Shoot farther!

[BucksnDucks]

Folks of an older age class that grew up hunting and were taught woodsmen skills and how to get close to animals, which is what hunting is

I hear ya and have no doubt it applies to you and many others. Unfortunately, I've witnessed far too many actions from this class that were not taught the skills, got lazy or have forgotten.

 

[Hilljackoutlaw]

Classes like this are nothing new. I dislike unethical long shots the same as a 100 yard gut shot by a guy that hasn't held his rifle since last season. If they are truly marketing from the 1000-yard kill angle, shame on them. What I see on the link is not that.

"Our precision hunting series is designed for hunters who want to show up to season sharper, steadier, and more prepared when the opportunity finally comes."
"Learn the essentials of long-range marksmanship from the ground up. From rifle setup and ballistic data to field mechanics and positional shooting, this course builds the foundation for confident, ethical shots in the field."

I think practice and instruction from skilled shooters would benefit just about any hunter. In the end the decision to take the shot falls on the individual. Training in "real world" environments is quite eye opening for many and could serve as more of a reason not to take the shot.

An ad popped up on my feed from them that specifically stated shooting an animal from farther as the spotlight of the ad. The website i agree spells it out a little differently.

 

[Mallardsx2]

Does leupold make a 1 mile cds dial?

 

[Hem]

Huh? mtmuley

Maybe those guys should redirect from handling each other's guns?

 

[mtmuley]

Maybe those guys should redirect from handling each other's guns?

Doing what they like and making money. I could care less if they teach long range shooting. What you do with the training when you leave is out of their control. mtmuley

 

[Wyoming270]

I dont care how far someone wants to shoot, but theres a difference between shooting and hunting. Some of the best hunters ive known would get within 20 yards of anything.

 

[mtmuley]

I dont care how far someone wants to shoot, but theres a difference between shooting and hunting. Some of the best hunters ive known would get within 20 yards of anything.

There's a new member in town. mtmuley

 

[RealMuddyboots]

OK, the definition of long range versus extreme long range is quite different. Cartridge requirements follow the same line of thought. Smacking steel subsonic versus energy for hunting is another rabbit hole. Minimal velocity for proper bullet expansion another variable. I am old geezer, hunted with bayonet on end of rifle. Then I did something stupid and jumped into rabbit hole rebuilding the first rifle I bought in 1968. I suppose you can do the math. It was simply a rebuild to SAAMI. Then I rebuilt a 300WSM with some tweaks. Uh oh. Then I really dove in. Built a rocket of a .270 known as .270 Thors Hammer. @Redmt might recall it from LRH. I have kills little over 600 with it which is the range I decided I would not exceed. This rifle runs a 156HH 3250 so it has the horsepower. 700LA trued, 27" SS, Light Palma, 1:8tw, 0.290 freebore, TriggerTech trigger, Athlon Midas Gen 2, 5x25x50. Magpul stock. If you build a rifle to maximize performance, distance does become relative. I shoot woodchucks out to 500 with a .243 so its just what you become comfortable doing with equipment capable of doing it. I built a 06 last year even more capable, details posted up on HT. Serengeti Bore Rider teamer with 1.5° leade entry. A181HH @3150 is no slouch either. It is also a 700LA trued, 26", 1:9tw, freebore, TriggerTech trigger, Magpul stock. Rifles like this are fully capable at moderate long range.

Don't confuse "ethics" with lack of capability or competence. Shoot as far as you the shooter are competent along with a capable rifle. Me? I prefer having at least 2,000fps at distance to insure good bullet terminal performance. My .270TH hits 800yds with this requirement. I will never shoot that far in all likelihood. Just not my preference even though the rifle is capable. Too many variables. The rifle is proven at 600 so I like that as a go no go reference point. Leica 2700B, Kestrel ballistics and Apps do help though.

The biggest issue I have is the complete disregard for GOOD bullet terminal performance which will hinge upon adequate velocity to achieve GOOD bullet terminal performance.

If you bowhunt, the same principle applies to arrow mass to velocity to distance for GOOD penetration.

Well this should be good for another 5 pages?

 

[mtmuley]

OK, the definition of long range versus extreme long range is quite different. Cartridge requirements follow the same line of thought. Smacking steel subsonic versus energy for hunting is another rabbit hole. Minimal velocity for proper bullet expansion another variable. I am old geezer, hunted with bayonet on end of rifle. Then I did something stupid and jumped into rabbit hole rebuilding the first rifle I bought in 1968. I suppose you can do the math. It was simply a rebuild to SAAMI. Then I rebuilt a 300WSM with some tweaks. Uh oh. Then I really dove in. Built a rocket of a .270 known as .270 Thors Hammer. @Redmt might recall it from LRH. I have kills little over 600 with it which is the range I decided I would not exceed. This rifle runs a 156HH 3250 so it has the horsepower. 700LA trued, 27" SS, Light Palma, 1:8tw, 0.290 freebore, TriggerTech trigger, Athlon Midas Gen 2, 5x25x50. Magpul stock. If you build a rifle to maximize performance, distance does become relative. I shoot woodchucks out to 500 with a .243 so its just what you become comfortable doing with equipment capable of doing it. I built a 06 last year even more capable, details posted up on HT. Serengeti Bore Rider teamer with 1.5° leade entry. A181HH @3150 is no slouch either. It is also a 700LA trued, 26", 1:9tw, freebore, TriggerTech trigger, Magpul stock. Rifles like this are fully capable at moderate long range.

Don't confuse "ethics" with lack of capability or competence. Shoot as far as you the shooter are competent along with a capable rifle. Me? I prefer having at least 2,000fps at distance to insure good bullet terminal performance. My .270TH hits 800yds with this requirement. I will never shoot that far in all likelihood. Just not my preference even though the rifle is capable. Too many variables. The rifle is proven at 600 so I like that as a go no go reference point. Leica 2700B, Kestrel ballistics and Apps do help though.

The biggest issue I have is the complete disregard for GOOD bullet terminal performance which will hinge upon adequate velocity to achieve GOOD bullet terminal performance.

If you bowhunt, the same principle applies to arrow mass to velocity to distance for GOOD penetration.

Well this should be good for another 5 pages?

You do move Hammers along quite nicely. mtmuley

 

[geetar]

I hear ya and have no doubt it applies to you and many others. Unfortunately, I've witnessed far too many actions from this class that were not taught the skills, got lazy or have forgotten.

There was a lot of guys in older age classes that possessed true woodsmanship skills. There was also a lot of poachers and poor ethics in older age classes. Probably as much or more than today. It's not new and older age classes aren't morally superior it's just a different brand of poor ethics today and unfortunately people can't resist posting their poor decisions online these days.

 

[mtmuley]

There was a lot of guys in older age classes that possessed true woodsmanship skills. There was also a lot of poachers and poor ethics in older age classes. Probably as much or more than today. It's not new and older age classes aren't morally superior it's just a different brand of poor ethics today and unfortunately people can't resist posting their poor decisions online these days.

The internet is great. You learn about ethics. You learn about shooting, long range or not. You learn about bullets, cartridges and rifles. You learn about optics, how to carry them and support them. Rangefinding devices. Odd a service like is offered. mtmuley

 

[geetar]

The internet is great. You learn about ethics. You learn about shooting, long range or not. You learn about bullets, cartridges and rifles. You learn about optics, how to carry them and support them. Rangefinding devices. Odd a service like is offered. mtmuley

Yep. Like anything else it has brought good and bad to the world but more good than bad if used correctly.