Long Range Hunting - some match data

[taliv]

the shoot for the green PRS match in Oklahoma this past weekend had an interesting stage. Four plywood deer silhouettes were positioned at different distances with an 8" circle cut out and a steel gong hung in it, representing the vital zone. Shooters had to start with the closest deer and get two hits on it before progressing to the next farthest one. Max round count was 10 rounds.

Of course, it's not a laboratory "scientific" test, but it's certainly interesting data. imho It's quite a bit easier than an actual hunt because the deer didn't move. The ranges were known. It was shot from a very stable prone position with no grass or other interference. The deer were perfectly broadside. AND you had several dozen very good shooters sharing wind calls with each other and adjusting their plans based on watching the impacts as others shot the course.

Over the day, most shooters were holding between 5-10mph wind on this stage, which is pretty dang calm for western oklahoma

The results? out of 87 shooters

17% couldn't even get 2 hits on an 8" vitals area at 425 yards with 10 tries
32% got 2 hits at 425 yards, but couldn't get 2 hits at 574 yards
44% got 2 hits at 425 and 574, but couldn't get 2 hits at 754 yards
7% got 2 hits at 425, 574 and 754, but weren't able to get 2 hits at 942 yards
0% got 2 hits on all 4 deer

Put another way,
83% hit the 425 yard deer (even though some may have taken all 10 rounds to get their 2 hits)
51% hit the 574 yard deer
7% hit the 754 yard deer
nobody hit all 4

Equally interesting, only ONE shooter in that 7% was in the top 15. i.e. the match winner only hit 2 deer. Of the 14 guys behind him, only one got 3 deer. So it isn't really the case that we should be confident that these are high percentage targets for the "best shooters"

Also, I know several shooters did take a shot at nearby rocks to get a wind call before engaging the deer targets, since you couldn't see misses on the plywood at that distance. So that strategy is factored into the results.

overall, i shot poorly, but i did get 2 hits on 3 deer but missed the 942 yard deer.

 

[Laphroaig]

Those results are interesting. What kind of rigs were the competitors using?

Laphroaig

 

[notaglockfanboy]

Sounds like you guys should practice on deer targets more often.

 

[jmr40]

As Dirty Harry once said, "A mans got to know his limitations". My personal comfort zone is 300 yards. Under perfect conditions with a solid rest, a good shot angle and zero wind I might shoot at 400.

I've simply never practiced enough to feel comfortable at longer ranges, but know people who are. I have a brother-in-law who has 3 one shot kills on elk and mule deer out of 3 attempts at ranges between 650 and 700 yards.

An 8" kill zone is a bit small too, that would be a tiny deer that most would pass on anyway. A 10-12" kill zone is more realistic on a deer of any size and 16-20" would be on par for larger game such as elk or moose.

 

[taliv]

google precision rifle blog what the pros use to see what kind of gear people are using. mostly stuff like GAP and surgeon and Accuracy International type rifles.

nota, yeah, no kidding!

 

[MrBorland]

"A mans got to know his limitations"

To that end, one could level the playing field by letting shooters choose to stop at any point, or go on, with the caveat that they loose all their accrued points if they choose to start the next target but failed to get those hits.

Surprisingly enough, though, it doesn't sound like the playing field needed to be leveled on this exercise, which I suppose was one of your points.

Cool exercise, though. I'd like to give something like that a whirl sometime.

 

[1911 guy]

To put it in perspective, that 942 yard deer has a vital zone .81 MOA wide. That's not much at all. If you're a 2 MOA shooter (and many aren't even that), you've got no business shooting live game beyond 350 yards under perfect conditions.

Matches like this are a good thing, it stretches a shooter and his equipment. It also drives home the reality of what it takes to make hits.

 

[MCgunner]

As Dirty Harry once said, "A mans got to know his limitations". My personal comfort zone is 300 yards. Under perfect conditions with a solid rest, a good shot angle and zero wind I might shoot at 400.

Same here. I've simply not had the facilities to ever practice beyond 300 yards. I have made solid hits at over 300, though, on a mulie and a coyote. Nothing I've ever shot was beyond 400 and the vast majority was under 200.

 

[Water-Man]

Sounds like fun.

What was the purpose of allowing two shots per target? In over sixty years of hunting, there have been few occasions more than one shot was possible.

One shot per target would have been a more realistic test for hunting purposes.

 

[taliv]

One shot could have been luck so they wanted a little more evidence that you could repeat it
They actually called the second shot a confirmation shot

 

[MtnCreek]

If you're a 2 MOA shooter (and many aren't even that),

I can be less than moa with solid position, but less than optimum position and conditions can throw me off pretty bad. Shooting a 8" plate at ~470yds a few times over the last week or so. One day I'm prone / rear bag with ~5mph wind from 10 o'clock. After several rds there's one big shiny spot a hair left of center. A couple days later, same setup, but really variable wind from near nothing to 18mph and from 10 o'clock to 1 o'clock. I missed the plate all together twice. Yesterday, same yardage, but no rear bag (used left hand) prone with light breeze. I did ok, but nothing special (stressed from work). Then shot from the truck toolbox, bipod, no rear support and had to stretch to get correct height behind the rifle. I missed once, hit once (was surprised I hit) then called it. Just before that I was spotting for a friend off the truck hood, crosshairs were all over the place. Improvised position took a ~moa setup to > 2 moa and I knew what the range was because I shoot there all the time. I also had all the time I needed to dial elevation and correct parallax.

 

[sage5907]

taliv, was that match near Seiling, Oklahoma? If it was that match, a good friend shot 4th in the group. He said the 1st place shooter was only separated from the 4th place shooter by 10 points. Also, there was a tie for 4th place and a difficult to shoot target was used as the tie breaker.

 

[SVTOhio]

Would be really fun to try. Would be cool to get some guys out there with real hunting rigs. I would love to get my 400$ 25-06 out there to see what I can do

 

[taliv]

yep, sage, ~7 mi east of chester. and 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th place were all local guys so you may know several

SVT, yeah no kidding. I'd say these guns all had an advantage over "real hunting rigs" because these are all long, heavy barrels and stocks and benchrest quality actions, bipods, brakes or suppressors, big scopes, etc. avg gun probably weighs 15-20 lbs.

you can see a lot of pictures here https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.10100114727818109.1073741828.177802738&type=1&l=5e6d260c0d

 

[sage5907]

SVT, I shot one of the ranges 3 weeks ago with a Winchester 70 featherweight 30-06. On a 10 inch steel circle at 300 yards I hit every shot. On a 13 inch steel circle at 400 yards I hit every shot. Had trouble at 500 yards because with my hearing protection I couldn't tell if I was hitting the steel. The only way I knew if I was missing was to see the dirt fly with a miss. My shooting buddy started yanking off his hearing protection after I fired to hear the clang when the bullet arrived down range. It's difficult to hit at 500 yards with a fixed scope setting and from now on I'll limit my shooting to 400 yards with a deer rifle. I did fairly well at 500 yards by using the cross bar on the target holder to estimate holdover. I do have some rifles with long range Leupold M3 scopes and they would work for the longer ranges. Also, I was using a shooting stick instead of shooting prone. taliv, that range was near Griever Canyon, and I do some of my deer hunting less than 10 miles from there.

 

[sage5907]

taliv, I liked your comment about missing the 942 yard deer. Heck, when I went to one of those ranges the first time I couldn't even figure out where the 942 yard target was located! You're right I do know several of those guys. Most are real competitors. 20 years ago many of them were shooting 3D archery tournaments so it was just natural for them to get into long range rifle shooting when it became popular. Thanks for posting your comments in the hunting section.

 

[Ankeny]

An 8" kill zone is a bit small too, that would be a tiny deer that most would pass on anyway. A 10-12" kill zone is more realistic on a deer of any size and 16-20" would be on par for larger game such as elk or moose.

True enough. Frankly, an 8 inch plate at 400 yards with a zero value wind is a real gimme. FWIW, most of the long range hunters that I know are happy with a "kill zone" that runs from the neck to the diaphram and spine to the brisket. Sooner or later they will figure out the "high shoulder shot" includes a lot of area with no vitals.

 

[MCMXI]

Also, I know several shooters did take a shot at nearby rocks to get a wind call before engaging the deer targets, since you couldn't see misses on the plywood at that distance.

This is the key point here and probably why the hit percentages were poor. I've shot a lot of F-Class matches where hits inside an 8" circle at 600 yards are easy, even in 5 to 10mph full value winds. However, the hits are marked allowing for corrections that help rather than hurt. It can be very frustrating when you don't know if you're missing left, right, up or down.

I want to make one of those targets now.

 

[Double Naught Spy]

This is the key point here and probably why the hit percentages were poor. I've shot a lot of F-Class matches where hits inside an 8" circle at 600 yards are easy, even in 5 to 10mph full value winds. However, the hits are marked allowing for corrections that help rather than hurt. It can be very frustrating when you don't know if you're missing left, right, up or down.

Well, that is sort of the point about hunting. You usually don't get the benefit of a couple of practice shots near a given animal to assess the range and range corrections.

 

[MCMXI]

Of course! taliv is making a good point with this thread. If competent and practiced shooters with heavy tactical rifles shooting high BC bullets in near ideal conditions on static, known distance targets, where some took sighter shots, weren't able to hit an 8" kill zone, what does that say about the "typical" hunter. I got the message loud and clear. Considering that most hunters are shooting much lighter rifles under less than ideal conditions, shooting lower BC bullets and with more variables e.g. animal movement, range etc., it goes without saying that we should give this some serious thought. I shot a mule deer last year at 203 yards and destroyed the bottom third of the heart. It was an easy shot, but like others, I wouldn't shoot at a game animal much beyond 300 yards with any of my hunting rifles.

I've heard hunters up here refer to the kill zone on an elk as being the size of a trash can lid. Personally I prefer the 8" approach. A coworker shot and killed a cow elk last year at 500 + yards using a light weight hunting rifle. I came to work on a Monday to hear him talking about his great shot so I asked him what the bullet drop was for his .308 Win at 500 yards +. He had no idea and was really surprised when I told him it was over 48". It turns out that he had ranged the animal incorrectly too. So I walked away shaking my head telling him it was a lucky shot. He had never shot at any target beyond 200 yards prior to that hunt and only shoots a few times a year. Sadly he's fairly typical of many hunters.

 

[SmokingFrye]

The fact that they even have competitions like this is absolutely appalling. I spent a lot of my life taking people out to hunt mule deer and elk in Nevada, where some of the longest of shots are required, and in nearly a decade, I could count on one hand the number of hunters that could shoot well at a distance beyond 300 yards.

The problem that I have with this particular competition is that it makes people think that they can take shots that they really shouldn't be taking. Those who spend their time sitting in tree stands and/or sitting at the base of a tree in thick woods (pretty much everyone east of the Mississippi), probably could not visually judge what 300 yards really is, much less make an accurate shot when adrenaline kicks in and after hiking the mountains for miles on a western hunt. And yes, I had plenty of "match shooters" that swore they could hit anything, even at distance beyond 500 yards. None of them actually made the shot btw, mostly because I wouldn't let them take it. Each usually let me get them closer to 300 yards where they still promptly missed.

It drives me crazy every time I see the words "hunting" and "match" thrown together, since very seldom are the two skill-sets related. :banghead:

Now I'll get off my soap box.

 

[Double Naught Spy]

The problem that I have with this particular competition is that it makes people think that they can take shots that they really shouldn't be taking.

Yeah, I hate it when people try to develop good shooting skills before going to hunt. What are they thinking, right? Why would they shoot at a target that looked like quarry. That is just crazy talk. After all and like you said, these things don't have anything to do with one another. Better that folks just head out into the woods and just start blasting until they have a clue, huh?

You actually see any of your clients shoot in a match? Just because somebody shoots in a match doesn't mean that they have the skills to shoot very well.

You probably didn't spend any time vetting your clients skills before taking their money either, I suspect. Most guides don't. Their job is to get the client on the animal, not to make sure that the client can actually take the animal.

When you start having classes on long range hunting let us know.

 

[SmokingFrye]

Actually DNS, we actually ALWAYS spent the first day shooting with the client to understand his or her limitations. Oh, and we spent time hiking with them to understand his or her physical limitations as well. Don't lump all "guides" together unless you know all "guides", it doesn't make you look very good.

The problem that I have with the competitions in this thread is that people are practicing shots at 500, 700, even 900+ yards at game-imitating targets, making them think that they can/should take such shots in the field.

And no, I never watched a client shoot in a match. I could care less if a client is able to hit a 10" gong at 1000 yards in a match competition, unless he did it after climbing 7 miles of rock and steep mountains and then added the rush of having a massive bull elk in his or her scope. You did actually get that assumption right. Good work.

 

[taliv]

frye, it appears you've totally missed the point. I suspect the match directors knew people wouldn't do well and set it up to prove the point that people would not get hits, otherwise they wouldn't have required a 'confirmation shot'.

also, you might be surprised at how physical some of the matches are. this isn't an f-class match. there is just as much "rush" in matches as hunting. (after all, there was over $15k in cash prizes, plus a lot of high dollar gear on the table)

i don't know why you would get so upset over matches that try to duplicate hunts. after all, you just said you spend a day shooting with your client. what do you do that couldn't be done in matches?

 

[1911 guy]

I happen to agree with Taliv and suspect SmokingFrye missed the point of this conversation. Reading the opening post does not lend itself to the conclusion "Oh, it's easy so I'll blast away at a 600 yard animal."

While I do heartily agree with SmokingFrye that only ethical shots within the limitations of the shooter and conditions should ever be taken on a live animal, competitions such as these both expose the shooter to what his limitations are and help to slowly expand the envelope closer to the limitations of the equipment and conditions.