Long Range shooting

[shortpants]

Hey Coues7 I have the same ACI but I havn't used it yet.

 

Casey, you totally lost me.

[blaserman]

The only one that I could find on the Web site was a Badger Cosine set up. Thats a good price on that.

It's a shame I can't use the whole thing , I don't have a Rail on my rifle for the mount , I will have to use a Half set of 30 mm Rings. Coues 7 I see where you have it forsale also put it on Precision Long Range Hunting .

[Red Rabbit]

HuntnCoues,

The ACI can be attached to your bow and would be useful from a treestand or in steep terrain. Or use Leupolds new rangefinder.

 

RR

[Huntn coues]

HuntnCoues,

The ACI can be attached to your bow and would be useful from a treestand or in steep terrain. Or use Leupolds new rangefinder.

 

 

 

 

Buying the range finder.

 

Thanks.

[firstcoueswas80]

jason, i was quoting you. dont let it bother you though lol.

 

 

bottom line on long range shooting is to get out there and practice. no matter the method you use, weather it be a specialized rig costing thousands of dollars, or the 270 ( said that for you lark!) that you shoot every other day and is a extension of your body. nothing replaces experience and practice. you cant buy a 10,000 rifle and scope, and expect to shoot sub MOA groups out to 1000 yards just cause you paid a ton of money for the rifle and someone else can with the same rifle. its all about what you can do with the rifle.

 

edited to add: some people think because a rifle shoots .000001 at 100, that it will shoot the same at no matter what distance. that is not true. also, some people think because a rifle only shoots 2-3" at 100, that it is no good at all. from what i have read, this is not true some rifle shoot better at longer distances. now, me and my rifles, can produce 1/2 MOA at any distance. we are just good like that. :D:D that is unless a deer is put infront of me! isnt that right Ernesto!

[Coues 'n' Sheep]

Good to read this thread, appreciate the comments.

 

I have been successfully shooting a 30-06 for 25 years for elk and deer, but am thinking of getting a 300 Win Mag to improve odds for the longer shots, like 400 yards and then unsure if it's practical to go any further.

 

Any opinions if there is a substantial difference between the two to justify upgrading? Considering bullet would be a good long range factory load, 130 or 150 grain, boat tail.

 

The balistics charts that suggested two feet or more seemed nearly too much to hold high, so good to learn I can get the better scopes that will compensate for this to then hold dead on.

 

Cheers, Mike

 

Mike,

 

If you are getting into long range hunting to shoot accurately then FORGET THE NOTION OF HOLD OVER. If you have a desire to ETHICALLY AND HUMANELY kill big game animals at long ranges you need to get a quality scope WITH TURRETS OR a quality scope with A BALLISTICS RECTICLE. I somewhat agree with TAM that a 30-06 will do......I would recommend a larger caliber for shots over 450 yards. You need a round that has the capacity to project a high BC (ballistic coefficient) bullet at higher velocities if you are going to ETHICALLY AND HUMANELY kill a larger animal at those yardages. A 300 Win Mag will do that for you. Just because one has a nice rifle......he also need to be able to shoot it CONSISTENLY AT THOSE YARDAGES!!!!!!!!!!

 

A properly calibrated turret is Far more ethical than a "hold over", or a Balistic Recticle...... IMO....

 

I have never been a fan of the 30-06..... I am a 300 Wby guy.... .... Like it or not the Wby is a ballistically comparable to a 7mm. I can zero @ 200 yds. and still be holding on hair (barely) at 400 yds on an elk, with a 180 gr. factory load...... But to shoot beyond that does require a Quality scope, IMO....and you are not buying one for $400....no way. I also don't have a whole bunch of faith in a gun tha comes right out of the box, being able to shoot sub-MOA groups.... I spent over a $1000.00 on my Wby and the best group I have gotten with it are right at .5 inches @ 100 yds. The 300 Wby I got from AzOneCam is straight out of the box and Jason told me that the best he could get out of it was just over 1 MOA groups @ 100 yds.... That is over 6" at 600 yds..... that is a lot when shooting at coues deer.

 

I have posted in the past that I am looking to put a LR Scope on my Wby.... and have settled on the Huskemaw Optics scope and after I have it set up I will post and review about it, as it is a fairly new product built by hunters for hunters. I also really like the Idea of practicing personal technique from a bench, but there is no substitute for prcticing in hunting conditions, too... Also,because ammo (and reloading ammo) is not cheap and to save the barrle on my rifle, I am in the process of building a .22 cal target pistol.... simlpy for cheap technical practice (I'll let you know how that works out, too)....

 

CnS

[firstcoueswas80]

A properly calibrated turret is Far more ethical than a "hold over", or a Balistic Recticle...... IMO....

 

I have never been a fan of the 30-06..... I am a 300 Wby guy.... .... Like it or not the Wby is a ballistically comparable to a 7mm. I can zero @ 200 yds. and still be holding on hair (barely) at 400 yds on an elk, with a 180 gr. factory load...... But to shoot beyond that does require a Quality scope, IMO....and you are not buying one for $400....no way. I also don't have a whole bunch of faith in a gun tha comes right out of the box, being able to shoot sub-MOA groups.... I spent over a $1000.00 on my Wby and the best group I have gotten with it are right at .5 inches @ 100 yds. The 300 Wby I got from AzOneCam is straight out of the box and Jason told me that the best he could get out of it was just over 1 MOA groups @ 100 yds.... That is over 6" at 600 yds..... that is a lot when shooting at coues deer.

 

I have posted in the past that I am looking to put a LR Scope on my Wby.... and have settled on the Huskemaw Optics scope and after I have it set up I will post and review about it, as it is a fairly new product built by hunters for hunters. I also really like the Idea of practicing personal technique from a bench, but there is no substitute for prcticing in hunting conditions, too... Also,because ammo (and reloading ammo) is not cheap and to save the barrle on my rifle, I am in the process of building a .22 cal target pistol.... simlpy for cheap technical practice (I'll let you know how that works out, too)....

 

CnS

 

theroticaly speaking, that gun would shoot a 6" group at 600 yards. is that a bad thing? heck no. what that means is that gun should not be shot at an animal at 600 yards... period. that is the way the gun is set up, now with some tuning and customizing, it can probably be made to shoot smaller. its not the guns fault that it shoots that big, and id be willing to bet, that gun in the right hands would shoot smaller than that at that distance.

[billrquimby]

"Is this gun big enough for Coues deer at 500 yards? Is there enough velocity and energy at that distance to drop these deer? I’ve always herd the magic number of 2000 ft per second when it comes to velocity and energy. Do you think if I change the barrel to a 24 or 26 inch barrel this would better my odds with this gun, as far as increasing velocity and knockdown power or do I look at getting a different rifle? "

 

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

The answers to the questions above are like the fabled price-of-the-yacht question -- If you have to ask, you can't afford it.

 

Five-hundred yard shots are doable and ethical for those who study and understand ballistic tables, have the proper equipment and practice, practice, practice until they also know and understand the effects of wind drift.

 

However, most people should get 200 yards closer to their targets. It's not that hard to do.

 

When someone tells he kills most of his game at quarter-mile-plus distances, I mark him down as a shooter and not an especially good hunter.

 

Bill Quimby

[Coues 'n' Sheep]

Five-hundred yard shots are doable and ethical for those who study and understand ballistic tables, have the proper equipment and practice, practice, practice until they also know and understand the effects of wind drift.

 

However, most people should get 200 yards closer to their targets. It's not that hard to do.

 

When someone tells he kills most of his game at quarter-mile-plus distances, I mark him down as a shooter and not an especially good hunter.

 

Bill Quimby

 

I would agree with you in most cases...... but if you believe that you can close that 200 yds all the time you have never hunted some of the country that I do..... We often have Nothing but air between us and the game animal.... meaning that to clost the distance you might have to get to 50yds and no animal in the county that I am talking about is going to let you get to 50yds.....In really heavy cover and rugged country some times you are NOT getting any closer... and you may never see that buck again. Finding a deer in country like that is very difficult in the first place and finding them is what defines hunting and the hunter, IMO..... other wise it would be called killing. How we dispatch the animal after we find it does not matter as long as it is done in an ethical manner.....bow, muzzle loader, rifle, or at 12yds or at 610 yds. We should not judge that hunter or classify him unless given a reason to believe that it was done in an unethical manner......

 

 

 

Casey,

 

I also agree that a 1 MOA rifle should Not be shot at long distance..... If I cannot get it whipped into shape I would never dream of using it as a long range rifle..... but I believe that it just needs a bit of work, as you said. And since I have yet to shoot this rifle,yet, I don't know what it will take, but look forward to the challenge.

 

CnS

[billrquimby]

"I would agree with you in most cases...... but if you believe that you can close that 200 yds all the time you have never hunted some of the country that I do..... We often have Nothing but air between us and the game animal.... meaning that to clost the distance you might have to get to 50yds and no animal in the county that I am talking about is going to let you get to 50yds.....In really heavy cover and rugged country some times you are NOT getting any closer... and you may never see that buck again. Finding a deer in country like that is very difficult in the first place and finding them is what defines hunting and the hunter, IMO..... other wise it would be called killing. How we dispatch the animal after we find it does not matter as long as it is done in an ethical manner.....bow, muzzle loader, rifle, or at 12yds or at 610 yds. We should not judge that hunter or classify him unless given a reason to believe that it was done in an unethical manner......"

 

 

coues 'n' sheep:

 

I didn't say it was possible to cut a 500-yard shot down to a 300-yard shot every time because it isn't. Nothing is sure in hunting.

 

And, I would bet a $5 bill that if I haven't hunted the exact area you now do that I have successfully hunted country identical to it at least once over Arizona's past 60 deer seasons.

 

Also, a bowhunter would disagree about never getting to within 50 yards of an animal. But I was talking about cutting 500 yards to 300 (and not to 50) and that usuallly isn't difficult to do in most places unless you're talking about wide-open antelope habitat. Deer country usually is broken and has some cover.

 

What I said was: "When someone tells me he kills most of his game at quarter-mile-plus distances, I mark him down as a shooter and not an especially good hunter."

 

Note that I said, "most of his game." I stand by that.

 

Bill Quimby

[Coues 'n' Sheep]

"I would agree with you in most cases...... but if you believe that you can close that 200 yds all the time you have never hunted some of the country that I do..... We often have Nothing but air between us and the game animal.... meaning that to clost the distance you might have to get to 50yds and no animal in the county that I am talking about is going to let you get to 50yds.....In really heavy cover and rugged country some times you are NOT getting any closer... and you may never see that buck again. Finding a deer in country like that is very difficult in the first place and finding them is what defines hunting and the hunter, IMO..... other wise it would be called killing. How we dispatch the animal after we find it does not matter as long as it is done in an ethical manner.....bow, muzzle loader, rifle, or at 12yds or at 610 yds. We should not judge that hunter or classify him unless given a reason to believe that it was done in an unethical manner......"

 

 

coues 'n' sheep:

 

I didn't say it was possible to cut a 500-yard shot down to a 300-yard shot every time because it isn't. Nothing is sure in hunting.

 

And, I would bet a $5 bill that if I haven't hunted the exact area you now do that I have successfully hunted country identical to it at least once over Arizona's past 60 deer seasons.

 

Also, a bowhunter would disagree about never getting to within 50 yards of an animal. But I was talking about cutting 500 yards to 300 (and not to 50) and that usuallly isn't difficult to do in most places unless you're talking about wide-open antelope habitat. Deer country usually is broken and has some cover.

 

What I said was: "When someone tells me he kills most of his game at quarter-mile-plus distances, I mark him down as a shooter and not an especially good hunter."

 

Note that I said, "most of his game." I stand by that.

 

Bill Quimby

 

I'll buy that...... And there is know doubt in my mind that you have as much Hunting Experience as any 2 or 3 guys on this site combined. I guess what I meant is that with the awesome optical equipment that we use today, we are able to hunt areas that were once thought to be too difficult or impossible to hunt.... in doing so we often, but definately not always, are forced to make longer shots due to the terrain. I think that you open up your opportunities a bit if you are as proficient at 500 as you are at 200. Further more, having harvested 5 coues deer with a bow all between 12 & 33 yds, I am certain that we are talking about two very different forms of hunting based on the terrain. Many places that I have hunted these past few years to avoid crowds has put me in possitions where you shoot from 500 or you just don't shoot. There is no option of closing the distance..... unless you have wings. Again, it is not all the time...... but there is that possiblity, and it is good to be prepared. Prepared is the key to that statement....

[billrquimby]

I totally agree about being prepared, with a proviso.

 

In the late 1960s I competed in the Sonoran metalicas siluetas matches in Nogales, Hermosillo and Cananea over a couple of summers -- I even won a small trophy -- and could hit the metal "borego" targets offhand from 500 meters without any type of rest or sling about 20% of the time, so 500 yard shots don't scare me.

 

Even when I was at my peak, though, given the choice of shooting at a deer 500 yards away or closing the distance to 300, I'd have tried to get closer every time.

 

Bill Quimby

[Coues 'n' Sheep]

I totally agree about being prepared, with a proviso.

 

In the late 1960s I competed in the Sonoran metalicas siluetas matches in Nogales, Hermosillo and Cananea over a couple of summers -- I even won a small trophy -- and could hit the metal "borego" targets offhand from 500 meters without any type of rest or sling about 20% of the time, so 500 yard shots don't scare me.

 

Even when I was at my peak, though, given the choice of shooting at a deer 500 yards away or closing the distance to 300, I'd have tried to get closer every time.

 

Bill Quimby

 

 

Agreed.... If one has the opportunity to close the distance and doesn't.... that is lazy. When you can't close the distance and still make a clean and ethical harvest..... you were prepared.

 

Thanks, for making it clear that both our points of view are very close to the same, Bill. It was a pleasure.

 

CnS

[billrquimby]

"It was a pleasure."

 

Ditto!