FrankenMauser
New member
I have not read the above replies.
I wanted to get my own thoughts down without any influence.
My personal standards are probably a bit more lax than some others here will claim.
But, it pretty much boils down to:
Big game: I want a first-round, cold-bore impact on a deer-sized heart, at any range I am willing to take the shot. For short range, I, of course, have higher standards. A 4-5" group at 100-150 yards is not acceptable. But for 300+ yds, I just need confidence in that roughly heart-sized target.
Small game: I want a first-round impact on a squirrel head, with no horizontal dispersion. With rimfire, a little vertical stringing is expected with most ammo, but that allows for a bullet to drop into the neck or chest, depending on range. I still want repeatability on that head-sized target, but vertical fudge factor helps. A squirrel head impact also works for rabbits and grouse. (Grouse are legal to take in Idaho with more than just a shotgun.)
That being said, just because I have confidence in long range shots doesn't mean I want to take them. I prefer closing the distance, regardless of what the rifle can do. I have made head shots on antelope beyond 400 and 600 yards, as well as 'boiler room'. But that doesn't mean I would do it again. I was younger, stupider, and still learning.
My average range for Antelope is well under 200 yards, and the long shots skew the average. Without the long shots, I believe my average is closer to 125 yards. Lazy hunters and people that haven't hunted them are always claiming that 400-700 yards is the norm, but I hunt speedgoats in some of the flattest, most open ground in Wyoming and still hold an average well under 200 yards. It doesn't take much effort to get close, if you read the terrain and animals, and just try.
I was talking with an old timer at the range last Monday, after he noticed that I was shooting at 330 and 375 yards with a scoped .22, as well as 50-200 yd with an iron-sighted .22; between shots with my 6.5x284 Norma.
He worked through three rifles from 300-375 yd, before turning to another that required backing up to 100 to troubleshoot a scope. (It turned out to just be different loads shooting to radically different POIs horizontally.)
Our discussion of testing and 'playing' at long range turned into a very long and heated discussion about the current craze of "long range hunting."
Both of us had rifles and ammunition capable of 700+ yard shots on antelope, up to moose, and neither of us wanted to even attempt such.
"If you can't get closer than 200 yards, then you're doing something wrong. It isn't the animal or the terrain, it is you."
*I'll allow some stretching of shots for game like bighorn sheep and mtn goat. Sometimes, you just can't get closer. But I don't hunt them, so I still hold those shots at some level of contempt.
As for reigning back in the "long range hunting" fantasy, I do not know.
As long as shows and social media posts make it seem like the norm, people easily influenced by those outlets will continue to believe.
Last year, there was a video going around of a "perfect" shot on a bull elk at something like 890 yards (with some form of 6mm if iirc). But you can see the trace and the impact, as the elk took a step while the bullet was in flight. Absolutely perfect gut shot.
Luckily for the shooter, the bull stumbled and paused just long enough for an actual kill shot.
But crap like that propagates the myth and continues to influence people that don't recognize how terrible that first shot actually was. The shooter did everything right (except getting closer), and the situation still went sideways.
I wanted to get my own thoughts down without any influence.
My personal standards are probably a bit more lax than some others here will claim.
But, it pretty much boils down to:
Big game: I want a first-round, cold-bore impact on a deer-sized heart, at any range I am willing to take the shot. For short range, I, of course, have higher standards. A 4-5" group at 100-150 yards is not acceptable. But for 300+ yds, I just need confidence in that roughly heart-sized target.
Small game: I want a first-round impact on a squirrel head, with no horizontal dispersion. With rimfire, a little vertical stringing is expected with most ammo, but that allows for a bullet to drop into the neck or chest, depending on range. I still want repeatability on that head-sized target, but vertical fudge factor helps. A squirrel head impact also works for rabbits and grouse. (Grouse are legal to take in Idaho with more than just a shotgun.)
That being said, just because I have confidence in long range shots doesn't mean I want to take them. I prefer closing the distance, regardless of what the rifle can do. I have made head shots on antelope beyond 400 and 600 yards, as well as 'boiler room'. But that doesn't mean I would do it again. I was younger, stupider, and still learning.
My average range for Antelope is well under 200 yards, and the long shots skew the average. Without the long shots, I believe my average is closer to 125 yards. Lazy hunters and people that haven't hunted them are always claiming that 400-700 yards is the norm, but I hunt speedgoats in some of the flattest, most open ground in Wyoming and still hold an average well under 200 yards. It doesn't take much effort to get close, if you read the terrain and animals, and just try.
I was talking with an old timer at the range last Monday, after he noticed that I was shooting at 330 and 375 yards with a scoped .22, as well as 50-200 yd with an iron-sighted .22; between shots with my 6.5x284 Norma.
He worked through three rifles from 300-375 yd, before turning to another that required backing up to 100 to troubleshoot a scope. (It turned out to just be different loads shooting to radically different POIs horizontally.)
Our discussion of testing and 'playing' at long range turned into a very long and heated discussion about the current craze of "long range hunting."
Both of us had rifles and ammunition capable of 700+ yard shots on antelope, up to moose, and neither of us wanted to even attempt such.
"If you can't get closer than 200 yards, then you're doing something wrong. It isn't the animal or the terrain, it is you."
*I'll allow some stretching of shots for game like bighorn sheep and mtn goat. Sometimes, you just can't get closer. But I don't hunt them, so I still hold those shots at some level of contempt.
As for reigning back in the "long range hunting" fantasy, I do not know.
As long as shows and social media posts make it seem like the norm, people easily influenced by those outlets will continue to believe.
Last year, there was a video going around of a "perfect" shot on a bull elk at something like 890 yards (with some form of 6mm if iirc). But you can see the trace and the impact, as the elk took a step while the bullet was in flight. Absolutely perfect gut shot.
Luckily for the shooter, the bull stumbled and paused just long enough for an actual kill shot.
But crap like that propagates the myth and continues to influence people that don't recognize how terrible that first shot actually was. The shooter did everything right (except getting closer), and the situation still went sideways.