Is it the firearm or the ammunition?

[jennageit]

Hi guys,

I was chatting with a mate a few months back and he was telling me about his hunting fun. According to him, he routinely shoots foxes and rabbits at a range of around 800m, sometimes further. I have no reason to disbelieve this guy as, in the last 4 or so years he hasn't lied to me, but I failed to ask what he was using to do this.

When it comes to shooting over longer distances, does it come down to whether the rifle can shoot at those sorts of ranges, or is it the ammunition?

Chatting to the guys at the club, according to them, the rounds we use are good for a couple of hundred metres (SKR Match .22lr - 40gr) but no-one has mentioned whether it's the rifle or the round that determines the range.

So guys, care to help me out on this?

My thoughts are that it's the ammunition more so than the rifle, am I right or wrong?

Jenna

PS. I try to stick to one dumb question a night at the club. I don't want them thinking I'm too blonde!

[Gwion]

Better answers will follow, but in short it is both.

The rifle has to be chambered for a cartridge suitable for the range and the target (animal [what size/type] or paper or steel) and it also has to have suitable construction characteristics & tolerances to achieve fine accuracy in a repeatable fashion. The ammunition has to be constructed in such a way as to deliver the goods at the given range (tight loading tolerances and suitable bullets, etc).

So, it's not one or the other, it is both.

[Noisydad]

I'll be brave enough to say that as a regular shooter of a 600 yard full size buffalo gong (that looks positively tiny at that distance and using a rifle with iron sights) that even seeing a rabbit or fox at 800 metres is a pretty tall boast! Not saying it can't be done but can it be done repeatably? I'd like to see it first!

[RoginaJack]

I reckon it's a bit more involved than that.

For a start, a lot of people wouldn't be able to spot a rabbit at 800m, let alone hit it.

In no particular order -
1/ Equipment - rifle, calibre, scope etc. Is the combination capable of consistently delivering the accuracy required.
2/ Caliber and projectile. Self explanatory.
3/ The shooter - is he/she capable and experienced enough to locate and accurately range and hit this type of target at 800m +
4/ Conditions - wind, temperature etc - very important.
5/ And finally a combination of all of the above plus a few other variables. .

Cheers

[Gwion]

Definitely the shooters' experience and ability play a HUGE role. I struggle to spot a rabbit at 70m in failing light.

At those ranges (out way yonder) peripheral equipment would also come into play. Good specs (bino/spotting scope) and range finder for a start.

One day i'd like to try those ranges, but i'd say something the size of a buffalo would be the extent of my ability. Even then i'd hit it in the arse when aiming for it's shoulder is a gentle breeze was blowing.

[tom604]

you sure he didn't mean 80 mtrs , people can shoot that far and hit small targets (google milk carton challenge) but unless he has a dedicated range and dedicated rifle, over a rabbit warren and not just hunting im calling bull scat ,on the routinely bit at least, and thats only because im nice

[bigfellascott]

I wouldn't like to try and kill a fox at 200m with a 22! but have shot clays and gongs etc at 200m+ was good fun actually.

[tom604]

Definitely the shooters' experience and ability play a HUGE role. I struggle to spot a rabbit at 70m in failing light.

At those ranges (out way yonder) peripheral equipment would also come into play. Good specs (bino/spotting scope) and range finder for a start.

One day i'd like to try those ranges, but i'd say something the size of a buffalo would be the extent of my ability. Even then i'd hit it in the arse when aiming for it's shoulder is a gentle breeze was blowing.

70 mtrs,, any light,,that's what kids are for young eyes then scope

[Oldbloke]

Foxes at 800 mtrs, has never lied? Sorry but I think he is now. Try 80 mtrs. Anything beyond 300 mtrs would be getting dificult for most in tne field. Sure a few experts can do much better than 300 mtrs but 800 is BS. IMO

[brett1868]

Maybe he meant 800 feet? Cause if he meant 800m then I'll call B.S on it as well..maybe to be fair a little more information would be good cause it's entirely possible to shoot 1.5" groups at 1000 yards but I don't think this guy is a world champion benchrest shooter.

This is from last weekend on my trip bush, rifle is a M99 .416 Barrett out to a meagre 520m. Video was on 90x zoom and the scope has a massive 42x zoom, the drums while visible are rather hazy due to mirage effect. Check the video and tell me how the hell he's shooting foxes / bunnies at almost double this range? He may say that using a spotlight at night he can see their eyes but even best lights barely make 500m of usable light.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8NRindX5XVQ

[North East]

I can shoot rabbits out to 800M with my .30-06 and an Aimpoint 1X red dot......NOT.

[Tiiger]

My thoughts are that it's the ammunition more so than the rifle, am I right or wrong?

Both as the guys have said. Consistency is the issue with ammunition.

A few things you'll be able to test and see yourself.

Case capacity varies. Grab a few cases out of a pack of Winchester or Remington brass and measure the internal capacity (done with water if you google) and you'll see capacity varies by a few grains.

Projectile weight varies. If you've got some scales and projectiles stick a few on one by one. In a pack of "150gr" bullets you'll find weight could range anywhere from 147gr to 153gr. More or less depending on the brand.

A powder thrower can over or under throw by 0.1gr or 0.2gr of powder.

And so on.

As for regularly busting bunnies at 800m

[dustin]

Neck tension is another factor of ammunition. You might have heard that mentioned from the bench rest boys as it's often a focus from them.

Certain design features also add or accuracy e.g. Tikka bridge their actions to make them more rigid for accuracy.

[Chronos]

I tend to agree your mate is stretching the truth.

Take for example a top F class shooter. Custom gun, high end scope and joystick front rest, rear bag, known range and wind flags every 100m

At 800m the aim mark is a big black dot over a meter across and the V ring is 255mm (10") don't know how many if those guys and girls could hit the V first shot from a cold bore. I'm sure it happens though and a 10" ring is fox sized Id say.

Now take a skilled hunter with a factory rifle, accurate hand loads and a 4-12 or even a 6-24 powered scope from a bipod, no rear bag on a surprisingly camoflauged rabbit at 800m i reckon 400m is more likely but still a hell of a good shot

As for your wuestion I think it's been answered, both the rifle and the ammo need to be consistent but the most important factor is always the nut behind the butt

Chronos

[Jack V]

It's a whole lot of things , To produce enough accuracy to hit a rabbit at 800 meters consistently you need a suitable well tuned and accurate rifle with fairly high quality scope . Suitable ammunition capable of holding about .5 MOA accuracy and having enough residual energy to kill said game . Then the shooter needs to be capable of producing the accuracy that the gun / ammo combination is capable of . Including ability to read wind .
It is certainly possible with the right skill and gear but to be honest I think your friend might be exaggerating the range a tad . A rabbit is a mighty small target viewed from 800 meters and the slightest wind miss calculation could cause a miss on a first shot . Walking the shots onto the target is more possible which is less precision and more trial and error . I have a 24 power Vortex and I don't think I could see a grey rabbit at 800 m unless he was painted fluro pink and sitting on a black rock but younger eyes might do a lot better . I have tagged a few bigger targets at 400 to 500 m but that extra 300 makes it way harder .

[KWhorenet]

I think this topic begs that the hunter in question log in and have their say... itd be only fair

[Warrigul]

Hi guys,

According to him, he routinely shoots foxes and rabbits at a range of around 800m, sometimes further. I have no reason to disbelieve this guy as, in the last 4 or so years he hasn't lied to me, but I failed to ask what he was using to do this.

Totally possible:

giant rabbit.jpg (15.12 KiB) Viewed 5665 times

Giant fox.jpg (12.08 KiB) Viewed 5665 times

[bigfellascott]

[code][/code]

Hi guys,

I was chatting with a mate a few months back and he was telling me about his hunting fun. According to him, he routinely shoots foxes and rabbits at a range of around 800m, sometimes further.

You might want to take the muffs off next time he's speaking to ya!

[Baronvonrort]

Hi guys,

I was chatting with a mate a few months back and he was telling me about his hunting fun. According to him, he routinely shoots foxes and rabbits at a range of around 800m, sometimes further. I have no reason to disbelieve this guy as, in the last 4 or so years he hasn't lied to me, but I failed to ask what he was using to do this.

When it comes to shooting over longer distances, does it come down to whether the rifle can shoot at those sorts of ranges, or is it the ammunition?

So guys, care to help me out on this?

My thoughts are that it's the ammunition more so than the rifle, am I right or wrong?

Jenna

PS. I try to stick to one dumb question a night at the club. I don't want them thinking I'm too blonde!

I am not going to call BS on shooting rabbits and foxes around 800m it's plausible,the saying the older I get the better I was could also be plausible in this case.
It's the shooter along with rifle and selection of ammo, if they can tick all the boxes then yes, they don't have to be world champ bench rest maybe top 500 or 10000 could do it.

Ask him what caliber and what projectiles he used that would be interesting.

A .243 w could do it if you had a customised rifle shooting 105 gr Amax with ballistic coefficient around .500 or berger vld hunting 105 BC .532 with a powerful scope.
If you have a decent load they will stay supersonic to around 1100m with over .500BC which is about max range for that combo.
A .243 shooting 105 (.500bc) Amax or VLD (.532bc) at 3000fps will hit harder than a 7.62 nato 150 gr ball (military ammo) at 1000m,plug that one into your ballistics calculators before calling bs.

The higher the ballistic coefficient the less the projectile will be slowed down by air resistance, which means it will go further and hit with harder, a crosswind will not affect a high bc projectile as much as a lower bc projectile,all things being equal I would go with the projectile with the higher bc for long range.
For this range you need something that shoots high bc projectiles so choice of gun and ammo is critical.

Here is a guy hitting a beer can at 1260 yards with a 338 lapua-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=emJ0RToUYGE

[Noisydad]

Wonder if the alleged marksman is also a fisherman?

[Westy]

I'm just calling bulls**t on this one J and does he drink a lot???? Not many places you can see a rabbit from 800m away does he live on the nullabor plains at all????

[headspace]

Nice one Westy, I was beginning to wonder where your were on this one. Sorry but your mate is one of a number of things or a combination of them. a) A bull artist, b) someone who thinks 80m is a very long way, c) someone who takes very short little steps or d) an unbelievably good shot who should be representing Australia in the Olympics.
JD

[Westy]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I mean Seriously 800m is a bloody long way in anyone's language

[jennageit]

Whether true or not, I have no idea. I'm leaning towards the "fish that got away story" myself. Either way, he's a nice bloke who my kids absolutely adore, and I like him.

I'm thinking he meant 800 feet, but that's still well out of my league. I can't even manage to score a 200/200 at 50 metres shooting paper tigers! Still, I love shooting, even if it has warped my brain a little lmao

Jenna

PS. Is it normal to think of distance as "range" rather than "metres"?Also, why is I love the smell of that little whisp of smoke so much, when I eject the spent round? lmao

[Jack V]

The term range is the distance to a target . or a place where you shoot . Metres and yards is how you measure that range . The two terms are linked but different .

If someone says , " what was the range to that pink fluro rabbit sitting on the black rock , you would respond with , " about 800 metres give or take 600 metres " .

The whole problem is with the word "routinely " It is possible to hit a rabbit at 800 metres but to do it routinely all the time is very hard to believe .

[Kelix]

I'm thinking he meant 800 feet

That'd be a different story then.

244m with a good varmint rifle is very doable.

[Lorgar]

Also, why is I love the smell of that little whisp of smoke so much, when I eject the spent round? lmao

You and Noisy will get along... Black powder junkie that he is.

[vonfram88]

I'm calling BS on it. 100m for a bunny is good work.