Does anyone here on this site hunt, or know of anyone who hunts dangerous game, using longrange specialized equipment and or longrange techniques? If so, what equipment do you, or they, use?
Please this is not a discussion about this favorite caliber or that, or the virtues of a CRF versus a PF action. I'd like true practical experience(s), combined with insite on equipment the used.
I am particularily thinking about griz and or brown bear at long ranges (500-1000 yards). Is this a feasible idea? If not why? If we can take elk sized animals and deer at exteme ranges... why not dangerous game like griz, lion or cape buffaloe? I can't help but think that many opportunities at these animals are passed every year due to a lack: of training, understanding of the real limitation(s) of ballistics, and or the proper equipment needed. If you have a tag, and the opportunity arises, why not execute the kill?
I know that many bears in Alaska are killed during spot and stalk hunting on foot, or via float trips and or coastal hunts in Alaska. Some bears are killed when the hunter is surprised at close range. Many are killed under 200 yards because of a guide or self imposed hunter range restriction.
Do you think the powerful .375s will get it done at longer ranges? IE .375 R.U.M.. I am currently leaning towards the .378 Weatherby pushing 300s grain at 3000 FPS. Or the .416 Rigby pushing 400 grain at 2600-2700 FPS.
I realize that any rifle 7mm Mag or above in performance will probably get it done to a certain pre-measured range. I want as a humane kill as possible at the longer ranges. Not one where the beast flails for minutes, while I watch thru glass.
What do you think will be the minimal foot pounds criteria used to select a load or round for large griz or brownies? I use 1000 FP for deer and think 1500 FP is about right for elk, moose, caribou etc etc. Consequently, I use these figures to gauge how far my shots can be with different weapons.
I will have the proper gun built for this task. Any input on what caliber, action to use, or barrell length etc etc.
Thanks in advance, I will execute in Alaska next year during the fall hunt, so please, any serious input will be considered. As for my abilities: I have considerable experience at long range, and will naturally focus my training accordingly.
I sat in on a discussion of this idea when I was hunting brown bears in Alaska last year. The guides had been considering this exact scenario, and they were pretty much in agreement that the .50BMG was the cartridge that they would consider. There are indeed some flats that offer very long shots at bears, the big consideration is wounding obviously. Nobody wants to get involved with following up a wounded bear in the alders, so the shot placement would be crucial. As for energy, break the scapula or disable the central nervous system and he is yours. These fellows were even considering using a boomer to enable handicapped hunters to experience an Alaskan hunt - possibly from blinds or even a floating shooting platform in a bay.
They had not heard of this being done but who knows, might be a very viable method of taking a big bear if the shooter is up the challenge.
Like Ian, I believe the first consideration is precise placement of the round so there's no tracking a wounded bear in the bush. With that in mind the problem for the larger bore cartridges (except the .50) is that it might be difficult to find a good bullet for 750 to 1000 yard shooting. I recently shot my 375 H&H long range and believe it would not be adequate beyond about 700 yards (I was shooting the 260 Accubond) due to accuracy issues. I also have a 416 Rigby and finding bullets is a little problem. Barnes makes a few Triple Shock bullets for the 416 with a BC in the .5 range (advertised). I haven't shot the 416 Rigby long range yet but I believe it'll also be limited by bullets. A 50 BMG might be too much but there are a few wildcat cartridges aruond that are .50 caliber and could use the benefit of the .50 750 A-Max and such. I believe George Gardner has a 50 caliber based on a Rigby case, "50 Battleship" as I recall.
The .338, pushing the 300 grain MK to 3000 (+) FPS, retains about 2100 FP plus or minus at 1000 yards, I believe? I'd like a larger frontal mass, but energy can't be discounted.
Dave, your right, the bigger boomer .375 (+) ballistically poop out quickly past 600-700 yards. Ive worked a .375 H&H at 500 yards, and believe it or not, the bullets barely scratched the steel plate. Splattered best described the effect! Not that I am dogging the .375 H&H, it is a real killer, proven all over the world, ballistically out to 400 yards. On the other hand, my souped up .300 WM shooting 200 gr MKs, dug a full 1/2 inch into the steel surface. You could literally feel the impact!
Ian, the .50 BMG is too much! I've dealt with them quite a few times here in the Army. While they are great hard target interdiction systems, they are a bit much IMHO for people, or any game except at 1600 yards and beyond. Just too much for maneuverbility's sakes in my hunting style.
Alaska is a mixed bag for sure. I like working the bush better than most, guess I'm nuts, but want the equipment available in case the opportunity presents itself at distance. All the while keeping the weapon reasonable enough for close in stuff too.
I'm not trying to start anything and I don't mean any disrespect, but how is a Brown bear (one of the most magnificent creature on earth) "dangerous game" when you shoot at it at "... 1000 yards" with a ".50 caliber" bullet? I'm sorry, but think about it, is it not the flushing of quail at your feet (and the difficulty that causes to shooting with a cool head) the sport in birdhunting and by the same token stalking into range of something that can bite back if you screw the pooch is what makes it "dangerous" and therefore sporting and very, very exciting to be up close and personal. I thinks it's remarkable when man and equipment can come together and take down an Elk with one shot at 1000 yards or a varmint at twice the range, but this is God's greatest predator (above us on the food chain) and I'd say that earns him a little more of a handicap on our part in this game. I'm open to other opinions----it's just how I feel now---and I am open to opposing views and even if I'm not persuaded, I still would like to be able to defend the legal rights of others on this issue, but presently, I'd have a hard time doing that with a straitface to an anti-hunter.