wildwoody Report post Posted November 4 Well my friend here needs help with his score. Will add pics as we go.. 2 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Eli Report post Posted November 4 Cool looking deer, regardless the score. Lot of character 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wildwoody Report post Posted November 4 3 hours ago, Eli said: Cool looking deer, regardless the score. Lot of character Yes sir, I really don't care, but with first 2 scores of mass are at 8 inches each both sides so was wondering the possibilities. So what's everyone's thoughts ?? 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
WHT_MTNMAN Report post Posted November 4 17 minutes ago, wildwoody said: Yes sir, I really don't care, but with first 2 scores of mass are at 8 inches each both sides so was wondering the possibilities. So what's everyone's thoughts ?? Really??? 8" is giant!! thats awesome. giant mass with some extras. Sure big enough to shoot. very cool 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wildwoody Report post Posted November 4 42"s of mass. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
azbow Report post Posted November 5 1 hour ago, wildwoody said: 42"s of mass. If the first two circumferences (H1 & H2) are 8” on both sides, that is 32”. The next 4 circumferences (H3 & H4) must be approximately 5” each, which would make the total mass 52”, not 42”….pretty outstanding Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lancetkenyon Report post Posted November 5 Taking your mass #s. 167 gross 156 net Weak forks, not overly wide, decent G2s, decent mains. Cool old buck. With that mass, he has to be old and on his way down. Was he aged? 8.5 years old? 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Big or Bust Report post Posted November 5 3 hours ago, wildwoody said: Yes sir, I really don't care, but with first 2 scores of mass are at 8 inches each both sides so was wondering the possibilities. So what's everyone's thoughts ?? You are saying the first 2 mass measurements on each beam was over 8" for a total of 32" with 42" of total mass? If that's the case the final 4 mass measurements average 2.5"? Beam doesn't suggest that whatsoever. Are your #'s correct? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wildwoody Report post Posted November 5 6 minutes ago, Big or Bust said: You are saying the first 2 mass measurements on each beam was over 8" for a total of 32" with 42" of total mass? If that's the case the final 4 mass measurements average 2.5"? Beam doesn't suggest that whatsoever. Are your #'s correct? Ya sounds right but not. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
