To add to the honesty of this discussion... I missed a groundhog at a range of about 15 yards once. I had no excuse - I'd just shot the exact same rifle at distances way beyond that and I'd hit much smaller targets. My sights were dead on, the range was close, the target was plenty big... and I just plain missed.
tall tales
- Thread starter jlr1962
- Start date
- Status
It can be a first shot kill. But not an "every shot" kill.
Seriously though if you check out the targets shot by F Class and F/TR shooters at 1000 yards including some using bone stock rifles then it becomes a matter of "most shot kills". There's a review from a well known reviewer on this web page. It's a few years old but it was also done before the advent of the Target AccuTrigger which was a big improvement to the Savage rifles. Another report worth reading talks about a Savage based rifle (upgraded stock and barrel only) setting a new record for F/TR shooting at 1000 yards. And that was with a .223. So all those that continually say the .223 can't compete with the .308 at 1000 yards might want to read this story and it's a pretty good indication of the level of quality of Savage products too. Yes the barrel and the stock certainly made a difference most likely. But we're talking a record setting performance and I know that people shoot those competitions (and sometimes win) with bone stock Savage rifles. That report can be read on this web page. There are lots of stories similar to this on the net. It is very possible to kill a p-dog on most shots if you're a talented shooter with some knowledge. Personally I've never shot 1000 yards anywhere, anytime. But I have read many reports on these rifles and that is the reason I bought one. I'd tell you what mine has done but I'm sure someone will call me a liar. I know the limiting factor in my shooting at long distances is my ability to dope the wind though. The rifle itself shoots better than I do.Just for reference though I did find the 1000 yard Junior F-TR National Record target. Remember this is the best for a US junior so the target shot by that Savage based rifle is likely considerably better since it set a senior "world" record. Looks like it's possible to make those p'dogs nervous with a Savage rifle at 1000 yards after all.
goon said:
It's sometimes hard to get your sights right at short distances. All of us zero at considerably longer distances and sometimes we don't understand how to aim at a target shorter with sights that are set for longer distances. Even at 50 yards we will see bullet drop. So if you're shooting a .22 at 50 yards the drop can be significant. That means you need to aim underneath a target at 15 yards sometimes by a few inces depending on the gun, the type of sights used, the caliber, and the way the gun was zeroed.
Last edited:
redneck2
Member
Tell you what I'll do. I have a measured 100 yard range in my back yard. I'll pick five rifles from my collection. Set up 1" metal discs. You can pick any of the five rifles you think I should shoot in any order you like.
Wager is $20 per shot, fifty shots. Lay the money down ahead of time. I miss, you get a twenty. I hit, your twenty is mine
FWIW, four of the five are factory stock
Last edited:
That is one of the most bizarre setups, and I don't understand it at all. They think if you're shooting a 22LR that you'll miss the backstop?
I'm not sure I understand this either. Someone is inexperienced or a mall ninja because they like to shoot 22LR, like milsurps, ARs, or iron sights?
I took a $100 rifle from the 1930s to the range recently, fixed bayonets, loaded a 5 round en bloc clip, and put the first round in the head of a M4 zero target at 25 meters (http://www.weapon-blog.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/m4_zero-230x300.png). The 2nd round went in the torso. But I guess what I did wasn't safe enough for their range?
I also managed a 214 score at an Appleseed in the pouring rain with a 22LR AR. But I guess that wasn't safe enough for their range.
Come to think of it, the only part of their rules I understand at all is the .50 BMG part. The range I go to doesn't allow it either because it'd destroy their baffles.
Geek, the examples are examples of the diverse crowd at the range. Big city, big crowd. As far as their reasoning for their rules..... their range, their rules. They have baffles made of steel, filled with gravel to keep bullets on their property. If you shoot a baffle, you pay for the repair, and you are tossed out. Period. I don't think it is possible to shoot a bullet off property as long as it is pointed down range. They have not had any strays in many years. Knocks on wood. I don't shoot 50 yards there on weekends. Way too many people.
Go to one.
http://www.appleseedinfo.org/
Click on a state for the schedule. The 2015 schedule will be out before too long I think.
http://www.appleseedinfo.org/search-states-map.php
You want to post a target to brag, and have people believe the conditions under which it was shot...post your best AQT...and the pic of you receiving your Rifleman patch from the instructor/shoot boss while you hold one of the targets.
HankB
Member
One of the tallest tales I remember reading was in the ad copy from a company that offered "accurizing" services for rifles, including a testimonial from a customer who was firing five-shot, ONE HOLE groups with his .308 at 600 yards . . . using iron sights.
That is, at worst, ~1.2 inches, center to center. About 1/5 MOA. Sure.
* * * * *
Now, with good ammo, my .30/06 M70 is a sub-MOA rifle at 100 yards. In fact, I once shot a quarter inch group at that distance. I was in college at the time, and based on my repeatable accuracy, I computed the probability of repeating that quarter inch group.
I don't recall the actual numbers, but the odds are the barrel will be worn out long before I duplicate that group.
That is, at worst, ~1.2 inches, center to center. About 1/5 MOA. Sure.
* * * * *
Now, with good ammo, my .30/06 M70 is a sub-MOA rifle at 100 yards. In fact, I once shot a quarter inch group at that distance. I was in college at the time, and based on my repeatable accuracy, I computed the probability of repeating that quarter inch group.
I don't recall the actual numbers, but the odds are the barrel will be worn out long before I duplicate that group.
It wasn't that many years ago that I swore I would never own a Savage rifle. Now I own several Savage rifles that perform rather well.
The rifle in the pic is a Savage 6.5-284 shooting 140 Berger VLD bullets. The scope is a Zeiss Conquest 6.5-20 sitting on a 20 MOA rail. It isn't necessary to spend thousands (although I have) of dollars for a long range rifle.
In 1857, the Whitworth rifle fired groups under 4.5" st 500 yards. 1857. That's 157 years ago. I would assume accuracy has increased somewhat since then. The Whitworth was the first modern sniper rifle and it was leaps and bounds ahead of the competition. It achieved that by changing the way rifling worked with bullets. All rifles use that new design now (new in 1857).
My .223 Savage 12 LRPV will shoot consistent groups under 5" at 400 yards. It's bone stock. I've seen it do groups under an inch at that same distance. The gun range info actually claims that distance is 500 yards but I measured it with the new measuring feature of Google Maps and it came up 400 yards. Whatever the case I can't shoot 1" groups consistently by any means and if the wind is blowing very hard I'll be lucky to shoot 12" groups. But on a fairly calm day with the right ammo my groups hover around 4"-5". I never mentioned this before because I know people will say it doesn't happen. I don't care what they think really. I've done it. I have a witness. I'm certainly not the only one. And again I'm shooting a bone stock rifle. There are ways to make rifles more accurate with aftermarket upgrades. My Savage is NOT the most accurate rifle on earth. Not even close I wouldn't think. That consistent 1" group at 600 yards is not as outlandish as it might sound. I can't do it and I sure couldn't even come close with iron sights. But I knew a guy who was a WWII sniper and he never used a scope. Yet I never saw anyone shoot better than him at long distances. Lots of military people learn to shoot extremely well when it's a matter of life and death. And many of them have done it with iron sights.
I'm not saying what you heard was likely or even possible. I'm just not as anxious to write it off as impossible. Some rifles can shoot extremely well and some shooters do extremely well with iron sights.
Just to cut to the chase I'll post a photo of a target shot from 600 yards with iron sights. It's no 1" group but it's pretty darn good. This is just one example I found on the net. I'm sure there are better examples.
SilentStalker
Member
I agree with whoever said that they don't keep any rifle that doesn't shoot sub MOA. All of the rifles I currently own are sub MOA, some moreso than others but sub MOA. And, yes, you can get factory rifles with off of the shelf ammo that can shoot sub MOA all day long. Then there is honing them in even more with load development. Sub MOA rifles should be the rule.
You and I have different purposes for our rifles, it seems.
Which is fine of course.
I don't see the automatic assumption here Warp. Lots of regular grade hunting rifles are capable of shooting MOA from the bench these days. That doesn't mean they will do it in the brush when you're looking to shoot dinner. It's just true that lots of rilfes are capable of doing it. Some are even guaranteed to be able to do it. And I've seen them do it. Once again I have .22LR rifles that will shoot MOA at 100 yards very often. Not every time of course because the wind is a factor. But on a still day I'd say I could come close to shooting MOA half the time with my CZ 453 and my Savage MkBTV. Neither are purpose built for target shooting. They just happen to shoot well and there are lots more where those came from.
I don't hunt or shoot from the bench.
I don't know what qualifies as a regular grade hunting rifle but I'm pretty sure I don't own one.
jlr1962, Post 111:
Probably because the backstop (berm, armor plate, whatever) has a smaller included angle at the longer ranges and it's easier to miss the whole thing with non-precision sighting and shooting equipment. Not to mention non-precision shooters.
That's the way I'd look at it if I were a range owner/manager. Can't figure the .17s being OK, except that the bullet's so light it just can't do much damage even if it misses the backstop.
Terry, 230RN
Probably because the backstop (berm, armor plate, whatever) has a smaller included angle at the longer ranges and it's easier to miss the whole thing with non-precision sighting and shooting equipment. Not to mention non-precision shooters.
That's the way I'd look at it if I were a range owner/manager. Can't figure the .17s being OK, except that the bullet's so light it just can't do much damage even if it misses the backstop.
Terry, 230RN
Last edited:
HankB
Member
An honest 600 yards is pretty far.Cee Zee said:Just to cut to the chase I'll post a photo of a target shot from 600 yards with iron sights. It's no 1" group but it's pretty darn good.
If that's an NRA MR1 target, the X-ring is 6" in diameter.
See that little triangle of white dots just to the left of the X-ring at 9 o'clock? I'd really like to see someone who can consistently keep 5 consecutive shots in that little triangle at 600 yards with iron sights; a small fraction of the X-ring, THAT's roughly the level of accuracy claimed in the ad copy I mentioned - five shots in one hole.
redneck2
Member
i just back from an antelope hunt in a Montana. Used a .243 Weatherby. I believe it has the 1" accuracy guarantee
maxxhavoc
Member
Go to one.
http://www.appleseedinfo.org/
...
You want to post a target to brag, and have people believe the conditions under which it was shot...post your best AQT...and the pic of you receiving your Rifleman patch from the instructor/shoot boss while you hold one of the targets.
I only got to shoot one AQT at the Appleseed I went to, and I wasn't happy with the result. It earned me my rifleman patch, but I plan on going back and getting a better score after I get some transition practice in.
Everybody with a rifle should attend one. Lots of fun, and good training for cheap.
d2wing
Member
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2008
- Messages
- 6,434
I disregard most unusual claims unless it is witnesses in sanctioned competition especially some posted on here by people caught lying before. Some wild claims might be true, I have seen some. But anybody can claim anything and who knows. Some guys on here claim lots of things for attention. Can't stop it. if some claims were true we would have the wrong guys in the Olympic and at Camp Perry. I think it gives new shooters unrealistic expectations and causes them to lie too. The are lot's more windbags than proven shooters.
Longhorn 76
Member
The prairie dogs I shoot at are maybe one inch wide and two or three inches tall. And you guys are shooting them at one thousand yards??
Maybe they are a lot bigger where you are from.
Maybe they are a lot bigger where you are from.
warp said:
I've got one I'll sell you.
I was referring to the entry level hunting rifles like the Axis etc.. But hey I'll sell you whatever you think "regular" is if the price is right. HankB said:
Me too. I never said it could be done. I was just saying a person can shoot a pretty tight group at 600 yards with iron sights. The people on that site where I got the target also shoot 1000 yards without a scope. What I actually said was, "I'm not saying what you heard was likely or even possible. I'm just not as anxious to write it off as impossible." And I'm not. People manage to do amazing things at times. I certainly don't believe shooting 1 hole groups at 600 yards with iron sights is common. I have never seen it done. I don't even know that it's possible. I'm just not willing to say never when I've seen so many things I would have sworn weren't possible before I saw them. Watch some of Bob Munden's videos for example. Yes it is a different type of shooting but it's still spectacular.
sorry I could not resist. those sound like prairie puppies not dogs.
d2wing said:
It's not bragging to tell the truth about an incredible shot that you've made. If you shoot enough rounds you'll get fairly good. If you shoot at enough stuff with slightly better than average skills (which you will gain from shooting fairly often), statistically you're going to eventually make a few remarkable shots. You won't be able to help it.
Would you believe me if I told you I'd hit a bottle cap at 100 yards offhand with a .22LR and open sights? Because I did. It took a lot of rounds - Federal Automatch .22LR from a CZ-452 - to get more than less good enough to get my bullets hitting in the same time zone at that range. Then it took a calm day at the range with no one else around and no wind. The sun was out and that was good, because I needed full sun to even see a tiny little white bottle cap at that distance. Then it took me maybe 25 rounds that day to get settled in.
Then I just flat out nailed a bottle cap shooting offhand at 100 yards.
Would it be better if we lied and said we'd never made shots like that?
No sense in practicing or going out and shooting at small stuff way out there with iron sights. Sorry Timmy, I've never hit anything any smaller than a Chevy at ten feet and you won't either. You might as well give up now. There is no hope. You'll never do anything remarkable with a rifle no matter how much you practice. Go wear out your playstation instead.
That's not exactly encouraging, is it?
I've actually enjoyed hearing some of the remarkable shots others have made in this discussion.
FWIW, I didn't make the best shot I've ever seen made.
A friend hit a clay pigeon rolling on the ground with a compound bow that he hadn't shot in ten years. He just picked it up and shot an arrow through a rolling clay pigeon! It was largely luck, but still, he can say he hit a clay pigeon with a compound bow and half a dozen people saw him do it.
- Status
