Best Ideas for Accuracy - FRH vs. SRM type hunters explain their techniques details.

[Darryl Cassel]

That's right Brent

Two sighters "at times" and at extreme range to make sure of the scope setting and that the bullet will impact into the animal.

That's the way we do it and that's all I can tell you about the spotter shot/s procedure.

I thought you saw that I had said, two spotters at extreme range like 1500 yards plus?
"NEVER" several spotter shots as you put it.
It usually takes only ONE spotter. Sometimes two at the most.

DC

[ 01-19-2003: Message edited by: Darryl Cassel ]

 

[Brent]

Hey Darryl,

I read the part about the 2 sighters at extreme LR, just don't know why you can't see why I think "a few" sighters would be more accurate, giving a TRUE zero, and sometimes needed and discuss the "why" part about it?

Instead we seem to be in a rut as to its really being zeroed with just one or two shots. I say it isn't, you say it is.

I see where improvement can be made in a big way with a couple more shots, and it's measured in several inches.

. It's quite easy to see at what range the stacking errors get too big to ignore for the size killzone your aiming at.


You decide when to figure it in guys. I think I explained it well enough that you all get the picture. Something else to consider I thought was.

 

[Darryl Cassel]

Hey Brent

To sum this up, more then "two" spotters has "NEVER" been needed, even at extreme longrange. We can be on after two spotters with the optics we have to watch bullet impact.
That's all I was trying to explain to you.

I did talk to one LR group this year in PA and they said the deep snow was hiding the bullet impact and they could'nt see the hits at 1800 yards. They gave up on the buck they were after because in their situation and terrane, a spotter was not possible under the conditions. I would have done the same thing if I could not see a hit on a far off object. I would not have wanted to wound that animal and have it get away.

"You" also bring up a very good point. If you think that more then one or two spotters would be needed to accurately place a bullet in the target area, how would anyone think that a first round hit at extreme longrange (1500 plus) is going to be more accurate and a better way?

Have a good one.
DC

[ 01-20-2003: Message edited by: Darryl Cassel ]

 

[ewallace]

Brent
The story about Rays 1800 yard buck in Colorado With Darrel.

I did pick up a huge 4X4 buck for Ray and set my glasses and tripod close to his rifle where I could click the elevation and windage for him so he didn't have to take his eye out of the scope.

Had another fellow behind us to call the shots also in case I didn't pick up the vapor trails.
Ray wanted a one mile buck or elk kill and this buck was 1800 yards away and just standing there. I ranged the buck 3 times with the Russian laser and the range was confirmed each time.
I set 10 extra clicks of elevation more then what Rays drop chart called for and had him take 3 spotter shots because of the distance. Set the windage as per the shots going in over the buck and then took the 10 extra clicks off and told Ray to kill his buck. He fired and the bullet went straight and true to the shoulder and the buck dropped. He tried to get up and fell down hard and never moved. The buck was dead within a minute after he got hit.

 

[Darryl Cassel]

That's correct Crow Mag

The reason Ray took the third spotter OVER THE TOP of the deer was that he had NEVER killed an animal anywhere near that range and he wanted to be sure of the shot. We as his spotters all agreed especially since we (the other spotter and myself) "did not see" the FIRST spotter shot go in. You must be able to see the spotters and this is not "always" possible everytime.

This does happen from time to time but is not the norm. The suns glare cause the spotter to miss the bullet trail going to the target plus other factors.

This brings up the tecnique we used on Rays deer. Instead of going 100 yards left or right of the animal and on the same level, we sometimes put 10 extra clicks on the scope from the drop chart called for at that range, fire over the top of the deer or elk to adjust for our windage at an object which will impact over the top and BEHIND the animal.
The animal will only look at the impact and have sometimes even walked up and stuck his nose in the bullet hole in the ground.
We then make our adjustments, take the excess clicks off the scope and then kill him.

WE used this techneque on Rays deer and it worked to perfection.

The next or "fourth actual" shot was held dead on the animals shoulder and he dropped.
The bullet impacted "exactly" where Ray had aimed.
In reality, we saw "TWO" spotters go in and made our corrections from those two shots. The first of the three spotter shots, we did not see.

Every hunting senerio has a different twist to it, but the norm for us without a new LR shooter along, is "two" spotters (that we can see) at extreme range. Most of the time one shot will do.

As mentioned before, if you can't see the spotter shot after two or even three shots because of deep or blowing snow or other conditions , we will wait for a better opportunity or give up on that animal entirely.

Later
DC

[ 01-20-2003: Message edited by: Darryl Cassel ]

 

[Dave King]

I'm for one glad this thread got started up. I hadn't given much thought to the Spotter Round Method (SRM) before but am considering try this system. I'd need to switch to a bench setup or something that captures the rifle well anough to allow for the easy and accurate dialing from the Point Of Aim (POA) to the Point Of Impact (POI). Maybe I'll try to re-incorporate this into the bipod and sand sock system (hasn't worked well in the past).

Thanks for the discussion!

 

[Darryl Cassel]

Dave

It will work even with the bi-pod.

WE use one when we carry our lighter equipment out on far ridges here in Northern PA. The rear bag is fill with "clean" kitty litter for less weight. I have several lighter rifles I call "carry guns" just for this purpose.

Try it, but make "SURE" you have a spotter with you and with a good set of bigeye optics. This is a must.

We have been doing this for too many years to make any suggestions that would not work well for any shooter on this, or any forum.

Using one way or another would depend on the range you are trying. Extreme range the spotter system works BEST for us.

Most times Inside of 1000 yards ---range, read the wind, click and fire. With extreme wind, a spotter shot would be needed here.
Over 1000 yards Range, click, fire a spotter, make your scope correction, if another spotter is needed fire it, make your correction and go right back on the animal ASAP and fire. He will be down and dead.

Later and good luck to all.
DC

 

[Brent]

Hey guys, I hope you all don't take me wrong, I only wish to explore the advantages, disadvantages, techniques and experiences with BOTH methods used here. An honest attempt to compile some data in one thread that both experienced and new guys might gain something from and so we all may get the most from either method used when we have the chance at using it.

Thanks for the story Crowmag, that was cool. I can imagine the look on Rays face when that buck went down! I would have been just BLOWN AWAY, way too cool.

I bet he was exited over that, definately something I'd never forget, way cool! You guys sound like you enjoyed it just as much if not more than he did helpin him get it too!

Really, really cool guys.

Not really wanting a mere debate of which method is "better" here, rather just the aspects and such of both.

"You" also bring up a very good point. If you think that more then one or two spotters would be needed to accurately place a bullet in the target area, how would anyone think that a first round hit at extreme longrange (1500 plus) is going to be more accurate and a better way?

Darryl,

This is assuming the FRH guy has his actual shot data zeros "DOWN" at 1500 yards and not relying on computer generated charts alone, without this he's just simply out of the game alltogether. At the same time this comparison I cave assumes SRM guy is using a computer generated chart "only" at this range as a mere "reference" to keep him "close" to the spotter impact so only minimal adjustments are needed.

My fault, I should have stated the assumptions at the begining, I just assumed you all knew the need for "actual" shot data with the SRM was not necessary because of the spotter rounds fired from 1000-3000 yards give you this.

IF you have actual shot data at whatever range for both methods, the obvious is that the SRM will "tell" the wind exactly. The SRM is superior when known drop data is used, period...

If you read my first and second post and also Johns, this is why the FRH method has an advantage... in a no wind situation, with the assumptions just mentioned above.

Do any of you guys practice at 1500 yards or more and have actual data? If so what kind of consistancy do you get at these ranges?

 

[Darryl Cassel]

Brent

You made the point exactly----A no wind situation. Where I hunt, I don't have that luxury. There's ALWAYS wind to put up with at 1500 yards plus where I hunt or shoot.

The first round shooter would have to have his data and fire it EVERY day and at the same area and target to be on at that range (1500 plus) with a first round hit. There better not be ANY wind kick up either from day to day.

Sure we have drop charts from acctual fire and computer generated but, that will change from day to day, and in temperture and barometric changes.
Hence, spotter method to eleminate the problems.

This is why I have been saying, the spotter round fired first will remove ALL doubt "THAT DAY" and also give the wind values that you would not have trying the first round hit method. Again I say, 1500 yards plus. Keep in mind we have killed our elk at 2100 yards and I have a friend who got his at 2890 Yards with the spotter method.

If you or anyone else can make first round hits at 1500 yards "plus" in a 18" bull (target), everyday, in different locations and elevations, in all weather conditions, without sending a spotter or two over to the target area, you or that person happens to be one hell of a shot.
I have NEVER seen or heard of anyone doing this on a "consistant" day to day shooting outing or in the hunting fields.
Even some of the best military shooters will admit they miss some of their first round target attempts, if they are being honest.

This is why I never chance the first round hit at the yardages we shoot.
Things change to quick for us to try it that way.

Inside of 1000 yards, yes First round hits can be made without much effort unless there is a very strong cross wind your trying to fire into.
We don't move to another location so the wind is in our face or going away from us. We shoot the wind by use of the spotter first system because it will eleminate the wind problem and you now know where the bullet impact is being taken by the wind and can correct to it.

Over 1000 yds, it's the spotter round for us and my advice to use for anyone trying to reach extreme range.

Try it both ways and do what works best for "you".

I "know" what works best for me. It's the spotter method first and yes, I have tried the NF with the R2 Reticle. As a matter of fact I have had 5 of them over the years and and there are no R2 reticles on any of my rifles at present.

I think we have beat this subject matter to death.
Please try it both ways at longrange and extreme longrange and see what "you" like best. That's what's important here.

Be sure and have a good spotter with excellent optics when you do though. You can't do the spotter method without one.
It's a team thing.

Later
DC

[ 01-20-2003: Message edited by: Darryl Cassel ]

 

[Brent]

Darryl,

I agree the temp and bp on a day to day basis have a great effect. I will be testing over the next year the acccuracy of using programs to modify actual drop data in varying temp and bp's, namely with the Horus Vision handheld. I should be able to compare it to the Oehler BE and others and see how close they track along too. I'll try to get 500, 1000 and 1500 yard data at the very least, and test with only one variable at a time if I can.

Some method of modifying charts in the field and knowing they're accurate will extend range with confidence. I'll shoot for that 18" at 1500 yards and post all the pics of my fantastic success or miserable failure.

I'll shoot at a 4'x8' sheet a plywood covered in freezer paper. The digital camera is an easy way to record the LR target data associated with the Oehler 43's data.

Take care

 

[Guest]

[ 07-11-2003: Message edited by: S1 ]

 

[Len Backus]

S1

Which bullet was used and what was the muzzle velocity?

 

[Darryl Cassel]

S1

The shooter was not allowed to see the hit on the previous 100 yd target?
Could the shooter see the bullet impact of dirt or dust kicking up, in his scopes view, from behind the target or to the side on each 100 yd increment? If not, you probably did this test before or knew exactly where the bullet was impacting from a previous test and maybe at the same location?

Most times you can see the impact of dirt or dust. You did mentioned before you can see your own hits at extreme range and that would have certainly helped out on the test you mentioned?

This would obviously help the "shooter" on his next holdover or to judge the wind.

Maybe a test just "cold Turkey" 1500 yards and not immediatly following the test you mentioned, would be good with NO 100 yd increment shots taken up to that range and with several different shooters trying it?
Maybe at different locations and in different seasonal changes?
Just a suggestion since it could be my tax dollars at work?

Unless a person did an incredable amount of shooting almost everyday like maybe you do, he would not be that close at extreme range and I think you will agree. It takes a lot of practice and most people don't have the luxury of shooting equipment and facility that you do.

Adding different calibers to the test would be interesting too. If you did the shooting, you know what your rifle will do more so then most other people would, I would imagine?
Like Len mentioned, I know you like H1000 powder, but what bullet/powder were you using for these tests?

I don't machine gun 10 shots at the 1000 yd matches. When I try that, my groups open up terribly. Some do very well at it though.

DC

As an add on here---I forgot to ask if there was any major cross winds, head winds or tail winds on the day you did this test? Maybe you mentioned that and I missed it?

[ 01-22-2003: Message edited by: Darryl Cassel ]

 

[Mysticplayer]

Been following this thread and thought I would throw in my two cents.

I go with the spotter method as described by Darryl because the locations I hunt, the wind is variable and rarely constant. I will also admit that I am no genius at reading wind and conditions.

Under ideal conditions, I don't see why someone who has his rifle dialed in couldn't take a one shot kill. I just think that in situations where wind is uncertain or time short, the spotter method will take all the variables into account and let you adjust to your shot.

In both cases, the shooter has to have practised enough to know the accuracy and drop of the bullet. If the group size is too big or the shooter uncertain of where the bullet will land, then that person/rifle should not be used for LR hunting.

The spotter method just crystallizes all the variables and allows a quick adjustment to allow a shot at your game.

Jerry