Some Help Here - Shoot or Pass Pics

[cnelk]

OK,
We have a couple threads that show two different animals - one elk / one deer - and if we will shoot or pass.
I see that some will pass and some will shoot, based upon their own comfort level or past experiences.

Help me understand the \'kill zone\' size difference and \'risk of shot\' difference between the two pics below.
If the kill zone and risk of shot is similar, then shouldnt it just boil down to comfort level of making the shot?

Maybe some are more comfortable shooting deer and some are more comfortable shooting elk?

Are we over-thinking some of this?

 

[iccyman001]

I\'m in a doctors office and I\'ll post better zones when I get home, but from the get go we are looking at quartering away shots verse quartering to.

Quartering away and broadside shots are the only shots I am taking because I know the shot placements. It\'s much of a bigger area to hit verse the quartering to where you may be battling a front shoulder.

Angles obviously play a role on this depending on how much they are quartered for either situation.

The deer for me is a kill shot and the elk I am waiting.

I can explain better when I get home.

 

[otcWill]

On the first shot I see a mostly, if not totally, blocked kill zone. I see the heart is completely blocked by bone. I don\'t see a spot behind the shoulder to shoot both lungs. Like some have pointed out, I\'m just not \"sure\" the vitals can be hit here. I suspect they can. I can shoot the nuts off a mouse from this range but I\'m unsure of where to aim on this and so I\'m passing. I\'m seeing cnelk\'s blue circle in the other post as one lung and liver. Yes, probably deadly but I want both lungs or the heart and I want to be absolutely sure of a clean kill before I release.

On the deer, I have a clear shot at the heart. Thats where I\'m shooting. If I hit both lungs on the way, great, but its the heart I\'m aiming at.

 

[iccyman001]

Ultimately we all know we are shooting for a double lung or a heart shot.
I don\'t know anyone who shoots for one lung.

So with a quartering to shot you are really closing down that opportunity to hit both because of the shoulder.

On the opposite side, quartering away you have nothing stopping it. You\'re able to take both lungs, heart, the spaghetti junction, etc.

if that deer was quartering away a little bit more then it would be a no go, but I can take out all sorts of goodies with a shot on that deer.


Edit: will beat me to it

 

[OldMan]

The reason I like double lung shots other than it\'s always a kill is it\'s a big target. The bigger the kill zone the better chance of hitting it. When you squeeze that kill zone down real small by odd angles I consider it a chancy shot that I prefer to not take. I always try and put all the odds in my favor. A double lung shot from the side has the biggest odds, so i\'ve committed to just those shots.

There\'s always another elk/deer to shoot at.

 

[cnelk]

Here is a helpful pic for those interested

 

[razorback]

My posts were from experience with WTs. I like to take out both lungs and either watch them drop or hear them drop. I just don\'t think I would get that result on the quartering to shot. This past fall my cousin shot a small 8 pointer quartering to him. He claimed to find no blood, I wasn\'t with him. I went back a couple of days later as I had put him on that spot and had a stand about a 1/4 mile from there. As we parted ways I found his buck about 150 yards from where he had shot it. It was a lethal shot but apparently left no blood. I\'ve also helped out some buddies who have made similar shots and never found the deer. That\'s why I prefer to take the broadside and quartering away shots. They may all be equally lethal but for me recovery has always been quick and easy if I get an arrow through both lungs

 

[JohnFitzgerald]

All the elk I killed have been from the ground, not an elevated position. So I pass on the elk because to me its a quartering towards shot. Maybe there\'s an good vital shot but I\'m not comfortable with it yet.

The deer, no shot! He\'s just quartering to far.

Like Pete stated, there\'s many more animals to shoot at. Just personal preference.

 

[WW]

Here is a helpful pic for those interested

I think that picture was originated by Bill Allard. But he forgot to mention those are the insides of a moose overlayed onto an elk photo. Sure don\'t leave much room for guts does it!

 

[OldMan]

I kept saying to myself....those lungs look awfully big.

Try this.

 

[bowhunter]

I would say both angles present a double lung shot. Both animals could be killed quickly IF you hit exactly where you needed to. The target is small for both. I would have to be close to take either. We all know things can and will happen to make your shot off a couple inches or so. That is enough to wound and lose the animal. You better be calm and shooting great from lots of practice or it would be best to wait for a broadside shot.

Even though the elk is bigger I would bet that most with a bow would mess up on it more than the deer at 20 yards.

 

[Wake26]

I think I would pass on both. For me the elk needs to take a couple more steps. The deer has a small opening to sneek an arrow into the vitals, couple inches to the front at that angle you miss everything. Inch or two to far back you are into the hind quarter. My $.02

 

[AaronJohnson]

Tough shot on the elk at that angle. I\'m not taking it on an elk or the deer.

I\'ll shoot the deer at that angle no problem. I killed a whitetail at least that hard of quartering away angle in 2011. Aimed at the last rib and it passed through near side lung, heart and out the chest.

 

[Deertick]

Cnelk\'s photo is deceiving, I think. Who doesn\'t enjoy BB\'s shot placement photos? But that one is one I\'ve always had trouble with.

If I recall correctly, it\'s a half-butchered animal. As such, the guts fall rear-ward, since the abdominal cavity is open. I mean, look how far back the liver is. That just isn\'t right. I think the only useful thing about that photo is the bone structure, and, to be fair, I think that was BB\'s point when creating it.

No, in vivo, all the soft parts of that elk are smaller, and pushed forward and to the side a bit. We\'re seeing only in 2-D. If you look at that photo, you\'d thinking shooting center-mass would be a sure-fire way to go.