Why Match/Target Bullets For Hunting

[Formidilosus]

Sorry! Hit send early…. That would be interesting data. For ex what range are 100% at lower bc and what range are 100% at highet BC. This to me gives a better context of benefit of high BC

Both are at sea level (0ft DA), 12” target, and +/- 4mph wind caller, and 2,700fps MV, 140gr Accubond and 147gr ELD-M, 1moa precision.


140gr Accubond 100% hit rate is 215 yards-





147gr ELD-M 100% hit range is 260 yards-



For an 18% difference or increase in range.

 

[Lou270]

Thanks! That is cool software. I will have to look into it

Lou

 

[Shraggs]

Great question and data

Form, if not a lot of trouble what about ability to call wind +/- 2 mph? How dramatically do each of those ranges increase?

 

[Formidilosus]

Great question and data

Form, if not a lot of trouble what about ability to call wind +/- 2 mph? How dramatically do each of those ranges increase?

140gr Accubond, 100% hit range= 300 yards-




147gr ELD-M 100% hit range= 360 yards-






People WAY over estimate their ability in shooting.

 

[Shraggs]

Thanks. Just thought I’d be interesting on reading the wind more accurately

 

[mt100gr.]

140gr Accubond, 100% hit range= 300 yards-
View attachment 520620



147gr ELD-M 100% hit range= 360 yards-

View attachment 520621




People WAY over estimate their ability in shooting.

You'd know better, but I'm curious- in your parameters "target width/radius", is that actually diameter? (not radius?)

 

[mt100gr.]

...never mind. I see you select the shape.

 

[Formidilosus]

...never mind. I see you select the shape.

 

[EJFS]

People WAY over estimate their ability in shooting.

Now that we can all agree on!

 

[wind gypsy]

People WAY over estimate their ability in shooting.

Does the "rifle precision" input take into account mechanical precision and rifle/shooter accuracy (excluding wind)? If so, 1 MOA seems to be very high level. I'm damn sure not there with hunting rifle/hunting situations.

 

[Formidilosus]

Does the "rifle precision" input take into account mechanical precision and rifle/shooter accuracy (excluding wind)? If so, 1 MOA seems to be very high level. I'm damn sure not there with hunting rifle/hunting situations.

That’s the whole group size with rifle and shooter. 1 MOA is an extremely high level of shooting in the field.

An easy/quick thing people can do to see their field “group size” is the Kraft target/drill. When tested cold, the vast majority of long range shooters are really 4’ish MOA shooters.

 

[Outdoorsman12b]

That’s the whole group size with rifle and shooter. 1 MOA is an extremely high level of shooting in the field.

An easy/quick thing people can do to see their field “group size” is the Kraft target/drill. When tested cold, the vast majority of long range shooters are really 4’ish MOA shooters.

So what does that do to hit rate % in your criteria for 95% hit rate? With 4moa shooter +\-4mph wind call.

Just curious on the ranges a guy needs to start really considering not shooting. At the range with field equipment and positions I’m reading maybe I’m over confident.

 

[Lou270]

I did my own spreadshert version of the data Formidilous showed and it was eye opener. BC certainly helps a bit but you basically need to be perfect on your wind or no wind at all for much beyond 3-400 yards no matter how good a shot you are

Lou

 

[35WhelenAI]

I did my own spreadshert version of the data Formidilous showed and it was eye opener. BC certainly helps a bit but you basically need to be perfect on your wind or no wind at all for much beyond 3-400 yards no matter how good a shot you are

Lou

As well, what wyomingwomen44 said hits home as well, and is good food for thought. Shooting at live game animals at long range is more of a literal crapshoot with respect to facts. I believe the range folks should consider not shooting is a hell of a lot closer than what gets run up the flag pole.

 

[Formidilosus]

So what does that do to hit rate % in your criteria for 95% hit rate? With 4moa shooter +\-4mph wind call.

To be clear- I didn’t say a 95% first round hit for me. I said, high probability (+/- 95%) that I will be standing over the animal at the end.

There are situations that have a 95% probability of a first round lethal hit, but other factors lead to a reduced probability of recovery if I miss suck that successful probability drops low enough that I will not take the shot. In contrast, there are times where my first round hit probability is say 80% but due to terrain, animal, or the situation, the probability of recovery/successful outcome is 99% and I will shoot. That may be due to probability a second round hit by seeing my own trace or splash, ability to get multiple shots, tracking conditions, etc

Just curious on the ranges a guy needs to start really considering not shooting. At the range with field equipment and positions I’m reading maybe I’m over confident.

To answer your question:

With a 6.5cm at 2,700fps MV, a 4moa shooter (that’s 4 MOA rested), +/- 4mph wind call, 12” target, and 95% first round hit rate-

140AB is 95% at 225 yards-







147gr ELD-M is 95% at 240 yards-




This will seem very short for most. But think about this- if you’ve killed more than ten game animals in the last few years, how many have been missed or weren’t great first shots, and what is the range that you know without a doubt the outcome? For the vast majority of hunters that actually zero their rifle every year and put in some modicum level of practice at all…. It’ll be about 200’ish yards that they know they will kill a deer without issue. 300 yards they’ll take the shot, but they aren’t as confident. 400 yards is pushing it.


Now, for arguments sake, let’a take an average hunter. No one, or almost no one would say a hunter with a scoped bolt action rifle taking a 300 yard shot is wildly unethical even if they miss or wound an animal- most would shrug and say “that’s hunting”. So let’s look at their hit rate.

From what I’ve seen and what most have seen from public ranges of hunters trying to zero the week before season opens- 80+ % of hunters are 8-10 MOA shooters. That’s their rifle, them, and field positions. I’ve seen and measured enough hunters and shooters to say that pretty confidently. Now, most hunters do not have a zeroed rifle by almost anyones definition on this forum, but let’s say they get it “good enough”.

And let’s put them in a prone over backpack position, so let’s say 6’ish MOA (which admittedly is being generous), most of those hunters are shooting less than 100 rounds a year with their hunting rifle. At 300 yards that person has a first round hit rate with a 6.5cm and 140gr Accubond of 55%




This doesn’t take much thinking to see the reality of it. Either think back on how many legitimately ranged 300 yard shots you’ve taken on deer sized animals that were missed or not chest hit for the first shot; or think about the people you know and hear and the amount that admit to missed/wounded animals at real 300 yards. And very few people would tell an average hunter that it is unethical that they took a shot at 300 yards prone.

So now, let’s look at where 55% hit rate is for a 2 MOA shooter (practiced and trained), and 4 mph (practiced) wind call- this is a person that is shooting 500+ rounds a year, most of them away from a bench and using field positions, and some wind practice.


55% for that “practiced” hunter is 460 yards.



And interestingly most people that do practice but aren’t training constantly, would intuitively say that they’re good to 450’ish maybe 500 yards, but they’d really like to be closer. This isn’t wild. This is such a truism that I can and have shown it to people by just having them shoot on demand from field positions.

So now let’s take a truly trained and competent shooter that practices regularly in broken, mountainous terrain multiple times a month, to the tune of several thousand rounds a year, and they are a 1.5 MOA rested field shooter.

Using a 140gr AB (which that person probably would not do) they have the same hit rate (55%) at 625 yards that the slightly above average shooter has at 300 yards.

625 yards-




The exact same shooter, but using a 147gr ELD-M instead has a 75% first round hit rate at 625 yards.

 

[Formidilosus]

As well, what wyomingwomen44 said hits home as well, and is good food for thought. Shooting at live game animals at long range is more of a literal crapshoot with respect to facts. I believe the range folks should consider not shooting is a hell of a lot closer than what gets run up the flag pole.

It depends by you mean “long range folks”. That encompasses the entire range of shooters and from “I have a Bergera 300 PRC and Leupold VX5 with CDS and shoot 50 rounds a year” people, to people who “shoot 30,000 plus centerfire rifle rounds a year, with a significant portion of those from 600-1,200 yards in mountainous broken terrain and high winds, from previously unshot targets/ranges weekly, from rifles that allow them to spot every single round fired on target through recoil, with scopes that absolutely hold zero and work correctly, and who compete at a high level”.


Which “long range folks” are you talking to?

 

[35WhelenAI]

To be clear, I did not use the words "long-range folks". I said "the range folks should consider not shooting..."

Was that a "miss" read on your part? Couldn't resist, having some fun with words.

With that said, what is the number that makes up the sample size that shoot 30,000 rounds a year and engage live game within the distance you shared on a regular basis? Good on them, and good for them to shoot that much, it is a very dedicated regimen.

Shooting thousands of rounds is a regimen that not many do, including myself. I am one of the hunters who falls in the distances referenced in the posts of out to 400 yards. Never needed to shoot game beyond that. I have not spent time shooting beyond that on a regular basis and as such choose projectiles that get the job done at the ranges needed.

Those posts may hit home for a lot more guys than they don't. It did for me. I hope long-range folks (since you coined a new term), which can encompass everything you mentioned, will look at themselves honestly and assess their ability/need to shoot at living game at long range where the margin of error becomes a legitimate part of ethics. It is the reality that it doesn't take much to throw off the best laid plans for a shot.

 

[Fartrell Cluggins]

Form, the 95% hit rate/4 MOA scenario above strikes at the heart of why I am mentally programmed not to see the value of a match bullet and part of why I asked the initial question. That paints a more realistic picture of me as a shooter, in the way I assess myself at any rate. In the deep south, opportunities for long shots (200 + yards would be long) are very rare. Your comparison shows a 15 yard difference in 95% hit distance. Couple in the fact that not all match bullets have good wounding characteristics, and that's why I have favored more reliable copper and lead "hunting" bullets.

Good stuff brother. I appreciate it.

 

[ShortMountain91]

I should have posted earlier as I've been reading this thread for awhile. I wanted to make one comment on hydrostatic shock. As Form correctly mentioned early in thread with the quoted experiments, hydrostatic shock is not one of the 4 killing mechanisms. It will not make the animal die any faster. But from everything I've read on the subject I do believe it is a real thing and primarily occurs above 2600 fps. What I understand it does do is temporarily disrupts the CNS, i.e. render the animal unconscious. What this translates to in our hunting experience is the famous DRT shot which is a little misleading in its name. Nothing dies instantaneously when hit with a bullet. It takes some amount of time for the 4 killing mechanisms to make something dead. Form has done an excellent job explaining how to maximize those mechanisms and make something die faster. But when you can still get enough hydrostatic shock to render the animal unconscious, these killing mechanisms can do their thing while the animal is already lights out.

So while making sure what you shoot dies as quickly as possible is most important, I still personally think about and concern myself with hydrostatic shock because I like the DRT outcome. No tracking, most humane, least amount of stress hormone into the meat.

 

[Formidilosus]

Those posts may hit home for a lot more guys than they don't. It did for me. I hope long-range folks (since you coined a new term), which can encompass everything you mentioned, will look at themselves honestly and assess their ability/need to shoot at living game at long range where the margin of error becomes a legitimate part of ethics. It is the reality that it doesn't take much to throw off the best laid plans for a shot.

That is what I would say as well. The amount of people that are practicing enough and with equipment that is reliable enough for consistent and reliable success on 600 yard shots on animals is laughably small, let alone those who do enough for 800 yard shots. It’s easy to hit an animal or two and think you’ve got it, but keep doing it and you’ll see how high the failure rate is.