How hard would it be to have a cam there when you are filming from 7oo yards away?....
243 win 105 berger vld, dead elk 688 yards
- Thread starter kman300
- Start date
How hard would it be to have a cam there when you are filming from 7oo yards away?....
What bothers me most about a gimmick like this, which is all set up and performed, just so it can be shown on the web, is that so many on CGN, where the members are supposed to be responsible hunters, think it was an OK thing to do.
- Location
- Prince Albert, Sk
Shots can be just as easily missed at 100 yards as they can be at 700.Most likely there is MORE misses at 100 if I had to guess on numbers.If you are shooting at these distances in situations like this I think it is likely well practiced.I have seen folks miss at all kinds of distances, I think distance is a non issue.Confidence and knowledge is the issue.
What this video does demonstrate is the advances made in technology and equipment.
This wasn't a shot made by a truck full of hillbillies with 30-30's , Co-op clearance ammo and Pabst Beer for lunch(save on the ammo to optimize beer numbers).
Not going to please everyone on this one, some folks are so confrontational that they would argue the ethical difference between a heart/lung/liver shot at 100 years.People will argue the spine shot at this distance was irresponsible but it happens at close distances also, it is part of hunting.It is their decision and have to deal with repercussions of a miss, just like it would happen at close ranges.
Would I take this shot? With certain equipment I have, yes.
Is this my type of hunting? No, but it isn't me in the video.
It was a well placed, well practiced one shot drop of the elk, well done.
What this video does demonstrate is the advances made in technology and equipment.
This wasn't a shot made by a truck full of hillbillies with 30-30's , Co-op clearance ammo and Pabst Beer for lunch(save on the ammo to optimize beer numbers).
Not going to please everyone on this one, some folks are so confrontational that they would argue the ethical difference between a heart/lung/liver shot at 100 years.People will argue the spine shot at this distance was irresponsible but it happens at close distances also, it is part of hunting.It is their decision and have to deal with repercussions of a miss, just like it would happen at close ranges.
Would I take this shot? With certain equipment I have, yes.
Is this my type of hunting? No, but it isn't me in the video.
It was a well placed, well practiced one shot drop of the elk, well done.
- Location
- Dah Soo,ON
If I had John Burns spotting for me I'd take the shot too, it'd be a gimme. I think 70% of the people on this forum don't even know who John is, or what he's devoted the majority of his life doing. To say its a gimmick? Really, come on. The guys dropped more animals way out there than anyone else, poking long range critters is his job, and hes goddamn good at it...
If you got the know-how and gear to poke out far, by all means giver.
- Location
- Dah Soo,ON
He slings VLD's high on the shoulder. Blows everything up inside. It may not have been DRT but it wasn't going anywhere, and wasn't long for this world.
bearkilr
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Nowhere, ......just past the middle
You must've been watching a different video, the one I watched has a lady named Kassandra shooting her first elk at 688 yards.........
Very true, and all this equipment and technology means little skill is required to make a shot of this distance. I always marvel at the old timers shooting buffalo with Sharps,etc. and open sights. THAT took skill...........
- Location
- Dah Soo,ON
You must've been watching a different video, the one I watched has a lady named Kassandra shooting an elk.........
Look who's sitting over her shoulder...the man himself
bearkilr
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Nowhere, ......just past the middle
Look who's sitting over her shoulder...the man himself
Having Buffalo Bill and Annie Oakley sitting over my shoulder won't change my marksmanship much............
Long range hunting is certainly ethical, if you are practiced and know your bullet is going to hit where you want it. This is very doable with lots of time spent on the range practicing. Obviously you need the equipment and the practice to do it ethically, but if you can hit the kill zone whocares what range you hunt at?
What I take issue with is doing this with a .243 on an elk. A .243 is fine on an elk close range and with perfect shot placement. At 688 yards you're looking at about 900 ft/lbs of energy. Not nearly enough for an elk. What if she shot a little forward and hit the shoulder? You would have a wounded elk going a looooong ways. Looks to me like the animal was spined.
What I take issue with is doing this with a .243 on an elk. A .243 is fine on an elk close range and with perfect shot placement. At 688 yards you're looking at about 900 ft/lbs of energy. Not nearly enough for an elk. What if she shot a little forward and hit the shoulder? You would have a wounded elk going a looooong ways. Looks to me like the animal was spined.
- Location
- Dah Soo,ON
Having Buffalo Bill and Annie Oakley sitting over my shoulder won't change my marksmanship much............
no but pulling your head outta your azz would greatly enhance your stay on this planet.To think that John just threw a Grey Bull rifle in her hands and said "here have at 'er" is foolish. His shooters spend time behind these guns and run them on targets before chasing animals. Also John coaches them through everything and if he feels the shooters too nervous, or can't handle the shot, follow his instructions etc he calls it off...
'Course, you knew that because you've done a lot of reading up on John's work right?
bearkilr
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Nowhere, ......just past the middle
I'm truthfully not the least bit interested in John's marketing techniques. All the power to him if Berger sends him $$. Maybe he needs a catchy slogan, like Jim Shockey's "I trust my life to.........".
- Location
- Dah Soo,ON
A ####ty cowboy hat, red scarf and TC encore does wonders to the 70%. The other 30% prefer VLD's I guess
gunrunner8
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Kamloops, B.C.
X2! ....I wonder what is next stunt from that "hunter"- shooting the buffalo with 223Rem at 1000yds?
I enjoy reading people's responses. Some of them are very entertaining.
John said on the original thread that it was a high shoulder shot, which with bergers means everything inside was exploded and the elk was dead where it stood. Even if it wasn't (and I believe both the antelope and elk were) it will die in short order exactly where it dropped. I frankly don't see how it not being drt is any worse then having an animal run 100 yards and die in the bush? Are all the animals you guys shoot drt? I read lots of post this year about animals being shot and running X amount of yards after the shot. What's the difference?
The comments about it being "shooting" and not "hunting" are also interesting. Did you notice where they were hunting? Not exactly lots of trees to hide you while you "hunt" closer. Also in the video there are at least 3 elk looking at them (as in directly) and that's at 700 yards.
The equipment used is obviously very good and excellent equipment makes a big difference. Some of the posters commenting in his thread mentioned that this was the same rifle he took a few "novice" shooters out with and they were hitting gongs out to 1100 yards no problem. Point is if you have good gear and you do your part the gun will do the rest. That was the girls first shot at a big game animal and she did a great job. He knows the gear, set it up for her and she held steady and squeezed the trigger. Dead elk. If you listen closely you will notice he changed the shot placement from "in the middle" to "just behind the shoulder" just before he shot. He was watching the vapor from the breath and noticed that the wind slowed down just before the shot. He obviously knows a thing or two about shooting.
900 ft/lbs aren't enough for elk. Really? I don't know at what elevation that shot was taken but he mentioned that MV is 3050fps. Who says 900ft/lbs isn't enough? Who made up those arbitrary numbers in the first place? Some guys 50 years ago based on cup and core bullets? Bullets haven't changed since then? The same thinking demands heavy for caliber bullets to reach the vitals and punch through heavy bone because the front disintegrates on the way to the vitals. Does this still apply today with mono bullets? Do you need a 200gr cup and core in a .30 cal to kill a moose? Will a 150gr tsx kill it and retain all the weight and exit? Will a 130gr tsx? People 30 years ago would have called you completely stupid if you told them you used a 130gr weight .308 for big game hunting but with a 130gr tsx you will kill stuff dead.
The point is that lots of things have changed and we have better gear than ever before. People are slow to change their thinking and if they've been doing things one way for 40 years and it ain't broke they aren't going to change. There is nothing wrong with hunting with a 30/30. Or using 200gr 30 cal cup and core for your hunting. There is also nothing wrong with setting yourself range limits at which you can reliably and humanely kill critters.
On the other hand there is nothing wrong with using light for caliber mono metal bullets pushed fast to kill stuff. There is nothing wrong with using laser range finders, wind meters, iphones with ballistic programs, dialing elevation, windage, using match bullets and killing stuff way out there. Nothing wrong with bullets exploding inside animals and not exiting and filming the whole thing.
There IS something wrong with doing the above mentioned if you are not capable of said feats. You can't kill stuff at 600 yards with your 270 and crappy tire power point ammo. All forms of hunting, be they bow, muzzle loader or rifle, are subject to self imposed limitations regarding which shots you should and shouldn't take. The onus is on the shooter to realize his/her limitations and decide which shots to take and which to pass on. If that means your max range for a rifle is 150 yards then fine. If it's 700 yards that's fine too. The girl was obviously a novice but he coached her and she squeezed the trigger and the gear did the rest. I also recall a story about a 6 year old or so kid of a 1000 yard benchrest shooter shooting a 5 or 6" group at 1k. Good gear and steady trigger pull results in success.
I think it is wrong for making him or videos of long range kills out to be the bad guy just because people are to dumb to realize the limitations of their gear and their skill. Go admire the skill and practice if you want to be able to do the same. It's like watching Schumacher drive and instead of realizing he's a great driver you think you can do the same in your cavalier. When you then have an accident you promptly blame him for putting silly ideas in your head. John isn't saying that everyone should be doing what he does. He's just showing it can be done, just like Schumacher is showing you can take a hairpin at 200km/h. Doesn't mean you have any business doing either if you don't have the skill and gear to do so.
John said on the original thread that it was a high shoulder shot, which with bergers means everything inside was exploded and the elk was dead where it stood. Even if it wasn't (and I believe both the antelope and elk were) it will die in short order exactly where it dropped. I frankly don't see how it not being drt is any worse then having an animal run 100 yards and die in the bush? Are all the animals you guys shoot drt? I read lots of post this year about animals being shot and running X amount of yards after the shot. What's the difference?
The comments about it being "shooting" and not "hunting" are also interesting. Did you notice where they were hunting? Not exactly lots of trees to hide you while you "hunt" closer. Also in the video there are at least 3 elk looking at them (as in directly) and that's at 700 yards.
The equipment used is obviously very good and excellent equipment makes a big difference. Some of the posters commenting in his thread mentioned that this was the same rifle he took a few "novice" shooters out with and they were hitting gongs out to 1100 yards no problem. Point is if you have good gear and you do your part the gun will do the rest. That was the girls first shot at a big game animal and she did a great job. He knows the gear, set it up for her and she held steady and squeezed the trigger. Dead elk. If you listen closely you will notice he changed the shot placement from "in the middle" to "just behind the shoulder" just before he shot. He was watching the vapor from the breath and noticed that the wind slowed down just before the shot. He obviously knows a thing or two about shooting.
900 ft/lbs aren't enough for elk. Really? I don't know at what elevation that shot was taken but he mentioned that MV is 3050fps. Who says 900ft/lbs isn't enough? Who made up those arbitrary numbers in the first place? Some guys 50 years ago based on cup and core bullets? Bullets haven't changed since then? The same thinking demands heavy for caliber bullets to reach the vitals and punch through heavy bone because the front disintegrates on the way to the vitals. Does this still apply today with mono bullets? Do you need a 200gr cup and core in a .30 cal to kill a moose? Will a 150gr tsx kill it and retain all the weight and exit? Will a 130gr tsx? People 30 years ago would have called you completely stupid if you told them you used a 130gr weight .308 for big game hunting but with a 130gr tsx you will kill stuff dead.
The point is that lots of things have changed and we have better gear than ever before. People are slow to change their thinking and if they've been doing things one way for 40 years and it ain't broke they aren't going to change. There is nothing wrong with hunting with a 30/30. Or using 200gr 30 cal cup and core for your hunting. There is also nothing wrong with setting yourself range limits at which you can reliably and humanely kill critters.
On the other hand there is nothing wrong with using light for caliber mono metal bullets pushed fast to kill stuff. There is nothing wrong with using laser range finders, wind meters, iphones with ballistic programs, dialing elevation, windage, using match bullets and killing stuff way out there. Nothing wrong with bullets exploding inside animals and not exiting and filming the whole thing.
There IS something wrong with doing the above mentioned if you are not capable of said feats. You can't kill stuff at 600 yards with your 270 and crappy tire power point ammo. All forms of hunting, be they bow, muzzle loader or rifle, are subject to self imposed limitations regarding which shots you should and shouldn't take. The onus is on the shooter to realize his/her limitations and decide which shots to take and which to pass on. If that means your max range for a rifle is 150 yards then fine. If it's 700 yards that's fine too. The girl was obviously a novice but he coached her and she squeezed the trigger and the gear did the rest. I also recall a story about a 6 year old or so kid of a 1000 yard benchrest shooter shooting a 5 or 6" group at 1k. Good gear and steady trigger pull results in success.
I think it is wrong for making him or videos of long range kills out to be the bad guy just because people are to dumb to realize the limitations of their gear and their skill. Go admire the skill and practice if you want to be able to do the same. It's like watching Schumacher drive and instead of realizing he's a great driver you think you can do the same in your cavalier. When you then have an accident you promptly blame him for putting silly ideas in your head. John isn't saying that everyone should be doing what he does. He's just showing it can be done, just like Schumacher is showing you can take a hairpin at 200km/h. Doesn't mean you have any business doing either if you don't have the skill and gear to do so.
- Location
- Dah Soo,ON
Mister, you take that sound logic and you get the #### outta here.
Aint safe to shoot critters past 'hundred paces, grandaddy told me so.
You guys should compile a list of what makes someone a good "hunter". Together you're certainly smart enough. We need:
- acceptable chamberings by animal. We'll also need bullet weights and types, barrel twists and loads;
- acceptable distances. You'll need to advise on terrain and environmental conditions if that affects the acceptable maximum shot distance;
- type of blind. Are some kinds not allowed, i.e. if they're heated for example?
- clothing. Maybe some provides an unfair advantage;
- cost of equipment. Are Weatherbys allowed? A nice ATV?
- method of hunting. Only close stalks, or is a drive with dogs allowed?
I could see a panel of guys who could judge each hunt and declare whther or not it was "ethical", and if it's "hunting" or "shooting".
That would be good.
- acceptable chamberings by animal. We'll also need bullet weights and types, barrel twists and loads;
- acceptable distances. You'll need to advise on terrain and environmental conditions if that affects the acceptable maximum shot distance;
- type of blind. Are some kinds not allowed, i.e. if they're heated for example?
- clothing. Maybe some provides an unfair advantage;
- cost of equipment. Are Weatherbys allowed? A nice ATV?
- method of hunting. Only close stalks, or is a drive with dogs allowed?
I could see a panel of guys who could judge each hunt and declare whther or not it was "ethical", and if it's "hunting" or "shooting".
That would be good.
Haven't shot much, have you.
How can a bullet penetrate a shoulder and then "explode"? What physics makes it able to do that? How long does it take for an elk to run 100 yards before it drops? Five seconds? A man can do it in 10. There is a profound difference between 5 seconds from the shot to the animal's death, and an animal lying paralyzed for half an hour it will take those guys to get to that spot. That's the difference between a short death run and a spine shot. Spined animals are most often NOT dead. The difference is suffering.
And your point is what, exactly? No trees means 700 yard shots are hunting? Being 700 yards away is not hunting, it is long range shooting. Shooting is not hunting, whether the shot is 17 yards or 700, shooting is not hunting. Getting close to animals is "hunting". What on earth does "Not exactly lots of trees" have to do with anything?
So how do monolithic bullets make shooting at long range easier? How do the many things that have changed change the facts that reliably and humanely killing critters is very "iffy" at 700 yards? How many ways are there for that 700 yard shot to go "wrong" even if they have practiced, had good equipment, and could hit paper at that range? How long did the bullet take to get there? A single step by that elk would have changed things dramatically.
Finally, there is no proof at all for your belief that the elk was dead. It is actually quite unlikely that it died that quickly. If you had shot many animals you would understand that very few drop dead on the spot, no matter what is being shot at them. For an elk to collapse its legs like that, a spine shot is the most likely cause. The immediate "zoom out" is also a common tactic for film makers to avoid the unpleasant view of a struggling, and suffering animal as it dies. I do not have any faith that elk was "humanely" killed.
If you can argue that 700 yard shots are perfectly fine, because you saw one on the internet, you are in for some bad hunting experiences. So are some unfortunate animals.
