Good points, I read up a little on MPBR on Chuck Hawks websites a long time ago, useful to know. Thanks!
Last edited:
Finally Got First Deer :) And Lessons Learned
- Thread starter miykael
- Start date
Thanks lucky & tigger! I know that the rangefinder has helped me get better practicing 
I guess I should clarify that I want to range-find so that I can use my ballistics/scope skills if needed - I want to use the turrets (or Mil-Dots/MOA reticle) when needed for fine adjustment. I want to shoot precise not just generally hit a zone...guess that for me is a part of 'hunting'
I guess I should clarify that I want to range-find so that I can use my ballistics/scope skills if needed - I want to use the turrets (or Mil-Dots/MOA reticle) when needed for fine adjustment. I want to shoot precise not just generally hit a zone...guess that for me is a part of 'hunting' 
Gear and tech obsession aside, I'm thrilled to see some guy who is new but thorough and practiced going hunting. There are lots of guys with a lifetime of experience still guessing the range and ballistics and banging away.....
Thanks for posting the story. My first time out this year. This is flat country and although I will get a range finder for a longer range hunt, I'm relying on MBPR first time around. I enjoyed reading and congratulations.
- Location
- Just West of the GTA
Congrads on a job well done! You can't be too careful with your shots when you are hunting. If you respect the game you pursue you will take as much care as you can to make a clean kill. Better to be overly careful than not carefule enough or reckless.
To any of the guys on here that have been critical to the OP about his use of a rangefinder please consider that on the opposite end of the spectrum we have guys out there that think that whatever they are doing is always "good enough". I have hunted with these guys and they are hacks. I understand that most of us know what MPBR is and what 100 yards look like, yata yata.....
Watched a guy take a 270 yard shot on a deer that he wounded and we didn't recover. The distance was known (laser) but his trajectory was off as he didn't know enough about his actual load - he got the numbers from a chart on the internet. I personally spent 5 hours looking for that animal (2 hours that night, 3 hours in the morning). We wouldn't have been in that situation if the guy had done his due diligance and taken the time to find out what his load ACTUALLY SHOT instead of glancing at a chart on the internet for FACTORY loads that he wasn't shooting - he was shooting hand loads with a DIFFERENT bullet and at a DIFFERENT velocity. What a shame. I wish that this was the only instance of poor judgement that I have seen in the field, where guys should have had more technical knowledge and marksmanship skill.
So use whatever you want and be as careful as you like. You are learning and should be proud to be a hunter and not a hack (not to say that the guys on here being critical of you are hacks - not saying that at all).
To any of the guys on here that have been critical to the OP about his use of a rangefinder please consider that on the opposite end of the spectrum we have guys out there that think that whatever they are doing is always "good enough". I have hunted with these guys and they are hacks. I understand that most of us know what MPBR is and what 100 yards look like, yata yata.....
Watched a guy take a 270 yard shot on a deer that he wounded and we didn't recover. The distance was known (laser) but his trajectory was off as he didn't know enough about his actual load - he got the numbers from a chart on the internet. I personally spent 5 hours looking for that animal (2 hours that night, 3 hours in the morning). We wouldn't have been in that situation if the guy had done his due diligance and taken the time to find out what his load ACTUALLY SHOT instead of glancing at a chart on the internet for FACTORY loads that he wasn't shooting - he was shooting hand loads with a DIFFERENT bullet and at a DIFFERENT velocity. What a shame. I wish that this was the only instance of poor judgement that I have seen in the field, where guys should have had more technical knowledge and marksmanship skill.
So use whatever you want and be as careful as you like. You are learning and should be proud to be a hunter and not a hack (not to say that the guys on here being critical of you are hacks - not saying that at all).
Ardent
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Glad for your success, and glad to hear you're looking for a light / standard hunting rig, check out Kimbers. You see a lot of big heavy "sniper" rigs near the roads, yet to see one in the backcountry.
All in all, awesome success, and you're learning, so all good there's a ton more to learn yet. Everyone of us goes through it and it's enjoyable!
Again, hearty congratulations, that's the biggest kill of your hunting career no matter how successful you are down the road.
All in all, awesome success, and you're learning, so all good there's a ton more to learn yet. Everyone of us goes through it and it's enjoyable!
Again, hearty congratulations, that's the biggest kill of your hunting career no matter how successful you are down the road.
EcoHeliGuy
Member
- Location
- Vancouver island
I know my round isn't a 308. but I have sighted my rifle (7mm rem mag 175gr bullet) in at 175 yards. from the mozzle to 250 yards I'm +/- 1.5" from point of aim. at 300yrds i'm 3 inchs low. No range calculation for me. maybe play with your app and find a sweet spot. Be realistic on the range you'll shoot. and not worry about bullet drop.
Ardent
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Damn good point, and why there are some snickers about rangefinders. At any hunting range that looks reasonable, if you're sighted 2 inches high at 100 yards, you don't even consider bullet drop or any kind of compensation. Most commonly, people overestimate range, and aim way high when new, either lung shooting, missing the vitals high, over even shooting over the back in extreme cases. Most new hunters would do best to do without the range finder I believe as it just overcomplicates things. If you need a range finder for the shot, it's too far for a new hunter to reasonably go for anyhow, in my opinion. And if you're not hunting stone sheep in the Northern Rockies, you're not forced to take a 400 yard shot after two weeks of hunting. Likely 95% of deer are taken under 200 yards.
Totally understand and see what you guys are saying but I guess like the other thread I started about what hunting means to different people, it shows how we all look at 'hunting' differently. For me, knowing ballistics is a part of my hunting and satisfies other areas of why I hunt (not only for meat) as it brings together all my skills (including precision loading). If you know your ballistics, know your range, have decent equipment and have consistent ammo (low ES), all of a sudden a 3-400 yard shot isn't really any harder than a 100 (braced, not freehold), except for accounting for wind. But not many people are going to be able guesstimate 3-400 yards accurately (without a rangefinder how would you really know). To me hunting is precision shooting an animal, to others a 1-3 MOA+ shot is adequate (which can be 3-9 inches at 300y!). If you rifle is shooting 1 MOA with good ammo, the bullet can hit anywhere in that 1 inch circle. But how many people could freehold shoot within an inch of where they were aiming (crosshairs), with adrenalin pumping? Honest answer and can be tested at the range. Some hunters I see sighting in at the range with commercial ammo are happy with a 2" group at 100y (that's using a rest) as that's enough to hit the 'large' killzone.
You might be among the rare (and I mean rare) individuals that could freehold shoot and hit an animal's vitals at 300+ (or even 100+) yards, but not me. I wouldn't even try it because I know I would just wound an animal (if I even hit it). But I do know that my gear, my OCD made precision loads and now me...can hit within a half inch of where I'm aiming; which gives me great satisfaction. In the future I do want to hunt (or shoot coyotes/gophers) mid to longer ranges, that really test ballistic knowledge and use of ranging (including turrets). I'll take the ribbing for being geared out Would you tell a sniper to forget all gear and just take a guesstimate shot, not likely; for me (not saying for anyone else) hunting isn't any different
I think a rangefinder is a great tool for those that want to KNOW where their round will hit, almost exactly in the case of those that care about ballistics When the apocalypse happens and I need to do rifle CQB, then 100y general vital zone will be good enough for me Haha....
You might be among the rare (and I mean rare) individuals that could freehold shoot and hit an animal's vitals at 300+ (or even 100+) yards, but not me. I wouldn't even try it because I know I would just wound an animal (if I even hit it). But I do know that my gear, my OCD made precision loads and now me...can hit within a half inch of where I'm aiming; which gives me great satisfaction. In the future I do want to hunt (or shoot coyotes/gophers) mid to longer ranges, that really test ballistic knowledge and use of ranging (including turrets). I'll take the ribbing for being geared out
Would you tell a sniper to forget all gear and just take a guesstimate shot, not likely; for me (not saying for anyone else) hunting isn't any different I think a rangefinder is a great tool for those that want to KNOW where their round will hit, almost exactly in the case of those that care about ballistics
When the apocalypse happens and I need to do rifle CQB, then 100y general vital zone will be good enough for me Haha....
Last edited:
With a name like Superbrad I gotta trust you
you're right, it's all about learning and improving. I'm a sponge for other peoples experience too and can respect it but still gotta be me...
Nice work! Congrats! If your use of a rangefinder gives you confidence, more power to you!
I have a rangefinder, but use it very seldom.
I have used the same sighting for 40 years on my hunting rifles...+3" at 100 yards.
Depending on which chambering I am packing, that means no compensation for shots out to possibly 340+ yards.
Enjoy your young buck....he will be delicious!
Regards, Dave.
I have a rangefinder, but use it very seldom.
I have used the same sighting for 40 years on my hunting rifles...+3" at 100 yards.
Depending on which chambering I am packing, that means no compensation for shots out to possibly 340+ yards.
Enjoy your young buck....he will be delicious!
Regards, Dave.
Totally understand and see what you guys are saying but I guess like the other thread I started about what hunting means to different people, it shows how we all look at 'hunting' differently. For me, knowing ballistics is a part of my hunting and satisfies other areas of why I hunt (not only for meat) as it brings together all my skills (including precision loading). If you know your ballistics, know your range, have decent equipment and have consistent ammo (low ES), all of a sudden a 3-400 yard shot isn't really any harder than a 100 (braced, not freehold), except for accounting for wind. But not many people are going to be able guesstimate 3-400 yards accurately (without a rangefinder how would you really know). To me hunting is precision shooting an animal, to others a 1-3 MOA+ shot is adequate (which can be 3-9 inches at 300y!). If you rifle is shooting 1 MOA with good ammo, the bullet can hit anywhere in that 1 inch circle. But how many people could freehold shoot within an inch of where they were aiming (crosshairs), with adrenalin pumping? Honest answer and can be tested at the range. Some hunters I see sighting in at the range with commercial ammo are happy with a 2" group at 100y (that's using a rest) as that's enough to hit the 'large' killzone.
You might be among the rare (and I mean rare) individuals that could freehold shoot and hit an animal's vitals at 300+ (or even 100+) yards, but not me. I wouldn't even try it because I know I would just wound an animal (if I even hit it). But I do know that my gear, my OCD made precision loads and now me...can hit within a half inch of where I'm aiming; which gives me great satisfaction. In the future I do want to hunt (or shoot coyotes/gophers) mid to longer ranges, that really test ballistic knowledge and use of ranging (including turrets). I'll take the ribbing for being geared out
I think a rangefinder is a great tool for those that want to KNOW where their round will hit, almost exactly in the case of those that care about ballistics
I totally get what you are saying here, however I think some people just feel like the same can be achieved for less money and effort. This is not a criticism of people like you who chose to have every gadget and be OCD about loads, etc. Just a comment that some people feel that much of it is unnecessary. Include me in that group. As you said, there is lots of room for different opinions and there is no right answer for everyone.
In my case, I have a $450 combo package Savage 111 in .270 + Weaver 3-9x40 w/Ballistic X reticle. It puts 130gr. blue box Federals into .75" at 200y (zeroed) from the bench, which puts the rounds 1.5" high at 100y and the reticle has marks for 300y, 400y and 500y allowing easy hits on the 12" gongs out to 500y. From the "elbow-on-knee" crouched position with solid forend grip and proper sling usage, I can keep it within 2" at 200y. Range time has taught me to be a great judge of distance anywhere from zero to 300 or so yards and the rifle throws 130gr. copper premiums just as well. Every deer I have shot so far has been within 200y. There is no thought or calculation or hesitation involved, no other devices necessary. Just crouch, aim and fire. Dead deer every time. A rangefinder would be "nice to have" but so far it would have provided not a single benefit to me. In the future, if I want to start shooting animals beyond 300y or so I will likely purchase a RF.
Again, I am not being critical of your methods or tools. Just presenting one example of how someone else gets the job done.
