Low light visibilty stinks!
09-09-2002, 11:31 PM
#61
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: HENDERSON KY USA
Posts: 6,634
RE: Low light visibilty stinks!
You may not judge it but you do have to compensate for it either by instinctive measures or by aiming your bow high or low.It still is a factor.Your groups are still affected by the distance.
By saying you have a 9" target is like saying you only need a 9" group at 30 yards to be an affective hunter.That will pretty well eliminate any other factor such as yardage mistakes.
By saying you have a 9" target is like saying you only need a 9" group at 30 yards to be an affective hunter.That will pretty well eliminate any other factor such as yardage mistakes.
09-10-2002, 06:23 AM
#62
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location:
Posts: 2,413
RE: Low light visibilty stinks!
<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote<font size=1 face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>By saying you have a 9" target is like saying you only need a 9" group at 30 yards to be an affective hunter.That will pretty well eliminate any other factor such as yardage mistakes.
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' size=2 id=quote>
No matter what the yardage, there is still a nine inch target. When I shoot 3D, I don't know the yardage and my goal is a hit in the kill zone on every target. It is not the same as saying you need a 9" group at a known yardage. It is saying you need a 9" group no matter the unknown yardage. Completely different comparison. A person who can hit a 9 inch group at an unknown yardage will have a smaller group at a known yardage.
If a person shoots a 30 target 3D and puts every shot with 4.5" of the center of the kill zone, that is very acceptable shooting in my opinion.
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' size=2 id=quote>
No matter what the yardage, there is still a nine inch target. When I shoot 3D, I don't know the yardage and my goal is a hit in the kill zone on every target. It is not the same as saying you need a 9" group at a known yardage. It is saying you need a 9" group no matter the unknown yardage. Completely different comparison. A person who can hit a 9 inch group at an unknown yardage will have a smaller group at a known yardage.
If a person shoots a 30 target 3D and puts every shot with 4.5" of the center of the kill zone, that is very acceptable shooting in my opinion.
09-10-2002, 06:45 AM
#63
Boone & Crockett
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Lehigh County PA USA
Posts: 12,157
RE: Low light visibilty stinks!
Oh Boy, a great debate thread like this and somehow I didn't have a chance to open it until this morning. 
My take on this is rather simple. Yes, shooting without a peep sight or sights in general does require us to train subonscious mental processes which might normally remain dormant and which do come in handy in unusual hunting situations but, to coin Flhunter's terminology, most people don't "marry" their bows. This gets back to the debate about how technology is "ruining" our sport and how a hunter isn't a hunter unless they go out and practice each and every day with their bow in order to be proficient at any given distance.
Technology has given us some advantages, most notably, the ability to not have to go out every day and practice. Is this a bad thing? No, it isn't. Any particular individual can go out and practice if they so desire, on a daily basis, but now we at least have a choice. Does it make us any less ethical because we don't practice as much...no, in my opinion it doesn't...Why? Because our equipment allows us to remain accurate and consistant from day to day without having the need to practice as much.
Now, you may ask why I brought this discussion into this. Well, it seemed to me that this thread was turn into another argument of technology versus past practice...except in this case the little ol' peep sight was to blame.
I have used one of those peeps that <BLOCKQUOTE id=quote<font size=1 face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>are tied in at three or four sides with string strands running through the shooter's field of view <hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' size=2 id=quote>. It is called a Shurz-a-Peep three way or four way. I have been using it for at least 6 or 7 years now and guess what....it has never cost me the opportunity of harvesting an animal.
As is my response in every one of these types of threads...."To each his own"....shoot what you like but don't try to tell me that it is any better or any worse than what I use.
Edited by - PABowhntr on 09/10/2002 07:50:04
My take on this is rather simple. Yes, shooting without a peep sight or sights in general does require us to train subonscious mental processes which might normally remain dormant and which do come in handy in unusual hunting situations but, to coin Flhunter's terminology, most people don't "marry" their bows. This gets back to the debate about how technology is "ruining" our sport and how a hunter isn't a hunter unless they go out and practice each and every day with their bow in order to be proficient at any given distance.
Technology has given us some advantages, most notably, the ability to not have to go out every day and practice. Is this a bad thing? No, it isn't. Any particular individual can go out and practice if they so desire, on a daily basis, but now we at least have a choice. Does it make us any less ethical because we don't practice as much...no, in my opinion it doesn't...Why? Because our equipment allows us to remain accurate and consistant from day to day without having the need to practice as much.
Now, you may ask why I brought this discussion into this. Well, it seemed to me that this thread was turn into another argument of technology versus past practice...except in this case the little ol' peep sight was to blame.
I have used one of those peeps that <BLOCKQUOTE id=quote<font size=1 face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>are tied in at three or four sides with string strands running through the shooter's field of view <hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' size=2 id=quote>. It is called a Shurz-a-Peep three way or four way. I have been using it for at least 6 or 7 years now and guess what....it has never cost me the opportunity of harvesting an animal.
As is my response in every one of these types of threads...."To each his own"....shoot what you like but don't try to tell me that it is any better or any worse than what I use.
Edited by - PABowhntr on 09/10/2002 07:50:04
09-10-2002, 06:50 AM
#64
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 9,175
RE: Low light visibilty stinks!
Certainly I know whether a deer is at 15, 25 or 35 yards, but I don't have to think 'He's 29.273 yards away and I have to hold this 30 yard pin exactly .237" low to hit that spot.' Takes too long, takes concentration away from where it should be, the deer. When the shot 'feels right' I dump the string. That's also the way I shoot 3D, as practice for hunting. Field archery, I use a hard gap system. Totally different.
One summer, I won 3D tournaments in 5 different classes; compound release, compound fingers, compound barebow, recurve and longbow. (Shooting my heavy logs against the speedy little pultruded knitting needle carbons, by the way.) Who else do you know that can say that? The only style I have never competed in is the open/freestyle unlimited classes. So, I've got a pretty good grasp of the various problems, limitations and advantages of MOST of the various rigs.
IMO, the longbow has fewer problems and limitations than any other setup. It is the perfect bowhunting tool for someone with the time and guts to learn how to use it, and if it weren't for my medical limitations, I'd still be hunting with a longbow, EXCLUSIVELY.
Accuracy... People saying you have to have your anchor within 1/64 th of an inch to shoot accurately makes it sound like you have to shoot consistent 1/2" groups at 30 yards to have a prayer of taking a deer. The way some folks have been going on about this stuff, one would begin thinking that only Olympic Gold Medalists should be hunting. Hunting is not target shooting... even though, IMO, most folks are trying to hunt with 3D target bows....
If you can hit a 9" circle, every time, UNDER HUNTING CONDITIONS, then yes, you can be an effective hunter. If you're talking about standing in front of a target butt, then I agree with you. What ever distance you can hit a 4" circle, MAX, every time, that is your maximum effective range.
But how the hell any of this post ties in to low light visibility is beyond me.
<img src=icon_smile_question.gif border=0 align=middle>
Edited by - Arthur P on 09/10/2002 07:54:36
One summer, I won 3D tournaments in 5 different classes; compound release, compound fingers, compound barebow, recurve and longbow. (Shooting my heavy logs against the speedy little pultruded knitting needle carbons, by the way.) Who else do you know that can say that? The only style I have never competed in is the open/freestyle unlimited classes. So, I've got a pretty good grasp of the various problems, limitations and advantages of MOST of the various rigs.
IMO, the longbow has fewer problems and limitations than any other setup. It is the perfect bowhunting tool for someone with the time and guts to learn how to use it, and if it weren't for my medical limitations, I'd still be hunting with a longbow, EXCLUSIVELY.
Accuracy... People saying you have to have your anchor within 1/64 th of an inch to shoot accurately makes it sound like you have to shoot consistent 1/2" groups at 30 yards to have a prayer of taking a deer. The way some folks have been going on about this stuff, one would begin thinking that only Olympic Gold Medalists should be hunting. Hunting is not target shooting... even though, IMO, most folks are trying to hunt with 3D target bows....
If you can hit a 9" circle, every time, UNDER HUNTING CONDITIONS, then yes, you can be an effective hunter. If you're talking about standing in front of a target butt, then I agree with you. What ever distance you can hit a 4" circle, MAX, every time, that is your maximum effective range.
But how the hell any of this post ties in to low light visibility is beyond me.
<img src=icon_smile_question.gif border=0 align=middle>
Edited by - Arthur P on 09/10/2002 07:54:36
09-10-2002, 07:04 AM
#65
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Virginia / West Virginia
Posts: 4,906
RE: Low light visibilty stinks!
<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote<font size=1 face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
But how the hell any of this post ties in to low light visibility is beyond me.
<img src=icon_smile_question.gif border=0 align=middle>
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' size=2 id=quote>
I was thinking the same thing Arthur. <img src=icon_smile_big.gif border=0 align=middle> LOL...good post though!
Like I said earlier...I shoot both eyes open, with a 3/16" peep, and have never had a low light problem...period. If it's too dark for me to be able to see, then it's too dark to be out there, and probably past legal shooting time in most places. My guess is that most folks having low light problems are shooting one eye closed.
PA...I agree, whatever works for the individual, go with it. Personally the peep helps me maintian my consistency.
But how the hell any of this post ties in to low light visibility is beyond me.
<img src=icon_smile_question.gif border=0 align=middle>
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' size=2 id=quote>
I was thinking the same thing Arthur. <img src=icon_smile_big.gif border=0 align=middle> LOL...good post though!
Like I said earlier...I shoot both eyes open, with a 3/16" peep, and have never had a low light problem...period. If it's too dark for me to be able to see, then it's too dark to be out there, and probably past legal shooting time in most places. My guess is that most folks having low light problems are shooting one eye closed.
PA...I agree, whatever works for the individual, go with it. Personally the peep helps me maintian my consistency.
09-10-2002, 07:31 AM
#66
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location:
Posts: 2,413
RE: Low light visibilty stinks!
<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote<font size=1 face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
Hunting is not target shooting... even though, IMO, most folks are trying to hunt with 3D target bows.... <hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' size=2 id=quote>
So true, but that's because 3D rewards score at any distance, and hunting is the object of getting close to your quarry.
<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=1 face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>But how the hell any of this post ties in to low light visibility is beyond me.<img src=icon_smile_question.gif border=0 align=middle><hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' size=2 id=quote>
I see the connection, vaguely. It's the debate, "Should I put accuarcy ahead of all else?" when hunting a deer vs., "should I put a priority on gear that will not fail me in any hunting situation and rely upon my skill to get close enough to be in my effective range?" Low-light shooting conditions are just one of those decisions where equipment choices make a difference. One crowd, wants to treat the deer as a target, and the other wants to have a chance no matter what the situation. Neither is completely wrong, but in my opinion, one is more effective than the other.
Hunting is not target shooting... even though, IMO, most folks are trying to hunt with 3D target bows.... <hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' size=2 id=quote>
So true, but that's because 3D rewards score at any distance, and hunting is the object of getting close to your quarry.
<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=1 face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>But how the hell any of this post ties in to low light visibility is beyond me.<img src=icon_smile_question.gif border=0 align=middle><hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' size=2 id=quote>
I see the connection, vaguely.
It's the debate, "Should I put accuarcy ahead of all else?" when hunting a deer vs., "should I put a priority on gear that will not fail me in any hunting situation and rely upon my skill to get close enough to be in my effective range?" Low-light shooting conditions are just one of those decisions where equipment choices make a difference. One crowd, wants to treat the deer as a target, and the other wants to have a chance no matter what the situation. Neither is completely wrong, but in my opinion, one is more effective than the other.
09-10-2002, 03:55 PM
#67
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: HENDERSON KY USA
Posts: 6,634
RE: Low light visibilty stinks!
The deer is a target that presents many more variables than a 3-d target.The consequences of a bad shot are more severe on the live animal than on the 3-d one.
It is true that the target on a live animal has a bigger effective kill shot than that of a 3-d target.The 1 thing to remember is the closer you get to the outside of the 9" diameter the better your tracking skills need to be.I guess what I don't like is settling for 6" groups at 30 and justifing it by saying I have a 9" target.You increase the odds of a bad hit on live animals when other factors come into play.If 6" is the best you can do at 30 under perfect conditions,then 20-25 yards should be your max yardage.IMO
Yes,I also agree that to each his own.I have been quite effective with a recurve in the past and have taken a quail in flight with one(luck).I also used to love to play bow golf with them and shooting fish is a blast.
You are right Arthur,we are getting a bit off topic but they relate in a small way.
It is true that the target on a live animal has a bigger effective kill shot than that of a 3-d target.The 1 thing to remember is the closer you get to the outside of the 9" diameter the better your tracking skills need to be.I guess what I don't like is settling for 6" groups at 30 and justifing it by saying I have a 9" target.You increase the odds of a bad hit on live animals when other factors come into play.If 6" is the best you can do at 30 under perfect conditions,then 20-25 yards should be your max yardage.IMO
Yes,I also agree that to each his own.I have been quite effective with a recurve in the past and have taken a quail in flight with one(luck).I also used to love to play bow golf with them and shooting fish is a blast.
You are right Arthur,we are getting a bit off topic but they relate in a small way.
09-10-2002, 07:07 PM
#68
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Oh USA
Posts: 1,584
RE: Low light visibilty stinks!
I don't feel I need a peep for hunting, or any shooting I do. Granted I may score better at targets with one, but my groups and accuracy are plenty good to hunt to 35 yds. 25 yds is my personal max, and it's a done deal from there. I feel the lack of a peep allows me to see much better, in any light. I think that we can all become proficient with our chosen setup. It just takes dedication and practice; be it peep, no peep, no sights. If you want the ultimate in visibility, in any light, lose the peep. I'm just not ready to lose the sights.
Phil.
Phil.
