What Is Long Range?

[BLooDTRaCKeR]

If someone can shoot and kill animal at 1,000 yards…great! But releasing all this technology to folks that have a hard time killing at 100 yards is criminal. Look at what the average person does with a cell phone while driving….people cannot be trusted to do the right thing. This long range tech in the wrong hands creates wounded animals and shooters not willing to follow up on a shot because animal did not drop before moving out of sight. It’s taking away opportunity from the rest. Tell me how many people that shoot at an animal long range first think, “I will need to walk over there and follow up on my shot if it doesn’t drop within eyesight….am I willing to walk/hike that far?” Nah, it’s a shoot and ask questions later routine for most of these slob rookie long range wannabe’s.

 

[OutdoorWriter]

 

[roadrunner]

Tell me how many people that shoot at an animal long range first think, “I will need to walk over there and follow up on my shot if it doesn’t drop within eyesight….am I willing to walk/hike that far?”

I can tell you with surety of one...

 

[elkassassin]

Hey BLooD!

If They Take Muzz Scopes!

Take them as Well!

And The We'll Hear Some BAWLING!

 

[Cam@strawberry]

The edge of your comfortable shooting range. For some dudes that’s the end of the barrel. Others further than you can see

 

[Bigfoot 1]

As I get older I want them a lot closer, not that I can’t make a so called long range shot but because they are easier to get out.

 

[quest]

I don’t think there’s anything wrong with long range hunting. I’d more interested if the overall hunter success went up because of it. I don’t think it has? I think long range hunters are more selective on what they pull the trigger on and letting those younger bucks for someone else …

 

[BLooDTRaCKeR]

I don’t think there’s anything wrong with long range hunting. I’d more interested if the overall hunter success went up because of it. I don’t think it has? I think long range hunters are more selective on what they pull the trigger on and letting those younger bucks for someone else …

I watched a guy plink a 2pt at 800+ yards on the Utah gen season rifle hunt. Did he kill it? Yes. But his motivation behind doing it is what worries me. He attempted the shot because he wanted to see what his capabilities were. Shouldn’t this be practiced on the range??? And why a 2 pt? They more expendable and easier to forget about when wounded and not found??? Better to “test” your tech out on a young buck versus a quality buck that would haunt you if you wounded??? I worry that his confidence will get to his head and the next shot will be further and not a good hit. I worry that this behavior will create shooters, not hunters. I worry this behavior will promote laziness in a lack of follow up to the “missed” confirmations….especially when shooting across deep canyons that are difficult to hike across. I don’t like the idea of putting this tech in incapable hands. Our wildlife deserve better than we give. Ethical, clean kill is the approach every hunter should take. Yes, animals are lost at closer ranges too. But follow up is more easily achieved and mistakes are minimized. At long range, a small flinch/jerk at the barrel exaggerates to feet at the target. Unknown crosswinds at target as well. Too many variables for me to feel confident enough to play with long range tech on a living creature.

 

[RookieWYhntr]

I watched a guy plink a 2pt at 800+ yards on the Utah gen season rifle hunt. Did he kill it? Yes. But his motivation behind doing it is what worries me. He attempted the shot because he wanted to see what his capabilities were. Shouldn’t this be practiced on the range??? And why a 2 pt? They more expendable and easier to forget about when wounded and not found??? Better to “test” your tech out on a young buck versus a quality buck that would haunt you if you wounded??? I worry that his confidence will get to his head and the next shot will be further and not a good hit. I worry that this behavior will create shooters, not hunters. I worry this behavior will promote laziness in a lack of follow up to the “missed” confirmations….especially when shooting across deep canyons that are difficult to hike across. I don’t like the idea of putting this tech in incapable hands. Our wildlife deserve better than we give. Ethical, clean kill is the approach every hunter should take. Yes, animals are lost at closer ranges too. But follow up is more easily achieved and mistakes are minimized. At long range, a small flinch/jerk at the barrel exaggerates to feet at the target. Unknown crosswinds at target as well. Too many variables for me to feel confident enough to play with long range tech on a living creature.

A lot of assumptions there...

To me, if you have spent hours and hours of getting to know your rifle AND loads, practicing out to desired distances, and knowing when your groups opens up (greater than MOA) only then should you make an honest opinion on long range shooting/hunting.

Those of you that make assumptions or has never done with the steps I've mentioned above are really just making BS guesses.

I have done all of the above over the span of 3yrs before I actually made an attempt at an animal. I recommend all to do the same even if you don't intend to shoot at an animal at long range. You will know soon enough what you're capable of.

For me, my max long range that I will ever attempt is 600yds. This is based on my rifle/loads and my shooting ability. This is what I came up with after 3yrs of practice.

 

[Sherlock]

Regardless your definition of LR by yardage, do we agree that it’s unethical to back up just for the challenge and “fun” of a longer shot (while hunting)? I have an acquaintance that does that.

 

[Bigfoot 1]

A lot of assumptions there...

To me, if you have spent hours and hours of getting to know your rifle AND loads, practicing out to desired distances, and knowing when your groups opens up (greater than MOA) only then should you make an honest opinion on long range shooting/hunting.

Those of you that make assumptions or has never done with the steps I've mentioned above are really just making BS guesses.

I have done all of the above over the span of 3yrs before I actually made an attempt at an animal. I recommend all to do the same even if you don't intend to shoot at an animal at long range. You will know soon enough what you're capable of.

For me, my max long range that I will ever attempt is 600yds. This is based on my rifle/loads and my shooting ability. This is what I came up with after 3yrs of practice.

He mentioned 800 + yards, I agree with him, we’ve got a guy on here who brags of 900 + yard shots. There is so much involved for somebody to hit an animal at that distance in an uncontrolled environment. My question is why? Why do you want to attempt a 900 yard shot on a deer? Are you hunting or shooting? To each their own, if it works for you all the time I reckon that’s great.

 

[slamdunk]

Regardless your definition of LR by yardage, do we agree that it’s unethical to back up just for the challenge and “fun” of a longer shot (while hunting)? I have an acquaintance that does that. I find it disgusting.

Personally I have never heard of nor known anyone who intentionally backs up simply to make an attempt at a LR shot.
Not saying they don't....

Who in their right mind would purposely take the time to back off a couple hundred yards risking the animal to move out and or change both his and your position ?

 

[JPickett]

900 + yard shots. There is so much involved for somebody to hit an animal at that distance in an uncontrolled environment

I thought you said when you done it, it was no big deal? Which is it?

 

[RookieWYhntr]

I thought you said when you done it, it was no big deal? Which is it?

I know nothing about playing soccer. But I often talk like I do.

 

[JPickett]

I know nothing about playing soccer. But I often talk like I do.

That is the perfect analogy for super man here!! Too funny

 

[ridgetops]

Right?
That definitely seems to be a few people's consensus.

My Lapua CAN kill at 1000 yards, but it doesn't.
My Knight muzzy CAN kill at 400, but it doesn't.
My PSE has lied in its case (casket) since about 1995 because I had lost the last deer I ever wanted to lose.

So because I have tools that CAN, i am automatically grouped into the 2% which are driving the success rates too high which somehow has wiped out not only all our bucks, but all the does as well and am to be blamed for decimating our herds.
Sounds like 4.3 GPA logic to me??‍

What's the energy and velocity of your bullet while shooting your knight at 400 yards?

 

[slamdunk]

What's the energy and velocity of your bullet while shooting your knight at 400 yards?

I would hate to even dare guess, but I highly doubt it meets the recommended 1000 lbs needed to effectively kill big game.

At approximately 1700 at the barrel, I'm sure it's pretty light at 400, which is exactly why I don't shoot it at 400.

 

[Bigfoot 1]

I thought you said when you done it, it was no big deal? Which is it?

I’ve never done it on a deer like you Quigley. Again reading comprehension is not your strong suit. I would bet it’s like your 960+ yard shot also.

 

[JPickett]

Ballistics and environmental conditions change with what you’re shooting at? Wow. That gun range you own must be the highest tech one in the world

 

[Bigfoot 1]

Ballistics and environmental conditions change with what you’re shooting at? Wow. That gun range you own must be the highest tech one in the world

That statement right there proves you know nothing about “long range” shooting! Do you even own a firearm?

 

[BLooDTRaCKeR]

A lot of assumptions there...

To me, if you have spent hours and hours of getting to know your rifle AND loads, practicing out to desired distances, and knowing when your groups opens up (greater than MOA) only then should you make an honest opinion on long range shooting/hunting.

Those of you that make assumptions or has never done with the steps I've mentioned above are really just making BS guesses.

I have done all of the above over the span of 3yrs before I actually made an attempt at an animal. I recommend all to do the same even if you don't intend to shoot at an animal at long range. You will know soon enough what you're capable of.

For me, my max long range that I will ever attempt is 600yds. This is based on my rifle/loads and my shooting ability. This is what I came up with after 3yrs of practice.

I have a few close buddies that have long range setups…hitting targets at 900-1000 yards….not consistently though. Their guns were both set up for them by someone else that knows what they are doing. My buddies don’t have the knowledge or time to gain the knowledge to know what they are doing. They just know the gun has the capability to hit at a 1,000 yards. They don’t hunt at those distances, but they do know that it can shoot accurately at that distance. Having that capability at the fingertips…and in incapable hands is what worries me.

Not even a fraction of public do what you mentioned you have done to get familiar with weapon and loads (hats off to you). Everyone wants the 1,000 yard out of the crate gun just to think they can do it if they choose or see the need. We are losing opportunities to hunt because incapable folks are slinging lead, wounding animals at distances that belong on the range only.

 

[quest]

I guess I belong to the elite long range club? If we are harvesting more deer because of long range hunting then we might have a problem but…. I don’t see that. The people I hunt with are all skilled hunters they don’t wait for a long range shots they’ll take a deer at close range. I don’t know what the big deal is about trying to stop those that want to harvest buck at long range?

 

[Zeke]

Personally I have never heard of nor known anyone who intentionally backs up simply to make an attempt at a LR shot.
Not saying they don't....

Who in their right mind would purposely take the time to back off a couple hundred yards risking the animal to move out and or change both his and your position ?

I’ totally prepared LR “WHEN NEEDED” (that definition varied between folks) but I have seen people (and know if people doing so) drive back to get to some magic range. I say this is where gongs should be employed, not deer or antelope.

Zeke

 

[JPickett]

That statement right there proves you know nothing about “long range” shooting! Do you even own a firearm?

Who’s reading these to you? Im certain now your completely illiterate

 

[Bigfoot 1]

That’s an interesting comment.

 

[JPickett]

Or so you’re told. Could be whoever is reading for you isn’t really telling what these post say. That would actually explain a lot

 

[Bigfoot 1]

You may be right

 

[Bigwiffy]

Just watched a hunt in CO with the huntin fool boys. They killed a buck at 1010 yards. They made the comment they needed to "sneak" into range in case the buck came off the private. They "snuck" into 1010 yards, stealthy as jungle cats to be able to get that close!

 

[slamdunk]

I’ totally prepared LR “WHEN NEEDED” (that definition varied between folks) but I have seen people (and know if people doing so) drive back to get to some magic range. I say this is where gongs should be employed, not deer or antelope.

Zeke

This brings up a valid unanswerable question, but I'll throw it out there anyway.

How many "LR" people are dumping thousands of dollars into "LR" rifle setups to kill average and below average bucks?
I would have to think it's not very many.
Are they really killing hundreds of yearling bucks throughout the units at ranges over 500 yards?

I wouldn't think so, but I could be completely wrong ?‍

Having said that, I would have a really hard time believing that a "professional hunter" or otherwise would purposely "back up" to harvest a trophy animal just because.

"Backing up" on purpose would take a substantial amount of time and would dramatically change the entire dynamics of a shot with angles, wind, obstacles, etc.
Who would purposely risk that on a 200" buck or 400" bull for the sake of saying they killed it at 1000 yards?

I understand people are killing at 1000+, but are we really at a point where we are saying "Hey Johnny, hold my beer while I back down the hill 500 yards further away so I can kill that buck of a lifetime at 1000 versus 500!"

 

[Bigwiffy]

This brings up a valid unanswerable question, but I'll throw it out there anyway.

How many "LR" people are dumping thousands of dollars into "LR" rifle setups to kill average and below average bucks?
I would have to think it's not very many.
Are they really killing hundreds of yearling bucks throughout the units at ranges over 500 yards?

I wouldn't think so, but I could be completely wrong ?‍

Having said that, I would have a really hard time believing that a "professional hunter" or otherwise would purposely "back up" to harvest a trophy animal just because.

"Backing up" on purpose would take a substantial amount of time and would dramatically change the entire dynamics of a shot with angles, wind, obstacles, etc.
Who would purposely risk that on a 200" buck or 400" bull for the sake of saying they killed it at 1000 yards?

I understand people are killing at 1000+, but are we really at a point where we are saying "Hey Johnny, hold my beer while I back down the hill 500 yards further away so I can kill that buck of a lifetime at 1000 versus 500!"

They aren't trying very hard to get close. Maybe 1000 yards is close? Plus it's only a very small percentage that shoot long range thank goodness for that right Slam??

 

[slamdunk]

They aren't trying very hard to get close. Maybe 1000 yards is close? Plus it's only a very small percentage that shoot long range thank goodness for that right Slam??

Well we all know by now that to you, anything further than you can shoot your arrow is considered"LR".

 

[Bigwiffy]

Well we all know by now that to you, anything further than you can shoot your arrow is considered"LR".

About time we agree on something!

 

[JB1975]

964 is in range to some folks here. Not much sneak involved in that.

Just watched a hunt in CO with the huntin fool boys. They killed a buck at 1010 yards. They made the comment they needed to "sneak" into range in case the buck came off the private. They "snuck" into 1010 yards, stealthy as jungle cats to be able to get that close!

 

[one_dryboot]

Anything other than a spear in your hand is long range.

 

[BLooDTRaCKeR]

I’m not worried about the people that can shoot the eye out of a needle at 1,000 yards. Go ahead and kill. It’s the folks that set up for a long range bomb, shoot, “miss,” then continue their hunt with more long range “misses” until something finally drops within view that is worth the walk. One poor shooter at long distances can damage a population of game during their quest to hang their hat on a LR kill shot. Not too worried about those who shoot at 1 animal, kill it and tag out.

Just because you can afford a 200 mph car doesn’t mean you know how to drive at that speed or should. Learn it’s capabilities, learn your capabilities, and set your boundaries.

For hunting LR, (whatever you define it as) keep it ethical in the sense that you know what your ethical limitations are.

 

[Bigfoot 1]

This brings up a valid unanswerable question, but I'll throw it out there anyway.

How many "LR" people are dumping thousands of dollars into "LR" rifle setups to kill average and below average bucks?
I would have to think it's not very many.
Are they really killing hundreds of yearling bucks throughout the units at ranges over 500 yards?

I wouldn't think so, but I could be completely wrong ?‍

Having said that, I would have a really hard time believing that a "professional hunter" or otherwise would purposely "back up" to harvest a trophy animal just because.

"Backing up" on purpose would take a substantial amount of time and would dramatically change the entire dynamics of a shot with angles, wind, obstacles, etc.
Who would purposely risk that on a 200" buck or 400" bull for the sake of saying they killed it at 1000 yards?

I understand people are killing at 1000+, but are we really at a point where we are saying "Hey Johnny, hold my beer while I back down the hill 500 yards further away so I can kill that buck of a lifetime at 1000 versus 500!"

I’m active in various organizations around here such as the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, I know many old and young hunters. I hunt quite a bit with different groups of people all depending where and what we hunt and not a one of them shoots animals at 1,000 yards. I’m not saying it doesn’t happen, I’m saying in nearly five decades of my hunting experience I don’t know one guy who does that. People I know hunt. If you can get it done all the time and retrieve your game than go for it. Shooting 1,000 yards in areas we hunt would at times have you crossing two canyons to your target. I can’t even see animals at that distance with my naked eye.

 

[ridgetops]

What is long range? It's farther than I'm willing to shoot.

 

[JPickett]

964 is in range to some folks here. Not much sneak involved in that.

zero sneaking involved. what you have, or should have anyway if your going to take that shot. is a very relaxed animal, a ton of time to read and evaluate the conditions, the ability to read and evaluate the conditions and ample time to decide of its a shot you can make or should take.

the 964 is obviously a shot at me. thats fine. on that shot, i watched the buck for over 20 minutes. went back and forth from my spotter to scope at least 4 times. watched the conditions between me and the buck for at least another 15/20 minutes. confirmed temp/pressure/angle compensations and spin drift. set up my rest and sat in the scope for a good 5 minutes with an empty chamber. dry fired 3 times to assure my rest and trigger pull was good. got up one more time to check conditions and make sure it was a shot i could make then settled back into my rifle. at that point i made the final determination i could take, and make this shot. went through my routine of breathing and settled for the shot. nice easy trigger squeeze and the buck dropped where he stood.

the kill shot was a direct hit in his heart. now was i aiming for his heart at 964? i guess yes. i was aiming center mass just behind the shoulder. so lungs, heart, all in that zone. that shot was the culmination of years of shooting, reloading and load development. not to mention thousands of dollars in a gun, scope, smith work, optics and ammo. but yeah, keep thinking i'm just out there slinging lead at anything that moves with my off the shelf long range build.

like ive said before, ts entertaining to see what you guys "think" i just talk about what i know. so ill keep it up, and keep punching tags. this year a bull will die from one of my pointy sticks inside 50 yards (that will let bigfoot think im a real hunter) and a buck will die withing range. (and i will still care less what the internet warriors think about that)

 

[Bigwiffy]

zero sneaking involved. what you have, or should have anyway if your going to take that shot. is a very relaxed animal, a ton of time to read and evaluate the conditions, the ability to read and evaluate the conditions and ample time to decide of its a shot you can make or should take.

the 964 is obviously a shot at me. thats fine. on that shot, i watched the buck for over 20 minutes. went back and forth from my spotter to scope at least 4 times. watched the conditions between me and the buck for at least another 15/20 minutes. confirmed temp/pressure/angle compensations and spin drift. set up my rest and sat in the scope for a good 5 minutes with an empty chamber. dry fired 3 times to assure my rest and trigger pull was good. got up one more time to check conditions and make sure it was a shot i could make then settled back into my rifle. at that point i made the final determination i could take, and make this shot. went through my routine of breathing and settled for the shot. nice easy trigger squeeze and the buck dropped where he stood.

the kill shot was a direct hit in his heart. now was i aiming for his heart at 964? i guess yes. i was aiming center mass just behind the shoulder. so lungs, heart, all in that zone. that shot was the culmination of years of shooting, reloading and load development. not to mention thousands of dollars in a gun, scope, smith work, optics and ammo. but yeah, keep thinking i'm just out there slinging lead at anything that moves with my off the shelf long range build.

like ive said before, ts entertaining to see what you guys "think" i just talk about what i know. so ill keep it up, and keep punching tags. this year a bull will die from one of my pointy sticks inside 50 yards (that will let bigfoot think im a real hunter) and a buck will die withing range. (and i will still care less what the internet warriors think about that)

If you put an arrow through something inside 50 yards I'd be interested to hear about that hunt. All that other stuff you talked about would impress Bill Nye.

 

[JPickett]

If you put an arrow through something inside 50 yards I'd be interested to hear about that hunt. All that other stuff you talked about would impress Bill Nye.

well i do it every September. like to get closer then that and id say if i averaged my elk kills its probably 25 yards. last year was just about 46. its funny how some cant see the discipline other methods of hunting take. ive mentioned in another thread i sold my muzzle loader. killed several animals with it but i just really don't like the weapon. all the crap you have to carry to reload, how dirty the damn things are. the fact that when you pull the trigger it might go bang (at least the seasons restrictions ive hunted when 209's were not legal) so ill likely never hunt with a muzzle loader again. but i can certainly respect the guys like slam that do and do so successfully. especially with out a scope

 

[Bigwiffy]

well i do it every September. like to get closer then that and id say if i averaged my elk kills its probably 25 yards. last year was just about 46. its funny how some cant see the discipline other methods of hunting take. ive mentioned in another thread i sold my muzzle loader. killed several animals with it but i just really don't like the weapon. all the crap you have to carry to reload, how dirty the damn things are. the fact that when you pull the trigger it might go bang (at least the seasons restrictions ive hunted when 209's were not legal) so ill likely never hunt with a muzzle loader again. but i can certainly respect the guys like slam that do and do so successfully. especially with out a scope

Haha don't let @slamdunk fool you he's using a scope on his smoke pole......at least for now

 

[JPickett]

Haha don't let @slamdunk fool you he's using a scope on his smoke pole......at least for now

he is. but ive talked to slam and i think i can safely say hes just fine with taking it off

 

[Bigwiffy]

he is. but ive talked to slam and i think i can safely say hes just fine with taking it off

Hahaha he would be ok taking it off for you Bubbles, no doubt about that!

 

[JPickett]

 

[slamdunk]

Haha don't let @slamdunk fool you he's using a scope on his smoke pole......at least for now

Yep @Bigwiffy I sure am!
I've got myself a Vortex 4x12 "tactical" that I've killed one deer at 50 yards with.
It'll fit nicely on my 204 coyote gun when the big bad bullies make me take it off ?