Loadbase 3.0 and Exbal

Discussion in 'Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics' started by bigngreen, Sep 4, 2010.

  1. bigngreen

    bigngreen Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    5,841
    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2008
    I have been a solid Loadbase supporter but I have shot with a few and read of a few extremely solid long range shooters and hunters that rely on and use Exbal, so I thought I would give it a try to see how it works this hunting season.

    I loaded Exbal on to a Dell Axim X51 and I put it on the CF card so I can run Loadbase on the main system and have ample room for updates. I set it up so I can tab between Loadbase and Exbal just by pushing a button. Going from one to the other is fast so it will make for a very good comparison!

    My initial impression is that Exbal is extremely easy to get up and running, I'm not a computer geek but I can usually struggle and fight with something long enough to figure it out and Loadbase takes just a little computer savy to get up and running.

    Exbals flow is a little broken up to me, in and out of screens and having to edit functions like output values in one screen to change in another. Loadbase has a good flow and the core ballistics tab contains sub tabs that you can move though and you can change the out put values very easily from the page your on.

    Exbal owns the speed department, it is fast to load pages and fast to adjust to new input values. Loadbase is slower for sure and I see how this was frustrating to Broz.

    I really dig the trajectory validation tool and is one of the main reasons I wanted Exbal. I also wanted to check out the ballistic reticle analysis tool.
    The Library on Loadbase and Exbal are both good and handy, it seems like Loadbase has more stuff and one very big advantage to Loadbase is the updates that come out when it is needed.

    Loadbase really has a ton of tools on it, now it has GPS capability if your set up with GPS on your PPC. Loadbase has a bunch of Analyzer functions and it has a very nice Logbook funtion.

    I like how simple Exbal is, all the extras and bells and whistles are not why I carry ballistics programs with me hunting and shooting. On target, cold bore hits in varying terrain and conditions are why I carry them, time will tell which one I can get better dopes from. gun)
     
  2. 300rum

    300rum Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    564
    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2006
    Exball is really easy to use.

    You do not have to exit and enter on new meniu all the time.
    The only info what you have to change after you setup the load, are FIELD CONDITION - TARGET ENGAGEMENT

    Just Click on FIELD COND (imput all the info) and click NEXT (will jump you right on Target engagement.
    nEXT PRESS cALCULATE.

    Just pay little more time with exball and you will noticed the simplicity.
     

  3. Mikecr

    Mikecr Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,269
    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2003
    I have both and a bunch of others, and I completely agree that the field versions need to be stick figure simple and fast. Just the meat and potatos please!

    I used Exbal in the field for years in a PPC, and even it was a bit cumbersome. I went with a custom spreadsheet for awhile which was perfect, but batteries where always an issue with a PPC. So then I settled on field click cards. This has worked good for my ranges. After working with LB for a year or so on a laptop, and reviewing field screens, I'm not even gonna attempt to actually use it in the field. It's just beyond pratical IMO. I know they're always adding features. It's alright I guess.

    I've picked up Moball for next season.
    Battery life in MONTHS.. Absolutely no 'extra' screens or features to muddle things up. Just exactly what's needed for inputs and a single solution for me to dial in & hold-off. No stupid drop tables with TOF, and energy, and a bunch of other useless in the field. Just MOA of adjustment.

    I risk alot of crap here cause I know this forum rallies to LB. And LB's great, well worth the money.
    Just not what I'd carry in the field.
     
  4. Broz

    Broz Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    8,637
    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2007
    You guys are describing what I feel with way more tact than I could. But this is exactly how I feel. LB is great to use at the desk, but not necessary and to slow for in the field. And the in field stuff is all I really care about.

    So,,,,, guess I am not so alone after all. Kinda gives me a warm fuzzy feeling...:D:D.

    Bottom line... use what works well for ya.

    Jeff...gun)gun)
     
  5. bigngreen

    bigngreen Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    5,841
    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2008
    I'll get it into the field soon hopefully, bow season is on so we'll see :D So far just comparing it to trajectories that I have validated and know are good in Loadbase, using the same data Exbal has been about 3/4 MOA low. But, I've been shooting with LB so I know what it likes for accurate trajectories so I feel I just need to get some range time and shoot a few hundred rounds to get a feeling for what Exbal is looking for.

    The speed at which I get a solution to me is only nice while sitting at home, in the field I don't care how fast I get the solution just as long as it is a good one. I take a lot of time when taking a LR shot, I sit and watch the game for half hour or more so more than likely if I were to need a solution so fast that it would make a difference then I won't shoot that rushed.

    I didn't start this thread to pile on one program or the other more just to look at some of the differences and some weak or strong points between the two and to learn how they both work, mostly out of respect for some good shooters that I have seen and shot with.

    I actually hope that I get to know both programs equally well so that I can use both, I don't mind redundancy at all as it helps catch mistakes I've made with an input.
    Loadbase or Exbal or any other ballistics program is not a replacement for rounds down range but they sure can be a good tool!!!gun)
     
  6. bigngreen

    bigngreen Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    5,841
    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2008
    What version are you using, when I change field conditions then I have to hit "update" then it goes back to the front page then I have to chose "target engagement" fill that in hit "update" and then it goes back to the front page then I get to hit "calculate" to get to the solution.

    One thing I really like is to have wind values in time value not degrees, plus for Exbal.
    One thing that I dislike but really like in LB is the wind value is adjustable from the solution page, it seems in Exbal I have to back out and change the wind value in the target page then update which takes me to home then calculate again.
    I see no speed value in Exbal in this case because you have to go through 4 screen changes to get the data changed but LB I just punch it up and tap the range box and it recalculates no screen changes.
     
  7. Broz

    Broz Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    8,637
    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2007
    BnG, if you know it is running 3/4 moa low, why not just do a tragectory validation on your exbal? Then start comparing them. Might be good practice to see the traj val work.

    Just a thought.

    Jeff
     
  8. bigngreen

    bigngreen Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    5,841
    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2008
    Exactly what I did, just gotta test it. In my mind the trajectory validation is the one tool that Exbal has that I really was wanting to take advantage of. I have a perfect test rifle, dad shoots a 300 WBY that has a trajectory malfunction and I want to see if Exbal can get it on target!:D

    I only got the PPC version so it is a little tedious checking trajectories but I have been playing all after noon with it! I'm going to need a larger battery :D
     
  9. 300rum

    300rum Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    564
    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2006
    I'm using the PDA version not the windows.
     
  10. Eaglet

    Eaglet Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,779
    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2005
    To all,

    I had my son shooting today at 1360 yards. We had fun. Elevation come-ups were pretty much right on. Using LoadBase that's not a big thing.

    I was shooting at a Latitude of 39° and an Azimuth was 220°
    I turned on "Spin Drift" and "Coriolis" and the adjustment was 0.5 MOA more than what Exbal predicts... Had we used Exbal prediction on a deer it'd been a miss.

    Exbal is really doing pretty good considering:

    1) you have to use G1 for your BC which according to Bryan Litz it's got a variation of 0.137 in BC in his testings (SMK 300 gr.) and on top of that not forgetting the fact that G1 is velocity dependent.

    2) Can not use G7 for BC which is not velocity dependent and the variation in BC was only 0.024. Quite a difference. Gives you an excellent reason to use a ballistic program that would allow the user to use G7 drag BC's.

    3) No practical way to use Coriolis and Spin Drift.

    4) your trajectory validation is only good for the distance you validate it for. It will not do no magic for you... Don't believe it? Go and shoot at different distances... You'll find out you'll be doing a lot of trajectory validations which means it will only be good for the distance validated and it's surroundings.

    I'm glad you boys are still playing with it. One of these days it'll dawn on to you!

    The only reason I participate in this kind of activities is because I want to help others to find the better products without the head aches. Not because I enjoy taking sides with some and destroy others, I just merely love helping those that would want to be helped.

    LoadBase is a easy as you want it to be and as complicated as you want it to be.

    Being a minister for over 25 years I have gotten to know a lot about people, many once their mind is made up nothing will change it. It's like a naked woman in the middle of the street, at day time, and you go out with a blanket to cover her with, and she gets upset and says to you "I'm not naked you fool, get away from me".

    I was going to do it, but I don't believe it's worth it, I was going to show how much easier LoadBase from one screen you can do so much more than most others programs I know. That's simplicity!!!

    Sooner or later it'll dawn on you. :) :) :)
     
    Last edited: Sep 5, 2010
  11. Broz

    Broz Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    8,637
    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2007
    Hey BnG, since this is a comparison thread. Maybe this would be a good test?? You have several sets of field data that you have proofed, so, run a trajectory validation at 800 yards on exbal to get it on with a proven dial up at this range. Then, run a series of other field conditions and distances to see how both LB and Exbal measure up to what it actually took for that shot to be on. Just do your best to estimate or round up or down with the LB prgram as it will be giving you come ups like 20.3 or 20.6 moa. and we know both Exbal and the scope are in .25 moa. Go ahead and run the coriolis and spin drift on LB. This test is mainly to compare dial ups, as many long range shooters realize the spin drift and coriolis affects on windage is almost impossible to test for positive. When you factor in the error factor of the combine package of the rifle, shooter and ammo along with the wind, many seasoned LR shooters believe it becomes irrelevant, or is smaller than the capability of the rifle, shooter and ammo.

    I have pages and pages of data, actual shots fired from 500 yards to one mile. I have already done this test but would like to see what your results are as I truely feel you remain unbiased.

    Jeff
     
    Last edited: Sep 5, 2010
  12. Mikecr

    Mikecr Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,269
    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2003
    My version of Exbal is atleast a 'classic', and possibly an antique by now...
    But it appears the later versions do include coriolis and spindrift(in PPC ersion). I thought by now they would have G7 BC input. Doesn't seem so though.

    Eaglet, I think you slightly misrepresent ballistic software's lookup of drag coefficients to mach#.
    Neither G1, nor G7 drag curves actually match our bullets, and so they both vary by velocity.
    The variance is smaller across a wide band with G7 because our bullet's actual drag coefficients are closer to G7 than G1.
    But not matching..
    With retard rate adjustments afforded by LB and Pejsa, a custom/internal drag curve can be built that is even better than G7.
    Anyway, you're right about G7 producing better results across a full range of distances, and why that is so. I applaud Pejsa's approach to 'fixing' G1 BC disparities, and glad it's built into LB. Of course, we should also recognize the resultful efforts of Bryan Litz contributing to wider-spread implementation of G7, coriolis, and spindrift.

    Field ballistic solutions are advancing daily now. It's fantastic.
    I see us eeking toward standards we'll soon be so much better with.
     
  13. bigngreen

    bigngreen Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    5,841
    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2008
    Eaglet,

    I have been playing with both and I was thinking about the how each program deals with the G1 BC, I was floating it around in my brain that I needed to have multiple BC's to get Exbal to the same POI as LB with all other data the same. It is clear that both programs deal with it differently!

    I'll play with the Spin drift and Coriolis later but for now I want to learn what it take to get everyone on the same elevation POI, I know it is possible.

    There are guys who can basically do a trajectory validation with Exbal and then go and be on target at insane distances so for some it seems to work.
    Look at Shawn Carlock, he's shooting and making excellent long range kills on game using Exbal, so there is something to it for sure.

    I'm not bailing on LB by any means but I'm thinking for some LB is not the tool for the job. I know that for me I find LB fairly easy but I know that my buddy that I'm building an RUM for will not function with LB but I think Exbal he will if we can manipulate it to be accurate.

    I gotta get of the computer and hit the range !!gun)
     
  14. bigngreen

    bigngreen Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    5,841
    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2008
    I think that I'll do this but I have to get a more consistent barrel on this one is changing to much right now because of being smoked, it is accurate with one bullet but the velocity is changing to much to do a good test that I would feel everything was equal.
    I'm headed out this morning and I will try to do a validation with Exbal and run it against the data I used in Townsend to shoot.

    I'm not really trying to do a LB vs Exbal more of trying to find the strengths of both and get to know both to an equal level so I can, without remorse, tell someone what I think based on what I have done.:cool: