what Cal

BTW Lynn,


I don't have any sort of a problem with handgun hunting. I just know from experience how absolutely lethal a bow is also.......and for ME I don't feel at all undergunned with a nice compound. I would be more comfortable driving an arrow through a dangerous animal than a handgun slug simply because my setup will completely range an elk or bear from any angle. Opinions vary :) but I don't frown on any sort of hunting, done well.

It's ALL good, done well.

I know people who've goaded wild hogs onto handheld spears...........I got no problem wi' dat! I also know a guy personally who dropped onto a deer from a tree, with his KNIFE!!! (It didn't work out so well for heem :D:D:D) But I got no problem wi' DAT neither!


LOL


al
 
Al I guess you didn't read the story and see the picture of Mr Shehane's grizzly bear he shot with a small pistol in Precision Shooting Magazine?

Phil our friend winmod70 actualy thinks hes clever and we are dumb.He wants you to shoot a chicken because they tend to flop around at which point he'll say see I told you they are suffering.Its the oldest scam in the world and one of the ploys of the Violence Policy Center who he works for.They have a guy post a whoe bunch of junk in an effort to raise a ruckus then they send out flyers asking for donations and quoting posts from the various shooting forums.The head guys name is Diaz and winmod70 is one of his hackers looking for stories.They visit the 50 caliber boards all the time under a similar name.
Lynn


Damn! And I thought I had her,errr,him,pegged clear back on page 9.:D
 
I think I might know where this "chicken" thing originated. In an episode of the TV show "The Unit" it shows the Special Forces guys training by shooting a marked chicken from a flock of feeding chickens.


LOL



al
 
Alinwa

Al I was just checking to see if you read the story.

Also if you had built a heavy Calfee style tuner none of this would be posted past the post by The BountyHunter.We would all ignore this post completely and argue about stopping the muzzle.It does work.
Lynn
 
WinMod70

Hey Model70 I want you to read this lengthy report about Alaska hunters.I want you to remember we are shooting off of a bench with a spotter and consider 9 inch 5 shot groups as a sign we need a new barrel.You also really need to remember were your at.You seem to keep getting caught up in the emotion rather than understanding you are writing to some of the finest marksman in the world.We want to inform on this board and not to send you away with a sense of resentment.

Cartridges of Alaska's Hunters – Too Much Gun?

As Southcentral hunters prepared for the 1999 hunting season Lee Rogers, rangemaster at the Alaska Department of Fish and Game's Rabbit Creek Range in Anchorage, conducted a survey of 1,848 Alaskan hunters. Rogers surveyed hunters to find out what cartridges Alaskan hunters are choosing for their big game hunting. According to Lee, hunters sighted in rifles using 70 different cartridges during the July to September survey.
The most popular cartridge with Southcentral hunters is the tried and true .30-06, used by 387 or 21 percent of hunters. The .30-06 was closely followed by the .300 Winchester Magnum with 342, and the .338 Winchester Magnum with 339. Lee says these three cartridges combined are used by almost six out of ten Southcentral hunters. There was a huge drop from the .338 Winchester to the next most popular cartridge, the 7mm Remington Magnum with 157 users.
Lee also looked at cartridges by caliber. The 30 caliber, for almost 60 years the choice of the U.S. military, boasted 912 users or almost exactly one-half of all hunters surveyed. The highly popular .30-06 and .300 Winchester Magnum are joined in this group by the .308 Winchester, .30-30, .307 Winchester, .300 Savage, .300 Weatherby Magnum, and the new .300 Remington Ultra Magnum.
Taking a distant second place were the cartridges using .338 diameter bullets. The increasingly popular .338 Winchester was joined in this group by the wildcat .338-06 and the .340 Weatherby Magnum. Almost one out of five hunters are using these medium-bore rifles for their big game hunting.
The third most popular caliber proved to be the 7mm. Led by the 7mm Remington Magnum, the 7mm clan had 202 users or about 1 of 10 Southcentral hunters. The 280 Remington, 7X57 Mauser, 7mm-08, and 7mm Shooting Times Westerner were used by a total of 42 hunters.
The classic Alaskan brown bear cartridge, the .375 H&H showed well, being used by 116 or 6.3 percent of all the hunters surveyed. Cartridges with the word "Magnum" in their name accounted for 1086 or 58.7 percent of all cartridges used.
This last statistic is the most interesting, according to Lee Rogers, who talks with and watches over 15,000 shooters each year. Many hunters, says Rogers, are uncomfortable with their loud, hard-recoiling magnums. Lee says that when a hunter is shooting a hard-kicking slobber-knocker" magnum, he or she often sights-in the rifle from a bench rest as quickly as possible and then packs up and leaves the range. Sometimes the hunter may even have to quit before the rifle is fully ready for the hunting fields.
To confirm his theory that too much gun frequently results in too little practice, Rogers conducted a short study on hunters' ability to shoot their rifles from hunting positions at game-sized targets. During the summer of 1999, Lee asked more than 80 hunters to chronograph their hunting loads to determine the actual velocity. Hunters sighted in their rifles under Lee's expert supervision on a secure, stable bench rest. After sighting in, hunters were asked to shoot three shots at the vital, heart-lung zone of a full-sized moose silhouette, standing broadside at a distance of 100 yards. The individuals in the study averaged 19 years of hunting experience.

Rogers says that less than one-half (46 percent) of hunters placed all three shots in the 16-inch by 24-inch vital zone. Twenty-eight percent of all shots taken would have wounded rather than immediately killed the moose. Most of the wounding shots are, in the opinion of Rogers, the result of too much gun and too little practice from the basic hunting positions of sitting, kneeling, and off-hand. Only about one out of ten hunters practices shooting from these hunting positions after sighting in their rifle, states rangemaster Rogers. This lack of practical practice, compounded by the use of a gun that is simply unpleasant to shoot, is likely to result in wounding and crippling animals. In a Department of Fish and Game telephone survey of Alaskan hunters, 38 percent said they had killed a big game animal that had been previously wounded by another hunter. According to Rogers, the results of this survey seem to confirm what he sees daily.
Do Alaskan hunters need these big-kicking magnums for big game? Not really, say most biologists, hunter educators, and experienced big game hunters. Big game animals are not killed by foot-pounds of kinetic energy or some mystical "knock-down" power. Big game is consistently, quickly, and humanely killed by accurate, precise placement of a well-constructed bullet in the vital heart-lung area. A cartridge loaded with a 180 grain Nosler (partition bullet) fired from the 94-year-old .30-06 will almost always pass completely through a moose or caribou, taking out both lungs. Rogers says that hunters should find a cartridge and gun they can shoot comfortably enough to fire 30 to 40 rounds during a practice session. After sighting in, all the hunter's practice should be from hunting positions likely to be used in the field.
Furthermore, when hunters chronograph their magnum factory loads they are often surprised they are getting so much buck and bang and so little gain. For example, during Roger's survey 15 hunters using .300 Winchester Magnum factory ammunition loaded with 180 grain bullets averaged 2,919 feet per second for 45 shots. Twelve different .30-06 rifles using factory ammunition loaded with 180-grain bullets chronographed 2,644 feet per second. See, some say, you get 275 feet per second difference! In the real world of hunting that works out to a gain of about 25 yards in range in exchange for easily one-third more recoil and a hefty increase in muzzle blast!
What about bears, hunters ask? Shouldn't Alaskan hunters have a magnum in case I have a run-in with 'ol fuzzy? Bear experts say that alertness in the field and keen observation skills are better protection than a magnum rifle. Analysis of bear encounters reveals the fact that most surprise encounters with a bear are just that, a surprise. Fortunately for bear and man, the bear usually swaps ends and runs away. In the rare event of a genuine charge the distance is typically measured in feet, and the hunter most likely carrying his rifle slung over the shoulder or in one hand. Under these circumstances he has no real chance to gather himself, ram a cartridge in the chamber and make an accurate, aimed shot at any vital area. In the even more unlikely event that the hunter is carrying his rifle "at-the-ready" and is able to take an aimed shot, a well-placed .30-06 will do more good than a poorly placed .300 or even .375 magnum. Most of us are simply better off hunting with a partner, remaining alert to bear sign, avoiding dense thickets where visibility is virtually zip, and quickly moving game meat away from the gut pile.
Hunters are responsible for wise use of our wildlife resource and using too much gun that results in wounded and crippled animals is not what we should aim for when we hunt.

Model70 I hope you read this entire thread and understand what it says about your everyday hunter.
Lynn
 
Hey Model70 I want you to read this lengthy report about Alaska hunters.I want you to remember we are shooting off of a bench with a spotter and consider 9 inch 5 shot groups as a sign we need a new barrel.You also really need to remember were your at.You seem to keep getting caught up in the emotion rather than understanding you are writing to some of the finest marksman in the world.We want to inform on this board and not to send you away with a sense of resentment.

Cartridges of Alaska's Hunters – Too Much Gun?

As Southcentral hunters prepared for the 1999 hunting season Lee Rogers, rangemaster at the Alaska Department of Fish and Game's Rabbit Creek Range in Anchorage, conducted a survey of 1,848 Alaskan hunters. Rogers surveyed hunters to find out what cartridges Alaskan hunters are choosing for their big game hunting. According to Lee, hunters sighted in rifles using 70 different cartridges during the July to September survey.
The most popular cartridge with Southcentral hunters is the tried and true .30-06, used by 387 or 21 percent of hunters. The .30-06 was closely followed by the .300 Winchester Magnum with 342, and the .338 Winchester Magnum with 339. Lee says these three cartridges combined are used by almost six out of ten Southcentral hunters. There was a huge drop from the .338 Winchester to the next most popular cartridge, the 7mm Remington Magnum with 157 users.
Lee also looked at cartridges by caliber. The 30 caliber, for almost 60 years the choice of the U.S. military, boasted 912 users or almost exactly one-half of all hunters surveyed. The highly popular .30-06 and .300 Winchester Magnum are joined in this group by the .308 Winchester, .30-30, .307 Winchester, .300 Savage, .300 Weatherby Magnum, and the new .300 Remington Ultra Magnum.
Taking a distant second place were the cartridges using .338 diameter bullets. The increasingly popular .338 Winchester was joined in this group by the wildcat .338-06 and the .340 Weatherby Magnum. Almost one out of five hunters are using these medium-bore rifles for their big game hunting.
The third most popular caliber proved to be the 7mm. Led by the 7mm Remington Magnum, the 7mm clan had 202 users or about 1 of 10 Southcentral hunters. The 280 Remington, 7X57 Mauser, 7mm-08, and 7mm Shooting Times Westerner were used by a total of 42 hunters.
The classic Alaskan brown bear cartridge, the .375 H&H showed well, being used by 116 or 6.3 percent of all the hunters surveyed. Cartridges with the word "Magnum" in their name accounted for 1086 or 58.7 percent of all cartridges used.
This last statistic is the most interesting, according to Lee Rogers, who talks with and watches over 15,000 shooters each year. Many hunters, says Rogers, are uncomfortable with their loud, hard-recoiling magnums. Lee says that when a hunter is shooting a hard-kicking slobber-knocker" magnum, he or she often sights-in the rifle from a bench rest as quickly as possible and then packs up and leaves the range. Sometimes the hunter may even have to quit before the rifle is fully ready for the hunting fields.
To confirm his theory that too much gun frequently results in too little practice, Rogers conducted a short study on hunters' ability to shoot their rifles from hunting positions at game-sized targets. During the summer of 1999, Lee asked more than 80 hunters to chronograph their hunting loads to determine the actual velocity. Hunters sighted in their rifles under Lee's expert supervision on a secure, stable bench rest. After sighting in, hunters were asked to shoot three shots at the vital, heart-lung zone of a full-sized moose silhouette, standing broadside at a distance of 100 yards. The individuals in the study averaged 19 years of hunting experience.

Rogers says that less than one-half (46 percent) of hunters placed all three shots in the 16-inch by 24-inch vital zone. Twenty-eight percent of all shots taken would have wounded rather than immediately killed the moose. Most of the wounding shots are, in the opinion of Rogers, the result of too much gun and too little practice from the basic hunting positions of sitting, kneeling, and off-hand. Only about one out of ten hunters practices shooting from these hunting positions after sighting in their rifle, states rangemaster Rogers. This lack of practical practice, compounded by the use of a gun that is simply unpleasant to shoot, is likely to result in wounding and crippling animals. In a Department of Fish and Game telephone survey of Alaskan hunters, 38 percent said they had killed a big game animal that had been previously wounded by another hunter. According to Rogers, the results of this survey seem to confirm what he sees daily.
Do Alaskan hunters need these big-kicking magnums for big game? Not really, say most biologists, hunter educators, and experienced big game hunters. Big game animals are not killed by foot-pounds of kinetic energy or some mystical "knock-down" power. Big game is consistently, quickly, and humanely killed by accurate, precise placement of a well-constructed bullet in the vital heart-lung area. A cartridge loaded with a 180 grain Nosler (partition bullet) fired from the 94-year-old .30-06 will almost always pass completely through a moose or caribou, taking out both lungs. Rogers says that hunters should find a cartridge and gun they can shoot comfortably enough to fire 30 to 40 rounds during a practice session. After sighting in, all the hunter's practice should be from hunting positions likely to be used in the field.
Furthermore, when hunters chronograph their magnum factory loads they are often surprised they are getting so much buck and bang and so little gain. For example, during Roger's survey 15 hunters using .300 Winchester Magnum factory ammunition loaded with 180 grain bullets averaged 2,919 feet per second for 45 shots. Twelve different .30-06 rifles using factory ammunition loaded with 180-grain bullets chronographed 2,644 feet per second. See, some say, you get 275 feet per second difference! In the real world of hunting that works out to a gain of about 25 yards in range in exchange for easily one-third more recoil and a hefty increase in muzzle blast!
What about bears, hunters ask? Shouldn't Alaskan hunters have a magnum in case I have a run-in with 'ol fuzzy? Bear experts say that alertness in the field and keen observation skills are better protection than a magnum rifle. Analysis of bear encounters reveals the fact that most surprise encounters with a bear are just that, a surprise. Fortunately for bear and man, the bear usually swaps ends and runs away. In the rare event of a genuine charge the distance is typically measured in feet, and the hunter most likely carrying his rifle slung over the shoulder or in one hand. Under these circumstances he has no real chance to gather himself, ram a cartridge in the chamber and make an accurate, aimed shot at any vital area. In the even more unlikely event that the hunter is carrying his rifle "at-the-ready" and is able to take an aimed shot, a well-placed .30-06 will do more good than a poorly placed .300 or even .375 magnum. Most of us are simply better off hunting with a partner, remaining alert to bear sign, avoiding dense thickets where visibility is virtually zip, and quickly moving game meat away from the gut pile.
Hunters are responsible for wise use of our wildlife resource and using too much gun that results in wounded and crippled animals is not what we should aim for when we hunt.

Model70 I hope you read this entire thread and understand what it says about your everyday hunter.
Lynn


You like many on this forum continue to use all forms of excuses to prove you're better at killing animals that he average hunter but the none of you have given me an answer concerning the value of time of flight in your considerations of taking game. This report does not answer that question but rather gives a common sense solution to a novice hunter about cartridge choice but the last sentence of the report does state the hunters responsibility which I totally agree.
 
Winmod70

I don't recall you asking me a technical question but my bullet takes 1.205 seconds to make the trip to 1,000 yards.I don't shoot running deer and I don't shoot through heavy cover.I shoot from a solid bench and the deer are usually feeding on a bush.

I enclosed the report to show you what a average hunter with 19 years worth of experience shoots like at 100 yards.Less than half can put 3 shots into a moose's vital organs at 16X24 inches broadside standing.

I take a group of disabled veterans hunting every year from the St Helena V.A. hospital.Most of them can barely walk and it would be a chore of gigantic proportion to get them crawling through the woods.Most of them however will get atleast a shot at a buck anywhere from 285 yards to around 630 yards.In California we are allowed a disabled shooters permit allowing them to shoot from the truck.All of shooters choose to shoot from the bench and we have never had a wounded animal get away.

I am taking from your posts that you are not a guy seeking information or a guy who easily recognises the facts and that is probaly my fault for not communicating to you correctly.I showed you a report from a credible source telling you what the seasoned hunter with 19 years is capable of at 100 yards.You chose to ignore its results.You can go to the NBRSA news letter and see what a typical 5 or 10 shot group looks like for the various posters here but you choose not to.In hunting we don't shoot groups we only need a single good shot.For the life of me I can't see were the communication problem is here so I'll have to agree to disagree with your point of yiew entirely.
I do think however that after reading the included report you should start advocating your concerns at your local 100 yard range starting in August.You should convince the 54% that can't hit a standing moose broadside at 100 yards to limit there hunting to a more respectable 35 yards do to there limitations.
Good Luck with your quest whatever it may be.
Lynn
 
Nahhh winmod70, you're just not listening. The "time of flight thing" HAS been approached. You're trying to blow it out of proportion but it just isn't working, because it's go no validity. Trying to explain it to YOU is not possible, your time sense is oddly skewed. (Evidenced by your quote here "inside of a quarter of a second") It's a NON-issue! The animals fired upon from 1/2 to 3/4 mile out are acting in a predictable fashion.


You're showing that you're just another argumentative redneck, NOT someone concerned with ethics or learning. As Paul Simon wrote, typically "a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest." Only by rising above this propensity can you hope to move forward. You sound like a guy driving down the road in your ford escort loudly TELLING the racecar drive sitting next to you that his million dollar car cannot be driven "safely" in conditions where your escort would fail......GOOFY and uninformed all at the same time :rolleyes: I've had guys like you say things like "Well, even if the animal IS moving predictably, what about when it stops and picks up its head when it hears the shot?" "What about when it bolts because it's spooked by the muzzle flash?" etc etc......

Another technique is to wait for the animal to bed for a few minutes, not uncommon for un-spooked game. Then you'll get guys saying it's "unethical" to shoot an animal in its bed. GOOFY/stupid.


BUT, again I'll try.......... You'll have to take it on faith that TOF is 1.5-2 seconds @ 1K for your typical longe-range hunting rig. So you observe your quarry, you observe it AT LEISURE because he has no idea that you're around..............It's really NOT hard to predict where it's going to be in two seconds. It's easier than wingshooting a grouse or a duck........it's certainly "easier" than shooting a running deer at 50-100yds, something which a properly trained shooter can accomplish with boring regularity.


The PREDICTION of where the animal will be is easy.....hitting it still requires a major commitment.


one thousand one, one thousand two ................ it ain't Rocket Science!


al
 
OOOPS Lynn!

We doubled.

My post wasn't in any way a reply or response or modification of Lynn's, in fact his TOF number is more accurate than mine.


al
 
I don't recall you asking me a technical question but my bullet takes 1.205 seconds to make the trip to 1,000 yards.I don't shoot running deer and I don't shoot through heavy cover.I shoot from a solid bench and the deer are usually feeding on a bush.

I enclosed the report to show you what a average hunter with 19 years worth of experience shoots like at 100 yards.Less than half can put 3 shots into a moose's vital organs at 16X24 inches broadside standing.

I take a group of disabled veterans hunting every year from the St Helena V.A. hospital.Most of them can barely walk and it would be a chore of gigantic proportion to get them crawling through the woods.Most of them however will get atleast a shot at a buck anywhere from 285 yards to around 630 yards.In California we are allowed a disabled shooters permit allowing them to shoot from the truck.All of shooters choose to shoot from the bench and we have never had a wounded animal get away.

I am taking from your posts that you are not a guy seeking information or a guy who easily recognises the facts and that is probaly my fault for not communicating to you correctly.I showed you a report from a credible source telling you what the seasoned hunter with 19 years is capable of at 100 yards.You chose to ignore its results.You can go to the NBRSA news letter and see what a typical 5 or 10 shot group looks like for the various posters here but you choose not to.In hunting we don't shoot groups we only need a single good shot.For the life of me I can't see were the communication problem is here so I'll have to agree to disagree with your point of yiew entirely.
I do think however that after reading the included report you should start advocating your concerns at your local 100 yard range starting in August.You should convince the 54% that can't hit a standing moose broadside at 100 yards to limit there hunting to a more respectable 35 yards do to there limitations.
Good Luck with your quest whatever it may be.
Lynn

Now I guess you're going to tell me that you and others have the ability to read the animals mind and thus the time lapse is not a condition to consider. 1.205 seconds is a long time and a needless variable in taking game, thats why 300 yards has been listed by hunting publications for years as the extreme limit of hunting game with a rifle. The improvement in accuracy and velocity over the years since 300 yards was labled the standard does not make up for the inability to judge the animals ability to move; 1.205 seconds is just too long.
 
You're showing that you're just another argumentative redneck, NOT someone concerned with ethics or learning.

You're right about one thing, a Redneck would not consider 1000 yard shooting of animals ethical.
 
Winmod70

Model70 the bullets time of flight is the least of your worries at 1,000 yards.Like Alinwa says we aren't shooting at spooked animals at all.If an animal moves your screwed because our scopes field of view isn't large enough to allow instantaneous follow up shots.My rest weighs in at a skimpy 50 pounds not counting lead shot bags.
You couldn't even get on a animal that was moving with a heavygun were I hunt.

Oh don't put to much faith in those hunting magazines you read.I read a story of a famous Writer/Hunter making a running 275 yard shot on an antelope in wyomig one time.I used the very same guide and he said would you believe 75 yards and sleeping on the edge of a dry creek bed.He also said there are only two types of hunters and you really should pay attention to this.
The first type of hunter fires one shot and the trip is over.
The second type of hunter goes into town alot buying more ammunition.
Lynn
 
Winmod70

Lets put it this way even if a deer or you, with your abilities were to be at 1000 yard,and could see the smoke from the rifle when it goes off. Would you THINK fast enough to react, I doubt It, I'd even give it 2 second.
Now go away!
 
1.205 seconds is just too long.

For some people and circumstances. You obviously being one the way you feel.

But then maybe 300 yards is entirely too long too, regardless of what the gun rag writers say, (Boy now that is a credible, authoritative source for sure). Suggest you limit it to 30 yards to keep the chickens from flopping.:D

I made the first response post and hopefully this is the last. It is time for this thread to die the death it deserves and I hope it does not flop too much.

"You can always tell a Rock, but you cannot tell them much!"

BH
 
Lets put it this way even if a deer or you, with your abilities were to be at 1000 yard,and could see the smoke from the rifle when it goes off. Would you THINK fast enough to react, I doubt It, I'd even give it 2 second.
Now go away!

The most feeble deer I ever seen can move easily 2 feet in the 1.205 seconds that was given as a standard previously stated, now do you contend that you know what goes through the deers thought process during that time so that it will be exactly where you aimed; no way under the sun.
 
YUP!!!



Part of being a hunter is knowing what goes on in the little fellers mind!


Same with riding a horse or herding cows or trying to catch your wee escaped hamster.


They ain't rocket scientists!



al
 
Model70 the bullets time of flight is the least of your worries at 1,000 yards.

I couldn't agree with you more but you plus nobody else has explained how you know where the animal will be during the time it takes the bullet to get there.
 
puhh-LEEEEZE tell us now how they'll "flinch from the shot" in that 1.205 seconds :D:D:D:D:D


LOL



al





PS, ya' might wanna' go outside somewhere's and LOOK a thousand yards firstly though :) we had a guy on here a while back who talked about how while varminting he'd walk out to a thousand yards and leave his SHOE for reference and then on his way back he'd drop the other shoe off at 500............really good inside stuff there!
 
YUP!!!



Part of being a hunter is knowing what goes on in the little fellers mind!


Same with riding a horse or herding cows or trying to catch your wee escaped hamster.


They ain't rocket scientists!



al

Have I made contact with the great deer whisperer?
 
Back
Top