arcticcathonda
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- Southern Alberta
A chronograph is an invaluable tool. If you are going to try and back-calculate your velocity using measured drops at different ranges though, I would recommend going out a lot further than 400 meters to where the trajectory starts dropping off a lot more.
A quick example using ballistic data I have for my 223's 75 gr A-Max load (2795 fps at the muzzle, 100 meter zero), I get 9.0 MOA up adjustment required to be on target at 400 meters. Just playing around in my ballistics program, I can go down to 2755 fps muzzle velocity and only need 9.3 MOA up. I can go up in muzzle velocity to 2838 fps and then only need 8.7 MOA up. Assuming I can shoot consistent 0.6 MOA groups at 400 meters, this gives me an 83 fps spread where the true velocity can be. This can add a lot of uncertainty when stretching out to longer ranges. Of course maybe this is close enough if you can spot your splashes and aren't worried about first round hits at longer ranges
That is assuming you only used one distance to true your algorithm. The more accurate input parameters you provide the truing solver, the better your estimation.
I am only speaking from personal experience, I could care less what a chronograph says, where the bullets actually meet the paper is what concerns me.
So, what's the associated error in the chronograph you or anyone else uses?
Last edited: