rdsii64
Well-Known Member
I have never had a problem with Trasol.
Ballistic calculator
- Thread starter DDWing
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
rdsii64
Well-Known Member
I use trasol. I think it uses the same engine. It has worked well for me.
dfanonymous
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jul 16, 2016
- Messages
- 2,282
I use trasol. I think it uses the same engine. It has worked well for me. it doesn't. Applied ballistics is stand alone, with some similarities to shooter…as is partners with Berger bullets, so thus, Bryan litz.
It doesn't.
Trasol is based on another software system that was common in the military before the fairly recent ( within the decade) switch to AB integrated equipment. That software was coldbore.
The majority of gwot I had a stupid Trimble recon/nomad stuffed in my pack.
It doesn't.
Trasol is based on another software system that was common in the military before the fairly recent ( within the decade) switch to AB integrated equipment. That software was coldbore.
The majority of gwot I had a stupid Trimble recon/nomad stuffed in my pack.
Last edited:
rdsii64
Well-Known Member
Thanks for the correction.
rdsii64
Well-Known Member
I'm grabbing at straws, but maybe something is funky with his phone.
Winefly
Member
I'm sorry I haven't read most of these but it is very entertaining
if you're worried about how much ammo you're using to test loads you could've (can) created your own charts the whole idea of a ballistics chart is just to make things simple
obviously you can't do that but if you know the drop you have at 100 200 300 400 it really is a matter of just filling in the blanks or getting one of your kids or Grand kids to do the app stuff for you. Either way you're still gonna be better off to have it printed out and something that you can look at without stuffing about on the phone that you don't trust
if you're worried about how much ammo you're using to test loads you could've (can) created your own charts the whole idea of a ballistics chart is just to make things simple
obviously you can't do that but if you know the drop you have at 100 200 300 400 it really is a matter of just filling in the blanks or getting one of your kids or Grand kids to do the app stuff for you. Either way you're still gonna be better off to have it printed out and something that you can look at without stuffing about on the phone that you don't trust
I get the same results as you with three different software
I sure hope the OP will share his final resolution! Some pretty highly experienced shooters have invested lots of brain power trying to help! My own humble ballistics app would predict his bullet would fall right where he observes it - 3.5 MOA at 300yds. Which of course equates to 1.8MOA@300 + 5 inches more or less.
xsn10s
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2016
- Messages
- 7,638
So these were the come ups to hit target at 300 yards. 13 "clicks" on a 1/4 moa elevation adjustment to be in the bulleyes at 300 yards. 13/4=3.25 moa. JBM tells me 3.6 moa for 300 yard adjustment. I don't think it's the apps.
Last edited:
I looked on Lapua site and came up with a G1 of 242, 20 points difference and a different form factor on a bc will definitely change things
@DDWing @338 dude The point I was trying to make is that 4 differnt Ballistic Apps (including what 338 dude used give the same result given the same input. What the difference was the BC used.
338 Dude, for my education, how using Lapua data you come up with G7 BC 0.242 and yet in your app you used 0.444?
Thanks
338 Dude, for my education, how using Lapua data you come up with G7 BC 0.242 and yet in your app you used 0.444?
Thanks
I may have been wrong but in the early post I thought that was the information DD Wing used I thought of everything else and decided to go back and check for myself. on their website for that bullet they give a G1 of .242 that was the only discrepancy I could find which led to my last post and it did change the elevation necessary hopefully it lines up for DD Wing
