(originally posted 12/16/2021)
Steve Davis
Administrator
Lots of talk about how heavy or light to run. The more I do this the faster I want to run. But I will say light and fast is not always the answer. You have to weigh in all the factors of what the intended purpose of the rifle is. Range to be used, wind deflection at each range, and then drop. Most important for me with drop is what is the max point blank range. Or how far can I shoot before I have to think about changing my aim point. All of these things go together in the decision making. Also assuming that the chosen bullets have plenty of twist to be fully stable. I personally will not push the stability to gain a small advantage in range etc.
So I ran some ballistic numbers comparing the .308 cal 199g Hammer Hunter and the 137g Hammer Hunter. I used the 300 rum as the platform. I have my current load data with the 199g Hammer Hunter but have not loaded the 137g Hammer Hunter so used vel data that I think is realistic. Attached you will see the comparison of the two bullets ballistically. Note most importantly the wind drift and impact vel of each bullet. I started the drop charts at 300y out to 800y. The faster lighter bullet gives an advantage of 25y for max point blank range. At 300y the faster bullet has an impact vel advantage of 122 fps but a disadvantage in wind of 1.7". You all know that I am not much of an energy guy. To me it is generally an irrelevant number but well worth noting in this exercise. The Heavier bullet has 1006.6 ft/lbs more energy at 300y. Now let's take into account the amount of shed weight from each bullet. They are very proportionally designed so I am going to use 65% weight retention for each bullet. This would mean that the 199g HH is going to shed pretty close to 70g of petals and the 137g HH will shed pretty close to 48g of petals. Let's say that each bullet sheds 4 petals. There is no predicting this but good for this exercise. That would make each petal for the 199g HH about 17.5g and each petal for the 137g HH about 12g. So the 199g HH has about 68% more shed mass creating their own brand of havoc.
At 300y does the 100fps impact vel advantage of the 137g HH have an advantage for terminal performance? Maybe... I am not sure. At 400y the two bullets are virtually identical in impact vel. A slight advantage of 4fps for the 137gHH. The wind advantage of the 199g HH at 400y is now 3.3". I would say that on a 5" radius target wind is now significant. By the way I used a full value 10 mph wind for the calculations. Past 400y the advantage of the Heavier bullet becomes greater in every way.
My conclusion:
For hunting under 400y I would not talk anyone out of running the lighter bullet. In fact I would probably encourage the use of the lighter bullet. Less recoil, higher impact velocities, and flatter trajectory.
I attached the drop charts for review.
rum drop comparison.pdf (927.57 KB)
jakesch
Senior Member
Love this! But at the end of the day I think the toughest part is "choosing" a range. I have killed elk from 100y to 660y with hammers...I love the idea of light / fast impacts but I do not want to give up long range "effectiveness".
To me, the "big" question is whether the close range (sub 400y) benefits of light weight out-weigh it's downsides out to 700y? Half of my elk shot opportunities that I have had are beyond 400y.
harperc
Global Moderator
I "THINK" one of the reasons light and fast is popular on this site is, we're either more honest, or conservative regarding our distance needs. Hence Shock Hammers, and other adaptions friendlier.
I just put a thread on ignore elsewhere (regarding long range) as it got too much to read.
As I've said before a pet peeve of mine is advising a beginner on 1000 yard bullets, knowing they don't own a basic range finder.
ButterBean
Platinum Member
No truer words have ever been said
jakesch
Senior Member
That is fair. My max distance on elk (700y) is much further than my distance for deer (~500y). I am more likely to go lighter / faster on mule deer than elk.
farleg
Platinum Member
Gday
Isn’t it good to have the boss back
Nice post Steve even @ 4K ( you can get a touch more in the rum ) for the 137 those figures won’t change your still correct
I like all of the above & fits pretty well with those velocity brackets /triangle
I’ll add a touch as we increase the size of the animal we need more mass in those petals to get the wounds to the far lung on a broadside or to the vitals on the quarter shots
SF is also a interesting one that as we increase animal size /resistance more importance should be given to its thought & petal mass also is tied in here also I believe
jakesch nothing wrong with that analogy or application but I’m not going to give up on you with those 175 just need to wait till you get into country of a 400/500 yard max shot potential then I’m going to ride you if you use the 260 lol
& lastly while I’m on for the ride I got pulled up by the boys in blue in regard to my comment on small deer
I call elk & moose in the deer category & really I should be more specific to a small deer is around the 300/400 lb mark or less then I sometimes break this down further
If I put this forward jump on me again & sort our differences of interpretation out
sorry for my bad
Cheers
tthetinkerer
Senior Member
Steve,
I used the exact same approach to making a decision between the 52gr and 64gr HHs. The only issue is that the powder I had on hand couldn't get me the projected velocity with the 52gr and the very same powder actually got me a slightly higher than projected velocity with the 64gr.
Shed weight between the two is very similar based on hollow point depth and nose length. Wind performance is better on the 64gr at all ranges, and point blank range on the 52gr is longer by about 20yds at 52gr (3500fps) and 64gr (3150fps) IIRC. Impact velocity is higher with the 52gr out to 250yd, and at 175yd it is about 100fps faster. But this is all at a 52gr HH projected speed of 3500fps, but I was only able to get 3400fps. The 64gr looks to be able to get 3175fps easily. I also think I need a longer barrel for the lighter bullets to get all their much needed velocity.
Long story short, the 64gr actually works better for my 20" 1-8" twist barrel.
jakesch
Senior Member
(Farleg) jakesch nothing wrong with that analogy or application but I’m not going to give up on you with those 175 just need to wait till you get into country of a 400/500 yard max shot potential then I’m going to ride you if you use the 260 lol
I just may have to load up those 175's for my Caribou trip next fall. I just ordered a box to see how well I can get them to shoot. But that gets me thinking...what are you thoughts are bears...would you rather have that 175 @ at 3500 fps impact velocity or the 260 @ 2900 fps when a bear is coming in hot?
IF the 175's in that platform acted like 30cal/124's in the rums(high SF and velocity), I think they would be hard to ignore by shooter or target. I think I would want some first hand experience before trusting my life with them on a charging grizzly or brown, but anything else, yes.
farleg
Platinum Member
Gday jakesch
caribou
nice
then
here we go bears are going to pull me up again lol
this is going to be a bit of interpretation due to above
first off we need to definitely look @ the SF & if you’re below 2 on this I would be cautious the higher the better for sure
are you with a guide ? I want my 375 rum with those 270 levers over any other pill that’s stopping power
yes I’m trying to deflect lol as hate bears
the 260 ive seen from you guys penertration wise is great
the 175 got no idea penertration wise so I’m cautious & don’t know but I’m swayed to the 260 if the SF
& 2900 impact still knocks the stuffing out of them but @3500 it’s a whole new world but we need to know the triangle parameter & im going to say the 175 will potentially struggle on penertration on a real big bear like RH hunts so it’s the 260 for me if your SF is up
I’ve got the same situation with the 500 Jeffery on buff & a 570 or 600 gr pill will be my go to pill for a charge but the 425 may surprise me
yes I’m going to find out once Steve makes them
Got no idea on bears just thoughts
cheers
Steve Davis
Administrator
That is a good question. Not sure what I think on that one. I guess I think either would work. If you wind up in that situation you can tell us what happens and then we will have a better recommendation. lol!
jakesch
Senior Member
It's a DYI bou hunt...with guaranteed bear sightings every day. Most people don't have scuffle's with them, but it is a good to be prepared. I would agree, a 375 RUM is much better suited for that fight.
Here I am derailing the new thread that was created because it derailed another. (rofl)
Sea Level @ 59 degrees, the 260's (3100 fps) have a SF of ~1.9 while the 175's (3700 fps) have an SF of ~4.0...oh to test the confidence of our theories!
I will say, I am impressed how well that 260 performed on that elk leg bone. I do not believe many bullets would have obliterated that tough of a bone (especially close to the knuckle) and kept going the way it did. In addition, that 260 has been great a hitting 1000 yard targets. Lol
jakesch
Senior Member
Here is the ballistic comparison for my 338 RUM. I will note that I have not verified that I can achieve 3700 fps with the 175's, but I do think getting there is possible with H4350.
I included the wind drift in the chart...maybe the 213HH is the real winner.
Note: I've added the two additional altitudes / temp combos that i harvested elk with this year with the 260's.
Sea Level 59 degrees
6000 ft, 40 degrees
9000 ft, 40 degrees
farleg
Platinum Member
Welcome to the derail club a few of us are good @ that lol
You guys are cool with your cool colours
Carl & I are still using crayons
I do like the 213 on that chart & it just shows us we shouldn’t assume
now the derail from this side of the ditch
Now weve got our heads wrapped around those brackets how about ——————-…..,,,,,,,!!!!!!
yes it will come just not yet lol
keep up the good work
love this place
cheers
harperc
Global Moderator
I commented over on "Bear Bullets"
harperc
Global Moderator
Some of this is dated, but illustrates my experience.
We have a couple of younger guys here that as soon as they could afford it bought .338 Edges, and loaded with 300 grain Bergers. It took them awhile to realize that really didn't serve their needs.
They weren't shooting 1200 yards, half of that was a long poke for where we hunt. Gradually a shift back to lighter faster choices occurred.
Not a poke at them or the fellow they were trying to emulate. 20 years later they have grown enough to be in that club if they choose.
Back in the day one of the long range pioneers had a range finder from a Japanese Battleship.
My point is "long range hunting" requires more than a "long range bullet".
richcotte
Platinum Member
Dec 16, 2021 at 10:57am jakesch said:
Love this! But at the end of the day I think the toughest part is "choosing" a range. I have killed elk from 100y to 660y with hammers...I love the idea of light / fast impacts but I do not want to give up long range "effectiveness".
To me, the "big" question is whether the close range (sub 400y) benefits of light weight out-weigh it's downsides out to 700y? Half of my elk shot opportunities that I have had are beyond 400y.
jakesch I struggled with a similar question when I bought my 300WM this year.
I know what my abilities are for long range, and they’re well beyond ethical distances for animals, so how do I settle on the max range I would use the rifle at? After scouting a few areas where I planned to spend most of rifle season glassing for elk, I looked at the ranges from those locations where I would be willing to retrieve an animal from combined with bullet flight time and that helped me decide on my max range which was roughly 750 yds. From there I looked at the bullet options that stayed above 1800 fps at that range and beyond and made my selection of bullet.
Hopefully, I’ll be much closer that that when I finally get the opportunity to pull the trigger on an elk with that rifle (back injury killed my season this year). But, that’s how I made my choice of bullets in a nutshell. Hope it helps.
joe16
Platinum Member
Fellas
I'd like to ask you a question, this is interesting to me.
Why isn't going a field with two bullets an option? I've never hunted elk but I'm pretty sure it's 1 and you're done if I'm not mistaken.
Could one not go out with his rifle zeroed with his long-range option and if a shorter shot presents itself then choose your light option bullet, the zeros should not be that far off. A piece of tape stuck to the side of the stock would keep the dope handy.
When I ran The Arms Room for my infantry unit we had scout sniper teams. Primary Shooter had his weapon zeroed for him, spotter was required to qualify on that same rifle and put his dope in and then shoot for qualification. I'm just surprised that I haven't heard anybody mention that this is how they attack the long-range short-range possibility.
This is just a question that entered my mind, for my self-imposed limit on an animal is 400 and in. I'm a major time-of-flight guy and with my physical limitations I make distances as short as possible.
Joe
jakesch
Senior Member
I've considered this option with my 338 RUM, but the 213 HH 100y zero is about 4" left, 3" above my 260 gr HH zero. If the zeros were only an inch or so off, I would consider the two bullet.
Also, I would hate to get caught up in the moment and firing the wrong one (especially light / fast with not perfect zero at long range). I know it can be done, but honestly, mentally you need to remove as many sources of mistakes as possible as you get into the high stress situations.
joe16
Platinum Member
Jake
When I first read your post I was going to agree wholeheartedly but while I was sitting here I was thinking that I don't believe in dialing in but if you're going to dial in two in. what's the difference of dialing in 4 in.? I understand this takes a completely different mindset and multiple, multiple sessions of practice not just practice but perfect practice there's a difference. Along with this practice comes the confidence that's required.
I'd like to add again that my self-imposed limit is 400 yds and I do not use the two bullet approach. I was just wondering if anybody had. I don't believe in dialing in, It adds one more possibility of a mechanical failure and a human failure.
I applaud your rifle choice, you're going a field with enough rifle for the task. God knows I've made the wrong choice going to light
. And I'm sure your Optics are equal to the task as well. Do you mind if I ask you if you dial in for a distance increase and dial-in for a windage compensation. Again I'm not picking, I'm just asking out of curiosity. I don't hunt the species or conditions y'all have out west, so I'm just wondering.
Just askin
Joe
PS I apologize for hijacking this thread
farleg
Platinum Member
Gday joe t/ jakesch here is a thread somewhere on dual loads
Possible for some others not so much
Cheers
jakesch
Senior Member
It is a fair questions. I personally zero at 100y, then adjust my turret to my MPBR based on the game and hunting conditions. I do this, so it is a point and fire sub 350 yards or so, and a simple holdover out to 400 yards. I dial beyond those distances and hold for wind using outputs from my sig2400abs.
I try to keep my process as tidy as possibly, because I recognize my brain goes to mush. I hate it, but once I held a 10 MOA holdover for a 250 yard shot (200y zero) without even thinking (shot over back of the elk). So my current process is following:
- Range with sig2400abs
- Dial elevation (as needed, beyond MPBR)
- Adjust parallax (as needed, beyond MPBR)
- Check wind, scale MOA holdover relative to a 10mph crosswind output from sig
This in itself is a "lot" of steps in high stress situations.
I could easily generate a another profile in my sig2400abs and switch. Inside sig range finder, it can account for the 100y offset in zero and give holdover / windage properly in the calculations. But now I have to make sure the cartridge in the chamber is the same profile being used on my range finder, I could easily screw that up. I could color code brass to make it easier...
So long story short, yes it is possible and plausible with plenty of practice and a good system...but what does the extra time / effort of this system actually buy you? A velocity bracket change sub 150 yards? I do not believe added complexity is worth it.
joe16
Platinum Member
Jake
Now I agree wholeheartedly Jake all of this must take place in .2 seconds I dislike most of my Parallax adjusting scopes because it's one more step required. Hence the 400-yard limit.
And mush I know all about mush, I'm good for 10 Heartbeats, then the crap hits the fan. Hence the 400-yard limit.
Jake thanks for taking this as an exercise in debate because that's all it was Sir I was just wondering
Joe
Steve Davis
Administrator
Lots of talk about how heavy or light to run. The more I do this the faster I want to run. But I will say light and fast is not always the answer. You have to weigh in all the factors of what the intended purpose of the rifle is. Range to be used, wind deflection at each range, and then drop. Most important for me with drop is what is the max point blank range. Or how far can I shoot before I have to think about changing my aim point. All of these things go together in the decision making. Also assuming that the chosen bullets have plenty of twist to be fully stable. I personally will not push the stability to gain a small advantage in range etc.
So I ran some ballistic numbers comparing the .308 cal 199g Hammer Hunter and the 137g Hammer Hunter. I used the 300 rum as the platform. I have my current load data with the 199g Hammer Hunter but have not loaded the 137g Hammer Hunter so used vel data that I think is realistic. Attached you will see the comparison of the two bullets ballistically. Note most importantly the wind drift and impact vel of each bullet. I started the drop charts at 300y out to 800y. The faster lighter bullet gives an advantage of 25y for max point blank range. At 300y the faster bullet has an impact vel advantage of 122 fps but a disadvantage in wind of 1.7". You all know that I am not much of an energy guy. To me it is generally an irrelevant number but well worth noting in this exercise. The Heavier bullet has 1006.6 ft/lbs more energy at 300y. Now let's take into account the amount of shed weight from each bullet. They are very proportionally designed so I am going to use 65% weight retention for each bullet. This would mean that the 199g HH is going to shed pretty close to 70g of petals and the 137g HH will shed pretty close to 48g of petals. Let's say that each bullet sheds 4 petals. There is no predicting this but good for this exercise. That would make each petal for the 199g HH about 17.5g and each petal for the 137g HH about 12g. So the 199g HH has about 68% more shed mass creating their own brand of havoc.
At 300y does the 100fps impact vel advantage of the 137g HH have an advantage for terminal performance? Maybe... I am not sure. At 400y the two bullets are virtually identical in impact vel. A slight advantage of 4fps for the 137gHH. The wind advantage of the 199g HH at 400y is now 3.3". I would say that on a 5" radius target wind is now significant. By the way I used a full value 10 mph wind for the calculations. Past 400y the advantage of the Heavier bullet becomes greater in every way.
My conclusion:
For hunting under 400y I would not talk anyone out of running the lighter bullet. In fact I would probably encourage the use of the lighter bullet. Less recoil, higher impact velocities, and flatter trajectory.
I attached the drop charts for review.
rum drop comparison.pdf (927.57 KB)
jakesch
Senior Member
Love this! But at the end of the day I think the toughest part is "choosing" a range. I have killed elk from 100y to 660y with hammers...I love the idea of light / fast impacts but I do not want to give up long range "effectiveness".
To me, the "big" question is whether the close range (sub 400y) benefits of light weight out-weigh it's downsides out to 700y? Half of my elk shot opportunities that I have had are beyond 400y.
harperc
Global Moderator
I "THINK" one of the reasons light and fast is popular on this site is, we're either more honest, or conservative regarding our distance needs. Hence Shock Hammers, and other adaptions friendlier.
I just put a thread on ignore elsewhere (regarding long range) as it got too much to read.
As I've said before a pet peeve of mine is advising a beginner on 1000 yard bullets, knowing they don't own a basic range finder.
ButterBean
Platinum Member
No truer words have ever been said
jakesch
Senior Member
That is fair. My max distance on elk (700y) is much further than my distance for deer (~500y). I am more likely to go lighter / faster on mule deer than elk.
farleg
Platinum Member
Gday
Isn’t it good to have the boss back
Nice post Steve even @ 4K ( you can get a touch more in the rum ) for the 137 those figures won’t change your still correct
I like all of the above & fits pretty well with those velocity brackets /triangle
I’ll add a touch as we increase the size of the animal we need more mass in those petals to get the wounds to the far lung on a broadside or to the vitals on the quarter shots
SF is also a interesting one that as we increase animal size /resistance more importance should be given to its thought & petal mass also is tied in here also I believe
jakesch nothing wrong with that analogy or application but I’m not going to give up on you with those 175 just need to wait till you get into country of a 400/500 yard max shot potential then I’m going to ride you if you use the 260 lol
& lastly while I’m on for the ride I got pulled up by the boys in blue in regard to my comment on small deer
I call elk & moose in the deer category & really I should be more specific to a small deer is around the 300/400 lb mark or less then I sometimes break this down further
If I put this forward jump on me again & sort our differences of interpretation out
sorry for my bad
Cheers
tthetinkerer
Senior Member
Steve,
I used the exact same approach to making a decision between the 52gr and 64gr HHs. The only issue is that the powder I had on hand couldn't get me the projected velocity with the 52gr and the very same powder actually got me a slightly higher than projected velocity with the 64gr.
Shed weight between the two is very similar based on hollow point depth and nose length. Wind performance is better on the 64gr at all ranges, and point blank range on the 52gr is longer by about 20yds at 52gr (3500fps) and 64gr (3150fps) IIRC. Impact velocity is higher with the 52gr out to 250yd, and at 175yd it is about 100fps faster. But this is all at a 52gr HH projected speed of 3500fps, but I was only able to get 3400fps. The 64gr looks to be able to get 3175fps easily. I also think I need a longer barrel for the lighter bullets to get all their much needed velocity.
Long story short, the 64gr actually works better for my 20" 1-8" twist barrel.
jakesch
Senior Member
(Farleg) jakesch nothing wrong with that analogy or application but I’m not going to give up on you with those 175 just need to wait till you get into country of a 400/500 yard max shot potential then I’m going to ride you if you use the 260 lol
I just may have to load up those 175's for my Caribou trip next fall. I just ordered a box to see how well I can get them to shoot. But that gets me thinking...what are you thoughts are bears...would you rather have that 175 @ at 3500 fps impact velocity or the 260 @ 2900 fps when a bear is coming in hot?
IF the 175's in that platform acted like 30cal/124's in the rums(high SF and velocity), I think they would be hard to ignore by shooter or target. I think I would want some first hand experience before trusting my life with them on a charging grizzly or brown, but anything else, yes.
farleg
Platinum Member
Gday jakesch
caribou
nicethen
here we go bears are going to pull me up again lol
this is going to be a bit of interpretation due to above
first off we need to definitely look @ the SF & if you’re below 2 on this I would be cautious the higher the better for sure
are you with a guide ? I want my 375 rum with those 270 levers over any other pill that’s stopping power
yes I’m trying to deflect lol as hate bears
the 260 ive seen from you guys penertration wise is great
the 175 got no idea penertration wise so I’m cautious & don’t know but I’m swayed to the 260 if the SF
& 2900 impact still knocks the stuffing out of them but @3500 it’s a whole new world but we need to know the triangle parameter & im going to say the 175 will potentially struggle on penertration on a real big bear like RH hunts so it’s the 260 for me if your SF is up
I’ve got the same situation with the 500 Jeffery on buff & a 570 or 600 gr pill will be my go to pill for a charge but the 425 may surprise me
yes I’m going to find out once Steve makes them
Got no idea on bears just thoughts
cheers
Steve Davis
Administrator
That is a good question. Not sure what I think on that one. I guess I think either would work. If you wind up in that situation you can tell us what happens and then we will have a better recommendation. lol!
jakesch
Senior Member
It's a DYI bou hunt...with guaranteed bear sightings every day. Most people don't have scuffle's with them, but it is a good to be prepared. I would agree, a 375 RUM is much better suited for that fight.
Here I am derailing the new thread that was created because it derailed another. (rofl)
Sea Level @ 59 degrees, the 260's (3100 fps) have a SF of ~1.9 while the 175's (3700 fps) have an SF of ~4.0...oh to test the confidence of our theories!
I will say, I am impressed how well that 260 performed on that elk leg bone. I do not believe many bullets would have obliterated that tough of a bone (especially close to the knuckle) and kept going the way it did. In addition, that 260 has been great a hitting 1000 yard targets. Lol
jakesch
Senior Member
Here is the ballistic comparison for my 338 RUM. I will note that I have not verified that I can achieve 3700 fps with the 175's, but I do think getting there is possible with H4350.
I included the wind drift in the chart...maybe the 213HH is the real winner.
Note: I've added the two additional altitudes / temp combos that i harvested elk with this year with the 260's.
Sea Level 59 degrees
6000 ft, 40 degrees
9000 ft, 40 degrees
farleg
Platinum Member
Welcome to the derail club a few of us are good @ that lol
You guys are cool with your cool colours
Carl & I are still using crayons
I do like the 213 on that chart & it just shows us we shouldn’t assume
now the derail from this side of the ditch
Now weve got our heads wrapped around those brackets how about ——————-…..,,,,,,,!!!!!!
yes it will come just not yet lol
keep up the good work
love this place
cheers
harperc
Global Moderator
I commented over on "Bear Bullets"
harperc
Global Moderator
Some of this is dated, but illustrates my experience.
We have a couple of younger guys here that as soon as they could afford it bought .338 Edges, and loaded with 300 grain Bergers. It took them awhile to realize that really didn't serve their needs.
They weren't shooting 1200 yards, half of that was a long poke for where we hunt. Gradually a shift back to lighter faster choices occurred.
Not a poke at them or the fellow they were trying to emulate. 20 years later they have grown enough to be in that club if they choose.
Back in the day one of the long range pioneers had a range finder from a Japanese Battleship.
My point is "long range hunting" requires more than a "long range bullet".
richcotte
Platinum Member
Dec 16, 2021 at 10:57am jakesch said:
Love this! But at the end of the day I think the toughest part is "choosing" a range. I have killed elk from 100y to 660y with hammers...I love the idea of light / fast impacts but I do not want to give up long range "effectiveness".
To me, the "big" question is whether the close range (sub 400y) benefits of light weight out-weigh it's downsides out to 700y? Half of my elk shot opportunities that I have had are beyond 400y.
jakesch I struggled with a similar question when I bought my 300WM this year.
I know what my abilities are for long range, and they’re well beyond ethical distances for animals, so how do I settle on the max range I would use the rifle at? After scouting a few areas where I planned to spend most of rifle season glassing for elk, I looked at the ranges from those locations where I would be willing to retrieve an animal from combined with bullet flight time and that helped me decide on my max range which was roughly 750 yds. From there I looked at the bullet options that stayed above 1800 fps at that range and beyond and made my selection of bullet.
Hopefully, I’ll be much closer that that when I finally get the opportunity to pull the trigger on an elk with that rifle (back injury killed my season this year). But, that’s how I made my choice of bullets in a nutshell. Hope it helps.
joe16
Platinum Member
Fellas
I'd like to ask you a question, this is interesting to me.
Why isn't going a field with two bullets an option? I've never hunted elk but I'm pretty sure it's 1 and you're done if I'm not mistaken.
Could one not go out with his rifle zeroed with his long-range option and if a shorter shot presents itself then choose your light option bullet, the zeros should not be that far off. A piece of tape stuck to the side of the stock would keep the dope handy.
When I ran The Arms Room for my infantry unit we had scout sniper teams. Primary Shooter had his weapon zeroed for him, spotter was required to qualify on that same rifle and put his dope in and then shoot for qualification. I'm just surprised that I haven't heard anybody mention that this is how they attack the long-range short-range possibility.
This is just a question that entered my mind, for my self-imposed limit on an animal is 400 and in. I'm a major time-of-flight guy and with my physical limitations I make distances as short as possible.
Joe
jakesch
Senior Member
I've considered this option with my 338 RUM, but the 213 HH 100y zero is about 4" left, 3" above my 260 gr HH zero. If the zeros were only an inch or so off, I would consider the two bullet.
Also, I would hate to get caught up in the moment and firing the wrong one (especially light / fast with not perfect zero at long range). I know it can be done, but honestly, mentally you need to remove as many sources of mistakes as possible as you get into the high stress situations.
joe16
Platinum Member
Jake
When I first read your post I was going to agree wholeheartedly but while I was sitting here I was thinking that I don't believe in dialing in but if you're going to dial in two in. what's the difference of dialing in 4 in.? I understand this takes a completely different mindset and multiple, multiple sessions of practice not just practice but perfect practice there's a difference. Along with this practice comes the confidence that's required.
I'd like to add again that my self-imposed limit is 400 yds and I do not use the two bullet approach. I was just wondering if anybody had. I don't believe in dialing in, It adds one more possibility of a mechanical failure and a human failure.
I applaud your rifle choice, you're going a field with enough rifle for the task. God knows I've made the wrong choice going to light
. And I'm sure your Optics are equal to the task as well. Do you mind if I ask you if you dial in for a distance increase and dial-in for a windage compensation. Again I'm not picking, I'm just asking out of curiosity. I don't hunt the species or conditions y'all have out west, so I'm just wondering.Just askin
Joe
PS I apologize for hijacking this thread
farleg
Platinum Member
Gday joe t/ jakesch here is a thread somewhere on dual loads
Possible for some others not so much
Cheers
jakesch
Senior Member
It is a fair questions. I personally zero at 100y, then adjust my turret to my MPBR based on the game and hunting conditions. I do this, so it is a point and fire sub 350 yards or so, and a simple holdover out to 400 yards. I dial beyond those distances and hold for wind using outputs from my sig2400abs.
I try to keep my process as tidy as possibly, because I recognize my brain goes to mush. I hate it, but once I held a 10 MOA holdover for a 250 yard shot (200y zero) without even thinking (shot over back of the elk). So my current process is following:
- Range with sig2400abs
- Dial elevation (as needed, beyond MPBR)
- Adjust parallax (as needed, beyond MPBR)
- Check wind, scale MOA holdover relative to a 10mph crosswind output from sig
This in itself is a "lot" of steps in high stress situations.
I could easily generate a another profile in my sig2400abs and switch. Inside sig range finder, it can account for the 100y offset in zero and give holdover / windage properly in the calculations. But now I have to make sure the cartridge in the chamber is the same profile being used on my range finder, I could easily screw that up. I could color code brass to make it easier...
So long story short, yes it is possible and plausible with plenty of practice and a good system...but what does the extra time / effort of this system actually buy you? A velocity bracket change sub 150 yards? I do not believe added complexity is worth it.
joe16
Platinum Member
Jake
Now I agree wholeheartedly Jake all of this must take place in .2 seconds I dislike most of my Parallax adjusting scopes because it's one more step required. Hence the 400-yard limit.
And mush I know all about mush, I'm good for 10 Heartbeats, then the crap hits the fan. Hence the 400-yard limit.
Jake thanks for taking this as an exercise in debate because that's all it was Sir I was just wondering
Joe
Last edited: