Dialing vs. Holdover For Long Range Hunting

[teesquare]

I'm merely stating that there is a reason that dialing in your data on previous engagement(s) is more accurate than holding over and attempting to explain why. That is what the topic of this thread is about; isn't it?

I am attempting to be helpful to others by sharing information.

Yeah...well - How about looking back at your "tone" with the previous posts since you waded in to the discussion recently. Start with "I am glad this is your last post on this topic"...And the pursuant attitude left no room for doubt that anyone NOT following you - is just stupid.

Dialing more accurate? - yes, absolutely. And again - if you re-read the content of the discussion was not saying that dialing is not better...but I will say this to you: As a student of accuracy...you need to learn firing solutions that are not ONE, puritanical school of thought.
I have had "situations" where a turret failed to work ( funny how that can happen when lead moving toward you strikes the scope turret....)SO - dialing quickly became a luxury that I had no currency for.
My point is - there are always options on how to de-fur a feline. And knowing some of those may be more useful than "by the wrote" training.

Appreciate the current trend away from such a recalcitrant and monastic viewpoint. The mind definitely functions better like a parachute...open.....

 

[985]

People on pain meds probably shouldn't be on the thread. And since I just had my neck replaced, I've been on Serious pain meds. My apologies.

 

[del2les]

I'm merely stating that there is a reason that dialing in your data on previous engagement(s) is more accurate than holding over and am attempting to explain why. That is what the topic of this thread is about; isn't it?
.

The topic is "Dialing vs Holdover for Long Range Hunting", so with that in mind, hunting transverses numerous situations with many that do not allow time to laser range, dial a rapidly changing solution on a moving target or a short few seconds before the game is into cover, behind a rock, down a hole, over a ridge, into a valley or breaks on a rapid run into the next zip code (Coyote or Prong hunting). Thus an experienced and skilled shooter/hunter can make these "Kentucky" adjustments while looking through his scope and tracking the target.

Even a still target can be engaged via this same methodology and rapid adjustments taken in the advent the target decides to vacate. P-Dog shooting hundreds of rounds daily, we use holdover/under far more than chasing a turret in a ranged solution a couple of hundred times a day, and we average from 50 to 600++ yards a P-dog shoot.

Standing or bedded large targets give much more time to range, dial a solution, mechanically gauge the wind, change position to decrease range and wind effects, etc, etc, and then more accurately place a round on target. And that is a part of the fun of LR Hunting, and of course, those times when we cannot effectively close the distance without spooking or losing sight of the target.

Learn and train with both and be a more complete and successful shooter and hunter.

 

[teesquare]

People on pain meds probably shouldn't be on the thread. And since I just had my neck replaced, I've been on Serious pain meds. My apologies.

You have my genuine sympathies for the pain. I still have my ex-wife's shoe lodged in my upper colon....:roll eyes:Wouldn't be so bad...but her atty. continues to use a 2" x 4" to either retrieve the shoe - or turn me into a human possible. I can't decide which.

That aside, twice broken back, herniated disc between C-3 and C-4, 5 major knee rehabs, shrapnelized left ankle and right knee ( dang near lost that leg...) left heel blown off and patched back together.

So - it is nomad expression when I say "I feel your pain".

Godspeed on the healing -
T

 

[985]

teesquare: Endurance / one day at a time and Prayer.

BTW, if you have your neck fixed, the first three days are very/very painful. Then it eases up a bit and within a week or so, your challenge becomes patience and getting rid of the anesthesia that's still in you. A Lazy Boy Recliner is a must have item. I was stuck in-between lying down and sitting up, just miserable. So my wife picked up a Lazy Boy and I've been sleeping in it.

 

[CoachChris]

My point is - there are always options on how to de-fur a feline.
Appreciate the current trend away from such a recalcitrant and monastic viewpoint. The mind definitely functions better like a parachute...open.....

Best lines of the whole thread!!!

 

[985]

 

[Danehunter]

We (especially me) have beaten this poor dead horse far too long.

But I've learned a few things here, mainly how open minded the majority of posters are here.

Plus the fact that most have far more experience than me with both methods, many using both methods as the situation and scope reticle dictates. Gotta love a hunting site like this that brings people with so much to contribute together in one place.

I only wish my SWFA mil/mil 5-15 scope had an Xmas tree reticle but it doesn't so next month if I get a buck mulie or cow/calf elk in my scope I'll have to dial for wind and hold for elevation. It's all in yer reticle and yer training. Six of one and half dozen of the other.

Ward, PM me with details of your training site and I'll get back to you. My belief is that the more training I have the better I'll be in competition and hunting. "I may be crazy but I'm not stupid."

Eric B.

 

[985]

Eric, there's more... After a shooter who utilizes the holdover method has cheated the drag curve, (trued the trajectory) to force the point of impact to match the point of aim, they have done so with a scientifically flawed method. If the shooter then thinks that they can return to the optical center and dial in their adjustments, they will find that they will be inaccurate. Any instructor who has drank the cool aid of holding over has sent their students down range screwed up.

 

[teesquare]

Eric, there's more... After a shooter who utilizes the holdover method has cheated the drag curve, (trued the trajectory) to force the point of impact to match the point of aim, they have done so with a scientifically flawed method. If the shooter then thinks that they can return to the optical center and dial in their adjustments, they will find that they will be inaccurate. Any instructor who has drank the cool aid of holding over has sent their students down range screwed up.

Allow me to assist you in installing some integrity in your statements.

1. You are obviously referencing a target shooting scenario.

2. In that scenario - YES...when one has time to dial it is the best method.

3. When one is hunting, animals will not respond like fixed targets. And - the degree of accuracy is not measured in boxes or concentric circles, or "scores". It is measured in whether or not the game is downed swiftly and in a manner of accuracy respectful to the animal.

4. That is why holdover - for hunting is still the more common method for taking game.

5. Perhaps - with an open mind and a balanced perspective...you will consider teaching both methods for specific need, and uses.

 

[985]

Wrong ,Wrong & Wrong. There isnt an argument. There aren't 2 sides to an argument where science Proves otherwise. Embarrassed, (and thank goodness) our military is finally waking up. I do instruct holding over for immediate reactive drills. However, it is a different type of hold over method, instructed from lessons learned from 4 wars. It involves a max Ord zero which I won't go into here.

 

[teesquare]

I am having a hearty laugh at you as I type this. And - while it is funny, I also feel that you miss the point. And - yet worse, it is your ego that prevents you from admitting what even a ballistic neophyte knows, before he can calculate the impact of quartering wind, and coriolis in his head:

That there is NO ONE or "ONLY" WAY to be successful in hitting the target. And - that the most powerful weapon we posses is our ability to logic thru the process, and decide WHICH method for WHAT circumstance is the correct firing solution.

Your prevention of "science" as your validation for absolute empirical proof is flawed by the basic understanding that what we call "science" is in reality THEORY. And - it is always theory until the bullet lands exactly in the same place, in many repeated shots.

That never happens because of the myriad of variables that "science" cannot account for exactly every time. Differences in the round itself, shifts in wind, warming or cooling air conditions, momentary changes in thermals/mirage - ad infinitum. And we have not even considered the "human factor".

I urge you to throw yourself on the mercy of the court of logic, reality - and common sense. Public opinion is watching.....

 

[985]

Yeah.. It's pretty funny that our troops are dying (L.B., A-Stan 2011), because of this flawed method. Math is math and science is science. You can deflect what I've said, defend your position and attack me with what ever your mind can concoct. Coriolis. The Coriolis routine on pocket pc's doesn't work. The routine produces random errors because of mantissa digits. Do you know what that is? mantissa digits are the numerals to the right of the decimal point in a logarithmic equation that blows up due to the fact that they are long strings of numerals that run out of room with fixed point processors. All hand held pocket pc's utilize fixed point processors. You don't know your subject, so keep laughing, just like the two senior officers at SOCOM who've been busted down for implementing the system and the two sniper instructors as well. But, if you enjoy this method, knock yourself out. I'm not telling you what to do.

 

[teesquare]

Once again, and with feeling this time

No ONE method is the ONLY method for EVERY situation. This is my contention for the time restarted down the path to the Land of Oz with you. ( Chemically enhanced reasoning - much?). The subject of this thread is about HUNTING. Not how to determine the hypotenuse of a goose's nostrils.....
My mentioning of coriolis - as well as other aspects of physics which are all components of long range shooting were merely to illustrate the one can get so absorbed in the "science" that you forget the solid basics that make or break "the shot".
I do not own - nor do I need a "pocket PC". I use methods that are more robust, and devoid of dependence on any battery powered, and weight adding equipments - save for my laser range finder. True, that is a compromise - and one I have grown used to. But I can still range a known size target within the limitations of my reticle and usually ( at 500 yards and in ) is sufficient. Beyond that range - I do use the rangefinder.

Obviously you feel that you are smarter than even SOCOM brass....Interesting, and arrogant as hell.... I am going to flatly say that you have obviously never been engaged in a true firefight scenario. Doubtfully - even a distant or "overwatch" position during an actual lead trading session with folks that are trying their best to ventilate you.
It is a rare and "movie making" scenario that allows one the luxury of "college prep" math in the gritty environment that you refer to. And even if you have a protected or concealed position at distance - your focus is solidly fixed on training that is repeatable under circumstance which does not afford complex calculations beyond what you and - perhaps a spotter can call in terms of clicks in 2 both axis that your rifle scope understands.

THIS>>>Math is math and science is science. Is your foundational postulation as to the "superiority" of one method vs another. And - to issue ONE LAST flogging to this deceased equine beast...There is NO ONLY way - when in the real world of hunting - or war. While playing "sniper":roll eyes: at a fixed point shooting position on a bench and aiming at a steel plate...? SURE!
But, in honor of your "fixed -mental position" on the subject, I believe you to be worthy of a new username and title of "Keyboard Commando" ( thanks to my friend Art Jackson for that phrase. BTW - Art's mentor was Carlos Hathcock...)

Years ago, my old PTSD counselor told me that only the sane can allow for the flexibility of thought process, that is - they allow for the possibility that they might be wrong occasionally, or even question their own sanity as part of the process in the "un-packing the baggage" many come home with.
So, K.C. -because you are right - and every other method must be inferior/wrong and because you cannot accept the possibility of any other method that would be more applicable to less than perfect circumstance....seek help.

I truly have nothing else to say to you that will help you understand that NO ONE disagrees that you may have a method that under a particular scenario is "best". That was agreed upon early in this vomitious diatribe.

My apologies to all on-lookers. I do hope that this exercise in "mutual urination on one another's boots" has created some entertainment value, and perhaps cautioned some that - hitting a real target in our REAL WORLD of hunting game at distance - is NOT the same as benchers steel plinking.