Another Long Range TV Show Misses Coues Deer By 3 Feet!!!

[The_Jim]

It looks like these guys make a living off of the monetization of wildlife and promoting long range shooting at wildlife.

As long as people watch these videos, they keep making money.

 

[JohnJohnson]

I wonder how many archers sail them over the back at 40 and under the belly at 60… some of you guys are judgey as hell. I’ve seen way more close range wounding and missing than on the LR stuff. Don’t watch dumb shit on tv, problem solved.

Yeah, lots of judgmental world-class hunters on here that never miss.

I talked to seven dudes this year that "stuck" bulls but never found them.. I hear these stories every damn year. A bad shot is a bad shot, no matter the distance.


A friend of mine pulled this out of the backstrap of a bull he killed a few days ago with a rifle.

View attachment 954917

Animals that are wounded by long range bullets are walking around in excruciating pain. Animals that are wounded by broadheads are walking around in awe of how close the hunter got to them and how in tune with nature the archer is compared to rifle hunters. Nothing archers do can be unethical because they're morally superior.

 

[JGRaider]

Always love the argument that "more animals are wounded at close range than long range......." If you're not more accurate at 150 yds than you are at 800 you need to take up fishing.

 

[ebrownw2]

The only hunting shows I’ve ever watched that that I would recommend are “Outdoors with T.K. and Mike”.

Maybe with a little more hard work, and some steadying on their part….

 

[bnewt3]

I find the
"you are more likely to miss completely at long range and that makes it OK" argument to be lazy. It essentially means you are throwing darts blind.

If you arent extremely confident, backed by serious experience and proficiency in field shooting(competition or training that simulates hunting situations), you are going to get a good hit on the first shot, no matter the range, then you shouldnt shoot.

Edit:
The fact that they checked zero after the fact and it was as expected says there is an experience/skill deficiency somewhere, either in wind reading, ballistics truing at longer ranges, trigger press, stable position, etc.

 

[wind gypsy]

You're missing the point, and the math. At worst bad shots are made at long range at the same rate as they are at short ranges. At short ranges you're going to have more bad shots result in gut shots than at long ranges by at least an order of magnitude. Therefore, short range hunting is going to result in more gut shots than long range hunting assuming that short range and long range shots are taken at the same rate. We know the overwhelming number of shots by hunters are taken at short range. Therefore we should expect that short range hunting results in exponentially more gut shots.

That is a really "interesting" take. The point is shot selection where your less than perfect shots still get the deal done. Where does a "good shot" land in a long range situation when the bad shots are missing POA by 4'? Only miss by 1' instead of 4 -> guts.

 

[TaperPin]

You're missing the point, and the math. At worst bad shots are made at long range at the same rate as they are at short ranges. At short ranges you're going to have more bad shots result in gut shots than at long ranges by at least an order of magnitude. Therefore, short range hunting is going to result in more gut shots than long range hunting assuming that short range and long range shots are taken at the same rate. We know the overwhelming number of shots by hunters are taken at short range. Therefore we should expect that short range hunting results in exponentially more gut shots.

At any range and any choice of weapon, if someone isn’t capable of hitting the kill zone, for whatever reason, beit equipment, weather, wind, animal movement, shooting ability, shooting position, buck fever, or ability to remember how to use the scope, they are beyond their limits to understand the situation and the poor judgement to take the shot is what it is.

 

[wind gypsy]

Guys, i'm sure they validated their rifle out to 1000 yards so they were good to go.

 

[huntsd]

I like that they show the ups and in this case downs of hunting. Not hiding the fact that people f up from time to time. Feels relatable. Maybe he had a bad rest/ shooting position and just plain f’d up bad.

 

[bnewt3]

Guys, i'm sure they validated their rifle out to 1000 yards so they were good to go.

Assuming you are correct, the shot still missed by at least 3 feet. So something else was lacking, by a long way, which means the trigger should not have been pulled.

 

[bnewt3]

That is a really "interesting" take. The point is shot selection where your less than perfect shots still get the deal done. Where does a "good shot" land in a long range situation when the bad shots are missing POA by 4'? Only miss by 1' instead of 4 -> guts.

IMO we should NEVER take a shot where we have "calculated" the chances of a clean miss vs wounding and done some backwards justification of the risk.

It should be first shot mortal within a few minutes at the most? Yes or no.

If no, dont shoot.

 

[SuperDUECE22]

We don't hate long range hunting, we hate the video being on the Internet.

Well if people quit consuming the content these imbeciles would have to get real jobs.
IF YOU'RE WATCHING IT, YOU'RE FUNDING IT !!

 

[ThorM465]

That is a really "interesting" take. The point is shot selection where your less than perfect shots still get the deal done. Where does a "good shot" land in a long range situation when the bad shots are missing POA by 4'? Only miss by 1' instead of 4 -> guts.

4" miss shouldn't equate to a gut shot if you're aiming at the appropriate spot.

1" miss turning into a 4" miss in an MOA rifle is 400 yards. Are we calling a 400 yards shot long range hunting? I'd agree that is for most hunters, but it isn't for modern rifles and optics.

1" miss isn't a miss, it's shooting MOA. If you're shooting MOA, you're qualified for hunting at longer ranges assuming you do the rest of the work. The people we're really talking about shoot 3 MOA and 6" to 9" miss at 100 yards is probably what they're seeing. That's 30" to 45" at 500 yards, 45" to 67.5" at 750 yard, and 60" to 90" at 1000 yards plus wind.

At any range and any choice of weapon, if someone isn’t capable of hitting the kill zone, for whatever reason, beit equipment, weather, wind, animal movement, shooting ability, shooting position, buck fever, or ability to remember how to use the scope, they are beyond their limits to understand the situation and the poor judgement to take the shot is what it is.

Brother, we are in violent agreement here.

Guys, i'm sure they validated their rifle out to 1000 yards so they were good to go.

How many hunters do you think validate their rifle beyond 100 yards? Honest question.

 

[wind gypsy]

Assuming you are correct, the shot still missed by at least 3 feet. So something else was lacking, by a long way, which means the trigger should not have been pulled.

Yeah, what's usually lacking is the understanding of what their actual odds are to hit vitals on the first shot in a new location with an unverified read of the conditions. Break a shot that is 1 MOA off from POA and miss wind call by 4ish MPH = 3' of error at 1000 yards. "bUt I hIT sTeEL Out tO 1000 yARds beFoRe sEAson"

 

[bnewt3]

"bUt I hIT sTeEL Out tO 1000 yARds beFoRe sEAson"

I agree thats a huge problem as well, one that gives unjustified confidence.

Hitting somewhere on a 36x36 steel plate at 1000 is not good enough to take a shot at a coues deer at 1000.

 

[JF_Idaho]

1" miss turning into a 4" miss in an MOA rifle is 400 yards. Are we calling a 400 yards shot long range hunting? I'd agree that is for most hunters, but it isn't for modern rifles and optics.

Wouldn't a 4" miss in a 1 moa rifle at 400 yds be a hit vs a miss........?

I think that's the bigger problem. A 1 moa hit at 1000 yds is 10.5 inches. Any variable that takes you outside that 1 moa is going to be a pretty serious miss. If it's even a true moa gun. If it's a 1.5 moa gun a hit could easily be outside the vitals.

 

[bnewt3]

Wouldn't a 4" miss in a 1 moa rifle at 400 yds be a hit vs a miss........?

I think that's the bigger problem. A 1 moa hit at 1000 yds is 10.5 inches. Any variable that takes you outside that 1 moa is going to be a pretty serious miss. If it's even a true moa gun. If it's a 1.5 moa gun a hit could easily be outside the vitals.

And a 1MOA gun on the range quickly turns into a 1.5 or 2MOA gun in the field. If not more.

 

[Steve300xcw]

I wonder how many archers sail them over the back at 40 and under the belly at 60… some of you guys are judgey as hell. I’ve seen way more close range wounding and missing than on the LR stuff. Don’t watch dumb shit on tv, problem solved.

Hell, how many times have you read a thread about somebody with a bow who "hit em a lil far back" But we looked really hard and are kinda sad about the whole dealio. Followed by an internet bro hug from everybody else that has done it because "if you do this long enough that will happen"

 

[bnewt3]

Hell, how many times have you read a thread about somebody with a bow who "hit em a lil far back" But we looked really hard and are kinda sad about the whole dealio. Followed by an internet bro hug from everybody else that has done it because "if you do this long enough that will happen"

Its tricky isnt it. We should prefer a complete miss than a wounding, but not fatal(or at least not quickly fatal) shot. But at the same time, If we miss completely, do we belong in the woods?

 

[Harvey_NW]

Always love the argument that "more animals are wounded at close range than long range......." If you're not more accurate at 150 yds than you are at 800 you need to take up fishing.

I don't think that's the meaning of that statement, I think it's that there are way more shitty shooters out there taking shots at "acceptable" ranges and still messing them up, as there are more prepared shooters taking longer shots.