LASER range finders are nice but sometimes the hunting conditions give them fits. If I have the time to do a laser shot then I will use it to verify what I have already estimated using the ranging system built into the scope.
Mildots are a pain to do the math and I use a Mildot master to relieve my head.
Otherwise I am using a Shepherd scope and you can get pretty good with consistent usage. The nice thing about the Shepherd is you don't have to "click in" for elevation or windage. The tools are in the scope retical to deal with range and windage. To date I have taken 4 caribou at better than 500yds with a Shepherd and a .340Wby and they have all gone as expected with no surprises. 4 shots, 4 caribou.

quote:

Originally posted by brass thief:
Without a LRF, it"s just irresposible guesstimation after 200/250 yds. Most of the LRF"s I"ve seen (including my own!) don"t work reliably past 400/450 yds.
Yesterday I was shooting 1 litre milk jugs out to 350 mtrs in wind and rain. Lying prone, on a good rest I could relaibly hit a 5x9 inch container. Further than that, I could"nt hold the LRF steady enough to get a reading.
I was holding about 5 inches into the wind, and just below the first reticle down on my Leupold Varmint Hunter. I also had the advantage of being able to shoot at the center of a bullseye target first, the walk out and see the strikes.I marked the strikes, walked back to the firing point and saw where the strikes were in the scope, and then just held that poinmt on the target.
For anyone to be shooting at that distance, or further without accurate range measurement and a range card is just irresponsible cruelty.
good shooting

You need to get the Binocs with a built in range finder. My Leicas are good to 1300 yards. I like them because when you take your last (confirmation) look before you get your rifle up, just hit the button and you get your yardage. Simple as shit.

quote:

With all due respect, you are wrong GA Hunter. You are guilty of regurgitating the same bullshit most outdoor writers have written for years - hold for the horizontal distance.

The correction is 1-cos(angle) X total bullet drop (total bullet drop being drop from a barrel parallel to earth). Assuming 50 total inches of bullet drop in the above example, our bullet will strike 14.5 inches higher than without an angle. So if you zeroed at 200 yards, you would hold about 21 inches high. The "hold for the horizontal distance" theory would have you hold for 11 inches of bullet drop, which would clearly cause a miss.

The "hold for the horizontal distance" theory will cause you to miss low, or in the case of a rifle sighted in for 300 yards, to hit high at ranges less than 300 yards. It takes a bullet longer to fly 500 yards than 353, angle notwithstanding. The reason the bullet hits higher than on level ground is because of the angle of the target and the distance of the bullet from the line of sight

quote:

A careful look at Figure 3.3-1 (a) or (b) shows us that the amount by which the bullet shoots high at the slant range distance Ro is equal (approximately) to the perpendicular distance do from the line of sight to the extended bore line minus the projection of the drop do on that same perpendicular line. From plane trigonometry, the distance by which the bullet shoots high at Ro is:

Amount by which the bullet shoots high = do [1.0 – cosine A]

I must admit that after searching the web and doing some reading that I was wrong. I will definitely be doing some more research. There are a ton of outdoor writers putting out bad information.

quote:

Originally posted by GA DEER HUNTER:

quote:

With all due respect, you are wrong GA Hunter. You are guilty of regurgitating the same bullshit most outdoor writers have written for years - hold for the horizontal distance.

The correction is 1-cos(angle) X total bullet drop (total bullet drop being drop from a barrel parallel to earth). Assuming 50 total inches of bullet drop in the above example, our bullet will strike 14.5 inches higher than without an angle. So if you zeroed at 200 yards, you would hold about 21 inches high. The "hold for the horizontal distance" theory would have you hold for 11 inches of bullet drop, which would clearly cause a miss.

The "hold for the horizontal distance" theory will cause you to miss low, or in the case of a rifle sighted in for 300 yards, to hit high at ranges less than 300 yards. It takes a bullet longer to fly 500 yards than 353, angle notwithstanding. The reason the bullet hits higher than on level ground is because of the angle of the target and the distance of the bullet from the line of sight

quote:

A careful look at Figure 3.3-1 (a) or (b) shows us that the amount by which the bullet shoots high at the slant range distance Ro is equal (approximately) to the perpendicular distance do from the line of sight to the extended bore line minus the projection of the drop do on that same perpendicular line. From plane trigonometry, the distance by which the bullet shoots high at Ro is:

Amount by which the bullet shoots high = do [1.0 – cosine A]

I must admit that after searching the web and doing some reading that I was wrong. I will definitely be doing some more research. There are a ton of outdoor writers putting out bad information.

GA:

It isn't that you were wrong per se (maybe I was a little harsh); you believed the gazillion of writers who have quoted this BS. Even NRA pubs has written this. I will hopefully have an article in Guns&Ammo about it. I have written a few in Varmint Hunter, but Art Pesja and Chuck Smith have written more concisely about it than I have. Jim Carmichael of Outdoor Life is the only famous writer who has ever written that horizontal theory is bunk, but even what he wrote is really not that clear, which is unusual, because he is the best of the best from a technical standpoint.

quote:

Originally posted by Kensco:
What are the rules regarding hunting elk with spotting scopes and walkie-talkies in Utah? Anybody know?

Cant say for certian about spotting scopes, but the use of Walkie talkies is illegal in Ut.


Shooting @ an angle. Assuming you guys mean upward or downward, when shooting downward the amount of bullet drop is increased, however shooting upward the drop is LESS than if it were shooting horizontal. Its a strange phenomena, it has to do with the effects of gravity on the bullet. The gravitational pull on the bullet @ a horizontal shot is more pronounced than if you were to shoot upward toward the sky, and thus it actually appears to climb above the intended trajectory when shooting upward. The oppisite applies when shooting downward.

Just guessing, I would say that the amount of drop from a 300 WM downward 45* angle @ 500 yds, you would have to add at least 1/3 more drop than if the shot were horizontal. Probably a bit more. That is just my best guess without researching it.

quote:

Originally posted by elkhunter:
I killed a deer at over 12,000 yards about six years ago.

I was shooting a 155mm howitzer. We were fring high angle missions (somwhere around 40 degrees of elevation above the horizontal). It took 62 seconds for the round to reach its target. About 20 seconds after the rounds had been fired one of the forward observers called a cease fire due to animals in the impact area. The rounds were already in the air by that time so there wasn't much we could do. The FO said the results were pretty ugly.

NOw that is an honest man!....I saw the remains once as a kid of a batch of deer hit in an impact zone on Ft. Bragg.... hamburger every where!

[quote]Shooting @ an angle. Assuming you guys mean upward or downward, when shooting downward the amount of bullet drop is increased, however shooting upward the drop is LESS than if it were shooting horizontal. [quote]

This is not correct the effects for shooting uphill is exactly the same as shooting down hill. Example: A 300 Mag sighted in at 100 yards shooting a 180 grain bullet with a .525 bc at 1450 feet elevation at 3073 fps.zeroed at 100 yards the correction requiered at 500 yards is 7.25 MOA or( 38.1 inches) Change to a 45 degree angle and the correction is 4.25 MOA or (26.7 inches) the correction is the same uphill or downhill........

Just an observation in line with the original post by wapiti7

quote:

Hey! let's "keep it real" this fall, buy a range finder and quit lying!!!!

I've seen a fair number of folks that have a good bit of difficulty using their laser rangefinder. In many cases it appears to me they are going for the 'instant acceptance without a sanity check method' in that they believe any number the magic gadget displays.

Most recent error I witnessed (and I've witnessed this many times with laser users in class) was the device was set to meters vice yards... this is an easy check and fix in that the devices often display the units on-screen... this produces an error of ~10% in your mis-matched distance value.

Another common error is associated with collimation errors with the laser unit or the operator not ranging carefully on the actual target (critter) but rather getting distance from surrounding objects or background.
The most common distance error I see is when an object is on a knoll or rise with a woodline behind. The laser operator often fires the laser from a less than solid position and gets bounce from the much larger woodline rather than the small(ish) critter. In these instances it's often better to wait for the laser to go to scan mode and slowly pan across the critter in an effort to get a differential (critter vs background) and take the lesser of the two distances as correct.

Some lasers as just poorly collimated with the displayed target area being completely askew. An easy way to check is by using a large building with a distant (hundred yards or so) background. Stand about 100 yards from the face of the building and range the background on both sides and the top of the building by placing the target area indicator just on the edge of the building. You are essentially bracketing the indicated target area with the building to verify the indicated target area is the actual target area. Check the top bracket by turning the laser upside down (180 degrees of rotation) or on its side (90 degrees of rotation) and ranging past the building once again. This little exercise will allow you to verify the actual reading area vs the indicated (factory best guess) reading area.

In my opinion lasers are good electronic tools but like all tools they need to be calibrated, in the correct mode and operated with a little understanding of the limitations and pitfalls.

GA, you are pretty spot on. Drop would only be 7.8 inches. You could shoot right at him. Interestingly, at a fairly steep antle, say 75 degrees (not unheard of from top to bottom of a canyon), you would actually be 16 inches high at that range.

My wife, who has never hunted, claims to be able to see me no matter how far away I am.
Closest deer, a Fallow spike I rattled, I ever shot was 15 feet. I watched him for 30 minutes, or so, approach me. By the time he finally stopped I was shaking so badly I could hardly hold my rifle. And did he stink! The last 15 minutes with the wind from him to me was gagging.Location was in Dallas county, Alabama at the Wilcox county line.

quote:

Originally posted by Ole Miss Guy:
My wife, who has never hunted, claims to be able to see me no matter how far away I am.
Closest deer, a Fallow spike I rattled, I ever shot was 15 feet. I watched him for 30 minutes, or so, approach me. By the time he finally stopped I was shaking so badly I could hardly hold my rifle. And did he stink! The last 15 minutes with the wind from him to me was gagging.Location was in Dallas county, Alabama at the Wilcox county line.

CLOSEST deer I ever shot was in self defense.Not that it was actually charging me so much as I was in its way as it was running full out as it popped from the brush. 1st shot was with .357 chest at about 8 feet, 2nd shot was shooting UP as it was clearing me on the jump as I went to the ground.

quote:

You're shooting a .300 Win mag, using 165 grain nosler ballistic tips at 3200 feet at a mule deer a lasered 500 yards from the top of a drainage to the bottom at a 45% angle. What's the bullet drop and can you shoot right at the deer?

You do not give enough info to properly answer the question.
What is the elevfation , what distance is the rifle zeroed nwhat is the scope hieght?

quote:

quote:
You're shooting a .300 Win mag, using 165 grain nosler ballistic tips at 3200 feet at a mule deer a lasered 500 yards from the top of a drainage to the bottom at a 45% angle. What's the bullet drop and can you shoot right at the deer?



You do not give enough info to properly answer the question.
What is the elevfation , what distance is the rifle zeroed nwhat is the scope hieght?

I just "assumed" 1.5 inch sight height and 200 yard zero.

And elevation? Sea level 7500 feet or what?

I sell alot of big cased magnums to guys that shoot deer at the extreme ranges of 75-100 yards. They just buy that stuff so they can say,"mine is bigger than yours".

I can't believe nobody is commenting on the statement that magnums were created for over 500 yard shooting.

Some overbore cartridges were designed for that. I think though that the very first magnums were designed to throw a heavier bullet over the same hunting distances rather than going for longer and longer shots.

More powder capacity is not just about more distance. Sure, you can go to a lighter bullet and increase velocity and down yard trajectory. You can go to a heavier bullet and buck the winds better. You also get a flatter trajectory over the shorter, realistic and responsible hunting distances as well. Also more energy is developed with higher velocity for given bullet. you do get to a point where the cartridge is getting inefficient, while not my thing to use more granules of powder than necessary some guys are into burning powder (as a matter of fact my friend and I were burning some the other night on a steel plate so he could see the differences in burn rate and understand better why different powders for different cartridges).

Anyways, I think it is not only an incorrect statement that the purpose of magnum cartridges is for shots in excess of 400 or 500 yards, I think it is also a bad statement to make. there are idiots out there that just went out and bought a 7mm rem or a 300win and barely know where the bullet comes out, wouldn't take much to encourage them to start taking shots they can't make.

Red

A heavier bullet at a velocity of 2700 fps or above is prefered for lomg range shooting, not a light wieght for many of the reasons listed in the post above by Dago Red

Good post Dago Red. I'm sure that magnums were created to make people think that they could shoot long range easier. But I have always felt that the beauty of a magnum was to deliver extrodinary power at normal ranges. Not normal power at extrodinary ranges.

The truth, is that a 300 savage will kill an animal as far away as any magnum if you can hit it properly. And hitting it beyoud the max point blank range of the cartridge is a matter of user proficency, not ballistics!