• This Forum is for adults 18 years of age or over. By continuing to use this Forum you are confirming that you are 18 or older. No content shall be viewed by any person under 18 in California.

Vertical Dispersion: Flat spots on the MV ladder test are meaningless

Impressive how you’re telling one of the best long range shooters of all time how to tune. Hilarious!

Bart
I don’t know about today, but as of yesterday, David Christian was leading the several Americans (all very good) competing at Bisley in the European championship long range pair fire matches.
 
Bryan Litz dedicated a full chapter, 6 for ladder testing for accuracy.
Under the fair use clause, here is a summary that supports the claim of this thread and supports the conclusion of the OFPS theory, seeking the lowest MV SD

View attachment 1367979
Our theory for ladder testing isn’t dependent on ES/SD. It’s about what prints on paper. At least mid range. LR u would prefer a sub 20 ES. If not it can be tuned for the slower felicity to print higher.
 
A number of people say this, but a 0 ES is the only logical goal. There is a real problem with accepting non-correlation as being true. For consecutive bullets shot at different velocities, if they went through the same hole, it was due to luck, meaning a flinch, bad aiming, the wind, a bullet defect, etc.

In a tunnel with a constant hold, It is simply not possible for identical bullets to hit exactly the same place if they have different velocities. They will necessarily drop, spin, and spin drift at different rates. That we don’t shoot in a tunnel, does not mean that now a certain amount of ES that is bigger than 0, becomes good for accuracy.
I would like to see proof of this. It does not bear out with what I see on paper.
 
Last edited:
I would like to see proof of this. It does not beat out with what I see on paper.

If positive compensation does serve to mechanically compress vertical dispersion with a given velocity spread, it would still do that as the velocity spread decreases.
 
I don’t know about today, but as of yesterday, David Christian was leading the several Americans (all very good) competing at Bisley in the European championship long range pair fire matches.
I believe I said one of the best in the world. Iceman is a 600 and 1000 Benchrest shooter. No disrespect to the F Classers. But I’d put money on Jason.

Bart
 
If positive compensation does serve to mechanically compress vertical dispersion with a given velocity spread, it would still do that as the velocity spread decreases.
I am not referring to positive compensation or anything else that may be the theoretical cause. I just know that at 100 yards I have shot numerous zero five shot groups with es varying as much as 30fps. I hate to think that it is just luck. If it is, I need to buy lottery tickets.
 
I believe I said one of the best in the world. Iceman is a 600 and 1000 Benchrest shooter. No disrespect to the F Classers. But I’d put money on Jason.

Bart

My bad, … thought it referred up above to David’s discussion on the thread.
 
Last edited:
I am not referring to positive compensation or anything else that may be the theoretical cause. I just know that at 100 yards I have shot numerous zero five shot groups with es varying as much as 30fps. I hate to think that it is just luck. If it is, I need to buy lottery tickets.

The trajectory curve is much more forgiving at close range though. The ratio between forward and downward movement of the bullet is still favorable. At the “extreme” all bullets would be going straight down, no longer forward at all, and muzzle velocity difference on identical bullets would spread out those eventual impacts tremendously. Conversely, a few yards from the barrel, very high ES would make almost no difference, and all of our shooting is done along the spectrum between those extremes.

Even 1k long range is much closer to short range than it is to that effect of a bullet coming in at ~60 degree angles, but we have certainly seen this in videos, and a vertical target is at a real disadvantage, essentially exaggerating actual vertical dispersion, but that’s a separate matter. We know watching our 1k traces that the bullet is dropping in from a distinct arc, on its path to what would become an eventual vertical free fall.

I don’t know how much V spread we can get away with at close range with still-competitive groups, but SR dispersion from ES is not in proportional linear relationship with LR, that relationship would plot out exponentially to the axis limit, with the ratio of dispersion being that of the two areas “under the curve” - basically big and getting worse, to the disadvantage of the longer range.
 
Last edited:
I don’t know about today, but as of yesterday, David Christian was leading the several Americans (all very good) competing at Bisley in the European championship long range pair fire matches.

And here I thought you were referring to the below conversation:


I just wasted 30 minutes of my life trying to see if this thread was going anywhere…I will never get that time back.
Someone like Bryan Litz spend their life to be better at internal and external ballistics.
I recommend you buy his new book coming out in September

Honest question and I am not trolling with this post: @Beiruty are you just trolling the forum?
 
And here I thought you were referring to the below conversation:





Honest question and I am not trolling with this post: @Beiruty are you just trolling the forum?
It’s pretty evident the guy has a vocabulary. He’s already admitted that he doesn’t do much but sit at a range and shoot a rifle or two that likely far from accurate.

The data he used isnt his and Bryan is a “close personal friend”. Everything else is just conjecture and regurgitated data from other sources, most is suspect at best.
 
It’s pretty evident the guy has a vocabulary. He’s already admitted that he doesn’t do much but sit at a range and shoot a rifle or two that likely far from accurate.

The data he used isnt his and Bryan is a “close personal friend”. Everything else is just conjecture and regurgitated data from other sources, most is suspect at best.
I published my paper 3 years ago. Litz book just came out.
If you do not like to read this post, move on to the next thread.
 
What I really like to see is posters who identify themselves by their real names. With a keyboard and screen name one can be free to make any assertion without consequences to ones reputation. For some that seems to be too much of a temptation. Also, is someone tells me that they are serious about learning about accuracy's fine details, and in the next breath tell me that they have done their work with factory rifles, I tend to be skeptical. How many individuals do we see at ranges, being used by shooters that do not compete? My challenge to those who think that they understand these issues....shoot an aggregate to confirm your theories. IMO we see far too many "wallet groups".
 
Since I will soon have access to a 500 yard range, I was doing to archive searching on ladder tests so I could see some examples. This one came up in my search...

I got a big chuckle remembering about this thread.
 
Since I will soon have access to a 500 yard range, I was doing to archive searching on ladder tests so I could see some examples. This one came up in my search...

I got a big chuckle remembering about this thread.
This one is a painful read. I just went back 4 pages and wasted about 45 minutes of my life. My highlights were Beiruty giving advice to Dave Way and then Bart kindly pointing out the irony in this situation. Reminds me when I was a kid and my parents had company over to play cards (two couples) and the one guy drove a 76 Monte Carlo at a dirt track in northern Michigan and he was offering he driving expertise to a very close friend of my dad’s that I was told to call Uncle Benny (but got lost in translation and my brother and I called him Uncle Bunny). The two couples didn’t know each other and just had my parents as mutual friends. Finally, my dad stopped Mr. Wheeler from talking and said, “you know Benny drives in NASCAR, right?” Mr. Wheeler was familiar with the name but apparently not the face of Benny Parsons (who my dad built race engines for with Odie Skeen). And still to this day, the irony of that night is burned into my memory and always reminds me that one should always know the audience they are talking to and that results will always speak louder than theory at the end of the day.
RIP Uncle Bunny (lol)
Dave.
 

Upgrades & Donations

This Forum's expenses are primarily paid by member contributions. You can upgrade your Forum membership in seconds. Gold and Silver members get unlimited FREE classifieds for one year. Gold members can upload custom avatars.


Click Upgrade Membership Button ABOVE to get Gold or Silver Status.

You can also donate any amount, large or small, with the button below. Include your Forum Name in the PayPal Notes field.


To DONATE by CHECK, or make a recurring donation, CLICK HERE to learn how.

Forum statistics

Threads
165,838
Messages
2,204,651
Members
79,160
Latest member
Zardek
Back
Top