Looking for a shot plotter

P

pmarcott

New member
EE Expired
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Good day shooters.
I am trying to track down a shot plotter. This would be a accessory that is used to track my shots during long range shooting practice or competitions.
Normally made from aluminum with a lexan cover over the desired target and marked with a grease pencil.
Anyone know of a vendor that carries said item?

Thanks
 
called a "Plot-o-Matic"

Drop me an email, and I will give you the name of a fellow that makes them, as well as a fellow that sells the actual "p-o-m" versions.
 
Also called an EZ Graf marketed by Milcun. The only problem with either the Plot-o-Matic or EZ Graf or Ouiji board or what ever you want to call it, is that you do not have a hard copy unless you tranfer it on to paper afterwards.
 
maynard said:
Also called an EZ Graf marketed by Milcun. The only problem with either the Plot-o-Matic or EZ Graf or Ouiji board or what ever you want to call it, is that you do not have a hard copy unless you tranfer it on to paper afterwards.
Click to expand...

Honestly, with the advent of plot sheets that have accurate .25MOA grid lines, I am not quite sure what the plot-o-matic appeal is for most shooters. I can center a group using a hard copy and more to the point, linear graph plotting reveals trends far better than target plotting. I do shoot F-class, which is a bit more "accurate" (in theory... I've eaten huge chunks of TR humble pie in my day though...) and as such, I admittedly don't have a TR perspective on things.

Ian
 
disclaimer: I have used both, and am in the pro-plotomatic camp (and yes there definitely are "camps" on this matter!!!). Having said that I have a great deal of respect for some very fine shooting done by people who plot on paper cards.

For what it's worth there is a low cost version of the plotomatic in the works ($50 ballpark perhaps?), it is not yet on the market and I don't know if there is a good estimate of when it might be. In the meantime you have the choice of buying one commercially (relatively expensive) or making your own (not an option for everybody)

A plotomatic records the same data and performs the the same functions as a paper plotting card. The plotomatic presents the data in different manner.

One of the two main "pros" of a plotomatic are that it is (or should be) faster than running a paper plot. When a shot comes up, you need to do one thing on a plotomatic (accurately record the location of the shot on the target). On a paper card there are three things to do (accurately record the location of the shot on the target, compute and plot one point on the "corrected elevation graph", compute and plot one point on the "corrected wind graph").

The other main "pro" is that a plotomatic presents the shot group in a single 2-D visual format. The elevation and windage graph contains exactly the same information, but in the form of two separate 1-D plots. Most patterns of interest are more directly readable from the former; the only thing more directly readable in the latter that I can think of are trends over time.

I know for a fact that good shooters win matches using paper plots, plotomatics, and no plotting. Which is probably worth always keeping in mind.

Specifically with respect to shooting with a scope, there is one other thing to my knowledge that can be done better with a plotomatic than with paper cards, and that is the integration of "aiming off" with the shot plot. There is a way to operate a plotomatic, which I don't see widely discussed, which allows for a really brilliant and quite intuitive connection between aiming-off and recording the shot plot. It can even be used to exactly plot any called bad shots, and while it won't allow you to improve the value of a bad shot it will allow you to extract 100% of the information contained in the fall of that bad shot.

The overall value of plotting in general and specific methods in particular, varies with respect to the conditions of shooting. Some wind conditions and styles of firing will allow very useful improvements to be achieved from plotting shots. In other conditions there can be little improvement to be had from plotting (or sometime even a bit of detriment!)
 
The linear graphs on a plot sheet are used to plot trends which a plot-o-matic does not do. it - as with only putting dots on a reproduced target face plot sheet - shows MPI.

Plot sheets that have .25 moa grid lines essentially perform the same function as a POM

It is all a question of preference, but I achieve what I need with a good plot sheet.
 
Personally I prefer the 20 to 25 year old blonde built HSLD model that sits in her cropped top and micro shorts in the seat behind me looking through the spotting scope recording shots.
It's even more fun after the match to review the plots at the "debriefing."
Sorry did I just type that out loud?
 
Obtunded said:
The linear graphs on a plot sheet are used to plot trends which a plot-o-matic does not do. it - as with only putting dots on a reproduced target face plot sheet - shows MPI.
Click to expand...

Until you change your sights. Then, the fall of shot plot on a paper plotting card no longer shows you your group's centre (mean point of impact), nor does it show you the size of the group and the outer limits of the group. In order to get those pieces of information you need to refer to the elevation graph and to the windage graph.

Plot sheets that have .25 moa grid lines essentially perform the same function as a POM

It is all a question of preference, but I achieve what I need with a good plot sheet.
Click to expand...

It ultimately does come down to a matter of personal preference, but they are not performing an identical function. Both methods have their own pluses and minuses, they are both taking in the same information (sight settings and fall of shot) and from that displaying useful information to the plotter. But they don't display the "processed" information in the same way, and depending on what it is that you are in immediate need of, one display format might be more advantageous than the other. There is also a difference in operating speed and the amount of mental arithmetic required.
 
maynard said:
Cool, but not legal for competition.
Click to expand...

Yes, and that's a real shame too (current rules prohibit "electronic devices" from being used on the firing point). I think it's time for us to have a look at this rule and decide if we want to stick with it or change it.

Matt, nicely done. I wish I had an iPhone so I could try it out!
 
ONT0001 said:
Personally I prefer the 20 to 25 year old blonde built HSLD model that sits in her cropped top and micro shorts in the seat behind me looking through the spotting scope recording shots.
QUOTE]
I want that model of P.O.M.also, just don't tell my wife.
Click to expand...
 
ONT0001 said:
Personally I prefer the 20 to 25 year old blonde built HSLD model that sits in her cropped top and micro shorts in the seat behind me looking through the spotting scope recording shots.
It's even more fun after the match to review the plots at the "debriefing."
Sorry did I just type that out loud?
Click to expand...

Hey Gord, that P.O.M costs a lot more to "maintain" and "use".

Can also cost a lot more even after you stop using the "model"..... :runaway:

cheers,

BB
 
maynard said:
Cool, but not legal for competition.
Click to expand...

As Dan mentioned, you're quite right - he was also right in saying that we probably need to look at this rule more closely in this day-and-age, as everything that was once analog turns digital... heck, even magazines are digital these days.

I think anyone who's ever shot in competition knows, there is simply no time to be using ballistic calculators or other applications that might give you an unfair advantage while shooting on the line - I barely have time to get my spotting-scope and mat setup before people start getting antsy.

In this regard I believe that there would be little difference between an all digital Plot-o-Matic or an analog version... Except that you get the benefit of a P-o-M and a Point-of-Impact plotter when using the digital version.

Once I get a few more features squared away, I plan to start lobbying the respective shooting federations to re-evaluate this rule and perhaps allow a few concessions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom