Shoot2Hunt University

[Schmo]

Trying to get classifieds

I love that you’re honest as to why you’re posting! Most new guys reply in a thread by saying “following”, when there’s a follow button at the top of the page lol. Welcome to the ‘slide!

 

[ztc92]

Would someone remind me which spotting scope the instructors preferred at the class? A Leupold.... It had great eye relief. But I don't remember the model

I believe it is the Leupold Mark4 Spotter with the Horus H32 reticle.

Maybe this one or something similar?

MARK 4 12-40X60mm Inverted H-32

The Mark 4® 12-40x60mm tactical spotting scope with the Inverted H-32® reticle gives you the brightness and clarity necessary for positive target identification in any conditions. Built to survive shocks, blows, drops, and impacts, it's not only tough, it's also 100% waterproof and fogproof.

www.leupold.com

 

[Formidilosus]

Would someone remind me which spotting scope the instructors preferred at the class? A Leupold.... It had great eye relief. But I don't remember the model

Leupold Mark 4 12-40x60mm with H32 (not inverted).

 

[RockAndSage]

Leupold Mark 4 12-40x60mm with H32 (not inverted).

Would you mind providing a couple of educational bullet points on why this one specifically?

 

[Formidilosus]

Would you mind providing a couple of educational bullet points on why this one specifically?

-Good glass
-Best eye relief of all spotters
-Durable
-H32 reticle because it doesn’t cover the center of the FOV up.


The eye relief is the big thing. Most/nearly all do not even notice that either they have to bury their eye socket into their spotter to get a full FOV, or they just subconsciously accept a smaller FOV and pull their eye away from the eyepiece. I’ve checked in most S2H course and somewhere around 90% of people have to touch the eyepiece at minimum to o get a full FOV. It’s flipping awful and is baffling why companies don’t address it.

 

[RockAndSage]

-Good glass
-Best eye relief of all spotters
-Durable
-H32 reticle because it doesn’t cover the center of the FOV up.


The eye relief is the big thing. Most/nearly all do not even notice that either they have to bury their eye socket into their spotter to get a full FOV, or they just subconsciously accept a smaller FOV and pull their eye away from the eyepiece. I’ve checked in most S2H course and somewhere around 90% of people have to touch the eyepiece at minimum to o get a full FOV. It’s flipping awful and is baffling why companies don’t address it.

That's great info, thank you. Was wondering about why the H32 specifically, and the eye-relief thing is doubly problematic in wearing glasses, so that makes a lot of sense. Appreciate the detail.

 

[atmat]

FWIW, the gold rings are some of the “easiest to sit behind” spotters I’ve ever used in my life.

 

[plchny]

That video should not have been made public because it looked exactly like you described here.

It's not a hat creek video, it's a GBRS video... But yeah, it's atrocious

 

[plchny]

Bold move joining RS today and having this be your second post.

I didn't think anything I said was bold?

 

[plchny]

I haven't taken S2H's course, or any precision rifle course. But I am seeing parallels with other experiences I've had, where entirely different traditions/schools/approaches aren't being properly understood in context, yet they get compared against each other as "the truth", and then people get tribal and absolutist about it. I'd like to not see that here, as I'm sure both schools have a lot to offer.

It's my understanding that S2H has been built entirely around field-realistic hunting, with everything not optimizing that more or less just getting removed or modified.

That's just not what Hat Creek's about, as far as I understand. And that's good. It would make an immense amount of sense that a different school, with different priorities, for different competitive or real-world applications, especially with a different student pool, would have different approaches and techniques.

Well said, you get it. I've been around a lot of different shooting disciplines, instructors, environments, etc. I cannot stand it when someone pushes that their way is the only way.. war is war, hunting is hunting, PRS is PRS, NRL.., ELR.. There is a ton of overlap, principles are the same, but there is no catch-all.

Additionally, when money or a product is involved in immediately skeptical. Bryan Litz is a rocket scientist and is absolutely smarter than me, however, I don't believe in every principle he sells... Bc he's selling. He's not lying and he's an incredible resource, but he's also selling a product.

 

[plchny]

Some fair points and observations. They’re certainly more experienced than I am and in the real world would most likely make me look like an amateur, which I am.

Well, you've killed a sheep... Not many of us lower 48ers without a fat wallet can say that! Haha

 

[plchny]

Welcome to Rokslide! Maybe you can help clear some things up. The only information about Hat Creek that most of the public can see are several newer YouTube videos and some social media clips. To most shooters those videos look like it is an advanced training facility, to some Roksliders it looks like the basic gun handling procedures are not being taught. So, seeing how you won the NASTI and train there can you share your opinions on these procedures.

The videos show lots of PRS gamer bolt manipulation, after the shot, bolt back and left there, or they shoot and don't run the bolt just leaving the gun dead. Does Hat Creek teach this or should you always "shoot, watch trace, spot your correction, run the bolt and re-engage as necessary" also considered "reset and prep"?


Does Hat Creek teach to allow spent cartridges to be left in the gun. Why would you do this?

When does Hat Creek teach to return the scope turret to zero after a shot and the target or threat is dead? There are videos of students engaging their next targets with previous elevation still dialed on the scope....

B_Reynolds_AK just noticed some details that I don't really think are taught at this high level training facility. But these videos show some poor gun handling and training.

Thanks man!
Let me see if I can unpack some of this haha.
-I'll start with this, the GBRS dudes aren't snipers or if we're being honest, not even really good shooters.
-Hat Creek is an Advanced training facility. Obviously, they specialize is training in high winds, steep angles, and unconventional positions. They do offer open enrollment courses periodically, however, if you're new to long range it's a lot to absorb. I'll agree that piss poor weapon handling (not necessarily unsafe), poor position, and probably more was on display. You'll also notice that they weren't really listening to what they were being told. That said, they weren't there for instruction... They were there for social media content.

-I'm not going to tell anyone how to run their bolt for each situation. For me personally, I almost never use a safety on a bolt gun, unless i'm hunting. For competition, i typically move on an open bolt. If I already have one chambered and I'm making a smallish movement (ie nearby position) I'll just lift the bolt handle. Regarding what to do after the shot, I think you should do what makes sense... If you don't have a spotter, you should prob focus on making sure you're seeing your shot first and running the bolt second. If you have a spotter, you can absolutely let him do all of the work after the shot, sometimes I do, sometimes I don't. The biggest key is getting your second shot (if necessary) off quickly so that the conditions don't have time to change on you. Personally, for longer shots (1000m+) I'll watch trace, run the bolt, hold what I saw, and wait for the spotter to spit new data, and pull the trigger... That all takes maybe 3 seconds including bullet TOF. My spotter and I are typically very close, and if I'm already holding what I saw the movement is minimal.. I'll always defer to what he saw.. ie I saw .5mil L and he gives me .7 L, I'll hold his data unless he gives me something completely different from what I saw then it's a quick convo.

- it is generally advisable to eject the cartridge after the shot. I personally don't think it's unsafe to leave a spent cartridge in the chamber, so long as you follow the ol treat every gun as it's loaded rule and you apply common sense. However, as I said previously, I'll usually move with the bolt back to a nearby position, and completely lock and clear if I'm leaving.

- returning to zero is a little more nuanced. I always return to zero if leaving a position. I will also return to zero if I'm confirming distance/elevation with a weapon mounted LRF. However, if he's just feeding me data from one target to the next I don't always return to zero. I'm not sure what they were shooting in the video, they may have either had no data dialed on and were just holding, or they could have had MPBR dialed on... They could have just been missing wildly.. haha

Hopefully that helps, feel free to ask more and I can delve in. I'm tardy on these replies because I don't have notifications on, haha.

Pat

 

[RockAndSage]

-I'll start with this, the GBRS dudes aren't snipers or if we're being honest, not even really good shooters.

Lol, I got a good laugh out of this, because it's true. At the same time though, to be fair, in their former work they were themselves machines and weapons systems required to do a hell of a lot more than just shooting, at very high levels of competence, than all but the rarest competitive shooter is capable of in any discipline.

It's also why I always find it so bizarre when people appeal to authority in gun forums or martial arts stuff, in referencing most former SOF guys. Anyone who has done that kind of work or similar professionally knows just how little of the work is shooting. About the only exceptions to that I've come across is Delta, and maybe a couple of small corners of the Executive Branch - who are doing elite shooting daily, built on a pyramid of other competencies.

 

[Formidilosus]

Lol, I got a good laugh out of this, because it's true. At the same time though, to be fair, in their former work they were themselves machines and weapons systems required to do a hell of a lot more than just shooting, at very high levels of competence, than all but the rarest competitive shooter is capable of in any discipline.

That’s certainly an excuse that’s used.

Much like snipers.

Inside the military:

Q) What makes you different?
A). We are real shooters and engages targets no own else can.



At any point when they perform poorly especially in front of non military:

Q). Why do you do so poorly when actually measured?
A). Well- we have tons of things to do in our jobs, shooting is just a tiny part of it.

 

[RockAndSage]

That’s certainly an excuse that’s used.

Much like snipers.

Inside the military:

Q) What makes you different?
A). We are real shooters and engages targets no own else can.



At any point when they perform poorly especially in front of non military:

Q). Why do you do so poorly when actually measured?
A). Well- we have tons of things to do in our jobs, shooting is just a tiny part of it.

Lol, definitely. It is also one of those things though, where two things can be true at once.

I know I'm preaching to the choir here, but the guys in those fields who actually shoot at peak levels within any given unit...they tend to be passionate, personally, about shooting anyhow. At the identity level. The kinds of people who hold themselves to extremely/impossibly high shooting standards, never satisfied, regardless of unit standards, who blister their own callouses from loading mags long after everyone else has gone home. Those are the guys who generally shoot at elite levels whether in or out of a unit, regardless of what additional competencies the job demands of them.

But the guys who get into the unit for the "job", and the belonging and identity and status they get from whatever badge or hat they're wearing...those are the ones who seem to comparatively suck at shooting when actually asked to perform.


Edit: my point in the quoted post was related to expectations. As much as I personally would like to see anyone in a Tier 1 unit shooting like Jerry Miculek, Jerry is Jerry because he isn't doing 30mi landnav under nods all weekend in between studying dive tables, Urdu, or this month's new comms gear - he's shooting all weekend. But yes, 100% agree it's used as an excuse to wave off $h*tbag performance way too much, too.

 

[plchny]

Lol, definitely. It is also one of those things though, where two things can be true at once.

I know I'm preaching to the choir here, but the guys in those fields who actually shoot at peak levels within any given unit...they tend to be passionate, personally, about shooting anyhow. At the identity level. The kinds of people who hold themselves to extremely/impossibly high shooting standards, never satisfied, regardless of unit standards, who blister their own callouses from loading mags long after everyone else has gone home. Those are the guys who generally shoot at elite levels whether in or out of a unit, regardless of what additional competencies the job demands of them.

But the guys who get into the unit for the "job", and the belonging and identity and status they get from whatever badge or hat they're wearing...those are the ones who seem to comparatively suck at shooting when actually asked to perform.

Well said, you know what you're talking about. Most military folks are competent with firearms, but will absolutely get crushed in a competition by non mil guys who are passionate. Military guys who put in the work are a different breed.

It's so about where your passion lies.