In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
nononsense
bigbore4570
Member Posts: 36 ✭✭
Well here goes, i couldn't help but see that nononsense is not one of the moderators. of all people here on gunbroker, nononsense and justc have been some of the most complete and knowledgeable "gun people" i have found. this is not meant to be a slight at all to 1911a1 fan, but i don't know that he was the best selection for co-moderator of this forum. of the 3 people i saw listed by others, Richbug, JustC, and Nononsense, 1911A1fan was not one. two others nominated themselves, as i read it, but other than that, I saw noone nominate anyone but these 3. richbug turned it down. JustC accepted and Nononsense asked what was wanted of him. i understand a bow-out, but never got that publicly from nononsense. then again, i never saw a public nomination of 1911a1fan. if nononsense declined the position, i can see that, but the selection of 1911a1fan above him is above me. i checked back through the 72 open posts on the forum and noticed that justc and nononsense had a huge amount of posts back to a very seldom 1911a1fan post. i just figured on some kind of democracy here and a vote on who would be moderator(s) rather than an arbitrary selection of a reloader of a wealth of knowledge and a reloader who seldom posts in the reloading forum. i feel like i am going to get blasted back at, but i can take it. i just feel like there were other people who SHOW more knowledge on the subject than 1911A1fan. just my opinion, and i hope the topic isn't locked before i can see some replies to it.
I'm not an expert, but i did stay in a Holiday Inn Express last night.
I'm not an expert, but i did stay in a Holiday Inn Express last night.
Comments
The problem here is that Windows can't open the trajectory.tbl file (which is the one I need to answer my questions).
Interesting, but I can open all the other Pointblank files. Just my luck.
Did you encounter the same problem when using the software?
Which program did you tell Windows to use to open the trajectory file?
Sorry to be such a bother
Jack
No, I didn't run into any problems downloading the program or using when I first started a number of years ago. I just tried it again and I created a file on my 'C' drive and it all loaded just fine. Did you use the 'zip' feature and did it download and unzip the files correctly? Try deleting all of the files completely and then download it again. If this doesn't work, delete everything from the download and use this link for another program:
http://www.eskimo.com/~jbm/calculations/traj/traj.html
I use several other progams that cost a lot of money but that provide an incredible resource for the things that I do.
Let me know how this plays out and I'll keep checking back to lend a hand.
Best.
I just ran these against JMB and another program and they are within 1/10th of an inch of each other probably due to barrel length or chrono placement.
100 yds = 0.0"
200 yds = 2.5"
300 yds = 11.8"
400 yds = 30.4"
500 yds = 61.3"
Best.
You nailed it. I deleted the program and downloaded PointBlank again. Now, everything works perfectly. It is an amazing piece of software.
Please help me with another related question. Using the PointBlank program for the .223, 55 gr. Nosler Ballistic Tip: 1. I used a ballistic coefficient of .267 (found this at Midway); 2. I used a scope height of 2.75 inches (measuring the center of the Leupold tube to the center of the bore); 3. I used a target zero range of 200 yds; 4. I used a muzzle velocity of 2800 fps (the quoted fps for the ammo is 3000 but my barrel length is only 18 inches, so I estimated a loss of 200 fps).
The printout showed that with a 200 yd zero, the bullet trajectory would be +1.48 inches at 100 yards. So, if I adjusted the Leupold to have the bullet point-of-impact 1.5 inches above my point-of-aim at 100 yards, would this mean that the rifle would be zeroed for 200 yards (at least in a rough way)???
Crazy question, I know...but like I said, I don't have access to a range greater than 100 yards at this time.
The reason I am going thru all this crazy estimating is because the optic I have on the rifle is a Leupold VX111, Long Range Target, with their new Varmint Reticle. The reticle works off a 200 yard zero, and then provides hash marks for longer distances. If I can get the scope "close" before I make my infrequent journey to a real shooting range, I can save a lot of valuable time.
Thanks again,
Jack
nononsense
You nailed it. I deleted the program and downloaded PointBlank again. Now, everything works perfectly. It is an amazing piece of software.
Please help me with another related question. Using the PointBlank program for the .223, 55 gr. Nosler Ballistic Tip: 1. I used a ballistic coefficient of .267 (found this at Midway); 2. I used a scope height of 2.75 inches (measuring the center of the Leupold tube to the center of the bore); 3. I used a target zero range of 200 yds; 4. I used a muzzle velocity of 2800 fps (the quoted fps for the ammo is 3000 but my barrel length is only 18 inches, so I estimated a loss of 200 fps).
The printout showed that with a 200 yd zero, the bullet trajectory would be +1.48 inches at 100 yards. So, if I adjusted the Leupold to have the bullet point-of-impact 1.5 inches above my point-of-aim at 100 yards, would this mean that the rifle would be zeroed for 200 yards (at least in a rough way)???
Crazy question, I know...but like I said, I don't have access to a range greater than 100 yards at this time.
The reason I am going thru all this crazy estimating is because the optic I have on the rifle is a Leupold VX111, Long Range Target, with their new Varmint Reticle. The reticle works off a 200 yard zero, and then provides hash marks for longer distances. If I can get the scope "close" before I make my infrequent journey to a real shooting range, I can save a lot of valuable time.
Thanks again,
Jack
Yes, but you need to actually shoot the rifle and find out exactly where it's shooting. This method will give you a rough 200 yard zero though.
Good, I'm glad it loaded correctly. It's a good program for uses such as yours.
The process you outlined will work just fine. You will need to fine tune the zero because you are guesstimating the velocity. I don't think you'll lose that much velocity by cutting a few inches off of your barrel but who knows? Generally, I figure about 25 FPS./inch of barrel length lost and that works out pretty close in most situations. But even that's a guess or rather an average of lots of shooting and barrel cutting by lots of folks.
Best.