trebark
Well-Known Member
Trajectory validation as it's commonly thought of usually involves adjusting MV or BC to get the predicted trajectory to match actual. Sometimes MV and BC might be the correct variables to alter, but in my experience, often times the culprit is scope adjustment.
Example; A program predicts 30 MOA of drop. You dial it, hit high, and go about modifying MV or BC in the program until predicted matches observed. But did you ever check to verify that your scope is moving as you think? Correcting a trajectory based on MV or BC when the real problem is scope adjustment gives you the illusion that you're solving the problem, but what you end up with is a solution that's really only correct for a single range. If you address the real problem, you'll have a solution that's more accurate for all ranges.
Shooter has a variable called correction factor, which is a multiplier you can apply to your sight adjustment so that the program accounts for the error between expected and actual reticule movement.
-Bryan
I never really thought of the error being in the scope adjustment. Although I feel like I remove this variable with three data points rather than just one. My trajectory validation this particular instance was done at 200, 300, and 400 yards for both rifles (If I can, I prefer validation at even longer distances out to 600). The amount of 'error' at each distance was just about the same. So I feel confident that it is not just scope adjustment.
Good to know that Shooter has a 'correction factor'. Can you use multiple data points for this correction?