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
Bigger is better theory or truth?
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="Bob Wright" data-source="post: 1736812" data-attributes="member: 104363"><p>So many variables today, it's mind boggling. I must say in my younger years the 30-06 dropped many animals from elk to deer on a 165 grain core lokt or a Hornady spitzer point flat base. Longest shot then was 365 yards. As I reach out further today with high accuracy, all that experience is less certain. I set up a rifle for a youth doe hunt with copper monos a "must" by game and fish request. It magnificently dropped a small deer with a 7mm 145 Barnes at 80-90 yards but cost 2 front shoulders in the process. We were taught 40 years ago to shoot behind the shoulder for less meat loss. Now that the blood shot meat is showing up, in the shoulders, that doesnt seem to be the perfect answer. Right now, we aim for vitals and if a blood track is the requirement or DRT, then that is our issue to deal with. No easy answer for an open country highly variable hunt in the southwest. Long or short, you work with the ammo that can deliver immediate lethality if the range is right. But the stars rarely line up that way. My vote is accuracy first and generally good expansion at a distance I try to understand from the manufacturers. Then I hope my shot does what I believe it will do. The variables are endless and the debate rages on.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Bob Wright, post: 1736812, member: 104363"] So many variables today, it's mind boggling. I must say in my younger years the 30-06 dropped many animals from elk to deer on a 165 grain core lokt or a Hornady spitzer point flat base. Longest shot then was 365 yards. As I reach out further today with high accuracy, all that experience is less certain. I set up a rifle for a youth doe hunt with copper monos a "must" by game and fish request. It magnificently dropped a small deer with a 7mm 145 Barnes at 80-90 yards but cost 2 front shoulders in the process. We were taught 40 years ago to shoot behind the shoulder for less meat loss. Now that the blood shot meat is showing up, in the shoulders, that doesnt seem to be the perfect answer. Right now, we aim for vitals and if a blood track is the requirement or DRT, then that is our issue to deal with. No easy answer for an open country highly variable hunt in the southwest. Long or short, you work with the ammo that can deliver immediate lethality if the range is right. But the stars rarely line up that way. My vote is accuracy first and generally good expansion at a distance I try to understand from the manufacturers. Then I hope my shot does what I believe it will do. The variables are endless and the debate rages on. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Hunting
Long Range Hunting & Shooting
Bigger is better theory or truth?
Top