Distance that separates Men from boys

[Milf Dots]

Modern technology and great instruction have really pushed the distances at which shooters are able to make hits, so in your opinion, what distance is the NEW range at which you consider things to get much more challenging? Lots of variables I know, so assume very average conditions in a place that isn't known to be windy.

Again, what distance do you think separates the Men from the boys?

For those who instruct, you might have 2-3 common distances at which groups of students seem to struggle.

ETA: For sake of this question, assume a rifle chambered for a common factory cartridge that doesn't exceed 30-06.

 

[Milf Dots]

Double posted.

 

[theLBC]

depends on what they are shooting? a challenge to the .308 shooter might be cake for .338 lapua.

 

[Milf Dots]

depends on what they are shooting? a challenge to the .308 shooter might be cake for .338 lapua.

Can't believe I forgot to address that very important variable! I'll edit it.

 

[brianf]

The last 20% of any cartridge.

 

[acudaowner]

there my mind goes back into the gutter thinking the answer was 8 to 10 inches or so nope its a deeper question

 

[Cjwise5]

Check out the ballistic app from AB. Input your variables and then look at the WEZ analysis page. AB WEZ What I think is interesting is the hit percentages as they relate to more environmental factors being added in. (wind). The hit percentages drop dramatically.

To answer your question, I still think hitting a man-sized target at 1000 yards is pretty impressive - if you can do it with high confidence. (to put a number on that, let's say, you can do it 90% of the time)

 

[M8541Reaper]

I think the real shift from novice to competent is the ability to be consistent. If you can accurately read wind and you know what your drop is, then it only leaves you with the shooters ability to consistently apply the fundamentals. Math is the only constant, so distance is irrelevant until the system’s hit probability factor drops below a certain point.

Someone shooting a thumb tack at 100 or a 4” plate at 1000 once every 5rds isn’t impressive. The shooter who, on command and in any condition, puts every round he fires in a 1” circle at 100 and 10” circle at 1000, is impressive as they are reliable. We all get lucky from time to time with amazing shot at distance, but luck doesn’t count (unfortunately lol).

EDIT: After thinking a bit more, the 100% hit ratio standard at 1000yds should be a 66% IPSC, as that is practical.

That’s how I’d personally judge the difference between the two categories.

 

[Dthomas3523]

I’m not sure if a distance necessarily separates. Obviously closer targets require less wind and allow more room for error (unless very small).

The two things I see that really separate people are:

Preparation
Consistency

The two go together hand in hand.

The amount of people that show up to matches with very little dope or just dope straight off a calculator without verifying is pretty high. Sometimes it’s a lack of opportunity/availability of a range in which to true data, but most of the time it’s just being ill prepared. I almost never see anyone who has no/bad data with a data book recording corrections during the match.

Consistency wise, you see a lot of guys be low/mid low/mid, upper pack, then back down the next match. Things click every so often and they do well at a match. This is typically due to subpar fundamentals which they get right when the stars align. The matches in which they do well make them feel good and they don’t correct the issues, thus keeping up the cycle.

The standouts are guys who take dope gathering seriously and those guys typically take fundamentals and being consistent seriously. They are the guys that are consistently at the top (top is relative. Could be top 5 all the time at club matches and top 20 at national, or whatever).

For examples by watching or when asking advice, I personally would take guys who may not win a lot or may have never won (yet, it’ll happen), but are always top 5 in club matches.........over a guy that is usually mid pack, but had a perfect day an won a match.

 

[Pbgt]

What separates the men from the boys, is who puts in the work.

 

[theLBC]

how do they separate the men from the boys in the middle east?

crowbars.

 

[Pbgt]

prolly don't have a garden hose, eh?

 

[Jack Master]

Everything is relative as stated by the responses above. Target size, consistency, wind, cartridge...etc, all of these are ways of also defining these categories, but when it comes to straight yardage:
1) on a relatively square range
2) shooting prone in a relaxed environment
3) with a capable caliber (30-06 or under)
4) making calculated, consistent first round impacts

100 to 300 is everyone.
300 to 700 are the Beginners (boys)
700 to 1100 are the Experienced (men)
1100 to 1500 are the Experts

Here is my thought process of this:
100 to 300 can be done with Kentucky windage by a beginner. Most rifle hunters with no "long range" experience are doing this.
300 to 700 is the basic understanding of drop and beginning windage. This is the learning long range zone.
700 to 1000 has changing environmental effects with Density altitude and drops as well as wind zones (Horizontal and Vertical)
1000 to 1500+ is being awesome. Fully understanding day to day environmental effects on Drops and really good at reading wind. (maybe a touch of Luck)

To be in the Men or Expert level you must be able to do this at every shooting location, not just your home range that you always shoot on. You might be a in the 700 to 1100 category on your home range but in the 300 to 700 if you travel to someone else's range. Your lowest level if your level.

Added Men's categories to measure by.
Master of Firearm - I think Consistency is a big deal. 1"-100yd groups ALL the time, better yet, hit 1" dots at 100yd consistently.
Master or Environment - I think being able to change total environments and still make impacts is a big deal. Impacts on small targets at shorter ranges and impacts on sufficient targets at longer ranges. (Florida to Idaho for example)
Master of Terrain - I think being able to make difficult terrain shots is big. (Steep Up hill, Steep down hill, cross canyon)
Master of Knowledge - I think being able to do all of the above without a computer is the most impressive. (no Kestrel or apps, just paper)

Just my 2 cents.

 

[A&8's]

I agree with Reaper. It's an "On Command" thing, not a distance thing.


As a recent PR instructor stated in class, "...taking 69 shots to hit 4000 yards is not precise or accurate..." ((Paraphrasing, because I can't remember the exact number of shots or yardage.))

 

[Luke]

Exactly. I have seen plenty of people get on steel at 1000 yards after a couple boxes of ammo, but to see someone walk up to the line and smack it on their first and subsequent shots is impressive.

 

[wade2big]

I think the real shift from novice to competent is the ability to be consistent. If you can accurately read wind and you know what your drop is, then it only leaves you with the shooters ability to consistently apply the fundamentals. Math is the only constant, so distance is irrelevant until the system’s hit probability factor drops below a certain point.

Someone shooting a thumb tack at 100 or a 4” plate at 1000 once every 5rds isn’t impressive. The shooter who, on command and in any condition, puts every round he fires in a 1” circle at 100 and 10” circle at 1000, is impressive as they are reliable. We all get lucky from time to time with amazing shot at distance, but luck doesn’t count (unfortunately lol).

EDIT: After thinking a bit more, the 100% hit ratio standard at 1000yds should be a 66% IPSC, as that is practical.

That’s how I’d personally judge the difference between the two categories.

Nobody is 100% at 1000 yards shooting a 66% ISPC.

 

[M8541Reaper]

Nobody is 100% at 1000 yards shooting a 66% ISPC.

Then nobody meets that standard lol. It’s just an opinion, not set in stone anywhere.

What is set in stone is being able to perform on command, every single time you are asked, regardless of environment or equipment. Too many dudes share shooting stories but they are just the range equivalent of fishing stories. If you can’t perform on command, that’s fine, not everyone can. The only thing we can ALL do is continue to learn each and every time we get behind any system.

Also, anyone who says “well I’m better with a bolt gun” when called out on not being able to hit shit with a handgun or carbine, is just a fundamentally flawed shooter. Consistent applications of the fundamentals apply across the board to everything and anything you use/do.

 

[GySgt Smith JE]

Everything is relative as stated by the responses above. Target size, consistency, wind, cartridge...etc, all of these are ways of also defining these categories, but when it comes to straight yardage:
1) on a relatively square range
2) shooting prone in a relaxed environment
3) with a capable caliber (30-06 or under)
4) making calculated, consistent first round impacts

100 to 300 is everyone.
300 to 700 are the Beginners (boys)
700 to 1100 are the Experienced (men)
1100 to 1500 are the Experts

Here is my thought process of this:
100 to 300 can be done with Kentucky windage by a beginner. Most rifle hunters with no "long range" experience are doing this.
300 to 700 is the basic understanding of drop and beginning windage. This is the learning long range zone.
700 to 1000 has changing environmental effects with Density altitude and drops as well as wind zones (Horizontal and Vertical)
1000 to 1500+ is being awesome. Fully understanding day to day environmental effects on Drops and really good at reading wind. (maybe a touch of Luck)

To be in the Men or Expert level you must be able to do this at every shooting location, not just your home range that you always shoot on. You might be a in the 700 to 1100 category on your home range but in the 300 to 700 if you travel to someone else's range. Your lowest level if your level.

Added Men's categories to measure by.
Master of Firearm - I think Consistency is a big deal. 1"-100yd groups ALL the time, better yet, hit 1" dots at 100yd consistently.
Master or Environment - I think being able to change total environments and still make impacts is a big deal. Impacts on small targets at shorter ranges and impacts on sufficient targets at longer ranges. (Florida to Idaho for example)
Master of Terrain - I think being able to make difficult terrain shots is big. (Steep Up hill, Steep down hill, cross canyon)
Master of Knowledge - I think being able to do all of the above without a computer is the most impressive. (no Kestrel or apps, just paper)

Just my 2 cents.

Very well thought out and explained. By your standards I'd fall into the 300-700 range (boys). I can get 2nd round impacts on steel at a 1000, and sometimes 1st round impacts, but I cannot constantly get 1st round impacts at every range I go to. I'm ok with being in that category as it gives me something to strive for in the future.

 

[Steel head]

Exactly. I have seen plenty of people get on steel at 1000 yards after a couple boxes of ammo, but to see someone walk up to the line and smack it on their first and subsequent shots is impressive.

At places where I have a lot of experience(and notes) a first round hit and subsequent hits at 1000+ is common.
New places are a bit more difficult but doable with good dope and some observation/consulting.

 

[Danattherock]

Anyone with basic fundamentals can hit steel at extended ranges with an accurate rifle. There is no realistic distance I find impressive.

Separate men from boys as you say, go to a PRS match when a storm is brewing and wind is 15-25 mph. The good shooters rise to the top fast.

 

[Johnny00K]

For me it is 1300 yards. When I first started long range the first shot was the 880 rock, super easy. Shot farther and it was still easy. Anything over 1300 yards that day was impossible. Anything under 1300 I got first round hits (big rocks). I couldn't explain it. It became my main mission to pass the mystical 1300 yard mark. A few months later I actually walked up the hill to where I was shooting and found out where the 1300 yard targets start that there is way more wind in that canyon, and after being up there several more times the wind blows consistently harder starting in that exact canyon. Even with a logical explanation of why I couldn't hit anything past that distance when people ask me what distance separates the men from the boys, my answer is always....... "1300 yards. Exactly 1300 yards."

 

[Milf Dots]

For me it is 1300 yards. When I first started long range the first shot was the 880 rock, super easy. Shot farther and it was still easy. Anything over 1300 yards that day was impossible. Anything under 1300 I got first round hits (big rocks). I couldn't explain it. It became my main mission to pass the mystical 1300 yard mark. A few months later I actually walked up the hill to where I was shooting and found out where the 1300 yard targets start that there is way more wind in that canyon, and after being up there several more times the wind blows consistently harder starting in that exact canyon. Even with a logical explanation of why I couldn't hit anything past that distance when people ask me what distance separates the men from the boys, my answer is always....... "1300 yards. Exactly 1300 yards."

You must find the distance of 1300 yds to be vexing! If it were me, I'd switch my thinking to meters in an effort to "retake the initiative" from that evil number, LOL! And I've read that metric is 'more accurate' than imperial, according to some 'inner-net experts'.