Bone to pick with new rifle owners - 100 yards out of the box

[Gregg C]

All these stories remind me of an old saying............
When you're dead,
you don't know you're dead,
only others feel the pain....
The same thing happens when you're stupid.

Oh my heck, I bout swallowed my cud!! I'm putting that one in my repertoire!!

 

[MtPockets]

Oh my heck, I bout swallowed my cud!! I'm putting that one in my repertoire!!

I would, but it hits too close to home!

 

[Rflshootr]

Oh my heck, I bout swallowed my cud!! I'm putting that one in my repertoire!!

2 things to remember...
1) who you heard it from
2) there is a plagiarism fee every time you use it.

 

[lyle2231]

Nice! I have a DAQ, forgive me as I have not hunted antelope, is that a trophy, or can you eat the "steak" also?

 

[Turpentine21]

I can't count the number of rifles I have zeroed for hunters because "in their words" they don't shoot well enough to zero a rifle. Or they can't handle the recoil to zero their rifle.
In the last few years I've heard the comment over and over. "What? the guy at the store told me the 6.5 Creedmore shot way flatter and was superior to the 270". Not so! Another favorite is " my 7mag shoots way flatter than the 270. Again, not at normal hunting distances. Well how high would you like me to set it at 100. "Oh it's so flat shooting I Ike it dead on at 100. That way I can shoot to 400 without having to hold over. These guys aren't proficient enough to take a 200 yard shot. Much less 400. If you really want to confuse them just mention ballistic coefficient and bullet design. Then there's the " i just can't seem to kill deer with my 270, I'm tired of all the blood trailing, so I bought a 300 win mag. That normally doesn't end well. My usual statement is that isn't the rifle. It's their shot placement that's the problem. That doesn't go over well.
Lastly, there's the Lead Sled. The lead sled adds to the length of pull of the rifle. This causes your head to sit at a different place on the comb. Your zero off the sled is generally not in the same place as it is off the shoulder. Sometimes significantly so. They may work for some but I simply do not like them. They can help get you close but you can bet I'll shoot a rifle from the shoulder in a field position before Id consider taking it hunting.

 

[Ol' Red]

I can't count the number of rifles I have zeroed for hunters because "in their words" they don't shoot well enough to zero a rifle. Or they can't handle the recoil to zero their rifle.
In the last few years I've heard the comment over and over. "What? the guy at the store told me the 6.5 Creedmore shot way flatter and was superior to the 270". Not so! Another favorite is " my 7mag shoots way flatter than the 270. Again, not at normal hunting distances. Well how high would you like me to set it at 100. "Oh it's so flat shooting I Ike it dead on at 100. That way I can shoot to 400 without having to hold over. These guys aren't proficient enough to take a 200 yard shot. Much less 400. If you really want to confuse them just mention ballistic coefficient and bullet design. Then there's the " i just can't seem to kill deer with my 270, I'm tired of all the blood trailing, so I bought a 300 win mag. That normally doesn't end well. My usual statement is that isn't the rifle. It's their shot placement that's the problem. That doesn't go over well.
Lastly, there's the Lead Sled. The lead sled adds to the length of pull of the rifle. This causes your head to sit at a different place on the comb. Your zero off the sled is generally not in the same place as it is off the shoulder. Sometimes significantly so. They may work for some but I simply do not like them. They can help get you close but you can bet I'll shoot a rifle from the shoulder in a field position before Id consider taking it hunting.

I have an ex-son in law that told me he was not impressed with his .300 Win Mag. It took three shots to kill an antelope. He was also mad at the processor because he didn't get all of his meat back. I could explain it, but the walls don't listen either.

 

[Chadp82]

Turpentine21, very valid comment on the lead sled. I inherited one but it is seldom used. I only use it if starting brand new on load development or getting close with a new scope if I am using a heavy recoil rifle. It's only to get close. I don't fine tune reloading or zero a scope with it. I have found I get better results when it's me, a solid/adjustable front rest, and a rear bag.

 

[Turpentine21]

I have an ex-son in law that told me he was not impressed with his .300 Win Mag. It took three shots to kill an antelope. He was also mad at the processor because he didn't get all of his meat back. I could explain it, but the walls don't listen either.

A very good friend that has actually killed 100s of deer decided he wanted a 300 win. mag. Now I'll admit there I absolutely nothing wrong with a 300 win mag. I zeroed one for a guy last week and with a brake it really shot comfortably. The friend shot a 30-06 before this. He simply couldn't handle the 300 well. His wounding went through the roof. I also found that lungshot deer traveled just as far with the 300 as they went with his 30-06 or my 270. He finally went back to his 30-06. Thank goodness

 

[marksman1941]

No kidding!

I ordered a brand new Christensen Arms Ridgeline chambered in 6.5 PRC just to see if all the hype was true. I got it all set up ready to go and headed to the range with a good supply of factory ammo to get acquainted. I set up at 25 yards, chambered a round and pulled the trigger the shot was just off the point of aim, I lifted the bolt handle and the case would not come out of the chamber. The bolt lift was not hard but the case wouldn't budge. I beat the bolt open with a plastic hammer I keep in my range box and examined the case, there was a large gouge on the base of the case just forward of the rim, the chamber was so badly burred that it took a chamber reamer to fix it. It was very obvious that this rifle was never test fired at the factory! On a gun that retails for over $2000.00 this should NEVER happen. My $350.00 TC Venture .270 shoots circles around it and works every time I pull the trigger and cycle the bolt.

Sorry to drag this OT!

I bought a Christensen CA10 (ar10 in 308) that had a chamber so out of spec it didn't odd the no-go gauge test. My first few rounds, the cases were coming out halfway to straight walled. I have no clue it was off so much. It took me 2 emails and 3 phone calls to get them to look at the gun, and they replaced the entire rifle for me upon inspection. It clearly wasn't fixable. Took 6 months and a pile of back and forth to make a $3,500 rifle function at the most basic level. I don't know how their QC is so dang low.

 

[skinny pedal]

about 20 years ago is when i seen the light. it was opening day of deer season and out at about 800 yards was a big buck walking along and stopping to nibble. i had no clue as to how far it was but i was sure i could hit it with my 30-378 weatherby fine little deer cartridge so i laid the rifle across a big rock to get stable and pulled the trigger when the dust settled and i got the dirt out of my eyes from the brake i looked out and the deer was still there and who knows if i even hit in the same county he was in. from that day is where the time and money began to flow. there is no substitute for practice and trigger time also some finer optics help too. i wont take shots that far at game anymore because im not that guy that we all talk about but i sure have spent a bunch of time and money learning what it takes. oh and also learned that it does not take a 3400 fps cartridge to shoot longer distances.

 

[LongestShot]

It would remove far more than 10%, here in PA a lot of our hunters are what would be considered social hunters. They hunt as part of a group but it's more about time spent with the group rather than actually hunting. Many of the ones we had dropped out over the years but there are a few that still hunt. That type of test would immediately be a non-starter for them even if they could pass it as they don't want to take the extra time to do it.

Additionally on top of that who gets to dictate the test and how difficult would it be? It wouldn't be hard it incrementally increase the difficulty to make it extremely difficult to qualify and get a hunting license. And then does it need to be a yearly test? One for every license? One for all types of arms or one different one for rifle, bow, shotgun and muzzleloader? See how it could easily spiral if allowed?

I will admit I am a relatively poor offhand shot, or at least I think I am, so I brace myself for almost every shot I take at game regardless of how close it is. A moderately small offhand target with a time limit would wash out a substantially large portion of shooters possibly myself included.



When I did the only guided hunt I've been on the guide required we check the rifles prior to the hunt to ensure they didn't get bumped on the plane. This also had the dual purpose of showing how proficient the hunter handled their firearms. He said he has had clients previously that he had to show how to load their rifle just prior to the hunt.

I was apparently more worried about it than he was as he told me my first shot was fine but I wasn't happy and tweaked my zero shooting three more times with my main rifle to get it where I wanted it.

While I understand you're concern, I'm the last person who want's it micro managed, If Europe can find a common sense, reasonable standard for testing, there's no reason the US can't. No one's looking for 1/2 moa at 200 yards; 5moa at 50 is not asking a lot. Let's look for a middle ground. Also a basic, common sense Q&A would not be asking too much.

 

[Labwhisper]

While I understand you're concern, I'm the last person who want's it micro managed, If Europe can find a common sense, reasonable standard for testing, there's no reason the US can't. No one's looking for 1/2 moa at 200 yards; 5moa at 50 is not asking a lot. Let's look for a middle ground. Also a basic, common sense Q&A would not be asking too much.

Giving our government, federal, state or local this kind of power over an activity that involves hunting and shooting would invite abuse to the detriment of all.

 

[Baker Alvin]

Enjoyed this thread! Self taught hunter and reloader, trigger time is everything, load development is a good way to get it.
100-200 yd was my target range, then went to 300 yd and the game changes.
Plastic water and soda jugs are fun at any distance.

 

[CMP70306]

While I understand you're concern, I'm the last person who want's it micro managed, If Europe can find a common sense, reasonable standard for testing, there's no reason the US can't. No one's looking for 1/2 moa at 200 yards; 5moa at 50 is not asking a lot. Let's look for a middle ground. Also a basic, common sense Q&A would not be asking too much.

In Europe it is primarily the rich and well connected that have the firearms and access to hunt in the first place so the test purposely isn't designed to be tough.

Here in the US there are plenty of politicians actively looking for ways to reduce the number of hunters. Requiring such a test would absolutely be used as a way to achieve that goal. It may start out easy enough but just like gun laws every bad hunter story would be used as an excuse to increase the difficulty "to weed out the bad hunters" until very few can actually pass the qualifications.