704yd Hare V-Maxed

[Crouch valley]

I wonder if he has hare listed on his firearms ticket to be shot with .243 i dont think so. A total disrespect to game

Edited October 23, 2010 by crouch valley

[Bazooka Joe]

The hare is now hanging up in my garden and will be skinned and frozen tomorrow.

 

Pictures please before & after you skin it,

 

I'd be interested to see what the 75 vmax does at that range

 

BJ

[Redgum]

Mmmmm, these things do pop up don't they. I only shoot hares if instructed to, usually around apple orchards. The .17hmr is the perfect tool out to 140yds and I couldnt do that after 5 months of having my FAC. Driving to another farm and adding another 200yds to the shot because of the wind direction, the wind in your face, did you have a tool to check wind speed before dialing in elevation. Hare shooting off bags. Even if it didnt come from Jackanory it was hell of stupid shot.

Hares defence is often sitting tight until the last minute, with the wind in your face and something behind you to stop the siloutte, a little bit of field craft should have put you down to 150yds before Mr Hare would have bothered about you.

 

But whatever, James and the Giant peach wasnt based on fact but still makes good reading.(for the kids anyway)

[shaun4860]

Used to shoot mice at this range all the time with my HMR,

 

Dont see what all the fuss is about...

 

shaun

[petrol_head29]

good luck finding anything left of the hare to eat!

[henry d]

I wonder if he has hare listed on his firearms ticket to be shot with .243 i dont think so. A total disrespect to game

 

Beat me to it..........

 

Perhaps a picture of the hare and a picture of the certificate

[njc110381]

Not a shot I would try to take on a live animal. There are too many variables at that range.

 

Whether the Hare was clean head shot or vapourised doesn't matter a bit to me. It's a waste of meat but in some areas they're a pest which needs controlling just the same as any other. The most important part is respect for the quarry and after five months of shooting you still have a vast amount to learn.

 

I know of guys that I would put a days wages on them getting a hit at that range. They've been shooting for a lot longer though and to be honest I still wouldn't be all that comfortable with the morals of it all.

[bigt1754]

I may have missed it, but I would like to see a reply from the OP.

[henry d]

Just read some of the OPs "old" posts and the trollometer is a high 8 going on a 9.

 

Posts and runs, never returns to a hot topic, however he is here ATM, hopefully he will answer the critics..........not holding my breath though.

[flyingfisherman]

How many times have we all pushed a shot with a shotgun and peppered a bird or rabbit or hare, sometimes seeing we have hit it and other times not even knowing that the prey is carrying our shot. If you shoot a fast moving partridge on the edge of range, its seen as a sporting shot, you will get praise for it, if you walk towards a pheasant clapped in the grass and shoot it with a .22, will you get the same respect?!

 

I see a pot and a kettle.. Blood sports are diverse, we do them for different reasons and some things are acceptable in some areas which are not in others.. If you hit a hare anywhere with a .243 its more likely to be immobilised/killed instantly (either way a lot easier to recover than a rangy shot with a 12g where wounding could be likely). The .243 was originally designed as a varmint round and the hare could be described as a varmint size and shape.

 

Im not saying that i dont smell a bit of bullpoo but i think that peoples reactions are narrow minded. You cant go saying about backstops etc without proof, you dont know the detail so dont hypothesise.

 

 

The facts are that its a slightly tall story, if he did shoot it then good on him as long as it was safe. I personally wouldn't shoot a hare like that but everyone to their own.

 

For you who are moaning about possible suffering, maybe you shouldnt pull that trigger unless you can guarantee a kill or swift recovery of that pigeon/rabbit/game/squirrel. I wonder how many shots you wont take.

[Hornet 6]

Lets not start that one, there are far too many things about the situation you do not know to make a comment like that.

 

It's a long way sure, but many can shoot just as well, if not better, and even further!

 

I know at least a couple of people I would put money on to make that sort of a shot, (neither of them is me though...I'd have an each way on me)!

 

 

So you can voice your opinion, but I can't, is that it ?

It was an unethical shot end of story, and that goes for any shot on a live animal at that range.

As for not knowing the full story, I know enough, do you ?

 

Neil.

[Boristhedog]

‘For you who are moaning about possible suffering, maybe you shouldnt pull that trigger unless you can guarantee a kill or swift recovery of that pigeon/rabbit/game/squirrel. I wonder how many shots you wont take.’

 

There is always the chance of a misplaced shot but surely the point is that you ought to minimise the chances of such a shot. We don’t deliberately take shots that are questionably either by ethics or situation.

[Crouch valley]

flyingfisherman generally when shooting at partridge there are a teem of pickers up behind watching for any pricked birds ready to dispatch them as soon as they can. A hare is not classed as a varmit

it is game and to take shots at 700 yards is ridicules if he was to just shoot its leg off how long would it have taken him to get there to dispatch it thats if he could even find it.

[flyingfisherman]

Generally there arent pickers up unless your on a driven shoot and whos to say the bird has taken enough shot to actually fall within site. I didnt say the hare is a varmint, but its varmint sized, sorry, i probably didnt make myself clear enough. And regarding blowing its leg off, i agree but im not going to argue that point as the same happens to hundreds of other animals we shoot EVERY day of the shooting season, theyre all animals and deserve the same respect.

 

Im basically saying that how can you differentiate between a hare and any other creature? Were taking the life of an animal so surely if your ''happy'' (you know what i mean) about taking a 'sporting' shot at a partridge then how can you not be ''happy'' with taking a similarly sporting shot at a hare..

 

Again, im not saying what is right and wrong, just saying that there are different disceplines, look at deer stalking and my example of stalking a pheasant with a .22..

 

SO putting aside the fact its a living animal, a 700yd shot is impressive, IF its true.

[Boristhedog]

'SO putting aside the fact its a living animal, a 700yd shot is impressive, IF its true.'

 

Agreed.

[flyingfisherman]

‘For you who are moaning about possible suffering, maybe you shouldnt pull that trigger unless you can guarantee a kill or swift recovery of that pigeon/rabbit/game/squirrel. I wonder how many shots you wont take.’

 

There is always the chance of a misplaced shot but surely the point is that you ought to minimise the chances of such a shot. We don’t deliberately take shots that are questionably either by ethics or situation.

 

Well where do you draw the line? Im playing devils advocate i suppose but it makes you think, 'minimise' the chances of a wounding, well do that at your local pheasant shoot with low pheasants and you will be waiting a long time for your return invite..

 

I push the limits every time i shoot.. is this wrong? no. I wouldnt gut shoot something because i cant see its chest or head, so im minimising the risks to a certain extent but you cant fulfil both sporting and ethical camps generally with our choice of pastime and you can do it even less so with shotgun shooting.

[Boristhedog]

‘I push the limits every time i shoot.. is this wrong? no. I wouldnt gut shoot something because i cant see its chest or head, so im minimising the risks to a certain extent but you cant fulfil both sporting and ethical camps generally with our choice of pastime and you can do it even less so with shotgun shooting.’

 

flying fisherman - You are right, I know that but do you really push the limits? Would you take a shot where, realistically, you had such a tiny chance of success. Maybe I’m being just as unrealistic with my argument!! A ‘sporting shot’ can only be within limits and going back to the OP (which is likely to be BS anyway) a 700 yard shot at a hare does not have a realistic chance of success. It might clean kill but that’s just so unlikely as to be non existent.

[bullet boy]

Does it make sense to shoot a .243 calibre rifle at a Hare at 700 yards-Not!This thread is the most riddiculous thread I've ever heard!No respect for quarry at all!! :good:

[1967spud]

taking the facts as they are a 700 yard shot a hare is possible with a 243 thats fact but if you can do it consistantly enough to garantee a clean kill thats another thing i am not so sure

 

 

as i have said before if you up the calibre and get a better bc'ed bullet the odds are dropping all the time for a clean kill but they are still not good odds add in to the facter of wind and its getting difficult

 

 

the shooter stated on the day that there was a head onwind , i wonder if he allowed for a touch more elevation as a head wind will stall your bullet a touch as apposed to a tail wind that will lift a bulett accordingly to wind speed

[flyingfisherman]

‘I push the limits every time i shoot.. is this wrong? no. I wouldnt gut shoot something because i cant see its chest or head, so im minimising the risks to a certain extent but you cant fulfil both sporting and ethical camps generally with our choice of pastime and you can do it even less so with shotgun shooting.’

 

flying fisherman - You are right, I know that but do you really push the limits? Would you take a shot where, realistically, you had such a tiny chance of success. Maybe I’m being just as unrealistic with my argument!! A ‘sporting shot’ can only be within limits and going back to the OP (which is likely to be BS anyway) a 700 yard shot at a hare does not have a realistic chance of success. It might clean kill but that’s just so unlikely as to be non existent.

 

 

Point taken Boris, but are you on about the equipment limitation or the shooter? A .243 is a 1000yd gun in the right hands, and a shotgun is a lot more effective in somebody elses hands than mine.. So i suppose ive answered my own question that the shooter is the limting factor, but if we didnt push the boundaries then we would never improve. Even if the boundaries are only pushed a little, surely thats taking the shot outside your comfort zone which itself MUST reduce the chances of a clean kill. I admit that a 700yd shot is more than a little outside the comfort zone for the majority of shooters in the UK.

 

Your last sentence does ring true with myself as i find myself not pulling the trigger because of the likelihood of a successful shot being so low that i prefer not to waste the ammo/make the creature gun shy or just dent my own abilities by shooting at such a difficult target..

[bruno22rf]

What did Alice say when she saw what you had done?

[Sprags]

Does it make sense to shoot a .243 calibre rifle at a Hare at 700 yards

 

 

At a hare? maybe not, or at least I wouldn't. But I do shoot out to very long ranges with my .243ai.

 

It seems that the first ones who condem long range shooting are the ones who know very little about it.

Edited October 23, 2010 by Sprags

[flyingfisherman]

At a hare? maybe not, or at least I wouldn't. But I do shoot out to very long ranges with my .243ai.

 

It seems that the first ones who condem long range shooting are the ones who know very little about it.

 

Same, i dont shoot hares generally but the guy MAY have a valid reason for getting rid of them by any means. Some have also asked if he has hares mentioned on his FAC but does anyone have hares or game specifically mentioned under a .22 or .17? I dont..

 

 

Interesting debate, people are always very quick to criticise!

[Billy.]

At a hare? maybe not, or at least I wouldn't. But I do shoot out to very long ranges with my .243ai.

 

It seems that the first ones who condem long range shooting are the ones who know very little about it.

 

No one's condemning long range shooting. It's the shooting of an animal at great distances that people are condemning.

[Mr_Logic]

Right then... I was not aware of the OP's somewhat dodgy credentials. However, let's look at ballistics. Nobody has ever said which v-max we're talking about, so let's assume that it's the 87 grain. (since the predicted drop is 15.4 MOA, that tallies)

 

A fairly normal load for 243 will drive this at around 3200 fps, and it has a good BC of .400. This means that, at 700 yards, the velocity will be around 1700 fps, energy at 560 ft/lbs. That's more than enough for a hare, and velocity is such that the bullet is likely to expand well.

 

Whether the shot is humane depends on more than simply the range, because if the hare is presenting in a certain way, you end up with a shot which is likely to be a lethal hit or a clean miss. At the end of the day, chances are that bullet will be fatal instantly, if the damn thing hits at all.

 

If the shooter is practised in making long range shots, calling wind, dialling in, etc, then there is no way this is impossible. Certainly, if I was out in those conditions and I could get the right position, and I was comfortable with my rifle, then I'd take that shot.

 

Whether or not the OP did this is another matter, and I don't think we can prove it either way. It seems, given the highlighted information, that he's full of ****, but if it's true, then it stands in my opinion as a great shot. Taking a pot-shot with a rifle at that range is not sensible or particularly humane, but an aimed shot from a well-setup rifle is another matter, and those who argue long range shooting is inhumane would do well to remember that, and also the old shooting adage that is - just because YOU can't make a shot doesn't mean SOMEONE ELSE can't.