jarhead ground poundin infantry OOOH rah
semper fi jarheads, its nearly OUR birthday
(2531 W/ sp 8") the BIG boom.

quote:

Originally posted by ravenr:
jarhead ground poundin infantry OOOH rah
semper fi jarheads, its nearly OUR birthday
(2531 W/ sp 8") the BIG boom.

Semper Fi to you and Whitworth.

Sure glad you mentioned the Birthday. One of my buddies ALWAYS calls me a day or two early to "beat me" to the Happy Birthday wish. I'll call him tonight.

JWP



SMACK



rc



HC & Vapo

Ah yes, the Road Warrior.......

quote:

Originally posted by AnotherAZWriter:
something to brag about or one who thinks the correct hold for a "quartering" wind is 1/4 the full value. Man, that last one is pure physics.

Had a great time shooting last night at 750 and 700 yards. Held .7 milrads for wind to hit and hit 2 inches left of where I was aiming. At 700 I shot two calibers; one I held .5 mrads and hit my 3 inch cirlce, and the other was 4 inches to the right. Shot another just to confirm that wild shot and it hit an inch to the right and two inches low.

You guys have a nice day. When you shoot something big enough to mount, let me know. Or did you mount those dinky bucks and does?

Explain how READING WIND is PHYSICS? Reading wind is an ART. I hit were I was aiming, 6" difference what are you smoking? According to Exbal at 7400 Ft elevation with a wind from 3 0'clock at 10 MPH I get 30.1 inches of wind drift at 775 yards. If I quarter that (divide by 4) I get 7.5 inches of drift. If I quarter a 10 MPH wind I get 2.5 MPH. When I use a 2.5 MPH wind in Exball I get 7.5 inches of drift. This is useing a bullet with a .507 BC at 3070 FPS. 6 inches off my ass. You're totaly clueless

IN P.O Ackleys first book if you read the chapter by Homer Powley whom was a PHD in Physics and read exactly what I am saying You're totaly clueless

quote:

Originally posted by woods:
JWP



SMACK



rc



HC & Vapo

Now that's funny...

quote:

rc

he does seem like the sort of person that would beat women and hate minorities

gimpsuitjones

quote:

Originally posted by jwp475:

quote:

Originally posted by AnotherAZWriter:
something to brag about or one who thinks the correct hold for a "quartering" wind is 1/4 the full value. Man, that last one is pure physics.

Had a great time shooting last night at 750 and 700 yards. Held .7 milrads for wind to hit and hit 2 inches left of where I was aiming. At 700 I shot two calibers; one I held .5 mrads and hit my 3 inch cirlce, and the other was 4 inches to the right. Shot another just to confirm that wild shot and it hit an inch to the right and two inches low.

You guys have a nice day. When you shoot something big enough to mount, let me know. Or did you mount those dinky bucks and does?

Explain how READING WIND is PHYSICS? Reading wind is an ART. I hit were I was aiming, 6" difference what are you smoking? According to Exbal at 7400 Ft elevation with a wind from 3 0'clock at 10 MPH I get 30.1 inches of wind drift at 775 yards. If I quarter that (divide by 4) I get 7.5 inches of drift. If I quarter a 10 MPH wind I get 2.5 MPH. When I use a 2.5 MPH wind in Exball I get 7.5 inches of drift. This is useing a bullet with a .507 BC at 3070 FPS. 6 inches off my ass. You're totaly clueless

IN P.O Ackleys first book if you read the chapter by Homer Powley whom was a PHD in Physics and read exactly what I am saying You're totaly clueless

JWP:

You don't divide the angle by direction of wind; you use trig. A wind coming in at 45 degrees has 70% of the effect of a full value, not 50%. A 30 degree angle has 50% full value. A 22.5 angle has 38% full value, not 1/4.

It is ballistics 101. When I noticed you said you dialed in 1 moa in a 10 mph "quartering" wind, I know from experience the drift is more than that.

You were lucky. Go to Long range hunting and ask how to hold for values less than full value.

Here is an article to explain it:

http://www.rifleshootermag.com...nd_values/index.html

BTW, Plaster rounds the 1/2 value to 75%, but it is actually .707.

You are dead wrong on this point. But I am sure you will deny it.

quote:

Originally posted by woods:
gimpsuitjones

Fuck yeah, I'm rich as hell

not very attractive though

quote:

Originally posted by gimpsuitjones:

quote:

rc

he does seem like the sort of person that would beat women and hate minorities

That's way out of line.

quote:

Originally posted by The Slug:

quote:

Originally posted by gimpsuitjones:

quote:

rc

he does seem like the sort of person that would beat women and hate minorities

That's way out of line.

Mel Gibson fan?

quote:

Originally posted by AnotherAZWriter:

quote:

Originally posted by jwp475:

quote:

Originally posted by AnotherAZWriter:
something to brag about or one who thinks the correct hold for a "quartering" wind is 1/4 the full value. Man, that last one is pure physics.

Had a great time shooting last night at 750 and 700 yards. Held .7 milrads for wind to hit and hit 2 inches left of where I was aiming. At 700 I shot two calibers; one I held .5 mrads and hit my 3 inch cirlce, and the other was 4 inches to the right. Shot another just to confirm that wild shot and it hit an inch to the right and two inches low.

You guys have a nice day. When you shoot something big enough to mount, let me know. Or did you mount those dinky bucks and does?

Explain how READING WIND is PHYSICS? Reading wind is an ART. I hit were I was aiming, 6" difference what are you smoking? According to Exbal at 7400 Ft elevation with a wind from 3 0'clock at 10 MPH I get 30.1 inches of wind drift at 775 yards. If I quarter that (divide by 4) I get 7.5 inches of drift. If I quarter a 10 MPH wind I get 2.5 MPH. When I use a 2.5 MPH wind in Exball I get 7.5 inches of drift. This is useing a bullet with a .507 BC at 3070 FPS. 6 inches off my ass. You're totaly clueless

IN P.O Ackleys first book if you read the chapter by Homer Powley whom was a PHD in Physics and read exactly what I am saying You're totaly clueless

JWP:

You don't divide the angle by direction of wind; you use trig. A wind coming in at 45 degrees has 70% of the effect of a full value, not 50%. A 30 degree angle has 50% full value. A 22.5 angle has 38% full value, not 1/4.

It is ballistics 101. When I noticed you said you dialed in 1 moa in a 10 mph "quartering" wind, I know from experience the drift is more than that.

You were lucky. Go to Long range hunting and ask how to hold for values less than full value.

Here is an article to explain it:

http://www.rifleshootermag.com...nd_values/index.html

BTW, Plaster rounds the 1/2 value to 75%, but it is actually .707.

You are dead wrong on this point. But I am sure you will deny it.

It is reading wind. Through a football to a running recieve is not math iti s a judgeemt call and the ball is throw to a spot in front to arrive at the same time. if it were perfect geomertry then you are correct but it is a judgement call and whether you agree or not It worked. I had no protractor to measure an angle A judgement of neede correction was made and it worked

Well Hell, JWP, you mean you don't have a protractor in that sack with the altimeter, wind thingy, range thingy, gps thingy, and, of course, a computer to pull it all together??
You're way behind times guy.

quote:

It is reading wind. Through a football to a running recieve is not math iti s a judgeemt call and the ball is throw to a spot in front to arrive at the same time. if it were perfect geomertry then you are correct but it is a judgement call and whether you agree or not It worked. I had no protractor to measure an angle A judgement of neede correction was made and it worked

So we have gone from something that can be “perfectly accounted for” (your first post, to paraphrase), to something that is an art.

Don’t blame lack of a protractor here, you believed your math method was correct. It is not.

Let’s plunge into the worlds of statistics here; I actually hold two patents for statistical methods to mine data, so I kinda know what I am talking about here.

The table below shows the actual correction factors for the drift you mention. My apolgies for the formatting.


Wind Angle % full value JW's Method % Error Drift Error on 30" total drift
0
5 0.09 0.06 3% 0.95
10 0.17 0.11 6% 1.88
15 0.26 0.17 9% 2.76
20 0.34 0.22 12% 3.59
25 0.42 0.28 14% 4.35
30 0.50 0.33 17% 5.00
35 0.57 0.39 18% 5.54
45 0.71 0.50 21% 6.21
50 0.77 0.56 21% 6.31
55 0.82 0.61 21% 6.24
60 0.87 0.67 20% 5.98
65 0.91 0.72 18% 5.52
70 0.94 0.78 16% 4.86
75 0.97 0.83 13% 3.98
80 0.98 0.89 10% 2.88
85 1.00 0.94 5% 1.55
90 1.00 1.00 0% 0.00















In almost every case, your method creates a tremendous amount of error. Of course, the wind can change, and that six inches to the left suddenly lands right in the boiler room, and viola, a picture of a dead deer at 775 worthy of posting on AR. But just as badly, it can go the other way.

If a deer’s vitals are ten inches, and you can keep you shots in a four inch group at 800 yards (I have no doubt you can based on the equipment you appear to be using), then you only have 3 inches of “freeboard” on the vitals. In other words, if a wind is blowing left to right, in order to be absolutely certain of a 100% chance of a hit, the bullet on the far right of your group must not hit more than three inches to the right, or you are out of the vital area. But let’s assume you can shoot one hole groups at 800 yards. You still must land that bullet within 5 inches or you miss. The method you quote here results in errors big enough to throw the center of your group out far enough to miss the vitals completely. Of course, because half your bullets are going to land left of where you aim and half to the right (due to the fact you shoot a group), you would still have a 50% chance of killing an animal. And if you only tried once and did it, you would think you have this long range shooting thing down cold - like flipping a quarter once, having it land "heads" and proclaiming it has a propensity to land "heads." (Which is why doing something once means nothing.)

Here is another one of my favorites: you can ignore the wind blowing behind you. Yea, at normal hunting ranges, you can. But let’s look at a 10 mph wind that fishtails from behind at 5 to 7 o’clock. Now let’s further restrict that to 5:30 to 6:30, or a wind blowing behind from 15 degrees left to right to 15 degrees right to left. The angles here are 15 degrees. Using the chart about and using the correct method, the drift correction is 26% of full value (shocking, isn’t it). Using 30 inches of total drift, we have a wind that will blow the bullet 7.8 inches. Piece of cake to correct for that – that is one MOA. Dial it and hold. But just as we fire the wind switches and instead of coming in at 5:30 it comes in at 6:30. We just missed by 15.6 inches. Gee, any error of 5 inches is too much. But this is three times that. In other words, a wind from behind that is swirling from 5 degrees left to 5 degrees right will cause a miss. I know because I see it happen all the time. I hate winds from behind (toward me is the same, but easier to detect it changing). A good friend of mine shoots 1000 yard competitions; I was telling him how much I hate winds from behind and he agreed, but he couldn’t figure it out. Once he saw the math I point out here, he totally agreed. Notice the effect of small wind angle changes coming in at 90 degrees is much less – in fact, negligible even at 775 yards.

But let’s say you absolutely can measure the wind angle (which we already know you don’t because you don’t bring a protractor), what is the impact of a 1 mph wind error? Assuming your drift of 30 inches (I get more like 42 inches, but I will use your numbers), that means your bullet is drifting 3 inches for every one mile of wind speed. Again, assuming you can shoot a 4 inch group at 775 yards that means you must estimate the wind speed +/- one mph, because even a 1 mph wind error will drift the “outside” bullet in your group 3 inches. I don’t know about you, but I have never been able to stand outside with anemometer and measure the wind blowing at a constant speed.

How far is too far is absolutely more a question of wind speed and direction than range or even bullet energy. We can shoot big bullets fast. But even the best of them all begin to drift 5 inches for each mile of wind drift, and at that point there is no tolerance for error. No tolerance for error in measuring wind speed. No tolerance for failing to measure the wind angle correctly. No tolerance for the wind we dialed in changing. No tolerance for the wind changing while our bullet is speeding down range, taking a full second to get there. Oh, and last but not least, no tolerance for not being able to shoot a four inch group at 775 yards from field positions.

At some point, it is too far.

quote:

Originally posted by gimpsuitjones:

quote:

Originally posted by The Slug:

quote:

Originally posted by gimpsuitjones:

quote:

rc

he does seem like the sort of person that would beat women and hate minorities

That's way out of line.

Mel Gibson fan?

Just trying to be a decent person. Suggesting that someone is the sort to beat women is over any line of decency if it's not true.

Great post AZ.

Waaaay over their heads, but great post!

If anyone understands then take AZ's info and couple it with the inferior ballistics of the Grendel to realize how the error magnifies!

I am a numbers person, but all the math here becomes largely irrelevant in the field, where you have no way in Hades of truly measuring wind speed at every juncture between the muzzle and the target. It may be 9.1 mph at the shooter and 13.5 mph at the target -- and who knows what in between. The angle of the wind, too, may be slightly different from point A to point B.

Therefore, while the numbers game may put in the ballpark, experience -- not to mention the occasional good or bad luck -- becomes a significant factor. As to long range ability, some have it and some don't. JWP has proven he's one of the elite who can consistently connect at long range. But he doesn't go around expounding his credentials on every board, so many of you probably aren't even aware of his abilities. He simply goes out and gets results. For him and many others, it's a lot more than some incessant ego trip.

For my money, I'll take the shooter with significant experience over the calculator junkie who has to plug in to a program every time.

This long range shooting debate reminds me of photography. With all the new technology available, half the population thinks they are a pro shooter, but take away their auto-foocus, autoexposure and heavy editing and they are absolutely lost.

You guys can hash this out forever and never agree. Personally, I couldn't care less. There are more important things things to worry about than some never-ending debate...

I have a radical idea. Why not just actually hunt and then you wouldn't have to worry about all the friggin math. If you can't get closer than 600 yards to a damn deer you aren't trying very hard.

Bullet drop, wind drift, and trajectory bullet or football is all math. Being able to judge it without using math is an art.

BigB

quote:

Originally posted by The Slug:

quote:

Originally posted by gimpsuitjones:

quote:

Originally posted by The Slug:

quote:

Originally posted by gimpsuitjones:

quote:

rc

he does seem like the sort of person that would beat women and hate minorities

That's way out of line.

Mel Gibson fan?

Just trying to be a decent person. Suggesting that someone is the sort to beat women is over any line of decency if it's not true.

But it's alright with you if I imply people hate minorities then? You have no objections to that at all?

quote:

Originally posted by gimpsuitjones:

quote:

Originally posted by The Slug:

quote:

Originally posted by gimpsuitjones:

quote:

Originally posted by The Slug:

quote:

Originally posted by gimpsuitjones:

quote:

rc

he does seem like the sort of person that would beat women and hate minorities

That's way out of line.

Mel Gibson fan?

Just trying to be a decent person. Suggesting that someone is the sort to beat women is over any line of decency if it's not true.

But it's alright with you if I imply people hate minorities then? You have no objections to that at all?

I am a minority! I just don't feel the need to talk about it all the time. What else you got?

What I have, is a lot of boredom with this whole argument RE 6.5 grendel, hence making facetious and obnoxious comments

AnotherAZWriter, I have not been clear enough are you are extremely obtuse. I will try one last time

I used a 1/4 wind, not a quarter of 180 degrees. The wind was not blowing at a 45 degree angle, you erroniously continue to make that assumption. Yhe wind was coming in at about 11:45 therefore I used a quarter value wind which for a 10 MPH wind is 2.5 MPH. That is treat the wind as if it were 2 1/5 MPH coming in at a right angle. The method works the same way a wing shooter looks at the bird and decides lead and makes the shot. It is an art not a MATH PROBLEM. How many wing shooter use radar to determ9ine the speed of the bird and then shoot an angle to decide lead? NONE

With a hand held computer one can run real time numbers in the field, but the out put is only as good as the input

If you can't understand it, the don't bore me with any responce

quote:

Originally posted by DC Roxby:
I have a radical idea. Why not just actually hunt and then you wouldn't have to worry about all the friggin math. If you can't get closer than 600 yards to a damn deer you aren't trying very hard.

+1

quote:

Originally posted by jwp475:
AnotherAZWriter, I have not been clear enough are you are extremely obtuse. I will try one last time

I used a 1/4 wind, not a quarter of 180 degrees. The wind was not blowing at a 45 degree angle, you erroniously continue to make that assumption. Yhe wind was coming in at about 11:45 therefore I used a quarter value wind which for a 10 MPH wind is 2.5 MPH. That is treat the wind as if it were 2 1/5 MPH coming in at a right angle. The method works the same way a wing shooter looks at the bird and decides lead and makes the shot. It is an art not a MATH PROBLEM. How many wing shooter use radar to determ9ine the speed of the bird and then shoot an angle to decide lead? NONE

With a hand held computer one can run real time numbers in the field, but the out put is only as good as the input

If you can't understand it, the don't bore me with any responce

A "quartering" wind as you describe it, would be 22.5 degrees, half of 45 - that is what you said earlier. The correct hold for that is 38% of full value - not 25%.

When the wind is blowing between "quartering behind" and almost directly behind you, each 5 degree change in wind speed results in one inch of error at 775 yards (again, assuming 30 inches of total drift). Each error in wind speed estimation adds another 3 inches. Since you can't shoot one shot groups at that range, you have to be perfect to hit at that range. No one is perfect every time.

I will admit I originally took that to be 45 deg. But my numbers above use your numbers.

Lets put it a different way. In order for a 10 mph wind to blow the equivalent of 2.5 mph, you would have to have it blow at an angle of 15 degrees (0 is directly behind you). That is hardly "quartering."

My point here is that very small fluctuations in wind at that range can blow you right out of the vitals. Do you not agree?

I agree what you did worked. But I also think you could have easily missed. Is 775 too far? Maybe, maybe not. But my original point is that when a bullet drifts 5 inches in a 1 mph wind you have no business shooting. How anyone could argue that is beyond me.

I also think you had no idea you needed to use trig, based on your responses above. I am pretty sure Smack knows, because he didn't come running to your defense. Now we all know.

quote:

Originally posted by jwp475:
AnotherAZWriter, I have not been clear enough are you are extremely obtuse. I will try one last time

I used a 1/4 wind, not a quarter of 180 degrees. The wind was not blowing at a 45 degree angle, you erroniously continue to make that assumption. Yhe wind was coming in at about 11:45 therefore I used a quarter value wind which for a 10 MPH wind is 2.5 MPH. That is treat the wind as if it were 2 1/5 MPH coming in at a right angle. The method works the same way a wing shooter looks at the bird and decides lead and makes the shot. It is an art not a MATH PROBLEM. How many wing shooter use radar to determ9ine the speed of the bird and then shoot an angle to decide lead? NONE

With a hand held computer one can run real time numbers in the field, but the out put is only as good as the input

If you can't understand it, the don't bore me with any responce

I try to refrain from being what some of you would call "rude" since I'm a sponsored shooter, but jwp, please stop posting.

You're proving our point.

Now, wasn't that nice?....

You're still a prick, maybe a nice prick, but a prick none the less

Now wasn't that truthfull

Hey jwp,

Do you know what sexual position makes the dumbest kids that grow up into walking phalluses?



Ask your Mamma!

quote:

Originally posted by rcamuglia:
Hey jwp,

Do you know what sexual position makes the dumbest kids that grow up into walking phalluses?



Ask your Mamma!

I'll ask yours since she has experience

AnotherAZWriter, are you naturaly this obtuse or do you have to work at it? Either way you've got it down well. The only one talking about angle is you

quote:

Originally posted by rcamuglia:
Hey jwp,

Do you know what sexual position makes the dumbest kids that grow up into walking phalluses?



Ask your Mamma!

Browning sure sponsors real a class act, NOT

quote:

Originally posted by jwp475:
You're still a prick, maybe a nice prick, but a prick none the less

Now wasn't that truthfull

Yeah, as we all have seen, your posts optimize "class"

Brilliant come back BTW. You're about as sharp as a sack of wet mice.

quote:

Originally posted by rcamuglia:
Great post AZ.

Waaaay over their heads, but great post!

If anyone understands then take AZ's info and couple it with the inferior ballistics of the Grendel to realize how the error magnifies!

Way over their heads!!!!!You assume a lot.

quote:

Originally posted by rcamuglia:

quote:

Originally posted by jwp475:
You're still a prick, maybe a nice prick, but a prick none the less

Now wasn't that truthfull

Yeah, as we all have seen, your posts optimize "class"

Brilliant come back BTW. You're about as sharp as a sack of wet mice.

Of course I'm not a representative of a company that is in the business of selling products to the very people that you insult with threads like this one:

quote:

Choosing the 6.5 Grendel as a Long Range Deer/Elk Cartridge: PITIFUL AND PATHETIC!

Calling 493 yards long range shows a lack of knowledge on the subject and to continually call the cartridge "inadequate" despite a 1 shot kill with the bullet exiting the animal, shows that you are completely clueless.

I hope that you continue to post in order to showcase your utter cluelessness, such as using "optimze" instead of the more appropriate "epitomize."

Whoopsie!

another thread gone to hell in a handbasket.

quote:

Originally posted by Doc:
another thread gone to hell in a handbasket.

Judging from the title, there was never any doubt where this thread was headed

quote:

Choosing the 6.5 Grendel as a Long Range Deer/Elk Cartridge: PITIFUL AND PATHETIC!

Just got back from the range today. My gunsmith was going out to shoot the 600 yard F-Class and I went along. I thought it would be a great chance to see wind effects.

We just used our Tac rifles in 6.5 Creedmoor and shot off of our bipods. It was very interesting and quite applicable to the thread since we're discussing the weenie Grendel at Long Range. The Creedmoor and the Grendel are obviously both 6.5mm cartridges. The 6.5 Grendel suffers ballistically because it can only launch a 120 grain bullet with a BC of .458 at around 2400 fps (a gift). The Creedmoor fires the 139 grain Lapua Scenar with a BC of .615 at 2850 fps out of my rifle.


The Grendel has 80" of drop and 27" of drift in a 10 mph wind at 500 yards

The Creedmoor has 44" of drop and 11 of drift at the same range.

I would hunt deer with the Creedmoor but never consider it an elk cartridge like smack and Larue, at any range.

After shooting about 50 rounds in the match and being pretty pleased, I decided to stick around and really nail down the data out to 760 yards on the steel. In the morning during the F-Class I had to dial .75 more MOA than my ballistics program was telling me at 600 yards. As the temperature increased, I had to take off .5 MOA for X's. My velocity input in the BulletFlight program needed to be tweaked down by 25 fps to work perfectly out to 760.

Had a 5 mph wind out of 3 O'clock


3-shot at the 330 yard plate with a dead center hold. About a .25 mil drift.






3-shots on the 560 yard plate holding right edge, about a .3 mil drift.





1st shot hit on the 650 yard plate with a .3 mil right hold






1st shot hit on the 700 yard plate with a .4 mil right hold






At 760 it got interesting. The first hit was a first shot hit on the right side of the plate using the same .4 mil hold, but the wind changed ever so slightly to less wind. I took 2 more shots and missed the plate to the right, holding the same amount of wind. Let the barrel cool and fired 3 more shots. The wind had increased a touch and I missed the plate to the left while using a .5 mil hold. I took out the Kestrel and the wind was at 7 mph at times. The program called for .75 mil hold off and the hit was on the left side of the plate.






The point is that tiny fluctuations of wind anywhere between you and the target can cause enough drift to wound something. It was a 2 mph fluctuation and with the puny Grendel, you're asking for trouble.



Hey woods!

Your movie analogy post was very good but not as accurate as I have measured. You better get a new thingy or recalibrate your movie analogy thingy with another thingy to correct it. If that doesn't work, go out and buy two more thingys and we'll talk about it tomorrow.


Mine says it's more like this:


jwp





smack





rc





Hot Core





woods





Vapodog and AnotherAZWriter




gimpsuitjones