Gun Hub Forums banner

Another Shooting Challenge

2151 Views 14 Replies 5 Participants Last post by  SpecialEd
OK. So, I don't think that all of Cooper's ideas are handed down from on high but I like the hell out of this one. Anyone want to meet up at Whittington and give this a go?
Hmmmmm maybe I need another rifle.

This is from the current Cooper's Commentaries, V-12 #2:

"Do any of you marksmen think it possible for a man to place 20 shots in a
20-inch circle in 20 seconds at a 1,000 yards? I posed this question to
the range masters down at Camp Pendleton many years ago and was told that such a thing was not possible. During much of my life a four-minute mile was deemed to be impossible, to say nothing of motoring around on the surface of the moon.

"Obviously this rifle challenge is very, very hard. I
have tried it twice myself and conclude that while the task is not
impossible, it is nearly so.

"Therefore, I am undertaking the proposal of a
perpetual prize in the form of a grand gold cup or bowl to be awarded to
anyone who can bring off this stuntproperly supervised, of
course. Administration of the effort will be complicated, but that we can
handle. I hope to avoid commercialization, but where there is a will there
is a wayand money in sufficient quantities can provide the will."

1 - 15 of 15 Posts
it's a silly waste of time and money

cause neither men nor animals are going to be holding still for the second shot at them, much less for 18 more.
Who said it had anything to do with reality?

Under those criteria Bullseye is a silly waste of time and money too.

yes, Bullseye IS a waste of time and money.

so is nearly all of IPSC and most of IDPA, for that matter.
"cause neither men nor animals are going to be holding still for the second shot at them, much less for 18 more. "

Depending on the rate of fire and atmospheric conditions it is likely that several would be on the way before the sound got there.

But it is an interesting challenge. At least in theory 1/2 minute rifles aren't hard to find but it would almost surely take a semi-automatic rifle such as an M-14 with adequate magazine capacity or perhaps one of the Model 700s modified to accept an M-14 magazine. It would also take incredibly good conditions and a squad of angels hovering near.
there's no way on earth any bolt

action is even going to come close, Charlie, that I can guarantee. At 1 shot per second, and a load that can reach 1000 yds, the bolt action, even in a bipod, is doing fantastically well to stay on a man's chest at 25 yds, much less 1000 yds. :) The sound will get there in less than 3 seconds, and if you have to swap over and hit another man, you aint doing that in 2 seconds, at 1000 yds. So all you'd be doing with shot #2, is throwing an "insurance" shot out there, in case the target moved, or some error, fluke of wind, etc, made the first shot miss.
I think you missed the point. Col. Cooper didn't talk about people or animals did he? Wasn't it a 20" target?

You're right about the sound, but the second bullet should arrive at about the same time.

Bipods are far from the most stable shooting positions for rapid fire... a good tight sling controls muzzle rise much better.
muzzle jump is a very small part of the equation

at 1000 yds, or with a bolt action and the combo is out of the question. If it aint about combat, why the tight time limit, hmm?
Perhaps, like breaking the 4 minute mile, just to see if it can be done...
You got it Walt...

I was thinking more along the lines of Hillary: "Because it's there!" But yes that is the point, there is no point, other than it poses a challenge... can it be done?

Remember, if it wasn't for us cynics and skepticsasking questions, we'd still be swinging in the treetops eating berries! :wink:

At Jeff's range, men are a 10" mark

until the range passes 300m, then suddenly men (or deer) are a 20" mark. He uses 2" thick steel disks, and the fact that a 223 wont move them enough (at 400m+) to indicate a hit is viewed as a proper reason to eschew the 223 as a fighting round! Well, men AINt 20" marks, and men do indicate when they've been solidly hit with a rifle bullet, most of the time. They are rendered unable to hit you (at 400 yds) because you at most offer a 10" circle as a target (because you are head on to them, and prone). Most of the time, you will be nothing more than a bobbing head (around cover) too.

I helped Jeff design the IPSC target, and his rational for the 10" circle of the A zone was two fold. A man is either a 12" wide frontal target, or an 8" wide sideways mark, so the 10" circle was an average, and because a head on prone man offers a 10" circle as a target, for the (not yet formulated) IPSC rifle matches Jeff foresaw already (in 1976)
I guess we know who not to invite. Personally I think the journey is the fun part...not so much the destination.
Since when does a shooting sport have to be about something anyway? Can't 21st century shooters have fun anymore? Frankly, the idea of attaching meaning to everything is beginning to bore the hell out of me.
Imagine if every time you had sex you felt like you had to accomplish replication, that is just exactly as asinine as saying:
Doing that would be a waste of time and money...and besides what's the point, no 10" deer is going to stand still for 19 more shots.
Have fun y'all
Out here
While I agree that it has no practical application, it is indeed a good challenge. Remember Sir Edmund Hillary? Why did he climb Mt. Everest? "Because it is there."

I'd love to go, but my summer schedule is going to be too full, and besides, I don't have the rifle to do it with, and even if I did, I'd be lucky to get one shot on even if I had twenty MINUTES to do it. Bring it in to 200 yds and I'd do pretty fair. :oops:

Actually, I'm a bit surprised at what I can do with my Winchester Trapper in .45 Colt at 200 yds.; about 70% A Zones on a standard IPSC target, firing at a rate of approximately one shot per 2 seconds. That's using the standard front sight but with a Williams receiver sight with the apperture removed making a "mini ghost ring" sight.
sex and shooting have nothing in common

but it's typical of men to think so. Sex is an affirmation of how you feel about yourself. Shooting, just to make noise, is a childish wish to be "noticed".
Re: sex and shooting have nothing in common

jumpy said:
but it's typical of men to think so. Sex is an affirmation of how you feel about yourself. Shooting, just to make noise, is a childish wish to be "noticed".
Maybe if you slowed down in stead of concentrating on speed you wouldn't miss the point so often!

1 - 15 of 15 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.