vabyrd

I'd be willing to bet that more animals are injured from hunters shooting @ 100 yards than those at 500 yards.

Any takers?

mossyoak1

Vabyrd i'll agree with you most bad shots and wounded animals i've dealt with have been less than 100yds a couple less than 50yds!

dylan_b

i dont really look at a my rifles as long range rifles, although they fall into the catagory. i like to think of my "lr gun" as a adaptive rifle. its not over the top with only a 6-18 scope on it and it only carries a medium bull barrel. it is very much ideal from 0-600 yards, since its light enough to carry up a stand but heavy enough for some long range work.

if it had a lesser scope i wouldnt gain anything, since i can up that rifle and put the crosshair where i need it when the scopes on 6x. and while im on the topic of a scope, why do so many people make assumptions of the use on stronger scopes? a fixed 6x is a very effective scope for short range so why wont my 6-18 work if i keep it on 6x. and as for the turrets i dont use them all the time and its not like a have to dial them every time i take a shot. to have the dials is to have the option if the opportunity arises.

bipods are another area of fodder. well on my setup the bipod only comes on the hunt when im in a area when i know i will need it. the extra pound greatly outweighs the extra 200 + range i get from it. i guess some people just arent willing to work a little extra hard on a hunt to be able to better make use of there skill.

i dont think i can make a good arguement towards full bull barrels since i dont have the skill to really get the extra range from them. the extra weight helps without a doubt but the added accuracy from the improved harmonics over a medium bull or heavy sporter barrel doesnt help much within 750 yards.

i dont think there is any arguement towards aftermarket fiberglass stocks. they more stable in extreme weather and better ergonomics both help the user shoot better. the lighter weight also helps mediate the weight of some of the heavier scopes and barrels.

i know i dont realy do what some people call long range but i never intended to do so. adaption is the bottom line in a rifle and if that means learning to use a differnt style of scope and carrying a few more pounds to the field then i will do so. here is a article that i read that i find interesting on the subject and i think it will change a few minds http://www.gunsandammomag.com/cs/Sat...gs=pagenum%3D1

vabyrd

I'd say if you handed an actual Sniper your run of the mill hunting rifle/scope in your caliber of choice, your ash would still be grass at 1000 yds.

Switchback_XT

To The OP:
Hey guy settle down. So what if they want to use a heavier rig than you? maybe their hunt's are different than yours. Did you think of that? I have seen places in the mid west where you can't get 200 yards near a Deer. All the hunting is done shooting from one hill to the other.
As for your hate of 26" barreled rifles. Id hate for you to see my collection. Most of them wear barrels that range from 28" to 32". They are mil surplus rifles from the 1940's. They usually weigh in at around 10 lbs and have "graduated" Iron sights. The *** Mod 38 has settings for up to 2800 meters. Not that I could even pick out a deer at those ranges but it is there. I am not about to rip them off just cause it doesn't make sense to you.
I also have sever carbines. They were the original carbine's, one is in 8MM Mouser. I have been working on collecting a carbine in every model of infantry rifle I have.
Id also like the get the sniper variant but thats not gona happen. While I paid maybe $100 for my infantry rifles and under 200 for the carbines, the sniper variants will cost several thousand. Most times its the same rifle as the infantrymen caries save for a scope combo and of course matching serial numbers.
What do you think of that? I use them all. When deer season rolls around I just look through my rack and pick which ever tickles my fancy then thats what I take.

wghuffman

They say that the left side of the BRAIN controls the right side of the body. THAT MAKES LEFT HANDED PEOPLE IN THERE STATE OF MIND MY Wife says i lost mine


SOMETIMES WE SCARE OURSELVES

spaniel

So what if I carry a 12lb rifle with a 26in barrel, bipod and a tactical scope. Odds are that even with it and you carrying a 7lb sporter rifle you would be begging for mercy if you tried to keep up with me on a 3-day excursion into the Bob Marshall Wilderness on foot. I like to actually hit the animal where I'm aiming so the steadiness of the bipod and exactness of dialing the range into the scope is to my liking. I don't see why anyone should have a problem with that, I'm the one humping the weight into the backcountry.

Now if you're talking about the guys that drop $3000+ on a custom gun with DBM, cool knobs, camo paint etc but never visit a range over 100 yds and don't understand ballistics or good shooting well enough to ever do the rifle justice, I get your point. But you don't see those people in the woods with those guns, you see them on range drooling on each other and bragging about .5 MOA groups with a $3000 gun when a $500 gun with decent handloads would do as well.

Switchback_XT

[quote=bradc;3566009]This +1 *means I agree for u non l33t folk*

keylargo

An actual thread where someone thinks a rifle can be to accurate! No you don't need quarter inch groups to kill a deer,but there is sure nothing wrong with them.

wghuffman

You are so right. Some of us like the ability to do tight groups.It also makes you a better shooter