I didnt see that one but Ive seen him shoot running coyotes.

110 yards is a "little" out of my comfort zone but if anybody can do it, Tim Wells can.

 

I didnt see that one but Ive seen him shoot running coyotes.

110 yards is a "little" out of my comfort zone but if anybody can do it, Tim Wells can.

Ever seen him shoot a dad gum dove outta the air!!?!?! I can hardly do it with a shotgun!

 

Ever seen him shoot a dad gum dove outta the air!!?!?! I can hardly do it with a shotgun!

Yep that's some Book Of Eli stuff right there !

 

He's one of the best in the world!

 

I have shot at 100 sevral times.....And while the range does not impress me that much.....The fact that he does it with no SIGHTS does bigtime!!!!!

GF

 

He is a killer for sure. His instinctive shooting is un-freakin-real !!

 

Reminds me of the old ben pearson videos. I disagree with taking shots like that but agree when the arrow does find its mark its impressive. When the arrow doesnt find its mark, thats a different outcome and by far the most likely at that range. Bottom line, its an unethical shot that shouldnt be taken. Heck, if every person in archery went around and took every hunnert yard shot we were presented, there would be deer runnin around with arrows hangin out all over em. THis guy may be G. Fred Asbell himself, or Paul Shaffer, but he darn sure aint gonna consistently make kill shots at that range. Period.

 

Uh duckln, do you happen to watch his show?? He is obviously very comfortable with his equipment and confidant in himself. Heck I seen him shoot a brown bear squat between the eyes at no telling how far, and if I'm not mistaking took a shot on a wolf close to100yrds.

 

A friend of my dad's used to work with Ben Pearson when they were in a circus act together (that's the story he told anyway). This gentleman has been dead for many years, but I remember when I was a kid watching him be able to hit a paper plate thrown in the air, then the fletchings would "catch" the plate and it would hit a target about 10-15 yds beyond....absolutely incredible.

He had a crazy game room with tons of animals he shot with a bow; including several geese and ducks. He probably had 20-30 different bows, many signed by Ben Pearson and given as gifts to him.

 

I didn't see it but I don't doubt it. His abilites are almost beyond comprehension!

 

Reminds me of the old ben pearson videos. I disagree with taking shots like that but agree when the arrow does find its mark its impressive. When the arrow doesnt find its mark, thats a different outcome and by far the most likely at that range. Bottom line, its an unethical shot that shouldnt be taken. Heck, if every person in archery went around and took every hunnert yard shot we were presented, there would be deer runnin around with arrows hangin out all over em. THis guy may be G. Fred Asbell himself, or Paul Shaffer, but he darn sure aint gonna consistently make kill shots at that range. Period.

That's the difference, Tim Wells isn't every person in archery, he's Tim Wells. He could probalby take 80 yard plus shots the rest of his life and have a better kill ratio than the average bow hunter.

 

I have shot at 100 sevral times.....And while the range does not impress me that much.....The fact that he does it with no SIGHTS does bigtime!!!!!

GF

Agree, with moder stuff and practice, 100 is doable for sure, but with no sights.....wow.

 

Reminds me of the old ben pearson videos. I disagree with taking shots like that but agree when the arrow does find its mark its impressive. When the arrow doesnt find its mark, thats a different outcome and by far the most likely at that range. Bottom line, its an unethical shot that shouldnt be taken. Heck, if every person in archery went around and took every hunnert yard shot we were presented, there would be deer runnin around with arrows hangin out all over em. THis guy may be G. Fred Asbell himself, or Paul Shaffer, but he darn sure aint gonna consistently make kill shots at that range. Period.

I'll take the beating with you... :hide: No doubt that is impressive that he can shoot that accurately at 100 yds, BUT ANIMALS MOVE! I don't care who you are or how good you can shoot an arrow, it takes time for the arrow to get there and that animal is more than capable of turning the best shot into a miss or terrible, non-lethal wound before the arrow hits its mark. I think it is a poor example to shoot that far at animals. Period.

If you take shots that far you clearly don't have much concern for injuring, and not recovering the animal. More power to him for being a good shot, but I disagree with shooting at animals that far away.

 

i'm sure he doesn't care what i think tho.... :fit:

But hey its a forum and its offseason... :shrug:

 

They can move enough to do the same things when shot at from up close as well so should no one shoot or what is THE acceptable distance?

 

:skeptical:

 

They can move enough to do the same things when shot at from up close as well so should no one shoot or what is THE acceptable distance?

Some of you guys really are just here to pick fights with people... There is obviously a pretty big difference in how long it takes an arrow to go 35 yds versus 110 yds. The more time in-between the release of the arrow and the impact, the greater the chance of the deer moving. This is the same reason why some people choose not to take walking or moving shots at deer. I'm not on here trying to tell people "THE" distance they should shoot. But if you don't care whether you injure an animal or successfully harvest it, then be my guest to take 200 yd shots with your bow.

Hey SA: Not sure if you've realized it yet... this is a hunting forum where guys get on here and discuss things and give opinions and feedback on things. You don't have to pick arguments with everyone or agree with everyone for that matter. Not every post is a personal attack against somebody. There are lots of folks that agree with me about taking that long of a shot at an animal with a bow. You just don't happen to be one of them. That's fine. I simply stated that I would rather not injure animals or take shots where there is a high risk of injuring animals because of factors out of my control (them moving). You can take 100 yd shots with your bow and kill you 500 animals a year and thats fine. It doesn't make you a BETTER or ETHICAL hunter. Me not taking those shots doesn't make me a BETTER hunter either.

I don't appreciate your attempts at picking an argument though... Guys like you probably cause other guys to just read and not post because they don't want to start an argument (accidentally) with someone such as yourself. Lighten up please...

 

But he gots a point

 

who does alpha?

 

Sa

 

If you guys really don't see a difference in how long it takes an arrow to go 35yds versus 110 yds, and the likelihood of the animal moving a significant amount more... not to mention how accuracy tends to go down when you discuss the difference in the two distances then I have nothing to say... I'll just agree to disagree :head:

 

I wish I had his job

 

If you guys really don't see a difference in how long it takes an arrow to go 35yds versus 110 yds, and the likelihood of the animal moving a significant amount more... not to mention how accuracy tends to go down when you discuss the difference in the two distances then I have nothing to say... I'll just agree to disagree :head:

Ever shot 110? Arrows lot quicker than you think

 

Ever shot 110? Arrows lot quicker than you think

you don't acknowledge the difference??? seriously??? I've shot 75-80.... i know at 20 yds you don't have to worry about a deer ducking your arrow like you may at 35 or 40... i can't believe ya'll pick to argue the other side of this coin... It's like you guys like to argue just to argue...

 

I wasn't picking a fight. You expressed an opinion and I did too. If anyone was picking a fight it was you calling someone unethical because they don't do something exactly like you do. My point was that ANY animal can take a step during the shot. The likelyhood goes up the longer the arrow is in flight but that also varies with how speed just like it does with yardage. You obviously had a strong opinion on this issue and are convinced that's it's unethical (period) I believe was the terminology you used. So if you have such a strong opinion on what is unethical, I just wanted to see what you considered ethical.