Problem finding range to target

Comeraghshooter

I was out checking my zero yesterday evening and everything went fine zeroed perfect at 100m, range finder was working fine.
I decided to put out a new steel gong target I made up and put it out on the hill.
When I got back to the firing point I tried to find the range to target but I wasn’t getting any reading from the range finder.
Anyway with the target out and me back at the firing point I decided to have a crack at it, I guessed it was about 350m or so.
I could see the bullet drop in front of the target and off to the left so I kept adjusting the scope until I heard the PING! At this stage I was up 38 clicks and 11 clicks to the right.

My question is, from the info given is it possible to work out the approx distance to the target

Caliber: .223
Ammo: Hornady 55gr V-Max
Barrel Length: 26 Inch Barrel
Scope: Nightforce NXS 12 – 42 – 56(Scope is about 2 – 3mm off the barrel)

dev110

I am going to guess distance was around 460 yards and there was a 4.5 mph wind at 90 degrees

This would be for my rifle with a 24" barrel with 55gr V-max

It wasn't me!

What sort of reticle is in your scope? Can you use it to judge range? It may not be exactly as precise as the rangefinder, but it'll be more than good enough for hunting.

Comeraghshooter

It wasn't me! wrote: »

What sort of reticle is in your scope? Can you use it to judge range? It may not be exactly as precise as the rangefinder, but it'll be more than good enough for hunting.

I think its the NP-R2... not sure if it can be used to judge the range if it can im not able to work it out anyways

It wasn't me!

It has graduations, so yeah, it can. Find out which magnification (It's a second focal plane, right?) is the ranging setting, then figure what each graduation delineates. Look at a grid of 1" squares at 100 yards (Like a zeroing target) and if the distance between two of the hashmarks on the reticle is two of the 1" squares, that makes it 2 MOA, so it would hold a six inch target between the two lines at 300 yards then, or an eight inch target at 400, so you measure the gong you use, and use the graduations on the reticle to judge how far away it is, so if it's an eight inch gong and it takes up two graduations on the reticle, it's 4 MOA, and therefore 200 yards away, or half a graduation, it's 800 yards away. You can use them to judge drop the same way once you have the range, and wind drift. So let's say I'm shooting a six inch plate at 300 yards and the hash marks on the reticle are 1 MOA apart at my ranging setting, it'll take up two hash marks on the reticle, which gives me my range. Now, I know my .25-06 drops about 7" from my 200 yard zero at 300 yards, so I look at the centre of the plate and move the centre of the reticle up until the centre of the plate is two and a third hash marks down from the centre. There's a slight breeze from left to right, only four or five miles an hour, so not much, but I'll just hold off one hashmark, which is 3". It's a question of knowing your drift in those conditions, but that'll also have you holding at the edge of the plate. Boom, target falls over.

Tackleberrywho

For .223 55grain use the second line below the intersection for 300 yard bunnies.
Istrelok can be down loaded for your phone and is really handy.
I don't often use the rangefinding reticle as you need to know the size of the target for it to work.

A Pusheen rabbit @300 looks like a Bigg'en @400 which is a trap you can fall into.
I gave up guessing years ago and bought a range finder for rabbits past 200.
12-42 rangefinding setting is ~12 or 14x
my 8-32 is 12 and 5.5-22 is 10 if my memory serves me.

http://downloadnew.biz/software/istrelok/
I have it for my Nokia and it works well on all android phones

Like anything in Maths, if you only have one unknown it is relatively easy to find an answer, you knew the Bullet drop, you knew the derivations on the reticle were 2MOA and you did not know the distance


As per NF

NP-R2: Field tactical, Varmint, Long-range hunting

An especially good choice for long-range applications. 2 M.O.A. vertical increments allow accurate rangefinding and multiple zero and hold points to compensate for windage and bullet drop.

Any size target can be easily ranged using a simple formula: target size in inches ÷ M.O.A. x 100 = range in yards. Once range is determined select an appropriate hold point based on the bullet drop of your cartridge. The vertical spacings can easily be split into 1 M.O.A. increments further enhancing long range accuracy. The horizontal line is divided into equal 5 M.O.A. increments for windage compensation.

Cass

Okay i am re-opening this thread.

ANY deviation from the OP's question or any sidetrackig into irrelevant information and it will be closed again. Have some regard for the OP and respect for his question.

Ez.

Comeraghshooter

Comeraghshooter wrote: »

I was out checking my zero yesterday evening and everything went fine zeroed perfect at 100m, range finder was working fine.
I decided to put out a new steel gong target I made up and put it out on the hill.
When I got back to the firing point I tried to find the range to target but I wasn’t getting any reading from the range finder.
Anyway with the target out and me back at the firing point I decided to have a crack at it, I guessed it was about 350m or so.
I could see the bullet drop in front of the target and off to the left so I kept adjusting the scope until I heard the PING! At this stage I was up 38 clicks and 11 clicks to the right.

My question is, from the info given is it possible to work out the approx distance to the target

Caliber: .223
Ammo: Hornady 55gr V-Max
Barrel Length: 26 Inch Barrel
Scope: Nightforce NXS 12 – 42 – 56(Scope is about 2 – 3mm off the barrel)

In my original post i don't think i made it very clear.
If anybody has a ballistic calculator or an Application that can give me a reading (distance/ Range) from the below information id appreciate it.

Hopefully in the next couple of days ill get back out to where i was shooting again and get the actual distance if i get my rangefinder working.
Think it would be interesting if the answers i get from your replys are close to the real range when i find out.

Zeroed: 100 meters
Caliber: .223
Ammo: Hornady 55gr V-Max
Barrel Length: 26 Inch
Scope: Nightforce NXS 12-42-56 (2- 3mm of the barrel)
Scope was up 38 clicks and 11 clicks to the right.

Thanks
CS

Vegeta

A quick and dirty link http://www.biggameinfo.com/BalCalc.aspx

You'll need the muzzle velocity (is it around 3200fps or something) of your round and the ballistic coefficient (.255 according to google) but the Hornady website will provide specifics. I cant check Hornady site as it's blocked here

For a 100 yard zero and 38 clicks it seems about 480'ish yards.

Tackleberrywho

Vegeta wrote: »

A quick and dirty link http://www.biggameinfo.com/BalCalc.aspx

You'll need the muzzle velocity (is it around 3200fps or something) of your round and the ballistic coefficient (.255 according to google) but the Hornady website will provide specifics. I cant check Hornady site as it's blocked here

For a 100 yard zero and 38 clicks it seems about 480'ish yards.

FOR NP-R2 Ret if you used 4 moa lines down on the reticle and ~3/4 1 moa for windage you would have hit without clicking @480 yards with 100 yard zero

Strelok for Mobile phone
Thats day time temperature 12 degrees

It wasn't me!

Under 20" drop at 480 yards from a 100 yard zero? That's not right. And it'd depend on the magnification anyway as it's a second focal plane reticle. Should be more like 48-50" of drop according to Hornady (52.2" at 500 yards). Would probably just add 9.25 MOA and fine tune if necessary.

Tackleberrywho

It wasn't me! wrote: »

Under 20" drop at 480 yards from a 100 yard zero? That's not right. And it'd depend on the magnification anyway as it's a second focal plane reticle. Should be more like 48-50" of drop according to Hornady (52.2" at 500 yards). Would probably just add 9.25 MOA and fine tune if necessary.

He had a ~45.6" drop @480yards by adjusting 38 clicks if this calc I am using is working correctly.

1 Click @ 100 yards 1/4 @400 it's an inch, so 200 yards will be 1/2 inch movement per click, 300 yards will be 3/4 in. per click, 400 yards = 1 in., 500 yards = 1 1/4 in and so on

That's why I find it handier using the MOA increments as no messing, and no forgetting to dial back:eek:

It wasn't me!

Yeah, prefer hold over myself, and use low profile turrets so it's less fiddly than trying to remember what I've clicked as there's no obvious visible reference. However, it'd be more like 9 MOA than 4.

Vegeta

It wasn't me! wrote: »

Yeah, prefer hold over myself, and use low profile turrets so it's less fiddly than trying to remember what I've clicked as there's no obvious visible reference. However, it'd be more like 9 MOA than 4.

I think Tack meant 4 of the reference bars or MOA indicators on the scope reticle, each being 2 MOA.

What is important to remember is that these scope reticle reference bars are only 2 MOA at the indicated magnification on the mag ring.

38 clicks is 9.5 MOA so only using 4 of the reference bars (4 x 2 MOA = 8 MOA) is not going to cut it for rabbit sized targets at close to 500 yards.

Tackleberrywho

Vegeta wrote: »

I think Tack meant 4 of the reference bars or MOA indicators on the scope reticle, each being 2 MOA.

What is important to remember is that these scope reticle reference bars are only 2 MOA at the indicated magnification on the mag ring.

38 clicks is 9.5 MOA so only using 4 of the reference bars (4 x 2 MOA = 8 MOA) is not going to cut it for rabbit sized targets at close to 500 yards.

True, I have only got a couple of rabbits @ over 400.

2 MOA is 2" @100 so 4"@200 6" @300 8"@400 10"@500

In regards the scope view, I imputed the Data into Strelok for 3200 fps and 100 yard Zero and that's what jumped up.

(having said that Strelok says 480 yards is 31.7 Clicks)

38 Clicks would be 530 Yards if I am reading the Calc correctly

OP is it possible it was 530 yards (hence range finder not working for you)

Norwayviking

I prefer reticles with mildot.
Atleast you have the option to doublecheck up against the rangefinder if the range is right.

For Meters:

Object size (in) divided by 39 x 1000 divided by mils read
Object size (in) x 25.4 divided by mils read
For Yards:

Object size (in) divided by 36 x 1000 divided by mils read
Object size (in) x 27.77 divided by mils read
Lets try this out; You are a varmint hunter and looking down range you see a fat ground hog that happens to stand up looking around. You think he is 10 inches tall and place your reticle on him. You mil Mr. Ground hog at .6 mils, plugging what you now have into the formula this is the result;

10 inches divided by 36 x 1000 divided by .6 equals 462 yards OR
10 inches x 27.77 divided by .6 equals 462 yards OR
10 inches divided by 39 x 1000 divided by .6 equals 427 meters OR
10 inches x 25.4 divided by .6 equals 423 meters

So if you know your target size in inches\cm its easy to get the distance using the mildots.

http://www.mil-dot.com/user-guide

Tackleberrywho

Problem happens when the "ground hog" is 5" Tall and not 10.

I have often over estimated rabbits that were babies; thinking I was aiming at an adult bunny further away.

So Range finder still reigns supreme

Norwayviking

Tackleberrywho wrote: »

Problem happens when the "ground hog" is 5" Tall and not 10.

I have often over estimated rabbits that were babies; thinking I was aiming at an adult bunny further away.

So Range finder still reigns supreme

Atleast as long as you have batteries,lol.:D
But like i said its never 100% accurate even with the mildots,but it gives you an idea of the actual distance.
And offcourse the smaller the target,the less accurate it will be.
And to estimate the range you dont have to to it to the actual target,it could be something nearby.As long as you know the size of it,its easy to estimate.:)

And the ground hog was just an example from the site of the link attached

Tackleberrywho

Norwayviking wrote: »

Atleast as long as you have batteries,lol.:D
But like i said its never 100% accurate even with the mildots,but it gives you an idea of the actual distance.
And offcourse the smaller the target,the less accurate it will be.
And to estimate the range you dont have to to it to the actual target,it could be something nearby.As long as you know the size of it,its easy to estimate.:)

yep, that's the joys of shooting.

Will anyone confirm that Commeragh Shooters Target was 530 yards from the data he gave us??

I could convert my phone into a range finder then by giving it the clicks and it would give me the range

Norwayviking

Norwayviking wrote: »

Atleast as long as you have batteries,lol.:D
But like i said its never 100% accurate even with the mildots,but it gives you an idea of the actual distance.
And offcourse the smaller the target,the less accurate it will be.
And to estimate the range you dont have to to it to the actual target,it could be something nearby.As long as you know the size of it,its easy to estimate.:)

And the ground hog was just an example from the site of the link attached

Heres a good guide to bring to the field.

Cass

Tackleberrywho wrote: »

Will anyone confirm that Commeragh Shooters Target was 530 yards from the data he gave us?

I have run the numbers through the NF BC and PMed him with the results i got.

They are 482 yards with a mild 2-3 mph 90 degree wind. So if his elevation clicks are correct thats the distance however i feel the windage clicks are wrong. Thats either a miscount, improper zero or simply that there was no wind when the shot was taken.

The NF BC has all makes and calibers of bullets, and their relevant BC, MV, etc built in. So its just a matter of selecting the right round and it does the work.

Norwayviking

Ezridax wrote: »

I have run the numbers through the NF BC and PMed him with the results i got.

They are 482 yards with a mild 2-3 mph 90 degree wind. So if his elevation clicks are correct thats the distance however i feel the windage clicks are wrong. Thats either a miscount, improper zero or simply that there was no wind when the shot was taken.

The NF BC has all makes and calibers of bullets, and their relevant BC, MV, etc built in. So its just a matter of selecting the right round and it does the work.

How does the NF BC work for you Ezri?Is it the palm or pc version you got?
How accurate is it compared to Ballistic FTE and other ballistics computers?

Cass

Its the PC version.

Its a great tool. Its not always 100% accurate, but then again i've yet to see any BC that is 100% accurate. Real world situations are slightly different.

The thing i like best about it is there is no need to go hunting for a bullets ballistic coefficient. Simply click on make of bullet, caliber, and then specific type. It gives the MV, BC, etc for it. Also with the windage readings. You can select wind direction to very small changes expressed in 0.1 decimal changes. Gives readings out to 2000 yards in 25 yard intervals.

A few things i would like to see are barrel length, twist rates, etc. That may or may not change the results as i'm sure the people that create these prorammes would know more about it than i.

Lastly, as i have a NF scope i thought who better to tell me the settings i need than them.

Sparks

Tackleberrywho wrote: »

Problem happens when the "ground hog" is 5" Tall and not 10.
I have often over estimated rabbits that were babies; thinking I was aiming at an adult bunny further away.

It has to be said.



:pac:

Norwayviking

Ezridax wrote: »

Its the PC version.

Its a great tool. Its not always 100% accurate, but then again i've yet to see any BC that is 100% accurate. Real world situations are slightly different.

The thing i like best about it is there is no need to go hunting for a bullets ballistic coefficient. Simply click on make of bullet, caliber, and then specific type. It gives the MV, BC, etc for it. Also with the windage readings. You can select wind direction to very small changes expressed in 0.1 decimal changes. Gives readings out to 2000 yards in 25 yard intervals.

A few things i would like to see are barrel length, twist rates, etc. That may or may not change the results as i'm sure the people that create these prorammes would know more about it than i.

Lastly, as i have a NF scope i thought who better to tell me the settings i need than them.

Thanks

I was looking into getting the pc version as well,have the ballistic fte on the ipod,but you cant print out data,make range cards etc for the ammunition used.
So i heard about the pc version that NF have.

Tackleberrywho

Ezridax wrote: »

I have run the numbers through the NF BC and PMed him with the results i got.

They are 482 yards with a mild 2-3 mph 90 degree wind. So if his elevation clicks are correct thats the distance however i feel the windage clicks are wrong. Thats either a miscount, improper zero or simply that there was no wind when the shot was taken.

The NF BC has all makes and calibers of bullets, and their relevant BC, MV, etc built in. So its just a matter of selecting the right round and it does the work.

OK

I see I had the wrong BC in. D'oh
But for 38 click's I'm getting 488 yards (9.5MOA or 48.54"'s drop from Zero) and wind speed 2.5mph 6.3 clicks 8.11" drift (1.57 MOA)

I used 999hPa atmospheric pressure and 12 Degrees C.

I have 55 grain .255 BC MV of 3240fps (however that's Hornady's speed I've only ever chrono'ed 75 grains and that was in Paulo's Tikka)

So it just shows how easy a miss at a small target is @ 490'odd yards if you make a smallest of error in calculation:eek:

Tackleberrywho

Sparks wrote: »

It has to be said.



:pac:

What's that Father?

I didn't know that there were ground hogs in Ireland??

Norwayviking

Tackleberrywho wrote: »

OK

I see I had the wrong BC in. D'oh
But for 38 click's I'm getting 488 yards (9.5MOA or 48.54"'s drop from Zero) and wind speed 2.5mph 6.3 clicks 8.11" drift (1.57 MOA)

I used 999hPa atmospheric pressure and 12 Degrees C.

I have 55 grain .255 BC MV of 3240fps (however that's Hornady's speed I've only ever chrono'ed 75 grains and that was in Paulo's Tikka)

So it just shows how easy a miss at a small target is @ 490'odd yards if you make a smallest of error in calculation:eek:

Maybe you should check the barometric pressure again.
It seemed a bit low for this time of the year.:D
But then again it could be right,its Ireland afterall.:rolleyes:
And you used G7 or G1 BC?

Tackleberrywho

Norwayviking wrote: »

Maybe you should check the barometric pressure again.
It seemed a bit low for this time of the year.:D
But then again it could be right,its Ireland afterall.:rolleyes:
And you used G7 or G1 BC?

I have a Tissot Touch watch and it is very accurate at giving BP info, some machines I work on are BP affected so I thought having a watch that could tell me to leave the machine alone because the BP was affecting it rather than an internal Machine fault would be a handy instrument to have on one's person.

P.S, I saw your Rifle recently, the only thing I did not like was the scope height and Tube size.

Norwayviking

Tackleberrywho wrote: »

I have a Tissot Touch watch and it is very accurate at giving BP info, some machines I work on are BP affected so I thought having a watch that could tell me to leave the machine alone because the BP was affecting it rather than an internal Machine fault would be a handy instrument to have on one's person.

P.S, I saw your Rifle recently, the only thing I did not like was the scope height and Tube size.

I know i am working on that.
I have a sightron 8-32x56 coming soon with 30mm tube and medium rings.
Did you see at Fergal White by any chance,lol.
Needed a bit of pimping i guess.:D

Tackleberrywho

Norwayviking wrote: »

I know i am working on that.
I have a sightron 8-32x56 coming soon with 30mm tube and medium rings.
Did you see at Fergal White by any chance,lol.
Needed a bit of pimping i guess.:D

I liked the stock, my Favourite colour Green!

patsat

Norwayviking wrote: »

Thanks

I was looking into getting the pc version as well,have the ballistic fte on the ipod,but you cant print out data,make range cards etc for the ammunition used.
So i heard about the pc version that NF have.

I have Fte on my iPhone aswel, just an idea rather than changing to a different calculator....

Get up the data on the screen of ur iPhone/iPod and then press the lock button ( the button on top!) and the back button ( the one at the bottom of the screen! ) and this should take a screenshot of your phone!

Go into images and there should be a pic of your ballistics graph/data, put that on your pc and print the image!

Norwayviking

patsat wrote: »

I have Fte on my iPhone aswel, just an idea rather than changing to a different calculator....

Get up the data on the screen of ur iPhone/iPod and then press the lock button ( the button on top!) and the back button ( the one at the bottom of the screen! ) and this should take a screenshot of your phone!

Go into images and there should be a pic of your ballistics graph/data, put that on your pc and print the image!

Hey Patsat

Thanks for that.Didnt know you could do that with the FTE.
Much appreciated.:D

patsat

Norwayviking wrote: »

Hey Patsat

Thanks for that.Didnt know you could do that with the FTE.
Much appreciated.:D

It's not a feature of Fte it's a function of the iPhone! No matter what app ur on it just takes a pic of the screen! It can come in very useful!

Comeraghshooter

I was tinkering around with the rangefinder this evening and found that once you go over about 250 meters or so it does not work very well but if you aim for something reflective like a road sign it works fine, so with this in mind i headed for the place where i was shooting the other day.
I drove up to the firing point and hung a Hi-Vis coat over the spare wheel of the jeep so i could aim for it with the rangefinder.
I got up the place where i had the gong target set up and used the rangefinder to aim for the back of the jeep, it came in at 415 meters which i think is about 450 yards.

Happy enough as this is the farthest Ive shot so far and id be confident enough to add another 100 meters or so the next time, also the next time ill bring the camera so you can see what the groups are like.

Thanks to all for the help earlier, i think Dev110 was the closest at 460 yards!

Cass

There is the thing about ballistic calculators. They are not reliable on their own. The box of 55gr V-max accorind to some says 3200fps as MV. Yet to hit the 450 yard mark with 9.5 MOA would show a MV of approx. 3025fps.

Thats why real world testing is better than relying on a calculator.

dev110

Ezridax wrote: »

There is the thing about ballistic calculators. They are not reliable on their own. The box of 55gr V-max accorind to some says 3200fps as MV. Yet to hit the 450 yard mark with 9.5 MOA would show a MV of approx. 3025fps.

Thats why real world testing is better than relying on a calculator.

For a ballistic calculator to work all the figures has to be accurate and as I chrono'd the V-max in my rifle I just kept changing the distance till it equaled the OP click adjustments.

Cass

I'll give you a recent example dev110.

I've another new barrel on the FTR (thank you Fergal White). I got it all set up and was chrono-ing the rounds as i broke in the barrel. Its a 1:13 twist. I used he NF BC to calculate the elevation to 1,000 yards.

I input the following:

• Temp
• Altitude
• Pressure
• Muzzle velocity
• Ballistic Coefficient
• Zero range
• Wind Direction
• Wind Speed
• Cartridge
• Bullet Weight
• Humidity
• Sight Height
• Incline Angle

The result was 31.50 MOA to 1,000 yards. I put on the 33MOA for the safety chart. Left it on when i went out to the range. Fired (with the appropriate wind) and i was 0.5 MOA low. Final adjustment and setting for the entire shoot was 33.50 MOA.

Thats 2 MOA or 20 inches at 1,000 yards more than the BC said. Even though all variables were accurate, and measured it still didn't work out as it should have.

Norwayviking

Ezridax wrote: »

I'll give you a recent example dev110.

I've another new barrel on the FTR (thank you Fergal White). I got it all set up and was chrono-ing the rounds as i broke in the barrel. Its a 1:13 twist. I used he NF BC to calculate the elevation to 1,000 yards.

I input the following:

• Temp
• Altitude
• Pressure
• Muzzle velocity
• Ballistic Coefficient
• Zero range
• Wind Direction
• Wind Speed
• Cartridge
• Bullet Weight
• Humidity
• Sight Height
• Incline Angle

The result was 31.50 MOA to 1,000 yards. I put on the 33MOA for the safety chart. Left it on when i went out to the range. Fired (with the appropriate wind) and i was 0.5 MOA low. Final adjustment and setting for the entire shoot was 33.50 MOA.

Thats 2 MOA or 20 inches at 1,000 yards more than the BC said. Even though all variables were accurate, and measured it still didn't work out as it should have.

I see they have similar problems on the Ballistic FTE.
It shows great deviation if you use G1 instead of G7 drag settings on it.
The G7 seems more accurate on the match bullets.
And it doesnt take much error in the inputs before it flys way of target.:D

poulo6.5

Norwayviking wrote: »

I see they have similar problems on the Ballistic FTE.
It shows great deviation if you use G1 instead of G7 drag settings on it.
The G7 seems more accurate on the match bullets.
And it doesnt take much error in the inputs before it flys way of target.:D

G1 setting is for flat based bullets and G7 is for boat tail or match bullets,

Cass

Don't get me wrong i would sooner have the use of a BC than not. The main thing to understand with these as with all shooting aids is they are just that - an Aid.

The BC will have me in the target within a shot or two. Problem with BCs is simple enough as i see it. The variables that a person enters are fixed. The calculator does not take into account gusting wind, the drop in wind, the mirage on the target, the curling effect a wind can have, but to mention a few.

There is the benefit of using G7 settings as opposed to a G1, but as most bullets fall under the G1 heading this is the preset value for most BCs especially those used for hunting. The version of the NF BC i have does not have the function to change this setting so either way i use what i have.

I agree that match bullets and VLDs would benefit from G7 based BCs, but then sellers of BCs (online or with products) would not have as much success selling them. The higher end and military/L.E. ones have this , i think.

Just my opinion.

Norwayviking

poulo6.5 wrote: »

G1 setting is for flat based bullets and G7 is for boat tail or match bullets,

You probaly mean the G6 or G8:D

• G1 or Ingalls (by far the most popular)
• G2 (Aberdeen J projectile)
• G5 (short 7.5° boat-tail, 6.19 calibers long tangent ogive)
• G6 (flatbase, 6 calibers long secant ogive)
• G7 (long 7.5° boat-tail, 10 calibers tangent ogive, preferred by some manufacturers for very-low-drag bullets[10])
• G8 (flatbase, 10 calibers long secant ogive)
• GL (blunt lead nose)

Norwayviking

Ezridax wrote: »

Don't get me wrong i would sooner have the use of a BC than not. The main thing to understand with these as with all shooting aids is they are just that - an Aid.

The BC will have me in the target within a shot or two. Problem with BCs is simple enough as i see it. The variables that a person enters are fixed. The calculator does not take into account gusting wind, the drop in wind, the mirage on the target, the curling effect a wind can have, but to mention a few.

There is the benefit of using G7 settings as opposed to a G1, but as most bullets fall under the G1 heading this is the preset value for most BCs especially those used for hunting. The version of the NF BC i have does not have the function to change this setting so either way i use what i have.

I agree that match bullets and VLDs would benefit from G7 based BCs, but then sellers of BCs (online or with products) would not have as much success selling them. The higher end and military/L.E. ones have this , i think.

Just my opinion.

Thats true Ezri.And its not always the BC(G1) is correct either.
I believe some of the Lapua Scenars and others are given a higher BC than they actually are.

Cass

I know the Lapua Scenar 155s are given a BC of .505, yet in testing some reckon it to be closer to 0.495 (ish). Hence the reason you have bullet trimmers, and tools like John Whidden's bullet die to perfect the tip of the bullet and give as true a possible ballistic coefficient.

poulo6.5

Norwayviking wrote: »

You probaly mean the G6 or G8:D

• G1 or Ingalls (by far the most popular)
• G2 (Aberdeen J projectile)
• G5 (short 7.5° boat-tail, 6.19 calibers long tangent ogive)
• G6 (flatbase, 6 calibers long secant ogive)
• G7 (long 7.5° boat-tail, 10 calibers tangent ogive, preferred by some manufacturers for very-low-drag bullets[10])
• G8 (flatbase, 10 calibers long secant ogive)
• GL (blunt lead nose)

No i didn't

Norwayviking

poulo6.5 wrote: »

No i didn't

Well G1 covers the lot.
Its the standard reference projectile for all bulletstypes.
And yes its also flatbased with a 2 caliber ogive.
But so is G6 and G8 which would be more useful to use in a ballistics computer.:D