Best Ideas for Accuracy - FRH vs. SRM type hunters explain their techniques details.

[Brent]

I'll state some facts, you be the judge and offer some improvements, experiences and techniques assoiated with both methods. Many people I'm sure could benifit from your detailed explanation here of "How I do this for maximum accuracy".

I have always had a question that bugged me about the spotter systems accuracy potential, with all due respect to you gents who use it, as opposed to known drop data for ones gun.

The nagging fact that a sighter shot fired is "not" always impacting at the center of a would be group and could likely be to the extreme edge, lets say all the way high.

You now dial the retical over to the impact from the original aimpoint, move to the animal and hold on center mass. The bullet impacts the dirt just over the animals back because you rezeroed on a "high" impact and the bullet went "high" again, an obviously likely scenario.

This would apply to "double" low, rt, or lt shots also. In this case, the fellow that knows his drops well and dials or uses an R2 to "center" his group accuratly and accordingly has the potential advantage of cutting that shot dispersion in half.

You see, if the guns potential "guaranteed" is 1 moa and you are taking an animal at 1500 yards the the "FRH" guy will maintain under a 16" group, or hit within this circle.

On the other hand the "SRM" guy may take a spotter shot that impacts high in a would be 16" group, or 8" higher than the normal center. He then moves to his target and fires a subsequent 8" high shot... but now this high shot is "added to the 8" high sighter shot he zeroed to.

Because this IS now his zero, an impact a total of 16" above the "ACTUAL" 1500 yard zero is the result. This is the benifit of the doubt too, he will likely have error that adds several inches that could "Stack" on top of this too because a spotter round can't be measured to the "inch" just seing the impact in bigeyes. I would venture to say a +- 3-5 inches is as accurate as one can get watching impacts at over 1000 yds in dirt, stumps, rocks etc.

Do you see the advantage to the FRH guy considering this "Stacking" of errors that MUST be accounted for using the SRM?

The only way I see the SRM being equal and in some cases superior is when multiple spotter shots are fired to obtain a "center" of group to dial to...

This is of course in a no wind apples to apples comparison of course.

Would someone like to address these issues? I'm sure noone believes that a kill shot will "exactly" follow a sighter at long range and these are serious problems only associated with this method that begggg for logical answers.

If we could have the ones who use this method give us their secrets and some guidence to make the most of this method when we have opportunity to use it.

If you use the FRH method lets hear from you on it if you would, limitations, reasons, how to... tell your whole story guys.

If you feel your gun is "guarenteed" more accurate than this examples 1 moa then by all means explain using your data.

Let's hear how you do it...

Thanks guys.

 

[Darryl Cassel]

Brent

Your forgetting the hunting partner with the Bigeyes who is doing the spotting.

Lets say I take a spotter "shot" that will impact 100 yards to the left or right of the animal so it won't scare him.
Keep in mind I have looked for an impact spot as my aiming point. It could be the bottom of a stump or a bare spot of ground and my aiming point is the CENTER of that target.

I fire with the amount of clicks called for after I have ranged the yardage with my Military laser rangefinder.
My spotter and I both see the bullet impact 1 foot high and 1 foot right or two feet high and two feet right, it doesn't matter. We dial the windage and elevation "FROM" the original aiming point and to the impact of the bullet to make this correction and fire one more time. This time the bullet impacts EXACTLY at the aiming point and we then swing to the animal and kill it within 5 seconds.

You won't be high, low, left or right after you have made the scope adjustments and fired a final round to make sure that the wind didn't change.

Within 5 seconds the animal is hit where we aimed.

The first round hit leaves alot to be desired at the 1500 yard range. As has been said, NO drop chart is 100% correct day after day.

I would suggest trying Both ways and seeing which you like the best. Make sure you have a hunting partner with a set of Bigeyes. If you hunt alone, the first round hit is your only option.

If your shots are extremely long and if you have a hunting partner who is your spotter with a real good set of Bigeyes, I'm sure you will find the most accurate way is with the spotter or two first, system.

We have tried the rangefinder reticles and have always gone back to the spotter system here in PA and Colorado. For "us" it's more positive and accurate especially at the ranges we like to shoot.

As an add on here---If shooting inside of 1250 yards, one shot is normally fired as a spotter. You mentioned 1500 yards and I'm saying 1500 plus for two spotters.
We always click TO the impact of the bullet from the origianl aiming point on our spotter round. That way there is NO guess work.

Don't you think that actual fire "THAT" day will eleminate a lot of "if's"???

Take your pick of hunting styles. The spotter system has always worked well for me.

DC

[ 01-18-2003: Message edited by: Darryl Cassel ]

 

[Brent]

Hi Darryl,

I've used both methods for a while now and use a spotter set up with a spotting scope (no bigeyes yet) or R2 reticle in another NF that works well to see hits. The bigeyes should have a distinct advantage for extended viewing for sure. When your zeroed in on a target though, the NF R2 or Leopold 12-40 is plenty adequate for seeing hits.

When you fire a spotter and it hits 1' high and 1' right, do you assume this would be the center of a group if fired?

You are in fact dialing to move the crosshair up and over to the impact after the crosshair is centered on the original aimpont, thus forcing the shooter to move the crosshairs via repositioning the "gun" back to the aimpont consequently moving the bore along with to the aimpoint as well. Humor me,

some may not understand this method, also known as the "one shot zero".

The same problem results as with the one shot zero though. you could be zeroing your rifle on a impact that is NOT representative of the average dispersion, UNLESS a group is fired and crosshairs are moved to the "Center" of this. Don't you agree?

This beggs the question, "how far off from center dispersion did the scope get dialed to if only one shot was fired?" I would think at long range this is a most critical point to consider? Do you think only one shot to verify your adjustment "center" is valid? I have never counted on just one, as the next couple could go to the other extreme.

How do you guys reconcile actual "center of group" drop data collected before the hunt if it's different by 1 moa or something from the "adjusted from a spotter zero?" Split the difference, go with the single spotter zero, or revert to the collected known data?

The R2 is the "cats ***" when LR ranging in any weather, unless of course you have a Vector or Russian unit.

I really doubt I'll need anything else now but man one of those little Vectors would be nice!

 

[Darryl Cassel]

Brent

The accurate Rangefinder is the key for the one shot or spotter shot method. The military units are unreal for repeatability in any weather and at ANY range.

As mentioned
At the distance we shoot, the spotter seems to be a more accurate way of hunting success.

When dialing in the scope after the spotter shot, we dial it to the exact spot of impact while looking in the scope at the target we fired at. That target might be a tree stump or bare spot of earth. WE can see the impact hole of the bullet. We simply dial the windage and elevation TO the bullet hole while keeping the scope on the target we fired at.
This is the same way we do it at Williamsport. The crosshairs of the scope are held at the center of the bull when we make the first shot. If our first shot is high 1 foot and left one foot of the bull, we simply KEEP the cross hair held on the center of the bull and dial the target knobs TO the bullet impact on the target even though it may be 1 foot off in two directions, windage and elevation. The next shot will be in the bull.
Same principle is used while LR hunting.
We dial "TO" the bullet impact and it is dead on when we swing onto the animal.

It is not off once this is procedure done.

Later
DC

 

[Guest]

I think what Brent is saying and I agree is that if your gun is shooting 1/2 MOA then at 1500 yards the group size is 7.8525"

If your shooting 1 MOA then your group size is 15.705"

How do you know if your spot shot is in the middle of the group or High, Low, Left, or Right?

If you fired three spot shots your aggregate would be a more accurate sample.

DC, what do you do if your second shot after the spot shot is off?
What is the most spot shots you have taken?

 

[texas]

Correct me if I'm wrong but is this the same way you are suppose to sight in the shepard scope? Not that many if any on this board uses them. Believe it was said somewhere that they were not that good if not why use their method of changing the POI? Just asking.

 

[Brent]

Thanks John, That is what I've been trying to say... exactly.

Do I not have a valid point?

We dial "TO" the bullet impact and it is dead on when we swing onto the animal.

It is not off once this is procedure done.

My point exactly is just that, even if you can see the hole, at that distance how can you be "not off" making a correction based on one shot when a gun will not produce "one" hole groups at 1000 yds much less 1500 yds or more? I WILL more likely in fact BE off, but just by how much and what do you do to account for it is the question?

If rifles were lasers we wouldn't be discussing this, but they're not. Is anyone accounting for this when using the SRM or is it just simply ignored and treated as insignificant? Boyd and Darryl, I know you guys use this method so what kind of groups do your rifles really shoot at 1000 and 1500 yards? Lets hear it guys, what's the bar you've set on paper, consistantly? I want to hear about some really accurate sticks now, I'm sick of thinking about my medioker groups today.

 

[Brent]

Hi Texas,

I don't know about all of the Shepards but the one my buddy has I think uses either rangefinding circles or something at different levels accross the lens, I'm not sure how they are sighted in or at what range if it's a BDC reticle though. His wasn't that clear so I never looked at it much after that. I rate them about the same as the Springfield Armory scopes...

My dad seen the difference in my NF and his SA scope yesterday, he stopped and his first words were "alot clearer than mine." I can't stop giving him a hard time about the SA scopes he's got, the way he talks sometimes I'd think he has stock in the company or something.

I think he's seeing the light now though.

I'm taking him out to 600 yards next week to shoot the 8' plywood and get him a chart for the new load in his 300wsm. I'll have him out to 1000 yds on steel plates for his first time maybe the same day if we get going early enough. Suppose to be 30 degrees out.

 

[Huntaholic]

I got a question for you guys who fire spotter shots before taking the actual shot on game. Have you not ever had the "crack" of the bullet startle or spook your intended animal? I have been 75 yards or so off to the side of our long range target and heard the bullet as it comes by and it is MUCH LOUDER than I would have ever imagined! It sounds about like a .22 mag. revolver firing to me! The sound of the rifle is very faint in comparision!

 

[Guest]

Texas, the "one shot sight in" method is nothing new or exclusive to Shepard scopes.

It is not "Their" method.

 

[Darryl Cassel]

Hunt

The crack of the bullet does NOT alarm the animal at all.

Trust me.

DC

 

[Darryl Cassel]

Brent

Read what I said about 1500 yards. WE take two normally at that range and withing a few seconds. I can only remember two shots at the most for spotters to make the final adjustments to the scope.
The wind does not change in that length of time.

Keep in mind, the Kill zone on the elk is 18 to 24" going into the heart and lung area.

It is the MOST accurate way of killing at the ranges we shoot and the most successful way to date that I have seen.

You would have to see this system in operation to understand how we do it.

It can be done very quickly.

Since you don't have a spotter with a good set of Bigeyes, I can see where your coming from on the negative questions concerning this way of hunting.

It does take a team effort and you don't attempt this by yourself, EVER.

Later
DC
Later
DC

 

[No Fear in Accuracy]

I went to watch Williamsport 1000 yd match and they still use one or two spotters. The spotters tell the shooter where the bullet was hit and he adjusted the scope (elevation). It is fun to watch.

It is "possible" (not always) that the spotter give the wrong info to the shooter. The spotter looked thru the big eyes and watched the bullet impact over 1500 yards, he "believed" the bullet was hit 2 feet to the left but actually it was 3.5 feet to the left. It is hard to measure when looking the bigeyes over 1500 yards. I could be wrong because I haven't tried that yet. It is just my theory. When the distance gets longer, it is harder to measure it.
It is like a cheap rangefinder, it reads +/- 5 yards at 1000 yards, something like that.
Does it make sense, hmm?

-Denny

 

[Brent]

Since you don't have a spotter with a good set of Bigeyes, I can see where your coming from on the negative questions concerning this way of hunting.

Darryl, come on now, you obviously have got to understand my point by now so I won't bother to repeat it. I'm not trying to be "negative" as you put it. I would have thought you to could see I am interested in the "Finer" points of your way of getting your bullet to the target as accurately as possible.

I actually thought you'd point out that at extreme range not just a couple but several sighters need to be taken to confirm the "aggregate" as John put it because a single shot just isn't valid enough because too much error is introduced.

Two sighters it is then, thanks.