Never mind the paper punching...

[TonyH]

Related to Nemasis/Andy's thread since it's partly about misses... But no pics I'm afraid. It amazes me how so many of you guys seem to photograph - or even film, forsooth - your hunting exploits. I'm a photographer, but i don't usually carry a camera when i go shooting, can't be arsed and it's extra weight + hassle. Carrying a heavy varmint rifle, big heavy binocs, rangefinder, ammo, earmuffs etc is enough for me, and in a superstitious way I feel carrying a camera is being a bit over confident...

Anyway, still shooting my 22-250 erratically on the range, but it's vital not to get carried away with group sizes and so on. My chum in Canada admits freely he can't shoot at the range for toffee, but in the field after groundhogs it's different, and his longest so far with his .243 AI is well over 900 yards...

So last night I went out with the heavy Rem and a few rounds of what seems the best load so far - 33.8gr of Benchmark in a neck-sized WW case, WW primer, V-Max 55gr seated about 25 thou off. I have a nice field with maximum range from "my" corner to the opposite one of a bit over 300 yards, and there are usually rabbits at that farthest corner plus sometimes a couple at the nearer corner. So with bunnies from maybe 150 to 300+ it's good for testing, and a pretty spot too. Big Devon hedgerows and hedges all round.

There was a lively but erratic breeze blowing from my left, quartering away; not predictable though: the general trend of the land here is sloping from left to right quite steeply, and the field itself has a big funnel-like scoop across the middle, widening towards the downhill side to my right. The opposite side is almost level with the firing point. As you can imagine, this topography makes for some weird wind patterns: I didn't attempt to dial in for windage, but held off, according to what I could see from waving grass, butterflies, dust etc.

I saw several rabbits straight away, and went for one directly across the field, ranged with the Leica at 250 yards. I have a click chart created from Exbal; the chart says 13 clicks up from my 100 zero, and that's what i dialled; steady on the Harris bipod, squashy bead bag under the heel, Boom! Pop! Bunny fell over. OK, I won't detail the others because it's tedious with no pics, but i fired six more rounds over 30 - 40 minutes; I missed two rabbits at just over 300 (21 - 22 clicks) and a young fox at 288; the fox came back to the same spot exactly, and i got him; I shot two more rabbits, at 270 and 295. In each case the hits were solidly centred with instant kills. So I think my chart is right, the rifle and ammo are shooting pretty well, and my misses I think were down to not allowing sufficient windage - I was holding off left for each shot, to a varying degree, but never actually off the fur.

Great evening, landscape brightly lit then the sun dropping behind the Moor, encouraging results, and I rounded it off by calling at the pub on way back for a couple of pints of Six X and a natter with chums.

TonyH

[1967spud]

to get my vids posted a day or two a go i have had to carry my camera for the last 10 months to have a shot at a fox on camera then i do it twice in little under half an hour

[brown dog]

Tony,

 

Great post; enjoyed reading it.

 

But statements like this always puzzle me:

My chum in Canada admits freely he can't shoot at the range for toffee, but in the field after groundhogs it's different, and his longest so far with his .243 AI is well over 900 yards...

 

You're not alone in saying that sort of thing; but how can someone say they're no good at 'practice'; but that they're tip-top in the field 'when it counts'?

 

It's little different to saying "I'm crap at tennis unless I'm playing in a match".

 

Iffy technique isn't ironed out by pointing at one target-type over another; it's still iffy -and may just be less noticeable.

 

I suspect that the reality is that it's psychologically easier to ignore the poor shots (that, say, paper targets present as unwanted but un-ignorable hard-evidence).

 

Not having a go (I can see my post risks reading a bit like that ) - just chatting

[TonyH]

Tony,

 

Great post; enjoyed reading it.

 

But statements like this always puzzle me:

 

You're not alone in saying that sort of thing; but how can someone say they're no good at 'practice'; but that they're tip-top in the field 'when it counts'? ..........................Not having a go (I can see my post risks reading a bit like that ) - just chatting

No, I see what you're saying, no problem. I think "iffy technique" might often be the case, but the point is that one uses different techniques on the range compared with in the field. At the range I use a heavy rest, with proper front & rear bags etc, even play sometimes with applying tape beneath the forearm, talc on the bags…. But I’ve always found it fiddly, disconcerting, a bit tense, extremely difficult to achieve consistency, and at bottom since I’m not a target shooter, I find it hard to take seriously. My groups at the range reflect all this.

I’m into varmint hunting, and when I have a furry target downrange I take it very seriously! I’m OK enough at the range to get my loads and zero sorted, even if my groups are erratic: my field accuracy is better because I believe in what I’m doing, I like the feel of pastureland beneath my bipod, the countryside, the distant varmint… I know my friend in Ontario thinks the same way - he just can't be bothered with range work beyond the minimum necessary.

I’m sure there’s something in what you say, but I feel it’s the mental approach that counts; we hear a lot about the “mind game” with golfers, tennis players – and target shooters – and it sounds alien to me, ‘cos what I need to focus my mind is a furry pest just crying out for a high velocity bullet!

Regards, Tony

[devilishdave]

I know quite a few guys who are not good at clays but reasonably good on game. I dont know any one who is good at clays who is bad on game though!

 

With a rifle the way I see it either you can shoot straight or you cant, I am guesing if a guy is shooting ground hogs at 900m he must be reasonably good on the range. I guess it depends who you judge your self against. If you are shooting with national champs puting in regular sub 1/4 MOA groups then if you are sub 1/2 although in reality a fairly good group it might not seam that hot.

 

Dave

[Andrew]

I am straddling the fence on this one. I tend to agree that if you are shooting 1.5MOA at the bench, you're probably going to do that in the field but that doesn't mean your success rate won't be excellent. The simple fact is that rabbits and, for me, prairiedogs, are at least several MOA across in the vital areas. On a big rabbit you can hit within a 5" circle and still score a solid hit.

 

I think the same applies to deer. A heart lung area on one of our local deer is a pretty big target. Put a bullet from a 3.5 MOA rifle into it and you are eating venison. JMHO, of course.~Andrew

[nemasis243]

Enjoyed the read Tony

cheers Andy

[Chris-NZ]

...

 

Iffy technique isn't ironed out by pointing at one target-type over another; it's still iffy -and may just be less noticeable.

...., paper targets present as unwanted but un-ignorable hard-evidence).

 

 

Hear, hear.

I know plenty of guys round here that have venison coming out their ears who (by our standards) couldn't hit the side of barn from inside. If you asked them to knock over a bunny at 300yds, they wouldn't have a chance. It just shows deershooting is a totally different game to varmints

 

Chris-NZ

[onehole]

Interesting read!!mmmm? I find range and field work sort of compliment each other and both very necessary.I usually kick off on the range as this is the place where you can get a pretty good idea what is going to work as far as accuracy goes over the short distance and will narrow down what loads I would take to do the field testing ie obtain and test the best 200 yard group.This is the minimum distance in my opinion to really get to know what your rifle likes and thats where i would normally set my field zero and have evidenced that a spot on zero at this range will coincide far better with a ballistic chart/programmes when dialling out much further.I bet quite a few of you work with 100yd/meter zero,s and work from there???,its too flat at this point and you could be way out when going/dialling to 200 ,what I would suggest is try the 200 it may work better for you and you wont miss so many longer ones or wonder why you did.After all anything up to 200 is pretty flat anyway and most calibres only having a mid range of one to two moa max along the way.

Group size.paper punching etc.With lighter calibres, I have more recently tried the pinching method ie thumb only on the rear of trigger guard and finger on the blade and squeeze with no part of me touching anything else except the bench and with the rifle in good quality rests.You can often see an amzing improvement in group size doing this and can show up bad technique from holding the rifle in a more hands on method.This is hard to duplicate in the field of course but a really good way to identify and not miss a really good accuracy node ,try it you may be blown away with the result.This method is not good with 308,s etc,bit too jumpy!!!

Basically I think we have control over two things number one being obtaning an accurate and properly zeroed rifle and working within a field tested range chart,these two things should not change from one session to the next but the mess up comes with conditions on the day and that is fundamentally where it all goes wrong until you suss whats up.Those of us that use all the toys can get a little closer to combat these"conditions" but we are after the first shot to count and it will never be easy but doing a lot of shooting in all sorts of conditions does help and to shoot along side regular field shooters that are used to long range can be amazing to watch ,have a good day___onehole.

[foxing2night]

Dave, you have hit the nail on the head???

Paper and field shooting go hand in hand,,

how else can one see what is going on with your loads

and your rifle,,,

 

well said

 

all the best, Darrel

[stag1933]

A bevy of `blotted` bushytails. [10]

HWH.

[TonyH]

Interesting read!!mmmm? I find range and field work sort of compliment each other.......................doing a lot of shooting in all sorts of conditions does help and to shoot along side regular field shooters that are used to long range can be amazing to watch ,have a good day___onehole.

Hi Dave, spot on. I didn't mean to belittle the use of the range, though one or two others seem to think that's where i was at. I agree that range & field compliment one another. Expressing myself more carefully this time, I was trying to emphasise the futility of getting carried away with group shooting, at the expense of real-world shots in the field. I’m a varmint hunter: real shooting takes place in the field, for varmints. But before I do that. I need range sessions to work up a decent load. I don’t necessarily shoot huge groups; rather, when I’m trying to tame an awkward rifle, I shoot erratic groups! I get nice tight sub-groups of three or four shots, plus flyers that are way off!

I think your key words are to do with lots of field shooting – absolutely the best medicine, IME. My own shooting has never been better than when I’ve gone away on a shooting trip and spent several days shooting at varmints in the field. Such experiences have been great fun, very rewarding, and morale boosters: they’ve proved to me that I’m not a bad shot, despite my frequently weird & puzzling range experiences!

I think all dedicated paper-punchers and confirmed target shooters should get out occasionally and shoot at furry things…

Regards, Tony

[Guest Scotland Rifles]

Hi Dave, spot on. I didn't mean to belittle the use of the range, though one or two others seem to think that's where i was at. I agree that range & field compliment one another. Expressing myself more carefully this time, I was trying to emphasise the futility of getting carried away with group shooting, at the expense of real-world shots in the field. I’m a varmint hunter: real shooting takes place in the field, for varmints. But before I do that. I need range sessions to work up a decent load. I don’t necessarily shoot huge groups; rather, when I’m trying to tame an awkward rifle, I shoot erratic groups! I get nice tight sub-groups of three or four shots, plus flyers that are way off!

I think your key words are to do with lots of field shooting – absolutely the best medicine, IME. My own shooting has never been better than when I’ve gone away on a shooting trip and spent several days shooting at varmints in the field. Such experiences have been great fun, very rewarding, and morale boosters: they’ve proved to me that I’m not a bad shot, despite my frequently weird & puzzling range experiences!

I think all dedicated paper-punchers and confirmed target shooters should get out occasionally and shoot at furry things…

Regards, Tony

 

Hi Tony

 

I only shoot paper to zero, and i cant or wont do it one minute longer than i need to, once zeroed i am so glad to get away and get on with the hunting bit,

 

i don't miss that often (not meaning to sound big headed at all) but i do my foxing and rabbiting to a high standard and find that i am better at hitting the live target than a bit of paper.

 

bob.

[terryh]

Gents,

 

To me it's all trigger time, all my shooting improves if I dry fire, which is niether range or field. I'm still learning so the only place I can try new ideas to see if they work for me is on a range where it is repeatable (as OneHole states)

 

If you are only going to the range to zero at a fixed distance then you'll probably not gain much, except for a good zero, assuming you can 'shoot' in the first place. If you are shooting on a range out to longer distances then you will learn how your rifles performs, how to call the wind. This cannot be easily achieved in the field against varying targets, you cannot repeat the set of conditions, where as on a range for example, only the wind is changing. When I say 'range' here I mean fixed targets at known distance - so your 'range' could actually be in the field (if this makes sense?)

 

But one thing I do find strange is most people will only shoot prone or from a bench on a range, basically practicing the things they can do. My choise of range work these days does not involve straight paper at fixed distance in my own time.

 

Each to thier own at the end of the day, but I knowI need to imporve and I'm not getting enough practice and the only place for this is on a range.

 

Saying this I'm out after red's on Saturday so hopefully one shot will do it

 

Brgds Terry

[Rimotu66]

I have to agree with Bob here, I can shoot a few rounds on paper but soon get bad groups, I think I get bored, much sooner be out shooting furry critters.

[sako75]

I well remember the time when I was doing my DSC 1, the amount of experienced stalkers, who were totally unable to put 4 round in to the 4-inch square regardless of the distance they were shooting at, just amazed me!

 

But they all claimed, they were capable of culling deer at much greater distances; maybe they were. But its funny how people react when put under pressure i.e. shooting in front of other stalkers. One poor chap, who was a doctor, could not even get a shot anywhere on the target, yet he reckoned he killed over a hundred deer a year without any problem!

 

Some people just don’t handle shooting on a range at all well, yet they have no difficulty knocking over rabbits and foxes at much greater distances and on a regular basis; maybe its stress related?

 

ATB Bob