E targets in longrange benchrest

[tom]

That sounds great Clay!

I received 43 more holes today, and we got one boys!!! Check out #12 brown, now we're talking! This was pulled of the "adjusted acoustic center" data I got today.



I realize that Glenn's record we sent in only shrunk .0097", and that may or may not be human error or paper shrinkage or...? But there's error in my bal x app working with a picture as well, and this hole is going in the $$$ folder!

Tom

 

[Bc'z]

That sounds great Clay!

I received 43 more holes today, and we got one boys!!! Check out #12 brown, now we're talking!

View attachment 1520668

I realize that Glenn's record we sent in only shrunk .0097", and that may or may not be human error or paper shrinkage or...? But there's error in my bal x app working with a picture as well, and this hole is going in the $$$ folder!

Tom

Tom fuk it, I'm not the sharpest tool in the drawer but I ain't the dullest either....
How we get two 12's?
I'm trying to get into a lil LR BR not run away.

 

[tom]

Tom fuk it, I'm not the sharpest tool in the drawer but I ain't the dullest either....
How we get two 12's?
I'm trying to get into a lil LR BR not run away.

I measured the real hole, best I can see it, to the plotted one for "group size". I haven't studied this latest data that closely yet, there could be more "$$$" holes.

Tom

 

[Dave Way]

That sounds great Clay!

I received 43 more holes today, and we got one boys!!! Check out #12 brown, now we're talking! This was pulled of the "adjusted acoustic center" data I got today.

View attachment 1520668

I realize that Glenn's record we sent in only shrunk .0097", and that may or may not be human error or paper shrinkage or...? But there's error in my bal x app working with a picture as well, and this hole is going in the $$$ folder!

Tom

Show me a system that plots them all like that and I’m on board with electronics. I’m surprised from what I’ve heard about target positioning, microphone positioning and target being perpendicular to the bench that only one plots properly. I would think they would all plot properly if that’s the case or are we seeing the limits of the system even when everything is set up properly? Do we know what the wind conditions were like when this target was shot?

I hope we someday see a system that works all the time. We simply don’t seem to be there yet.

Thanks for the effort Tom.

Dave.

 

[Bc'z]

I measured the real hole, best I can see it, to the plotted one for "group size". I haven't studied this latest data that closely yet, there could be more "$$$" holes.

Tom

Now I see what you were looking at
I think

 

[sdean]

I measured the real hole, best I can see it, to the plotted one for "group size". I haven't studied this latest data that closely yet, there could be more "$$$" holes.

Tom

If the actual hole for shot 2 is other side of line, then the question is are you willing to accept that. I have a shotmarker for years and got tired of testing. Very few will plot the same hole. I shoot Fclass and willing to accept that instead of pulling targets in the heat of the South.

 

[tom]

If the actual hole for shot 2 is other side of line, then the question is are you willing to accept that. I have a shotmarker for years and got tired of testing. Very few will plot the same hole. I shoot Fclass and willing to accept that instead of pulling targets in the heat of the South.

It appears I may have been wrong anyway, but as i said, i am okay with admitting that. The "raw data" doesn't look like the "adjusted acoustic center" one that I pulled that pic from anyway.

Tom

 

[Dave Way]

It appears I may have been wrong anyway, but as i said, i am okay with admitting that. The "raw data" doesn't look like the "adjusted acoustic center" one that I pulled that pic from anyway.
View attachment 1520780
Tom

So in simple terms, you still haven’t found one hole in a target that lines up with the e-target?

Dave.

 

[tom]

So in simple terms, you still haven’t found one hole in a target that lines up with the e-target?

Dave.

I need a big screen at work today, there's one over left side that looks close ish.

Tom

 

[DHuffman]

Maybe I'm looking at it wrong but if you're shooting an e target and they're not changing paper and NOT giving you your actual target you'll never know if you shot what the e target showed you shot?

Edit for clarity

 

[Ccrider]

Maybe I'm looking at it wrong but if you're shooting an e target and they're not changing paper and giving you your actual target you'll never know if you shot what the e target showed you shot?

You are looking at it wrong. You will know that you did not shoot what the e target showed.

The question will be how much is it off.

 

[DHuffman]

Whooh whooh’ I must be totally wrong here, my understanding was that a shooter does not receive a paper target only a screen shot. Where did I take a wrong turn ?

Edited my post

 

[Medic505]

I'm not going to bash E targets. Been there, done that. I just don't see it would be a boon for a precision sport.

But, like Dos XX said," you do get to go home early".

 

[Evan]

Or I prefer to consider that we may be able to shoot 6 or 8 targets in a day instead of just 4.

 

[Dave Way]

Or I prefer to consider that we may be able to shoot 6 or 8 targets in a day instead of just 4.

So at the end of that day you get to go home questioning whether 6 or 8 targets were correct instead of only questioning if 4 were correct. Hey, you got to shoot more targets, you didn’t have to buy or pull paper targets, and we are saving the planet by reducing waste at the same time!

I may have been looking at this all wrong… this may be a way to make rifle matches politically correct.

Dave.

 

[sdean]

You are looking at it wrong. You will know that you did not shoot what the e target showed.

The question will be how much is it off.

This is the correct answer. No paper target will ever align perfectly with the target. No one answers how much error will you accept. You can hope it will average out. Group shooters that put in the work like Tom almost couldn't use Etargets for load work. Other than that I love my Shotmarker.

 

[Evan]

So at the end of that day you get to go home questioning whether 6 or 8 targets were correct instead of only questioning if 4 were correct. Hey, you got to shoot more targets, you didn’t have to buy or pull paper targets, and we are saving the planet by reducing waste at the same time!

I may have been looking at this all wrong… this may be a way to make rifle matches politically correct.

Dave.

We don’t know each other personally, so it’s hard for me to interpret how you mean for that to be taken, Dave. That really doesn’t read very friendly so I will take the hint and go away.

Evan

 

[Ccrider]

This is the correct answer. No paper target will ever align perfectly with the paper. No one answers how much error will you accept. You can hope it will average out. Group shooters that put in the work like Tom almost couldn't use Etargets for load work. Other than that I love my Shotmarker.

I have a Shotmarker and it beats the hell out of having to drive to the target to see where you just shot when tuning a rifle. I actually prefer the long range target camera but use both the Shotmarker and the camera.

If the margin of error for the Shotmarker is greater than the normal margin of victory, it seems simple to me that the Shotmarker should not be used to measure group size in a br match.

 

[DHuffman]

If the margin of error for the Shotmarker is greater than the normal margin of victory, it seems simple to me that the Shotmarker should not be used to measure group size in a br match.

Appreciate your response, BR matches regularly come down to a few thou so that's very telling.

This topic has gotten pretty polarizing, some people are willing to give up the accuracy of the measurement and the ability to ever check or verify it and some are not so who's wrong here?

Nobody really I guess but I plan on spending my money going to matches that measure paper and give you the target so you can check it and dispute an error if it's going to change the outcome of a match whether it's in my favor or not.
If that makes me a pain in the ass I guess it is what it is.

 

[davidjoe]

Maybe said already, but a shootmarker error induced by Doppler effect of a wind shift in F-Class may cause that shot to drop a point, but it won’t wreck the value of the prior shots or the subsequent shots.

Groups are judged by the worst shot relative to the others, so the stakes of a single error, real or perceived, are multiplies higher in BR.