Long range hunting...

[Bosbefok]

I have always been amazed at guys that shoot animals past 300-400m as I can barely keep the rounds on paper out to 300m. I don't want to risk an injured animal so I try to keep my shots under 200m. My gear is pretty simple as I only really have 3-9x40 vx1 scopes on my 308, 243, 25-06.

Not sure if you guys have seen this new bit of gear but it seems to be a Burris eliminator on steroids...

http://www.ebaumsworld.com/video/watch/83026602/

[handofcod]

Good article on long range hunting in Australia:

http://www.austargets.com/sambar.htm

[North East]

I'd be bouncing off trees if I took a shot over 100 yards around my place.

[KWhorenet]

they make it look impressive. Just need to get me a team of 3 and go out in my " Gippsland Open Plains " game park

Spotter - "Fox at 10 O'clock, he stopped, 130m, do you have him?"
Me & 22 Hornet - "I see him, I have him at 131 m, 5m/s wind from right"
Laptop guy - "Yes that is what I have"
22 Hornet - "bang"
Spotter - " You got him !, you got him !, he's down ! UNBELIEVABLE !!! "

All 3 of us in concert with a wink to our camera guy - " NOW THAT IS SHOOTING !!! "


that clip reminds me of the pro fishing shows...when will there be a 'Master Shooting/Hunting' reality show

[Elek]

I have always been amazed at guys that shoot animals past 300-400m as I can barely keep the rounds on paper out to 300m. I don't want to risk an injured animal so I try to keep my shots under 200m.

Best to limit it to ranges you're capable of shooting well at IMO

In addition to not getting a humane kill you'd just as likely scare it off with a miss when you could have gotten a bit closer and taken it.

[Grated]

Not sure if you guys have seen this new bit of gear but it seems to be a Burris eliminator on steroids...

And they're only $17,500 US

[brett1868]

These are sold as a package of scope and rifle, I did some investigation into buying the .338 Lap one last year and didn't like the almost $35k AUD price tag. Exchange rate, export fees, import duties, GST and dealer handling charges all add to the already high cost to land one locally. What many fail to understand is that all that high tech wizardry and rifle add up to zero if the ammo is even slightly off compared to what's setup in the ballistics computer. Anything more then 10 fps variation in velocity will cause a miss and how are they factoring in wind? As an example a 8 kph cross wind will deflect a Barrett .416 projectile .5 mils over 1000 yds. Projectile uniformity also becomes critical otherwise there'll be BC differences leading to a miss. I'm curious how many shots they missed when making the promo.
I do a lot of long range shooting out to 1000m & 1500m and my key focus isn't on the rifle, scope or me but on producing ammunition that's consistently 3150 fps +/- 5 fps and that's extremely difficult to achieve. With the many long hours I've spent developing a load and shooting, the best I've managed is 5 shots into 5" @ 1000m under perfect conditions.
If you're keen on the long range shooting stuff then I highly recommend "Accuracy and Precision For Long Range Shooting" by Bryan Litz who is the chief ballistician for Berger bullets in the U.S. It's a real education in understanding how projectiles behave and what's required to hit the target at longer ranges. I have to give thanks to Appollo for recommending Bryan's work to me as it's been a big help.

Here's the one I was looking at...and only a 30 Day guarantee which shows just how much faith they have in their own product.
http://tracking-point.com/precision-guided-firearms/precision-guided-bolt-action-338-lm

[bigfellascott]

Can't say I have a need for it and even if I did spending $35k plus to do it, I don't think so, I'd rather spend the $$ on a 4wd and drive closer!

[Sam45]

Can't say I have a need for it and even if I did spending $35k plus to do it, I don't think so, I'd rather spend the $$ on a 4wd and drive closer!

Copy that, Even a buggy and be within 100 yards

[Oldbloke]

I have always been amazed at guys that shoot animals past 300-400m as I can barely keep the rounds on paper out to 300m. I don't want to risk an injured animal so I try to keep my shots under 200m.

Best to limit it to ranges you're capable of shooting well at IMO

In addition to not getting a humane kill you'd just as likely scare it off with a miss when you could have gotten a bit closer and taken it.

+1

[bigfellascott]

I know blokes who do long range shooting - gongs/deer hunting etc and haven't spent a 10th of what they are asking for that outfit! To me its just another one of those gimmicky type things that are designed to do what you can already do without em.

[headspace]

The real fact is that it's not hunting, it's sniping. And please don't anyone start drawing analogies of military marksmen taking out targets at extreme range. If you wound a combatant that's OK. We call ourselves hunters and that carries with it certain set of ethics including a clean kill and if that doesn't happen then a follow up involving a blood trail or any other clue to put the animal out of its misery. How anyone can say that sort of thing is hunting is beyond me. Let's say you wound the animal at a "modest" 400m. By the time you get to where the animal was hit, it's had plenty of time to drag itself away to where you may never find it. long range however it's defined should be kept for target shooting, not game. There is a lot skill involved in getting as close to your target animal as possible, and I take a lot of pride in doing just that. Sometime the long shot just has to be passed up.
JD

[bigfellascott]

The real fact is that it's not hunting, it's sniping. And please don't anyone start drawing analogies of military marksmen taking out targets at extreme range. If you wound a combatant that's OK. We call ourselves hunters and that carries with it certain set of ethics including a clean kill and if that doesn't happen then a follow up involving a blood trail or any other clue to put the animal out of its misery. How anyone can say that sort of thing is hunting is beyond me. Let's say you wound the animal at a "modest" 400m. By the time you get to where the animal was hit, it's had plenty of time to drag itself away to where you may never find it. long range however it's defined should be kept for target shooting, not game. There is a lot skill involved in getting as close to your target animal as possible, and I take a lot of pride in doing just that. Sometime the long shot just has to be passed up.
JD

So what your saying is that hunters don't lose wounded animals at close ranges? Yeah right. I say it takes a lot of skill to get good kills at long ranges, a skill that has been honed over a long time before its put into practice on live animals.

Each to their own of course but long range hunting is a type of hunting, not your idea of hunting but no diff to taking a shot at an animal at 300 or 400m really, plenty of people ball em up at those ranges and closer

[deye243]

The real fact is that it's not hunting, it's sniping. And please don't anyone start drawing analogies of military marksmen taking out targets at extreme range. If you wound a combatant that's OK. We call ourselves hunters and that carries with it certain set of ethics including a clean kill and if that doesn't happen then a follow up involving a blood trail or any other clue to put the animal out of its misery. How anyone can say that sort of thing is hunting is beyond me. Let's say you wound the animal at a "modest" 400m. By the time you get to where the animal was hit, it's had plenty of time to drag itself away to where you may never find it. long range however it's defined should be kept for target shooting, not game. There is a lot skill involved in getting as close to your target animal as possible, and I take a lot of pride in doing just that. Sometime the long shot just has to be passed up.
JD

i have seen more deer shot and lost to your so called close hunters over the last 30 years than i have long range

in fact none have been lost because these marksman don't spend upwards of $6000 to $10000 in a rifle and all

that go's with it to carry on like a nob with buck fever and take a shot that they think they might make.

and as for your last statement we pass up a lot more than we take because of animal position and change in conditions

it is a discipline not a sport .

[deye243]

gee ya gotta be quick around here gday Scott

[bigfellascott]

gee ya gotta be quick around here gday Scott

G'day D I get the feeling that some people say it can't be done cause they can't do it so no one else can apparently. Me I know my limitations (around 300m) haven't really tried shooting much further than that so I limit myself to those sorts of ranges as a rule.

I know plenty of people who shoot a hell of a lot further than that and are very skilled at doing so, whether it be on paper/gongs/animals - at the end of the day it really comes down to ones skill level more so than the distance as such.

As the saying goes - a mans got to know his limitations. and for me that's around 300-350m on rabbits and foxes.

[North East]

Short range...over powered scope...problems.
Long range...under powered scope...problems.

[deye243]

gee ya gotta be quick around here gday Scott

G'day D I get the feeling that some people say it can't be done cause they can't do it so no one else can apparently. Me I know my limitations (around 300m) haven't really tried shooting much further than that so I limit myself to those sorts of ranges as a rule.

I know plenty of people who shoot a hell of a lot further than that and are very skilled at doing so, whether it be on paper/gongs/animals - at the end of the day it really comes down to ones skill level more so than the distance as such.

As the saying goes - a mans got to know his limitations. and for me that's around 300-350m on rabbits and foxes.

you are a very wise man Scott i think it hurts their ego as well

now just to show that some of us take it seriously i practice around 3 days a week in all types of weather within reason

and shoot milk cartons in 20+ km breeze have no trouble hitting them at 750 to 770 yards so that's my limit on game ATM .

but i am training for the big one 1000 yards but in reality it don't look good for me on game at this range but the week

i start to hit 10 out of 10 in one session 3 or more times and in different conditions i will them give it a go .

[headspace]

The real fact is that it's not hunting, it's sniping. And please don't anyone start drawing analogies of military marksmen taking out targets at extreme range. If you wound a combatant that's OK. We call ourselves hunters and that carries with it certain set of ethics including a clean kill and if that doesn't happen then a follow up involving a blood trail or any other clue to put the animal out of its misery. How anyone can say that sort of thing is hunting is beyond me. Let's say you wound the animal at a "modest" 400m. By the time you get to where the animal was hit, it's had plenty of time to drag itself away to where you may never find it. long range however it's defined should be kept for target shooting, not game. There is a lot skill involved in getting as close to your target animal as possible, and I take a lot of pride in doing just that. Sometime the long shot just has to be passed up.
JD

i have seen more deer shot and lost to your so called close hunters over the last 30 years than i have long range

in fact none have been lost because these marksman don't spend upwards of $6000 to $10000 in a rifle and all

that go's with it to carry on like a nob with buck fever and take a shot that they think they might make.

and as for your last statement we pass up a lot more than we take because of animal position and change in conditions

it is a discipline not a sport .

Not sure what you point is with all that but the fact remains that you have a far better chance of a clean kill the closer you get. If you've seen all those animals lost from close range your choice in hunting mates probably needs thinking about. I mentioned nothing about how much money you spend, and that has nothing to do with how well you use what you have. The last statement? I kind of thought we agreed there. If I have doubts about making the shot then I won't. I don't know about referring to hunting as a discipline, but call it what you will the end result should be a clean kill.
JD

[headspace]

The real fact is that it's not hunting, it's sniping. And please don't anyone start drawing analogies of military marksmen taking out targets at extreme range. If you wound a combatant that's OK. We call ourselves hunters and that carries with it certain set of ethics including a clean kill and if that doesn't happen then a follow up involving a blood trail or any other clue to put the animal out of its misery. How anyone can say that sort of thing is hunting is beyond me. Let's say you wound the animal at a "modest" 400m. By the time you get to where the animal was hit, it's had plenty of time to drag itself away to where you may never find it. long range however it's defined should be kept for target shooting, not game. There is a lot skill involved in getting as close to your target animal as possible, and I take a lot of pride in doing just that. Sometime the long shot just has to be passed up.
JD

So what your saying is that hunters don't lose wounded animals at close ranges? Yeah right. I say it takes a lot of skill to get good kills at long ranges, a skill that has been honed over a long time before its put into practice on live animals.

Each to their own of course but long range hunting is a type of hunting, not your idea of hunting but no diff to taking a shot at an animal at 300 or 400m really, plenty of people ball em up at those ranges and closer

OK Scott, 300 or 400 how about 500, where do you stop? You can say all you like about the skills of shooting at long range and that's fine at targets; you don't wound them if you make a balls of it. The longer the range the bigger chance you WILL make a balls of it. And I never said people don't bugger it up at close range, however the shorter range minimises that possibility. How many changes of wind direction can you determine in 400m? At the range there are usually flags to tell you that. In the field there's nothing.

[bigfellascott]

The real fact is that it's not hunting, it's sniping. And please don't anyone start drawing analogies of military marksmen taking out targets at extreme range. If you wound a combatant that's OK. We call ourselves hunters and that carries with it certain set of ethics including a clean kill and if that doesn't happen then a follow up involving a blood trail or any other clue to put the animal out of its misery. How anyone can say that sort of thing is hunting is beyond me. Let's say you wound the animal at a "modest" 400m. By the time you get to where the animal was hit, it's had plenty of time to drag itself away to where you may never find it. long range however it's defined should be kept for target shooting, not game. There is a lot skill involved in getting as close to your target animal as possible, and I take a lot of pride in doing just that. Sometime the long shot just has to be passed up.
JD

So what your saying is that hunters don't lose wounded animals at close ranges? Yeah right. I say it takes a lot of skill to get good kills at long ranges, a skill that has been honed over a long time before its put into practice on live animals.

Each to their own of course but long range hunting is a type of hunting, not your idea of hunting but no diff to taking a shot at an animal at 300 or 400m really, plenty of people ball em up at those ranges and closer

OK Scott, 300 or 400 how about 500, where do you stop? You can say all you like about the skills of shooting at long range and that's fine at targets; you don't wound them if you make a balls of it. The longer the range the bigger chance you WILL make a balls of it. And I never said people don't bugger it up at close range, however the shorter range minimises that possibility. How many changes of wind direction can you determine in 400m? At the range there are usually flags to tell you that. In the field there's nothing.

Have you actually tried shooting at long ranges? I had a go for the first time at 1000m a while back with a mate who shoots those sorts of ranges often (paper and gongs) I can tell you he wasn't too shabby at it either, he hit the gong first time and 2 shots later we were hitting the centre with very good consistency (even I managed to nail the centre) not because of my skill level but because of his, he did all the dials and worked out the wind/elevation/BP etc did the cals and the rest was history.

At the end of the day it really comes down to ones skill level more so than the distance, plenty of people can't hit s**t at 50m with any degree of consistency, others can do it out too 1000m + with very good consistency.

As for where do I draw the line - as I said around 300-350m at this stage until I can get some practice in at longer ranges. If you're not up to it mate that's fine but don't try and tell those that are that they shouldn't, because of your misguided understanding of how it all works, their skill level is way above your's in that department obviously, which is the important part of the whole equation (Skill Level), it's not the distance that is the limiting factor but the skills they have to get the job done with a high degree of success.

As I said one has to know there limitations and you obviously know your's as do I and I'd imagine those who practice this long range hunting know theirs too.

[brett1868]

Short range...over powered scope...problems.
Long range...under powered scope...problems.

Bit of a subjective observation....what do you classify as over powered for short range and under powered for long range?

I use a 3-12 for the hunting rifles while the longer range ones get 8-32 though I mainly have them set to 25x when firing. I like to use the zoom to check the target and look around behind it before coming back to 25x. Picked up a S&B PMII FFP 12-50 x 56 for the .416 as I need a bit more zoom to see out to 2km with a degree of clarity. It all comes back to what Scott said about a man knowing his limitations though I have to add that he needs to also know the limitations of his equipment.

[bigfellascott]

Short range...over powered scope...problems.
Long range...under powered scope...problems.

Bit of a subjective observation....what do you classify as over powered for short range and under powered for long range?

I use a 3-12 for the hunting rifles while the longer range ones get 8-32 though I mainly have them set to 25x when firing. I like to use the zoom to check the target and look around behind it before coming back to 25x. Picked up a S&B PMII FFP 12-50 x 56 for the .416 as I need a bit more zoom to see out to 2km with a degree of clarity. It all comes back to what Scott said about a man knowing his limitations though I have to add that he needs to also know the limitations of his equipment.

Yep that's part of "A mans gots ta know his limitations" Another nice long range setup you have there Brett.

[headspace]

Actually Scott I have done plenty of long range shooting; at targets. So I learned to read wind and bullet drop and all that. I began my shooting life back in the early 60's shooting a match grade 303 Lee Enfield with target aperture sights and did pretty well with that out to 600 yards. My training in the Army some years later sharpened that up a lot to the point that I shot competitively against all branches of the services and managed a creditable second place over all. So I do know a little about long range shooting. My point that you either missed or chose to ignore is that hunting animals is a totally different matter. I chose to hunt my quarry at closer ranges because I believe that's the ethical way to do it. There IS less chance of the animal being wounded and going off to die slowly. The SPORT aspect of hunting is in the hunting itself not necessarily in the final outcome, but maybe that has escaped you as well, along with that of the others of your kind who spend their time drooling over the latest in technology. Sure you can nail rabbits and foxes at long range because they come apart a lot easier than a deer or goat. Bow hunters get close all the time because they must. As the range gets longer, apart from unseen wind currents, your target only has to move slightly to make a perfect shot into a nasty wound.

[bigfellascott]

Actually Scott I have done plenty of long range shooting; at targets. So I learned to read wind and bullet drop and all that. I began my shooting life back in the early 60's shooting a match grade 303 Lee Enfield with target aperture sights and did pretty well with that out to 600 yards. My training in the Army some years later sharpened that up a lot to the point that I shot competitively against all branches of the services and managed a creditable second place over all. So I do know a little about long range shooting. My point that you either missed or chose to ignore is that hunting animals is a totally different matter. I chose to hunt my quarry at closer ranges because I believe that's the ethical way to do it. There IS less chance of the animal being wounded and going off to die slowly. The SPORT aspect of hunting is in the hunting itself not necessarily in the final outcome, but maybe that has escaped you as well, along with that of the others of your kind who spend their time drooling over the latest in technology. Sure you can nail rabbits and foxes at long range because they come apart a lot easier than a deer or goat. Bow hunters get close all the time because they must. As the range gets longer, apart from unseen wind currents, your target only has to move slightly to make a perfect shot into a nasty wound.

We will just have to agree to disagree on this one mate

[headspace]

Yeh mate, fair enough. I would like to add though that people should practice longer shots, and get totally familiar with their gear. A mate of mine was hunting overseas at a very exotic location and he had a shot at a Bighorn sheep at 400 yards across a valley. It was the last day of a hunt that cost him around $15,000. He took the shot and nailed it. But he knew the terrain he was going to be hunting in and used a 300Win Mag for the job. I call anything over 300m long range and sometimes you simply cannot get closer.

[bigfellascott]

Yeh mate, fair enough. I would like to add though that people should practice longer shots, and get totally familiar with their gear. A mate of mine was hunting overseas at a very exotic location and he had a shot at a Bighorn sheep at 400 yards across a valley. It was the last day of a hunt that cost him around $15,000. He took the shot and nailed it. But he knew the terrain he was going to be hunting in and used a 300Win Mag for the job. I call anything over 300m long range and sometimes you simply cannot get closer.

That's what it's about mate, you have to know your gear, practice is really the only way to do it with any degree of consistency - I guess that goes for any type of shooting, the more you practice and get familiar with your gear the better you get at getting consistent results.

Have a look on Youtube you will see plenty of long range hunting results, these people don't just wake up one day and decide to go shooting animals at 1000m, they have become proficient at using their firearms and know them and the skills that are needed to achieve good consistent results.

Me I'm too lazy to bother with trying to get better than what I shoot now (300-350m being my comfort zone) which is good enough for my needs but I guess if I wanted to learn how to shoot further I could.

[headspace]

Mate I guess my main problem is with the people who basically set out to shoot an animal from as great a distance as possible. As I said sometimes a long range shot is all the chance you get at the trophy of a lifetime, however the idea of just going out and shooting some at some ridiculous distance just because you can ( or think you can) makes no sense at all. With that sort of mindset, I think I'm right in saying that it's not hunting, it's sniping.
Every hunter should be as proficient as possible with the rifle of his choice. But not simply to compete with himself in trying to shoot animals at extreme ranges. I personally have big problems with the ethics of that.
Cheers
John

[Oldbloke]

Mate I guess my main problem is with the people who basically set out to shoot an animal from as great a distance as possible. As I said sometimes a long range shot is all the chance you get at the trophy of a lifetime, however the idea of just going out and shooting some at some ridiculous distance just because you can ( or think you can) makes no sense at all. With that sort of mindset, I think I'm right in saying that it's not hunting, it's sniping.
Every hunter should be as proficient as possible with the rifle of his choice. But not simply to compete with himself in trying to shoot animals at extreme ranges. I personally have big problems with the ethics of that.
Cheers
John

+1
And as Scott said a man has to know his limits. And the rifles. Closer the better, that's my motto.

[Franky]

The real fact is that it's not hunting, it's sniping. And please don't anyone start drawing analogies of military marksmen taking out targets at extreme range. If you wound a combatant that's OK. We call ourselves hunters and that carries with it certain set of ethics including a clean kill and if that doesn't happen then a follow up involving a blood trail or any other clue to put the animal out of its misery. How anyone can say that sort of thing is hunting is beyond me. Let's say you wound the animal at a "modest" 400m. By the time you get to where the animal was hit, it's had plenty of time to drag itself away to where you may never find it. long range however it's defined should be kept for target shooting, not game. There is a lot skill involved in getting as close to your target animal as possible, and I take a lot of pride in doing just that. Sometime the long shot just has to be passed up.
JD

That's making a lot of sense to me.