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
Hornady 4DOF Ballistic Program
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="mitch260" data-source="post: 1228452" data-attributes="member: 53720"><p>Edd, there is definitely room to improve. Keep in mind that the 3378 yard target is only 24" tall, 36" wide, which is only 0.67 MOA tall and just over 1 MOA wide. On top of that, by the time you get to that target you will only have 5 or less minutes left and 5 shots to hit it. Not only that, but spotting impacts is incredibly difficult. No matter who hits it, it will be an accomplishment to be celebrated. This is what makes the KO2M event special. This isn't a lay down and prepare/shoot all day thing.</p><p></p><p>Guys, I just want to clear some things up here that I have tried too previously.</p><p></p><p>A) There was never a personal attack on the guys developing the Hornady system.</p><p></p><p>B) We understand that the Hornady solver is capable of being an accurate solver and are not disputing that, the key here is helping people to understand what it is and isn't hype. Hornady is throwing around a lot of buzzwords and technical information about how much more accurate their solver is than anything on the public market and that they are the first to do it correctly. Well, this turned into a big debate over who's is more accurate, forcing us to keep addressing this. The key here, is that our data is already within 1% of what the best radar data is, and we continuously prove this through live fire tests. Lot variance and possibly anomalies with specific rifles (which some people have brought up as reasons to true) can easily throw the data from even a perfect custom drag curve well out of the tiny possible difference between our colletion method and radar.</p><p></p><p>What are you guys hoping to gain with radar data? Again, not saying its bad at all, but our data will get you closer than 99.9% of guys can keep their variables, including bullet lot variance and possible rifle anomalies. And you can't say guys didn't fall for the Hornady marketing hype. Most people in this discussion keep going back to the accuracy of the Custom Drag model data, which was never a problem to begin with. It became a problem when Hornady said it was, and this is exactly the kind of thing (hype) that gave us reason to publish the article and confront Hornady.</p><p></p><p>Most guys here will agree that the lot variations and possible rifle anomalies cause the vast majority of error in the predictions. I am going to throw user input errors in this group as well, since this is very important and is definitely one of the larger causes of error in data.</p><p></p><p>C) I can't comment on the patent issue, but Bryan knows this field and wouldn't have had issue with it if it were a legitimate position.</p><p></p><p>At the end of the day, you guys can keep trying to say that we are just putting out hype and are just scared of Hornady jumping into the market, but that is just simply not the case. If Hornady brought out a team to the KO2M match and won, we would be the first ones there to shake their hand and congratulate them. One comment in a long post above was something to the effect of "I hope guys can see whats really going on here." Well, we do too.</p><p></p><p>Going all the way back to the beginning, we just want guys to keep things focused on reality and the truth. And if that comes with some criticism from the other side then so be it.</p><p></p><p>Guys can come out to any of these matches and meet us. Those who have know we are out there to advance the sport and keep things real. We go to these matches and frequent these forums because we are right in the middle of the sport of long range shooting.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="mitch260, post: 1228452, member: 53720"] Edd, there is definitely room to improve. Keep in mind that the 3378 yard target is only 24" tall, 36" wide, which is only 0.67 MOA tall and just over 1 MOA wide. On top of that, by the time you get to that target you will only have 5 or less minutes left and 5 shots to hit it. Not only that, but spotting impacts is incredibly difficult. No matter who hits it, it will be an accomplishment to be celebrated. This is what makes the KO2M event special. This isn't a lay down and prepare/shoot all day thing. Guys, I just want to clear some things up here that I have tried too previously. A) There was never a personal attack on the guys developing the Hornady system. B) We understand that the Hornady solver is capable of being an accurate solver and are not disputing that, the key here is helping people to understand what it is and isn't hype. Hornady is throwing around a lot of buzzwords and technical information about how much more accurate their solver is than anything on the public market and that they are the first to do it correctly. Well, this turned into a big debate over who's is more accurate, forcing us to keep addressing this. The key here, is that our data is already within 1% of what the best radar data is, and we continuously prove this through live fire tests. Lot variance and possibly anomalies with specific rifles (which some people have brought up as reasons to true) can easily throw the data from even a perfect custom drag curve well out of the tiny possible difference between our colletion method and radar. What are you guys hoping to gain with radar data? Again, not saying its bad at all, but our data will get you closer than 99.9% of guys can keep their variables, including bullet lot variance and possible rifle anomalies. And you can't say guys didn't fall for the Hornady marketing hype. Most people in this discussion keep going back to the accuracy of the Custom Drag model data, which was never a problem to begin with. It became a problem when Hornady said it was, and this is exactly the kind of thing (hype) that gave us reason to publish the article and confront Hornady. Most guys here will agree that the lot variations and possible rifle anomalies cause the vast majority of error in the predictions. I am going to throw user input errors in this group as well, since this is very important and is definitely one of the larger causes of error in data. C) I can't comment on the patent issue, but Bryan knows this field and wouldn't have had issue with it if it were a legitimate position. At the end of the day, you guys can keep trying to say that we are just putting out hype and are just scared of Hornady jumping into the market, but that is just simply not the case. If Hornady brought out a team to the KO2M match and won, we would be the first ones there to shake their hand and congratulate them. One comment in a long post above was something to the effect of "I hope guys can see whats really going on here." Well, we do too. Going all the way back to the beginning, we just want guys to keep things focused on reality and the truth. And if that comes with some criticism from the other side then so be it. Guys can come out to any of these matches and meet us. Those who have know we are out there to advance the sport and keep things real. We go to these matches and frequent these forums because we are right in the middle of the sport of long range shooting. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
Hornady 4DOF Ballistic Program
Top