Loadbase 3.0 and Exbal

[jwp475]

To all,

I had my son shooting today at 1360 yards. We had fun. Elevation come-ups were pretty much right on. Using LoadBase that's not a big thing.

I was shooting at a Latitude of 39° and an Azimuth was 220°
I turned on "Spin Drift" and "Coriolis" and the adjustment was 0.5 MOA more than what Exbal predicts... Had we used Exbal prediction on a deer it'd been a miss.

Exbal is really doing pretty good considering:

1) you have to use G1 for your BC which according to Bryan Litz it's got a variation of 0.137 in BC in his testings (SMK 300 gr.) and on top of that not forgetting the fact that G1 is velocity dependent.

2) Can not use G7 for BC which is not velocity dependent and the variation in BC was only 0.024. Quite a difference. Gives you an excellent reason to use a ballistic program that would allow the user to use G7 drag BC's.

3) No practical way to use Coriolis and Spin Drift.

4) your trajectory validation is only good for the distance you validate it for. It will not do no magic for you... Don't believe it? Go and shoot at different distances... You'll find out you'll be doing a lot of trajectory validations which means it will only be good for the distance validated and it's surroundings.

I'm glad you boys are still playing with it. One of these days it'll dawn on to you!

The only reason I participate in this kind of activities is because I want to help others to find the better products without the head aches. Not because I enjoy taking sides with some and destroy others, I just merely love helping those that would want to be helped.

LoadBase is a easy as you want it to be and as complicated as you want it to be.

Being a minister for over 25 years I have gotten to know a lot about people, many once their mind is made up nothing will change it. It's like a naked woman in the middle of the street, at day time, and you go out with a blanket to cover her with, and she gets upset and says to you "I'm not naked you fool, get away from me".

I was going to do it, but I don't believe it's worth it, I was going to show how much easier LoadBase from one screen you can do so much more than most others programs I know. That's simplicity!!!

Sooner or later it'll dawn on you.

Get the update for your ExBall and you will have G-7's. I have never ever had a problem with Exball giving the correct dope as long as correct info is feed into it.

 

[Mikecr]

This test is mainly to compare dial ups, as many long range shooters realize the spin drift and coriolis affects on windage is almost impossible to test for positive

I'll agree that software is more accurate than our guns. But I have to point out that both coriolis and spindrift have vertical components. This, given fairly impractical ranges for most.

 

[bigngreen]

Get the update for your ExBall and you will have G-7's. I have never ever had a problem with Exball giving the correct dope as long as correct info is feed into it.

My Exbal is fresh of the press and I can not find a G7 capability. All I have is the PPC version, does the Desktop have it or can you tell me if I'm just missing something.

 

[bigngreen]

Ran to the range and found out all I had to shoot was 5 shots so I made the best of it, almost. I broke a prime #1 rule the last time I was a the range and didn't return my turrets to zero before I got up so I wasted two shots. Got squared away and shot two at 590yrds that landed just down wind and an inch low with 1/2 in of vertical which I felt was good considering horrible mirage. Shot the last one at 300yrds for a close second range and was perfect so I feel I have some validation data I can play with next week after I get another 100 loaded. Then we'll take it out to 1030 and 1450 to see what we can get to happen.

Man, I need to save money and get an optic with a zero stop!!!!!

 

[SHRTSHTR]

Intersesting thread! I do not have the experience many of you have but this is what I have found so far.

I have Exbal, Mobal and Loadbase 3.0. Exbal is hands down easier for me to use. I like everything about it except its inability to use G7's.

I have Mobal but must admit I have only used it once. My smith in Montana is using Mobal and swears by it. He is doing some pretty amazing things at extreme distances using Mobal and customizing his G7 for the 300SMK and Berger Hybrids.

Used Loadbase for the 1st time in the field yesterday. I have been on the phone with a guy from this sight for hours going over Loadbase before hitting range.

Loadbase worked perfectly for me all morning out to 535 yards. I moved my AR500 target out to 730 yards (This is where my ATV decided to stop ). I ranged my target and input the range into LB. LB gave me a firing solution of 11.5 moa up. This is with a 300 yard zero. I knew this seemed like a bit much but I shot anyway. I was way high as I expected it to be.

I double and triple checked my data and it came out the same! Hmmm, I am sure it is something I am doing wrong but I had already used LB for my 300yd and 535yd target and they were scary accurate. At 730 yards something was amiss, probably me.

In my mind I had no choice but to try Exbal. I loaded my data in Exbal and I think it gave me a fire solution of 8.5 up. I connected 5 of 5 times at 730 yards.

I know that I had to do something wrong with LB but have not figured it out yet. I will try and figure it out today. All I know is that if I were in an actual hunting senario and would have taken a shot at a live animal at 730 yards...I would have missed completely or maybe wounded an animal.

Guess what I am saying is LB might be a little post graduate for me at this time. Exbal is so easy, even a caveman like me can use it and get the job done! I have not given up on LB. I think it is a great tool but I have my 1st hunt of the year on the 20th of this month. It has taken me 13 years to draw this tag. I will use whatever program works the best for me as I draw closer to the hunt. Right now Exbal is in the lead gun)

 

[Pdvdh]

I'm not really trying to do a LB vs Exbal more of trying to find the strengths of both and get to know both to an equal level so I can, without remorse, tell someone what I think based on what I have done.

Good for you. Thanks for putting the time and effort in and sharing the findings.

 

[Pdvdh]

... as many long range shooters realize the spin drift and coriolis affects on windage is almost impossible to test for positive. When you factor in the error factor of the combine package of the rifle, shooter and ammo along with the wind, many seasoned LR shooters believe it becomes irrelevant, or is smaller than the capability of the rifle, shooter and ammo.

Jeff

I think it depends on how windy it is where you shoot and hunt. Spin drift plus Coriolis drift combined are very evident for me.

The part of this argument that gets hard to follow is the dismissal of ~8-11 inches of rightward drift each and every shot at ~1000 yds. I have to believe it's being accounted for one way or another. But obviously not with predicted dope if the ballistic software doesn't provide the option.

This rightward drift is occurring whether it's windy or calm. Even 4" is relevant for my shooting. Let alone ~8-11". I can understand how it might be difficult to separate the drift from wind drift if it's always windy where you're shooting. I don't see how it could be considered irrelevant. I suspect it's being built in to the doping one way or another. As long as it's allowed for, the end result is the same.

 

[jwp475]

My Exbal is fresh of the press and I can not find a G7 capability. All I have is the PPC version, does the Desktop have it or can you tell me if I'm just missing something.

I have it on my desk top computor and the latest Exball definately has G-7 drags

 

[bigngreen]

I have it on my desk top computor and the latest Exball definately has G-7 drags

As far as I can tell Exbal PPC does not support G7 numbers as of the current software. Exbal Desktop sounds like it supports G7 but that isn't very handy in the field and I'll have to pay for an update!

 

[Eaglet]

My version of Exbal is atleast a 'classic', and possibly an antique by now...
But it appears the later versions do include coriolis and spindrift(in PPC ersion). I thought by now they would have G7 BC input. Doesn't seem so though.

Eaglet, I think you slightly misrepresent ballistic software's lookup of drag coefficients to mach#.
Neither G1, nor G7 drag curves actually match our bullets, and so they both vary by velocity.
The variance is smaller across a wide band with G7 because our bullet's actual drag coefficients are closer to G7 than G1.
But not matching..

I fully agree! The G7 std drag is much closer to the drag of modern long range bullets.

With ****** rate adjustments afforded by LB and Pejsa, a custom/internal drag curve can be built that is even better than G7.

Agreed! Though it has been my experience as well as other that many times you don't have to mess with it if you're using Bryan Litz calculated BC7's

Anyway, you're right about G7 producing better results across a full range of distances, and why that is so. I applaud Pejsa's approach to 'fixing' G1 BC disparities, and glad it's built into LB. Of course, we should also recognize the resultful efforts of Bryan Litz contributing to wider-spread implementation of G7, coriolis, and spindrift.

Field ballistic solutions are advancing daily now. It's fantastic.
I see us eeking toward standards we'll soon be so much better with.

According to B. Litz, referencing BC to the G7 drag standard instead of the non-representative G1 solves the problem of velocity dependence and produces more accurate trajectory predictions.

That's all I know. I would have no problems accepting that there are still some variances and so forth but that's where I stop because don't know any better.

 

[Eaglet]

Get the update for your ExBall and you will have G-7's. I have never ever had a problem with Exball giving the correct dope as long as correct info is feed into it.

jwp475,

I checked and the pocket PC version they're selling is the same I have.

I only have the Pocket PC version 6.5

 

[bigngreen]

Guess what I am saying is LB might be a little post graduate for me at this time. Exbal is so easy, even a caveman like me can use it and get the job done! I have not given up on LB. I think it is a great tool but I have my 1st hunt of the year on the 20th of this month. It has taken me 13 years to draw this tag. I will use whatever program works the best for me as I draw closer to the hunt. Right now Exbal is in the lead gun)

I would say that if you use the same numbers for Loadbase and Exbal you will not get the same trajectories. The key is finding what each program needs for accurate solution.

Mobal, for me looks like a nightmare!!! Exbal has it's difficulties if your used to how Loadbase works. I can see how it would be difficult to go from a program that you have had luck with to another!

Go with the one that you get accurate solutions from when hunting! But, really dig into Loadbase and it's manual, I really like the LB flow and I'm finding Exbal choppy but usable but in the end the solution is the important thing.

If thing go good tomorrow I'll run trajectories on the 300WBY and a 250AI maybe my 270WSM in the morning and arrow an elk in the evening

 

[SHRTSHTR]

bigngreen,

I ran through my numbers today. No sure what I did but my numbers in LB match up very close to what Exbal is telling me now. The only real difference is Coriolis and Spin drift and Exbal does not have these.

I plan on giving LB some real effort in the coming weeks. I really like the program but need to get over my learning curve.

Will be looking forward to your results tomorrow.

 

[Mikecr]

According to B. Litz, referencing BC to the G7 drag standard instead of the non-representative G1 solves the problem of velocity dependence and produces more accurate trajectory predictions.

This is only pseudo-true, in a general sense, albeit the right approach.
It does solve a 'problem' with software solutions that are not taken to G1 drag coefficients. But only if that same software allows use of G7(that would be weird). And use of G7 form factors can produce less work/error for our long range bullet solutions.
But it can also produce greater errors..

Anyone should keep in mind the context of a pseudo-truth(aka rule of thumb). It's purpose is usually to provide 'useful' solutions while we're floundering with the truths. Look how long Greenhill lasted..
Sometimes pseudo-truths amount to nothing more than marketing(like extreme powders).
But only a real truth passes all tests. Any other will fail tests, unless facilitated with qualifiers.
I'm merely suggesting that we should recognize this before further building on another truth -that isn't.
I'll give you an example:

My lot, 95VLD velocity BCs taken to G1 and G7 drag coeff tables:
This shows a rock solid G7 match(compared to G1), that is the basis of Bryan's assistance.

By null at 2010-09-06

But what if someone trims these bullet noses to the same lengths, without first qualifying ogive radius(their datum), and opens a meplat to .100"?
Well I hope this person is now using G1 instead of G7 BCs..

By null at 2010-09-06

So it is possible, even if rare, to get better results using G1 BCs.