Best of the West. Your longrange authority. Seriously?? (Rant)

[RMulhern]

Frankly my opinion is that all these shows....including the 'hunting shows' are a (cleaned up language)....and nothing other than a medium to tout products and to con individuals that don't know (cleaned up language)'!!

 

[Scot E]

[FONT=&quot]Interesting thread.
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]I agree with the OP that the apples-to-oranges comparisons are taking advertising too far. This kind of thing drives me nuts too! Not that it makes it right but you see that everywhere in advertising anymore. Try buying a new truck based off the advertisements. I would never be able to decide what to buy because everyone is faster, more HP, better mileage, safer, than their competition! Don't even get me started on political ads. Very frustrating! I am not sure people realize this kind of thing is a big turn off for many and they loose sales because of it.
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]To be fair to BOTW, I have never heard them say that other options are worse or useless; I could have missed an episode or 2 though. My understanding in watching them isn't that their system is the most accurate but instead that it is accurate enough for hunting conditions and the fastest system to get on game quickly so a shot opportunity isn't missed. In their shows and especially on their website they do a very good job IMO of pushing the need for lots of practice at ranges you intend to shoot an animal. In their shooting tip section they probably have 20+ videos talking about their way to account for quartering wind drifts, angled shots, varying wind speeds, temperature changes, altitude changes, etc. Is their system the most accurate, no but "most accurate" isn't needed to put a bullet in the vitals of a deer or elk out to 700 yards or so, which is likely the average distance of most shots on their shows. The guys that do take longer shots are pretty dang good shots and are extremely familiar with what their gun will do. John Porter comes to mind here. If guys do their due diligence they will have a very good understanding of what the BOTW system is capable of and what it isn't.
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]I personally love the detailed research, aspect of this hobby and have really enjoyed looking at the various optical platforms capable of long range accuracy. From BDC turrets and reticles, to MOA and Mil reticles to dialing and PDA's, I have looked at all of them and there are positives to each system. I think one of the best aspects of the Greybull/BOTW shooting styles is being able to hold for windage and dial for elevation. Maybe it is the area I hunt and shoot but there is no such thing as stable winds and I hate trying to dial for windage. I can't keep up with the changing conditions fast enough. All the re-dialing trying to keep up with changing wind conditions gets old and to be honest pushes me to rush the shot so I can get it in before a wind change, never a good thing in shooting. With practice you can become very good at holding for wind, making adjustments as needed while looking through the scope when changing conditions are noticed. For me it is a more accurate way to shoot. Also, their yardage dials are very simple and I would guess fewer dialing mistakes are made with this kind of system than traditional dialing. And for those that used to hold over at distance beyond MPBR they can now have a reticle aim point which should make them more accurate.

[/FONT] [FONT=&quot]What really irks me about that show is that many times they have a new person shooting the gunwerks gun for the first time, at an animal. A knowledgeable John Porter type guy is there setting it all up, which I am okay with, but IMO it takes some time behind a rifle to get in tune with it so you know that the way you hold it or line up your eye with the reticle, etc is correct for the way it is sighted in. I don't like the message that sends to the general hunting masses.
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]While I think it is true that many newbie's are wounding animals because of their show I think it is also fair to say that if there was a show based on dialing distance and windage, using PDA's and ballistic software to find correct trajectories there would still be plenty of newbie's that wouldn't verify those trajectories in the field or take into account weather changes or powder sensitivity etc. and they would still end up wounding a bunch of animals. Not sure we can put all the blame on BOTW for the laziness and ignorance of some hunters.
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Good thread![/FONT]

 

[mo]

I don't watch any hunting shows...........

 

[AJBello]

I'll start by saying until this week I had never seen the show. I believe I saw a few youtube clips of some of their shots, but hadn't watched it on TV. I read this thread and a day or two later saw it on so I watched it. Im guessing it was the same episode because they did that comparison between the 7mm VLD and a .30 core-lokt out of a RUM.

All that said, I was actually impressed with the program. They said right up front this is why you need to use high ballistic coefficient bullets when doing that comparison. They never claimed it to be apples to apples, but an illustration of the difference BC actually makes. Considering lots of people getting started in the sport don't know anything about BC or what it means, I thought it was an appropriate illustration.

They also did an illustration of the difference several thousand feet in elevation makes. They said right up front that if you tried to use the same Husk turret and not account for the elevation, you'd be 30" off at 1000 yards (in this case). They urged users to have several turrets for varying locations / conditions and swap them out. I thought that was pretty responsible of them as opposed to just saying one is all you need.

Additionally, I must have heard them say PRACTICE PRACTICE PRACTICE 50 times during the show. They stressed that you must be comfortable with and knowledgeable about your equipment to make those shots.

Of course they pushed the hell out of the Gunwerks / Huskemaw products... but in the end it's a hunting show and that seems to be the name of the game. I still don't plan on running any of their stuff, but I was impressed overall with the show. My perception of what it would be was worse than what it actually was.

... I do think their windage system is pretty cool and could probably be a practical way for a LR hunter to deal with wind in a timely manner. Im just not willing to run a Husk scope...

 

[raisincenter]

Then, they compare the 300 RUM versus the 7mm RM. Now I dont have a problem with the comparison (I dont care for the 300 RUM much either) but I do expect them to give accurate information. The info given for the 300 RUM was accurate, however they didnt use information for the 300 RUM's true potential. 165 grain bullet at 3300 FPS? are you kidding me? We all know that the 300 RUM will drive those little bullets a heck of a lot fater than that. So then they give the 7mm info using its max potential AND using a VLD bullet instead of a hunting bullet like they did for the 300 RUM. Does that seem fair. Now for the real insult to this community......A flat out fairy tale. They claimed that the 168 Berger fired 1t 3000 FPS would deliver 1200 foot pounds of energy at 1000 yards AND drift 47" in a 10 MPH wind. ***????? Unless there is some magical BC there that I dont know about, they are about 150 pounds off AND 13" of drift off. Now I am not saying 1050 pounds of energy and 60" of drift is bad, but come on, get your information right. Why make something sound better than it really is?? Sounds like a sales pitch to me. All they had to do was compare apples to apples and use info for the 300 RUM using true velocity potential and another berger bullet such as the 168 VLD. The 7mm would still win the fight, BUT not by as much as they say and if they used a bullet weight in porportion such as the 190 VLD, it of course would hit harder, and drift less while making a bigger hole. Dont compare a berger VLD for one caliber and max velocity potential versus a bullet of similar weight and a totally different design AND at less than max velocity potential. He!! if we wanted to do that I could make the 308 look better on paper than the 30-378 using top BC bullets at max velocity potential in the 308 versus bullets of small BC at less than max velocity potential in the 30-378. Ahhhh, but then it wouldnt be apples to apples now would it?

Sorry for the rant, I just HAD to get that off my chest.

I have seen that so many times in magazines comparing big bore revolvers. drives me batty.