Your ~max hunting distances and time of flight relationships?

[Stinky Coyote]

1. Just curious if in hunting guys correlate their typical comfortable max hunting distances with time of flight?

2. Or...if they haven't maybe everyone can post their typical max hunting distances and their time of flight here so we can see if there's a trend?

Just something that could be a useful perspective for hunting set-ups and guys coming to read. It seems to me from many years of bowhunting and the pewpew game that the game seems to limit where guys tend to run their max walls up to and that's about 3/4's of a second time of flight, at least those are the walls I've migrated to in archery or rifles and maybe without even realizing it or correlating it along the way. Once you're pushing that time frame you definitely need to have ideal conditions and animal that isn't about to take a step.

It's been interesting looking at several cartridges and bullet combos with this view lately, thought maybe make for some interesting discussion. Give us some data work with folks.

 

[Mykolaivka887]

Don't know if this particularly fits with either of your questions, but last spring I had a client who hit an enormous (26+ inch bear) interior grizzly too far back and we almost lost it:

The client's rifle was in a stationary position on a moving bear at about 80 yards;

The sight picture (according to the client, after the shot) was on the junture of the neck and front shoulder when the first round was fired;

The bear was broadside and at a walking pace when hit by the first bullet, and that bullet did a complete pass through, through the liver;

Obviously, it took even less than a millisecond for the bullet to travel the 80 yards to the bear, but yet the bullet hit more than 16" from where it was aimed.

This particular bear weighed an estimated 700-800 pounds (spring weight) and was 56-58 inches tall at the shoulder. The stride distance was enormous. Consequently, in just one step forward, the bear's forward travel was suspected to have partially caused the error in impact of the bullet.

On the flip side (sort of), I finished off a wounded and extremely large interior grizzly for a client, that was about to enter heavy brush right before dark. My sight picture on that running bear was held low and about 15 feet in front of it, at about 250 yards. I hit it through both shoulders and that put the bear in a heap, back on the ground.

Don't know if any of this applies to the pair of questions you presented ......

 

[hereinaz]

I think the choice is all context related, and flight time is just one part of a great many things to consider. The difference between a "stationary" shot on a moving animal and a moving shot on a moving animal is significant.

I am just fine launching a bullet at an animal out to 1000 yards even though time of flight is long. The question is whether the animal is likely to move. I've watched through glass and my scope, and counted seconds how long animal tend to stay in one position, and when they are likely to move. When calm and feeding, there is most definitely a rhythm to movement and there are highly predictable windows large enough for high confidence.

I hear and see repeatedly people say, "an animal can move during the time of flight of a bullet, so it is unethical". But, those same people fail to mention other time related factors, so I don't think they have put much thought into it. I think it is their personal preference, and that is fine with me. I have no issue with whatever someone decides is right for them.

I have used "scientific" method to test my hypothesis that I could make ethical shots and there were points at which a very high confidence existed. So, I evaluated whether I could confidently make the call to shoot with the certainty necessary to make it ethical. When scouting, I practiced hundreds of times deciding when I would pull the trigger and then counted to three to see if the animal moved. If anyone did it, I think you'd be surprised at the outcome. I did that enough, to develop a high confidence that the bullet would get there in time. I would say that I have a greater confidence that a coues deer won't move on a long range shot than I would that the little bugger won't jump the string on a bow shot.

Of the compounding factors that made a miss on an 80 yard bear vs. rolling a moving 250 yard bear, there is one that has nothing to do with the rifle. In the conversations about flight time, very few people recognize the neurological processes required to fire a rifle or bow, and that actually causes more misses than "flight times". With the moving bear scenario at 80 yards, there is no way the stride of the bear was such that just the flight time made that great of a miss. And, on the other shot the bear didn't cover 15 feet in the fraction of a second it took the bullet to travel 250 yards after the primer popped.

The difference is explained best by comparing shotgun shooting. The reason you swing a shotgun when you fire is in part because of the flight time of the pellets for sure. But, a greater issue of target movement is the variability and the built in lag time of neural processing the decision to fire and then the actual firing. There are multiple paths that impulses travel from our brain deciding to shoot and the finger breaking the trigger. And, there is even a processing or perception error baked into the system, that when we think we press the trigger is earlier than even the neurons start firing.

The brain can't make so fine a calculation to determining timing the firing on a moving target with a static gun. So, on a moving target, our brains can't calculate the time appropriate so that we can maintain a static firing position on a moving animal. Because, no matter when the shooter thought he broke the trigger on the animal, he most certainly broke it later than he perceived it. Thus, the target had already moved because he didn't factor in all of the compounding factors that delay the bullet reaching the target, besides time of flight. You have to factor in far more than flight time. You can't hit a pigeon at 40 yards without swinging the shotgun and having your brain already built in the intuitive calculation. How do you think you can hit a bear at 80 yards without factoring in everything else.

Our brains are really effective at working out a solution that factors all of those things in, so we can intuitively know how far to lead an animal with enough practice. Its why you can get into a groove shooting shotgun once you get "the feel" for it. Your brain has subconsciously built the algorithm and as long as we have that amount of lead built in and are maintaining the appropriate lead at all times, then it doesn't matter what delay there is, because the amount of delay is baked into our brains algorithm. And, once that is there, our brains can then amazingly adapt it to pigeons crossing, moving away, and any combination.

And, that intuition is what allows a guy to know how far to lead a bear at 250 yards and roll him. It wasn't a calculation of flight time of the bullet. It is the brain's amazing intuition from prior practice that creates an algorithm.

 

[Mykolaivka887]

I think the choice is all context related, and flight time is just one part of a great many things to consider. The difference between a "stationary" shot on a moving animal and a moving shot on a moving animal is significant.

I am just fine launching a bullet at an animal out to 1000 yards even though time of flight is long. The question is whether the animal is likely to move. I've watched through glass and my scope, and counted seconds how long animal tend to stay in one position, and when they are likely to move. When calm and feeding, there is most definitely a rhythm to movement and there are highly predictable windows large enough for high confidence.

I hear and see repeatedly people say, "an animal can move during the time of flight of a bullet, so it is unethical". But, those same people fail to mention other time related factors, so I don't think they have put much thought into it. I think it is their personal preference, and that is fine with me. I have no issue with whatever someone decides is right for them.

I have used "scientific" method to test my hypothesis that I could make ethical shots and there were points at which a very high confidence existed. So, I evaluated whether I could confidently make the call to shoot with the certainty necessary to make it ethical. When scouting, I practiced hundreds of times deciding when I would pull the trigger and then counted to three to see if the animal moved. If anyone did it, I think you'd be surprised at the outcome. I did that enough, to develop a high confidence that the bullet would get there in time. I would say that I have a greater confidence that a coues deer won't move on a long range shot than I would that the little bugger won't jump the string on a bow shot.

Of the compounding factors that made a miss on an 80 yard bear vs. rolling a moving 250 yard bear, there is one that has nothing to do with the rifle. In the conversations about flight time, very few people recognize the neurological processes required to fire a rifle or bow, and that actually causes more misses than "flight times". With the moving bear scenario at 80 yards, there is no way the stride of the bear was such that just the flight time made that great of a miss. And, on the other shot the bear didn't cover 15 feet in the fraction of a second it took the bullet to travel 250 yards after the primer popped.

The difference is explained best by comparing shotgun shooting. The reason you swing a shotgun when you fire is in part because of the flight time of the pellets for sure. But, a greater issue of target movement is the variability and the built in lag time of neural processing the decision to fire and then the actual firing. There are multiple paths that impulses travel from our brain deciding to shoot and the finger breaking the trigger. And, there is even a processing or perception error baked into the system, that when we think we press the trigger is earlier than even the neurons start firing.

The brain can't make so fine a calculation to determining timing the firing on a moving target with a static gun. So, on a moving target, our brains can't calculate the time appropriate so that we can maintain a static firing position on a moving animal. Because, no matter when the shooter thought he broke the trigger on the animal, he most certainly broke it later than he perceived it. Thus, the target had already moved because he didn't factor in all of the compounding factors that delay the bullet reaching the target, besides time of flight. You have to factor in far more than flight time. You can't hit a pigeon at 40 yards without swinging the shotgun and having your brain already built in the intuitive calculation. How do you think you can hit a bear at 80 yards without factoring in everything else.

Our brains are really effective at working out a solution that factors all of those things in, so we can intuitively know how far to lead an animal with enough practice. Its why you can get into a groove shooting shotgun once you get "the feel" for it. Your brain has subconsciously built the algorithm and as long as we have that amount of lead built in and are maintaining the appropriate lead at all times, then it doesn't matter what delay there is, because the amount of delay is baked into our brains algorithm. And, once that is there, our brains can then amazingly adapt it to pigeons crossing, moving away, and any combination.

And, that intuition is what allows a guy to know how far to lead a bear at 250 yards and roll him. It wasn't a calculation of flight time of the bullet. It is the brain's amazing intuition from prior practice that creates an algorithm.

Definitely agree with you in that analysis. In the instance of the bear at 80 yds, where the hunter had his rifle unnecessarily nestled rifle on a backpack and was unnecessarily shooting from a prone position, in the time that his brain said "shoot" and the bullet hitting the bear was certainly significant enough. No doubt about it. Ditto for the bear at 250 yds, when my brain said "looks about right, better shoot before he gets in that brush" and when my bullet folded that bugger, the time was certainly significant enough. Good analysis. I like it.

 

[Stinky Coyote]

ya I don't want to argue at all in this thread, I'll never get down on a guy who puts in what's necessary to push his gear to the limits...never, I've had that put on me for ages so lets not do that in this thread...ethics police don't bother, will get all over them and their high horses in a hurry

this is more to get as many guys as possible to post what their typical max ranges have become and to take a minute to look up their time of flight and post that as well just to see where most of us land and see if there's a trend or pattern here?

 

[Stinky Coyote]

micklovakia1245...pick a longer name why don't ya how bout supercalafragilisticespyalladocios? lol

that's a heckuva a shot...well done, running shots are an art form, coyotes and birds a good place to get practice for that, can't stop the gun at the shot, gotta keep swinging through as you touch off, lets kill the derail early and not go down the rabbit hole

what's your typical max range and flight time? we're looking for data here to see where most of us land our comforts, if there's a pattern or rule of thumb to use in discussions going forward?

 

[35WhelenAI]

With respect to answering the question, I have always felt/thought bears were much more desirable at close range however it seems there are many different experiences on distance to engage. It's great policy on all our part to take the situation at hand and make the best judgment we can. Even an 80 yard broadside shot walking, the human factor enters in. If the exit wound was directly opposite the entrance wound, it was a straight broadside shot. If the bear was slightly going away, that would shorten the margin for error so to speak with respect to where the shot was called and hitting further back.

You're right, it's all about the original question, there are experiences people can share with respect to what they've actually done, and we can apply that to our own context and situation and apply it.

 

[Stinky Coyote]

I'm happy to quickly run the math if all guys wanna throw down is cartridge/bullet/velocity/elevation and personal max distances, throw your bc in if you know it

 

[willfrye027]

Not sure if this is what you’re asking but..

I shoot the same bullet (Berger .257 135hr lrht) out of two rifles. 25 creed at 2820fps and 25x284 at 3020 fps). That 200 fps faster and without looking at ballistic apps, the TOF feels significantly shorter at 600-800 yards. My wind holds are less, and I do shoot somewhat better with the faster cartridge at 800. So in that sense, yes it is increasing my effective distance on game.

 

[Stinky Coyote]

Ok here's example to start

500 yards
.75 seconds

you can include your details too if you like, I'm currently playing low hp game running a;

6.5 Grendel
123gr eld-m - .5 bc (g1)
2386 fps mv

oh, if you know your bullet bc add that too, that would help save me from looking up outside running the calculator

 

[Stinky Coyote]

Not sure if this is what you’re asking but..

I shoot the same bullet (Berger .257 135hr lrht) out of two rifles. 25 creed at 2820fps and 25x284 at 3020 fps). That 200 fps faster and without looking at ballistic apps, the TOF feels significantly shorter at 600-800 yards. My wind holds are less, and I do shoot somewhat better with the faster cartridge at 800. So in that sense, yes it is increasing my effective distance on game.

so you're saying 800 is your upper limit, that's .65 g1 bc and 1.04 and .96 seconds tof on those two rigs, thanks man

also since you mentioned 600...that's .74 and .69 seconds tof in your rigs

who's next?

 

[Wrench]

I don't shoot anything I need to dial for unless it's bedded, feeding or wounded.

Just my personal rule.

 

[Stinky Coyote]

I don't shoot anything I need to dial for unless it's bedded, feeding or wounded.

Just my personal rule.

don't worry about the situations, we're not gonna let the ethics police play here without getting bloody lets assume your max typical distance for those situations you will lay down and dial up...

what's your pewpew details and ~max distance comforts in ideal conditions?

 

[Wrench]

don't worry about the situations, we're not gonna let the ethics police play here without getting bloody lets assume your max typical distance for those situations you will lay down and dial up...

what's your pewpew details?

I tend to shoot 2800-3100fps pills at best of class bc's. 800-1000yds at the 1.0 second area. I don't play timing games. I watch body language as I'm calling the shot.

 

[Stinky Coyote]

10-4, thanks, relax on the ethics stuff, this thread isn't here to judge anyone, the nut behind the wheel can stay out of it, we will assume they've learned how to drive their rig as far as they put the time in to do so, there are likely guys out there more proficient at 1000 yards than some guys at 300 yards, see it every year lol

keep the data coming folks, we've got some 3/4 second and 1 second tof's to work with, lets get a bunch more

so far our spreads are .7 to 1.04 tof in ideal max distance comfort zones...my guess is if we get a lot of input we may see a trend or two develop

 

[Stinky Coyote]

typical archery gear 60-70 yard tof's around .7-.75 seconds tof...and most guys quit playing at those distances, harder to be as precise vs pewpews so not apples to apples, it's easier to go beyond 3/4's of a second with pewpews but interestingly, to me anyway, is the time of flight where most bowhunters call it quits....I'm curious to see, if my suspicion is correct, that is similar for the bang sticks...

data please gents, lets ballistic nerd this out a little please

 

[Wrench]

It's MY policy. I don't push it on anyone else. I don't care how you calculate your risk, I do care about mine.

 

[AZ_Hunter_2000]

Not really been concerned about it. If the animal is moving I wait until it stops or moves out of site which means no shot.

My 6.5 CM takes 1.05 seconds to hit 800 yards which is when it hits 1800 fps.
My 6.5 PRC takes 1.02 seconds to hit 850 yards but it hits 1800 fps at 1100 yards.
My 308 Win takes 1.01 seconds to hit 700 yards but it hits 1800 fps @ 575 yards.
My 30-06 takes 1.01 seconds to hit 725 yards but it hits 1800 fps @ 650 yards.
My 300 WM takes 1.01 seconds to hit 775 yards but it hits 1800 fps @ 800 yards.

Pretty much base my max distance on 1800 fps (within reason) and then knocking off distance for accuracy of wind call, stability of shooting position, how much caffeine, how comfortable a shooting position (cholla sucks), etc.

The only one that could actually cause me a potentially issue is with my 6.5 PRC. But if the right Coues gives me a shot...

 

[Stinky Coyote]

It's MY policy. I don't push it on anyone else. I don't care how you calculate your risk, I do care about mine.

man you must have been in some major ethics battles, you don't have to defend it here, I'm totally on your side, I'm exactly same as you, thanks for the data

 

[Stinky Coyote]

Not really been concerned about it. If the animal is moving I wait until it stops or moves out of site which means no shot.

My 6.5 CM takes 1.05 seconds to hit 800 yards which is when it hits 1800 fps.
My 6.5 PRC takes 1.02 seconds to hit 850 yards but it hits 1800 fps at 1100 yards.
My 308 Win takes 1.01 seconds to hit 700 yards but it hits 1800 fps @ 575 yards.
My 30-06 takes 1.01 seconds to hit 725 yards but it hits 1800 fps @ 650 yards.
My 300 WM takes 1.01 seconds to hit 775 yards but it hits 1800 fps @ 800 yards.

Pretty much base my max distance on 1800 fps (within reason) and then knocking off distance for accuracy of wind call, stability of shooting position, how much caffeine, how comfortable a shooting position (cholla sucks), etc.

The only one that could actually cause me a potentially issue is with my 6.5 PRC. But if the right Coues gives me a shot...

awesome info thanks!

what are your tof's to the 1800 fps thresholds?

I agree with making sure you're above your min fps impact threshold for game intended with bullet chosen. More data is better than less.

My wimpy 500 yard .75 sec tof example leaves me at 1700 fps impact...there's absolutely no fat in that set up lol. I'm hoping to see lots more standard hp modern rigs here like you've posted and where guys are the ranges guys are comfortable or practiced to under ideal conditions afield. Great data.