Moose shot at 1100 yards

Great shot but I would want more proof before believing the quoted distance of 1100 meters (approx 1200 yards). The shooter did claim a distance of 1100 in meters and not yards.

We must keep in mind that he was using a camera with zooming features - probably from wide angle to telephoto meaning that what you see in the video is not typical of what your eyes see normally.

For what it's worth, I would never attempt a shot at this distance even though I do use some of the more powerful magnum calibers available.

He mentioned using a 300 WinMag with a bullet of 180 gr (see ref below).

Let's use a Ballistic Calculator and bullet characteristics readily available and see what we come up with:

Caliber: 300 WM
Bullet: 180 gr (.308)
Ballistic Coefficient: 0.511
Sectional Density: 0.271
Muzzle Velocity: 3000 ft/sec (possible)
Sight at: 200 yd

(having problems to post all of the calculator's results here)

A few numbers (not taking into account wind velocity and direction):

Range: 1000 yd

Bullet drop: 277.5" (23 ft)
ComeUp Click: 106 (1/4MOA)
Velocity: 1432 fps
Time of flight: 1.458 sec
Energy in ft/lbs: 820

Range: 1200 yd

Bullet drop: 477.1" (40 ft)
ComeUp Click: 152 (1/4 MOA)
Velocity: 1228 fps
Time of flight: 1.912 sec
Energy in ft/lbs: 602

Recommended Max game weight at this range: 90 lbs

More suspicious than ever but not impossible...... sorry.

Further analysis of the time between the shot and the movement of the moose indicates an earlier minor reaction from the major one......... needs to be investigated further if someone wants to estimate the distance based on this time between the sound of the shot and the initial reaction of the moose. I did an initial analysis and came up from around 1 sec to over 2 depending on what part of the reaction I consider related to the shot. The timing was done using a stop watch with a resolution of 0.01 sec.

I did another set of time measurements and come up with slightly less than an average of 1.8 sec using the main reaction of the moose. Furthermore, the energy of this bullet at 1200 yd would be equivalent to that of a relatively low power handgun at short range.

And not to forget, I see no evidence of ear protectors being worn by this very young girl. I hope that I'm wrong and that she was wearing something as young people are probably more susceptible to ear drum damage than adults??


Duke1


===============================================================================

Ref:

From YouTube:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cWAXQUCv8qo&feature=player_embedded

McMillan MCRT  300 Win. Mag. with a Leupold Mark 4 4.5 - 14 x 50 Scope. 180 grain nosler ballistic tips.

And from the Internet:

http://www.biggameinfo.com/index.aspx?page=%2fbalcalc.ascx

Ballistic calculator .... 1200 yd shot...... not likely
 
Last edited:
I'll stick to what I posted.
It was a very bad idea to shoot at such a distance. The only reason he got the moose was because the slow moving bullet broke the moose's spine.
Note it was broken by the hips, which means if his shot had been lower in the body, it was so far back that the moose would have gone into the bush to die a horrible death.
 
knockturnal said:
why is it that when a canadian sniper takes out an enemy at 2300 yards, he gets praise from everyone, but when a guy makes a 1200 yard shot on a moose, he gets s**t on?
Click to expand...

A enemy is someone who will shoot you if they get the chance, a moose shot at 1200 yds is just for sxxts and giggles. Thats the difference:rolleyes:
 
knockturnal said:
why is it that when a canadian sniper takes out an enemy at 2300 yards, he gets praise from everyone, but when a guy makes a 1200 yard shot on a moose, he gets s**t on?
Click to expand...

If you watched the story about it, that sniper missed the first shot. (pretty sure the moose would have fled right then)
Then guided by the spotter he hit the target. With a 50 cal rifle.
We don't know whether the target died or just got wounded. (hunting ethics require clean kills)
Such a hit is unethical when hunting.
 
legi0n said:
Even an extremely accurate (quarter of a MOA) rifle gets 25 inches groups at 1000m.
The hit at issue was pure luck.
Click to expand...

MOA at 1000 yards is about 10", give or take. 2 MOA at 1000 is 20" give or take...

if you were shooting 1/4 MOA rifle at 1000 yards it's 2.5" group. That woudl be impressive.....:)

But a moose has a "boiler room" kill zone about 24" in diameter so if you were shooting 2MOA at 1000, you would still be within the moose kill zone.

If one was inclined to take a 1000 yard shot on a moose, which I am not.:p
 
The only thing I don't like is with the amount of time it took that bullet to fly that moose could have taken two steps and been shot in the ass. It could have easily been lost.

As far as the taliban shot at over a mile? Well that's war for you.

I'm not disputing the skill of that hunter, obviously he's a good shot but if it was wounded I, personally, would feel like s**t.
 
He is obviously a skilled shot, and extremely lucky. "have you tried hunting with a 2YR old" Seriously ! how would you follow up that wounded moose with a 2 yr old if the shot had been 2-3" lower? To each his own I guess.
 
Ever gone on youtube.com and watched NightForce optics precision hunting videos? They pull shots very close to a mile on game.

I'm all for it. if you practice at it, why not? I've taken coyotes from a long way off. only question is if you feel comfortable with the shot, and the current conditions affecting the flight.
 
shanedapane said:
Ever gone on youtube.com and watched NightForce optics precision hunting videos? They pull shots very close to a mile on game.

I'm all for it. if you practice at it, why not? I've taken coyotes from a long way off. only question is if you feel comfortable with the shot, and the current conditions affecting the flight.
Click to expand...

It is definitely NOT "the only question" if you feel comfortable with the shot!! I'd wager that most of the precision shooters on this forum are just that - good shooters and not highly skilled trackers. A generalization for sure, but just hitting a moose at extreme range does not mean that it can be found after the shot. Without a spotter to mark the spot the animal was standing in, and without fresh tracking snow or highly developed tracking skills, a moose hit with a low energy bullet at extreme range is very likely to be lost, even with a good hit! Hunting is much more than precision shooting, a fact that far too many shooters forget.
 
shanedapane said:
Ever gone on youtube.com and watched NightForce optics precision hunting videos? They pull shots very close to a mile on game.

I'm all for it. if you practice at it, why not? I've taken coyotes from a long way off. only question is if you feel comfortable with the shot, and the current conditions affecting the flight.
Click to expand...

Your comments reek of lack of experience in this game. Experienced hunters and not necessarily long range "shooters" recognize the hazards of shooting at game animals at extreme ranges.
I have hunted for 50+ years, and have taken some long shots [To me that is inside of 600 yards] IMHO, anyone who shoots at a game animal at close to a mile is very foolish indeed, regardless of his level of skill.
We're not "sniping" at an enemy here, we are shooting at a regal animal that deserves a humane and quick dispatch, not a chance to wander off to die a lingering, painful death, just to glorify ourselves, or our "shooting" skills!! Eagleye.
 
Longwalker said:
a moose hit with a low energy bullet at extreme range is very likely to be lost, even with a good hit! QUOTE]

Let's just say it was a .300 WM, and with the estimate we were given that it would have approximately 602 ft. pounds of energy at that range. Easily sufficient to get the job done IMO, seeing as my bow doesn't quite hit that hard at 35 yards.

I don't really want to get into the argument about what his tracking skills could/aren't/might be. You say most of them are shooters with little hunting skill, I say most of them were hunters before shooters. Probably doesn't matter what I say though seeing there is something to criticize.
Click to expand...
 
Shanedapane, it does matter what you say, but your facts are in error.

Bows do not kill with energy, they kill by achieving sufficient penetration of razor sharp blades that cut enough blood vessels to cause death by blood loss.

602 Ft. Lbs of energy is not "Easily Sufficient" to humanely and quickly kill a moose.

That the moose would die eventually from a low powered hit is not the point.
Often jurisdictions have minimum energy requirements for the cartridges allowed for hunting game larger than deer. "602 ft. lbs" does not meet the requirement of any minimums that I am aware of.

Not wanting to get into the "argument" of what tracking skills should be is a HUGE part of the issue here! Hunting is not just shooting. A competent hunter has all the skills required, not just a precision rifle and lots of trigger time.

A difference of opinion is not an argument, it is a different opinion. I believe you are in error, and your further explanation of your point of view has not convinced me that I should change mine.
 
Eagleye said:
Your comments reek of lack of experience in this game I have hunted for 50+ years, and have taken some long shots [To me that is inside of 600 yards
Click to expand...

So, would this be like him tracking for me, or me shooting for him? lol

I don't see how experience would justify judging a topic, I've been hunting around 15 years and shooting long range targets for about 5. I'd say 600 yards at an animal with a typical mass-produced hunting rifle is no different than shooting 1100 with something accurized, but I don't know exactly what you use for a weapon. I say this because that is pushing both types of guns, nearly to their designed limit to stay accurate.

If you were talking about my ethics, you might be more correct. In that sense I always seem to think more about whether or not I can rather than if I Should, but that goes a LOT further than just hunting.
 
I saw this a while back in an e-mail. I would really hesitate to say it is 1100 yards. Given the amount of impact seen in the video and the camera able to zoom in like that at that kind of range. I dont know about your camera but any of mine would never pull the target in well enough at that distance and with that kind of clarity to be able to see a bullet impact like the one shown in this video. He must have had a CTV camera crew with ultra professional equipment to make that shot show up if it was 1100 yards.I would say 1100 feet would be closer to the truth and 1100 feet is what....between 350-375 yards?!! Thats my .02 worth!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom