What prompts this is a post over on the Medium Bores site regarding; 400-500 yds shots with either a .338 or .375, which would be better,etc. The replies to most "LONG RANGE" threads seem to be the following.....

I think any of us with respect for the sport and the game feel compelled to reply from the side of caution; you may wound, may not be able to find the animal, gut shoot it, etc. We probably are not intendiing to lecture but up on the old soapbox we go. Anyone who has seen a wounded animal thats died an agonizing,lingering death can't help themselves. I can appreciate their (our) point.

Then you have a small group who REALLY can pull off some amazing feats of marksmanship,reading the elements,placing the shot,etc. They are very knowledgeable on guns,gear,ballisitcs, use rangefinders and very accurate rifles,etc. God Bless em. They have my awe and respect. Maybe they need to expand on just HOW they got to where they are. the years of practice, trying different bullets and calibers, the gear,etc.

Then there's the group who automatically suggest stalking many hundreds of yards closer as thats what they do, they have never had to shoot over X amount of yds,etc. Feasible WHERE THEY hunt, but maybe not feasible were the poster hunts. I know I've been ragged on over the years as my "prairie" elk hunting is much closer to antelope hunting with the average shots in excess of 300 yds.

Recently guided a guy from the east coast. His 2nd trip out to Montana. Last year he shot a raghorn at 100 yds after passing on MANY,MANY other better elk that were 200-300 yds away. Over the past year he went out and tested his rifle with all the available factory loads one could use for elk/deer. Bought a Harris bipod and did most of his shooting prone with the bipod. Joined a 300 yd rifle range where he could practice at 100,200,250 and 300 yds on paper. Kept records of just what loads worked the best,most accurate,etc. This year good elk were tough to find but when given a 320 yard opportunity in good light,nearly zero wind, he took a 327 yd shot and down it went.

My point? Nothing, maybe other than with practice and the right gear shots out of our comfort range are easily possible.
YOUR hunting situation is not the same as everyone elses. Not all of us CAN stalk closer.

No real point to this ,just an observation.

FN in MT

WELL SAID FRANK. MY SENTIMENTS EXACTLY!

I will refrain from adding to the lecture and just say that I agree whole heartedly!!

Very well said Frank!!!!! Some folks are just not up for those kind shots. I grew up shooting long ranges as a matter of course. It was just the way we did it back then in that area. My sons hunt there to this day and still take those long shots. We do not lose any game if we can at all help it.

As to elk at long range (300+ yds) it can be done in the right circumstances. Proper bullets need to be used and an intimate knowledge of your rifle and load are vital.

I was mulling that same thread as well but from a different angle. Many people who would never ever shoot at a deer at 400 or 500 yards because of sportsmanship will blaze away at prarie dogs, crows, chucks or coyotes at those ranges without guilt. Funny how we comparmentalize and rationalize. Not a criticism as I shoot at long ranges when I have a shot I believe in. I just never thought a deer was somehow more noble than smaller critters or they any less noble.

[ 12-09-2003, 00:48: Message edited by: tiggertate ]

A REAL 300 yards is a long shot in anyone's book. I don't care how much I paid for a hunt or how bad I want the animal, I owe it to the animal to make a clean one shot kill. Just me.

Tigertate,

I also am dazzled by the folks who will atempt a shot well out of their capabilities because its "only a coyote,or crow". To me they ALL suffer just the same from a wound.

HacksawTom,

I don't like to even see a "3" as the first number in my range finder when it appies to antelope/deer. I REALLY like 100-150 yd readings instead as the targets are fairly small.
But longish 200's and short 300's are really not that big a deal on elk. They have very large heart/lung areas. I routinely take off white 8 1/2 x 11 inch paper and tack it up for hunters to shoot at. If they can keep their shots in the "paper" at 300 they can take an elk at that distance.

As far as passing on shots, I applaud the fact that you DO. I do as well but suggest you try the "paper test" you may surprise yourself with your capabilites on elk.

FN in MT

I have to agree and disagree at the same time I shoot allot at 200 - 500 yards all year mainly because the deer lease I hunt on is mainly large wheat and soybean fields and it is more common to have a shots ranging from 300 to 450. I use a lazer range finder and a Leupold 3.5X10X50 and the largest buck I took this year was at 422 yards and the shot was dead center in his chest as he was facing me, the Buck weighed 176# and had a 20" wide spread, 8 points and went down like he was struck by lightning. Good preparation and lots of practice paid off. However I do not say everyone should try a shot at that distance mainly because most hunters do not practice at long range every weekend as I do. In fact most of the hunters I know only practice out to 200 yards and even then most of there shooting is at 100 yards.
I guess what I'm saying is that longe range hunting can be done with allot of practice practice practice but even then I would not dream at shooting a moving animal at that range. Just one old deer hunters opinion.

Yawn...

(posted in reply to all "long range 'hunting'" threads in general, not necessarily this one in particular. I am not sure how people have the energy to keep arguing about it. People always find ways to justify what they like to do - slingshot hunters and long range snipers alike.)

[ 12-09-2003, 00:52: Message edited by: Canuck ]

Its called boredom, Canuck. And an anonymous chance to pontificate. Gotta love it.

Tigertate,

Have to say, your last post struck me the wrong way. If my post appears as though Im speaking as an authority, or bombastic in any way that wasn't MY intention. If the "pontificate" dig was aimed at me I must say I found it offensive.

Frank N.

I never have seen what the big deal is with 300yd+ shots on deer. If you practice, there is nothing wrong with that shot. I shoot probably 100rounds during the summer and at the 300yd range I shoot a 3" group. So, why must some think 300yds+ is not ethical?

If you practice and the crosshairs aren't moving, why not take it?

I just can't see why so many lump every shooter into the same pile.

Those that can, do. Those that can't either say no one can, blaze away anyway or suck it up like a man and accept "their" abilities.

I was describing my day, not yours Frank. Please don't take my posts personally; I always address the individual in the post if that is my intent.

Tigertate,

Thank You,

FN

De nada, FN

Frank, I can't disagree with anything you've said. Excellent post....

It takes more than the ability to write a check to be a long-distance rifleman. Lot's of guys buy rifles that would be considered excellent extended-range rifles by most people, but then don't bother to pay the dues in terms of practice, load development, etc. in order to become true extended-range RIFLEMEN. So the equipment ends up outclassing the guy who buys it.

I've seen a number of guys shoot excellent groups off the bench with flat-shooting ordinance at 100 yds., then demonstrate serious bullet placement problems downrange because their scopes were canted, the scope's field-of-adjustment range was not centered in the true boreline of the rifle, etc. In other words, they introduced their own parallax problem because they didn't understand proper scope/optical mechanics to begin with, and never knew the difference because they spent most of their time shooting at 100yds. When things started to turn ugly downrange, they wondered why. I'd also venture to guess that 95% of all gunsmiths don't understand proper scope mounting, based upon what I've seen over the years. Just one example of a long-range conundrum, out of many.....

I don't care for extended range (over 300 yard) shots, and I'll avoid them if at all possible. I've been in situations on pronghorn, mule deer, coues deer, and gemsbok that required careful extended-range shooting, but those situations were few and far between. I've usually been able to stalk closer or else pass the shot.

I think ninety-some percent of the game I've taken over the years has been shot at under 200yds., and if I could keep it that way from here on out, I would...

AD

If long range shooting is what you enjoy...and you are willing to put in the time and effort to get capable...then by God more power to you.
I shot three deer this year at over 300 yards... all one shot kills. Longest traveled maybe 20 yards.
I shot a .264 win mag sighted in at 300 yard zero. I put over 100 rounds through it preseason & practice. If I know my gun, my rifle, and my load...then I damn well know my own capabilities.
Different strokes for different folks. The only time I shoot at an animal is when I intend to kill it.
Don't trash long shots. I get a bigger kick out of scoring from a distance than if I had shot it at 40 yds. Isn't that why we Prairie Dog?? To get better with the big game shots??

My $.02

swede

When I go out to my range to work up a load calm conditions are in order.

Very often I go to the range during windy conditons in order to improve my accuracy at unknown distance without the aid of range flags or range-finders.

Not one mention here regarding effects of wind which is a magnitude more difficult than doping bullet drop.

Frank i agree with you. I'd much rather take a 100 yard shot than a 400. But i do practice at 300 and 400 yards every time i go to High Ore to shoot. I also have a place in the mountains were i can set up my cardboard elk and shoot at 500+ yards. I'm very confidant out to 400 but at 500 things need to be "just right" for me take the shot. Practice.. Practice.. Practice.........

I am in full agreement also Frank. I routinly practice from 100 yds to 400 yds. I consider a 300 yard shot a good one if the conditions are correct. But then, someone surely will tell you that you just dont know how to stalk like them, Frank.

Every summer a group of SCI Chapters in this area have a meeting and a shoot. The shoot consists of shotgun, pistol and two rifle courses. The Chapters form different 5 member teams and about 90-100 shooters total.

One rifle course is at 100 yards at the range. 3 0ffhand, 3 Bench and 4 sitting. Target is an NRA standard target. Other than the Bench no leaning on posts etc. The second rifle is at an unknown distance. 3 offhand, 3 sitting and 4 any position including bracing on a straw barrel. Target was a 10" steel gong.

This year the temperature was in the nineties with a cross wind on the unknown distance which turned out ot be 330 yards.

One of the interesting things was the number of SCI members who couldn't even hit the 10 inch gong, 0 for 10, even with a rest. The other thing was the 10 or so people who hit the gong 8 out of 10 and 3 guys who shot 10 for 10. This includes the 3 offhand at an unknown distance. By the way, neither range finders nor practice shots were allowed. Hunting rifles only and no scopes over 10x.

I don't care who you are or how good you are, if you take a longer shot than is necessary under a given set of conditions you have chosen a lower percentage of success of hitting what you are aiming at.(That is not considering the lessened chance of spooking the game and eliminating the shot opportunity.) That's not a moral judgement, just a logical deduction. And it remains true even if the animal is laying at your feet shot through the heart at 800 yds. And it remains true if it has been repeated ten times consecutively.

Short-rangers tend to ignore the fact that when getting closer for the shot there is a point where diminishing returns approaches zero, ergo a 50yd offhand shot is essentially no more difficult than a 25yd offhand shot. A field rest extends this furthur and a portable bench furthur still by eliminating much of the firearm movement but cannot mitigate factors like mirage, wind, or target animation. These external factors will always keep returns of getting closer very high.

But it is simple inescapable fact, and one the long-range hunters among us seem to be reluctant to concede, is whether you are G. David Tubb, Dan Lilja or Michael Jordan, when you are closer to the target you will hit closer to point of aim.

The short-rangers are asking "if the lane is wide open for a lay-up (stalk) why shoot from half court?"

To which the long-rangers reply, "it's our shot, and we like shooting from half-court".

Happy Hunting everyone.

[ 12-09-2003, 07:28: Message edited by: steve y ]

The need for practice is critical and the key point. The more you practice and dial in your weapon, the more probable you are of hitting the target. I've seen more people miss from 150 to 200 yds because they didnt do adequate practicing with their weapon. That means get off the bench, and use field conditions like you will hunting, kneeling, prone, standing, braced with a stick, or cross sticks, etc. People that practice, and shoot year round have that capability, if you arent willing to do that, by all means, dont ever take a 300 yd shot. Even guides probably agree, it doesnt matter weather it is 100 yds, or 4 thous yds, if that shooter hasnt been practicing, his odds are not good at any distance.

One critical part of mid/long range hunting is correctly identifying range. I think this is where people get screwed up more than anywhere, despite the fact that it is simply harder to hold on target at extended ranges. Past 300 yds (really onto 400 yds with todays magnums) the range becomes critical. Too many otherwise good shooters cannot identify 350 yds from 400, and so have no way to compensate for the resulting 6 or more inches of bullet drop. Before this range, the path of the bullet remains somewhat similar. After this, it falls off, and you had better know the range accurately and the path the bullet will take.

Improper range estimates also make many "long" shots, I think. This fall I went shooting with two friends for the first time. They are the once-a-year sight in types (I have no problem with that, just know your abilities). We shot at 100yds and all went well (except one fellow insisted that 7" high was good for his long shots--he uses a 300mag). I suggested we try our luck at a metal plate set up a ways out. There was about a 15mph cross wind. My friend who sights his rifle in 7" high told me that it was impossible--the shot was 400 yds in a stiff wind. I knew from past shooting (and my measuring wheel) that the distance was closer to 285 yds). We went out and I put some fresh paint on the metal (they told me you would not be able to see it in your scope otherwise). I set up a rock that was about 10" across, too). My incredulous friend walked back with my wheel as I drove my truck back. When we shot, both were amazed at the ability of their magnums--grinning from ear to ear--after scoring multiple hits on both the metal plate and the smaller rock. And both had bragged to me previously about 3-400 yd shots. Also, I am not only aware of the difficulty of estimating ranges from my friends--while I stand on a known range--I also know from making mistakes many times myself in the field, without the benefit of my measuring wheel. My point is two-fold. First, 300 yds is a long ways. Second, many people don't really know how long. So I usually take those 400 yd shots with a grain of salt, unless the person is knowledgeble or has an accurate measuring device.

Like Frank, I am not really giving any great insight. I simply agree with others that it is important first to know your gear and abilities through practice. It is also important to know what range you are shooting at.

On another note, my friend who sighted his rifle in 7" high missed his first chance at an elk this year. He had a 60 yd downhill shot and missed completely. The worst part is, I told him that he should be careful of this, as I had done this sort of thing in the past (shoot over the back of an animal on a close, downhill shot). He told me he knew where to shoot. Oops! On the way back I tried a 600 yd shot at a crow but missed. Too bad, I'm sure he was hungry about then!
Lately, I've thought about sighting my rifle in for shorter ranges (200 yds, as opposed to 300) since most close shots are made quickly, with less time to consider trajectory. Then on longer shots, where I have to figure the bullet path, I usually have more time to contemplate (I know the Point Blank Range method, but I'm not comfortable hitting my targets at the top or bottom of the kill zone dependent on range--I like to give the center a good run for the money)

Lastly, I know this has been addressed, but Frank seems about like the least anonymous person on here, openly giving his full name and city, etc (and not exactly New York, either!). But I do sort of like the word "pontificate." Not sure why...

Point taken Jon. I heard one barrage three weeks ago of four quick shots. (But then I heard a three-shot barrage two years ago and the guy shows up with three dead deer.)

I didn't mean no one should shoot from half court, or that stalking was mandatory. In fact, in basketball if one has only practiced the half-court shot he may shoot a higher percentage than a closer shot he hasn't practiced. Doesn't seem to hold in shooting as long-range techniques, such as wind-doping hold proportionate advantages in making the shorter shots.

My point was that few, if any, long-range hunters seem willing to admit the obvious: a 600yd shot is less of a sure thing than a 300yd shot. (Obviously the proviso "all other things being equal" would apply.) It would be refreshing.

You may have drawn some mistaken conclusions about my position. I handgun hunt about half the time. If I worshipped at the altar of high percentages, I wouldn't step in the woods with a handgun. So I fault no one for handicapping oneself either with weapon choice or range choice.

I never stated there were not fabulous marksmen with fabulous equipment accomplishing fabulous shots at fabulous ranges. But take that marksman with the 90% kill rate at 800yds and he will likely be a 100% at 400yds.

Sorry if I didn't stick to the thread.

[ 12-09-2003, 11:27: Message edited by: steve y ]

Good post. One of the things that perhaps isn't mentioned is level of desperation. It's easier to pass on a shot at the keyboard or on your own farm than it is on a high dollar hunt of a lifetime in a foreign country.

Good point on the optics, AD. Probably the most overlooked single issue regarding shooting long distance.

Good post, good thread. Practice at long range is essential. My own experience is that it is much easier to blow a close stalk than a long shot. What ever path is chosen, one still needs to be certain of the shot.

Ways and means? If you are not a 'long ranger' and are interested in equipment and technique I'd suggest www.longrangehunting.com. You can find more gratification in the archives than I can even begin to describe. There are a few spirited debates there from time to time but fools fare poorly in that house. There are some no-joke experts there.

I practice out to 500 yards and shoot several hundred rounds a year, some years thousands. This year I shot 2 deer, the closest at around 350. The reason I took these long shots was the length of hunting time that I had available and these were the only shots I was presented with. Stalking was impossible in both cases.

My observation is that the people with the experience and skill that are required to make the longer shots are not the ones asking the questions.