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
Canting - the right answer
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="Brown Dog" data-source="post: 110539" data-attributes="member: 1622"><p>Bart, </p><p>I agree.</p><p></p><p></p><p>JBM, Tiro et al,</p><p></p><p>My previous post was addressing this issue (as posted by Tirofijo):</p><p> [ QUOTE ]</p><p> But when you have a hunting rifle you don't normally change the scope's settings, so you may take a shot at 400 m even if your zero is 200 m using holdovers. In this case the angle between LOS and bore line corresponds to the 200 m zero and the effect of canting would be smaller than if the rifle was zeroed at 500. </p><p></p><p>[/ QUOTE ] </p><p></p><p>To which the short answer is 'No!!!!!' /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/shocked.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif for all the reasons given in my previous post. </p><p></p><p>As soon as you apply holdover you are, in effect, re-zeroing to the new target range.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>The error of reasoning here is based in the fact that people have fixated on the angle between the boreline and the 'zeroed at X yds scope'. </p><p></p><p>When you are hitting a target at a given range; the critical angle for the purposes of cant effect calculations is:</p><p></p><p>[boreline's elevation relative to a horizontal datum (ie its Quadrant Elevation)] MINUS [True Angle of Sight to the Target (ie AS)] = Tangent Elevation [The tangent Elevation being that part of the QE that has been applied to account for the bullet's drop at that distance.] </p><p></p><p> (Sorry, but it's dawned on me that people are not understanding the terms 'QE', 'TE' and 'AS' …….perhaps they don't translate well across the pond! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif]</p><p></p><p></p><p>....which Bart neatly summarises as: [ QUOTE ]</p><p> just multiply the bullet drop at the target range by the sine of the cant angle </p><p></p><p>[/ QUOTE ] (bullet drop at a given range being another way of quantifying the TE)</p><p></p><p></p><p>You all (not Bart!) need 'Red Leg' [a US term that I know won't require transatlantic translation! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif] advice; not more formulae /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Brown Dog, post: 110539, member: 1622"] Bart, I agree. JBM, Tiro et al, My previous post was addressing this issue (as posted by Tirofijo): [ QUOTE ] But when you have a hunting rifle you don't normally change the scope's settings, so you may take a shot at 400 m even if your zero is 200 m using holdovers. In this case the angle between LOS and bore line corresponds to the 200 m zero and the effect of canting would be smaller than if the rifle was zeroed at 500. [/ QUOTE ] To which the short answer is 'No!!!!!' [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/shocked.gif[/img] [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] for all the reasons given in my previous post. As soon as you apply holdover you are, in effect, re-zeroing to the new target range. The error of reasoning here is based in the fact that people have fixated on the angle between the boreline and the ‘zeroed at X yds scope’. When you are hitting a target at a given range; the critical angle for the purposes of cant effect calculations is: [boreline’s elevation relative to a horizontal datum (ie its Quadrant Elevation)] MINUS [True Angle of Sight to the Target (ie AS)] = Tangent Elevation [The tangent Elevation being that part of the QE that has been applied to account for the bullet’s drop at that distance.] (Sorry, but it’s dawned on me that people are not understanding the terms ‘QE’, ‘TE’ and ‘AS’ …….perhaps they don’t translate well across the pond! [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]] ....which Bart neatly summarises as: [ QUOTE ] just multiply the bullet drop at the target range by the sine of the cant angle [/ QUOTE ] (bullet drop at a given range being another way of quantifying the TE) You all (not Bart!) need 'Red Leg' [a US term that I know won't require transatlantic translation! [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]] advice; not more formulae [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
Canting - the right answer
Top