Deep (caliber choice) thoughts from a shallow mind

[amassi]

Making sure I'm tracking with you, a wind bracket is where Xmph crosswind equates to a .1 hold at 100, .3 at 300, etc?

Correct
How many shooting situations have you had where the extra 1-3 mph bracket was necessary ?
Likewise if your capable of holding .7 mil, are you not capable of holding 1 mil?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[huntnful]

I have a 225 ELDM going 2950 in a 300 NMI and a 108 ELDM going 3260 in a 6 PRC. And they are very close in comparison. Within .1 Mil out to 700 yards, then the 225 starts to buck the wind better.

 

[Quicksilver]

I have a 225 ELDM going 2950 in a 300 NMI and a 108 ELDM going 3260 in a 6 PRC. And they are very close in comparison. Within .1 Mil out to 700 yards, then the 225 starts to buck the wind better.

Good thing you never shoot past 700

….at least so far not this season

 

[wind gypsy]

Just ran 108 ELD, 108 EH, and 215 berger both at standard atmosphere w/ 10MPH full value wind. @600 yards the ELD shows 1.1 mil, 108 EH 1.0, and 215 shows 0.8.

A 6 creed is probably going to push the 108s faster than a 300wm pushes 215s at same barrel lengths too but probably not enough to matter with wind.

 

[brn2hnt]

Correct
How many shooting situations have you had where the extra 1-3 mph bracket was necessary ?
Likewise if your capable of holding .7 mil, are you not capable of holding 1 mil?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm not worried about holding the wind so much as the drift from "missed" wind.

I think I need to stop looking at the inches of drift and look at mils. Inches don't matter as much when you consider that even something like a Mil-Quad only has 1/2mil subtensions for wind hold.

 

[jjohnsonElknewbie]

The comment was probably in reference to elevation drop instead of wind drift, but I had recently seen a post saying the new high BC 25 cal bullets are pretty much right there with a 300WM out to 1000.

I would think 6.5 or 7mm would be a much happier middle ground.

Here is the table I ran with 133 grain .257 (.25-06) vs. 180 grain .308 (.300 Win mag). I'm sure running it again with 215 grain .308 at 3,000 MV would level the performance playing field due to higher BC and MV. However, the .25 has a tremendous recoil and muzzle blast advantage for virtually the same numbers at reasonable ranges. Althought a tad slower with slightly worse drift and drop, the 25 Creed achieves close to the same numbers with even less recoil and blast (45ish grains of powder vs. 60ish). The Berger data provided is interhcangeable with the 133 or 135 per their engineer.

 

[amassi]

I'm not worried about holding the wind so much as the drift from "missed" wind.

I think I need to stop looking at the inches of drift and look at mils. Inches don't matter as much when you consider that even something like a Mil-Quad only has 1/2mil subtensions for wind hold.

Yea sounds like time calling wind to boost your confidence would be better used than looking at excel charts.
Remember that wind call cuts both ways an incorrect hold is incorrect regardless of gun #.
But with the lighter recoiling 6mm your more likely to see that and quickly correct.
Plus braked 300 win mags can kick rocks


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[brn2hnt]

Plus braked 300 win mags can kick rocks

I've got a lot of "old-timey caliber wisdom" that was ingrained in me from the time I could hold a 22 that I'm trying to work through, be gentle

 

[TaperPin]

I'm not worried about holding the wind so much as the drift from "missed" wind.

At least in windy areas, that “missed” wind can add up quick!

I almost spit out a granola bar overhearing two guys practicing their wind reading ability for hunting holding a kestrel up for like 5 minutes (as they were told to do) on a perfectly flat rifle range, then declaring how they would be within a few tenths of a mil on any mountain ridge with a 3 mil hold into the wind. Sure sounds easy. Lol

There’s definitely a false sense of security in wind estimation when it comes to first shot hits. The whole idea of being able to see a miss is for soldiers and plate shooters. The flatter your gun shoots the better.

 

[Formidilosus]

The whole idea of being able to see a miss is for soldiers and plate shooters.

Being able to see misses and hits are for all field shooting. It’s vastly more important for living things than for targets.

 

[TaperPin]

Being able to see misses and hits are for all field shooting. It’s vastly more important for living things than for targets.

That whole philosophy assumes the probability of a miss is pretty good. I’ve normally stopped shooting after clean miss because something was drastically wrong for that to happen.

 

[Formidilosus]

That whole philosophy assumes the probability of a miss is pretty good. I’ve normally stopped shooting after clean miss because something was drastically wrong for that to happen.

The probability of missing is 100% if you shoot at enough animals. Beyond that, from seeing large amounts of people shoot at animals, the average is about 1 hit in every 3-7 shots. Just listening, but also speaking to quite a few hunters this season alone, it’s about 3/4 that have shot at an animal this season that have missed at least once.

 

[Stickmark]

that ratio of hit to miss is awful. I am glad I know my real limitations.

 

[wind gypsy]

That whole philosophy assumes the probability of a miss is pretty good. I’ve normally stopped shooting after clean miss because something was drastically wrong for that to happen.

How do you know it was a clean miss if you didn't see it?

 

[TaperPin]

How do you know it was a clean miss if you didn't see it?

I shot at an antelope and after the shot it just stood there. That’s pretty conclusive. Historically before the scope dialers, it’s not like hunters had absolutely no idea if they missed and if they did, in which direction.

I get a kick out of the Texas Plinking or other long range shooting shows on YouTube because even with scopes stronger than 30x, the smallest bush hiding impacts and the shooter is often clueless. One well known shooter has an incredible 80x on his 20 lb rifle and could not see impacts at what was 600ish yards.

I grew up shooting rocks and prairie dogs at long range - we were blessed with an abundance of rocks and dogs - with a 270, 338, 243, 7 mag, and few others, and it wasn’t hard to see where the bullet went - even with recoil. That’s probably a function of the typical Wyoming abundance of dirt and lack of vegetation, but that’s where a lot of game is shot.

 

[wind gypsy]

I shot at an antelope and after the shot it just stood there. That’s pretty conclusive. Historically before the scope dialers, it’s not like hunters had absolutely no idea if they missed and if they did, in which direction.

I get a kick out of the Texas Plinking or other long range shooting shows on YouTube because even with scopes stronger than 30x, the smallest bush hiding impacts and the shooter is often clueless. One well known shooter has an incredible 80x on his 20 lb rifle and could not see impacts at what was 600ish yards.

I grew up shooting rocks and prairie dogs at long range - we were blessed with an abundance of rocks and dogs - with a 270, 338, 243, 7 mag, and few others, and it wasn’t hard to see where the bullet went - even with recoil. That’s probably a function of the typical Wyoming abundance of dirt and lack of vegetation, but that’s where a lot of game is shot.

It's not unheard of for an animal to stand around for a while after getting shot.

Not sure what 80x has to do with spotting impacts at 600. I'd rather be at 10x than 80x if I wanted to spot impacts.

 

[Lawnboi]

I'm not worried about holding the wind so much as the drift from "missed" wind.

I think I need to stop looking at the inches of drift and look at mils. Inches don't matter as much when you consider that even something like a Mil-Quad only has 1/2mil subtensions for wind hold.

Anymore when comparing bullets/cartridges I am looking at the guns wind number to what I would consider my max range. We are not calling half mile an hour winds, most are lucky if they have the ability to keep it within 3-5mph. Adjustments are also more coarse out at range, and I also can’t see holding half tenths or 1/8 minutes either on game. Quickly, in the field I think the wind number is the way to go, for what I do atleast, which isn’t that long of range.

On top of that, when shooting in real wind, that extra wind performance you’re gaining really isn’t going to change much. Your guess could go either way. Now if we are talking holding center and letting it fly, with no guess, then yes the wind performance matters.

This coming from someone who shoots mostly at 100-500 yards.

 

[brn2hnt]

Anymore when comparing bullets/cartridges I am looking at the guns wind number to what I would consider my max range. We are not calling half mile an hour winds, most are lucky if they have the ability to keep it within 3-5mph. Adjustments are also more coarse out at range, and I also can’t see holding half tenths or 1/8 minutes either on game. Quickly, in the field I think the wind number is the way to go, for what I do atleast, which isn’t that long of range.

On top of that, when shooting in real wind, that extra wind performance you’re gaining really isn’t going to change much. Your guess could go either way. Now if we are talking holding center and letting it fly, with no guess, then yes the wind performance matters.

This coming from someone who shoots mostly at 100-500 yards.

Maybe I am doing this all bass ackwards, but what I do is look at wind drift for 3-4mph. I figure I can get within 4mph in any wind I would consider shooting in, 3mph most of the time. I used to spray commercial ag fields and got verry comfortable gauging wind below 8-10mph. Not the same as adding in canyons, thermals, etc I know, but a lot of practice over 20,000 acres per year.

I look at those wind drift numbers, and figure that's my "uncertainty" in my cone of fire location on the animal. I start getting above 6-7" and that gets uncomfortable (for me) fast.

Don't have a mil scope (YET!) but the wind bracketing/gun number is one of the strongest reasons for my next scope being in mils.

I guess a better way of saying is I'm not worried about the math equation, I'm worried about using the wrong value for the primary variable.

 

[TaperPin]

It's not unheard of for an animal to stand around for a while after getting shot.

Not sure what 80x has to do with spotting impacts at 600. I'd rather be at 10x than 80x if I wanted to spot impacts.

I’m not sure what you’re getting at - the idea that I don’t pull the trigger until I’m quite certain the animal is dead is somehow offensive?

The 80x on a 20 lb gun shooting 1/4 moa 20 shot groups with small caliber would be the easiest possible combination to show a hit - it’s like having it happen on the big screen tv and he didn’t see any dirt fly. You wouldn’t have seen the dirt fly with a smaller magnification - the point is not every hit has visible dirt.

If you think an antelope just stands there looking around like nothing happened when hit, we don’t hunt the same animals. Back in the day it wasn’t uncommon to have an extra doe tag, so between me and the family I liked to hunt with we shot 20 antelope a year for decades - nobody ever mentioned a wounded antelope just standing there walking around like nothing happened. Elk often do, deer once in while.

If you want to use artillery tactics to lob shells at an animal until its hit be my guest - that’s what I do with prairie dogs, but that’s not what I do with big game.

 

[Formidilosus]

I’m not sure what you’re getting at - the idea that I don’t pull the trigger until I’m quite certain the animal is dead is somehow offensive?

The 80x on a 20 lb gun shooting 1/4 moa 20 shot groups with small caliber would be the easiest possible combination to show a hit - it’s like having it happen on the big screen tv and he didn’t see any dirt fly. You wouldn’t have seen the dirt fly with a smaller magnification - the point is not every hit has visible dirt.

If you think an antelope just stands there looking around like nothing happened when hit, we don’t hunt the same animals. Back in the day it wasn’t uncommon to have an extra doe tag, so between me and the family I liked to hunt with we shot 20 antelope a year for decades - nobody ever mentioned a wounded antelope just standing there walking around like nothing happened. Elk often do, deer once in while.

If you want to use artillery tactics to lob shells at an animal until its hit be my guest - that’s what I do with prairie dogs, but that’s not what I do with big game.

I am not sure what you are arguing for?

Are you arguing that it is better to see and have less information through the scope during and after a shot, or more information through the scope during and after a shot?