# To shoot 300 yards



## DallanC

Just saying, 240gr XTP @1850fps (my favorite hunting load):

100 yard zero: Drop at 300 yards is -46.56 inches
150 yard zero: Drop at 300 yards is -37.43 inches
300 yard zero: height above LOS at 175 Yards is +18.69 inches

The average Joe thinking he is going to suddenly start tipping deer over at +300 yards is sadly mistaken.


-DallanC


----------



## Bo0YaA

Exactly!! Thank you!


----------



## Critter

You mean that just because I put a 3x9 scope onto my ML that I can't expect to kill deer and elk at 600 yards like I do with my centerfire? 

I can't wait until next years ML season. You are going to see hunters out there with target turrets where they can dial in the bullet drop and expect to be the great white hunter while they are shooting at deer and elk over 300 yards away. 

It is a sad day for muzzle loader hunters but I plan on putting a nice scope on my inline and take advantage of the new regs. But then I know what a muzzle loader can and can not do at ranges. A deer or elk isn't made out of paper.


----------



## Dahlmer

Please don't try and prove your point with actual facts and data Dallan! :shock: I would much rather rely on my firmly held beliefs and bias.

Don't stop there though, please show the impact of wind on that load. At 300 yards and a 15-20 mph cross wind, you might just shoot into the wrong canyon. Of course I'm using hyperbole there, but only a little bit.


----------



## utahgolf




----------



## archerben

240gr XTP @ 2130fps (my favorite hunting load)

150 yard zero: Drop at 300 yards is 28.0" = 9.3 moa.

300 yard shot + dial turret to 9.25 moa + prone + bipod = slam dunk easy shot = dead deer


----------



## wyogoob

utahgolf said:


>


My grandson shot his first antelope with that firearm this fall; 175 yards, bang flop.

.


----------



## wyogoob

Long distance shooting with a muzzy, or handgun, or shotgun is complicated. I recommend a guy use outdoor skills and try to get closer than 300 yards.

.


----------



## utahgolf

archerben said:


> 240gr XTP @ 2130fps (my favorite hunting load)
> 
> 150 yard zero: Drop at 300 yards is 28.0" = 9.3 moa.
> 
> 300 yard shot + dial turret to 9.25 moa + prone + bipod = slam dunk easy shot = dead deer


and that all plays out while I'm quietly working my way across the canyon to get a closer shot, only to hear a shot from 200 yards behind me. I better start wearing my orange. Circus gates have opened. I bet we see a lot of ML sold and some harder to draw tags. Thank you WB for listening to the racs.


----------



## RandomElk16

If you don't think guys will buy this to capitalize on LE ML hunts, I believe you are wrong.

Not to mention, there are much more affordable custom ML. You can build them for $1000. I have seen some wicked ML shoot 200 grains.

And the average guy can buy an Encore or Triumph and shoot 300. He can even get a $5 ballistic calculator on his phone. Not to mention how many people are comfortable with hold over.

Not saying it is the end all... But I am saying you will see the amount of 200+ yard KILLS, not shots, more than double. GS isn't the big impact here, LE is.

*The scary thing* is the guy wearing camo with no scope that loves the thrill and chase of getting within 50, now dealing with a cross canyon shot of 250+ coming his way. So if your data is saying these shots will be big misses, they can also be lethal.... to other hunters. That has been my primary fear of this. No orange required.


----------



## DallanC

archerben said:


> 240gr XTP @ 2130fps (my favorite hunting load)
> 
> 150 yard zero: Drop at 300 yards is 28.0" = 9.3 moa.
> 
> 300 yard shot + dial turret to 9.25 moa + prone + bipod = slam dunk easy shot = dead deer


The fact you understand that means you are not the "average joe". Anybody that understands the above could be doing the same thing with a 1x or Vernier sight already.

-DallanC


----------



## RandomElk16

DallanC said:


> The fact you understand that means you are not the "average joe". Anybody that understands the above could be doing the same thing with a 1x or Vernier sight already.
> 
> -DallanC


There are literally free programs all over the internet and apps for your phone for this. It doesn't take much.


----------



## sagebrush

RandomElk16 said:


> *The scary thing* is the guy wearing camo with no scope that loves the thrill and chase of getting within 50, now dealing with a cross canyon shot of 250+ coming his way. So if your data is saying these shots will be big misses, they can also be lethal.... to other hunters. That has been my primary fear of this. No orange required.


the same goes with rifle hunt, so i guess you better stay home if your so scared.

dosent that gunwerks muzzle loader use smokeless powder


----------



## LostLouisianian

I can't wait to get me a cannon muzzie and 24X mil dot scope and shoot them buggers out at 1,000 yards.. ;-)


----------



## DallanC

RandomElk16 said:


> There are literally free programs all over the internet and apps for your phone for this. It doesn't take much.


Yes, and I'm the author of one of the most popular softwares out there. I can tell you flat out by the number of emails with questions I get weekly, alot of guys that even bother to get the software still don't understand ballistics, MOA and the effects of gravity on a trajectory.

-DallanC


----------



## LostLouisianian

DallanC said:


> Yes, and I'm the author of one of the most popular softwares out there. I can tell you flat out by the number of emails with questions I get weekly, alot of guys that even bother to get the software still don't understand ballistics, MOA and the effects of gravity on a trajectory.
> 
> -DallanC


I know most people don't understand ballistics worth a hoot. I can't tell you the questions I get from friends that are hunters and are pretty clueless. However that is the way it is. I love it when I start talking about mil-dots to people who supposedly know what they are doing and their eyes glass over...I try to stay with folks that reload because they tend to understand more of what a rifle or bullet is capable of doing. I have a few friends that I would honestly be very concerned about going big game hunting with.


----------



## DallanC

LOL... and we all know or have seen people at the range with center fire rifles that you know darn well couldnt hit a deer at 200 yards.


-DallanC


----------



## Dahlmer

Holdover is hardly the issue. If that were all we had to worry about then I agree with a little time on the range and a ballistic calculator guys could become very proficient out to 300 yards. The problem is horizontal correction, not vertical. Muzzleloaders perform nothing like modern rifles in this regard. 

At 300 yards, a 290 grain Barnes Spitfire (one of the best BC's available in MZ bullets) shot at 2000 f/s moves 22.8" in a 10 mph crosswind, 34.3" at 15 mph and 45.7" at 20 mph. How many guys can accurately dope the wind and make the necessary calculations for that shot? How many even realize they need to?

How many guys will take the time to build a load that will provide consistent groups at 200 yards, let alone 300? How many will chrono their shots so that these calculations have any meaning at all anyway? How many will then test that load against their calculations to ensure that they match? They don't currently do it for their rifles, why would they start now with their muzzleloader? The marketing says its a 300 yard gun...that's all I need to know. Right? All I need to do is throw some pellets down the barrel and use whatever bullet the guy behind the counter suggested and I'm money. Right?

The fact is...if you're opposed to using a scope, you can still hunt the way you like. There aren't that many muzzleloader tags, you're not likely to have too many issues with other hunters that didn't already exist. 

General season success ratios are only slightly better for rifles than they are for muzzleloaders, even if they rose to the same level as rifles it would be statistically insignificant. The spread is wider on LE hunts, but when success ratios are north of 70%, we're probably looking at the wrong issue anyway. Besides, I doubt we see a huge jump as result of the change in regulations...all of the others disadvantages of using a muzzleloader still exist.


----------



## LostLouisianian

Think of it this way, they'll take longer shots which means they miss and rarely hit the target and that means that they'll actually kill fewer deer. When you view it that way then it seems to be a good idea.


----------



## Packout

More guys know how to shoot farther than some are giving credit for. If a guy that was limited to 150 is now shooting at 200+ then he increased his range by 30%. That is a big deal in hunting. That creates a different hunt than what we have experienced in the past.

Success rates might not change much, but the success of killing the better animals will surely increase. 

In the end, it seems funny that some admit they have never shot longer-range (300+) with an ML, but they scoff at the guys who have. I have shot long range to 400 yards. Yep, the drop is measured in feet. But an 18 power scope makes it a possibility. I'd never shoot at an animal that far away, but many guys will. 

Obviously each side has its position on the subject, but that does not matter now. The cat is out of the bag. I imagine I'll stick with my open-sight, roundball gun and compete with masses of magnifying scopes. Or maybe I'll pull out the scoped ML......


----------



## RandomElk16

sagebrush said:


> the same goes with rifle hunt, so i guess you better stay home if your so scared.
> 
> dosent that gunwerks muzzle loader use smokeless powder


You are required to wear orange. One of the key differences I would say between PRIMITIVE hunts and Any Weapon. Ya know, the whole get close like primitive times part of them.


----------



## utahgolf

you guys are kidding yourselves. A 200 yard shot will be fairly easy now. I could take an average joe who's sighted in at 100 yards and with these modern scopes and a couple click adjustments and they will have no problem dropping deer at 200 yards. Funny how now we have pushed the bar from 200 yards to now saying that 300 yard shots aren't likely and average joes will struggle at that range, what happened to the 200 yard argument? I guess we're all in agreement that it is fairly easy now. Pretty soon we'll talk about how 400 yards is the tough shot and not many guys will take that sorta shot.


----------



## RandomElk16

Packout said:


> More guys know how to shoot farther than some are giving credit for. If a guy that was limited to 150 is now shooting at 200+ then he increased his range by 30%. That is a big deal in hunting. That creates a different hunt than what we have experienced in the past.
> 
> Success rates might not change much, but the success of killing the better animals will surely increase.
> 
> In the end, it seems funny that some admit they have never shot longer-range (300+) with an ML, but they scoff at the guys who have. I have shot long range to 400 yards. Yep, the drop is measured in feet. But an 18 power scope makes it a possibility. I'd never shoot at an animal that far away, but many guys will.
> 
> Obviously each side has its position on the subject, but that does not matter now. The cat is out of the bag. I imagine I'll stick with my open-sight, roundball gun and compete with masses of magnifying scopes. Or maybe I'll pull out the scoped ML......


Everyone is arguing about ballistic software and vertical vs horizontal, blah blah.

FACT is more people will try long shots. If horizontal is the issue, they have a higher chance of hitting a closer hunter. If vertical is the issue, they have a chance of hitting a closer hunter. Not sure why guys argue with common sense.

I understand many people aren't proficient with ballistic software, doesn't mean many don't get the hang of it or attempt it. You gonna tell me we had the same amount of LR hunters today as 20 years ago? Total people or even percent of total hunters?

Many of you are missing the point of primitive. I will stand by the fact that more people will successfully shoot further, and that more people will ATTEMPT to shoot further with this new rule. What the outcome of those two things is, that is up for debate. I can and will shoot further with a multi powered scope than a 1x or reddot- on any weapon. Weather it is an increase of 20%-150%... or even 500%... it isn't really debatable.


----------



## RandomElk16

utahgolf said:


> you guys are kidding yourselves. A 200 yard shot will be fairly easy now. I could take an average joe who's sighted in at 100 yards and with these modern scopes and a couple click adjustments and they will have no problem dropping deer at 200 yards. Funny how now we have pushed the bar from 200 yards to now saying that 300 yard shots aren't likely and average joes will struggle at that range, what happened to the 200 yard argument? I guess we're all in agreement that it is fairly easy now. Pretty soon we'll talk about how 400 yards is the tough shot and not many guys will take that sorta shot.


Exactly. 2 outcomes, they either hit deer further (resulting in kill or injury) or they miss (resulting in hitting something other than a deer. Could be a bush, could be a hunter).

People will try and stretch their distance. No doubt.


----------



## Dahlmer

Packout, I'm not scoffing at those who have shot their ML long range. If I have given that impression, I apologize. I just find it hard to believe that their will suddenly be an significant increase of ML hunters taking the time to become proficient at those ranges. My experience is that very few are proficient much over 100 yards...if that.

I suspect initially there may be a influx of guys who will try an ML with a scope, but I also suspect most will quickly lose interest when they find it's not "just like shooting a single shot rifle." If this is true I hope to find a good bargain in a couple years. 

As for me, I'm debating on whether to go with a scope up to 9x or 12x. I'm leaning toward 9x and spending up for clarity and light gathering rather than magnification. Maybe, I'll find a load I can comfortably shoot out to 250-300 yards under optimal conditions. Likely, I'll still be limited to 200 yards or less. I'll just have much higher precision from 125-200.


----------



## utahgolf

Dahlmer said:


> Packout, I'm not scoffing at those who have shot their ML long range. If I have given that impression, I apologize. I just find it hard to believe that their will suddenly be an significant increase of ML hunters taking the time to become proficient at those ranges. My experience is that very few are proficient much over 100 yards...if that.
> 
> I suspect initially there may be a influx of guys who will try an ML with a scope, but I also suspect most will quickly lose interest when they find it's not "just like shooting a single shot rifle." If this is true I hope to find a good bargain in a couple years.
> 
> As for me, I'm debating on whether to go with a scope up to 9x or 12x. I'm leaning toward 9x and spending up for clarity and light gathering rather than magnification. Maybe, I'll find a load I can comfortably shoot out to 250-300 yards under optimal conditions. Likely, I'll still be limited to 200 yards or less. I'll just have much higher precision from 125-200.


you've gotta be kidding? people are going to looooooooooooooooove it. It will be a cake walk at 150-200 yards. Here's my grouping off of life jacket for a rest, shooting a 1x scope with not the best of trigger squeezes and I don't have the greatest eyes. That target looked a mile away. Do you know how flipping easy it will be now with a variable scope? I can't wait to post up groupings on the 200 yard range when I try it a variable scope. It won't be difficult at all. The main reason guys don't hunt the muzzy has been the optics. Keep kidding yourselves, hopefully I draw a tag every few years now. carry on.


----------



## Bo0YaA

Love the decision! not so much for me, because I doubt I will ever go back to muzzy hunting but my kids now get to use one for there season which I think is great personally.


----------



## Packout

Dahlmer said:


> As for me, I'm debating on whether to go with a scope up to 9x or 12x. I'm leaning toward 9x and spending up for clarity and light gathering rather than magnification. Maybe, I'll find a load I can comfortably shoot out to 250-300 yards under optimal conditions. Likely, I'll still be limited to 200 yards or less. I'll just have much higher precision from 125-200.


Well, I suspect those poor ML shooters at 100 yards will now be much better shooters at 100 yards when they have a 9x scope. And those guys who used to only shoot to 150 can now shoot to 250 easily.

And here-in lies the problem- higher precision from 125-200 yards. So now the misses become hits, which equals more dead/wounded deer at the closer ranges. Where guys once didn't shoot because it was 200 yards, now it is much more precise. And if it is precise at 200 yards, then what is it at 250 or 300? More dead/wounded deer at longer ranges.

I have no doubt that you will find a 250 yard load that performs in an acceptable manner for you to confidently shoot that far. I have and I am not a ballistics junkie. Anyone with a little time can work up loads that will allow them to consider 250+ yard shots with a good chance at hitting the target-- or in this case the animal.

It is water under the bridge. They will never go back now. I'll adjust to the situation and get on with life. It isn't worth losing sleep over. I still enjoy your posts Dahlmer-- even if I disagree. Just different ways of looking at situations.


----------



## Dahlmer

First...It's not a primitive hunt! It's never been a primitive hunt.

Second...There are not going to be more accidental shootings as a result of this. How many people are shot or killed in the western united states as a result of missing or not properly identifying their target? Almost none...and that includes Idaho where no orange is required and Wyoming where only a hat is required. Hundreds of thousands of hunters and almost no accidental shootings. Most accidents are a result of improperly handling a firearm, assuming it was on safety or unloaded. Here's an example:

http://www.ksl.com/?sid=36901034&ni...in-cache-county-hunting-accident&fm=home_page

Third, Utahgolf we will have to agree to disagree I guess. I assume you have been hunting with an ML for a long time. Your experience has come hard earned and with time. I really don't believe most rifle hunters who are happy to pick up factory ammo a few days before the hunt and maybe or maybe not shoot their rifle prior to the opener are going to put the time in the be able to shoot groups like yours.

I have followed other forums where guys regularly shoot scoped ML's and very few shoot groups like that at 100 yards, let alone 200. Granted most don't need to shoot much longer ranges, but their groups at 200 are generally much poorer than what you shot.

People will shoot further...no doubt and will likely be more successful from 100+. I'm not denying that. I just don't believe the doom and gloom being preached, primarily from guys that believe it is a primitive weapon hunt or that are angry because it might attract more attention to ML hunting.


----------



## Dahlmer

Packout said:


> Well, I suspect those poor ML shooters at 100 yards will now be much better shooters at 100 yards when they have a 9x scope. And those guys who used to only shoot to 150 can now shoot to 250 easily.
> 
> And here-in lies the problem- higher precision from 125-200 yards. So now the misses become hits, which equals more dead/wounded deer at the closer ranges. Where guys once didn't shoot because it was 200 yards, now it is much more precise. And if it is precise at 200 yards, then what is it at 250 or 300? More dead/wounded deer at longer ranges.
> 
> I have no doubt that you will find a 250 yard load that performs in an acceptable manner for you to confidently shoot that far. I have and I am not a ballistics junkie. Anyone with a little time can work up loads that will allow them to consider 250+ yard shots with a good chance at hitting the target-- or in this case the animal.
> 
> It is water under the bridge. They will never go back now. I'll adjust to the situation and get on with life. It isn't worth losing sleep over. I still enjoy your posts Dahlmer-- even if I disagree. Just different ways of looking at situations.


 Ditto...If I'm wrong on this I'll gladly come back and admit it. What I won't deny is this will change ML hunting and this is a significant technological advancement. I guess it just seems natural to me whereas others find it more disruptive.


----------



## DallanC

utahgolf said:


> Keep kidding yourselves, hopefully I draw a tag every few years now. carry on.


Soooooo you aren't taking advantage of the loop hole to be guaranteed a tag every year?

-DallanC


----------



## RandomElk16

I don't believe its doom and gloom or that lives are at risk.. I just think it will have consequences. And I can guarantee people will shoot further; who knows if that is good or bad. 

What upsets me is that the board didn't even discuss any potential consequences, talk about other states, talk about instituting orange. They had no basis for the decision or to be opposed. They joked about duct taping a spotting scope on top. They didn't say one thing about how this would effect the hunt, hunters, or wildlife. I guess as I try and become more involved as a hunter I would hope we made decisions based off of some effort and research. Not "Just Cuz"...

There was no sound basis for the decision. They didn't even refute why the rule was instituted in the first place.


----------



## LostLouisianian

Think of it this way....no hunter orange more targets. More deer hunters shot by muzzle loaders fewer muzzle loader hunters....just kidding folks...LOL


----------



## utahgolf

DallanC said:


> Soooooo you aren't taking advantage of the loop hole to be guaranteed a tag every year?
> 
> -DallanC


 I started late on the loophole thing, I did it last year. So I at least kept my point.


----------



## swbuckmaster

DallanC said:


> The fact you understand that means you are not the "average joe". Anybody that understands the above could be doing the same thing with a 1x or Vernier sight already.
> 
> -DallanC


Except with the current one power scope your dot covers the entire animal at those distances.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk


----------



## Springville Shooter

If we're going this far, why not allow the use of single shot rifles using black powder cartridges? While we're wiping out the deer, I'd like to shoot one with a Sharps without bothering with hunter orange.------SS


----------



## wyogoob

swbuckmaster said:


> Except with the current one power scope your dot covers the entire animal at those distances.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk


Is that bad? 

.


----------



## DallanC

Springville Shooter said:


> If we're going this far, why not allow the use of single shot rifles using black powder cartridges? While we're wiping out the deer, I'd like to shoot one with a Sharps without bothering with hunter orange.------SS


Or a breech load Ferguson rifle!!! Its all loose components, just loaded from the rear. Really cool and innovative rifle for the time period. Look it up if you aren't familiar with it.

-DallanC


----------



## Bo0YaA

2016 will be a good year to put in for LE archery tags lol Point creep doesn't even come close to describing whats going to happen to the LE muzzy hunts in 2016 and beyond. So much for drawing a Vernon muzzy tag with 8 points...never gonna happen now.


----------



## DallanC

Another thing: Energy

In the OP, regardless of where you sight in, 240gr bullet drops below the 1000ft/lbs energy at 175 yards. With a 300gr bullet, it drops below 1000ft/lbs at 212 yards.

-DallanC


----------



## RandomElk16

DallanC said:


> Another thing: Energy
> 
> In the OP, regardless of where you sight in, 240gr bullet drops below the 1000ft/lbs energy at 175 yards. With a 300gr bullet, it drops below 1000ft/lbs at 212 yards.
> 
> -DallanC


Like you said.. the average joe won't know that, so he will still take the shot.


----------



## 35whelen

i liked the old reg because there was less competition to draw tags. hope it stays that way. oh well though. as long as they don't give out a lot more tags for muzzleloader hunt it will still be the same number in the field with me should i be lucky to draw. i have never put a scope on mine but I've see guys who had suspiciously large scopes on their muzzleloaders during the hunt.


----------



## 7mm Reloaded

DallanC said:


> Another thing: Energy
> 
> In the OP, regardless of where you sight in, 240gr bullet drops below the 1000ft/lbs energy at 175 yards. With a 300gr bullet, it drops below 1000ft/lbs at 212 yards.
> 
> -DallanC


 Can you or anyone tell me the energy of a .45 cal. 200 gr. SST sabot? These have 40 cal. bullets. All I know is 2 inches high at 100 ,4 inches low at 200. I have an old 45 cal. Black Diamond XR. curious? I don't have the ENERGY to look it up. :ranger:


----------



## RandomElk16

7MM RELOADED said:


> Can you or anyone tell me the energy of a .45 cal. 200 gr. SST sabot? These have 40 cal. bullets. All I know is 2 inches high at 100 ,4 inches low at 200. I have an old 45 cal. Black Diamond XR. curious? I don't have the ENERGY to look it up. :ranger:


Should be enough to shoot at animals out to 500 yards


----------



## 2full

Ya, I was right there to get a muzzle LE Elk tag. I have a couple of bull elk with a bow, and some with a rifle. Just need the Muzzle elk for my trifecta. Guess I'll just try with the open tag. -O,-

I know, I know, want some cheese with that whine..........


----------



## DallanC

FYI: A 200gr bullet isnt legal to hunt Elk in Utah.


-DallanC


----------



## Springville Shooter

I shoot my muzzy out to 500 yards for fun only.......at targets only. Because I can and have shot long range, the experience that I have gained in doing so compels me to keep my shots at big game inside 200 yards. My prismatic sight that met the old requirement does that quite nicely so I won't be rushing out to buy a new scope.

I do enjoy shooting at prairie dogs at 300+ yards and it does kill them cleanly when you hit them.------SS


----------



## 7mm Reloaded

DallanC said:


> FYI: A 200gr bullet isnt legal to hunt Elk in Utah.
> 
> -DallanC


 I was thinking deer , however you can use a 210 gr. or bigger NON sabot bullet for elk. it says in last years Regs. You can get 230 gr. also for the 45. thanks :usa2:


----------



## MuscleWhitefish

You could just get one of these babies and put it on your ML.






It only adds a heavy 2 lbs to the rifle.

You push the button after you set up your load and it shows you where to aim.

300 yards would be easy peasy if you got it set up correctly.


----------

