WWP2012
Well-Known Member
I should also correct the angle of the range. Come to find out it was only -2 degrees downslope.
Ballistics caculator help
- Thread starter WWP2012
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
Wow, if you aren't even sure of your zero distance, I wonder how accurately you know velocity, range to target, wind, and several other critical factors. How are you obtaining velocity? What chrono? How set up? How are you obtaining/measuring range? Rangefinder? Which finder? How is finder calibrated for laser point of aim? Actual tape measure to target? Are you assuming your shooting facility has correct posted ranges? how accurate were they measured? Maybe meters versus yards issue? All critical to make your DOPE not match actual impacts and thus screwing with your deviation troubleshooting. Garbage in; garbage out. Start at ground zero (pun intended) and work through all the details. only way to get accurate DOPE.
WWP2012
Well-Known Member
@Pro2A
I have a 100 yard test range and travel to the long range. With hand loading for 4 different rifles and several months of time elapsed. If I don't write it down it does not remembered. I kept the zero targets for each rifle and load. I didn't write down the zero on these targets.
So with my normal zero set at 200, I opted to skip it and start at 300. Those were my mistakes.
I have a 100 yard test range and travel to the long range. With hand loading for 4 different rifles and several months of time elapsed. If I don't write it down it does not remembered. I kept the zero targets for each rifle and load. I didn't write down the zero on these targets.
So with my normal zero set at 200, I opted to skip it and start at 300. Those were my mistakes.
Try the Shooter app from Kennedy group I've used it since I started long range shooting for years works great
Pro2A is correct in that you have to have a known starting point to work from. Without all the facts, you will never get good dope. Also, do your testing when the wind is not a factor, as it will affect your POI, elevation and windage.
Finally, BC is a fluid number. I modify it to dial in elevation at different distances so it matches actual results. Scope correction factor can also be used, but not as easily. I currently have a single BC that is good from 300 to 1250 (+/- a click), DEPENDING on weather and wind. Currently use "shooter" (Easy to work with).
Finally, BC is a fluid number. I modify it to dial in elevation at different distances so it matches actual results. Scope correction factor can also be used, but not as easily. I currently have a single BC that is good from 300 to 1250 (+/- a click), DEPENDING on weather and wind. Currently use "shooter" (Easy to work with).
User4302021
New Member
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2018
- Messages
- 0
actual: 2.5, 4.75, 6.75
JBM: 1.9, 4.2, 6.7
Strelok: 1.9, 4.2, 6.7
Ballistic Arc: 1.9, 4.2, 6.8
AB: 1.7, 4.0, 6.6
Trasol: 2.1, 4.1, 6.8
The ballistic program isn't his problem. They are all so close it doesn't matter.
JBM: 1.9, 4.2, 6.7
Strelok: 1.9, 4.2, 6.7
Ballistic Arc: 1.9, 4.2, 6.8
AB: 1.7, 4.0, 6.6
Trasol: 2.1, 4.1, 6.8
The ballistic program isn't his problem. They are all so close it doesn't matter.
WWP2012
Well-Known Member
The problem was I needed a -1" correction on my zero. When I added that the numbers jived.
User4302021
New Member
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2018
- Messages
- 0
I'm glad you got it figured out. Good shooting to you sir.
ronstone09
Well-Known Member
Try the strelok pro app !
BallisticsGuy
Well-Known Member
Why should he? No one app is any better than any other. Dog Rocket and I have already shown that.
WWP2012
Well-Known Member
I did buy that app when I started this thread. But the one thing I haven't found is a app that you could put multiple points of impact to. Traditionally more points of data in a equation equals better end results. Do any of the other paid apps allow that?
The Shooter app allows it. Called Velocity Calibration
Applied Ballistics allows it also. Called Ballistics Calibration
Other may too, dunno.
BallisticsGuy
Well-Known Member
That's what I would call goal seeking. Doing that is a defacto admission that either the math was wrong or the inputs were wrong. Since the math doesn't change, the inputs need to but which one and by how much? Most ballistics apps have some capacity for adding some level of refinement to the data, usually something like banded BC's and stepped velocities and such. Many apps (not mine because I advocate accurate data gathering and analysis) have "truing" features which adjust velocity or BC to make N result match the prediction of the model. In the case of velocity it's not truing squat, it's fabricating bogus input data to match observed results without regard to the origin of the departure between the mathematical model and the observed results. This is making up for BDU's (brain dead users) who don't want to troubleshoot or are incapable of troubleshooting. As far as BC truing, that is in my opinion the only legitimate use of truing type functionality. That's only because minor changes in BC aren't necessarily unheard of going from one lot of projectiles to another and because drag, especially at long range, is affected by quite a few continuously varying factors in the real world.
Dealing with an ultra-complicated reality in a way that Joe Sixpack with no understanding of the physics involved can enter some trivially easy to gather information into an app and get an answer to their question is not going to be without consequences to the perfection of the prediction of the model.
sea2summit
Well-Known Member
But set aside a weekend and a case of beer to enter your rifles unless you have the cable
