Capable of...When I do my part...?

[entoptics]

I apologize for the "letters in front of my name" comment. At the time I thought it would convey the years of training in regards to assessing accuracy and precision, and more importantly the application of the scientific method.

I see how it comes off as an "Rule 4 Violation" hole statement.

I've shot a lot more than most. I've assessed data a lot more than most. That's all I meant.

 

[entoptics]

To the PRS guy, walking 1-2moa shooting 'at' targets with the aid of spotting: you should never take any of that hunting...

I've never tried it, but I think PRS would be an outstanding training tool for hunting. As long as the data is unbiased. One must remember that recording misses is just as important as recording hits. A good hunter/competitor would record first round hits/misses, and use that training to evaluate accuracy/precision for the hunt.

 

[greenejc]

I would have to say that all quality rifles are better than the shooter 90 % of the time if fed really good ammo.

I competed in different types of matches for most of 50 years and there is no doubt that human error played a major roll in who won the match or shot to the ability of the rifle.

Few if any can shoot there best every time and a well prepared rifle and ammo combination has difficulty doing it, so the only reason for less than perfect has to be the shooter.

Even test guns that are clamped down and cant move will not shoot the same group size every time.

So when I hear someone say that their rifle is capable of 1/4 MOA that simply means that the rifle has done it before, but not very often. Shooting is not an exact science
that a certain group size can be achieved every time. Anyone that says that they can shoot sub 1/10th MOA consistently have a load of that green stuff that is found in a stock yard.

I personally don't care what other people shoot, only what I shoot. And I don't believe anything I hear and only half of what I see.

Just My opinion

J E CUSTOM

Are you the one making muzzle brakes? I agree with you about both the .25moa and the 1/10 moa statements. If someone could consistently shoot 1/10th MOA, they would be able to win the National Benchrest championship every time. But I'm pretty sure that no-one has done a 10 shot group like that in competition yet. I might be wrong. And yes, I've had lots of shooters tell me about their rifles which shoot like a lazer at 100 yards, and always go through the same hole. I don't have one that will do that, although I have shot groups like that. But they are shot only when everything is just perfect and I got lucky. I take pictures of them and send them to my brothers to make them jealous. But I'm quite happy if I post 5 shot groups that are 1 inch or less and centered about 0.75 in. above point of aim on a still day. The reason for being centered so low above point of aim is that I use a lot of Shepherd DRS scopes on my rifles. They have my bullet drop incorporated into the verticle crosshair in the front focal plane, and that puts my shots into the high third of a deer at ranges out to 700 yards using their aim points with all the rifles that I use for deer and elk.

 

[J E Custom]

I apologize for the "letters in front of my name" comment. At the time I thought it would convey the years of training in regards to assessing accuracy and precision, and more importantly the application of the scientific method.

I see how it comes off as an "Rule 4 Violation" hole statement.

I've shot a lot more than most. I've assessed data a lot more than most. That's all I meant.

No need to apologize to anyone, This should be just a discussion and as long as we don't get personal or use bad language. Most Of us want to hear other peoples opinions and some of us don't mind expressing ours.

Most of the time these post are enlightening and make us realize that there are others with different opinions and methods of doing things. Discussions are good, Personal attacks aren't. I learn something every day on this site that's why I visit it so often.

J E CUSTOM

 

[nicholasjohn]

I apologize for the "letters in front of my name" comment. At the time I thought it would convey the years of training in regards to assessing accuracy and precision, and more importantly the application of the scientific method.

I see how it comes off as an "Rule 4 Violation" hole statement.

I've shot a lot more than most. I've assessed data a lot more than most. That's all I meant.

I don't think you need to apologize for that. I took it the way you said you meant it. Using scientific methodology to analyze our findings is what makes all this testing pay off with the desired results. Training in the sciences is beneficial in that regard. That training coupled with a ton of shooting experience is even more valuable. Thanks.

 

[TRG65]

To the PRS guy, walking 1-2moa shooting 'at' targets with the aid of spotting: you should never take any of that hunting...

Please explain. What do you mean?

Reference and judging a shot based on vital zone size is quite reasonable. Vitals are 8-12 inches on a deer depending on who you ask. Translating that to MOA seems a reasonable way to BEGIN the approach to judging the reasonability of a shot.

What do you use spotting for? Other than finding and judging the game. It should be used for watching the conditions leading up to a shot. A spotting scope is much better for seeing mirage and conditions than a rifle scope, hence why on some shooting teams, it is really the spotter "making" the shot. The shooter uses the hold/call from the spotter because of the better capabilities of that optic. If you are only using your spotting to see/correct misses, you are missing the full capability of the tool.

Similarly with competition, why is that not something that builds skill and isn't skill exactly what you do want to take hunting with you? PRS/NRL is built around executing good shots quickly from improvised positions. Isn't that what you do when you have to shoot off a log for a rest when hunting? Isn't knowing how to build that position quickly to be able to get a stable, makable shot when the elk stops before moving into the timber something that could be the difference between a filled tag or tag soup. Isn't knowing you have shot similar positions and know that shot is too far for your skill level as equally valuable to knowing how to build the position.

 

[degreen]

I took some time one day, and watched some YouTube. I watched several teams with multi thousand dollar guns, multi thousand dollar equipment miss a target at a little over 1500 yards. This target was I believe slightly larger than 2 moa. This opened my eyes to see how hard it is to call all conditions perfectly.

 

[Mikecr]

For LONG RANGE HUNTING, we don't have to position ourselves badly in any regard. We don't have to snap off shots beyond our known capabilities.

We have all the time we need to better our situation for high percentage kill shots.
We can stalk game and use strategies to do this, getting back inside that needed to kill with single shots. If game presents in a way bad for this, then do not take any shots. Act with discipline.

 

[Greyfox]

I've never tried it, but I think PRS would be an outstanding training tool for hunting. As long as the data is unbiased. One must remember that recording misses is just as important as recording hits. A good hunter/competitor would record first round hits/misses, and use that training to evaluate accuracy/precision for the hunt.

I compete in PRS, and yes it is an excellent training tool for hunting. PRS is probably my favorite of all the various forms of rifle competition. Any competing I've participated in over the years has always been done with the goal of improving my hunting /shooting skills...my primary passion. IMO, PRS does build many skills that can be applied to hunting. Building solid shooting positions, form, trigger control, wind/mirage management, target acquisition, etc. Because shooting is done under time restraints, building speed is always in the forefront. There is a fundamental difference in psychology that does not transfer to hunting. PRS is a game of percentages. You can win a match with a 60-70% hit ratio.....there will be misses, many of them to learn from.
LRH, in the other hand, requires a different mindset. When that single hunting shot is taken, it must be taken with the absolute certainty of a hit to the vitals of the game animal. If this is not the case, the shot is forfeited, or the conditions corrected before proceeding.

 

[Deleted member 48126]

Hating on PRS is like the new cool guy hating on the 6.5 CM.

Real edgy to be a hater

 

[Clem Bronkoski]

Well hey now. I've been know to use this same line. Because unlike precision equipment the original poster mentioned a rifle, even one that can put all its bullets into the same hole, will suffer from human error. But sometimes the light is right, the wind is perfect, your trigger squeeze is dead nuts and the stars all align and the bullets do go into one hole. Other times, more often than not something goes awry and a bullet strays off its intended path. I know I have some rifles that will shoot better than I can get them to.

 

[entoptics]

Well hey now. I've been know to use this same line. Because unlike precision equipment the original poster mentioned a rifle, even one that can put all its bullets into the same hole, will suffer from human error. But sometimes the light is right, the wind is perfect, your trigger squeeze is dead nuts and the stars all align and the bullets do go into one hole. Other times, more often than not something goes awry and a bullet strays off its intended path. I know I have some rifles that will shoot better than I can get them to.

I'm not sure I agree, hence my OP.

A good shooter should be able to see the shot break. I'm nowhere near competitive level, and I can, every time. I also know pretty much exactly how tight I can hold (1/8-1/4 MOA with my bipod/bag). Add another 1/8-1/4 MOA in for not being great at perfectly consistent recoil, and I should be able to shoot a little less than 0.5 MOA plus what the rifle is "capable of". I've never owned, borrowed, or ever shot ANY rifle that would consistently give me anywhere near 1/2 MOA, best is probably my 300WM, which averages pretty close to 7/8 MOA currently.

The thing is, I think people misinterpret random chance as "what's possible". Bullets randomly land, and with enough of a sample size, they will randomly land close together.

This is not "what the rifle is capable of". Apply that logic to lottery tickets and you see how silly it is. "Just bought a scratch ticket and I won a $1000! That means I'm capable of winning the lottery, when I do my part!"

The aforementioned 300WM has printed 7 four shot groups below 0.6 MOA, 5 below 0.5 MOA, and 3 below 0.4 MOA. Problem is, I've recorded about 70 groups with it. 3-5 times, it's shot groups that are smaller than I can physically hold...See what I mean about random chance?

 

[greenejc]

No need to apologize to anyone, This should be just a discussion and as long as we don't get personal or use bad language. Most Of us want to hear other peoples opinions and some of us don't mind expressing ours.

Most of the time these post are enlightening and make us realize that there are others with different opinions and methods of doing things. Discussions are good, Personal attacks aren't. I learn something every day on this site that's why I visit it so often.

J E CUSTOM

I thoroughly agree with Mr. J.E. Custom. You shouldn't apologize or have to apologize for your accomplishments or skills.

 

[Mikecr]

I don't hate PRS. I think it's fantastic and would love to do it.
In my view it applies as tactical to urban warfare, which could really matter soon (the way things are going). And of course any trigger time and shooting development must help at least somewhat with shooting across the board.
My objection is with any competitive notions built on averages, aggs, preconditions, and practicalities built into competitive formats -as applicable to actual hunting.

There are folks out there generalizing that hunting is merely 'shooting at' game as they would any targets. This, including low percentage, inaccurate shooting. Some throw hail marys just to test their luck I guess.. Every year people are killed by those who don't even bother to identify their target. They're just compelled (by poor perspectives) to take them shots, while they still can..
That's more of military tactics than hunting, and there is no appropriate application of it in hunting.

Of course there are disciplined responsible hunters, who compete.
So my views on this will be both right and wrong. But it's easy enough to spot where I'm right. There are folks around you who's hunting perspectives should never be encouraged. Same applies to some concealed carry folks.
If my wife was armed, I give her a week, she'd end up in jail and rightfully so, for killing someone she didn't have to.
Wrong perspectives..