Can holdover be more accurate than dialing in a hunting scope?

[TaperPin]

Holdovers don’t work with a .22 at 100?
I’m interested on how you came to that conclusion. And what size targets your referring to.

That’s based on shooting small bore silhouette matches - chickens at 40 meters, pigs at 60, turkeys at 77 and rams at 100 meters. The match can be shot with holdovers, but it‘s easy to show scores go up significantly when dialing.

 

[TaperPin]

I’m curious what objects or food he uses for wind holds.

A big blueberry of course.

 

[Formidilosus]

The match can be shot with holdovers, but it‘s easy to show scores go up significantly when dialing.

And you believe that when you try the same things with centerfires from 100-400+ yards, that the same doesn’t apply?

 

[BLJ]

That’s based on shooting small bore silhouette matches - chickens at 40 meters, pigs at 60, turkeys at 77 and rams at 100 meters. The match can be shot with holdovers, but it‘s easy to show scores go up significantly when dialing.View attachment 688472

Not sure on the size of the ram, but I do believe that dialing is better.
How big are the targets?

 

[sveltri]

But first is on top. And he’s had the thickness of a thesaurus and pancakes for his holdovers. In reality I’m giving him crap. There’s much better ways to do it nowadays

Where would the first brick in a wall be laid?

 

[sveltri]

When I was younger I didn’t know that “dialing” scopes existed and we didn’t have any BDC reticle scopes all we did was hold over. 200-0, 300-6”, 400-16” or top of elks back. It worked pretty well as our accuracy requirement was minute of elk. We didn’t shoot further than 400ish, mostly because we weren’t presented with shots any further. If I had to go back to that I’d rather take my recurve.

 

[TaperPin]

And you believe that when you try the same things with centerfires from 100-400+ yards, that the same doesn’t apply?

Yep.

 

[TaperPin]

Not sure on the size of the ram, but I do believe that dialing is better.
How big are the targets?

 

[BLJ]

Yep.

So you’re saying that it’s not necessary to dial out to 400 when trying to kill an animal with a centerfire rifle but it is necessary when shooting silhouettes at 100 with a 22?

 

[General RE LEE]

My 4-16x Zeiss #68 reticle has 1 MOA subtends but when shooting off the reticle I shoot 8x thus 2 MOA subtends.

I can tell you right now I shoot weekly and am very comfortable putting scope on 8x and can hit deer side vital steel at 200,300,400 and 500 yards much much faster than anyone could dial. Some guy told me shooting a 1 MOA reticle at 1/2 power is too complicated. Horse shit.

 

[TaperPin]

So you’re saying that it’s not necessary to dial out to 400 when trying to kill an animal with a centerfire rifle but it is necessary when shooting silhouettes at 100 with a 22?

I’m not against dialing, but there is a time trade off, even if it’s only a few seconds. I’ve had three very nice animals in the scope under 400 yards that moved out of view just seconds before a shot could be taken - all were doable shots. One still makes my stomach hurt just thinking about it - it’s haunted me half a lifetime.

For any range an animal is seen, I’m making a judgement as to what the fastest most efficient way is to get a shot off. For me I’m confident the quick and dirty holds to 400 yards are close enough. A dialed scope providing an impact 2” closer to center doesn’t help if it takes extra time and eyes have to taken off the animal.

It’s no different from deciding between two shooting positions - the faster position vs the more accurate one. If the extra accuracy isn’t needed, the faster one provides better odds of bringing the animal home.

 

[Felix40]

I don’t understand how this is even a discussion. I can dial a knob a few clicks faster than I can count hash marks in a scope.

The whole system around aiming at the bottom 1/4 or holding top of the back or whatever probably works fine when you mostly shoot the same type of animals all the time. When you mix in a bunch of different species the target picture is going to be a wild guess based on how big you think the animal is every time. Around here a guy could hunt coues, mule deer, oryx, bear, elk, Barbary sheep, javelina, coyotes etc all in the same year. Good luck guessing what your 5” hold under is on an animal that you don’t really know how big it is. It seems so much more simple to just turn a knob 6 clicks and put the bullet where you’re aiming.

 

[Dobermann]

At 400 I don‘t have to take eye off to look at a table or spin a dial - with a 300 yard zero the 400 yard hold is right on the back and Bang Bang. Most people find it pretty easy to hold on the back. Even 450 is easy - the 15” drop when looking at a mule deer that’s around 20” chest to back isn’t a lot of mental math - it’s 1/4 of a deer chest high over the back. Antelope are about 16” deep - at the same 450 yards it’s holding half a chest over the back.

Oh dear.

Or oh deer ... and we wonder why hunters using Fuddlore wound so many animals.

 

[sickles107]

At 100 and 200 aim at the top of the first pancake. At 300 aim at the top of the second pancake. At 375 aim at the top of the third pancake. At 400 aim for the top of the fourth pancake.

I don’t range unless it’s past 300 yards.
View attachment 688318

 

[lefthandedasian]

Oh dear.

Or oh deer ... and we wonder why hunters using Fuddlore wound so many animals.

Practice and knowing your load ballistics gives you what Taperpin was talking about. Give a listen to Ron Spomer's podcast and you'll understand. MPBR (maximum point blank range) can take a target faster than dialing up to ~300 without hold overs because of typical bullet trajectory. Knowing your hold overs on an animal can be just as effective, but practice is key. When your target is diner plate size (vitals) and you and your rifle can consistently can shoot 1 MOA groups, you should be able to hit a vital size target easily out to 600 yards with no wind.

Either way, dialing or holdovers, wind will be the biggest factor in a good shot. Modern ballistic apps can tell you your drop and how many moa to dial, but I bet you 1% of people on this forum can actually read the wind correctly. Bet there are a fair amount of people who dial who've also wounded animals because they don't know how to read wind.

Different strokes for different folks but they both can wound animals.

 

[JohnJohnson]

Give a listen to Ron Spomer's podcast

No.

 

[lefthandedasian]

No.

Okay fine

 

[Macintosh]

After listening to some of @robby denning points on the Shoot to Hunt podcast regarding steps/time for holdover vs. dial, and consideration of the all the scope evals/proficiency ranges of hunters by @Formidilosus I started to wonder if holding over is actually more effective in cost and accuracy for the average hunter. Here me out...

1. Most hunting scopes cannot dial accurately or return to zero consistently. Hold overs don't change (assuming the reticle is correctly calibrated).
2. A lot of engagements are under 400 yards (most far less). With a 100 or 200 yard zero on an "average" cartridge your looking at less than 20-30 inches of drop. Less with a "good" cartridge.
3. A mil based reticle with .5 mil increments in holds is fairly intuitive, and out to 400 yards ranges that are not exactly lining up with 200, 300, 400 yards are solved by the trajectory of holding between the .5 mil increments.
4. Using something in the 9X upper range like the Trijicon credo in mil square or Swaro Z3 BRH, you will be limited to tighter eye box, and suffer some loss of spotting impact. However, maybe more accurate than dialing a shot using something like a VX3HD CDS?
5. Budget is a barrier for many hunters. I am North of the border and SWFA is not an option. The only readily available brand that can dial repeatedly is Nightforce, and many cannot afford to top every rifle they have with one. Plus the reticles kind of suck.

So with a 200 yard zero your holding back out to 300 to keep maximum FOV, and after that you crank up to 9X and use the holds. To Robby's points this seems faster. You range the game, if its in 300 range aim shoot. If outside, crank up scope select hold shoot.

What say you? Would you rather have a scope that is mediocre in adjustments? Or use a holdover with the above considerations?

With regard to equipment, the original post asked about a scope that was “mediocre in adjustment”…every scope Ive ever personally seen that was mediocre in adjustment also unexpectedly became mediocre in holding zero at some point, so my take is that if you have equipment like this you are swimming upstream against the current before you even get started. Personally, I wouldnt by choice settle for this scope regardless of which method I relied on—Id much rather stretch and put one good scope in one rifle to do everything, as opposed to putting functionally inferior scopes on “every rifle I have”. To me that makes no sense.
Personally, Ive practiced with holdovers using a variety of reticles, and I have found I am not able to be as precisise as Id like on smaller deer-sized game past about 300 or 350 yards, unless Im using a reticle that sucks for the majority of my (closer-range) shots. I believe dialing will always be more precise all other things being equal. It depends on the reticle a lot for me, but for this reason I dont really use holdovers for hunting past that range. But 100% I think Im better off choosing a reliable point-and-shoot scope using holdovers, than I am with a questionable-quality dialing scope. I only get to hunt in the west every couple years, but its been the rarest of shots for me where I needed to do either, so I’ll choose the “handicap” I know and can manage over the one that sneaks up on me and isnt consistent, every time.

 

[Shō[t]gun]

Give a listen to Ron Spomer's podcast and you'll understand.

His information is already garbled garbage that he’s paid to regurgitate by companies pushing product sales. Take it with the heavy dose of salt it requires.

When your target is diner plate size (vitals) and you and your rifle can consistently can shoot 1 MOA groups, you should be able to hit a vital size target easily out to 600 yards with no wind.

I’d like to see you make first round hits at 600 yard pie plates “with ease” in field conditions, especially holding over with MPBR like you’re saying. You obviously haven’t tested that theory, even with no wind.

I bet you 1% of people on this forum can actually read the wind correctly.

You may want to converse for more than the two hours you’ve been a member before assuming you’re better than 99% of shooters on here.

 

[JohnJohnson]

Bet there are a fair amount of people who dial who've also wounded animals because they don't know how to read wind.

Sure, probably. But what does that have to do with anything? Does using MPBR endow you with a mastery of how to read wind?

Also, and this is a genuine question, what exactly is Ron Spomer's experience with long range shooting? Given his attitude, I've never actually looked into the guy. Is he a useful source of information when it comes to long range?