Elk at 688 yards with a 243

[Nevada Mike]

I own plenty of LR capable rifles. All fun to shoot. But hunting isn’t all about shooting.
I would never taken that shot with any of my rifles.
Friend of mine used a .243 to take an antelope at 560 yards in Oregon a couple weeks ago. Longest shot he ever made by 200+ yards. Tells me two things… he should never have taken the shot and he was LUCKY!

 

[CoElkHunter]

Just ONE example I personally know of: My neighbor next door wanted to go deer hunting with another neighbor. I don’t believe he ever owned a rifle before. We suggested to him a .308, .270 or .30-06. He bought a .308. Well, a month later, his long distance shooting ex Navy buddy convinced him he needed a longer range cartridge. So, he bought a 6.5PRC. Nothings wrong with that cartridge, except he doesn’t practice with it. He went deer hunting once and didn’t get a shot. How many other hunters buy a rifle in a “long range” cartridge and take a longer shot at game than they’ve EVER practiced for? I’ll bet it’s a bunch.

 

[Phil Giordano]

To me, who close the distance will always be a better hunter than the one who shots from far away. I'm much more impressed by a shot from 50 yrds than 500. Less distance = more fun, more ethics, more respect of the animal. AND more skills. In my opinion.

 

[Inline6]

I own plenty of LR capable rifles. All fun to shoot. But hunting isn’t all about shooting.
I would never taken that shot with any of my rifles.
Friend of mine used a .243 to take an antelope at 560 yards in Oregon a couple weeks ago. Longest shot he ever made by 200+ yards. Tells me two things… he should never have taken the shot and he was LUCKY!

If you can't shoot, no matter the distance or the weapon are you hunting?

 

[freefall]

I suppose I am bigoted, I've hunted in a rain forest in the Susitna Valley, the longest shot I've ever had was about 150 yds and that was across a little pond.

 

[Tom Leoni]

Yikes. If you've got to brag about your long-range shooting skills, brag about how you do at the range.

Shooting at a living creature at 700 yards with a bare-minimum (if that) cartridge is certainly nothing I would advertise, no matter the result. Best case scenario: you sniped at an animal and the stars lined up for you. Worst case scenario: a wounded animal with little chance for a successful follow-up shot.

I'm generally not one to shake my head at fellow hunters--we're all brothers and sisters--but let's just say that this is something I would never try, let alone put on video. Combination between distance, cartridge and game is plain begging for a poor result.

 

[Nevada Mike]

If you can't shoot, no matter the distance or the weapon are you hunting?

Agree that shooting is part of it, but if animals are just targets, are you hunting or just shooting?

 

[CoElkHunter]

I’m just curious, but what power of scope are hunters using on their HUNTING rifles when taking extraordinary long shots? At 10x, I struggle at 300yds. off sticks.

 

[stk]

I’m just curious, but what power of scope are hunters using on their HUNTING rifles when taking extraordinary long shots? At 10x, I struggle at 300yds. off sticks.

10x is plenty of power for deer or larger sized game out to 600

 

[Stamp Collector]

I’m not one to cast stones. She made a great shot, maybe she can make that shot all day.

Having said that given how she was being coached, on when to take the rifle off of safe and how to focus, unless her guide does that for everyone regardless of shooting ability, I got the impression that she isn’t an overly accomplished long range shooter and shouldn’t have been attempting that shot no matter the cartridge she was shooting.

 

[Inline6]

Agree that shooting is part of it, but if animals are just targets, are you hunting or just shooting?

That is the whole reason we have these conversations. People have different views on what is moral and what they feel is not. It is all personal view points. If someone views an animal as a target are they wrong? Most people will target a species, from that species they will target a specific animal. So using the term target can mean different things to different people.

If someone views an animal as a walking target and nothing more, is that wrong? I can't answer that, if someone feels that way...I personally do not. Again this is where morals come into play, this to me is very subjective. Humans are not perfect creatures, then nothing in nature is.

Like others have said, should that shot have been taken? Well that elk was rolled up as soon as the bullet hit. We can have a debate on the moral aspect, it was a good clean kill. If the shot was made at 50 yards and the elk ran off we would have a discussion about the use of a 243. Point is if it did not play out to OUR view point, we as humans usually have something to say about it even if the outcome was perfect.

 

[Inline6]

I’m just curious, but what power of scope are hunters using on their HUNTING rifles when taking extraordinary long shots? At 10x, I struggle at 300yds. off sticks.

What is your definition of extraordinary long?

 

[HankBuck]

10x is plenty of power for deer or larger sized game out to 600

That does not seem to be the consensus regarding scope magnification and all the Long Range Custom Rifles (and “marketing” TV Shows) use much higher magnification - 18x, 25x etc... While I agree I might “hit” a deer at 600 yrds thru a 10x scope - certainly Not inside a 9” to 12” circle/kill zone. Maybe that’s me - I “wish” I could consistently hit a 9” circle at 600 yrds with any scope — under hunting conditions (or even from a bench). Too many variables for me to be confident. Also, how many hunters practice over 300 yrds to 400 yrds? Damn few, especially that live East of the Mississippi. It’s like thinking Tom Cruise can “really” fly a fighter jet.

 

[stk]

That does not seem to be the consensus regarding scope magnification and all the Long Range Custom Rifles (and “marketing” TV Shows) use much higher magnification - 18x, 25x etc... While I agree I might “hit” a deer at 600 yrds thru a 10x scope - certainly Not inside a 9” to 12” circle/kill zone. Maybe that’s me - I “wish” I could consistently hit a 9” circle at 600 yrds with any scope — under hunting conditions (or even from a bench). Too many variables for me to be confident. Also, how many hunters practice over 300 yrds to 400 yrds? Damn few, especially that live East of the Mississippi. It’s like thinking Tom Cruise can “really” fly a fighter jet.

It is easier to "see" a deer with a 10x scope at 600 yards than it is to see one at 100 yards with your naked eye. Do you need magnification to aim at deer greater than 60 yards away? Would you be comfortable shooting at one with a red dot at that distant, or with iron sights? If so, 10x magnification would be plenty at 600 yards. A 10x scope at 600 yards gives you the same sight picture as an unmagnified scope at 60 yards.

That's not to say actually shooting at a deer at 600 yards with a 10x scope is as easy (or should be done as readily) as shooting at one with a red dot at 60 yards. Obviously they're very different things, and the long shot is exponentially harder for a number of reasons. All I'm pointing out is that the scope magnification is probably not the limiting factor at that range. 10x is plenty for a deer out to 600 yards.

 

[HankBuck]

It is easier to "see" a deer with a 10x scope at 600 yards than it is to see one at 100 yards with your naked eye. Do you need magnification to aim at deer greater than 60 yards away? Would you be comfortable shooting at one with a red dot at that distant, or with iron sights? If so, 10x magnification would be plenty at 600 yards. A 10x scope at 600 yards gives you the same sight picture as an unmagnified scope at 60 yards.

That's not to say actually shooting at a deer at 600 yards with a 10x scope is as easy (or should be done as readily) as shooting at one with a red dot at 60 yards. Obviously they're very different things, and the long shot is exponentially harder for a number of reasons. All I'm pointing out is that the scope magnification is probably not the limiting factor at that range. 10x is plenty for a deer out to 600 yards.

STK - glad I read your last paragraph - otherwise I would’ve thought you never shot anything past 100 yrds. Yes, you are correct that there are “very different things” going on with a 600 yrd shot then it just being 10 times farther then 60 yrds. I am NOT a good long range shooter and 300 yrds - 350 is the end of my comfort zone. I cannot prove you are incorrect because I am not an expert, but I would say that I’ve never spoken to anyone or seen, read anyone that would “choose” a 10x scope for 600 yard shots — it is NOT what that magnification was designed for - being able to do it still does Not make it the best selection. I also don’t care for ultra high power scopes and 10x is my limit for normal big game hunting - usually 3-9 or 2-7 is adequate...but then “normal” for me is under 400 yards. I MAY NOT CARE FOR THE BIG HIGH MAGNIFICATION SCOPES BUT THAT DOESNT MEAN THAT THEY AREN’T SUPERIOR FOR VERY LONG RANGE SHOOTING. At least that’s my Nonexpert opinion.

 

[cajunchefray]

I’m not one to cast stones. She made a great shot, maybe she can make that shot all day.

Having said that given how she was being coached, on when to take the rifle off of safe and how to focus, unless her guide does that for everyone regardless of shooting ability, I got the impression that she isn’t an overly accomplished long range shooter and shouldn’t have been attempting that shot no matter the cartridge she was shooting.

Very True.
Don't want to cast stones to other hunters/shooters. That is one Helluva shot.

It was a lucky shot to hit the CNS at 680+ yards. I wonder if the shooter could do it again past 500 yards. Now, reality is that some women (my Wife) is steadier with a rifle, than many. I respect that.

There is a good reason that Russia, Finland, Ukraine employs women snipers.

I don't disparage other hunters for their equipment and techniques. My choice is a 30-06 and become VERY proficient at long range with high BC bullets, and technique. Lots of practice. And then more practice.

I do know, given my limited skills, that a 300-yard shot with a 30-06 caliber 165/180 grain Barnes or Berger VLD, or a Swift Scirocco, or Nosler Accubond is my limit.

 

[stk]

STK - glad I read your last paragraph - otherwise I would’ve thought you never shot anything past 100 yrds. Yes, you are correct that there are “very different things” going on with a 600 yrd shot then it just being 10 times farther then 60 yrds. I am NOT a good long range shooter and 300 yrds - 350 is the end of my comfort zone. I cannot prove you are incorrect because I am not an expert, but I would say that I’ve never spoken to anyone or seen, read anyone that would “choose” a 10x scope for 600 yard shots — it is NOT what that magnification was designed for - being able to do it still does Not make it the best selection. I also don’t care for ultra high power scopes and 10x is my limit for normal big game hunting - usually 3-9 or 2-7 is adequate...but then “normal” for me is under 400 yards. I MAY NOT CARE FOR THE BIG HIGH MAGNIFICATION SCOPES BUT THAT DOESNT MEAN THAT THEY AREN’T SUPERIOR FOR VERY LONG RANGE SHOOTING. At least that’s my Nonexpert opinion.

I don't disagree with much of what you say. Higher power scopes are more popular. I don't think they're more popular because they're better for shooting large mammals at long range. They're more popular because they're better for putting tiny holes in pieces of paper that don't move from a bench at the shooting range. I think the great majority of people with "long range" hunting rifles set up their rifles with scopes that work the best at the shooting range and then use them to shoot animals. If they were to buy the scopes that work best for shooting animals--larger FOVs, ability to more easily spot shots, highest likelihood of quick follow up shots, quickest target acquisition at both close and long range--they would generally have scopes with less magnification.

I'd wager far more animals were lost from using too much magnification than not enough.

It isn't the same thing, but if you look at an organization that actually sets up their rifles to perform best at shooting large mammals at long range instead of shooting targets at the range (the military) you'll find a lot more fixed 10x scopes and lower power ones than you will great big 5-25 power scopes.

 

[meigsbucks]

All have made valid points. My take on it is from several angles. First, the shooter may be one of the best 1000 yd shooters in the world, but hitting a gong at whatever range is totally different than a magnificent game animal at almost 700 yds under field conditions. Second, using a .243 with any bullet on a 400# animal is questionable at best and especially at such an extended range, which I consider folly. Third, some novice with a new Savage Axis .243 combo is going to watch this video and take it after elk and think they can kill one at 1/3 mile. Unfortunately, a number of these will result in wounded and lost elk. The worst of this is a long suffering death for the animal but also gives the anti’s ammunition.
I have 7mm, .300 and 338 mags suitable for long range shooting elk, which I consider <500 yds. However, even with these, IMO, I need to have the skills needed to pull off such shots and always try to get closer.

 

[Inline6]

All have made valid points. My take on it is from several angles. First, the shooter may be one of the best 1000 yd shooters in the world, but hitting a gong at whatever range is totally different than a magnificent game animal at almost 700 yds under field conditions. Second, using a .243 with any bullet on a 400# animal is questionable at best and especially at such an extended range, which I consider folly. Third, some novice with a new Savage Axis .243 combo is going to watch this video and take it after elk and think they can kill one at 1/3 mile. Unfortunately, a number of these will result in wounded and lost elk. The worst of this is a long suffering death for the animal but also gives the anti’s ammunition.
I have 7mm, .300 and 338 mags suitable for long range shooting elk, which I consider <500 yds. However, even with these, IMO, I need to have the skills needed to pull off such shots and always try to get closer.

We get lost on the 243 part of thing, a 3030 with a 170 gr bullet going 2200fps has less energy at 150 yards. High bc bullets carry energy. That's why the 6.5s and the 7s perform as well as they do. I'm not say a 3030 should be used, just want to point out differences in energy with two different platforms.

 

[CoElkHunter]

What is your definition of extraordinary long?

For ME with my standard scope, no turrets, probably 400yds with my .300WM. For many with more advanced scopes, 600+ yards. From sticks, no bench and the animals are moving for the most part because it’s a DIY hunt on public land and other hunters are pursuing them. When your target stops, you have a few seconds to take the shot. I’m really not that proficient at anything over 300yds given that reality. I don’t use sticks when elk hunting because where/how I hunt they’res no time. Different hunting environment than my one PG African hunt.