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
Hunting
Long Range Hunting & Shooting
Little bit of 300 grain Berger results
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="Eaglet" data-source="post: 396938" data-attributes="member: 3756"><p><strong>I have been using Exbal for more than 5 years. I have also bought every update being the last one 6.5 for my PDA. Here is my proof:</strong></p><p> </p><p><img src="http://i47.tinypic.com/2q0vtx1.jpg" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " style="" /></p><p> </p><p><strong>And I have been using LB2.0 and LB3.0 for close to 3 Years. Here is my proof</strong></p><p> </p><p><img src="http://i47.tinypic.com/vr81me.jpg" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " style="" /></p><p> </p><p>Reason I'm doing this is because I feel I mislead you when I many times </p><p>recommended LB3.0 over Exbal. </p><p> </p><p>If you know both programs as well as I do, you would have a very hard time</p><p>saying :</p><p></p><p> </p><p><span style="font-family: 'sans-serif'"><span style="font-family: 'Verdana'">In all honesty, I would say it like this:</span></span></p><p> </p><p><span style="font-family: 'sans-serif'"><span style="font-family: 'Verdana'">LB3.0 is way more involved since it is a huge and powerful suit of applications.</span></span></p><p> </p><p><span style="font-family: 'sans-serif'"><span style="font-family: 'Verdana'">but if we concentrate only on the thing at hand, like, external</span></span></p><p> </p><p><span style="font-family: 'sans-serif'"><span style="font-family: 'Verdana'">ballistics, LB3.0 would whip Exbal in user accessibility </span></span><span style="font-family: 'sans-serif'"><span style="font-family: 'Verdana'">and simplicity to use.</span></span></p><p> </p><p><span style="font-family: 'sans-serif'"><span style="font-family: 'Verdana'">But then again, that's just my opinion!</span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: 'sans-serif'"></span></p><p> </p><p>I honestly believe that if you get to know LB3.0 better you would agree </p><p>with me. Other wise, I'm sorry if in any way I mislead you.</p><p> </p><p>I believe you're a <strong>good person</strong> and that's the reason I care.</p><p> </p><p>There is only one ballistic program that I know of that using G1 BC will produce extremely accurate results similar to those produced using G7 BC; and that LoadBase 3.0 The reason for that is because of a highly sophisticated ballistic engine that will allow LB3.0 to do that.</p><p> </p><p>G1 is velocity dependent; not very reliable and accurate for very long range shooting, G7 takes away that dependency making it more reliable; way more reliable. My understanding the maker of Exbal expressed no desire to add the G7 ability to it. What ballistic program do you think we want to use? That's right, no questions asked.</p><p> </p><p>In any event I respect your opinion and respect you as good man and respectfully ask you to believe it was never my desire to mislead any one.</p><p> </p><p>Sincerely,</p><p> </p><p>Eaglet</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Eaglet, post: 396938, member: 3756"] [B]I have been using Exbal for more than 5 years. I have also bought every update being the last one 6.5 for my PDA. Here is my proof:[/B] [IMG]http://i47.tinypic.com/2q0vtx1.jpg[/IMG] [B]And I have been using LB2.0 and LB3.0 for close to 3 Years. Here is my proof[/B] [IMG]http://i47.tinypic.com/vr81me.jpg[/IMG] Reason I'm doing this is because I feel I mislead you when I many times recommended LB3.0 over Exbal. If you know both programs as well as I do, you would have a very hard time saying : [FONT=sans-serif][FONT=Verdana]In all honesty, I would say it like this:[/FONT][/FONT] [FONT=sans-serif][FONT=Verdana]LB3.0 is way more involved since it is a huge and powerful suit of applications.[/FONT][/FONT] [FONT=sans-serif][FONT=Verdana]but if we concentrate only on the thing at hand, like, external[/FONT][/FONT] [FONT=sans-serif][FONT=Verdana]ballistics, LB3.0 would whip Exbal in user accessibility [/FONT][/FONT][FONT=sans-serif][FONT=Verdana]and simplicity to use.[/FONT][/FONT] [FONT=sans-serif][FONT=Verdana]But then again, that's just my opinion![/FONT] [/FONT] I honestly believe that if you get to know LB3.0 better you would agree with me. Other wise, I'm sorry if in any way I mislead you. I believe you're a [B]good person[/B] and that's the reason I care. There is only one ballistic program that I know of that using G1 BC will produce extremely accurate results similar to those produced using G7 BC; and that LoadBase 3.0 The reason for that is because of a highly sophisticated ballistic engine that will allow LB3.0 to do that. G1 is velocity dependent; not very reliable and accurate for very long range shooting, G7 takes away that dependency making it more reliable; way more reliable. My understanding the maker of Exbal expressed no desire to add the G7 ability to it. What ballistic program do you think we want to use? That's right, no questions asked. In any event I respect your opinion and respect you as good man and respectfully ask you to believe it was never my desire to mislead any one. Sincerely, Eaglet [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Hunting
Long Range Hunting & Shooting
Little bit of 300 grain Berger results
Top