quote:

---

Originally posted by Atkinson:
With a proper bullet it is a quicker killer and more humane than a side shot, simply because it tears up more internal tissue throughout the body...and if cleaned quickly and washed out, it will not contaminate nor ruin as much meat..

---

I agree with you most of the time Ray, but I don't know that I'd go so far as to say all that.

I look at it as an effective option, but I prefer the ol' heart and lungs. Never have had occasion to use the "raking shot", but wouldn't hesitate if I needed to (under the right circumstances, right bullet/cartridge, yadda, yadda).

Canuck

I can't really argue with you about the effectiveness of that shot when you are prepared with a suitable caliber and premium bullet. It kills, period. Just as fast as any well placed shot to the vitals, and as you mentioned, it may even put them on the ground faster. More humane, well, that I am not so sure about. But certainly not less.

Just like with any shot, placement is critical. The raking shot doesn't have quite the latitude for error that a broadside, boiler-room shot does. I have followed up on a couple moose where an attempted T.H.S. went awry, and it wasn't too pretty. Like neck shots or longish shots, I think raking shots are best left for those who really know what they're doing.

I am sure your right about the opportunities in Idaho, and having the ability to cover all possible angles will certainly increase your odds of success.

The thought of messing up a sirloin really scares the poop out of me though.

Canuck

I've been told "It wrecks the meat" or it's "not polite" a million times. I don't know about wrecking the meat, but I'd guess the animal has it's own opinions about how "polite" it is to get shot ANYWHERE!

------------------
Good huntin', shootin', and spear chuckin',
RAB

------------------
To be old and wise.....first you have to be young and stupid!

Ray
Ya got it in one. The Texas Heartshot or whatever you wish to call it ( I call it "shot up the ass" ) knocks 'em down like lightning, even if you hit the rump on one side or the other the shock to the spinal region puts them down and a quick follow up shot is quite easy!! You might lose a part of the rump but you don't lose the lot. If you are into tanning the skins - a deer shot staight up the "clacker valve" has no holes in the skin.

Steve H

It allows little margin for error, but not much chance to wound the animal and lose it, either. You either knock it down or not hit it at all, for the most part.

Tom

Bush baby

quote:

---

Originally posted by TomP:
It allows little margin for error, but not much chance to wound the animal and lose it, either. You either knock it down or not hit it at all, for the most part.

---

Hi Tom,

Just for arguements sake, I offer the following. Those two incidents involving moose that I alluded to above are a good example of why you actually have less margin of error than on a broadside shot, and how you can inflict grevious injury without a knockdown.

The thing is, when using this shot you have to imagine a straight line between the entry point and the organs in the chest cavity. In some animals this is a long way, which leads to three potential problems.

The obvious one is inadequate penetration. This one has many variables including animal size, bullet used, impact velocity, whether the hip bone must be penetrated etc. I think we here have a pretty good handle on this one.

Another is bullet deflection. When penetrating a moose or elk (from angles other than straight on especially) the large hipbones can deflect bullets of all sorts. This happened on one of the moose I mentioned before. The bullet entered about 4" right of the centerline in the right ham. At the angle the shooter had, that should have allowed the bullet to track into the vitals, but the bullet hit the hipbone and deflected the bullet back out of the right side of the animal at the base of the paunch. This one took 8 hours and 3km of tracking to find. Nice big hole through the hip bone, but nothing broken.

The other potential problem is missing wide. The angle the bullet is following on a miss may also result in a fatal, but far from immediate death. This is what happened with the other moose. The hunter missed wide left, and the bullet cleanly passed through the upper hind quarter. Two days later we found this moose, very sick but far from dead.

The further the bullet must penetrate, the more chance there is for something to go wrong. Its kinda like a short pool shot versus one with "a lot of green". Other variables come into play besides marksmanship.

To sum up, I do not dispute the efficacy of the shot or whether anyone should use it. I am just saying that if you choose to use it, you should be careful and know what you are doing. In otherwords I wouldn't recommend it to most beginning hunters as the best way to kill cleanly and get instant knockdowns. There are more variables that must be considered than on a basic broadside shot, and ultimately a greater margin for error.

Of course, if you are using it as a follow up shot on a wounded animal, much of this can be disregarded. The objective there is just to get the animal down. A quick clean kill may have already been precluded and loss of meat is secondary to just recovering the animal or minimizing its suffering.

JMHO, Canuck

FN

The one time I used the shot was on a mule deer with 7mm magnum; penetration was not likely to be an issue. I agree that when there is bone involved which is heavy for the caliber, there are potential problems.

Tom

Canuck

------------------
JD