting caribou, he decided he was going after caribou. I suggested a .30-06 and a good 180 factory bullet. I even told him a good place to go. To make a long story shorter, he borrowed a Win. M-94 and bought a box of ammo. He didn't even bother to sight the rifle in. He drove up to the Denali highway, just west of the MacLaren river, parked his car at the edge of the road, and in a few minutes dropped a bull caribou that went into the book. From that minute on, he was the self proclaimed expert on caribou, and had a record book bull to prove it.

Well, I've either done it, heard about it or read about it. Just like the rest of you folks. Some of what I've read or heard makes sense, some doesn't. Take your pick. I try to ID my opinion from my experience but don't always do that. None of us will live long enough to do it all, doesn't mean we can't apply common sense and/or learn form others. EX: .22 CB shorts work well on cats. My one experience with elephants would indicate that a .223 Rem FMJ(one shot) is adequate for them. Both are my experiences, which do you put the most stock in?

I paper patch .44 mags for my Ruger 77/44, use 300 gr bullets of my design and it shoots MOA or less at 100 yds. It is an amazing combination, especially with the red dot sight. I'd hunt anything in N. America with it, but would be cautious with big bears, and would prefer other weapons for that task. I can make the small leaps of logic about Paper patching other cartridges based on this experience and don't mind sharing them. Use it or not, I couldn't care less.

Folks,

I try not to offer info unless I have some experience to go along with it. That said, I also include items of theory and heresay in my posts. I'm one that will start a sentence with "I have read" when I don't have hard evidence. I do this to make clear the context is understood. I even stray into the forbidden "I think" territory occasionally. If we all restricted our posts strictly to knowledge backed by hard experience, and all were 100% honest about it, 'I think' there would be far fewer posts to entertain us. Personally, I don't want that to happen. The reader always has the option of not reading what is typed. I am the first to admit that I don't know it all. But I do know a fair amount - maybe more than the average cottonchopper - maybe not.

'In my opinion', I would much rather see the end of flaming. Now that would improve the quality of my readership experience on this and all boards.

Live well

I don't give a lot of advice on the best caliber for various animals simply because I don't think it matters much. Also my experience is often not all that valid. When it is it may not be that appropriate.
For instance, when I say, "Leather soled slippers are called slippers for a reason and may not be the best choice for stalking elk. Always get a rubber soled pair.", Im speaking from experience.
When I say "It's easier to miss a running coyote than to hit it," I'm speaking from experience.
When I say "fill up that tank at the first opportunity and don't put it off 'til later," that's experience talking.
But when I say something like "the 130 Ballistic Tip probably isn't a good choice for moose." Well, I have to confess, that's probably conjecture. I have never even attempted to shoot a moose with a 130BT. The truth is most of what I have learned over the years has come from watching others shoot animals or listening to their reports of the hunt as they hung around the shop and watched me work. I never was one of those gunsmiths who was able to spend the entire season out in the field but instead, stayed in the shop while others went out.
Now, it might not have made much difference if I had gotten out in the field. It seemed like mostly I was better able to report on what fabrics soaked up rainwater best. Or how many miles one had to walk before a Spam sandwich tasted good (quite a few miles). I often got a pretty good idea what the world would look like without wildlife.
At one point my brother and I both worked at the same gunshop. Once when we were slogging back to the truck in a driving rain after seeing our usual quota of animals (0)on one of our weekend hunts he said, "Do you ever think it's a bit ironic that guys come to us to get advice from the experts?"
"I try not to think about it," I said.
"Well, I think about it quite a bit. The truth is, we suck."
I don't know that I would go that far," I replied. "I'm sure other guys get skunked too."
"But not every effing weekend!" he exclaimed.
"I think they just don't come in and tell us about the failures," I suggested. "I'm sure most of our customers have similar experiences to ours. Hold up. I've got to wring my socks out."
"At least we'll be able to report on the effectiveness of Dri-Kote boot dressing."
"Yeah. That stuff really sucks," I said.
" So what's your take on the 180 Sierra for deer hunting after this trip," he asked.
"Too heavy." I replied. "a lighter bullet would be easier to carry and might not tend to drag my pants down so bad and you can quote me on that."
So there you have it. Sometimes even the experts have to look elsewhere for their knowledge! Regards, Bill.

Bill....

Loved that post!!!!

Ditto, Nebraska.

Bill, great post.

Live well

Bigbob, that sounds like an elk hunting buddy of mine. He's killed one elk in 15 years (and that was a fluke) and I'm surprised he hasn't written a book on elk hunting. (if he did, I doubt it would be too much worse that some of the doggy "how to" gospels I have read.
If I say, "I've read", I'll usually be quoting say Finn AAgard or someone of his stature; if I say "I think" it will still be based on something other than arm chair conjecture. If I say "I know" something has happened often enough to form a definite pattern.

On second thought, if it weren't for hearsay, therory and experience, we'd be a boring bunch. Kind of like congress debating a bill.

All those who have been everywhere and hunted everything please take one step forward.

chirp, chirp..

Everyone forms their own opinions based on THEIR personal hunting experiences, whatever that may be. Where is a thread like this supposed to go? is AR supposed to start an elite members only forum? Develope a criteria for minimum kills for posting privlidges? How can anyone ever be expected to make a shot with their heads so high in the air?

I love the way Dutch has a knack for putting things into perspective, in a similar thread I recall him saying about the contents of this forum, something like, "its not much different than having a conversation in a coffee shop, you take what is usefull and keep one eye on the bullshit."