Precison will depend on the sight you are using : iron / red dot-reflex / scope
Then the shooter capabilities.
Also the weather conditions count.
grouping size for hunting based on skill
- Thread starter peepsig4t
- Start date
Then the shooter capabilities.
Also the weather conditions count.
I'm with ironcat in this one. My 200y steel is 14inches, I keep a 8x8 spot red in the center. If the shots land in there from all over the yard where I practice, done deal.
I practice from 50 on my close one gong which is a 10inch and from 150 to 250 on my far one. Prone, kneel, shooting stick, leaned on a tree. Hold under a bit maybe closer, but dead hold at 250. Doesnt need to be any harder than that.
Rather than argue incessantly about number of shots necessary to determine what your rifle will actually do (precision) and where it will actually put those shots (accuracy) (which I've done many many times on this web site and really do not wish to yet again get involved in a another protracted argument) suffice it to say that a larger sample size is much better and more reliable than a smaller size. (rules of statistics and probability).I get the impression that you're one of those "attached to a bench" guys, who thinks it translates directly to hunting. Can you provide a fact based link to where 3 shots sucks, but 10 shots is optimum? I'm under the impression that group size will get somewhat larger, but shouldn't the point of impact remain relatively the same? Also, the only thing 10 shots through a lightweight hunting barrel will do, is possibly make you wonder what's going on. Or can a guy shoot 3, cool off, 3, cool off, and then 4? Or maybe10 seperate cold bore shots?
Also, what part of Canada has this perfect hunting weather scenario, because I'd like to move there.
While important on the shooting bench it is also important in the field to know exactly how you, your rifle and ammo will perform and this takes a relatively larger sample size and in the end you will waste less ammo. After determining what your rifle, ammo and you can achieve and completing the zeroing in process then start to practice various shooting positions under realistic hunting scenarios . Happily many shooters are now starting to realize this and much is written about this very subject. You have but only to google it on the web.
Perfect hunting weather scenarios are rare and I only say this to emphasize that one should be very cautious about shooting beyond your means. You might attempt such a shot if conditions were perfect but more often than not you will and should stalk closer. This is advice directed at the OP which is obviously a hunter new to the sport.
I direct you to the Hornady Podcast
Ep. 050 - Your Groups Are Too Small | SAMPLE SIZE |
its also about putting the center of the plate in the center of the vitals.
That is why I mentioned in post 31 that a hunter needs to now where to place the shot so it hits the vitals, as in a quartering to or away shot .
Cat
Last edited:
Paper plates are the kind of thing that you will find in most hunting camps, even remote ones. The convience factor is there, even without the size being oddly appropriate. You can always put an aiming point on it if you want.
In Africa your target will inevitably be a card-board box, because boxes they have, paper plates not so much. They’ll likely ask if you want an aiming point or if you are happy just picking an emblem or letter to use. While you’re in dead serious squinty eyed mode to show that you can dot the same “i” three times the PH is watching you for gun handling and flinches while hoping you hit the box.
In Africa your target will inevitably be a card-board box, because boxes they have, paper plates not so much. They’ll likely ask if you want an aiming point or if you are happy just picking an emblem or letter to use. While you’re in dead serious squinty eyed mode to show that you can dot the same “i” three times the PH is watching you for gun handling and flinches while hoping you hit the box.
Last edited:
so are we done then?
I am just replying to your statements .
If this is some sort of debate then yeah, I'm done , totally.
I concede
Cat
Last edited:
No, I conceded first. lol
Nothing wrong at all with that set up .
I have lots of friends who use those to hunt with from a blind or stand , my son included
Cat
Another vote for "Whatever distance you can always hit a vitals sized target in the given conditions".
The appropriate distance will change wildly based on your shooting position, the weather, how out of breath you are when you take your shot, terrain, the animal you are hunting (different sized vitals), etc. etc.
My suggestion would be to practice shooting from standing and kneeling positions and see how you do at various distances. After you understand your own capabilities in a controlled environment, it comes down to confidence in the moment. If you aren't confident you'll make the shot you probably shouldn't take the shot. Doesn't matter if that is at 30 yds or 300 yds.
The appropriate distance will change wildly based on your shooting position, the weather, how out of breath you are when you take your shot, terrain, the animal you are hunting (different sized vitals), etc. etc.
My suggestion would be to practice shooting from standing and kneeling positions and see how you do at various distances. After you understand your own capabilities in a controlled environment, it comes down to confidence in the moment. If you aren't confident you'll make the shot you probably shouldn't take the shot. Doesn't matter if that is at 30 yds or 300 yds.
tactical lever
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- Fox Creek, Alberta
Think Suther and Cat covered it pretty well, as well as others I can't think of. I liked the comment about bringing the bench with you, and have mentioned that it's rare to have a cement bench where you need to take your shot as well. 
Not enough guys shoot offhand. Helps shooting a rimfire for practice, but also shooting your bigger rifles, too. I find there's probably only a couple smaller big game rifles I have that I can say I probably shoot as well as one of the .22 rifles.
Doesn't have to be serious. Just informal plinking. Reactive targets, close, far, standing offhand, casual rest etc. Gets a bit pricey, especially these days, but reloading offsets that, kinda.
And can always print targets for "free" too. Helps having a point to aim at.
Not enough guys shoot offhand. Helps shooting a rimfire for practice, but also shooting your bigger rifles, too. I find there's probably only a couple smaller big game rifles I have that I can say I probably shoot as well as one of the .22 rifles.
Doesn't have to be serious. Just informal plinking. Reactive targets, close, far, standing offhand, casual rest etc. Gets a bit pricey, especially these days, but reloading offsets that, kinda.
And can always print targets for "free" too. Helps having a point to aim at.
We also used to put cardboard inside old tires and take turns rolling them down the side berms for each other to practice on moving targets. Kind of frowned on now, but it was good practice. - dan
That's good practice, done it many times.
To old & can't find many willing to take the tire back up the hill any more
"People who have NEVER hit the first hole with the second shot at 100 should get there b4 preaching about tuning ffs."
Me thinks that's not so bad with a range gun, pretty positive I can't do that with my 1-6x scoped hunting rifle.
But I do have confidence the rifle will do 1-1/2", & that confidence eliminates one question in the back of my mind when I'm trying to get a good hold on a game animal.
From a purely scientific/statistical perspective a sample size of 3 is too small to do much of anything with.
If you've shot a hundred 3-round groups that is no longer a sample size of 3 though.
Mainly this. The first deer of the season is the worst.
There was a time when I practiced hard for shooting offhand matches with cast bullets at 200 yds, 1450fps. Target was a 1-1/2" bull, 3/4" rings going out, bull was 25 points. Best I shot was a 216 on 10 shots, when I first started, 180-185, took me 3 yrs to get to breaking 210 fairly steadily. The full outer circle was 18". Had a 400yd range to use at the time. Various people showed up to shoot at times, maybe a dozen overall. Sat them down by a log that was 300 from the 200 yd target, one guy got on paper on the first shot out of the bunch. That was w/o using the log for support, kneel, sit, lay down, whatever, using their own guns, some got on paper within 3 shots, most didn't, couple had kill shots within 3 shots. 270win, 270Wby mag, 300WM, 30-06. Most had killed elk or moose or deer "at 4-500yds". That was 1991ish, nobody owned a rangefinder yet, they'd just come out IIRC. Seriously doubt I could hold the 22 ring offhand at 100, alone 200, these days, don't practice enough, drink too much coffee, a lot older and shakier than I used to be.
As a veteran hunter and handloader, I killed over 300 big game animals and always achieved 1/2" groups and smaller with handloads. In life experiences, I did not require such accuracy when hunting. Case-in-point, my average distance killing big game is probably 125 yards and it was proven "again" this year with two buck kills, both at 125 yards.
However, I am prepared to take the longer shots, if required, as all my rifles are set at bullseye, at 300 yards. It's one thing to shoot groups on paper targets off the bench, it's another to practice shooting in various positions, most accurate is prone.
However, I am prepared to take the longer shots, if required, as all my rifles are set at bullseye, at 300 yards. It's one thing to shoot groups on paper targets off the bench, it's another to practice shooting in various positions, most accurate is prone.
