Long Range Hunting Online Magazine


Go Back   Long Range Hunting Online Magazine > Hunting > Long Range Hunting & Shooting

Long Range Hunting & Shooting Nightforce Optics


Poll: To Compute or not to Compute
Poll Options
To Compute or not to Compute

Reply

To Compute or not to Compute

 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #8  
Old 04-23-2013, 08:14 AM
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 15
Re: To Compute or not to Compute

I'm hijacking my own post. If you use a BDC or similar type method for shots in the 600 to 800 yard range and a computer for more accurate solutions past this range would you classify the "when I need a computer" range as "now shooting long range" as one of your long range definitions? I certainly would.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 04-23-2013, 05:03 PM
JST JST is offline
Bronze Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 53
Re: To Compute or not to Compute

I just fire a spotter, then use Kentucky windage and elevation. Bwaaahhhaaa.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 04-24-2013, 12:27 AM
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Halfway between Lubbock and Dallas
Posts: 4,566
Re: To Compute or not to Compute

Quote:
Originally Posted by Subnormal View Post
I'm hijacking my own post. If you use a BDC or similar type method for shots in the 600 to 800 yard range and a computer for more accurate solutions past this range would you classify the "when I need a computer" range as "now shooting long range" as one of your long range definitions? I certainly would.
Anything past 600=LR. Anything past 1,000-1,200 and you're into very long range. Anything past that and your are most certainly into extremely long range and difficult shooting.

Not only do your human and calculation errors really add up quickly past 600, they go up by multiples from there to 1,200 and geometrically from there.

When bullets approach transonic speeds and then pass to subsonic the variables you can't account for really start to mount up.

If a guy has the budget, gear, and time there's no reason not to take advantage of the best gear you have when you get into the LR and beyond ranges.

Take advantage of every advantage you can because when you get that far out the odds of success really go down.
__________________
Without the First and Second Amendments the rest of The Constitution is Meaningless.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 04-24-2013, 12:57 AM
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: SW Colorado
Posts: 270
Re: To Compute or not to Compute

WildRose hit the nail on the head. When you get past about 600-700 lots of things can change the elevation needed to get a good clean shot. So the more precise everything is the better.

Mike
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 04-24-2013, 05:43 AM
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Northeast
Posts: 2,222
Re: To Compute or not to Compute

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigngreen View Post
I've gotten to the point I use a Ballistic Turret out to 800 yards or so then I start using Applied Ballistics on my phone, the turret is so fast an accurate it's scared me a couple times when I realized how fast you can put something on the ground, better know what you want to kill before going into auto pilot death mode.
Punching in the data for the longer shots doesn't take me but a few seconds, most of the time is spent studying the wind and terrain.
My approach, using a G7BR2 rangefinder. This eliminated multiple turrets/corrections for density, temperature, and angle adjustments. This extended my effective range to 1000+ yards without having to switch to my computer and other devices. Last year I used the same turret at three different locations of 350, 2400, and 5000 foot elevations with temperatures ranging from 20-75 degrees. Worked like a charm!
__________________

"Let us speak courteously, deal fairly, and keep ourselves armed and ready"-T. Roosevelt
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 04-24-2013, 08:16 AM
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Central MT
Posts: 645
Re: To Compute or not to Compute

Quote:
Originally Posted by Greyfox View Post
My approach, using a G7BR2 rangefinder. This eliminated multiple turrets/corrections for density, temperature, and angle adjustments. This extended my effective range to 1000+ yards without having to switch to my computer and other devices. Last year I used the same turret at three different locations of 350, 2400, and 5000 foot elevations with temperatures ranging from 20-75 degrees. Worked like a charm!
I've never had the opportunity to see a G7BR2 in action except on TV. Someday I hope to run into someone who has one. Doesn't the program in the rangefinder compute for air density and shooting angle and apply the correction to the turret or ballistics solution you have selected? If this is the case couldn't you set the program to use MOA or MIL corrections and achieve the same results therefore eliminating a ballistics turret with a set solution? I would assume unlike a set ballistics turret using a series of conditions to establish an air density equivalent with shoot to ranges you would need a few turrets to swap out for severe enough air density change? The G7BR2 seems handy but I just havenít convinced myself to look into one yet. I figured as long as I am using a computer for wind I may as well input the COS, range, and air density.
__________________
Shoot CONFIDENT, Shoot SMART, Shoot STRAIGHT
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 04-24-2013, 08:41 AM
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Townsend, Montana.
Posts: 7,734
Re: To Compute or not to Compute

The G7 , only computes in MOA, which is fine with me. So it and an MOA turret is a good set up. The two short comings of the G7 I found were the large beam divergence picking up reflective obstacles instead of the intended target, and the way it gives you a wind correction. I feel that for a long shot with any wind you need to spend a little bit of time to get an accurate wind correction out of it. This requires paging through wind speeds, and maybe splitting values to be accurate. This makes the use of this unit, not much if any faster at all than I can be with my program and a more precise rangefinder if there is wind involved, and there seems to always be some. For my method, Rv and ballistic program, I simply enter the wind and direction. My ballistic program also automatically includes spin drift in the solution so I don't have to remember to add or subtract that. The large beam issue and inaccurate reading can be dealt with in many situations if you know about it and practice to diminish the odds of this. Both of these issues , out to 1000 yards can be lessened if the user will actually go practice with the G7 unit and learn to guard against it. Past 1000 I found it's accuracy to fall off and my ballistic program to be much more accurate. This also was found to be true by others that tested the G7-BR2 for a review on here. I have even seen the guys at G7 have the issue with a possible mis-range when they had to dial up for the second shot on game past 1000. Don't take this wrong. It is a very handy piece of gear for many hunters / shooters to 1000 yards and that will cover more than not. But like any precision gear it will server you better if you get to know it and it's personal short comings.
__________________
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes


Current Poll
Spot & Stalk or Ambush For Western Deer?
MOSTLY - Spot & Stalk - 73.57%
1,002 Vote
MOSTLY - Ambush - 26.43%
360 Votes
Total Votes: 1,362
You may not vote on this poll.

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:16 AM.


Powered by vBulletin ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Management Powered by vBadvanced CMPS
All content ©2010-2014 Long Range Hunting, LLC