Hunting rifles and big game at distance

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by canadaman30

Tell that to the crew of gunwerks. Mike Davidson is young guy who has the skill to make it look easy. But according to your video Oaknut, gunwerks guns must not be built proper and Mike is far to young an inexperienced to be able to shoot at the distances he's shooting. Another attack towards skilled shooter and gunmakers because of their age....sad really

---

And just where did I or anybody say anything about gunwerks?

Either you ignored the point of that or just refuse to see it. That old fart also can smell the BS from that video as with any of them. It's pretty easy to cut away and film the required parts later. He also mentions the fact that the bullets are not going to do what they were designed for at 1000 yards.



Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by canadaman30

Sounds like a jealous fudd who wants to attack younger gun makers and hunters that are much more capable of shooting accurately past 500yds. More of the same, if I cant do it and I'm old than nobody should be doing so because its unethical.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jaycee

It was ??? interesting but, in over 60 years of hunting, shooting , reloading and doing tons of reading about "rifles , custom and factory built " I have never heard of Randy Selby.
He is assuming a lot in his statements about other builders /shooters.
Manufacturing processes have changed and improved considerably over the last several years.
How does he know that the newer builders have not researched their rifles to see what particular load shoots to that degree of accuracy required for those long range shots?
He has an opinion , that's fine but to condemn someone for doing what he cannot is blatantly wrong!
He is an older man with a lot of experience, I will give him that however as a person ages, breathing is harder to control, eyesight deteriorates and makes it much harder to shoot at looong range even with the best optics available.

---

He's absolutely entitled to his opinion and so is everyone else. I'm sticking with my post,though,as interesting as Mr. Selby is,we must be very cautious condemning others. To do so merely hands the opposition the stick to beat us over the head with. I want to request that whomever took the OP's video down,put it back. Censorship is more dangerous than one man's opinion.

A .338 win.mag. was mentioned a few times in that long range video.
A 250 grn. bullet at 1000 yards still has enough energy to kill an Elk. [ 1200 ft. lbs. is what is claimed to be necessary]

Ballistic tables show that it still has 1161 ft. lbs. of energy at 1000 yards.[can't get the chart to print.]

link;https://www.outdoorlife.com/elk-cart...s-338-win-mag/

.338 Win. Mag. ballistics infographic
.338 Win. Mag. ballistics at a glance.

The above , in answer to Oaknuts post # 41 , below !

[COLOR=#000000]And just where did I or anybody say anything about gunwerks?

[COLOR=#000000]Either you ignored the point of that or just refuse to see it. That old fart also can smell the BS from that video as with any of them. It's pretty easy to cut away and film the required parts later. He also mentions the fact that the bullets are not going to do what they were designed for at 1000 yards.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oaknut

And just where did I or anybody say anything about gunwerks?

Either you ignored the point of that or just refuse to see it. That old fart also can smell the BS from that video as with any of them. It's pretty easy to cut away and film the required parts later. He also mentions the fact that the bullets are not going to do what they were designed for at 1000 yards.



Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk

---

Would this be another fake video, or is it possible it could actually be real?
https://youtu.be/CvssYmapeSU

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jaycee

A .338 win.mag. was mentioned a few times in that long range video.
A 250 grn. bullet at 1000 yards still has enough energy to kill an Elk. [ 1200 ft. lbs. is what is claimed to be necessary]

Ballistic tables show that it still has 1161 ft. lbs. of energy at 1000 yards.[can't get the chart to print.]

link;https://www.outdoorlife.com/elk-cart...s-338-win-mag/

.338 Win. Mag. ballistics infographic
.338 Win. Mag. ballistics at a glance.

The above , in answer to Oaknuts post # 41 , below !

[COLOR=#000000]And just where did I or anybody say anything about gunwerks?

[COLOR=#000000]Either you ignored the point of that or just refuse to see it. That old fart also can smell the BS from that video as with any of them. It's pretty easy to cut away and film the required parts later. He also mentions the fact that the bullets are not going to do what they were designed for at 1000 yards.

---

They were using a 338rum which is even more potent then 338wm. Looked to be a very effective cartridge at extended ranges

There's a difference between blatantly attacking someone's ethics and attempting to educate someone. What we have in this thread is a guy who is obviously an inexperienced hunter and may or may not be a practiced long range shooter on paper (hats off to him if he is). He's attempting to pass off what he's watched on YouTube and read on the internet as knowledge and fact.

He posts (I'm sure extremely edited) videos of spectacular long range kill shots and makes bold claims about potential results of these long range kills based on his limited knowledge of animal anatomy and obvious limited knowledge on how animals do or don't react to being shot. Contrary to some popular beliefs, aside from brain/high neck shots, there is no magical "stone dead" x-ring to hit on an animal's shoulder. Full stop. We went through this with Blackwolf already.

We are doing a disservice to those reading this thread who are new to the sport or might otherwise not know any better if we DON'T attempt to call out some of this stuff and bring things somewhat back to reality. Is it not unethical to stand aside and let the uneducated influence the uneducated?

Sent from my SM-A520W using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jaycee

A .338 win.mag. was mentioned a few times in that long range video.
A 250 grn. bullet at 1000 yards still has enough energy to kill an Elk. [ 1200 ft. lbs. is what is claimed to be necessary]

Ballistic tables show that it still has 1161 ft. lbs. of energy at 1000 yards.

---

You have half the equation in place. 1200 lbs is considered the bare minimum with 1500 to 2000 being recommended. But back to half the equation, at 1000 yards that bullet is moving at 1446fps. Copper bullets require 2000 fps to open reliably. Soft point or tipped bullets require 1800fps. Even the new ELD X requires 1600fps. So not only are you a touch under required energy all you are trying to do is punch a hole without any bullet expansion?

Not my idea of hunting..... shoot the animal, spend 30 minutes walking 5o where it was, spend another 30 minutes trying to locate the exact spot the animal was, realize that all you have done is punch a clean hole through the animals guts and let it walk away to die later.

Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GW11

There's a difference between blatantly attacking someone's ethics and attempting to educate someone. What we have in this thread is a guy who is obviously an inexperienced hunter and may or may not be a practiced long range shooter on paper (hats off to him if he is). He's attempting to pass off what he's watched on YouTube and read on the internet as knowledge and fact.

He posts (I'm sure extremely edited) videos of spectacular long range kill shots and makes bold claims about potential results of these long range kills based on his limited knowledge of animal anatomy and obvious limited knowledge on how animals do or don't react to being shot. Contrary to some popular beliefs, aside from brain/high neck shots, there is no magical "stone dead" x-ring to hit on an animal's shoulder. Full stop. We went through this with Blackwolf already.

We are doing a disservice to those reading this thread who are new to the sport or might otherwise not know any better if we DON'T attempt to call out some of this stuff and bring things somewhat back to reality. Is it not unethical to stand aside and let the uneducated influence the uneducated?

Sent from my SM-A520W using Tapatalk

---

Coming from the guy who stated nobody has any business shooting game past 100yds. We can make or own assumptions on your amount of experience. I have far less experience than you, I've only been hunting big game for 35+years. When I was young an inexperienced like yourself I didnt want to believe anything less than though the ribs was the way to shoot game. As years past and I did some of my own experiments, I no longer believe that theory at all.
I also have a great respect for talent and skill far beyond my own limitations. I find it truly sad how others here feel they need to attack others that may have more skill and talent that their own.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oaknut

You have half the equation in place. 1200 lbs is considered the bare minimum with 1500 to 2000 being recommended. But back to half the equation, at 1000 yards that bullet is moving at 1446fps. Copper bullets require 2000 fps to open reliably. Soft point or tipped bullets require 1800fps. Even the new ELD X requires 1600fps. So not only are you a touch under required energy all you are trying to do is punch a hole without any bullet expansion?

Not my idea of hunting..... shoot the animal, spend 30 minutes walking 5o where it was, spend another 30 minutes trying to locate the exact spot the animal was, realize that all you have done is punch a clean hole through the animals guts and let it walk away to die later.

Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk

---

Also you don't, or forgot to mention the fact that as the bullet drives deeper into whatever it hits, it expands more.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jaycee

Also you don't, or forgot to mention the fact that as the bullet drives deeper into whatever it hits, it expands more.

---

If the bullet is traveling too slow to expand in the first place just how do you suppose it will expand more when being slowed further?

Please see below, 338 Lapua at 100 yards for the first two, 500 for the third and a 30 cal for comparison, all shot into a poplar. Block. The RUM does not have that much of an advantage over the Lapua and there isn't an elk in the world as hard as a chunk of green poplar end grain.https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...1a82e10036.jpg

Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk