Posted in Featured, Ranging Shots | 2 Comments

Up Down?

Up Down?

Dangle Angle? Arguing With Reality?

In our January 2012 issue, there was a massive work of computations and charts and the accompanying widgets to in theory compile the data required to send a bullet down range at angles. Or, in layman’s terms, it was a buncha’ figures so you can shoot up and down and hit stuff.

I truly believe some people do the techie gig in the interest of seeing how hard they can make shooting or—better put—how to generate something so complicated it covers the fact once in awhile you simply miss the target. And if you never miss, it is because you never shoot.

Point number one, if you’re doing all the charts and cosine stuff you’re on the right track to make shooting complicated and you might just drive yourself a little nuts.

Second point, if this is about add-on parts for the rifle to improve personal field or life-saving skills A.K.A. as in combat, the time to apply these skills—if you actually learned them—is simply often not there. I have seen many people who had high-zoot equipment without the knowledge and personal skills to match. I would like to have $5 for each time I have seen a scope marked with an arrow to raise the bullet impact (when it was required) but the shooter turned the adjustment knob the wrong direction adding to the problem instead of solving it.

The great thing is none of the stuff in or on the charts, dials and widgets are any better than a simplified hold up or down if you haven’t practiced it in the field. All most of us need to decide is which system of skills we will have time to apply and will practice (like the old adage “this one is for shootin’ and this one is for fun”).

Most of the gadget and widget stuff’s practicality is arguable out to 700 yards—and even to that distance practice is required. Beyond 700 yards the light saber stuff may start to earn a seat at the table, but again not without lots of practice up down short or far.

Yeah and I know “the world’s record shot was…” Blah, blah, and it was good shooting, but it wasn’t a first-round hit.
Story By: Clint Smith Photos By: Heidi Smith

>> Click Here << To Read More April 2012 Ranging Shots

GUNS April Cover

Order Your Copy Of The GUNS Magazine April 2012 Issue Today!

Get More Ranging Shots

Share |
  1. Nick Smathers says:

    While I agree with Clint about techno wizardry gadgets not compensating for practice, I believe he missed the point of the shooting angle article. Articles are meant to be informative and entertaining to the shooting community. Educating shooters about angle compensation and computer ballistics programs can be helpful to us when correctly used . As far as understanding cosine error, talk to some tool makers and machinists. We’ll be glad to explain it.

  2. I agree with Clint and am glad some one is willing to say it. I took a quick walking Mulie With a ruger Number One in .270 This year seconds before he hit the fence that would have taken him off the CRP field I was hunting. Two shots. My partner called him at 300, at the first shot he turned but kept moving. Something told me he wasn’t hit hard and as I reloaded I thought the range was past 300. The second shot I put a little daylight over his back and he dropped at the shot. Ranged to the fencepost I rested on at 364 yards. Years of practice and familiarity with the rifle allowed me to make that shot in a few seconds. There would have been no time for turret adjustments or other wiz-bang gizmos.

Leave a Reply

(Spamcheck Enabled)