Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
Let's argue about BC's
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Jon A" data-source="post: 475612" data-attributes="member: 319"><p>The problem with that is you are likely creating multiple "wrongs" to make a "right." Giving false inputs to get the data to match your observations. That's great if you plan to be hunting on the very same range you collected that data. In the same weather. With the same scope. That chart you made is all that matters.</p><p></p><p>But when you make the chart at sea level but are going to be hunting at 9000 ft, your chart is now worthless. The same false inputs will not give you the same correct outputs with the change in conditions--you can't just change the elevation in the ballistics program and expect to be correct. You need to shoot at every range and build another chart. Expecting the computer to correctly compensate for an atmospheric change using the wrong velocity, the wrong BC or the wrong click value just because you fudged those numbers to give correct results in a different atmosphere is expecting too much. Your click values won't change with the atmosphere, neither will your velocity but the computer is using those fudges in its baseline to figure the new dope.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>The way to do it is to make sure you have accurate inputs. Use a good chronograph. Use a bullet with a fairly certain G7 BC (like one BL has tested). Actually measure the click value of your scope.</p><p></p><p>If you were talking 1500 yds, a mile, etc, then yes, any little thing makes such a big difference it's really hard to be dead nuts on your first shot. But 1000 yds is not nearly so hard. If you put in accurate inputs the results will be accurate. If they aren't, figuring out the real reason your actual dope doesn't match the prediction is what you should try to do. Once you figure that out and everything matches up, you're in a much better position than you were with experimental fudged data. Now when you change the elevation in the program, it can figure new solutions using accurate data and will give accurate results. Or when the actual velocity does change in colder weather, you can actually enter the real velocity and get correct results. You can even switch scopes and enter the new, measured, click value and expect to be on the money.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Jon A, post: 475612, member: 319"] The problem with that is you are likely creating multiple "wrongs" to make a "right." Giving false inputs to get the data to match your observations. That's great if you plan to be hunting on the very same range you collected that data. In the same weather. With the same scope. That chart you made is all that matters. But when you make the chart at sea level but are going to be hunting at 9000 ft, your chart is now worthless. The same false inputs will not give you the same correct outputs with the change in conditions--you can't just change the elevation in the ballistics program and expect to be correct. You need to shoot at every range and build another chart. Expecting the computer to correctly compensate for an atmospheric change using the wrong velocity, the wrong BC or the wrong click value just because you fudged those numbers to give correct results in a different atmosphere is expecting too much. Your click values won’t change with the atmosphere, neither will your velocity but the computer is using those fudges in its baseline to figure the new dope. The way to do it is to make sure you have accurate inputs. Use a good chronograph. Use a bullet with a fairly certain G7 BC (like one BL has tested). Actually measure the click value of your scope. If you were talking 1500 yds, a mile, etc, then yes, any little thing makes such a big difference it’s really hard to be dead nuts on your first shot. But 1000 yds is not nearly so hard. If you put in accurate inputs the results will be accurate. If they aren’t, figuring out the real reason your actual dope doesn’t match the prediction is what you should try to do. Once you figure that out and everything matches up, you’re in a much better position than you were with experimental fudged data. Now when you change the elevation in the program, it can figure new solutions using accurate data and will give accurate results. Or when the actual velocity does change in colder weather, you can actually enter the real velocity and get correct results. You can even switch scopes and enter the new, measured, click value and expect to be on the money. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
Let's argue about BC's
Top