Long Range Question
 

I am looking to buy a new rifle. I have a few hunting rifles, but I am lloking to buy a rifle for long range shooting. I want something that has a flat trajectory, and has some pop to it in case I ever decide to take it out hunting. I was thinking about the 325 WSM, but the ammo is a little more expensive than your standard rounds, and can be tough to find. What do yall think? 308, 300 win, 7 rem mag?
Any advice would help. Thanks.

RE: Long Range Question
 

It would help board members to know what you would be hunting, and what you consider long range.

RE: Long Range Question
 

I guess I should add that I already have a 243, 303, 223, and an old beat up 30-06.

RE: Long Range Question
 

Sorry. Kind of new at this! im looking for it to perform well out to 400-500 yards.
If I did take it hunting, I would use it for whitetail, mule deer, and elk...That is if I can ever get off from work long enough to take the trip!!

RE: Long Range Question
 

By "pop", what do you intend to hunt that your old .30-06 can't handle? School buses?

All kidding aside, if you're shooting at North American game at ranges beyond what the .30-06 is capable of, you don't need to be shooting. Grab a radio and call in some artillery. Dismounts in the open, fire for effect.

Like many, I enjoy TARGET shooting our to 500 and 600 meters. If I'm hunting big game though, I want it to go down hard with the first shot with a better than 95% guarantee. Yeah, if I won the lottery and bought a Barrett M82 I might try a poke at that kind of range. But, until then I'm saddled with a .30-06 or .300 Wby Mag, neither of which I'm going to attempt shooting anything beyond 300 yards - maybe less.

If you plan to hunt Alaska, the .325 might be justified.

RE: Long Range Question
 

Haha. Like I said my 30-06 is old and beat up. It is a pump gun with iron sights and I cant justify putting a scope on it becauseI know I would rarely use it. A new 30-06 would be a great, but I would like to get something that I dont already have.

I want to target shoot out to as far as possible, but as far as hunting goes, I agree with you and wouldnt take a shot out past around 300 yards.

RE: Long Range Question
 

Gotcha. I have a "beater" .30-06 too, a 1903A3 (Remington) Springfield - and it's still a shooter. Just can't see turning it into a scoped sporter.

So, dumb as it may sound, I've also a Remington M700 in .30-06 too. Next up from that is the .300 Wby Mag and then a big step up to the .375 H&H.

And really, though I love just as much as anyone here the chance to buy a new caliber, it just doesn't seem like I gained a whole lot with the .300 Wby. Anythingthe .300 can do, the .30-06 can do, especially regarding the game you mention (whitetail, mule deer, and elk). Have you thought about dropping DOWN in caliber? Maybe a 7mm Mag? .270?

You're still not going to gain much over the .30-06 with either of those. Were I you, I'd still give a newer .30-06 a good look.

RE: Long Range Question
 

RR-

Just a guess. 26"+ HFB? 11.5 lbs n/incl bipod?

A buddy of mine has a .300WM that I've hit paper plates with at 1000 meters. Kicks like a .22. Not something either of us can carry for long in the woods. Of course, it hasn't BEEN in the woods. It weighs 36 lbs. Reminds me of my old M60 machinegun.

Let's be a little practical here. You drag that beauty (and honestly, it is) above 8,000 feet for a week with us chasing elk in the timber and over the deadfalls, and I'll be impressed. Carry a pack like the rest of us too andI'll be REALLY impressed. Come along on our next grizzly hunt in the alder thickets with that and I will truly defer to you as the bigger man than I.

No problem here, but I'm not carrying abeanfield rifle in the brush, either.

RE: Long Range Question
 

7MM Magnum. Plenty of ammo choices, plenty of energy.

RE: Long Range Question
 

RR-

No, can't disagree with that - 700 really Isn't that far if you think about it. But, it is WELL beyond the reach of most "hunters" whose shooting experience might only amount to a couple zero rounds before each season. I heard a couple of guys talking this season about some guys shooting elk at some gawdawful long ranges and then the comment, "I wonder what kindof rifle and scope I'd need to buy to do that?"

I think you'll probably agree here, long-range "hunting" is MUCH more than how much money you spend on the equipment. There's a degree of practice and discipline involved as well. Not to mention that I'll bet your 6.5 Gibbs cases aren't a dime-a-dozen at the Wally World?

Target shooting is one thing, I'm not worried about wounding a paper plate or a gong if I shoot at it with my rack-grade CZ 550 Varmint in .22-250, which puts a hole in the paper, but nothing more than peels the paint from the gong at 600 meters.Could I hit an animal at 600 or 700 meters? I probably could. Like you say, 700 meters really isn't that far if you're practiced enough to predict what's going to happen to that bullet on its way to the target.

But, for that average Joe like most of us, the more we hear of these fantastic long-range shots, the more tempted we're going to be to take one ourselves. And, the more likely an animal's going to wind up wounded. Additionally, the range I hunt (whitetail, mule deer, elk) simply does not permit shots over 250 meters, sometimesanything over 50. So, it's really pointless for me to believe that I NEED (other than for prairie dogs or the sheer amusement of it) topracticeat ranges in excess of 300 meters. If those species are what Gamecockhunter may one day pursue, it's likely that he'll experience the same requirements in his equipment. He'd find himself very well equipped with a .30-06, 7mm Mag, or even a .270 with nothing higher than a 3-9x (even better would be 2-7x) scope on top.

I appreciate and respect that you have the equipment and experience to pull off a shot like you did above, primarily because I spend quite a bit of time on the range myself and even so don't think I'm up to making a shot like that myself. Mygreatest concern is that someone elsemight get the wrong idea from it, oversimplify it, and try it themselves without understanding what it took you to get where you are.

RE: Long Range Question
 

I really like the WSM line. I have owned or still own several of them. The 270 WSM is probably my favorite. The 7mm and 300's are excellent as well.

Another thought if you're a reloader is the 6.5-284. I own one and I really am impressed with the results. I've read good reports from Wildcatters about the 6.5 WSM. The 6.5 caliber bullets really shine at the longer distances.

RE: Long Range Question
 

tough to shoot flatter or higher energy than a 7mm RM, but flatness and energy aren't everything. 30-06, and 300 winmag can hit just as hard or harder. hard to go wrong with any of those.

RE: Long Range Question
 

Sorry about that back then RR, you are starting to bring me around though ;)

RE: Long Range Question
 

My personal favorites for long range are Sako TRG-S 7MM STW and custom Ruger m-77 mk2 in 7mm rem mag. both are very accurate and very capable of long range. In my opinion if you are confident in your ability to make a long shot who am I to judge chad

RE: Long Range Question
 

It's hard to beat the 7mm Rem Mag. I won't hesitate to shoot at an elk 500 yards away conditions permitting with mine (I practice at a 600 yard range). The same is true with the 300 Win Mag, but the 7mm is a better all-around cartridge if you plan on shooting smaller animals like antelope in addition to elk.

All of the people who say you shouldn't be shooting farther than 200-300 yards have probably never hunted in the West. There's nothing unethical about it, and sometimes your freezer will be empty by the end of the hunting season if you're not willing to take that long shot.

RE: Long Range Question
 

WTG,

Before you try speaking for all of us, I'll note that I've hunted WY since 1979. Snowies. Bighorns. Black Hills. T-Basin. T-Basin is the only place I've consistently found the terrain open enough to take shots beyond 300 yards on antelope. But, since I've never had to take an antelope at beyond 150 (the game is where you find them), I've had no need to engage in "long range hunting". I hunt public land exclusively, and while you'll find the rancher's fields in the Black Hills open enough for long shots, I can't say that for the National Forest. The Bighorns and Snowies are absolutely too thick - the last elk I shot in the Snowies was at point-blank range.

I can only speak from my own experience. Are there opportunities to hunt at longer ranges out here? Sure there are. Maybe my style of hunting is just incompatible with that method, though? I stalk. I've no opportunity to set up a spotting scope and pick animals up on a hillside that I can't see anyway through the trees. I watched guys in the Snowies sitting in their trucks on the open meadows,drainages and clearcuts. Yeah, I'm sure those guys could engage in some long range hunting if an elk happened their way. I'm not that patient, though. I'd rather look for sign and find the game, rather than let the game come to me.

I've hunted for 29 years now, and only once lost an animal (a doe in 1980) that I'd hit.Are there seasons I've come up empty? Sure. Sometimes I'vefound myself eyeing an animal in country just too rough for meto pack 400 lbs of elk out by myself and passed up theshot. Sometimes I just don'tfind anygame. But, I can never say that I was so desperate to fill the freezer or an empty space on the wall that I've risked crippling or losing an animal by taking a poor shot again.

Unfortunately, I've filled my freezer with four animals that someone else DID take a poor shot on. One antelope, two deer, and an elk. The elk was heavy enough that I'm sure someone was pretty disappointed to have lost him, but reading posts like yourskind of makes me wonder what would happen if you took a shot at an elk 700 yards away, not realizing that I was watching the same elk from 150. He breaks toward the stand of timber I'm in after you hit him, and I finish him off. Whogets to tag him?

Sorry guys, I won't bejoining the long range spotting-shooting club. As I said before, I'm fine punching holes in paper as far out as I can, but I've never been forced to shootbig gameat more than 300 yards and therefore concentrate mypractice at shorter ranges. You can do what you want.

RE: Long Range Question
 

First of all, I never claimed I was speaking for anyone other than myself. That's the way these forums work- everything you say is YOUR opinion. Not anyone elses.

There are literally hundreds of places in the Snowies and Bighorns where you might have to take a 400 yard shot at elk. Across draws, in meadows, ridge-tops, etc. It's the same way in all of the mountain ranges in WY. Are there a lot of places without openings like this, such as the Savage Run Wilderness? Sure. But if you've never seen a spot where you might have to take a longer shot in the Snowies or Bighorns you must have a whole different way of looking at terrain than I do. I won't even start on how many places you may have to take a 300+ yard shot down off of the mountains. And I'm not claiming to be a long-range hunter. I shot my antelope from 75 yards this year, and my deer from 250. The farthest I've ever shot anything was an elk at 350 yards out in the desert. I'm simply saying that if the shot presents itself and I don't feel like I can get any closer, I'll let 'er fly if its within 500 yards, assuming there isn't an excessive crosswind and I have a good rest.


You're missing the point here. Just because a hunter won't hesitate to shoot at an animal that's 400 yards away doesn't mean their hunting strategy is to find animals that will present long range shots. I'm stricktly a spot and stalk hunter as well, but who's to say that the elk or deer whose tracks you're following won't be out in a big opening when you finally get up on them? They could even be in a small opening across a draw, or in a mulititude of other possible locations, where the only shot you can take is what some may consider to be a long shot. Especially if the animal has spotted you and either you take the shot then and there or you're never going to see that animal again.

Are you implying that people who take long shots are desperate? Sure, some of the shots may be desperation shots, and I think that's wrong, but the same can be said about someone who shoots at a animal that is running only 20 yards away. Just because a shot is long-range doesn't mean it's a desperation shot.

And how do you know that the poor shots people took at those animals were long-range shots? They very well could have been shot from only 150 yards away.

What would happen if i shot an elk from 700 yards away that you were watching and only wounded it? Who gets to tag him then? That's for the two hunters to decide. The fact that it was shot from 700 yards has nothing at all to do with it. Would there be any difference if it was wounded from a distance of only 50 yards? I don't think so.

That's your own prerogative. I see nothing wrong with people not wanting to shoot long-range, just the same as I see nothing wrong with people not wanting to shoot at moving animals. But I don't criticize them for it simply because I don't agree with their reasoning.;)

RE: Long Range Question
 

I shot 2 does this year,1 at 280 actual yards,the other at only 50 yards but was running full blast. Both were bang flops. The farthest I've ever shhot a deer was 647 actual yards with a browning a-bolt rum I built. IHe was already wounded by another hunter and RUNNING ACCROSS MY800 YARD RIFLE RANGE,I didn't feel any of these shots particularly difficult as my a-bolt will group around 2.5" for 5 shot group at 800 yards but I never shoot at deer over 500 yards unless it's already wounded by another shooter. Hats off to ridge runner for the denication it takes to shoot that range.

RE: Long Range Question
 

well if you have the money bushmaster has a new ar platform that is in a .450 calit is a new round jst for bushmaster i am sure the ammo is not cheap

if it was me i would go with what ever had the most available ammo and cheapest but still a good round

RE: Long Range Question
 

WTG, RR,

Let's get something straight here - not everyone on this forum spends the money or time on the range that it takes to become a CONSISTENT long-range shooter, nor does everyone on this forum have access to facilities beyond 300 yards.

If you look around this forum, you'll find lots of experience levels. I read posts from quite a number of guys who probably scrape and scratch just to be able to buy one of the less expensive package rifles - and just to be able to participate. The more this community talks of specialized shooting, the more financially alienated these people are going to be, not to mention the more contentious it's going to become (just look where this has gone). You don't need a $2500 rifle and scope, the newest "super-most-extreme-short-magnum", wind doping equipment, rangefinders, GPS, a reloading bench, or an ATV to hunt these days, regardless of all the marketing hypehunters have becomesubject to.Start with the basics, learn, and over time most of us accumulate enough skill and "toys" to try something like "long-range hunting" if that's what we want to do. RR described the process quite well, I believe.

When you promote long-range shooting, consider the group who'll read your post. There's a .338 Edge video running around on the net right now that I've heard more than one "average" hunter at work talk aboutwanting to do the same thing. Most of them can't hit a target NOW at 300 yards. So, to them it's now just a "simple"matter of buying a new magnum rifle, a Leupold VX-1 instead of the old Simmons they're using now, a box ofammo at the Wally World, and maybe a spotting scope. Start saving, boys.

Any wonder why I worry about cripples? WTG said it himself - cripples happen at short range too.And unfortunately, the guys I know who are most liable to cripple game at short ranges are also the ones most intrigued by the .338 Edge .wmv and by posts on forums like this about long-range shooting, especially if it "might" give them an advantage over the rest of us come hunting season.

RE: Long Range Question
 

RR-guys like you are providing a service to us and indeed are some of the cutting edge of load/rifle development. It was guys like you that started the whole handloading/varmit/benchrest thing many years ago. Each hunter has the moral responsibility to decide their OWN effective range. In fact,I just got my reamers on my .375 ruger full length case necked down to .284.

RE: Long Range Question
 

RR,

Well, that was good for a chuckle after a long day at the office. I probably should have been clearer in my sarcastic remark about Wally World. I think you and I both know that the selection there isn't going to be up-to-par with the kind of equipment you're going to need to be a competent long-range shooter.

That aside, nothing you can buy will ever MAKE you a long-range shooter, and you described the discipline involved already. This is a credit card world. And I hope you'd agree that credit cards might buy all the stuff you need EXCEPT for the skill and experience. Considering what you've posted already, I wouldn't consider you an "average shot". I'm an average shot with average equipment. I can do better with custom equipment, I just can't afford to do anything but borrow it from friends.But, I'm quite familiar with long-range ballistics, even to the point of compensating for meteorologic data and rotation of theEarth (granted, we're talking ranges well beyond 10,000m now).

Actually, what has me worked up the most is the "flippancy" manyposters have today with long-range shooting. Some are full of crap. Some are extremely competent riflemen. But, who's to tell the difference (I mean, you ALMOST believed that I'd go to Wal Mart for a Horus Vision)? If I hadn't called you out, no one here would know anything about your evolution as a shooter, other than how irritated it makes you when someone says you shouldn't hunt at long range. So, in a sense, anyone who's reading this should now know that while long-range hunting is possible, one doesn't become proficient at it overnight, thanks alone to a particular rifle or scope. What I'd hate to see encouraged is someone to try this with their rack-grade model 700 and think they'll be as effective as you are. They'll simply be disappointed.

As far as "advantage" goes, I wish I had some photos of the country I hunt uploaded. Just too much timber, it's very rare you'll see across a canyon from one ridge to another without knocking down some trees first. You're just not going to see much farther than 300 yards. And if some guy with a Wal-Mart rifle and VX-1 does take a poke at something I'm stalking from 700 yards away, he probably isn't going to hit it in the first place. Not much of an advantage, eh? I just hope he doesn't hit ME.

With all due respect, I don't doubt at all your ability. If someone's truly interested in long-range shooting, I'd hope they'd tag up with someone like you and learn about it,as opposed to someone who's just full of testosterone and BS.

RE: Long Range Question
 

You are wasting your talent on hunting, you should be shooting in the National Matches or perhaps on the Palma team..:eek:

RE: Long Range Question
 

RR,

I think we're close to an agreement here. I have absolutely no issue with your post above. You nailed it. Thanks for your patience. If a person's willing to do exactlywhat you say, go for it. If not? Well, I hope you'll understand my frustration with them?

RE: Long Range Question
 

Of course that's from a solid rest. I have yardage markers and wnd flagsevery 50 yrds on my 800 yard range and my a-bolt in 7mm rum was handbuilt by me. Also,I regulary practice to that range.

RE: Long Range Question
 

To shoot or not to shoot? What a question about long range hunting. I see nothing wrong with long range hunting as long as you have the skills and the equipement. On occassion I will take a long shot. However, people are not born as marksman, they are trained and unfortunately trial and error comes into play alot of time. I started shooting as a kid and I was a terrible shot. I had a limited range of about 100 yards. I practiced and experimented with equipement and done quite a bit of research over the years on internal and external ballistics. I had increased my ability slowly over the years. I graduated from the US Army Scout Sniper Course with a lot of new found knowledge and I had perfected my craft. I was hooked just like a crack addict. There is something so special to those few who can connect on long shoots, that most people know nothing about. People who are just trying to BS someone on these forum's are pretty easy to spot for those that have the knowledge about long range shooting. It is also our duty to be ethical and bust their bubble. Being that I have said, I actually prefer hunting at very close range, not that I lack the skills or ability. I have just became addicted to the adrenalin rush that I get from being in close quarters with my intended target. Then again its a personal issue and opinion. Happy hunting and good shooting. I think I just realized the real debate here though; I believe that the sport of hunting has become to commercialized. It is a shame because as hunters we have let big bussiness get there fingers and greedy fingers into our pockets. There is nothing wrong with making a profit within the sport of hunting, but what is really happening is that is becoming a rich man's sport. There are alot of subsistant hunters out there in our great nation. Its a shame that we have to have the best scent free clothing and boots let alone the top of the line gun that just came along. How far as sportsman are we willing to go? Will our grandchildren be able to hunt? I think the real debate is not about long range hunting, but the fact that we are slowly but surely loosing ground to hunt. When a person has to apply for the right to buy a firearm and spend what little money they have worked so hard to earn and then be suckered into spending every dime to keep up with the likes of Bill Jordan and team realtree. I am in no way slamming Bill Jordan or team realtree. I remember as a kid hunting and I didn't have all the fancy hunting clothes and weapons that I have now. Yes, I have worked and bought what I wanted only after supporting my family. The real question is more about Big bussiness witha death grip on the hunting sport. Gee, do you realize that hunting is a industry now? So, where does questions and answers lye? In the sportsman and how deep we are willing to go into our pockets. I didn't mean to get on a rant but I think we should look at some of these issue's. Do you all realize that ammunition has more than doubled in the past 10-15 years? What about the average hard working people that like to hunt but can't afford to buy a decent rifle or hunting clothes.

Ya'll have a good debate and thanks for tolerating my opion even if you don't agree. Its your right, that I fight for every day.

RE: Long Range Question
 

OK RR I have been around a average hunters, I like to call the typical 30-06 crowd those who think the old '06 is "the gun" no disrespect, but if these guys knew that much about ballistics they would see its not all that . My dad who is responsible for my love of hunting and shooting has always stressed bullet placement, being able to know what your bullet is doing at range is a huge asset to getting the job done at distance. As for my dads gun for years he shot a .243 win ( a weatherby) and I saw and helped drag alot of deer at 375- 501yds deer he shot with an 87gr bullet , not to many '06 guys would even take that shot, and ask the average hunter what his bullet is doing at 300yrds and he doesnt know . My dad now has addopted one of my rifles a 6.5-06 a sweeet shooter and where he hunts he has the oppertunity to shoot out to 600yrds usually sees deer a lot closer. Now my fav hunting rig is my ruger 25-06 with a 100gr nosler Ballistic tip at about 3500fps at the muzzle. A pretty flat shooter , now just because I saw a guy on the internet kill a critter at 781 yrds or I saw my dad do deer at 500 yrds I myself even though I have the equipment to get the job done and have shot papaper at 300 yrds, and I know what my bullet is doing at that distance I dont feel I am 100% confident in my ability to make a clean kill.So kudos to you ,my hats off to you . Now if I had a spot where I could practice those looong shots I would love to build that confidence .

RE: Long Range Question
 

Greta post.

Despite what the hour long hunting commercials (available on DVD) that paint an unrealistic view of reality (unless everyone's reality was shooting trophy animals on canned hunts day in and day out), most of the crap shilled is not needed for hunting. Carbon suits, scent killers, etc are to hunting what most bass fishing gear is to fishing- if you buy it, it has already served its purpose.

Same thing with long range shooting. It seems to have become more and more of hte rage in the last few years. There isn't a day that goes by that I don't see a post on a forum somewhere where a person is looking for advice on buying their first rifle and usually asks how good the rifle will be at 500 or 1000 yards for hunting. :eek: Once again, somewhere somehow, people are being fed distorted versions of reality. Out of the last 5 deer I've taken with a rifle, ony one of them was beyond archery range, and even then, not by much.

RE: Long Range Question
 

That's pretty much the same bottom line that I had when we all went round and round on this subject a while back. If you are taking shots from 700 yards because you can't get any closer then you suck as a hunter. If you are hanging back at these distances on purpose just to see if you can still hit something then you are just playing Rambo Sniper and not actually even trying to hunt the animal.

Is a 750 yard shot an impressive feat of marksmanship? Yep, but I'd be just as impressed to see you hit a gong or a milk jug at that distance. Making your "target" a live deer at that distance adds absolutely no extra element of impressiveness. And so far as I know, no one has ever wounded and lost a gong or a milk jug.

:DI know. Ain't the internet grand. People can do dang near anything. On the internet that is.

RE: Long Range Question
 

Like someone mentioned before, you just have to figure out what game your gonna be shooting..
Personally I don't consider 400-500yrds "longrange shooting"
Most standard cals are capable of hitting targets at that distance time and time again have more than enough energy to dump deer size game out to 500yrds..
Moose aren't that hard to bring down with a 30-06 at that range either...
However things change when your shooting Elk...
If ya want a 500ryrd gun capable of shooting deer moose elk sheep goat
Personally I find the 30cals group better at longer distances, but heres some that could work for ya.
270WSM any of the 7mmmags and 300mags 325wsm and .338win mag...
If ya can handle the recoil of anything bigger than the .338 give em a whirl...

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.

RE: Long Range Question
 

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?

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.

RE: Long Range Question
 

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.

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.

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.

RE: Long Range Question
 

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.

RE: Long Range Question
 

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.

RE: Long Range Question
 

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.

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.

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??