200 yard zero my 180 grain accubonds will be 19” low at 400. 6 1/2” low at 300.

Those are easy numbers. My .257 wby is only 12” low at 400.

I’ll take a lot more 200 yard shots than 400 yards. Aside from coyotes and stuff I’ve only taken one shot approaching 400 yards and because of the angle I was shooting over the animal.

I don’t like shooting stuff at long range. Too much stuff can happen. A 400 yard shot for me is a worst case scenario for me where there is no choice to get closer. I’m a 200-300 yard guy and most of my animals have been killed at 200 yards or less

That describes 95% of hunters across the globe.

All the paper-punching mindset does for that group is introduce a bunch of unnecessary swing thoughts. KISS is always the best way in the field.

Because it ain't necessary. That is all.

I disagree with the KISS analogy. Go Prepared. Cash me outside, how bout dat?

I’d buy something with tactical turrets, it’s just going to be a lot easier in the long run. Your drop will change with elevation, temp, and pressure. Why risk the shot? Why risk wounding the animal or losing the animal when simply learning a new technique can significantly reduce those chances?

Everybody talks about being an ethical hunter. We pick the right caliber, the one we believe will be a 1 shot kill and knock him off his feet. We pick the right bullet, the one we think will best achieve that 1 shot catastrophic kill. Why not invest in a system that allows you to take the “guessing” out of how high to hold over? That being a scope with adjustable turrets.

We'll see if you're prepared tomorrow.

I’d buy something with tactical turrets, it’s just going to be a lot easier in the long run. Your drop will change with elevation, temp, and pressure. Why risk the shot? Why risk wounding the animal or losing the animal when simply learning a new technique can significantly reduce those chances?

Everybody talks about being an ethical hunter. We pick the right caliber, the one we believe will be a 1 shot kill and knock him off his feet. We pick the right bullet, the one we think will best achieve that 1 shot catastrophic kill. Why not invest in a system that allows you to take the “guessing” out of how high to hold over? That being a scope with adjustable turrets.

At 400 yards and in there’s no ethical considerations or “risk” of wounding or missing if one simply knows the basics of shooting and some rudimentary ballistics. None. Zero.

You don’t need a scope with adjustable turrets for hunting at ranges of 400 and under. In fact, they can be a hindrance. Which you may encounter one day if you can’t get on an animal fast enough while dialing or finding the right reticle mark to use as an animal walks or runs out of your life. All of which was unnecessary to begin with.

Then he might as well sling a 223 at it with that attitude

Sight in 3” high at 100 and you don’t even need to hold off hair on an elk at 400 with a .300 Win Mag. As said above, it ain’t rocket science.

Wind drift is wind drift - has to be accounted for and is an artful estimation no matter the reticle used.

Nailed it. Some people just love to chit on threads like this and act like they know what the [censored] they are doing, but I am not spending 5-10k to go kill an elk and make a SWAG as to where my bullet is going to end up when I pull the trigger. Obviously it has worked well for however long but we will agree to disagree.

Folks hunted successfully with some pretty primitive optics for a long time before FFP and all this turret twisting came along and did fine. A plain old 4x, 6x, or 3-9x still works just as well as it ever did whether or not you want to believe it. Shoot the way you like. I urge everyone to shoot the way they like, including with iron sights (yes, those still work too, and at impressive ranges in the hands of an accomplished rifleman), Weaver 4x Micro-Tracs, and Nightforce ATACRs. Stop trying to pushthe LR agenda on folks who aren't interested.

I’d buy something with tactical turrets, it’s just going to be a lot easier in the long run. Your drop will change with elevation, temp, and pressure. Why risk the shot? Why risk wounding the animal or losing the animal when simply learning a new technique can significantly reduce those chances?

Everybody talks about being an ethical hunter. We pick the right caliber, the one we believe will be a 1 shot kill and knock him off his feet. We pick the right bullet, the one we think will best achieve that 1 shot catastrophic kill. Why not invest in a system that allows you to take the “guessing” out of how high to hold over? That being a scope with adjustable turrets.

Nailed it. Some people just love to chit on threads like this and act like they know what the [censored] they are doing, but I am not spending 5-10k to go kill an elk and make a SWAG as to where my bullet is going to end up when I pull the trigger. Obviously it has worked well for however long but we will agree to disagree.

right on NP. Did it that way for 40 years with a 7mag and duplex reticle.

The only ones chitting on this thread are all the paper-punchers basically either insulting him or insisting he get something that he specifically said he didn’t want simply because they think they know better because they have complex scopes and must justify their necessity.

And the fallacy with this mindset, and the mindset of lots of turret spinners, is assuming the LR shooter can dope wind, and nobody can do that every time. Not Tubb, Nodnett, nobody.

And the fallacy with this mindset, and the mindset of lots of turret spinners, is assuming the LR shooter can dope wind, and nobody can do that every time. Not Tubb, Nodnett, nobody.

The only ones chitting on this thread are all the paper-punchers basically either insulting him or insisting he get something that he specifically said he didn’t want simply because they think they know better because they have complex scopes and must justify their necessity.

I seem to remember there were no takeres on a kentucky windage experiment we were looking to conduct last year at Fireman's. Just to see what happened and what the results were