Community
Guns Like firearms themselves, there's a wide variety of opinions on what's the best gun.

another quick question about ballistics

Thread Tools
 
Old 11-17-2006, 03:18 PM
  #11  
Nontypical Buck
 
BrutalAttack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location:
Posts: 1,572
Default RE: another quick question about ballistics

ORIGINAL: Ridge Runner

Soilarch, the cheekweld thing is what bothers me, the high scope can be advantageous, my RRA EOP varminter has the scope 3.5" above the barrel, you need this heigth on an AR, but that 3.5" amounts to 17.5 inches of drop at 500 yards that I don't have to compensate for.
RR
That's probably why they adjustable cheek peices and monte carlo style stocks. Cheek weld is imperative for precision shooting. Most people suggest a low profile scope mount system.
BrutalAttack is offline  
Old 11-18-2006, 02:17 PM
  #12  
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location:
Posts: 283
Default RE: another quick question about ballistics

go to remington.com and find the remingotn shoot ballistics program. i use it and it seems to be pretty accurate. you can pic and weight bullet and style that they make in that weight. you can type in a sight in yardage and a zero yardage, for example my 7mm mag would nee to be sighted in a little under a half inch low at fifty yrd to be zeroed at 100 yrd. and dead on at fifty will hit dead on again at 150. its a useful program.
hobie11 is offline  
Old 11-18-2006, 03:06 PM
  #13  
 
Roskoe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Colorado
Posts: 4,127
Default RE: another quick question about ballistics

I think James B. hit the nail on the head. Although on paper a rifle in the 30/06 velocity class, with a scope mounted 1.7" above the bore, should be about 3.5" high at 100 yards when sighted in dead on at 25 yards; you might in reality be anywhere from a little low to 8" high at 100 yards. Don't shoot at a deerfurther than100 yards away until you get back to the range to check your 100 yard zero.
Roskoe is offline  
Old 11-18-2006, 05:29 PM
  #14  
Dominant Buck
 
Champlain Islander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: On an Island in Paradise
Posts: 23,428
Default RE: another quick question about ballistics

I always thought you were better off with a low scope mount rather than a high see through. What am I missing here?
Champlain Islander is offline  
Old 11-18-2006, 07:26 PM
  #15  
Nontypical Buck
 
elgallo114's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Sierra Nevadas., Ca
Posts: 1,050
Default RE: another quick question about ballistics

Maybe a stupid question, but why don't you just start over and sight it in where you want it? I'm assuming you don't want the zero of a 300 win mag to be at 25 yards?

It would be way easier to bore sight at 50 or 75 yards, or even just start at 100 for that matter, then zero from there.
elgallo114 is offline  
Old 11-18-2006, 11:50 PM
  #16  
Nontypical Buck
 
BrutalAttack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location:
Posts: 1,572
Default RE: another quick question about ballistics

ORIGINAL: Champlain Islander

I always thought you were better off with a low scope mount rather than a high see through. What am I missing here?
You're not missing anything. You're thinking correctly.
BrutalAttack is offline  
Old 11-19-2006, 12:49 PM
  #17  
 
Roskoe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Colorado
Posts: 4,127
Default RE: another quick question about ballistics

The only time I have used a 25 yard target for big game application was when I wasn't on the paper at 100 yards. Otherwise, you are right - not muchreason to shoot a pistol ranges. I would much rather be confidently zeroed at 100 yards and figure the 25 yard impact point from a chart, than be zeroed at 25 yards and figure the 100 yard impact point from a chart.
Roskoe is offline  
Old 11-19-2006, 02:24 PM
  #18  
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Big Sky Country
Posts: 100
Default RE: another quick question about ballistics

You will be shooting high from my experience. Here is a 25 yard calculation with no wind for Hornady 165 grain .300 mag. You can probably get away with dead-on aiming out to 300 yards.

(25 yard zero)
Range - yds. Path - in.
250
100 3.1
2003.4
300 -1.1
MontanaVet is offline  
Old 12-01-2006, 01:56 PM
  #19  
Nontypical Buck
 
stalkingbear's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: central Ky
Posts: 2,867
Default RE: another quick question about ballistics

If you hit EXACTLY @ 25 yards then your bullet will impact 3 in. high @ 100,4 high @ 200,dead on @ 300

stalkingbear is offline  
Old 12-01-2006, 03:47 PM
  #20  
Giant Nontypical
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: fort mcmurray alberta canada
Posts: 5,667
Default RE: another quick question about ballistics

If you hit EXACTLY @ 25 yards then your bullet will impact 3 in. high @ 100,4 high @ 200,dead on @ 300
In theory this could be true if you knew the exact muzzle velocity of the load,the exact ballistic coefficient of the bullet and the exact height of your crosshairs above the center of the bore.

stubblejumper is offline  


Quick Reply: another quick question about ballistics


Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.