Quote:

---

Sure you can hit things out to 500 meters but I am talking about killing game animals ethically. Accurate heart/lung shots on a Fallow deer for instance is quite difficult with 1 to 1 magnification at 150 to 200 yards, as it is with open sights. Classic rifles often had sights to 500 or even 1000 yards but that doesn't mean that you could accurately hit the vitals of an animal. The stories of hunters in those days is also filled with tales of animals needing many shots to be killed and follow-ups lasting many hours tracking wounded game that were gut shot etc. If they were so good at 200 yards than no one would bother buying a scope with magnification which costs more and is heavier. I hunt a lot with an Aimpoint for deer and find them fantastic but I limit my shots to 150 yards or there abouts. If you feel comfortable that you can take longer shots accurately than by all means go ahead. I must say that I prefer to stalk in as close as possible rather than long shots anyway, but that's just me.

Waidmannsheil.

---

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Interesting video. Has made me think. Thanks for posting.

Good to see a .416 being used for the special snap. I have always used by .375 H&H. A lot of times it seems most guys go for the lightest calibre they can, which I believe the minimum is the .330 calibre and up. (?)

Red dot sights are point penalised though aren't they?

Good quick shooting with it.

A 2 MOA sight might be an answer for a problem I still have solved. For my Tikka 7x65R/12 gauge. Last time I talked about it on NE, I had a look at Trijicon, Docter etc and all the sights seemed to have excessive large MOA dots, such as 7 MOA etc. Waste of time for me.

Also I need a red dot sight which does not "star burst" for my eyes, and is a solid red circle or triangle.

---

Post Extras: