Old school shooting vs today's technology

[forrestgump01]

So I made a post in another thread , but I think the topic should have it's own thread.
I see a trend towards technology in long range shooting that is making the shooter irrelevant.
I understand most people are going this route simply to become a better shooter, but there are also many who are using technology/equipment to overcome their piss poor shooting skills.

With all of the gadgets we have along with the ability for them to interface , we have almost reached the point where x gadget finds target , ranges , then sends info to scope along with weather parameters, scope calculates firing solution and makes all necessary adjustments.
Where is the challenge ???
If you can literally take a dam monkey, put him behind the rifle , he pushes a button and squeezes the trigger, where is the fun in that ?

I guess I'm just old school and stuck in the past. The whole reason why I got into lr shooting was because it was such a challenge and to me that's where all the fun is at.

I assume the next gadget will be a motorized self adjusting , self leveling bipod with cup holder ?

 

[6/250/40]

Was going to put a post here, but wound up just SMDH........

 

[theLBC]

good points
i guess it can depend on whether you get into LR shooting as a hobby, or if you just want to quickly acquire the ability to defend yourself and your community against whatever threats might exist now or in the future, be it zombies, commies or commie zombies.

imho, shooting skills are still required, but technology just allows me to develop dope for my platform without needing as much time to develop dope via trial and error.

 

[Nik H]

I know no gadget that can line up the rifle and properly execute the correct fundamentals required to achieve the firing solution. I also know of no gadget that can read a miss and know what to do as quickly as a seasoned rifleman.

The gadgets may help you formulate a firing solution more quickly but it is up to you to execute the fundamentals. Follow up shot is largely a human response and not to be trivialized.

Trigger time is key.....brass in the bucket always speaks volumes

It always is up to you...regardless of the technology

 

[remmynikon.308]

right there with ya man, real shooting is using 50-70 sharps with a tang sight. everything else is just ridiculous. all this technology like scopes and bipods and chassis, its taking away from the pureness of the american marksman.

 

[forrestgump01]

I guess my point was misunderstood , but go ahead and flame away because I have thicker skin than you think.

 

[Birddog6424]

We are still a very long way from a monkey pulling a trigger.

All this technology you speak of simply provides us with information. It requires good data in to get good data out. It still requires proper rifle set up, and it still requires proper fundamentals of shooting.

Are we more effective at long range shooting than we were 20 years ago? Absolutely.. We have better equipment and access to more information. But that's still a long ways from it being mindlessly simple.

 

[Forward543]

This argument is very persistent. That technology is ruining shooting. At the root we should go back at least to an atlatl, and if you can't manage that, you should work on your fundamentals. Realistically, you are still required to have sounds fundamentals in order to do well. As things change and progress, so does the shooter. If it's only matches we are worried about, the md's can set there matches as they see fit.
I get the rub that you are not refining a skill, being uncomfortable, and persevering to develop into a better person. This argument is so much more faceted than we give it credit for. All of the interaction with any of these shooting scenarios, and our ability to place shots, requires some form of human technology. I personally am for a culture that rewards personal accountability, and the development of the individual. if we are going to limit our interaction with the sole purpose of a satisfying a feeling or emotion, I would caution that perhaps the technology is not the issue at all.

 

[Matches Malone]

This is my opinion, since there is more than one source than the dudes on sniperhide. This is going to be fundementals aside. I’m strictly talking analog vs tech.

For speed and real world application, NOT just tactical but even for hunting or other field hobbies, analog is probably not going anywhere. Tech always fails, using a MPH gun for wind, and knowing how to figure things out on the fly is irreplaceable.

However, in my experience, if you are doing some ELR level shooting, to define, shooting into subsonic, I think tech IF YOU KNOW HOW TO USE IT is more applicable. You still have to know your data, you’re dope, how to verify and make changes, and how the wind works through out the entire range to your target. There’s some interesting threads on here that have very good merit on calculators over compensating for things, like for instance spin. The shooter still needs to do their part.

There’s more than one discipline to shooting. PRS isn’t the end all be all, so really, it depends.

 

[forrestgump01]

right there with ya man, real shooting is using 50-70 sharps with a tang sight. everything else is just ridiculous. all this technology like scopes and bipods and chassis, its taking away from the pureness of the american marksman.

ya , ok that's exactly what I said , "we should do away with scopes, bipod and chassis " wtf.

to be clear guys, I said I see a TREND.
meaning moving in a certain direction. All I was asking was opinions about where were headed.
At what point DOES the shooter become Irrelevant. Simple question.
I never said we should all go back to musket loaders . yes there have been great improvements in equipment , chassis , bipods, etc. but there is some of the tech ( kestrels , ballistics apps , digital scope levels and so on ) that could leave you stranded when your in the field and it decides to crash or the battery is dead . Do you have a backup , do you even have a dope book .
My main point is that there are guys who completely rely on the tech and wouldn't know what to do without it.

 

[Darkside-Six]

OP, I think I get what you’re saying. We see a lot of this in PRS matches now with all of the “gameyness” that is coming out. Between all the gadgets and bags they have now it can get a little ridiculous.

With al of the AMP plates and game changer bags that make it easier to shoot of barricades and what not, it does kinda take away from the marksmanship aspect for many of those newer shooters that start learning that way and not in a more traditional way.
Now grated there are many that still practice shooting off of stuff with no bags to keep skills proficient and I’ll admit it has helped make me a better shooter, but I can’t help but laugh at some shooters that show up to a match with 5-6 differnt bags and what not.

 

[remmynikon.308]

ya , ok that's exactly what I said , "we should do away with scopes, bipod and chassis " wtf.

to be clear guys, I said I see a TREND.
meaning moving in a certain direction. All I was asking was opinions about where were headed.
At what point DOES the shooter become Irrelevant. Simple question.
I never said we should all go back to musket loaders . yes there have been great improvements in equipment , chassis , bipods, etc. but there is some of the tech ( kestrels , ballistics apps , digital scope levels and so on ) that could leave you stranded when your in the field and it decides to crash or the battery is dead . Do you have a backup , do you even have a dope book .
My main point is that there are guys who completely rely on the tech and wouldn't know what to do without it.

My point was only to point out that everyone uses tech, of course people need to learn the basics, but at the end of the day, i think we all need to worry about ourselves. if people have fun shooting with all the Ballistic-aids, thats cool. If other people dont like using all the new tech, cool, don't use it. this has been an argument for years in the bowhunting group, between vertical compounds and crossbows.... Until the longbow guys show up....

 

[forrestgump01]

OP, I think I get what you’re saying. We see a lot of this in PRS matches now with all of the “gameyness” that is coming out. Between all the gadgets and bags they have now it can get a little ridiculous.

With al of the AMP plates and game changer bags that make it easier to shoot of barricades and what not, it does kinda take away from the marksmanship aspect for many of those newer shooters that start learning that way and not in a more traditional way.
Now grated there are many that still practice shooting off of stuff with no bags to keep skills proficient and I’ll admit it has helped make me a better shooter, but I can’t help but laugh at some shooters that show up to a match with 5-6 differnt bags and what not.

bingo, you got it !

 

[Superjet]

Seeing Trijicon's new rangefinder made me think along the same lines as OP. After seeing the price of it, I realized I'm too poor to be dumb.

 

[Duckford]

Johnny is a golfer but not a good golfer. Every time he gets a poor score, he buys a new set of golf clubs, watches the golfing channel filled with experts, he subscribes to a golfing magazine, buys an expensive carbon fibre T. He always buys something, never fixes himself. His score never improves, but he thinks he will buy himself out of his rut.

Johnny's kid starts having trouble at school. Johnny buys him all sorts of medication for his kid to dope him up and get rid of his ADHD or the ten other diagnosis he has. He hires counselors to spend time with the kid and psychobabble him to death. He never spends time with the kid and teaches him morals, lessons, right and wrong, spanks him and tells him to behave. The kid grows up to be dysfunctional adult.

Johnny takes up long range shooting. Every time he shoots terrible, he buys a new rifle, a new optic, a new bag, a new sling, a dozen new parts for the picatinny rail, rangefinder, hand warmer, hand cooler, kitchen sink and other accessories because his previous kit was trash and caused him to miss. Vendors agree, of course, he needs to buy new stuff and magic scopes and super rangefinders and he will be 1/4 MOA in no time. He still can't hit the target.

No, technology isn't making anyone a worse shooter, a worse golfer. a worse anything. Nobody broke into your house when you were away and stole your iron sights, analog equipment, took off your scope and put a new digital one on it. Is anyone forcing anyone to buy a rangefinder or any other data collecting device for conditions? Have they (yet) taken your old gun and replaced it with a smart gun that fires itself? Is a dope generating computer as good as old fashioned shooting and logging of data for your actual individual rifle and load? Does a computer know the nuances of your cartridge and individual rifle?

Shooting is still a challenging task, the people who are using technology and consumerism as crutches are victims of their own mentalities, old school methods and non digital are still viable and sometimes your only option that nobody has stolen from you.

I get the whole "gear" problem of today's kids. I disagree with OP on many levels, agree on points about basic challenge and personal work. People trying to "buy" hits they need to make themselves. But I don't see any shortcuts to mastery or an idiot proof rig.

 

[Maxduty]

This argument is very persistent. That technology is ruining shooting. At the root we should go back at least to an atlatl, and if you can't manage that, you should work on your fundamentals.

LMAO, I have an atlatl.

 

[Blue Sky Country]

I like both...

Traditional shooting with plain irons is fun, challenging, and builds up your skills. However, when it comes time to put food on the table or defend my loved ones from a predatory threat, I want everything in my inventory that will increase the chances of me landing a fatal and decisive shot before the threat does.

I am all for technology and innovation and I fully embrace everything that has made modern firearms lighter, more reliable, and easier to acquire targets at range via electronic and optical components. HOWEVER, what really makes the shot matter is the skill of the man behind that gun.

 

[C.R. Adams]

So I made a post in another thread , but I think the topic should have it's own thread.
I see a trend towards technology in long range shooting that is making the shooter irrelevant.

If you can literally take a dam monkey, put him behind the rifle , he pushes a button and squeezes the trigger, where is the fun in that ?

a heavier rifle combined with 3 oz trigger will mitigate flaws in shooting techniques.

i will say this though............... Everybody wants to be a "good shot". as eluded, many of these trends are assisting individuals to achieve being a "good shot" . Attraction and retention of new shooters results in the gun industry making $$$. This is one reason the trend is being fed.............. if not the numero uno reason.

 

[theLBC]

i use an Impact data book and the ballistic tables for .308 Federal GM are pretty spot on for my rifle.
i still can't hit anything without knowing how far away it is.

while i believe being able to accurately range targets through my scope is part of long range shooting, practicing this skill without being able to reliably verify my estimates posed a problem. i couldn't think of anything besides a rangefinder to easily solve this.

 

[Boon20]

You could look at this a different way too and say all the gadgets are letting the new people get into long range and then when they want to learn how to be a marksman not just a shooter they can learn the old school way

 

[steve123]

I can see all the points everyone is making and I think we all realise that each person has their own perspective.
Mine is that, yes, a win can be literally bought with money.

If the question is related to competition the answer is simple, to win at whatever shooting sport, you need good gear! Past that aspect it's mostly the shooters skill and a tad bit of good luck involved.

I have this group of friends that are highly involved in black powder shooting. They built their own muzzle loaders with all the best components. They also practice, and they finish high or win.
From a modern perspective these guns are primitive, but in these comps they are higher grade rifles that are made to win. Couple that with good shooters and....

Same group of guys host a Black powder rifle silhouette match. It's the same deal in this sport too, some have $3000 custom Sharps with Krieger barrels, etc, heck the Tangent sight sets are $600. I've spotted for some of these guys and at 500M they can lay down hits right in the middle of the Ram with 535gr 45 cal slugs going 1150 fps that they cast themselves.

I got into the Vintage Sniper rifle events going on during the same silhouette match that those black powder guys host. A friend sponsored me with very expensive real deal WW2 rifles! So I got to experience and see the differences between the WW2 Vintage rifles and the Sharps type rifles side by side, and I already know what a $3500 custom tactical rifle is capable of.
Well basically if the WW2 Sniper rifles didn't have such crappy triggers, and had better ergos, the Sharps rifles wouldn't have stood a chance. A very fun and informative thing to have gotten a hands on with! BTW I did win one of the matches as far as score with the a Swede M41B, even beating the national blackpowder champ.

Shot my friends M40 build too, yet another step up in gear in some ways compared to the WW2 stuff.

I know a guy that used to struggle a bit in Field Target air rifle matches with medium quality, then even with various higher quality air rifles. He decided he was going to buy the best rifle that money could buy, that'd be a $4000 Thomas PCP air rifle. Since then he has cleaned the course more than a few times which used to be rare to do, and often wins the match.

Well you get my point, great gear makes a good shot even better, and certainly increases the chance of a win.

Me???, I think I'm done?? fine with my ARC Mausingfield/S&B 5-25, in 6mmBR. An old Kestrel to get DA and wind, a ballistic app, a decent bipod, a few bags, and that's about as far as I want to take the precision rifle thing.

It will be interesting to see how far modern rifles and accompanying equipment will go.

So far I don't see the shooter becoming irrelevant but do see advancements in gear making higher degrees marksmanship easier to attain.

 

[Thud]

One thought to ponder. If we get an Electrical Pulse that knocks out all the electronic stuff Old Guy's will Rule.
Shooting is a skill that needs to be practiced with care and simple stuff.

 

[Rthur]

Over time the tools will remain and the gadgets will fade.
It all depends on what the job is.

R

 

[NoLegs24]

 

[Ledzep]

Removing the "gadgets" doesn't take away from the skill of the shooter in his/her ability to shoot. It only takes away from his/her understanding of the situation. Having the gadgets is no different from shooting at fixed yard lines like BR, Palma, highpower, etc... The argument could be made that there is a skill set in understanding the shot situation itself without the use of those tools, but my take on it is that it's one of those things that requires a LOT of energy for not a lot of gain. Take the LRF away and the number of people that can reliably make a 1st round hit past 800yd drops to near zero.

Having a LRF and decent ballistic solvers is what allows for the extremely dynamic nature of PRS/NRL style events and LR hunting/target shooting at unknown distances. We have more capability, but also much more demanding targets, time limits, etc... than many other shooting sports.

If you look at interviews with WWII through Vietnam Era snipers where there were no good range finding tools, shots were largely limited to 400-500m only on static exposed targets. We knew plenty about the trajectory of a given rifle/ammo combination, but the lack of understanding of the shot (unknown range) simply made 800-1500yd capable cartridges limited to 400-600m max with rare exception.

 

[BANG...ping]

Could not agree with the OP more. Our military needs all the electronics and gadgets to get the job done. Lives are at stake. I want them to have every advantage they can. We are different. We do this for fun. This should not be a gadget race. I have often said to my kids that the best toys have no batteries (I.E. , a ball). We do not need laser wind readers. Let's keep this sport about about shooting and keep it from becoming a high dollar Formula 1 credit card battle.

Bang

 

[Deleted member 113831]

It would be interesting to see a competition where the furthest target on any stage was only 600 yards. The catch being that at every stage, you had to Shoot a rifle you had never seen before.

You would be given an index card with the general information on the cartridge and a chance to shoot a zero target.

After that, all targets shot for score. No apps or wind meters allowed.

The time limit would be generous, but the time would figure into the score.

 

[GrayRyder]

I used to think that if I had a LRF I would absolutely positively never miss again. Such touching naievete on my part.

I've often looked over these forums and marvelled at the technology that's showing up. That latest Bushnell laser product comes to mind. Gees, used go be the only guys that had gear like that were driving M1A1 tanks. We're getting as geared up as the professionals. Call me old fashioned or call me too poor to pay for it but the most technology I'm willing to pay for is a laser. And to me a LRF is as much a safety tool as it is a shooting tool. If I can maximize my chance of hittting the target by knowing the correct range and thereby mitigating the chance of an errant round, it's a worthwhile investment.

One thing further, I have a rifle, not one of my first tier rifles but a good one none the less that will only perform acceptably if I am perfect as far as the technical aspects of making the shot. Finger pad on the trigger consistently; consistent cheek weld, consistent scope view...I mean I've got to be really careful. It's a technologically advanaced gun but unless my fundamentals aren't exacatly right that thing is nothing more than a funny shaped paperweight. Technology can mask poor shooting skills but only for a time.

 

[SD Carpenter]

They get paid to win fights, not to fight fair.

 

[GrayRyder]

It brings to mind the time I was attending a Storm Mountain training session and a couple of guys brought folding shooting tables. I thought ROd was going to have an aneurysm. All I had was my rifle and a backpack filled with ammo and a sand sock or two and a factory 308 PSS. I didn't even have a pad or tarp to lay on. That's low low tech baby.

 

[pmclaine]

Removing the "gadgets" doesn't take away from the skill of the shooter in his/her ability to shoot. It only takes away from his/her understanding of the situation. Having the gadgets is no different from shooting at fixed yard lines like BR, Palma, highpower, etc... The argument could be made that there is a skill set in understanding the shot situation itself without the use of those tools, but my take on it is that it's one of those things that requires a LOT of energy for not a lot of gain. Take the LRF away and the number of people that can reliably make a 1st round hit past 800yd drops to near zero.

Having a LRF and decent ballistic solvers is what allows for the extremely dynamic nature of PRS/NRL style events and LR hunting/target shooting at unknown distances. We have more capability, but also much more demanding targets, time limits, etc... than many other shooting sports.

If you look at interviews with WWII through Vietnam Era snipers where there were no good range finding tools, shots were largely limited to 400-500m only on static exposed targets. We knew plenty about the trajectory of a given rifle/ammo combination, but the lack of understanding of the shot (unknown range) simply made 800-1500yd capable cartridges limited to 400-600m max with rare exception.

The theory of ballistics was well known.

Look at the sight leaf for an '03 Sprigfield - as in 1903.

Its got 3-4 sighting aperatures and corrects for spindrift of all things.

I think the ballisticians knew the math and theory, perhaps even better than today as it was done manually, but they lacked the manufacturing quality in certain things - powder and bullets probably being near the top of the list.

@lowlight posted a new thermal debuting at Shot and I facetiously posted a pic of the viewer from Luke Skywalkers binos in the 1977 version of Star Wars because it appeared to produce the exact same images.

That's 40 years ago as reality today.

Im guessing in the next twenty years science may crack the obstacles preventing energy directed weapons. Recruits 21 years from now will ask "Whats 'drop', whats this 'wind' you speak of".

Ballistics will be extinct except for mover holds, wait with velocities measured at 186K miles/second we wont even need those.

 

[unclefreedom]

all the gadgets and wazoos are amazing however they should never under any circumstance be a crutch for poor fundamentals they should instead be used as a platform to raise your already stellar fundamentals to a higher level. I think of them like a red dot on a pistol and tell folks I teach this. If you are a good or great shooter a reddot can take you to a higher level no doubt and it can even hide some of your deficiencies but you will still wind up exposed and it will serve you far better to be a proficient shooter with minimal gear that way when you add gizmos you become John fucking Wick with a pencil. Not to mention Batteries die and I don't care how badass your gadgets are when that energizer bunny stops drumming if you don't have all those fundamentals of shooting on lock you're gonna get exposed or in a crap situation you can get dead real quick. Murphys law

 

[Long Range 338]

Perhaps its just me, but there is a mystique surrounding the snipers during the Vietnam period. I probably read the Carlos Hathcock books too many times or something but I tend to see him as the GOAT. Doing what he did with the tech of the time is simply amazing and boggles the mind. At the same time it shows that it is doable without all of todays tech.

I love the new tech, its great but really its just a shortcut to the solution. For example truing our trajectories has become so easy, even 15 years ago you would have been shooting every 100 yards and documenting dope to predict actual drops at distance. But I'm also a sceptic so I actually keep a paper copy of my trued loads and figure that at some point they may become permanently necessary.

I don't really do comps so the gaming side of things doesn't appeal to me either. Yeah my rifle is 15 lbs fully loaded but it can be used in ways that I consider practical. The curious mind is often lost in the midst of a competition because you don't need to understand all the intimate details of many aspects, you just need the answers. I find myself studying and curious to dig into the details finding many of the very technical articles on here fascinating.

I use my rangefinder and kestrel to get the data I need but I also try to take a few minutes and see what my best guesses are before verifying with the equipment. Not great but it seems to get better with practice. I'm not going to know the difference between 975 and 1050 but without tech you will be limited...

The "art" of long range is enjoyable to me but doesn't lend itself to the competition side of things where the tech really shines. Personally I would find a match that limits the tech and provides general information to be very interesting. When the tech does everything for you, it takes away from the experience IMO.

 

[themightytimmah]

I think the technology is highly overrated - I shoot with a Kestrel, laser, rear bag, maybe 3 or 4 years of experience.

I have a friend who kicks my ass with a paper chart and 25 years of trigger time. Tech helps but it won’t read wind across the whole gamut of distances (yet) or squeeze the trigger for you.

 

[motorcycleboy]

So I made a post in another thread , but I think the topic should have it's own thread.
I see a trend towards technology in long range shooting that is making the shooter irrelevant.
I understand most people are going this route simply to become a better shooter, but there are also many who are using technology/equipment to overcome their piss poor shooting skills.

With all of the gadgets we have along with the ability for them to interface , we have almost reached the point where x gadget finds target , ranges , then sends info to scope along with weather parameters, scope calculates firing solution and makes all necessary adjustments.
Where is the challenge ???
If you can literally take a dam monkey, put him behind the rifle , he pushes a button and squeezes the trigger, where is the fun in that ?

I guess I'm just old school and stuck in the past. The whole reason why I got into lr shooting was because it was such a challenge and to me that's where all the fun is at.

I assume the next gadget will be a motorized self adjusting , self leveling bipod with cup holder ?

It seems like you’ve got the formula figured out. Why aren’t you winning everything then? I usually have a hard time finishing in the top half of the standings in a prs match around me. I have mediocre equipment. If I had the best of everything I doubt it would net me two more points. “ITS NOT THE BIKE”. ( or the drugs) The good shooters would hand your ass to you using your gun. Don’t kid yourself. The “I could win too if I was willing to spend the money, but I’m to Nobel” is one of the lamest excuses ever.

 

[forrestgump01]

It seems like you’ve got the formula figured out. Why aren’t you winning everything then? I usually have a hard time finishing in the top half of the standings in a prs match around me. I have mediocre equipment. If I had the best of everything I doubt it would net me two more points. “ITS NOT THE BIKE”. ( or the drugs) The good shooters would hand your ass to you using your gun. Don’t kid yourself. The “I could win too if I was willing to spend the money, but I’m to Nobel” is one of the lamest excuses ever.

How the hell do you take me asking a simple question and turn it into " me being to good for everyone " as you are trying to put it. I never said anything about "having it all figured out"
You are literally making up statements that I never said.
If trying to start a discussion bothers you that much and you have nothing to add then go fuck yourself , and yes I would say that to you if we were face to face.
I normally have a thick skin , but I have already had to deal with several stupid people today and now here you come !!!

 

[RyanScott]

30 years ago long range competition was massive paper targets at 600 yards and now its little targets at UKD to 1400. The gear expands the possible but is it harder to shoot Xs at 600 with a rifle from 1990 or 2 MOA steel at UKD beyond a kilometer with a modern rifle?

 

[motorcycleboy]

How the hell do you take me asking a simple question and turn it into " me being to good for everyone " as you are trying to put it. I never said anything about "having it all figured out"
You are literally making up statements that I never said.
If trying to start a discussion bothers you that much and you have nothing to add then go fuck yourself , and yes I would say that to you if we were face to face.
I normally have a thick skin , but I have already had to deal with several stupid people today and now here you come !!!

Your first sentence states that all this technology is making the shooter irrelevant. Talk about stupid. I won’t even pick the rest apart.

 

[Long Range 338]

It seems like you’ve got the formula figured out. Why aren’t you winning everything then? I usually have a hard time finishing in the top half of the standings in a prs match around me. I have mediocre equipment. If I had the best of everything I doubt it would net me two more points. “ITS NOT THE BIKE”. ( or the drugs) The good shooters would hand your ass to you using your gun. Don’t kid yourself. The “I could win too if I was willing to spend the money, but I’m to Nobel” is one of the lamest excuses ever.

No doubt the top comp shooters are VERY good at what they do. I believe OP was referring more in an abstract sense that today more than ever before if you have an unlimited budget you can buy hits. It’s actually quite prevalent if you look to Gunwerks who sell “1000 yards out of the box” or even Applied Ballistics who will sell you a complete system that you literally pull out of the case and it is good to go beyond 1k. These 2 examples wouldn’t win any comps but would certainly take a shooter with next to no experience and let them get hits at long range.

 

[forrestgump01]

Your first sentence states that all this technology is making the shooter irrelevant. Talk about stupid. I won’t even pick the rest apart.

Soooooo......... using a rangefinder that is capable of reading the wind and giving you the solution, .......well that kinda makes the shooters wind reading skills irrelavant if he doesnt use them.
If you want to pick apart my argument then go ahead.
I would rather you pick it apart rather than come on here and put words in my mouth or make the statement that I'm making excuses because I don't want to spend the money on equipment and I'm noble or some bullshit !!
but I'm stupid , ok .
I have no use for an ass that purposely twist someone's words .

 

[kthomas]

It would be interesting to see a competition where the furthest target on any stage was only 600 yards. The catch being that at every stage, you had to Shoot a rifle you had never seen before.

You would be given an index card with the general information on the cartridge and a chance to shoot a zero target.

After that, all targets shot for score. No apps or wind meters allowed.

The time limit would be generous, but the time would figure into the score.

Top Shot Season 6: prepare to get Skookum'ed

 

[TheGerman]

So I made a post in another thread , but I think the topic should have it's own thread.
I see a trend towards technology in long range shooting that is making the shooter irrelevant.
I understand most people are going this route simply to become a better shooter, but there are also many who are using technology/equipment to overcome their piss poor shooting skills.

With all of the gadgets we have along with the ability for them to interface , we have almost reached the point where x gadget finds target , ranges , then sends info to scope along with weather parameters, scope calculates firing solution and makes all necessary adjustments.
Where is the challenge ???
If you can literally take a dam monkey, put him behind the rifle , he pushes a button and squeezes the trigger, where is the fun in that ?

I guess I'm just old school and stuck in the past. The whole reason why I got into lr shooting was because it was such a challenge and to me that's where all the fun is at.

I assume the next gadget will be a motorized self adjusting , self leveling bipod with cup holder ?

There's 2 kinds of shooting.

One where the shot is 95% of the equation, and one where the shot is only 25% of the overall equation.

Tech/crutches/bullshit you can throw money at only helps with the first and in most cases actually hinders the second.

 

[motorcycleboy]

I

No doubt the top comp shooters are VERY good at what they do. I believe OP was referring more in an abstract sense that today more than ever before if you have an unlimited budget you can buy hits. It’s actually quite prevalent if you look to Gunwerks who sell “1000 yards out of the box” or even Applied Ballistics who will sell you a complete system that you literally pull out of the case and it is good to go beyond 1k. These 2 examples wouldn’t win any comps but would certainly take a shooter with next to no experience and let them get hits at long range.

I think the guy with no experience would have the same number of hits with a $1500 setup as they would with a $10,000 setup. Same amount of hits with two bags or if they had eight bags. The same score on barricades with a bag plate or not. These gear fears are silly. A sub moa rifle, a scope with reliable repeatable adjustments, smart phone,small rear bag, bipod and a game changer will get it done. It will be really difficult to “buy” more hits than you will get with the most basic useable setup. Especially for a beginner.

 

[Racer88]

I

I think the guy with no experience would have the same number of hits with a $1500 setup as they would with a $10,000 setup. Same amount of hits with two bags or if they had eight bags. The same score on barricades with a bag plate or not. These gear fears are silly. A sub moa rifle, a scope with reliable repeatable adjustments, smart phone,small rear bag, bipod and a game changer will get it done. It will be really difficult to “buy” more hits than you will get with the most basic useable setup. Especially for a beginner.

I'm thinking the same thing. A brand new shooter with no experience and no instruction will be just as clueless with $10,000 worth of gun and gizmos as he would be with a basic / minimalist rig. A shooter without a solid grasp (or ANY grasp) of the fundamentals won't be helped by gizmos. He'll miss the target just the same.

A driver with no track experience or instruction can hop into a Ferrari, and get circles run around him by an experienced driver in a Mazda Miata.

 

[motorcycleboy]

Soooooo......... using a rangefinder that is capable of reading the wind and giving you the solution, .......well that kinda makes the shooters wind reading skills irrelavant if he doesnt use them.
If you want to pick apart my argument then go ahead.
I would rather you pick it apart rather than come on here and put words in my mouth or make the statement that I'm making excuses because I don't want to spend the money on equipment and I'm noble or some bullshit !!
but I'm stupid , ok .
I have no use for an ass that purposely twist someone's words .

If you think you think a using kestrel has taken the art of doping the wind out of the equation, I really don’t know what to say. Good luck having it even help a little, let alone it’s takes care of wind reading for you. Reading wind with a devise is another skill all on its own. A skillI haven’t gotten around to learning in 3 years with my kestrel. Like most guys, I carry it around places and try to confirm what I think the wind is for practice reading it.

 

[Long Range 338]

I

I think the guy with no experience would have the same number of hits with a $1500 setup as they would with a $10,000 setup. Same amount of hits with two bags or if they had eight bags. The same score on barricades with a bag plate or not. These gear fears are silly. A sub moa rifle, a scope with reliable repeatable adjustments, smart phone,small rear bag, bipod and a game changer will get it done. It will be really difficult to “buy” more hits than you will get with the most basic useable setup. Especially for a beginner.

You are taking everything in the context of PRS shooting. The Interest in LR shooting is much more than just PRS. That is to what I am referring. I’ve been chasing LR hits for 20 years and can tell you firsthand that today’s equipment is a definite advantage over what was available back then. No doubt the experience and knowledge as well.

 

[motorcycleboy]

You are taking everything in the context of PRS shooting. The Interest in LR shooting is much more than just PRS. That is to what I am referring. I’ve been chasing LR hits for 20 years and can tell you firsthand that today’s equipment is a definite advantage over what was available back then. No doubt the experience and knowledge as well.

And I’m sure the guys chasing LR hits 20 years before you would say the same of your setup? Having a kestrel in your hand for a true LR shot is going to help someone who is not an expert useing one how much? Even if you cold figure out the wind where your standing and it’s direction, how much will that help if you know nothing about figuring the rest of the wind equation?

 

[Duckford]

No doubt the top comp shooters are VERY good at what they do. I believe OP was referring more in an abstract sense that today more than ever before if you have an unlimited budget you can buy hits. It’s actually quite prevalent if you look to Gunwerks who sell “1000 yards out of the box” or even Applied Ballistics who will sell you a complete system that you literally pull out of the case and it is good to go beyond 1k. These 2 examples wouldn’t win any comps but would certainly take a shooter with next to no experience and let them get hits at long range.

Go anywhere and look at products and services and you get to see all sorts of guarantees. You see custom 1911's guaranteeing 2 inch groups at 50 yards..... of course, you have to shoot good enough to actually put 2 inch groups on paper. Weight loss programs offer all sorts of weight losss..... if you actually eat less and exercise more. Why, you can go out and buy a kit car from South Africa and a doner Mustang and build your own Shelby Cobra in your garage..... if you have the skill and knowledge of a mechanic. 1,000 yard rifles out of the box, half MOA rifles out of the box..... if you can actually shoot that good and be as good as the rifle. Jack traded the cow for magic beans, people were sold on Sea Monkeys being little mermaid people..... you get the point. Shooting up steroids and not hitting the gym, buying a race car and not knowing how to drive, buying expensive body spray and not talking to girls and all that. Surprise: advertisers are bullshitters and clothes do not make the man.

30 years ago long range competition was massive paper targets at 600 yards and now its little targets at UKD to 1400. The gear expands the possible but is it harder to shoot Xs at 600 with a rifle from 1990 or 2 MOA steel at UKD beyond a kilometer with a modern rifle?

Remember that those guys are shooting at a 2 MOA 10 ring and a 1 MOA X ring, with (albeit the best combat irons ever made) iron sights. I don't think that's as easy as people think, and it is still an impressive task. Are the best Supermatch's of today better than the best built Supermatch M1a's of yesteryear, way back decades ago when men were getting all of their hits in that 2 MOA ring or better with irons? Pat Boyle managed a 500-32 score in 1975 with a "worthless" M14 with a wooden stock. Has anyone done better since? How many folks have tried to buy those kinds of shots and come up short? Both disciplines you mention are respectable and difficult for different reasons.

Are the best rifles today any better than the very best of rifles yesterday? The real answer is probably not. The fact is, cheaper rifles are better than they have ever been, and the average quality of top notch rifles are better than they have ever been, almost certainly because of better machining and mostly barrel making. The very best rifles of decades past will probably shoot as good as many new rifles, if you cherry pick the very best. So where does the change lie?

Bigger cartridges and heavier bullets for ranges nobody saw as much value in back in the day, along with better glass so high magnification optics were viable. Yes, kestrels and rangefinders and all that have made a big impact for long range shooting, but I think a lot of the change has more to do with changing attitudes of challenge and objectives rather than quality of guns and gun parts.

 

[forrestgump01]

If you think you think a using kestrel has taken the art of doping the wind out of the equation, I really don’t know what to say. Good luck having it even help a little, let alone it’s takes care of wind reading for you. Reading wind with a devise is another skill all on its own. A skillI haven’t gotten around to learning in 3 years with my kestrel. Like most guys, I carry it around places and try to confirm what I think the wind is for practice reading it.

never said a kestrel would do that , by itself , it could be part of it.

Trigicon just came out with a rangefinder that will read the wind !
it can probably interface (Bluetooth)
to kestrel, probably won't be long before that will interface over to the scope and automatically adjust for elv and wind.

you say...... gear doesn't buy hits ,
a shooter will have the same hits whether he has 2 bags or eight bags , well that's a lot of shit to carry around for something that won't make any difference. And yes there is a whole lot more than the prs world. I doubt you will ever see a hunter or military sniper toting around 5 "game changer" bags or the latest fluffy pillow
And why are they called game changer if they don't make any difference. sounds like false advertising.

I'm not saying you shouldn't have gear.
I am all for someone buying what ever the hell they want .
I'm just trying to have a conversation on how helpful is that gear.

 

[motorcycleboy]

never said a kestrel would do that

Trigicon just came out with a rangefinder that will read the wind !

you say...... gear doesn't buy hits ,
a shooter will have the same hits whether he has 2 bags or eight bags , well that's a lot of shit to carry around for something that won't make any difference. And yes there is a whole lot more than the prs world. I doubt you will ever see a hunter or military sniper toting around 5 "game changer" bags or the latest fluffy pillow
And why are they called game changer if they don't make any difference. sounds like false advertising.

I'm not saying you shouldn't have gear.
I am all for someone buying what ever the hell they want .
I'm just trying to have a conversation on how helpful is that gear.

So you really think any devise will solve wind doping solutions for a long range shot? Even if you are expert with a wind reading devise, it is a small part of the wind information needed to have the correction. And no I don’t think anybody will bring 5 bags on a dear hunt. But they will build a stand? The use of bags etc have enabled guys to know what might help them in a situation. In hunting Most of the time you are only solving one position scenario. There are lots of guys who are now taking a bag to their stand etc because they have learned it will help in that situation. The number will grow as more become aware of the possibilities.
Is gear useful. Yes
Is the shooter becoming irrelevant. Not in the slightest.