Masculinity and Caliber Choice

[Mikey_B79]

So long as the cartridge I choose moves a bullet fast enough to expand properly at the ranges I hunt, the cartridge choice is irrelevant. I take whatever gun makes my dick hard that day.

Hard to argue masculinity with a fully-erect man.

The rest is just hurf-blurf.

 

[atmat]

I’ve watched and listened over and over - a hundred conversations

Respectfully, you really haven’t. You join conversations, contribute really long non sequiturs about life in rural Wyoming, then never provide any evidence when asked about your claims.

 

[TaperPin]

No- it doesn’t. We miss due to the largest source of error.

1- we suck

2- scope/rifle was never actually zeroed

3- scope/rifle lost zero

4- scope/rifle had a sub par zero

5- wind



I and the group I hunt with have seen far more missed and botched shots with 6.5 PRC class cartridges than with 223/77gr TMK’s. People do not shoot as well as they think they do- see reason for missing #1. The easier a gun is to shoot, see your shot hit, and the animals reaction through the scope- the higher the success rate.







Is it shown? Where is it shown that you have seen it “time and time again”? Your personal experience.







Who said anything about “long range hunting”?





A 77gr TMK with a 2,800fps MV is the same thing as any bullet in a 22 Hornet at 500 yards?

I bring these up and encourage anyone reading it to simply look up the limitations of using group statistics to identify individuals. You can’t tell me how fast the wind is blowing today, even though average wind speed is easy to look up. You can’t say how many brothers and sisters someone has even though national statistics are easy to find. Likewise you can’t tell how well an individual shoots based on the averages of others, despite how many time you repeat yourself. Repetition may work for those who blindly listen.

You’ve talked up the 223 clear to 700 yards where it’s falling like a rock. Repeating this does nothing to help the average shooter, other than to set them up for disappointment. Personally, it doesn’t bother me what anybody says, but it makes for an easy teachable moment.

As time goes by your stories seem to change a bit and the quality of advice is more in question - I just tune you out for the most part.

Kids are smart - most will see through the bs and make good decisions.

 

[TaperPin]

Respectfully, you really haven’t. You join conversations, contribute really long non sequiturs about life in rural Wyoming, then never provide any evidence when asked about your claims.

I simply encourage people to use common sense and critical thinking - I don’t mind passing on what I’ve experienced or learned along the way - if someone chooses to ignore it that’s fine with me. It’s been a long time since I felt the need to somehow “prove” anything to anyone. Likewise if I find someone a credible source of information, I’ve never asked them to prove it to me. “Mr. Gunsmith could you please prove to me that your technique is good?” Lol

If you live life based only on what people are willing to prove to you, that’s a hard row to hoe.

 

[TaperPin]

Using your belief about your shooting ability with no objective on demand shooting data is much poorer.

I feel no need to “prove” my shooting ability to anyone - I outgrew that in my 30’s. If someone want to learn how I practice and what methodology I use to practice for hunting so be it, if they don’t it doesn’t affect me either way.

 

[ElPollo]

 

[Bobaloo]

Remember the whole “Real men don’t eat quiche?”

Real men eat whatever the fųck they want.

View attachment 700300



My specialty.




P

Damn I can smell that from here.

 

[Wyo_hntr]

That’s never been the point, and it seems from your interactions you either know that and are trolling or refuse to listen. Either one makes the entire conversation pointless

Correct

 

[Formidilosus]

As time goes by your stories seem to change a bit and the quality of advice is more in question - I just tune you out for the most part.

Do they now? Since you can quote on this forum, feel free to show where the “story changes”.

 

[BLJ]

Now just imagine trying to hit a tennis ball at those distances with a bad wind call.
That would be really hard.

 

[IDVortex]

Now just imagine trying to hit a tennis ball at those distances with a bad wind call.
That would be really hard.

That's why you have a magnum, so the bigger bullet still flops the animal and kills it instantly when you miss due to wind or a bad yardage call and shoot the back foot instead.

 

[Thegman]

Now just imagine trying to hit a tennis ball at those distances with a bad wind call.
That would be really hard.

Now just imagine trying to hit a tennis ball bouncing over a ridge at those distances with a bad wind call.
That would be really, really hard.

Fixed it for you...

 

[Thegman]

You’ve talked up the 223 clear to 700 yards where it’s falling like a rock. Repeating this does nothing to help the average shooter, other than to set them up for disappointment.

To be fair, talking up any cartridge/rifle combination to 700 yards isn't for the -average-shooter. Shooting game animals at 700 yards and average shooters are mutually exclusive, IMO.

 

[Shō[t]gun]

Now just imagine trying to hit a tennis ball bouncing over a ridge at those distances with a bad wind call.
That would be really, really hard.

Fixed it for you...

Is that the first shot or is this an injured tennis ball? If you say “Sharapova” while watching it closely it’ll show you how far to lead for the perfect hip shot.

 

[IDVortex]

To be fair, talking up any cartridge/rifle combination to 700 yards isn't for the -average-shooter. Shooting game animals at 700 yards and average shooters are mutually exclusive, IMO.

I agree, considering the average shooter shouldn't be shooting past 200 yards...

 

[Formidilosus]

To be fair, talking up any cartridge/rifle combination to 700 yards isn't for the -average-shooter. Shooting game animals at 700 yards and average shooters are mutually exclusive, IMO.

No doubt. Of course he can’t quote me saying that anyone should shoot anything at 700 yards.

 

[BLJ]

Now just imagine trying to hit a tennis ball bouncing over a ridge at those distances with a bad wind call.
That would be really, really hard.

Fixed it for you...

I never considered a bouncing tennis ball. That would be really, really hard

 

[IDVortex]

I never considered a bouncing tennis ball. That would be really, really hard

No wonder folks have a desire to shoot the animal in the ass... bigger target.

 

[Thegman]

I never considered a bouncing tennis ball. That would be really, really hard

I know, especially for someone like me. I don't think I'm a good enough shooter to count off juice containers, repeat the right word and bounce my rifle around in unison with the bouncy ball, all at the same time...screw it, I'm calling in the Abrahms crew.

 

[Gorp2007]

I know, especially for someone like me. I don't think I'm a good enough shooter to count off juice containers, repeat the right word and bounce my rifle around in unison with the bouncy ball, all at the same time...screw it, I'm calling in the Abrahms crew.

I dunno, the Abrams is still largely targeting a point target, which increases the likelihood of a miss.

I think you’re better served with a well trained 120mm mortar crew, so you can just blanket the entire hillside.