Thread: The dinner plate challenge

Very Nice! That is the way the challenge was intended: one shot, cold barrel, and at a distance and with the method and the target size replicating a particular hunting situation, a dinner plate-sized target being for larger deer. It gives a high level of confidence to the hunter as to whether they would be likely to make a humane killing shot on a deer in a similar situation and conditions — or not.

Deviating from this approach, by taking steps of any kind that improve the likelihood of hitting the target in this contrived situation is fine, but how then can the effect of these can be quantified and allowed for in a future hunting situation where the same steps can't be applied prior to a single shot being taken?
For example sighting-in immediately prior to the challenge is fine — if the hunter always sights in immediately before taking a shot at game. If not then the typical hunting conditions aren't being replicated. The question as to whether the rifle shoots to the same point of aim with a recently fouled barrel as opposed to one that was last shot some time ago is not being addressed, along with the rifle's ability to hold zero after being dragged through the bush for several hours etc... there are a number of variables that can change with time since the last zeroing. The same applies to shots being taken at targets progressively further away before taking this challenge at the longest distance, just like a deer at 600 metres will wait for a hunter to first confirm their come-ups and windage at 200m and 400m to factor out the effect of those particular conditions. Again these prior shots are taking out a lot of variables that the challenge was intended to be including as part of an assessment that as closely as possible replicates a hunting situation.