Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Hunting
Long Range Hunting & Shooting
Why a high shoulder shot?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Pdvdh" data-source="post: 194768" data-attributes="member: 4191"><p>Last fall I shot a bull caribou at 850 yds with a high shoulder hit which clipped both shoulder blades and took out the spine. The animal dropped in its tracks on the opposing mountain face, but continued moving it's head, neck, and front legs. He didn't die in the first two minutes and wasn't going to die without another shot - a fatal one. It was going to take about 35 minutes to get to where I could fire a killing round from closer range due to the terrain and distance needed to be covered to bring the animal into full view. The animal was horizontal on the ground and the only portion visible was the top of the head and the back of the neck almost down to about the junction with the front shoulders. Even that portion would have been obscured if the antlers weren't proping the head and neck up off the ground. The rest of the torso was pointed away from me and lie underneath the horizon of the knoll the animal fell on. In the effort to end this bull's life sooner than later, I took another shot and was fortunate to hit the much smaller lethal target now available to me, which was the neck. This second shot didn't dead center the neck vertebrae, but grazed the vertabrae and was close enough to damage the central nervous system such that the animal expired very quickly after impact. Point is, I'd have preferred to double lung the animal and watch him fall a little later - dead. </p><p></p><p>I will agree that the immediate impact from the high shoulder hit does seem to impart a physiological nervous system response that can be immediately or at least momentarily disabling at the longer ranges in comparison to simply punching out both lungs. In my observations, the same thing applies at closer ranges also. And I see merit in the argument that striking bone could help ensure bullet expansion at long range. I consider the range and terminal bullet velocity prior to taking a long shot and try to ensure there will be enough ramaining velocity to initiate expansion. It sounds like the Berger VLD bullets are performing very well in that regard, from what I've read on this forum. And I agree that it's normally easier to allow for elevation at long range than for the windage. </p><p></p><p>I'm not following the argument that there's the benefit of more windage error with the shoulder shot. I've got to allow for the wind whether I'm centering the kill zone or aiming nearer one edge of it (shoulders). If I don't allow for windage properly while aiming for the shoulders, I can wound the animal in front of the shoulders or end up just fine in the other direction with a fatal hit through the lungs. Aiming just behind the front shoulders I can tolerate some point of impact shift in either direction and still have a lethal hit. </p><p></p><p>I agree the front shoulder shot can kill the animal just as effectively as lung shots missing the front shoulders at long range. But I think there's very little difference in lethality between the two, and point of aim for the lung shot allows a bit more latitude for impact error in <strong>any</strong> and all directions, compared to targeting the shoulder.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Pdvdh, post: 194768, member: 4191"] Last fall I shot a bull caribou at 850 yds with a high shoulder hit which clipped both shoulder blades and took out the spine. The animal dropped in its tracks on the opposing mountain face, but continued moving it's head, neck, and front legs. He didn't die in the first two minutes and wasn't going to die without another shot - a fatal one. It was going to take about 35 minutes to get to where I could fire a killing round from closer range due to the terrain and distance needed to be covered to bring the animal into full view. The animal was horizontal on the ground and the only portion visible was the top of the head and the back of the neck almost down to about the junction with the front shoulders. Even that portion would have been obscured if the antlers weren't proping the head and neck up off the ground. The rest of the torso was pointed away from me and lie underneath the horizon of the knoll the animal fell on. In the effort to end this bull's life sooner than later, I took another shot and was fortunate to hit the much smaller lethal target now available to me, which was the neck. This second shot didn't dead center the neck vertebrae, but grazed the vertabrae and was close enough to damage the central nervous system such that the animal expired very quickly after impact. Point is, I'd have preferred to double lung the animal and watch him fall a little later - dead. I will agree that the immediate impact from the high shoulder hit does seem to impart a physiological nervous system response that can be immediately or at least momentarily disabling at the longer ranges in comparison to simply punching out both lungs. In my observations, the same thing applies at closer ranges also. And I see merit in the argument that striking bone could help ensure bullet expansion at long range. I consider the range and terminal bullet velocity prior to taking a long shot and try to ensure there will be enough ramaining velocity to initiate expansion. It sounds like the Berger VLD bullets are performing very well in that regard, from what I've read on this forum. And I agree that it's normally easier to allow for elevation at long range than for the windage. I'm not following the argument that there's the benefit of more windage error with the shoulder shot. I've got to allow for the wind whether I'm centering the kill zone or aiming nearer one edge of it (shoulders). If I don't allow for windage properly while aiming for the shoulders, I can wound the animal in front of the shoulders or end up just fine in the other direction with a fatal hit through the lungs. Aiming just behind the front shoulders I can tolerate some point of impact shift in either direction and still have a lethal hit. I agree the front shoulder shot can kill the animal just as effectively as lung shots missing the front shoulders at long range. But I think there's very little difference in lethality between the two, and point of aim for the lung shot allows a bit more latitude for impact error in [B]any[/B] and all directions, compared to targeting the shoulder. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Hunting
Long Range Hunting & Shooting
Why a high shoulder shot?
Top