Need help deciphering a missed shot

[Wrench]

In a crosswind and over 500....I'd take a practice swing at something down the canyon. Most animals will let you have one and not freak out. Take the practice swing, watch the impact.....learn from the impact and make your shot.

 

[PLhunter]

You lost the bullet impact when you shot, correct, but also saw a buck flinch, correct?

You watched a buck walk away, but haven't a clue if the bullet you sent from five hundo hit a buck because you never went over there and looked. How do you know what buck you shot and what buck walked away if you didn't go to where the deer were? "Perfectly confident"...

The SpongeROB Chronicles: The 2024 Elk and Deer 🦌 Hunt with the Avery’s and Cash

There’s 6 of us hunting this ranch and we’re all trying to cover different parts of it, my son couldn’t go this morning (test at school) so I was the scout and sure enough, I was the only one that had bulls within range, but everybody was seeing elk. Tanya and Ryan made an impressive mile climb...

rokslide.com

This is a good post to read through and should highlight that what one sees through the glass is vastly different than standing there first-hand. I find carcasses every year in locations where they should be found very easily. The idea that if the animal doesn't flop over in sight it must have been a miss and no need to track it down is easily avoidable and a black eye for hunters.

I think you’re missing that this buck didn’t just disappear or run off. We watched him through the spotting scope for awhile. He didn’t go out of sight. The deer headed up the basin before bedding down. Probably 10 minutes of walking uphill about 1,000 feet in elevation. Then when they bedded down I watched him at 40 power for awhile. He was feeding, rubbing brush, and keeping a young two point in check. We decided to move around onto their bedding spot. That walk took some time. Then someone bumped them and they headed up and over a peak. Right at the peak it was remarkable. Probably another 1,000 feet of elevation. We looked at them through the spotter and the buck was carrying on normally. At this point going back to the original location would have taken tons of time that got us no closer to getting that buck even were he hit. The decision was made to come up the following morning and try to get onto their likely landing zone. That next afternoon we saw his herd but not him. We saw him on a dudes back being packed out. I always check for blood but in this instance it wouldn’t have provided more useful information towards getting him even in the unlikely event he was mortally hit and sparing just minutes later and gaining thousands of feet of vertical…. I would put total time from shot to last visual of the buck at 1.5 to 2 hours. Roughly 20-30 minutes of close inspection through a spotting scope. When I know where the deer itself is.., I don’t typically drop a bunch of elevation to go back to the start I typically go to the deer itself when I can see it. In this case I saw it’s entire path for an extended period of time. I see what important point you’re trying to make but given context I think you’re making it in the wrong situation.

 

[PLhunter]

In a crosswind and over 500....I'd take a practice swing at something down the canyon. Most animals will let you have one and not freak out. Take the practice swing, watch the impact.....learn from the impact and make your shot.

He totally would have allowed for it. They had no clue where the shot was coming from. They never even broke into a stott or run.

 

[PLhunter]

Amen! I'd write my only child out of the will if I heard such from him.

I recovered a buck last year after insisting on sticking with it after my spotter assured me I missed and that he saw the buck run off fine. The deer was dead 100 yards from the shot which was a heart shot.

I check for blood on any shot unless of course in this case I can observe that the deer is not hit and that even were the deer hit the deer’s current known location makes going back to the point of potential impact a waste of valuable time and effort that could be going towards harvesting said buck. Hit or not going down there wouldn’t have gotten me any closer, only further from getting to the buck. I knew his last location many minutes after the shot. A well marked location where he loitered for awhile. As well as where he was most likely to be headed. Any buck that kept the pace and elevation gain he did without missing a beat is going to require follow up activity. Going down there would have only delayed that unnecessarily. If I have the deer I don’t track backwards generally unless it’s just for fun.

 

[sndmn11]

I think you’re missing that this buck didn’t just disappear or run off.

I'm not missing it. If you read through that above thread it should be clear that even legends get mixed up on occasion, even when "perfectly confident". All it takes is a walk the chip shot distance of 500yds to figure out if you dinged your target or were off by a whole minute of deer.

If you are unable to spot your impact (the crux of the thread you created) there's no way you can call your shot a hit or miss, nor any way you can definitely say you watched the buck you shot at run off and not a different one.

 

[TxxAgg]

Good lord. He watched the deer for 2 hours act perfectly normal. He obviously missed.

OP, you are handling this well.

 

[Megalodon]

I would be highly skeptical it was wind based on your miss on the second buck.

As fancy and high tech as these new range finders are they all handle angle comp differently and none of them especially well. It’s an exceedingly difficult calculation to get right. You really have to practice high angle shots so you know what adjustment your specific brand of rangefinder needs.

 

[Fireflyfishing]

What do you recommend? This rangefinder has great glass and picks up ranges farther than most and matches distances by other rangefinders. But also haven’t done a lot of extreme angle comparisons. I have friends with sigs that really like them. The glass is terrible to me in the sigs but it’s a rangefinder.

Leica. I have their Geovid-R binos and the are fantastic. Just ranged a rock on a hillside at 1080 today and it spat out corrected yardage with angle at 1075. I shot the rock with my 7 mag.

They just work. The monocular versions work too, just not as handy as the binos.

 

[Megalodon]

Leica. I have their Geovid-R binos and the are fantastic. Just ranged a rock on a hillside at 1080 today and it spat out corrected yardage with angle at 1075. I shot the rock with my 7 mag.

They just work. The monocular versions work too, just not as handy as the binos.

Wow. What an extreme angle!! Amazing they could find an accurate solution for that!

 

[Fireflyfishing]

Wow. What an extreme angle!! Amazing they could find an accurate solution for that!

Yeah yuck it up. I know the capabilities of of my gear and it works quite well.

 

[roadrunner]

Yeah yuck it up. I know the capabilities of of my gear and it works quite well.

As do most people...

 

[Fireflyfishing]

As do most people...

I’ve found that not to be the case actually.

 

[roadrunner]

I’ve found that not to be the case actually.

Maybe widen your circle of acquittances?

 

[Fireflyfishing]

Maybe widen your circle of acquittances?

I’m not the one who started this thread with the issue. I’ve drilled an antelope at 540 yards and a cow elk at 600 yards this year. I’m fine thanks. Keep conquering it from your keyboard bro…

 

[Megalodon]

... we were talking about high angle ballistic solutions. And you said you ranged a rock that was 1080 with a corrected yardage of 1075??? So a completely flat shot. A free phone app can figure that solution. The lowest end, sub $300 range finder can range that.

What you described has absolutely zero bearing on what is being discussed here.

And good to know you can't get closer than 600 yards from a cow elk lololololol

 

[Fireflyfishing]

. we were talking about high angle ballistic solutions. And you said you ranged a rock that was 1080 with a corrected yardage of 1075??? So a completely flat shot. A free phone app can figure that solution. The lowest end, sub $300 range finder can range that.

What you described has absolutely zero bearing on what is being discussed here.

And good to know you can't get closer than 600 yards from a cow elk lololololol

Captain dipshit. Like I said, keep killing it with the keyboard. Love to have you say that to my face.

For the record, my Leica works at high angle too.

 

[Antares]

Come on, girls. You're both pretty.

 

[PLhunter]

Interesting update. Hunting black tail in Oregon with a buddy this weekend we compared rangefinders. I have a vortex 3000HD and he has an Sig with the AB capability. We had the same LOS distance but our angle calculations were quite different. Mine read 26 degrees and his 30 degrees. Going off memory here but I think it resulted in a 35 or 45 yard difference in corrected readings at 770.

 

[Arminho]

Interesting update. Hunting black tail in Oregon with a buddy this weekend we compared rangefinders. I have a vortex 3000HD and he has an Sig with the AB capability. We had the same LOS distance but our angle calculations were quite different. Mine read 26 degrees and his 30 degrees. Going off memory here but I think it resulted in a 35 or 45 yard difference in corrected readings at 770.

This is really interesting to hear, but I suppose not surprising. Perhaps we should all try to compare with people who have alpha rangefinders. I never considered range finders to be under the 'alpha glass' umbrella but it appears as though I will need to consider upgrading my black friday Leupold from 5 yrs ago

I read through your post and I'm sorry to hear you missed. I had something very similar happen with a trusted 308 at 335 yds shooting down a cliff in New Mexico. Shot three times, spotter couldn't see trace, and recoil was too much to still see in scope. Never found a drop of blood. Still have no clue how I could have missed such a short shot. I'm thinking the angle must have been wrong in the range finder. Gotta sleep with that one. Best of luck to you.