Long Range Question
12-10-2007, 06:44 PM
#31
Fork Horn
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location:
Posts: 365
RE: Long Range Question
The .300 win. mags have made the 1000 yard club several times, sp they can and will work great for a long range rifle. If you are wanting to spend your money on a long range gun with 110% performance, than you will want to get a CZ 6.5x284. If you want to get a rifle that youll not have to spend too much than a .308 or .25/06 is the way to go.If you can handle the recoil, You could aso go with a .338 federal or win. mag or bigger.I would rather personally have a 25/06or the .308 over the .338but thats up to you. And the 25/06 over the .308, but thats also up to you.Hope Ive helped you a little bit.
12-11-2007, 05:23 AM
#32
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Pine Hill Alabama USA
Posts: 1,280
RE: Long Range Question
Yep, takes a real act of pure genious to put a stand up 50 tds downwind of a feeding area, tavel corridor, or a bait pile.
you may not know this but it is all simple math
12-11-2007, 06:41 AM
#33
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Body in SE WI, mind in U.P.
Posts: 4,781
RE: Long Range Question
[blockquote]quote:
Yep, takes a real act of pure genious to put a stand up 50 tds downwind of a feeding area, tavel corridor, or a bait pile.
[/blockquote]
First if you think that is what all hunting is actually like then that's another poor reflection on you. But in that same vein of thought, if it's no act of genious to set up 50 yards away then how dumb is it to back off another 700 yards on purpose?
[blockquote]quote:
you may not know this but it is all simple math
[/blockquote]
Yes and what math equation do you use to calculate 3 variable wind speeds from three slightly different directions at 3 different points along a 750 yard path? Hell, what means do you use to even detect that situation? You are playing sniper and using live deer as your pop up targets. But fear not, since you are our only source of info on what you do we will never know how many legs you blow off. We will just hear about the shots you want us to hear about. In other words the ones that killed something.
Yep, takes a real act of pure genious to put a stand up 50 tds downwind of a feeding area, tavel corridor, or a bait pile.
[/blockquote]
First if you think that is what all hunting is actually like then that's another poor reflection on you. But in that same vein of thought, if it's no act of genious to set up 50 yards away then how dumb is it to back off another 700 yards on purpose?
[blockquote]quote:
you may not know this but it is all simple math
[/blockquote]
Yes and what math equation do you use to calculate 3 variable wind speeds from three slightly different directions at 3 different points along a 750 yard path? Hell, what means do you use to even detect that situation? You are playing sniper and using live deer as your pop up targets. But fear not, since you are our only source of info on what you do we will never know how many legs you blow off. We will just hear about the shots you want us to hear about. In other words the ones that killed something.
Go easy there. There are a few people on this board who are truely knowledgeable about long range shooting and ballistics. If there are people that could reliably pull off shots like that, my money would be on RR. What he does doesn't concern me much, its the new hunters that think they need to shoot 500 yards at a deer and have never shot at a range beyond 50 yards.
12-11-2007, 11:23 AM
#34
Fork Horn
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location:
Posts: 264
RE: Long Range Question
[quote]ORIGINAL: Ridge Runner
Now get your superman panties out of a wad and pay attention.[quote]
That is the funniest damn thing I've ever seen on this board!
Youknow, I used to get irritated at people on this board for this reason. If someone on this board has an opinion that differs from yours they will call you wrong or unethical. Now I'm to the point that I just laugh at thier ignorance.
Now get your superman panties out of a wad and pay attention.[quote]
That is the funniest damn thing I've ever seen on this board!
Youknow, I used to get irritated at people on this board for this reason. If someone on this board has an opinion that differs from yours they will call you wrong or unethical. Now I'm to the point that I just laugh at thier ignorance.
12-11-2007, 01:38 PM
#35
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 59
RE: Long Range Question
I think I'd have to stick with the school of thought that considers not eliminating anything that could lead to an wounded and unretrievable animal unethical....I've done enough shooting at 400-500 yards to know it doesn't take much of a breeze or movement on the part of the shooter to push a bullet out of a animal's vital zone.
It falls more under using animals for targets than it does hunting. Just MHO.
It falls more under using animals for targets than it does hunting. Just MHO.
12-11-2007, 01:45 PM
#36
Fork Horn
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 298
RE: Long Range Question
ORIGINAL: leben_sie_gut
I think I'd have to stick with the school of thought that considers not eliminating anything that could lead to an wounded and unretrievable animal unethical....I've done enough shooting at 400-500 yards to know it doesn't take much of a breeze or movement on the part of the shooter to push a bullet out of a animal's vital zone.
It falls more under using animals for targets than it does hunting. Just MHO.
I think I'd have to stick with the school of thought that considers not eliminating anything that could lead to an wounded and unretrievable animal unethical....I've done enough shooting at 400-500 yards to know it doesn't take much of a breeze or movement on the part of the shooter to push a bullet out of a animal's vital zone.
It falls more under using animals for targets than it does hunting. Just MHO.
12-11-2007, 02:05 PM
#37
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 59
RE: Long Range Question
ORIGINAL: Badger_Girl93
That school of thought means that all hunting is unethical. Anytime human judgement and behavior is involved, you CANNOT possibly eliminate everything that could lead to a wounded animal. Eliminating everything that can lead to a wounded animal eliminates hunting all together....because hunting CAN lead to a wounded animal. Pretty simple logic.
ORIGINAL: leben_sie_gut
I think I'd have to stick with the school of thought that considers not eliminating anything that could lead to an wounded and unretrievable animal unethical....I've done enough shooting at 400-500 yards to know it doesn't take much of a breeze or movement on the part of the shooter to push a bullet out of a animal's vital zone.
It falls more under using animals for targets than it does hunting. Just MHO.
I think I'd have to stick with the school of thought that considers not eliminating anything that could lead to an wounded and unretrievable animal unethical....I've done enough shooting at 400-500 yards to know it doesn't take much of a breeze or movement on the part of the shooter to push a bullet out of a animal's vital zone.
It falls more under using animals for targets than it does hunting. Just MHO.
HOWEVER....deer don't always show up on shooting ranges...shots can be on an unknown angle, the direction and speed of the wind at the shooters location can be quite different, or constantly changing, from such at the location of the target. These aren't things a shooter has any control over. From an average "long" hunting distance of 100-300 yards, these facts don'tdeliver as much of an effect as they do further downrange.
So,derived from that logic, it seems to be irresponsible to target an animal at such an extreme distance. I'm in no way challenging RR's abilities as ashooter, I can tell fromhow he speaks here that he's more than knowledgable. It's just my opinion that taking game at the distance isn't hunting in the classical sense, and the ethics of it are debatable.
12-11-2007, 02:42 PM
#38
Fork Horn
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 298
RE: Long Range Question
ORIGINAL: leben_sie_gut
I think you're misunderstanding what I'm getting at. I'm not sure if you've ever attempted shooting, either at a target or an animal, at a range over 500 yards. As RR said, the majority of the guesswork can be eliminated with proper equipment and some fairly simple math.
HOWEVER....deer don't always show up on shooting ranges...shots can be on an unknown angle, the direction and speed of the wind at the shooters location can be quite different, or constantly changing, from such at the location of the target. These aren't things a shooter has any control over. From an average "long" hunting distance of 100-300 yards, these facts don'tdeliver as much of an effect as they do further downrange.
So,derived from that logic, it seems to be irresponsible to target an animal at such an extreme distance. I'm in no way challenging RR's abilities as ashooter, I can tell fromhow he speaks here that he's more than knowledgable. It's just my opinion that taking game at the distance isn't hunting in the classical sense, and the ethics of it are debatable.
ORIGINAL: Badger_Girl93
That school of thought means that all hunting is unethical. Anytime human judgement and behavior is involved, you CANNOT possibly eliminate everything that could lead to a wounded animal. Eliminating everything that can lead to a wounded animal eliminates hunting all together....because hunting CAN lead to a wounded animal. Pretty simple logic.
ORIGINAL: leben_sie_gut
I think I'd have to stick with the school of thought that considers not eliminating anything that could lead to an wounded and unretrievable animal unethical....I've done enough shooting at 400-500 yards to know it doesn't take much of a breeze or movement on the part of the shooter to push a bullet out of a animal's vital zone.
It falls more under using animals for targets than it does hunting. Just MHO.
I think I'd have to stick with the school of thought that considers not eliminating anything that could lead to an wounded and unretrievable animal unethical....I've done enough shooting at 400-500 yards to know it doesn't take much of a breeze or movement on the part of the shooter to push a bullet out of a animal's vital zone.
It falls more under using animals for targets than it does hunting. Just MHO.
HOWEVER....deer don't always show up on shooting ranges...shots can be on an unknown angle, the direction and speed of the wind at the shooters location can be quite different, or constantly changing, from such at the location of the target. These aren't things a shooter has any control over. From an average "long" hunting distance of 100-300 yards, these facts don'tdeliver as much of an effect as they do further downrange.
So,derived from that logic, it seems to be irresponsible to target an animal at such an extreme distance. I'm in no way challenging RR's abilities as ashooter, I can tell fromhow he speaks here that he's more than knowledgable. It's just my opinion that taking game at the distance isn't hunting in the classical sense, and the ethics of it are debatable.
I understood exactly what you WROTE. If you MEANT something different, that's on you, notme. Look at your first post again...specifically the portion that I bolded. Basically you said that ANY factor that COULDcause an animal to be wounded is unethical. Well, hunting is A factor that COULD wound an animal, andwould therefore be unethical under that school of thought. You may have meant something different, but that is precisely what you wrote.
12-11-2007, 02:44 PM
#39
Fork Horn
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 298
RE: Long Range Question
You can work hard to minimize the chances of wounding an animal, but you can never eliminate that possibility unless you eliminate hunting all together, and nobody here wants that.
RR minimizes the chance of a wounded deer by using good equipment, studying, practicing, knowing himself, his environment, his limits,and his equipment, and being extremely dedicated to his craft. That is what every hunter should do, and RR should be commended for doing it very well.
RR minimizes the chance of a wounded deer by using good equipment, studying, practicing, knowing himself, his environment, his limits,and his equipment, and being extremely dedicated to his craft. That is what every hunter should do, and RR should be commended for doing it very well.
12-11-2007, 03:07 PM
#40
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: ****ifornia
Posts: 5,052
RE: Long Range Question
I know that it takes a lot more skill, determination, patience, equipment, etc... to hit an animal over 500 yards then it does to plant a food plot and set up a tree stand.
So who is the "better" hunter??
So who is the "better" hunter??