Is this right? Weird ballistic calculator statement.

[bnewt3]

No it won’t. There are plenty of apps that allow you to select environmental conditions at zero.


Shooter. 140gr Berger Hybrid. 2,700fps MV.

0ft DA and 59° F. Zero was set at 1,000 yards-
View attachment 1003124



Now at 5,000ft DA and 20° F-
View attachment 1003125


A .8 mil difference.

So top zeroed at 0ft
bottom zeroed at 5000ft?

 

[bnewt3]

their point is that its virtually impossible to give the same inputs for each method.

because its virtually impossible to get the mean POI exactly on the bullseye due to optic adjustment limitations.

but that can be accounted for with the angle method.

I absolutely see that they are trying to push 4DOF, no question. They said other "calculators attempt to account for environmentals" while conveniently leaving out that 4DOF is also attempting to account for environmentals.

But I can also see how angle has a slight edge vs range.

 

[Formidilosus]

So top zeroed at 0ft
bottom zeroed at 5000ft?

No. It’s the same gun zeroed at 0ft DA. You can zero the gun in any environmental condition, then change conditions and the app corrects the data even at the range you zeroed it at.

Beyond that, zeroing at range other than 100 yards is silly. The “zero angle” thing is a crock.

 

[Formidilosus]

their point is that its virtually impossible to give the same inputs for each method.

because its virtually impossible to get the mean POI exactly on the bullseye due to optic adjustment limitations.

but that can be accounted for with "their" angle method.

I absolutely see that they are trying to push 4DOF, no question. They said other "calculators attempt to account for environmentals" while conveniently leaving out that 4DOF is also attempting to account for environmentals.

But I can also see how angle has a slight edge vs range.

Every legit app has the ability to input an offset vertically and horizontally for zero- exactly the same as zero angle. It’s nonsense.

 

[bnewt3]

I saw my error and changed "their" to the.

 

[Formidilosus]

But I can also see how angle has a slight edge vs range.

It doesn’t. That’s the point. The data output is exactly the same when given the same inputs. I don’t think you understand what “zero angle” versus “zero range” is supposed to do… because you have listened to the people trying to sell you on it and not done the comparison yourself.

 

[bnewt3]

It doesn’t. That’s the point. The data output is exactly the same when given the same inputs. I don’t think you understand what “zero angle” versus “zero range” is supposed to do… because you have listened to the people trying to sell you on it and not don’t the comparison yourself.

if your scope doesnt allow you to get your group exactly on POA, how do you give them the same inputs?

 

[Formidilosus]

if your scope doesnt allow you to get your group exactly on the bullseye, how do you give them the same inputs?

Versus-





And it doesn’t matter anyways- if you can’t dial the difference with a single click of the scope- the data output by the app is exactly the same.

 

[bnewt3]

zero height is vertical and offset is windage? idk if ive ever seen that. either 4DOF doesnt have that or im not finding it. Thank you for showing that.

TBC, i never thought there was a different calculation for range vs angle. I also never believed that Hornady in all their superiority had the market cornered on an angle calculator. Only that angle allowed for a more precise starting point that I now see is false.

maybe its just that in 4DOF, angle allows for a more precise starting point, but in other apps its the same.

 

[Formidilosus]

zero height is vertical and offset is windage? idk if ive ever seen that. either 4DOF doesnt have that or im not finding it. Thank you for showing that.

Yes sir, that’s the problem- 4DOF sucks.

 

[mlevimadden]

Yes sir, that’s the problem- 4DOF sucks.

Do you dislike 4dof from a user interface/usability standpoint or from an accurate ballistics data standpoint?

I have seen it be more accurate from the start and require less truing than BC-based solvers when shooting hornady bullets, but I agree the user interface could be improved. I do like the group analysis feature in it though.

 

[Formidilosus]

Do you dislike 4dof from a user interface/usability standpoint or from an accurate ballistics data standpoint?

Both. The user interface is about bad as any app on the market- I saw the proto version when they were working on it and told them so. It’s awful.
But it also produces bad data. It does ok with Hornady bullets, but way over estimates aerodynamic jump for instance for any bullets that aren’t theirs.

At the start- it does nothing for the shooter that a decent calculator doesn’t do.

have seen it be more accurate from the start and require less truing than BC-based solvers when shooting hornady bullets, but I agree the user interface could be improved. I do like the group analysis feature in it though.

I haven’t seen that. I get correct data right off by getting a true zero, and then using legit G1 (or G7- doesn’t matter) BC’s to past the terminal range of their bullets. Even using their bullets the data gets wonky often enough, that it isn’t used at all.

 

[bnewt3]

So their "the bullets in our library have been tested and use 130+ data points to give you a better solution" compared to just bullet weight, caliber, and BC calculations claim is complete BS? say it aint so.

 

[Cactus kid]

Both. The user interface is about bad as any app on the market- I saw the proto version when they were working on it and told them so. It’s awful.
But it also produces bad data. It does ok with Hornady bullets, but way over estimates aerodynamic jump for instance for any bullets that aren’t theirs.

Is aerodynamic jump worth adjusting for?

 

[Formidilosus]

Is aerodynamic jump worth adjusting for?

No.

 

[bnewt3]

quick related question:

I would think that longer bullets(more surface area) and the faster spin rate they need to stabilize make them have more aero jump than "traditional" bullets. True or not?

 

[West2East]

I landed on AB because 4dof kept giving me inaccurate data, in all weather conditions for ranges 500 - 800yds. Plus the interface was not quick to get through and get a solution.
Disclaimer: I'm not the most skilled so could have been me, but AB came out on top for my uses.