Long range airgun shooting

[Woodie]

Harry Fuller stirred the hornets nest over here on the bbs, and for all his doubters, it can be done, I achieved it but it took me over 15 attempts ( 5 shots per group). I am not good enough to do it consistently, but the group size he is speaking about, is definitely possible. I thought I would try and do it again today, but I failed as the winds were not very kind to me. Will try again when the conditions settle. Did this with a 18 ft/lbs rifle.

[Zico]

Yep, I think 1 or 2 on here owe him an apology. Did anyone in Gary C's group start a thread on their long range test results?.. was looking earlier but cant seem to find it.

[GEOFF]

Here you go ;)
http://www.airgunbbs.com/forums/showthread.php?t=214343&highlight=Robert.22

[JohnBam]

Invite is firmed up for w/e 31Aug to 1st Sept

Still to come... I can't wait to see their results, I hope the sun shines and the wind is still, and there bellys empty to eat there hats :D

Harry Fuller stirred the hornets nest over here on the bbs, and for all his doubters, it can be done, I achieved it but it took me over 15 attempts ( 5 shots per group). I am not good enough to do it consistently, but the group size he is speaking about, is definitely possible. I thought I would try and do it again today, but I failed as the winds were not very kind to me. Will try again when the conditions settle. Did this with a 18 ft/lbs rifleWell done mate :D

[Terry D]

...it can be done, I achieved it but it took me over 15 attempts ( 5 shots per group).

Can you state exactly what you did and at what range, mate? As someone who tried and failed to group inside an inch at 100 yards with any degree of consistency, I'm truly interested in your long range session.

All the best.

[JohnBam]

This subject has got me wondering something.

Do we believe the rifle and pellet combo is incapable of the sub 1 ich feat or simply, no man can pull it off consistantlly (excuse the pun).

Do you think todays rifles can theoretically pull this off consistantlly in ideal positions, ie clamped in a windless or constant slight side wind (as per Harry) and some sort of device doing the trigger work. And weighed and sized good BC pellets.

Or, is the beef with the shooters ability and the conditions being far from the ideal.

Out of interest Terry, what kind of results you getting?

[RichardH]

I've seen groups close to an inch at 100 with an Eliminator.

Baz has posted of hitting shotgun cases regularly at that distance with some Theoben or other

Sid or Craig have pulled of something close with a Career

It can certainly be done with an FAC airgun at 100 but I suspect is very sensitive to hold, rifle consistency and ammunition performance.

After all with a centrefire its commonplace so the human element is definately do-able its velocity consistency, wind variation and bc that are the killers

Richard

[Sid]

I think the lowest power I ever tried for 100 yard shooting was something like 20ftlbs worth of 15 grain .22, whatever that works out at in terms of velocity. I can't remember the group sizes, but they must have been fairly unimpressive because I didn't bother again after a couple of sessions.

The Career was certainly capable of something like an inch at 100 yards when everything went OK, but that was using about 45ftlbs energy with a 21 grain Bis Mag. I actually used to write all the group sizes and wind conditions etc down in a little notebook, but god knows where it is now.

What gets my goat is when the claims go from paper to live quarry ( like Harry " I never missed a rabbit even at 100+ yards " Fuller ). I'm no bunnyhugger, but at the end of the day they are living creatures, not convenient reactive targets.

[Terry D]

Out of interest Terry, what kind of results you getting?

Using rifles from 12 ft.lbs. to 60 ft.lbs., all of which would do one-holers at 50 yards, I shot off a sandbag rest in air that was as still as we could get it - i.e. not showing visible disturbance, and at 100 yards I produced 10-shot groups that ranged from pellet-on pellet to 6 inches in diameter. The trouble was, none of the really tight groups came from consecutive pellets! It was this inconsistency that frustrated me.

Had there been a selection of small targets down at the target end, say 12-bore cartridge cases placed end-on, then they would have been hit quite regularly, but not consistently and certainly not consecutively. Anyone watching would have concluded that it's possible to hit a one-inch target at 100 yards with an air rifle, but they'd also be forced to admit that it was far from an exact piece of shooting.

[flims]

Using rifles from 12 ft.lbs. to 60 ft.lbs., all of which would do one-holers at 50 yards, I shot off a sandbag rest in air that was as still as we could get it - i.e. not showing visible disturbance, and at 100 yards I produced 10-shot groups that ranged from pellet-on pellet to 6 inches in diameter. The trouble was, none of the really tight groups came from consecutive pellets! It was this inconsistency that frustrated me.

Had there been a selection of small targets down at the target end, say 12-bore cartridge cases placed end-on, then they would have been hit quite regularly, but not consistently and certainly not consecutively. Anyone watching would have concluded that it's possible to hit a one-inch target at 100 yards with an air rifle, but they'd also be forced to admit that it was far from an exact piece of shooting.

hi terry, i liked what you said however there is a point im cross with. even if the rifle groups one inch all the time all day long, i still wouldnt say i can hit targets all day long at the distance. ive been posting videos online of long range shooting for a couple of months. some of my groups even at further distances are quite good but unless i dial correctly for the wind i wont get a hit, and if the wind happens to gust from 1/2way to 3/4 of the distance im shooting, the group opens up again. if one looks at the 1000 yard competitions, this is very true. you will have many rifles that group under a 1MOA at that distance, but because of wind and gusting winds groups still tend to open up widely at times. whole point is, you can do so much till it leaves the barrel, but once in mid air you can only watch to follow up with yor next shot.
why don't you try it indoors if you just want to see the capability of the weapons, that way you eliminate the odds.

[Baldie]

I would have thought trying to get a 1" group with any [light] projectile at 100 yards using air gun speeds would have been an exercise in futility if there were any sort of breeze or wind. :D

Wouldn't you need a warm - dry - windless environment to do this? Which by default will mean somewhere overseas?

From what I've heard this Harry chap is a credible individual with an earned (good) reputation. I understood he was banned on the strength of what he said he shot with [FAC grade] air rifles. There is, after all, a sticky in the Rimfire section that clearly states Banning follows discussion of shooting specified quarry with air rifles. Zero tolerance too.


That said, don't we all deserve a second chance? If he has the limitations of posting here explained to him, (if he hasn't already) perhaps he could be allowed back to discuss his methods? One thing is for sure. He has a significant envionmental advantage over anyone shooting in the UK ......

Unless you know someone willing to let you use firearms in an aircraft hanger. ;) <windless 100/150 yard range>

...

[Woodie]

Can you state exactly what you did and at what range, mate? As someone who tried and failed to group inside an inch at 100 yards with any degree of consistency, I'm truly interested in your long range session.

All the best.

Hi Terry,

Shooting was off a bench rest, range was 100metres. My rifle was initially zeroed at 40m metres, and increased the zero range by 15 metres increments. Be prepared for a lot of walking to and fro towards the target. The scope was eventually max height (click wise) at IIRC, was about 75 metres. After that, it was down to using mill dots.

I had little “flags”, or should I say pieces of cloth on a stick from 70 metres and thereafter every 10 metres. I tried to take the shot when all flags were still, but I find that it was more of a hindrance and after a few groups relying on the flags, I did not really use them after that.

You’re right about consistency; I shot 5 shots groups over and over. They were between 4 and 8 inches, but this was because of the air, different bar pressure and bad shooting. Then I decided to shoot at 200 bar, which seems to be the most consistent for my rifle (confirmed on the chronograph). I fired 5 shots, and then topped the rifle back up to 200 bar for the next group. I stopped walking towards the target between every shot because when I returned, I noticed that I was sitting in a different position between shots, so then I never got up between 5 shots groups to check the target.

The groups got a lot closer, on average 3- 4 inches. Just kept on shooting every 15 minutes as the amount of concentration required shooting at ranges like this is enormous I find, hands become very sweaty, have to control breathing, and trigger squeeze, concentrate on absolutely everything.

I managed to get 1.5 inch group, then called it a day. It may have been luck,probably was but I certainly am not marksman, and couldn’t replicate that same group the next day, but got groups between 4 and 5 inches.

Still for me, it was an achievement. My point being is that it is possible, and sadly, will keep on trying to get a degree of consistency

[Born Again]

I got an inch-ish 10 shot group at 70yds on my first attempt, without proper equipment.

I'm going to try again, but the weather since the first attempt hasn't been suitable.

Even with the right kit I doubt I'll ever manage it at 100yds with a 12ft/lb rifle.

[snock]

I seem to remember Harry was claiming sub 1" groups at 150 yards, not 100.

:)

[Woodie]

but you can't really compare a 18ft.lbs to a 27ft.lbs, big difference.

[PeteB]

I seem to remember Harry was claiming sub 1" groups at 150 yards, not 100

I think there was some confusion over what was printed in the magazine and what Harry was actually claiming. He said that he was getting 1.2" groups at 150 yards.

[Baldie]

I seem to remember Harry was claiming sub 1" groups at 150 yards, not 100.

:)


So I hear. Does that mean 150 yard shots are a banning offence? :confused:

[snock]

So I hear. Does that mean 150 yard shots are a banning offence? :confused:

No Geoff.:)

What Harry was banned for was repeatedly posting that he regularly shoots foxes with airguns. He has also been seen slagging this forum off on other forums.

After I edited the first offending post to remove the reference - and him agreeing not to mention it again - he went and posted it at least once more. And not just in passing, either, he seemed to be enjoy posting about it.

150 yard paper targets are fine, but foxes at any range with an airgun does nothing for our sport over here in the U.K., even if it is fine down-under.

Regards,
Pete.

[baz]

As Pete said "Harry" thought he was beyond the rules even though admin were lenient in explaining to him about Foxes and airguns, others have had permanent bans for it with no second chance

Plus he has been enjoying slagging this forum (I am told) so why would he want to get back on here anyway:D

I have shot 8 pellets (magful of Bismags in a Career) into a pepsi bottle cap at a measured 100yds, rifle was set at 47ftlb, this was off Landrover bonnet and no noticeable wind (in a valley) I only did it once but it was quite easy to be honest, as Terry has said I would expect consistent similar results would be hard to do, I tried it on paper at same range at another time when it was a bit windy and I got around a 6 inch group

27ftlb out to 150yds, I know I couldnt shoot consistent 1.2 inch groups, I can shoot under an inch with my 22/250 but thats a different ballgame with 50grn "pellet" at 3800fps:D

[fitzcarraldo]

Not being picky here (yes I am) why isn't this thread in the airgun related section?

For the life of me, advancing towards the portals of senility by the way, what use is long distance air rifle shooting?

Half the enjoyment is getting as close to the quarry as you can before taking it out quickly and efficiently.

I once got within 15 yards of a dustbin before the bluddy bin men came and emptied it.

[baz]

It is in the airgun section:confused:

[fitzcarraldo]

It is in the airgun section:confused:

Am I leading a double life? Whoops. I blame the box of fermenting dates at lunchtime.

:D

[snock]

Am I leading a double life?

:D

Only 1 account per person!:D

I moved it shortly after Baz replied.;)

[Gary C]

I seem to remember Harry was claiming sub 1" groups at 150 yards, not 100.

:)

Indeed

But again let me stress, I do not disbelieve anybody who says that they have done this. I call anybody a liar who says they can go out, feel the wind, judge it, and put 5 shots into a 1" circle at 150 yards with certainty.

Harry played the game, but then his "embellishment" went OTT with the claims of "never missing" etc.

Sadly, once caught out as a blatant fantasist every other claim is then brought into question.

Just another lonely old josser with too much time on his hands sadly IMHO

[fitzcarraldo]

Only 1 account per person!:D

I moved it shortly after Baz replied.;)

Cor, forra minute I thought I'd caught that deja vu bug that's going around.

[Jon Budd]

it can be done, I achieved it but it took me over 15 attempts ( 5 shots per group). Did this with a 18 ft/lbs rifle.

I refer to my earlier thread about groups.. if it took you 15 goes, shooting a relatively small number of shots per group, then it's a fluke, not a measure of what's possible. Sorry...

Sniper_Wolf's 20 shot group with his EV2 is quite another matter..... very impressive, but that 2" @ 100

[Woodie]

I refer to my earlier thread about groups.. if it took you 15 goes, shooting a relatively small number of shots per group, then it's a fluke, not a measure of what's possible. Sorry...

Sniper_Wolf's 20 shot group with his EV2 is quite another matter..... very impressive, but that 2" @ 100

Thats excellent shooting by sniper_wolf, so that shows you can get a consistent group at 100 yards. What is the ft.lbs he is running at?

I will try it again when we have a perfect day. Unforutunately, the spread per fps varies greatly after 5 shots, so I am really limited by that factor if I have any chance to get those groups. Any more shots without topping up opens the group. Nevertheless, its fun and challenging.

[JohnBam]

I'm :confused: :)

I did a bit of this crack yesterday, and the biggest groups were just over 4 inch horizontal and around 3 inch vertical with a springer at approx 3 kicks in the arrse under 100yds!!!

I was testing to see if some of the shots actually grouped rather than the whole lot of them. Taking ones that did group to mean, I was shooting them when the wind was the same, and I did the same technique. Other shots all over the joint due to me/ my equipment/ variable wind.

My thinking is, if nothing grouped and the shots were trully random, hardly any shots would be together, but some did form 3 and 4 shots group, and I'm assuming (dangerous thing to do) that these were more than coincedance.

The shot spread of 6 inch you describe lads, are these mostlly due to horizontal spread, ie wind and is your vertical spread a lot better?

Heres the link to my results if ya want to check them out.

http://www.airgunbbs.com/forums/showthread.php?t=216110

[AAS410]

I think this is great, groups like this at 100 yards.:D But can't hit a 40MM disc at 38 Yard.:o These boys must be the next SAS recruits. But make sure the targets over 95 yards.;)

George

[Baldie]

No Geoff.:)

What Harry was banned for was repeatedly posting that he regularly shoots foxes with airguns. He has also been seen slagging this forum off on other forums.

After I edited the first offending post to remove the reference - and him agreeing not to mention it again - he went and posted it at least once more. And not just in passing, either, he seemed to be enjoy posting about it.

150 yard paper targets are fine, but foxes at any range with an airgun does nothing for our sport over here in the U.K., even if it is fine down-under.

Regards,
Pete.

Fair comment. [I seem to have been misled. :o] Seems like you've done more than a fair bit to help the fella out. I'm aware he mentioned what he shot, which was a (rightly) zero tolerance offence, but I had no idea he'd already been given a number of chances to make good. :o


As Pete said "Harry" thought he was beyond the rules even though admin were lenient in explaining to him about Foxes and airguns, others have had permanent bans for it with no second chance

Plus he has been enjoying slagging this forum (I am told) so why would he want to get back on here anyway:D


Doesn't sound much like a 'quality' person to me. :rolleyes: Hang 'im. ;) :D

[figjam]

...............................................

[JohnBam]

I think this is great, groups like this at 100 yards.:D But can't hit a 40MM disc at 38 Yard.:o These boys must be the next SAS recruits. But make sure the targets over 95 yards.;)

George

Please explain this one for me george, sure hope your not having an unfounded dig at my claims :rolleyes:. I'm sure we could arrange a measured indoor 38 yard shoot off at a 40mm disc, if you like.... And no need for any fancy bench rests either, here we could even do it standing or kneeling if you like :D.

Checked the distance in Chairgun for the range I shot at. Assuming a 15' upward shot, and rifle combro'ed yesterday averaging 795fps with exacts (792 - 799 over 5 shots),drop average was 20 inch (2 sheets of a4 taped together longwise, dot at top of one, pellets hitting bottom of other) distance was between 92 and 94 yards.

Even left the bench and the chair I used to set up the targets on(it was fooked, thats I why I used it ,before any accusations) where I'd used them, if you fancy giving it a go, before ripping out snidey comments. :p:D

[DAR]

If your sub 12 ft lbs rifle will go through a water filled drinks can AND 1/4 ply at 100 yards then I would chrono it as it should have around 2-3 ft lbs at that distance and that will not do as discribed above.
Dont fall into the "Harry" trap
Ben

Hi Ben,

It's just Kenny's written English and C- in composition:D
The ply board was not behind the drinks cans. I filled the drinks cans with river water and placed them on top of the boards. The pellets passed cleanly through the cans. The pellets also passed cleanly through the ply to which the paper targets were attached. Not both together.

[Born Again]

then again harry's posts were also edited and rewritten too! so im not surprised, why is there such a big defensive about all these long range posts and why are certain members being let away with murder in here!
There were over 1000 views to one of the threads alone that harry started and they werent watching the abusive manner in which he was being treated, infact he conducted himself as a perfect gentlemen way beyond the point of abuse that i would have snapped at. It was a very informative and knowledgable thread, surely this forum is all about learning more and respecting other members views and opinions? (if i recall he only snapped once the threats were made personally about him, now all of sudden the impossible has been achieved !!!! doent that warrant the return of threads and an apology?)

kenny

p.s. whats happened to this place!

I agree with you to an extent Kenny, I'm embarrassed at the way Harry was treated on this the premier British forum. It makes us look like a bunch of kids.

His post was badly edited to remove the word "Fox", which changed it's meaning. Gary then jumped on the new meaning, ignoring people who posted that the original text had been edited, and when Harry posted the F word again, to explain what had been edited out, he was banned.

[Woodie]

I'm :confused: :)

I did a bit of this crack yesterday, and the biggest groups were just over 4 inch horizontal and around 3 inch vertical with a springer at approx 3 kicks in the arrse under 100yds!!!

I was testing to see if some of the shots actually grouped rather than the whole lot of them. Taking ones that did group to mean, I was shooting them when the wind was the same, and I did the same technique. Other shots all over the joint due to me/ my equipment/ variable wind.

My thinking is, if nothing grouped and the shots were trully random, hardly any shots would be together, but some did form 3 and 4 shots group, and I'm assuming (dangerous thing to do) that these were more than coincedance.

The shot spread of 6 inch you describe lads, are these mostlly due to horizontal spread, ie wind and is your vertical spread a lot better?

Heres the link to my results if ya want to check them out.

http://www.airgunbbs.com/forums/showthread.php?t=216110


Good shooting Johnbam.Springers are difficult to shoot, but I hear that Pieman is brilliant with them. Would like to see what results he gets,and if there is an advantage for pcp over springers.I know for a fact that I cannot shoot springers well, thats why I moved onto pcp.:rolleyes:

[JohnBam]

Good shooting Johnbam.Springers are difficult to shoot, but I hear that Pieman is brilliant with them. Would like to see what results he gets,and if there is an advantage for pcp over springers.I know for a fact that I cannot shoot springers well, thats why I moved onto pcp.:rolleyes:

Cheers mate, would also like to see Harv and John Budd having a go at this. Great springer shooters the pair of them and use well tuned rifles. Bet they could achieve, substantially better than I have.

Hope they take it up.

And Kenny.... spot on, on yer comments mate re the Harry situation. :)

[Terry D]

And look now, people are achieving it!.

Are they? Where's that then?

[Gary C]

Couldn't agree more Kenny, tbh it doesnt really surprise me that he's slagged off this forum since, I would too if I'd suffered the abuse he did. And look now, people are achieving it!. Big slice of humble pie should be being chewed on at the moment by a few on here. :)


As TD said

Who is achieveing:

1. Sub 1" groups at 150 yards
2. Has the ability to walk up and shoot a 1" disk with his 1st shot at 150 yards
3. Has shot a large number of rabbits at over 100 yards and never missed one?

If anybody thinks they can do that I will put a grand with one of th emods on here aganst their £500 and they can come down here and show me.

So far it HASN'T HAPPENED.


There's always a gullible fool waiting to follow a false messiah. And nobody is as zealous as a fool.

ps

Did nobody ever pick up on Harry's constant need for admiration? a decent psychologist would perhaps offer a little insight...;)

[Bowie EA]

Kenny

I have to say that I understood exactly what you meant with regards to the can and the 1/4 inch ply. Having also enjoyed a number of HFT events at Juniper Green where the rifles were all chrono'd (all happily passing below 12fp) I must say that I agree with your view of posts that suggest otherwise.

If it was not for the fact that the competitions that you help run, at Juniper Green I would not have managed to get 2 people back into airgunning and they have both comented on the well run, safe setup and responsible shooters.

Like you say this is meant to be about enjoying our sport and sharing ideas, information and supporting one another.

Also it is rather amazing the number of 100 yard ... long range fun that we have all been enoying since a certain someone started a certain post.

Cheers
Euan

Keep up the good work in Scotland as we all need to stick together

[Zico]

Are they? Where's that then?

Well, Sagres for one is at least reporting he has achieved it. (See the 1st post on this thread) I haven't witnessed it for myself obviously and so I suppose his claim will also be poo-pood also but I have no reason to disbelieve him, who would risk their repution by making unatainable claims
I dont believe its possible every time.. form, conditions and a fair bit of luck may come into it but keep plugging away and eventually a group could well fall into these parameters. I dont recall Harry saying he did it every time either like some seem to be suggesting.

[Gary C]

Well, Sagres for one is at least reporting he has achieved it. (See the 1st post on this thread) I haven't witnessed it for myself obviously and so I suppose his claim will also be poo-pood also but I have no reason to disbelieve him, who would risk their repution by making unatainable claims
I dont believe its possible every time.. form, conditions and a fair bit of luck may come into it but keep plugging away and eventually a group could well fall into these parameters. I dont recall Harry saying he did it every time either like some seem to be suggesting.

You don't recall..therefore it didn't happen?

I pulled Harry on several things, clear lies.

1. I watched his boasts and pulled him when he suggested that you can effectively walk up, sit down, judge the wind and hit a 1" target at 150 yards

2. I pulled him when he claimed to have killed many rabbits over 100 yards and never missed one.

If you believe either of those things mate you're a little naive.

I agree with Sagres on the possibility, I've produced great groups at very long ranges which were satisfying. But like sagres it took me a lot of attempts.

I've also hunted for years out to 80 yards and watched small wind variances move the pellets. I have NO problem with people claiming super accurate technique, super accurate guns, perfect pellets. Way beyond my ability - but that's no reason to decry it. It's the wind that stops you being able to produce that perfect shot to order.

Harry asserts you can read the wind. I say you can't at that distance. I have a grand that says that nobody else can.

[pieter]

WHAT HAS HAPPENED TO THIS PLACE THAT EVERYONE IS FIGHTING/ ACCUSING AND OR ARGUEING.......


!!stop the banning its WORSE than anything we can say or print on this forum!!

[Sid]

What some people need to realise about long range shooting is that it's only meaningful if you have a reasonable degree of control over where the pellet or bullet strikes. There are cut-off points, depending on range and equipment where the whole exercise degenerates into a game of chance. Eventually you may as well be rolling 5 dice to see how long it takes for them all to come up sixes.

I politely asked Harry to tell us about his methods for reading the wind and applying corrections ( before I came to the conclusion he was full of it ) and he didn't choose to reply. Not because he was banned either, he had enough time to write a number of long rambling posts in the meantime, while ignoring the question.

[Zico]

I pulled Harry on several things, clear lies.

1. I watched his boasts and pulled him when he suggested that you can effectively walk up, sit down, judge the wind and hit a 1" target at 150 yards

2. I pulled him when he claimed to have killed many rabbits over 100 yards and never missed one.



I dont recall him saying these things in the context you describe.. Well the threads gone now, so from what either of us remember of it its a bit like arguing about what happens when you pop your clogs. ;)
Glad you agree that it could well be possible.. Hope your long range test at the end of the month produces some interesting results, heres hoping for some favourable conditions. :)

[Graham2]

I was sad to see the original thread deleted, as it was very interesting, and I wanted to hear more about Harry's claims. I realise he may have stepped out of line, but plenty of others were insulting from the off, but he remained pretty civil despite it all. I feel that his experiments could be valuable to all shooters, as it's only by pushing the envelope that things change for the better. Who knows, maybe his local weather conditions are the key to this type of shooting. There's a world of difference between this draughty, damp island and his. However, we won't know if his location is the key, not on here anyway. PS Terry, when did you try for the 100 yard groups, and what pellets were you using?

[Davey K]

Interesting discussion this - I think, if you pick the bones out of the sceptics argument, you will find that they are not denying that sub inch 100 yard groups (or 1.5" 150 yards FAC) are technically achievable. Stands to sense if you put enough pellets down range in five shot groups on a perfect day, eventually (after a few days:D) you'll get some to group under the magic inch. I expect this is what the long-shooting weekend will show.

BUT the real deal with this is that you are simply shooting a small number of shots at a fixed point and then landing the pellets in a group on a sheet of paper. It demonstrates the ability of your equipment more than anything else. What is in considerable doubt is the ability to consistently land pellets on a specific target at these ranges i.e. reading the wind over this distance and making an individual adjustment to each shot to land it in a bullseye in a group under one inch. As the original poster indicated, he needed 150 shots to land 10 in a group on his paper. Sniper Wolf did some brilliant shooting but as stated by Buddy Boy, his group was nearly 2".

Is it possible to achieve sub 1 inch groups consistently whilst also landing your shots on a specific target area with a sub 12ft lb rifle? I don't think so.

I'd love to be wrong, but I've got to agree with Terry, Gary and Ben, wind is the factor, and not just wind, breeze, light breeze and even the slightest shift in the air. It will take your pellets left and right or up and down and, while they may still group, they will not land consistently on the target.

This is why Harry ruffled so many feathers, he claimed to be able to combine grouping at range with pin-point accuracy on a target area and then use this skill to take down live prey. I'm not dismissing his claims because I am not able to make a judgement on the weather conditions in an elevated location in Australia but I very much doubt he would be able to demonstrate his findings in this country.

Looking forward to seeing where this one goes!:)

[Davey K]

What some people need to realise about long range shooting is that it's only meaningful if you have a reasonable degree of control over where the pellet or bullet strikes. There are cut-off points, depending on range and equipment where the whole exercise degenerates into a game of chance. Eventually you may as well be rolling 5 dice to see how long it takes for them all to come up sixes.

I politely asked Harry to tell us about his methods for reading the wind and applying corrections ( before I came to the conclusion he was full of it ) and he didn't choose to reply. Not because he was banned either, he had enough time to write a number of long rambling posts in the meantime, while ignoring the question.

Or ignore what I said, because M4 summed it up better and more neatly in a couple of paras!!

I think I've caught Harry's rambling disease.........:o

[Terry D]

Well, Sagres for one is at least reporting he has achieved it. (See the 1st post on this thread) .

But he isn't, is he? He was shooting at 100 yards, not 150, where, after many, many attempts he reported 'I managed to get 1.5 inch group, then called it a day. It may have been luck,probably was but I certainly am not marksman, and couldn’t replicate that same group the next day, but got groups between 4 and 5 inches.'

This is a long, long way from any sort of consistent grouping at 150 yards, Zico, and a world away from producing reliable, hunting standard accuracy at such a range.

I'm sorry, and I think you'll find that I was always respectful to Harry during his short time on here, but having extensively researched this area of airgunning, I don't believe it's possible to produce reliable, humane accuracy, under field conditions, at 150 yards with any 27ft.lbs. air rifle.

Experimental grouping is tremendous fun and pushing the limits of performance is what I do as part of my living, but using a live animal as a target is just not on. There are too many variables.

Hunting is not about what's technically, theoretically or occasionally possible, it's what really happens when you squeeze that trigger. At 150 yards, in the real world of hunting, what's really most likely to happen is a wounded animal.

[Woodie]

Terry,

You cannot dismiss Harry's claims on my performance,as I am just average. I know there are much better shooters than me. Look at Sniper wolf, sitting getting 2 inches with a sub 12 rifle. I would like to see him do it benchrest with a 27ft.lbs rilfe and see what results he gets.

[Terry D]

Terry,

You cannot dismiss Harry's claims on my performance....

I wasn't doing that, mate, I was clarifying to Zico that you hadn't achieved what Harry claimed.

Hope that makes sense.

All the best,

Terry

[Terry D]

... i dont shoot above 80 yds with an air rifle, and i dont have a FAC rated one to try, but if a sub 12ft/lb rifle can consistantly and humanly drop quarry at 80 yds and below then i dont disbelieve that a weapon with almost X3 the power cant do it!

Erm...can we clarify this point before it all kicks off, Kenny?

Are you saying you shoot live quarry out to 80 yards with a sub-12 rifle?

Sorry if I've misconstrued, I've been up since 5 am. :o

All the best.

[Born Again]

Erm...can we clarify this point before it all kicks off, Kenny?

Are you saying you shoot live quarry out to 80 yards with a sub-12 rifle?

Sorry if I've misconstrued, I've been up since 5 am. :o

All the best.

A valid point, but are you highlighting it to deflect attention from the subject of Harry ?

Just asking, like.

[Terry D]

A valid point, but are you highlighting it to deflect attention from the subject of Harry ?

Just asking, like.

Why would I do that, Brian?

I'm highlighting it to avoid confusion. Clarification helps on that front, surely?

[Gary C]

thxs euan,
i must also reply that between your self and owen (i can never spell his name) are a bl00dy privelage to have at our shoots! (oh theres one this coming sunday;))

I cant comment or blow my trumpet at your comments aboutrange safety as i only run a range the way i was taught and expect it to be!

Gary your running away with yourself again and altering what was said in the original threads.

Nope Kenny. I am paraphrasing accurately. You are looking at the old tosser with rose tinted glasses.

until the threads are re-instated and we can cross referance tne truths from the wild accusations put grand back in your pocket and let this slide!

I have no interest in reinstating anything, just dismayed at the gullibility of some of our members


If you notice i have never yet tried to 'quote' anything directly but have merely stated facts that were on here, but even if the posts were back up it would still be unfair as they were heavily edited to suit someones outcome!

who says they were unfairly edited? sounds like a whine to me. "I didn't really say it..."

so please gary, drop this crusade against an ex-member who cant defend himself or reply since being hounded out of here!

again - what crusade Kenny? did I start the thread? did I introduce Harry?


what is being broadcast her again is non-factual versions of the truth, still to cast harry in the wrong light!

ah, a conspiracy theory, never let the truth get in the way of a good old conspiracy


If he annoyed you that much gary and got under your skin, you even told him it was impossible and that he was talking crap yet your hosting a long range shoot????

Why not? I find the concept interesting. I like hang gliding, the difference is that Harry claims to be able to fly

yet you ctirticise everyones posts here made about there attempts at doing the same thing, i have twice posting pictures on various threads of groups taken and they have magically disappeared, lets see if yours get to hang around!

Who's posts have I criticised Kenny? Show me a few.


rgds
kenny


Sorry Kenny, I offered to discuss this with you on the phone, but chipping away on here with illogical and rambling posts is more your style.
That's fine.
Follow your messiah Kenny, I hope he never lets you down.

[Born Again]

Why would I do that, Brian?


Why indeed, I'm at a loss as to why there has been such vilification of Harry.

Why not restore the thread with the abusive bits cut out and lock it, then we can put an end to all the misquotes and misunderstandings.

[Gary C]

Why indeed, I'm at a loss as to why there has been such vilification of Harry.

Why not restore the thread with the abusive bits cut out and lock it, then we can put an end to all the misquotes and misunderstandings.

What's the point Brian? there will then be accusations of thread doctoring to put him in a bad light.

Ask yourself this.

Why would I, or anybody else, seek to villify another shooter?. Envy? I don't think so. For the record, and the last time, I had doubts about the old fantasist when he started rambling.
I cut in when he started making claims that ultimately could damage our sport. Specifically that he is capable of punching a 1" target at 150 yards. Not grouping, not having a few sighters, but straight off the bat.
His second was the claim about never missing a rabbit over 100 yards. Totally risible and an encouragement to the gullible (and boy do we have a few) to start dropping pellets into live targets, completely against the work we all do to promote responsible hunting.

I will comment no more.

[Terry D]

Why indeed, I'm at a loss as to why there has been such vilification of Harry.

First, there has never been any 'vilification of Harry' from me, not once, never.

Secondly, the Mods took a decision for what they believed to be valid reasons. You may not agree with that decision but the Mods have a job to do and decision-making is a part of that.

[Woodie]

Terry,

when you tried this, what results were you getting with 60 ft.lbs?

[JohnBam]

Hey Gary nice to see some more reasoned argument from ya, rather than the stuff on the Harry thread....was suspecting you were pre menstral during that period :D


My 2 bobs, I cant recall him saying that he could hit a 1 inch target at 150... was it not a 1.25 inch group at 124yds that he did once? Cannae mind exactlly and without the original thread, no way of checking.

The second comment you stated re the 100 yd bunnys, was nigh pretty late on in the discussion, just before he got banned, and did this not original say the 'f'word and was edited. Not saying this kind of thing was right, just trying to go with the accuracy of what was said.

Also, I don't think Harry is any kind of new age messiah, but he has opened up the sport a little into new areas, pushing the rifles to the limit re target shooting. And peeps are starting to show some decent results on not absoltelly ideal conditions.

Although hunting at these ranges may be a different matter, as right enough the thing we are all pretty much agreed on is wind/air variance which can cause significant shift. However another country, and different attitudes to there quarry, perhaps he should have heeded the warning and steered away from that subject, as this is UK based and he probably doesnt understand the reasoning behind why we can't shed what we do, in any kind of bad light.



PS Gary like the new sig, better than the old one.... but what is a Dinlo? :)

[Terry D]

Terry,

when you tried this, what results were you getting with 60 ft.lbs?

Worse than when I wound down the rifle to 38 ft.lbs., mate. :o

I was using Bisley Magnums, graded, sorted and individually weighed - yes, it's tragic but so am I when I'm in 'nth-degree' mode. :rolleyes:

My average 10-shot groups at 100 yards, shot indoors with 60 ft.lbs. measured just under 3 inches. As I say, some pellets landed on top of each other, but others veered off to all points around the 1 inch disc target, sometimes by as much as 6 inches.

Outdoors, using range flags every 10 yards to assess the wind, those 'rogue' pellets would often miss by a foot, when I could feel or see not a trace of wind. Most frustrating, I can tell you. :o

[Woodie]

Worse than when I wound down the rifle to 38 ft.lbs., mate. :o

I was using Bisley Magnums, graded, sorted and individually weighed - yes, it's tragic but so am I when I'm in 'nth-degree' mode. :rolleyes:

My average 10-shot groups at 100 yards, shot indoors with 60 ft.lbs. measured just under 3 inches. As I say, some pellets landed on top of each other, but others veered off to all points around the 1 inch disc target, sometimes by as much as 6 inches.

Outdoors, using range flags every 10 yards to assess the wind, those 'rogue' pellets would often miss by a foot, when I could feel or see not a trace of wind. Most frustrating, I can tell you. :o


What was the spread of fps between those 10 shots?

[Greendogg]

I can spin, draw and fire with my walther cp88 and get a 1 inch group at 200 yards.;)

[Born Again]

What's the point Brian? there will then be accusations of thread doctoring to put him in a bad light.

Ask yourself this.

Why would I, or anybody else, seek to villify another shooter?. Envy? I don't think so. For the record, and the last time, I had doubts about the old fantasist when he started rambling.
I cut in when he started making claims that ultimately could damage our sport. Specifically that he is capable of punching a 1" target at 150 yards. Not grouping, not having a few sighters, but straight off the bat.
His second was the claim about never missing a rabbit over 100 yards. Totally risible and an encouragement to the gullible (and boy do we have a few) to start dropping pellets into live targets, completely against the work we all do to promote responsible hunting.

I will comment no more.

I would never suggest that you were envious of Harry, I know what you have achieved. When the original threads raged watching you and Harry arguing was like watching two people arguing about the plot of different films. You were taking little notice of his explanations and him little of yours. The only reference I saw of 100yd hunting was when he said that he was completing a 100yd group and a mixied rabbit stepped out from behind a log next to his target. The "never missed" quote was, I believe, caused by the clumsy mod editing I mentioned earlier.

Restoring the thread would end this now, we could see what had actually been said. I for one trust the mods to restore the thread correctly and will not be accusing anyone of editing the threads to show Harry in a bad light.

I stated in a previous thread, which may or may not be deleted, that I believed your original reaction was driven by the need to discourage the "differently intelligent" from attempting to hunt at these ranges, I have also recently posted that I very rarely hunt at more than 35yds myself, but this is paper punching fun and should be seen as such.

Harry should not be a victim of our need to educate our idiots, maybe he could have been asked to remove the hunting references but his work remains interesting and supported by evidence from other members. Baz claims to have hit a 12 bore cartridge 5 from 5 at 100yds and others I can't recall claimed similar results.

I'm going to try again as soon as decent weather allows, I hope others will too because it is an interesting diversion and maybe it will improve my technique at shorter ranges too. I doubt I will ever extend my hunting ranges but that's a different matter, that's hitting a target area not putting together a good group, vital difference.

[Terry D]

What was the spread of fps between those 10 shots?

At the muzzle, less than 10 f.p.s. At the target, often double that outdoors. I used regulated and non-regulated rifles, springers and gas-rams. Incidently, the two occasions I clamped the precharged rifles' actions to a rig, the groups actually got worse. :confused:

As so often happens, there are more questions than answers, mate. ;)

[Terry D]

...BUT HOW THE HELL YOU LADS CAN EVEN SEE A ONE AND A HALF INCH TARGET AT 150 YARDS SUPRISES ME...

A 35X SCOPE HELPS, MATE. :cool:

[JohnBam]

TO BE HONEST GENTS ALL THIS LONG RANGE SHOOTING IS WELL OVER MY HEAD BUT HOW THE HELL YOU LADS CAN EVEN SEE A ONE AND A HALF INCH TARGET AT 150 YARDS SUPRISES ME.I THINK YOUR DREAMING MYSELF:o:D:D:D

I was using a 1 inch dot at about 94 yds and could see it no probs with 10x mag. Could even see the pellet holes as well. :)

[RichardH]

I was always respectful to Harry during his short time on here, but having extensively researched this area of airgunning, I don't believe it's possible to produce reliable, humane accuracy, under field conditions, at 150 yards with any 27ft.lbs. air rifle.

So you would disagree with Romsey publishings decision to pay for and print the article then?

[Born Again]

First, there has never been any 'vilification of Harry' from me, not once, never.

Secondly, the Mods took a decision for what they believed to be valid reasons. You may not agree with that decision but the Mods have a job to do and decision-making is a part of that.

I didn't say there had been any from you, I can't remember all the names but yours wasn't there.

Regarding the mods decision, I have given this some more thought and I think I can see your reasons now, I'll drop it.

[Baldie]

I would have thought trying to get a 1" group with any [light] projectile at 100 yards using air gun speeds would have been an exercise in futility if there were any sort of breeze or wind. :D


I've also hunted for years out to 80 yards and watched small wind variances move the pellets. I have NO problem with people claiming super accurate technique, super accurate guns, perfect pellets. Way beyond my ability - but that's no reason to decry it. It's the wind that stops you being able to produce that perfect shot to order.

Harry asserts you can read the wind. I say you can't at that distance. I have a grand that says that nobody else can.


all this talk of windless conditions, bolox!! the whole point is it doesnt matter what the wind is but say you go oout tomorrow and put up a yd square sheet of paper at 100 yds, draw a dot near the top, all your doing is aiming at the dot! doesnt matter if the pellets strikes 2 feet below the dot and the 7mph wind blows the pellet 16 inches to the left, the point is if the rifle is shooting consistantly at a known power, the pellets are reasonable all the same with no visual damage or impairments and the wind remains at 7mph and the rifle is shot from the same position every time!

you could do it canting the rifle at 30 degrees if you liked or even upside down, but as long as the 5 shot group all all shot in the exact same position and the constants are all the same!

by constants i mean anything that could alter the flight or trajectory of the pellet!


There's nothing constant about wind, and over 100 yards to 150 yards, I'd expect a couple of variations over the route. How can anyone 'read' two or three different speeds of something that's invisible and remote?

In these conditions it would be hard (if not impossible) to get an HMR round [20grn] travelling at 2500fps to group inside an inch at 150 yards. It may well be capable of it in still air, (just), but in even light (variable) wind? :rolleyes:

As I suggested, it would need something like the inside of an aircraft hangar [windless] to prove the air rifle/pellet combination was even a possibility at producing sub inch groups around 100+ yards.

I'd be interested to hear about ANY air rifle/pellet combination that could better an HMR in accuracy, and so would most FAC shooters.


In that light, I'd say Gary needn't worry much about paying out on his challenge any time soon. :D :D

[Born Again]

TO BE HONEST GENTS ALL THIS LONG RANGE SHOOTING IS WELL OVER MY HEAD BUT HOW THE HELL YOU LADS CAN EVEN SEE A ONE AND A HALF INCH TARGET AT 150 YARDS SUPRISES ME.I THINK YOUR DREAMING MYSELF:o:D:D:D

TIME TO GET RID OF THAT 4x40 MARK ;):D

[Terry D]

So you would disagree with Romsey publishings decision to pay for and print the article then?

Absolutely not. That was a judgement call made by someone whose job it is to do just that. A bit like the Mods on here, really.

All the best.

[RichardH]

Fair comment.

The bit I cant get my head around is whats there to disbelieve?

Holding a rifle well enough to shoot a group like that (with a centrefire) is easy, I can do it and most serious riflemen can also particularly from a bench as Harry did.

So theres no extra special skill in MOA marksmanship

He never professed to hit given targets merely acheived groups anywhere on a piece of paper against a single aim point therefore reading the wind becomes irrelevent as long as its consistent through the shot string and your piece of paper is big enough.

The whole exercise is purely a function of an accurate and consistent rifle, consistent ammunition and consistent wind.

Interestingly people chose to rip Harry apart wheras his actual involvement is possibly the least significant part his equipment and weather would be infinitely more important;)

Richard

[Terry D]

The whole exercise is purely a function of an accurate and consistent rifle, consistent ammunition and consistent wind.

Really Richard? Yet, without any wind, and using the finest hardware available to anyone, anywhere, my own modest efforts and those of some extremely talented marksmen, failed to produce consistent sub-inch groups at 100 yards.

I tried, I really did, as did others. We couldn't do it, mate.

[RichardH]

Depending on your skill at shooting it a 30ftlb rifle will extend your range considerably, plus of course much more hitting power, ignore people that say it only gives you a few yards extra, either they cant get an FAC or they cant shoot usually

I have humanely despatched rabbits in excess of 100yds with one in the right conditions and that aint BS its fact although the Ripley I was using was over 30ftlb, 80yds will be no problem if its a calm day



Case in point;)

[RichardH]

Really Richard? Yet, without any wind, and using the finest hardware available to anyone, anywhere, my own modest efforts and those of some extremely talented marksmen, failed to produce consistent sub-inch groups at 100 yards.

I tried, I really did, as did others. We couldn't do it, mate.

I understand but you are missing the point.

I've never seen you shoot:D

But we'll take it as read you're more than competent:D

A sub MOA hold from a bench is easy, have a look at some of the groups in the firearms forum so the human factor is definately do-able.

The limiting factors are the rifle, the ammunition and the conditions, unfortunately people jumped to rubbish the poster and his skills or lack of them in reading wind.

As he was only shooting groups NOT a fixed 1" target reading the wind becomes academic as long as it remains a consistent condition (and your paper is large enough;)) that was my clear understanding from watching the posts in real time.

Unfortunately some editting allowed this misunderstanding to reach its logical conclusion before we could examine his kit and weather conditions in more detail.

I've no idea of the wind or atmospherics in Harry's Australian valley and sadly now we are unlikely to get to the bottom of things.

Richard

[Woodie]

I know decisions have been made, but I respectfully ask the mods whether they could reinstate Harry's account as we clearly all have unanswered questions and would like them answered. We are all adults, lets move on to solving the puzzle

[RichardH]

It was a very tough call, perhaps with hindsight it wasn't the best one?

Perhaps he will be invited back for a proper grilling?

Richard

[rusham]

I know decisions have been made, but I respectfully ask the mods whether they could reinstate Harry's account as we clearly all have unanswered questions and would like them answered. We are all adults, lets move on to solving the puzzle

From reading his posts on another forum, I don't think he would be interested in returning.

[RichardH]

From reading his posts on another forum, I don't think he would be interested in returning.

It might be prudent for him to do some editting;)

[Terry D]

As he was only shooting groups NOT a fixed 1" target reading the wind becomes academic as long as it remains a consistent condition...

Seriously, Richard, when does the wind ever become, and remain, a consistent condition throughout 150 yards, over the course of even a short shooting session? That's one huge 'academic' you're quoting there.

All the best.

[RichardH]

Seriously, Richard, when does the wind ever become, and remain, a consistent condition throughout 150 yards, over the course of even a short shooting session? That's one huge 'academic' you're quoting there.

All the best.

Hi Terry

In the bottom of a steep sided quarry perhaps (Like where I zero my big rifles)

Even indoors for that matter;)

Richard

[Terry D]

Hi Terry

Even indoors for that matter;)



Ah, indoors. Now why on earth didn't I think of that?

Hold on...:cool:

[RichardH]

Now I'm puzzled Terry

I think we can agree that:

1- A MOA hold is easily acheiveable from a bench?
2- A modern pre-charged legal limit gun can pull 1/2" groups at 50 yards (MOA)
3- There is no wind indoors;)
4- A modern FAC airgun can produce twice the legal limit in terms of energy easily

What ballistically therefore can cause a previously stable pellet from a 24ft/ib rifle to be unstable at 100 when a legal limit rifle at half the power is very stable at 50?

Is it a function of needing faster twist rates for heavier pellets?

In short why are you convinced its impossible when physics dictates it has to be?

Richard

[sniper-wolf]

Just spent half an hour reading this thread. I am interested in Harrys theories and very interested in shooting longe range groups on paper with sub 12fpe. I have achieved a sub 2inch group of 20 shots at 100yds and have started another thread on here about it. I also followed harry to the other forum, as when I got back from holiday, all his threads had been deleted and he had been banned. I have no problem with that, but there is no arguing that the man is very dedicated and knows more than most of us will ever know about long range shooting with air. I will continue to get in touch and discuss with him concerning his achievments, and hope to learn more, and I am even thinking of buying another FAC air rifle and set it at the same power as harrys to see if i can achieve similar results. I would never dream of shooting live quarry at these ranges with sub 12fpe.

Harry is a very clever man and has dedicated a lot of time, and wishes to share his findings for all to see, and have a go at it, I am certainly hooked.

He should not have been banned IMO, but I could'nt read what went on during that time because I was on holiday.

[Terry D]

In short why are you convinced its impossible when physics dictates it has to be?



I'm a simple, practical man, Richard, and I prefer to see things happen rather than being dictated to by theory.

I'm not convinced it's impossible, but having tried - and tried extremely hard - to do it in the real world, rather than via theory, so far it has remained impossible to create consistent, sub-inch, 10-shot groups, at 100 yards indoors or out. Thus, the idea of adding another 50 yards to that range and producing groups of a similar size, outdoors, has to arouse the 'curiosity' in me, surely?

[Salvius]

If you had a 150 yard-long barrel, then I reckon you could shoot some pretty tight groups at that range.;)

[rusham]

If you had a 150 yard-long barrel, then I reckon you could shoot some pretty tight groups at that range.;)

Didn't Sadam Hussain try that?? Made in Sheffield I believe !!!!:D

[Gary C]

Just spent half an hour reading this thread. I am interested in Harrys theories

Are they Harry's or lifted from the American forums? I've not actually seen anything original there. Not saying that they're not his..just asking like. Regurgitating chairgunner does not make them HIS theories

and very interested in shooting longe range groups on paper with sub 12fpe. I have achieved a sub 2inch group of 20 shots at 100yds and have started another thread on here about it.

Nice shooting. What you have done is found an interesting goal and derived some enjoyment out of it, excellent

but there is no arguing that the man is very dedicated and knows more than most of us will ever know about long range shooting with air.

Not sure how you can say there's no arguing. Nobody has seen him shoot, nobody has verified his ranges or achievements. He has told at least 1 obvious lie, and his posts manifest a deep seated need fo rrecognition which is dangerous when asking for unverified belief.


I will continue to get in touch and discuss with him concerning his self proclaimed achievments,

sorry wolfie, there's a difference.

and hope to learn more, and I am even thinking of buying another FAC air rifle and set it at the same power as harrys to see if i can achieve similar results. I would never dream of shooting live quarry at these ranges with sub 12fpe.

so therefore you are contemplating shooting rabbits at over 100 yards. Nice touch. Harry has indeed achieved something

Harry is a very clever man and has dedicated a lot of time,
Has he?
and wishes to share his findings for all to see,
He certainly does
and have a go at it, I am certainly hooked.
You certainly are

He should not have been banned IMO, but I could'nt read what went on during that time because I was on holiday.
Then how do you know he shouldn't have been banned?:confused:



So far, nobody has managed what Harry has alleged. His only proof comes from chairgunner and his own claims.

On one hand we have the finest shot the world has ever known. n the other we have an old attention seeker revelling in un provable claims.

hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm:D:D:D

[sniper-wolf]

No problem Gary, I just like shooting to the maximum of my abilities, and Harry has re-ignited the flame within me to try and achieve some descent groups at longer ranges than standard FT distances.

I don't really care whether you or anyone else believes his claims or not. It's a bit of fun, and can be done given time and the right conditions.

All the best.

Neil.

[RichardH]

On one hand we have the finest shot the world has ever known.

Annie Oakley is here?

[C3PO_1]

I don't remember Harry ever claiming that he could perfectly read the wind ... I simply remember him saying that more times than not he was capable of sub 1" groups @ 150 yards using a 27tl/lb rifle in ideal, windless conditions at 4,000 feet.

[C3PO_1]

Didn't Sadam Hussain try that?? Made in Sheffield I believe !!!!:D

LOL, good one!

[RichardH]

I'm a simple, practical man, Richard, and I prefer to see things happen rather than being dictated to by theory.

I'm not convinced it's impossible, but having tried - and tried extremely hard - to do it in the real world, rather than via theory, so far it has remained impossible to create consistent, sub-inch, 10-shot groups, at 100 yards indoors or out. Thus, the idea of adding another 50 yards to that range and producing groups of a similar size, outdoors, has to arouse the 'curiosity' in me, surely?

150 yards is ambitious to say the least, I suspect reality is close to 100 but physics dictates it must be possible unless theres an evil vortex that applies to airgun pellets once they pass the magic 50 yards.

To shoot heavier bullets in centrefire calibres its standard practice to up the twist rate from 1/12 or 1/14 to 1/8 or 1/7 now given I would expect a heavy pellet to be essential to acheiving this why wouldnt this apply to airguns too?

By increasing the weight of the bullet from 55 to 80 grains and the twist rate from 1/12 to 1/7 a .223 rifle goes from a 300 yard gun to one with potential past 600.

Now has anyone got an airgun with a fast twist barrel?

Richard

[RichardH]

Someone send for Pneuguy;)

[Sid]

What interests me is this :-

I have got somewhere near reasonably consistent 1 inch groups at 100 yards with FAC air, under still outdoor conditions, and have seen a 1 inch group shot with the equipment I was using. I never felt the grouping was out of my control.

Terry Doe, in his experiments found that there was a dispersion at 100 yards which he felt WAS out of the shooters control. This also with FAC air, a better shooter and optimum indoor conditions.

It's difficult to reconcile the two, and on the basis of these specific cases I would start to make the assumption that I'm lying :D

If we can assume that I'm not lying, then how could I do it under less favourable circumstances ?

Coming up with a theory might be interesting - one thing I noticed about the Career I used was that floating the barrel gave a significant improvement in accuracy at longer ranges, one which wasn't apparent at normal hunting distances. Beyond that I really don't know, and if Terry was using a rifle with a free floated barrel then that theory is dead in the water :D

[Harry's Lad]

So far, nobody has managed what Harry has alleged. His only proof comes from chairgunner and his own claims.

So what’s with these oblique swipes at ChairGun? What has ChairGun to do with the discussion anyway? Having had several email conversations with Harry over the years, I have absolutely no doubt as to his claims or integrity. As far as I could read in the previous long-range thread (before it was deleted), he referred only to ChairGun used as a tool to compliment his considerable ability. Zeroing an air-rifle at 150 Yards would be a laborious and time-consuming task without some assistance but – even if he didn’t use ChairGun – he’d still be a gentleman and an excellent marksman. So, why does ChairGun qualify for these snide remarks? :confused:

Confused in Murcia
Dave

[RichardH]

Lionel

I am happy to oblige, please find an extract from an advertising broadsheet for various velocity and energy levels on the new Beaumont air rifle based on the Air Ranger/RWS 500:

.22 - 75 ft/lbs. 30,5gr. Pellet in excess 1050 ft/s. (5,50mm.)
.22 - 90 ft/lbs. 30,5gr. Pellet in excess 1150 ft/s. (5,50mm.)
.22 -100 ft/lbs. 40,0gr. Pellet in excess 1050 ft/s. (5,70mm.)
.25 -130 ft/lbs. 50,0gr. Pellet in excess 1100 ft/s. (6,35mm.)
.25 -120 ft/lbs. 36,0gr. Pellet in excess 1200 ft/s. (6,35mm.)
.30 -175 ft/lbs. 110 gr. Pellet in excess 850 ft/s. (7,80mm.)

I understand that the velocities are the minimum specified for a string of shots where the velocity will increase over the series before falling due to the power curve. Over 1300ft/s has been recorded with 36 grain .25 ammunition.

This gun has been developed for Export markets and for longer range shooting. Accuracies of 25mm groups are acheived at 150 metre ranges. Alfred the gun's developer reports that these accuracies are generally better than achieved by firearms.

Regards

David

Richard:D

[keith66]

An interesting thread, my experience of long range shooting with an air rifle has been mainly over a muddy creek with a couple of friends and could be construed as long range plinking. Best results were with a tuned BSA imp model D built in 1910, this rifle has an aperture sight on it with flip up tower so you can dial in the elevation. Using the back position the angle of elevation must have been 10 to 15 degrees but it was possible to hit cans fairly consistently at around 100 yards, of course you could see the fall of shot on the mud and adjust acordingly. good fun. When you thihk about it shooting an air gun at long range is akin to shooting a centrefire rifle at 1000 yards plus!

[Woodie]

Thats exactly what I said in Gary C long range get together 1k bet, Alfred De Vries can do 200 metres not yards with his beaumont., but it is 150 ft.lbs, so you can't really compare. Gary's response was "apples and oranges", which I agree with, however decent groups can be obtained with air rifles at long long ranges.

[Terry D]

I have got somewhere near reasonably consistent 1 inch groups at 100 yards with FAC air,

Sid, rather than putting yourself down as a fibber :cool:, study the bold section of the above quote. As a sad-to-the-point-of-tragic airgun tester, I would permit no inconsistency whatsoever during my 100-yard quest.

If nine pellets piled on top of each other and a single one went a bit bonkers, then that mad slug was included in the group sizing - unless I 'called' it out through shooter error. I was ruthless and no 'fudging' of the results was allowed, no matter how frustrating it all became. I wanted to produce a series of tight groups at 100 yards, just as I could at 50, but I couldn't do it with the same consistency.

Floating barrels were used, and they helped, mainly with the high-power rifles which used more air per shot and were most likely to cause microscopic barrel-shift as their reservoirs contracted and expanded during charging/discharging. At least that's one theory. There's barrel harmonics to consider, too, of course, plus the difference in the pellet-shape between those fired from pre-charged rifles and spring-piston or gas-ram ones.

My head's starting to hurt from the memory of it all. :o

[AAS410]

Sorry John, Don't see your name anywhere on my post.:eek: Still always up for a challange. My point is, where do you stop, Some people out there still think they can shoot rabbits at 100+. I will be more than happy to put up £20 if any one with a springer can put a group in at 100 yds (6 pellet group) of 2" or less. You can use ANY FT position. Any one interested this can be arranged at Kypeside shooting ground.;) Any one.:rolleyes:

Regards

George

[Graham2]

From being someone that wanted to hear more about all this, I've now lost the will to live! Maybe I should go and lie down, could be a good idea anyway, as I wrote off the Range Rover today.

[Lumberjack]

I will be more than happy to put up £20 if any one with a springer can put a group in at 100 yds (6 pellet group) of 2" or less

Looks like it's time to get me ol' Webley Tracker out again :D:D:p

Make it £40 George and I'll shoot backward over my left shoulder using a mirror. :D:D:D

Just one question. Telescopic or open sights, which would you prefer?;)

[AAS410]

Just for you, I will make it £40, and throw in a book. "Carpentry For Beginners":D Are you up for it.:p

Regards

George;)

[GEOFF]

I will have a go at paper shooting at 150 yards as soon as the weather get better, i will get a dvd recording of this aswell.
i will use my Condor .22 with a 21" barrel which is PTFE lined and has 100g steel hammer with two PTFE rings, i have three bottles
1st has a valve stem of 5.5mm runs at 65fpe
2nd has a valve stem of 6.5mm runs at 75fpe
3nd has a valve stem of 7.2mm 120fpe
http://i197.photobucket.com/albums/aa47/GEOFF4CLAIRE/DSC00171.jpg
http://i197.photobucket.com/albums/aa47/GEOFF4CLAIRE/DSC00170.jpg
http://i197.photobucket.com/albums/aa47/GEOFF4CLAIRE/DSC00169.jpg
There is a few member on here that have shot this rifle and know what its capable of ;):cool::rolleyes::eek::confused::D

[stevenB]

mmmmmmmmmmmmmmm lets c this one :D:D:D

[GEOFF]

mmmmmmmmmmmmmmm lets c this one :D:D:D
Steve you Know:cool:as you have seen ;)

[figjam]

Sorry John, Don't see your name anywhere on my post.:eek: Still always up for a challange. My point is, where do you stop, Some people out there still think they can shoot rabbits at 100+. I will be more than happy to put up £20 if any one with a springer can put a group in at 100 yds (6 pellet group) of 2" or less. You can use ANY FT position. Any one interested this can be arranged at Kypeside shooting ground.;) Any one.:rolleyes:

Regards

George


jesus george now your are taking the piss mate! FT position????

its hard enough bench rested mate, if your coming on sunday you can have a go! infact we could make it a side shoot if you like, you on for a decent wager??;)

[Sid]

Sid, rather than putting yourself down as a fibber :cool:, study the bold section of the above quote. As a sad-to-the-point-of-tragic airgun tester, I would permit no inconsistency whatsoever during my 100-yard quest.



I'll go with that. What is and isn't under your control is a subjective judgement at the best of times.

[Terry D]

I will have a go at paper shooting at 150 yards as soon as the weather get better, i will get a dvd recording of this aswell.
i will use my Condor .22 with a 21" barrel which is PTFE lined and has 100g steel hammer with two PTFE rings, i have three bottles
1st has a valve stem of 5.5mm runs at 65fpe
2nd has a valve stem of 6.5mm runs at 75fpe
3nd has a valve stem of 7.2mm 120fpe


Have you anything producing around 30 ft.lbs., Geoff? It would be interesting to see a series of 10-shot groups with that, mate.

Anyway, good luck.

[sniper-wolf]

In post 99, Gary C said I was contemplating shooting rabbits at 100yds. If he had read the last sentence of the first paragraph of post 95 he would have known that this was not the case.

I dont shoot live quarry any more at any range, and would never attempt to shoot anything but paper and tagets at long range.

I don't need preaching to by anyone, I just want to enjoy my shooting and do it to the best of my ability.

ATB. Neil.

[Woodie]

i have 2 groups at an Inch at 140 yards and mine are not measured CTC, one is shot by me and one is shot by a friend of mine on the same day, we had 3 scottish bikers at our range watching. i wonder if the word spread around in the highlands. besides that there where another 10 men at the range watching it. ive been doing this shooting for a whole year now. 31grainers at 924ft/s.

http://pic18.picturetrail.com/VOL888/4332777/9130733/266062176.jpg my group

http://pic18.picturetrail.com/VOL888/4332777/9130733/266062191.jpg my friends group

another group at 170 yards. the 4 shots at the top are 4 inches apart.
http://pic18.picturetrail.com/VOL888/4332777/9130733/266689344.jpg

the thing that annoyed me most in the article is that there was no data on the amount of elevation dialled or hold over used! almost all long range shooters keep a record of this and im surprised nothing was mentioned.
if you tell me that i can bring my air rifle to the UK, i'll be happy to attend in september.

Good shooting films

[AAS410]

Sorry Kenny, Don't think i can make Sunday. If i can i will come along. I dont have a gun, sold up my hft rig so gunless, so will have to watch. All the best.

Regards

George

[JohnBam]

. I will be more than happy to put up £20 if any one with a springer can put a group in at 100 yds (6 pellet group) of 2" or less. You can use ANY FT position. Any one interested this can be arranged at Kypeside shooting ground.;) Any one.:rolleyes:

Regards

George

Should be attending JG on Sunday....looking forward to giving it a go in the wee windless valley.

Anybody putting up £20 if it gets done there? :D

As far your challenge, 94 yards from sitted at the bench and my lucky bunny as support.....and no wind may take ya up on that ;)

Had a wee blast again yesterday up at Kypeside, will let Zico post his thoughts on it. :)

http://pccures.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/pics/windy.jpg

http://pccures.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/pics/range1.jpg

http://pccures.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/pics/range2.jpg

http://pccures.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/pics/target.jpg

[Terry D]

Had a wee blast again yesterday up at Kypeside, will let Zico post his thoughts on it. :)

What was the shot count and group size on that target, Jon? Looks about 5-inches if that's an A4 sheet, but larger if it's A3.

Just being nosy, really. ;)

[plonker]

In post 99, Gary C said I was contemplating shooting rabbits at 100yds. If he had read the last sentence of the first paragraph of post 95 he would have known th this was not the case.

he has a way of making things suit his arguement:cool:

[Weevie]

Richard, there is one thing that you don't seem to have taken into account and that's the different stabilisation methods of pellets versus bullets.

Pellets are by and large (boat-tailed bullet type designs) have drag stabilisation as a large component of the total stabilisation (as the Cardews showed). Spin does come into it or we'd all be shooting smooth bores but drag stabilisation is very important. Needless to say I'd expect that to be a significant factor in the differences between a bullet and a diablo shaped pellet.

The effect of the different shapes on the wind's effects has got to be a factor too.

I don't think you can compare pellets to bullets. Especially when the bullets are being shoved along at 4000 fps! :D

[Born Again]

A major problem with airgun accuracy at long range is the trajectory. If a pellet travels 20" above line of sight then canting the rifle 90degrees will result in a 40+" windage error. OK, nobody is going to accidentaly cant the rifle by 90degrees but you can see the point. If an HMR had 1" drop over the same distance the maximum error would be 2". Take those figures down to a realistic 2-3degrees and you can see that the HMR will be in one hole, the airgun much larger.

A large cross type target gives you something to align your crosshairs on, for consistency, and is the best type to use.

Note: this simplistic explanation does not take scope height into consideration.

[bengarzy]

What some people need to realise about long range shooting is that it's only meaningful if you have a reasonable degree of control over where the pellet or bullet strikes. There are cut-off points, depending on range and equipment where the whole exercise degenerates into a game of chance. Eventually you may as well be rolling 5 dice to see how long it takes for them all to come up sixes.

I politely asked Harry to tell us about his methods for reading the wind and applying corrections ( before I came to the conclusion he was full of it ) and he didn't choose to reply. Not because he was banned either, he had enough time to write a number of long rambling posts in the meantime, while ignoring the question.

He did the same with me when I asked where he got his pellet wheights from and his energy at 100 and 150 yards with the JSB he was useing as it was about 70% up on reality.

Ben

[Born Again]

He did the same with me when I asked where he got his pellet wheights from and his energy at 100 and 150 yards with the JSB he was useing as it was about 70% up on reality.

Ben


I understand that Harry tested the ballistic mathematics for Chairgun in association with the equations American author.

Ben, do your own figures allow for 4000ft altitude and the air temperature that Harry shoots at ?

[RichardH]

Richard, there is one thing that you don't seem to have taken into account and that's the different stabilisation methods of pellets versus bullets.

Pellets are by and large (boat-tailed bullet type designs) have drag stabilisation as a large component of the total stabilisation (as the Cardews showed). Spin does come into it or we'd all be shooting smooth bores but drag stabilisation is very important. Needless to say I'd expect that to be a significant factor in the differences between a bullet and a diablo shaped pellet.

The effect of the different shapes on the wind's effects has got to be a factor too.

I don't think you can compare pellets to bullets. Especially when the bullets are being shoved along at 4000 fps! :D

Hi Weevie

All fair points, however if a drag stabilised diablo will stay stable at 550fps at 50 yards from a legal limit gun, what physical condition would cause it to become unstable from an FAC gun giving say 550fps at 100 yards?

As long as you stay inside the speed of sound then I cant see a reason (that translates across from firearms where much more is written) why it would suddenly deviate from its planned course.

Now to increase BC it may be necessary to move to longer heavier projectiles which may (or may not) benefit from a faster rifling twist?

I think the answers here may well be along different lines to what's accepted at 50 yards, for example three combinations shooting 1/2" groups at 50 yards may very well produce wildly differing groups at 100 much as with rifle cartridges.

I dont have the answer but I'm sure it doesn't reside with any one individual messiah more a reasoned (or lucky) choice of rifle and projectile in optimum conditions which will probably take much experimentation.

That said unless anyone can explain how a 550fps airgun pellet can become suddenly wildly unstable past a certain distance regardless of the speed at which it was launched I can only conclude a 1" group at 100 must be possible with the right barrel, twist and projectile.

If anyone has this information please let me know and save me hours of agonising:D

Richard

[bengarzy]

Now I'm puzzled Terry

I think we can agree that:

1- A MOA hold is easily acheiveable from a bench?
2- A modern pre-charged legal limit gun can pull 1/2" groups at 50 yards (MOA)
3- There is no wind indoors;)
4- A modern FAC airgun can produce twice the legal limit in terms of energy easily

What ballistically therefore can cause a previously stable pellet from a 24ft/ib rifle to be unstable at 100 when a legal limit rifle at half the power is very stable at 50?

Is it a function of needing faster twist rates for heavier pellets?

In short why are you convinced its impossible when physics dictates it has to be?

Richard
It might have twice the energy but its not going twice as fast (which wouldnt help accuracy much as the projectile is not bullet shaped) so you are stuck with the projectile dfference between your centre fire rifle and Harry's pair of very ordinary (on paper) PCPs for comparison.
I didnt believe his claims when he got so much of the "down range energy" and other associated facts so wrong from what Terry and I and 2 others found some years back now and he would never answer those questions .

Ben

[baz]

This thread is now in its own section;)

[Born Again]

Another point, does anyone have a formula to calculate how much wind effect on a pellet/bullet will be decreased at 4000ft ? It must have less effect, the air is much less dense.

[bengarzy]

150 yards is ambitious to say the least, I suspect reality is close to 100 but physics dictates it must be possible unless theres an evil vortex that applies to airgun pellets once they pass the magic 50 yards.

To shoot heavier bullets in centrefire calibres its standard practice to up the twist rate from 1/12 or 1/14 to 1/8 or 1/7 now given I would expect a heavy pellet to be essential to acheiving this why wouldnt this apply to airguns too?

By increasing the weight of the bullet from 55 to 80 grains and the twist rate from 1/12 to 1/7 a .223 rifle goes from a 300 yard gun to one with potential past 600.

Now has anyone got an airgun with a fast twist barrel?

Richard
Could be something in this Richard, all air rifle barrels are around 1in16 and that that dates back from when they were making 0nly 500-600 ft ps in either calibre, I will have to try some stuff to see if the elevated speeds we now use could benefit from a different twist rate.

Ben

[Gary C]

Another point, does anyone have a formula to calculate how much wind effect on a pellet/bullet will be decreased at 4000ft ? It must have less effect, the air is much less dense.

Wind at altitude has a slight effect too...;)

[bengarzy]

Richard:D

Shooting bullet type projectiles or waisted JSB pellets like Harry:D:D

Ben

[Born Again]

Wind at altitude has a slight effect too...;)

I know it will have an effect, but the effect must be reduced. If we know by how much the effect is reduced we can apply a fudge factor to our group sizes to see if we can match Harrys.

[RichardH]

Could be something in this Richard, all air rifle barrels are around 1in16 and that that dates back from when they were making 0nly 500-600 ft ps in either calibre, I will have to try some stuff to see if the elevated speeds we now use could benefit from a different twist rate.

Ben

I can only speak from powder burners Ben.

But we do shoot heavier projectiles much faster these days and the way forward here has been long proven to be faster twist rates in firearms.

Airguns may be entirely different but it would seem worth trying, who knows even Bobs air bullets might work with a fast twist:D

Richard

[Harry's Lad]

He did the same with me when I asked where he got his pellet wheights from and his energy at 100 and 150 yards with the JSB he was useing as it was about 70% up on reality.

I’m guessing that Harry used the energy estimates (at 100 and 150 yards) from ChairGun2. He would be confident in using these since, paying meticulous attention to detail, he has already checked velocities at those ranges and is more than capable of conducting the simple calculation. I seem to remember that he mentioned (in the withdrawn thread) that he bulk-weighed the pellets – if you’re measuring velocity then the effect of tiny fluctuations of mass on the downrange energy equation are equally tiny. The effect on the trajectory is also tiny.
You also need to consider that, at 4000 Ft elevation, the BC value of a JSB pellet is enhanced so that the downrange energy retention is also enhanced. Where does this “about 70% up on reality” come from?

I didnt believe his claims when he got so much of the "down range energy" and other associated facts so wrong from what Terry and I and 2 others found some years back now and he would never answer those questions .
Ben

Please post these results. I’m sure we’d all like to see them. The ChairGun results (as quoted by Harry) seem pretty close to reality - and to Newtonian physics as we understand it. Perhaps you’ve discovered an anomaly in the time-space continuum …

Another point, does anyone have a formula to calculate how much wind effect on a pellet/bullet will be decreased at 4000ft ? It must have less effect, the air is much less dense.

The altitude is already (indirectly) accounted for. The generally accepted ‘Rifleman’s Formula’ – as used in ChairGun and everywhere else as far as I can see – postulates that deflection is proportional to the difference between time-to-target in air and time-to-target in a vacuum. In a vacuum the BC value is infinite but the BC value experienced in air depends primarily on the air density (which is, in itself, a function of air temperature and pressure). At elevation, the air density is reduced … so the BC value is increased (less drag) … so the time-to-target is reduced … hence the wind-drift is proportionately reduced.

Clear as mud, eh?

Dave

[bigtime]

is it that gary/terry/and ben can not do it so it must not be true and no one else can do it:rolleyes: maybee thats why harrys thread was deleted;)

[Born Again]

The altitude is already (indirectly) accounted for. The generally accepted ‘Rifleman’s Formula’ – as used in ChairGun and everywhere else as far as I can see – postulates that deflection is proportional to the difference between time-to-target in air and time-to-target in a vacuum. In a vacuum the BC value is infinite but the BC value experienced in air depends primarily on the air density (which is, in itself, a function of air temperature and pressure). At elevation, the air density is reduced … so the BC value is increased (less drag) … so the time-to-target is reduced … hence the wind-drift is proportionately reduced.

Clear as mud, eh?

Dave

I'll confess to not understanding this "time difference" theory at all. If there was a formula relating side-on BC, wind speed and flight time I could understand it, but what on earth does the flight time in a vacuum have to do with it :confused:

[RichardH]

Stop it, somewhere in here is a sensible discussion;)

[baz]

is it that gary/terry/and ben can not do it so it must not be true and no one else can do it:rolleyes: maybee thats why harrys thread was deleted;)

Maybe Harry cant do it in front of someone :)

You have been told several times why Harry was deleted, I suggest you go back and read them:rolleyes:

[bengarzy]

From being someone that wanted to hear more about all this, I've now lost the will to live! Maybe I should go and lie down, could be a good idea anyway, as I wrote off the Range Rover today.

Best thing that ever happened to it Graham, they were crap when they were brand new..............

Ben

[RichardH]

Best thing that ever happened to it Graham, they were crap when they were brand new..............

Ben

:D:D:D:D:D

[Born Again]

Best thing that ever happened to it Graham, they were crap when they were brand new..............

Ben

But at least they're cheap now :)

[Harry's Lad]

I'll confess to not understanding this "time difference" theory at all. If there was a formula relating side-on BC, wind speed and flight time I could understand it, but what on earth does the flight time in a vacuum have to do with it :confused:

Good question! It’s a very old rule-of-thumb that has the right dimensions and works in practice. The side-on BC thing is a bit of a red-herring, I think. It’s intuitively correct that the side-on BC value would make a difference but then, thinking about it some, the exposed profile of a projectile is basically a cylinder that has a dreadful Ballistic coefficient. So poor, in fact, that variations in the profile fail to make it much worse – or better. The side-on BC is therefore basically a constant regardless of the profile.
… but all of this is supposition – I’ll see it I can find a better answer and maybe post the answer here.

ATB
Dave

[bengarzy]

Good shooting films

A little different to Harry's claims though, 27 ft lbs with a 15-16 grn JSB waisted pellet you must be useing bullet shaped projectiles, makes a LOT of difference if they work in your gun at close to 50 ft lbs.

Ben

[bengarzy]

I understand that Harry tested the ballistic mathematics for Chairgun in association with the equations American author.

Ben, do your own figures allow for 4000ft altitude and the air temperature that Harry shoots at ?

Wouldnt know, Terry and I live in the real world so it wont have been a factor, but how ever high his altitude his projectile weights were wrong too so hes probably all theory and uses some one elses chart instead of actualy bothering to see if its correct (and in a lot of cases its miles out)

Ben

[Gary C]

is it that gary/terry/and ben can not do it so it must not be true and no one else can do it:rolleyes: maybee thats why harrys thread was deleted;)

Ah...."Bigtime"

Funny name. Funny man.

Hmmm let's analyse the facts. Bloke in Oz nobody's met makes some outlandish claims. Some of the countries top shooters poo poo them.

Who would YOU believe?

oops. Silly me. You did say...

I despair at some of the people on here, if he said he could fly you'd all be jumping out of windows.

Let those who have a brain look at his claims. I'll spell them out for you.

1. 1" group at 150 yards with 27ft/lbs. (no contradiction from me)
2. Ability to hit a 1" target at 150 yards by judging the wind (requires +/- .25mph). Ha ha
3. Shot (plenty / a lot can't remember exactly) rabbits at OVER 100 yards with an eliminator and NEVER missed one and NEVER required a second shot. HA HA HA HA HA

Anybody who believes points 2 & 3 is either "slow" or has never shot.

Perhaps, if a few could open THEIR minds, you could look at Harry's posting style.

If you were in the pub and a bloke said - just off to the shops in my Porsche you'd laugh at him. Who cares if he has a porsche. In the braggart box. If you heard a bloke say "I'm just off to see my Consultant Neurologist daughter", you'd wince and think he's an attention seeker. Enter Harry. His words.

Put it all together and what do you get? "sniff sniff". Bullseet on yer shoe

In fairness though, it does give a leader to those who can't shoot too well, are jealous of those that can, and have a chance to shout loud.

Here's a simple challenge - put up or shut up. I have a grand that says says nobody on here can get remotely close to what Harry has claimed. There's 20,000 members or so. Top shots. I'll give you odds of 5-1.

Any takers?

[bengarzy]

I can only speak from powder burners Ben.

But we do shoot heavier projectiles much faster these days and the way forward here has been long proven to be faster twist rates in firearms.

Airguns may be entirely different but it would seem worth trying, who knows even Bobs air bullets might work with a fast twist:D

Richard

Yeh 1 in 1 :D:D

Ben

[Woodie]

Gary,

I wouldnlt have thought it was possible to get a 2 inch group at a 100 yards, but sniper -wolf did and a 10 shot group( sub 12 ft.lbs)

Perhaps Harry is one of those chaps with a unique ability?

[bengarzy]

I’m guessing that Harry used the energy estimates (at 100 and 150 yards) from ChairGun2. He would be confident in using these since, paying meticulous attention to detail, he has already checked velocities at those ranges and is more than capable of conducting the simple calculation. I seem to remember that he mentioned (in the withdrawn thread) that he bulk-weighed the pellets – if you’re measuring velocity then the effect of tiny fluctuations of mass on the downrange energy equation are equally tiny. The effect on the trajectory is also tiny.
You also need to consider that, at 4000 Ft elevation, the BC value of a JSB pellet is enhanced so that the downrange energy retention is also enhanced. Where does this “about 70% up on reality” come from?



Please post these results. I’m sure we’d all like to see them. The ChairGun results (as quoted by Harry) seem pretty close to reality - and to Newtonian physics as we understand it. Perhaps you’ve discovered an anomaly in the time-space continuum …



The altitude is already (indirectly) accounted for. The generally accepted ‘Rifleman’s Formula’ – as used in ChairGun and everywhere else as far as I can see – postulates that deflection is proportional to the difference between time-to-target in air and time-to-target in a vacuum. In a vacuum the BC value is infinite but the BC value experienced in air depends primarily on the air density (which is, in itself, a function of air temperature and pressure). At elevation, the air density is reduced … so the BC value is increased (less drag) … so the time-to-target is reduced … hence the wind-drift is proportionately reduced.

Clear as mud, eh?

Dave
Harrys energys at 150 yards were more than Terry and I got at 100 yards and we had 3 ft lbs more at the muzzle with the same JSB pellet as Harry(27 v 30)
Harrys 4000 ft of elevation will not make more than a few % difference to anything I wouldnt think, hence my disbalief on all fronts.

Ben

[Harry's Lad]

Harrys energys at 150 yards were more than Terry and I got at 100 yards and we had 3 ft lbs more at the muzzle with the same JSB pellet as Harry(27 v 30)
Ben

I was asking you to publish the data so we could see where you made the mistake. How * exactly * did you measure the energy at 100 yards? What BC value was assumed? How was it corrected for ambient temperature/pressure/altitude?

Harrys 4000 ft of elevation will not make more than a few % difference to anything I wouldnt think, hence my disbalief on all fronts.
Ben

Ah, so this disbelief is based on your intuition. Perhaps if you actually did the sums as to the difference that 4000 Ft of elevation makes you could view the data a little more objectively.

ATB
Dave

[bigtime]

gary a few people on here have done some long range shooting with pcp and springers and the results speak for themselfs you maybee able to call harry a liar(as you say noboday has witness it from england) but can you call the other people on here WHO have posted there results with pictures liars i think not maybee you can not shot at 100 yrds plus yourself with decent accuracy but others seem to be able to do it even with legal limit guns.yes funny name but not a funny man.also why would a leading magazine publish such an article(bare in mind gary these magazine are there to promote are sport now if these claims from harry are not true why would the magazine publish such an article) so if they are not true and a leading magazine writes an article about it how can i belive the tosh you terry and ben are spouting on here.not haveing a dig just stating the obvious.oh by the way i would like to hear nigel allens view on this it can not be hard for mr doe to get him to put a post up in his own words as to why he would publish such a article if not true

[bigtime]

sorry you've started again gary!

a guy in oz came to this board and asked if there were any questions regarding this article made in the magazines about long range shooting!

You first instict was to then reply 'its impossible'

sorry gary, go and stop banging on about what you made harry appear to have said!

as for the rest of the bully brigade in here, get a life and stop discussing something which has been deleted.

it's a bit like sticking a dinner ticket in the backpocket of a double amputee and asking 30 minutes later why ne's not eaten!

secondly, where have all the posts gone which had links to photo's of longe range targets:confused:

sometimes wonder if this is a forum of free speech or if its a new version of an online airgunner/airgun world:D, where everyone is forced to read what's been vetted and edited!

kenny

yep makes you wonder where all the posts and photos have gone from people on this board to me it looks like if gary/terry/and ben can not do it then it gets deleted or is it that just once gary has bitten of more than he can chew and everything gets deleted just to save face.like i said gary not haveing a dig just stateing the obvious:cool:

[baz]

Depending on your skill at shooting it a 30ftlb rifle will extend your range considerably, plus of course much more hitting power, ignore people that say it only gives you a few yards extra, either they cant get an FAC or they cant shoot usually

I have humanely despatched rabbits in excess of 100yds with one in the right conditions and that aint BS its fact although the Ripley I was using was over 30ftlb, 80yds will be no problem if its a calm day




Case in point;)



That day it felt to be wind free, my ex was reading ranges off LRF and I first took a marker shot then used aiming mark to aim off as there was a bit of wind, the Rabbits died humanely, the rifle (Ripley XL25) was shooting Bismags just below speed of sound

[RichardH]

gary a few people on here have done some long range shooting with pcp and springers and the results speak for themselfs you maybee able to call harry a liar(as you say noboday has witness it from england) but can you call the other people on here WHO have posted there results with pictures liars i think not maybee you can not shot at 100 yrds plus yourself with decent accuracy but others seem to be able to do it even with legal limit guns.yes funny name but not a funny man.also why would a leading magazine publish such an article(bare in mind gary these magazine are there to promote are sport now if these claims from harry are not true why would the magazine publish such an article) so if they are not true and a leading magazine writes an article about it how can i belive the tosh you terry and ben are spouting on here.not haveing a dig just stating the obvious.oh by the way i would like to hear nigel allens view on this it can not be hard for mr doe to get him to put a post up in his own words as to why he would publish such a article if not true

You are aware both Gary and Terry write for the same airgun magazine publishing company that published Harry's article;)

I don't really know where that puts opinion, on the one hand the magazines are truthful and honest and on the other Harry's article was a work of fiction?

Hell now even I'm puzzled:D

Richard

[baz]

There is no such thing as free speech on this forum, its privately owned and you get to say what is allowed, anything that falls foul of the admins guidelines gets deleted, email Edward if you want;)

[Born Again]

Harrys 4000 ft of elevation will not make more than a few % difference to anything I wouldnt think, hence my disbalief on all fronts.

Ben

The air density at 4000ft is 0.886 of that at sea level, humidity makes a difference too. I can't remember what Harrys BC was, I think he said 0.037..

0.032 (JSB Exact) / 0.037 (Harrys result) = 0.865

[baz]

One thing Richard, nobody has seen Harry shoot the groups he claims, but quite a few have seen me shoot in past years, and thousands have seen TD shoot over the years, Ben, as far as I know hasnt made any claims

And theres quite a few that see Gary shooting in HFT in the present time

As for the 150yd groups, I would just take the correct type of gun, easy peasy:D

[Gary C]

sorry you've started again gary!

a guy in oz came to this board and asked if there were any questions regarding this article made in the magazines about long range shooting!

You first instict was to then reply 'its impossible'

sorry gary, go and stop banging on about what you made harry appear to have said!

as for the rest of the bully brigade in here, get a life and stop discussing something which has been deleted.

it's a bit like sticking a dinner ticket in the backpocket of a double amputee and asking 30 minutes later why ne's not eaten!

secondly, where have all the posts gone which had links to photo's of longe range targets:confused:

sometimes wonder if this is a forum of free speech or if its a new version of an online airgunner/airgun world:D, where everyone is forced to read what's been vetted and edited!

kenny

Kenny
You seem to have a thing about misquoting me? I'm not actually sure why you don't feel inclined to read my posts and respond to WHAT I'm saying. Or perhaps I do.
I have NO problem with Harry's original post re. grouping at whatever power. I think I've stressed that enough for you to have understood that by now?
Just in case I'll say it again. NO PROBLEM

My problem was his second wave of boastful comments about never missing a rabbit past 100 yards. Being able to gauge the wind so the 1" groups were repeatable on demand. Sorry Kenny, if you believe either of those claims you are not as smart as I thought.

Just between us, your amputee analogy, well, a bit crass mate and lets you down :o


Bigtime
Same as Kenny - please read what I am posting not what you think I'm posting. NOBODY on here has been able to produce anywhere near what Harry is boasting of. I've offered a grand bet, no takers surprisingly.


I would not have challenged Harry at all regarding the groups. I have said already (you obviously missed it) that I can't do a group at that range. I have said that just because I can't do it doesn't mean it can't be done - so no boasting on my part. No bigging myself up.

let me re-iterate my stance one more time.

I believe it is impossible to successfully shoot any "normal" sub 40ft/lb airgun over 100 yards with enough certainty to hunt humanely. Anybody who says he can do this, and has never missed, is a barefaced liar. Anybody who says thay can hit a 1" disk at 150 yards with any certainty with the same gun on the FIRST shot is a barefaced liar.

I applaud the guys on here, Scotland and Portugal etc, producing excellent groups. It takes patience and good shooting, but that is not what my issue is about!

[Gary C]

You are aware both Gary and Terry write for the same airgun magazine publishing company that published Harry's article;)

I don't really know where that puts opinion, on the one hand the magazines are truthful and honest and on the other Harry's article was a work of fiction?

Hell now even I'm puzzled:D

Richard

Don't be too puzzled Richard. I'll help you.

The editor published what he thought was the truth. It may well be, I haven't read it. TD and I have issue with what was posted on here, not published in the mags.

Glad to help;)

[conor1]

When the article first appeared I read it with interest.

The guy came across as reasonably pleasant and polite in both the article and in his subsequent posts on here.

But most amazingly of all, how did the editor of one of the worlds's leading airgun circulars get suckered into writing such an article. Where was the due diligence, who corroborated the story and if the story does prove to be untrue, are heads going to roll?:D

We need answers; now!

[RichardH]

Don't be too puzzled Richard. I'll help you.

The editor published what he thought was the truth. It may well be, I haven't read it. TD and I have issue with what was posted on here, not published in the mags.

Glad to help;)


Fair point:D

Let me ask a different question though.

Can you shoot a 1/2" group at 50 yards with a 12ft/ib rifle?
Can you shoot a 1" group at 100 yards with a rimfire or centrefire?

I suspect the answer to both is yes?

What I'm really interested in is what condition would stop a 24 ft/ib rifle shooting an inch at 100 indoors?

With a projectile of the correct BC, suitable rifling twist and consistent launch it has to be possible.

Richard

[Harry's Lad]

I'll confess to not understanding this "time difference" theory at all. If there was a formula relating side-on BC, wind speed and flight time I could understand it, but what on earth does the flight time in a vacuum have to do with it :confused:

WRT the side-on BC thing … it’s irrelevant. The whole wind-drift calculation is not a rule of thumb but the simple application of dynamics. I can do no better than to refer you to the excellent article here (http://www.horusvision.com/davis_art-9.shtml). It’s not even called the ‘Rifleman’s Formula’ (oops:o) – the Rifleman’s Formula refers to the POI correction when shooting up/down hill. Now that is a rule-of-thumb – and, for various reasons, not particularly accurate for airgun application. Thankfully, ChairGun2 does not use the Rifleman’s Formula for inclined shooting but instead derives the trajectory from first principles.

Sorry for the confusion.
Dave

[Born Again]

Who's interested in trying long range air rifle and who's interested in scoring points over other BBS members ?

I suggest anyone interested in the shooting bit go away and try it for a while, then we can all meet up here, in this new section, in a weeks time and compare notes.

Those interested in scoring points and insulting each other can stay on this thread and watch it get deleted as did all the others.

See you here in a week ;)

[Gary C]

I've said what I think of his exaggeration but what a shot in the arm he's given a lot of folks shooting. If this long range shooting takes off it will certainly be good for rifle development and pellet quality.

Hats off the the old chap for this!

[stillair1]

Perhaps a sticky at the top regarding live shooting at beyond extreme ranges would encourage a good debate without sanctioning people in this section.:)

[RichardH]

I've said what I think of his exaggeration but what a shot in the arm he's given a lot of folks shooting. If this long range shooting takes off it will certainly be good for rifle development and pellet quality.

Hats off the the old chap for this!

Here we agree mate:)

I can see 100 Yard (or 150 if anyone feels brave) benchrest shooting resulting in many significant moves forward in both barrel and pellet technology.

It also shouldnt be forgotten that if a competetive structure exists then such competitions or practicing for them would be good reason for the grant of an FAC airgun, after all a .308 for benchrest is easy to get.

Everyone wins

Richard

[Terry D]

How * exactly * did you measure the energy at 100 yards?

With a chronoscope. Starting with 30 shots at the muzzle, followed by 30 at 100 yards. We put in a lot of hours on that one, followed by more from me indoors.

No theory really, just plenty of practical tests.

[Terry D]

But most amazingly of all, how did the editor of one of the worlds's leading airgun circulars get suckered into writing such an article. Where was the due diligence, who corroborated the story and if the story does prove to be untrue, are heads going to roll?:D

We need answers; now!

Nigel considered the article to be within the magazine's publishing remit. Some articles are presented as discussion subjects, and this is one of them. A sort of 'what do you think of this, then?' type piece. As such, it's certainly worked for some on here.

[JohnBam]

What was the shot count and group size on that target, Jon? Looks about 5-inches if that's an A4 sheet, but larger if it's A3.

Just being nosy, really. ;)

Spot on tel, paper was A3, so was big. But hey I was only having a fook about at the top dot. :) Was aiming off, with the crosshair post and trying to hit the dot. The shot to the right, the faaaarrr away one, I reckon I pulled. The rest were not that bad. Hits at the bottom are during Zico'c second attempt.

Got some good results yesterday a couple of times..... some shots unbelievblly close, but the group got pulled apart a bit in its entirety from the wind. Best group of the day, was a 5 shotter one about 3 3/4 inch wide and a 1.4 inch high... not tell ya how close the first three shots were, as I couldn't believe it myself, and doubt you lot would :) but by shots 4 and 5 the lull in the wind I caught had finished and these pulled the grouip wide...was going dmaned well though.

And Terry to go back to an earlier question, is there any defined pattern in your grouping, is it the vertical or horizontal measurement screwing up the sizes, or are they random. Tis the horizontal that always bigger when I'm giving this a go.

[Harry's Lad]

With a chronoscope. Starting with 30 shots at the muzzle, followed by 30 at 100 yards. We put in a lot of hours on that one, followed by more from me indoors.

… and what was the velocity, air temperature/pressure/elevation, pellet weight and the resulting BC value? Just a thought: it was 0.22 JSB (not 0.177) was it? If you were using a 0.177 JSB then that could explain the difference in downrange velocity/energy suggested by bengarzy above … otherwise, it seems like the rifle didn’t like JSB Exacts very much!

Dave

[Terry D]

And Terry to go back to an earlier question, is there any defined pattern in your grouping, is it the vertical or horizontal measurement screwing up the sizes, or are they random. Tis the horizontal that always bigger when I'm giving this a go.

Horizontal mate, at least for the vast majority of the outdoors ones. The indoors ones were more circular. Has to be wind I guess.

After vowing never to drive myself bonkers again with this long range shooting lark, I'm actually itching to give it another go now.

No hope for some of us, really. :o

[Terry D]

… and what was the velocity, air temperature/pressure/elevation, pellet weight and the resulting BC value?

Hold on Dave, I'll just reach over and grab my weather station database readouts for those days......:cool:

Erm...I know we used weighed and selected Baraccuda Match in the 30 ft.lb. guns, and Ben kept all the data because he brought the picnic hamper and bottles of pop.

Hope this isn't too much ballistics for yuz. ;)

[oldwun]

I think we should now shut the rest of the forum down, apart from the sales department that is used by the none profit making dealers/dabblers as there does not seem to be many posts any where else today.
Stirred up a small storm didn`t our now banned poster from down under, i have also noticed the odd couple of posts from the main objector to his posts being almost APOLOGETICK. For give my spelling/grammer but if the admin can use Gr8 i am certain a bit of thought will be considered before dragging me over the coals.

goodolddad

[Harry's Lad]

Hold on Dave, I'll just reach over and grab my weather station database readouts for those days......:cool:

Thanks. No worry, I'll wait ... :D

Erm...I know we used weighed and selected Baraccuda Match in the 30 ft.lb. guns, and Ben kept all the data because he brought the picnic hamper and bottles of pop.

So that was a H&N Barracuda Match in 0.177 was it? That would explain the differences. Poor BC even in 0.22 compared to JSB Exact, worse in 0.177.

“Apples and Oranges” as Gary C said …

Dave

[Harry's Lad]

I've just run the numbers through ChairGun(3) using the data available.

Harry’s JSB Exact:
0.22 JSB Exact (15.9 Grain), BC=0.037 (0.032 @ NTP = 0.037 @ 4000 Ft), MV= 874 Ft/s … 27 Ft-Lbf

Terry’s Barracuda: (I’ve made some assumptions here since Terry hasn’t supplied his velocity data)
0.22 Barracuda Match (21 Grain), BC ~ 0.024, MV= 803 Ft/s … 30 Ft-Lbf

From Graph:

Energy equal @ 31 Yards = 22.5 Ft-Lbf
At 100 Yards, JSB has 15 Ft-Lbf remaining, Barracuda has only 11.6 Ft-Lbf
At 150 Yards, JSB has 11.2 remaining, Barracuda has only 7.3 Ft-Lbf
JSB @ 12 Ft-Lbf ~ 139 Yards, Barracuda @ 12 Ft-Lbf ~ 98 Yards


I’ve uploaded the graph here (http://www.chairgun.com/EnergyGraph_0001.JPG)

It’s all because of the BC difference. BC value is derived from exponential equations so that small differences (when the BC value is itself small) are significant. The increase in Harry’s BC value - by virtue of the 4000 Ft altitude – makes it even more so.
That is; 50% difference in BC (when the BC is only 0.03) leads to huge differences in downrange velocity/energy/POI whereas a 50% difference when the BC value is 0.5 is barely noticeable.

Again – because of the difference in BC value – Harry’s JSB would be a lot less affected by crosswinds …

This ballistics stuff is good, init? :D

Dave

[Terry D]

I've just run the numbers through ChairGun(3) using the data available.

I ran my .22 Baraccudas through a chrono'. Are you saying that ChairGun outranks that method, Dave?

Just curious, really.

[Sid]

The thing is, we don't know what conditions Harry was shooting under, apart from the 4,000ft elevation. Vaguely remembered from my flight training the density altitude ( which is what the pellet sees ) is derived from some other stuff like humidity and the pressure altitude ( rather than simply height above sea level )

I don't know how much difference this would make, but I personally would be inclined to trust TD's chrono, no offence Dave.

[Harry's Lad]

I ran my .22 Baraccudas through a chrono'. Are you saying that ChairGun outranks that method, Dave?
Just curious, really.

Of course not – the use of a chrono is essential for the intelligent use of ChairGun or any other ballistics software. ChairGun (or any other …) won’t give you any information that you couldn’t get ‘manually’. Personally, I've got better things to do. Accurate velocity estimation (at a couple of places in the trajectory) is essential. From the velocity (and a couple of other measurements) ChairGun will show you the shape of the trajectory, velocity & energy curves, etc. in graphical or tabular form.

ATB
Dave

[Zico]

Should be attending JG on Sunday....looking forward to giving it a go in the wee windless valley.

Anybody putting up £20 if it gets done there? :D

As far your challenge, 94 yards from sitted at the bench and my lucky bunny as support.....and no wind may take ya up on that ;)

Had a wee blast again yesterday up at Kypeside, will let Zico post his thoughts on it. :)

http://pccures.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/pics/windy.jpg

http://pccures.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/pics/range1.jpg

http://pccures.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/pics/range2.jpg

http://pccures.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/pics/target.jpg


Yep, The breeze was non existant at home, phoned John suggesting it would be ideal conditions to give it a blast. I decided to try the vice with the Vermy clamped lightly on the front part of the trigger guard to allow for the light recoil but to ensure it muzzle flipped vertically only with the vice acting as a hinge.
My very 1st 3 shots were within aprox 1.2 inch (iirc John?) the breeze picked up a little.. I then got a few wind affected shots that took it out to about 4 iches :( The highlight of this 8 shot group was 3 shots through ONE ragged hole!
Great, we thought, looks promising!.. but it all went a bit pete tong from there as the breeze had really picked up and started doing all sorts of things.

JB started producing better groups in this unpredictable eddying breeze by trying to read the wind and aiming off... was getting better groups with his pro-sport than my (still clamped at this point) Vermy.. :o :D I unclamped it and copied his approach but the breeze became more blustery and my FPS had fallen enough to require a top-up. :rolleyes:

I believe the ragged 3 shot single holer from my very 1st group of 8 hints at what could be possible if the conditions had allowed for it. Overall.. very encouraging!

[Harry's Lad]

The thing is, we don't know what conditions Harry was shooting under, apart from the 4,000ft elevation. Vaguely remembered from my flight training the density altitude ( which is what the pellet sees ) is derived from some other stuff like humidity and the pressure altitude ( rather than simply height above sea level )

Yes, of course. Altitude is used as a first-order estimate of pressure and hence density (which is what makes the difference to the drag/BC value). The temperature also plays a part but since we humans can only comfortably tolerate a narrow range of temperatures, I think we can safely ignore the temperature aspect of the density calculation in this particular argument. What say you?

I don't know how much difference this would make, but I personally would be inclined to trust TD's chrono, no offence Dave.

No offence taken but your last remark suggests that you misunderstand the current point (no offence :) ). A few pages back, bengarzy stated that he was inclined to disbelieve Harry’s claims because his (Ben’s) energy data was considerably different to Harry’s. Ben implicated Terry D in that message. Meanwhile, here in sunny Spain, my estimate of Harry’s ballistic data corresponded well with Harry’s estimate. Therefore (since the Laws-Of-Newtonian-Dynamics-As-We-Know-Them are the same as in Oz) it was clear that the pellet that Ben was writing about was not Harry’s JSB Exact. It turns out that Ben/Terry’s pellet was a H&N Barracuda Match – which has an inferior BC value and different dynamics/trajectory/energy retention to the JSB Exact under discussion. Post #184 explores the differences.

I think that it can be reasonably extrapolated that Ben’s original inclination to disbelieve Harry’s ballistics because they were not in his experience was, er, perhaps a little foolhardy. :) Maybe it's just me ...

Dave

[Sid]

No offence taken but your last remark suggests that you misunderstand the current point (no offence :) )

Dave

Well that's a definite possibility, I'm trying to pick out the ballistics stuff from among the personal stuff and it's slightly headache inducing :D
If it wasn't so interesting I would have given up by about page 4 :D

[cpt-vera]

I ask this question regarding this Harry chap,
he was warned fair and square to comply to the rules we all have to, he didn't, and subsequently hes gone,

"who really gives a ?"

Barry

[Born Again]

That is; 50% difference in BC (when the BC is only 0.03) leads to huge differences in downrange velocity/energy/POI whereas a 50% difference when the BC value is 0.5 is barely noticeable.

Again – because of the difference in BC value – Harry’s JSB would be a lot less affected by crosswinds …

Who'd have thought it ? :rolleyes:;)

[Harry's Lad]

Who'd have thought it ? :rolleyes:;)

Que? :confused:

[Born Again]

Que? :confused:

Sorry, me being sarcastic. I was referring to some posts about Harry getting better BC because of altitude.

I understand that Harry tested the ballistic mathematics for Chairgun in association with the equations American author.

Ben, do your own figures allow for 4000ft altitude and the air temperature that Harry shoots at ?

Another point, does anyone have a formula to calculate how much wind effect on a pellet/bullet will be decreased at 4000ft ? It must have less effect, the air is much less dense.

I know it will have an effect, but the effect must be reduced. If we know by how much the effect is reduced we can apply a fudge factor to our group sizes to see if we can match Harrys.

The air density at 4000ft is 0.886 of that at sea level, humidity makes a difference too. I can't remember what Harrys BC was, I think he said 0.037..

0.032 (JSB Exact) / 0.037 (Harrys result) = 0.865

And while you're here, why bother with "flight time in a vacuum", if the pellet is at a constant velocity due to no wind resistance why not just incorporate muzzle velocity into the equation ? I think "flight time in a vacuum" is a red herring myself.

Steve,
(not argumentitive, just curious and enjoying hearing your expert opinions - not in a sarcastic way)

[Harry's Lad]

And while you're here, why bother with "flight time in a vacuum", if the pellet is at a constant velocity due to no wind resistance why not just incorporate muzzle velocity into the equation ? I think "flight time in a vacuum" is a red herring myself.


Did you look at the link that I posted? I thought that the physics/dynamics were described rather well.

The flight-time-in-a-vacuum is, in itself, irrelevant. What is important is the ‘delay’ (caused by the ballistic drag) of the pellet reaching the target. In a vacuum (or if the BC were infinite) then there would be no drag (and hence no deflection).

The sums work out like this :

Wind drift [Feet] = (s * sin(a)) * (t - (v/r)) … where:

t [seconds] = time of flight = 24000 * BC * (Exp(r / (8000 * BC)) - 1) / v
s = wind speed [in Ft/s]
a = angle of wind off trajectory path [degrees]
v = muzzle velocity [in Ft/s]
r = range [in Feet]

Note that the (v/r) term is the flight-time-in-a-vacuum so that (t – (v/r)) is equal to the ‘delay’ caused by drag. If the wind were at 90 degrees to the trajectory then (s * sin(a)) reduces to the windspeed since sin(90deg)=1

Dave

[Born Again]

Did you look at the link that I posted? I thought that the physics/dynamics were described rather well.

The flight-time-in-a-vacuum is, in itself, irrelevant. What is important is the ‘delay’ (caused by the ballistic drag) of the pellet reaching the target. In a vacuum (or if the BC were infinite) then there would be no drag (and hence no deflection).

The sums work out like this :

Wind drift [Feet] = (s * sin(a)) * (t - (v/r)) … where:

t [seconds] = time of flight = 24000 * BC * (Exp(r / (8000 * BC)) - 1) / v
s = wind speed [in Ft/s]
a = angle of wind off trajectory path [degrees]
v = muzzle velocity [in Ft/s]
r = range [in Feet]

Note that the (v/r) term is the flight-time-in-a-vacuum so that (t – (v/r)) is equal to the ‘delay’ caused by drag. If the wind were at 90 degrees to the trajectory then (s * sin(a)) reduces to the windspeed since sin(90deg)=1

Dave

That's just what I thought ( ;) :eek:).

Actually, on second glance, that's not nearly as complicated as it looks. I'll have a better look tomorrow when I'm not full of red wine.

Thanks, and any more formulae welcomed.

[Woodie]

We had another bash it yesterday, shooting out to 100 metres. Same setup as before, 5 shots per group at 18 ft.lbs.

Results – I achieved groups between 2 -4.1 inches. A friend of mine tried it on my rifle and was achieving a consistent group of 2-2.3 inches with my rifle.How embarrasing:o
This leads to conclude that it is down to the shooters ability, because I could not get a consistent group at all yesterday and he did.

We are trying to get our hands on a 27 ft.lbs to see what results we can achieve. And will keep you posted.

[Harry's Lad]

Those of us of a certain age :o will remember when the four-minute mile was thought to be the very limit of human endeavour - 'impossible' they cried! Then, shortly after Roger Bannister achieved the ‘impossible’, a whole raft of athletes did it. Within ten years, the four minute mile equivalent was essential before a athlete could taken seriously. I reckon it’ll be like that with sub MoA groups at 100 and 150 yards – provided, of course, that that nice Gordon Blair (Tony Brown? ... whatever) and the rest of the knee-jerkers will let us keep our airguns long enough.

Better get practicing … ;)

Dave

[baz]

Heres a pic of the Pepsi bottle cap I shot several years ago with Career, 8 Bismags at measured 100yds, using a sandbag rest on bonnet of motor, the cap was trapped behind a bit of wire on a post

[Terry D]

Heres a pic of the Pepsi bottle cap I shot several years ago ...


Sez you.

Eh? :cool:

[rusham]

Did you look at the link that I posted? I thought that the physics/dynamics were described rather well.

The flight-time-in-a-vacuum is, in itself, irrelevant. What is important is the ‘delay’ (caused by the ballistic drag) of the pellet reaching the target. In a vacuum (or if the BC were infinite) then there would be no drag (and hence no deflection).

The sums work out like this :

Wind drift [Feet] = (s * sin(a)) * (t - (v/r)) … where:

t [seconds] = time of flight = 24000 * BC * (Exp(r / (8000 * BC)) - 1) / v
s = wind speed [in Ft/s]
a = angle of wind off trajectory path [degrees]
v = muzzle velocity [in Ft/s]
r = range [in Feet]

Note that the (v/r) term is the flight-time-in-a-vacuum so that (t – (v/r)) is equal to the ‘delay’ caused by drag. If the wind were at 90 degrees to the trajectory then (s * sin(a)) reduces to the windspeed since sin(90deg)=1

Dave

Very good, it all becomes clear!!!!

(Eye's become glazed, mouth slightly open, pen held to side of nose to try and show that he is listening, but in reality, the student is completely lost and hasn't the inclination to ask the lecturer to "repeat that bit again please")

[RichardH]

Heres a pic of the Pepsi bottle cap I shot several years ago with Career, 8 Bismags at measured 100yds, using a sandbag rest on bonnet of motor, the cap was trapped behind a bit of wire on a post

How did the other two holes get into it:D

[baz]

As I expected, and why I didnt put pic on the original thread:cool:

It was a concrete post that it was attatched to and by the time my mate (who also had identical Career) shot a couple of mags worth at a wine bottle cork in same place there was quite a bit of concrete missing:eek:

Admittedly it was an old post and a bit crumbly to start with but still not bad for an airgun:D

I remember chronoing the rifle in front of Terry Le Chem when TD brought him down a few years back I think it was doing 1030fps with Bismags

[RichardH]

As I expected, and why I didnt put pic on the original thread:cool:

It was a concrete post that it was attatched to and by the time my mate (who also had identical Career) shot a couple of mags worth at a wine bottle cork in same place there was quite a bit of concrete missing:eek:

Admittedly it was an old post and a bit crumbly to start with but still not bad for an airgun:D

I remember chronoing the rifle in front of Terry Le Chem when TD brought him down a few years back I think it was doing 1030fps with Bismags

I saw a bloke zero a .222 on a bit of board against one of those, just the reinforcing wire left:eek:

Richard

[Harry's Lad]

Very good, it all becomes clear!!!!

(Eye's become glazed, mouth slightly open, pen held to side of nose to try and show that he is listening, but in reality, the student is completely lost and hasn't the inclination to ask the lecturer to "repeat that bit again please")

The link referred to earlier here (http://www.horusvision.com/davis_art-9.shtml) makes it a lot clearer.

HTH
Dave

[rusham]

The link referred to earlier here (http://www.horusvision.com/davis_art-9.shtml) makes it a lot clearer.

HTH
Dave

Thanks Dave, quite interesting. I will admit that I do not take a scientific approach to my shooting and prefer to keep "things simple", but an interesting article non the less.

[Marko]

The link referred to earlier here (http://www.horusvision.com/davis_art-9.shtml) makes it a lot clearer.

HTH
Dave

I think I'll read that on any other day bar a Friday, especially in the afternoon!

Just looking at it made me yawn.

Night night.

Mar...zzzzzzzzz

[Woodie]

maybe a silly question, but isn't the air thinner at night? (less resistance), just before sun down?

Are you likely to get better groups long range without a silencer?

[Woodie]

http://bsaog.co.uk/forum/index.php?topic=272.0

[flims]

maybe a silly question, but isn't the air thinner at night? (less resistance), just before sun down?

Are you likely to get better groups long range without a silencer?

air gets thinner with Elevation not by night or day. if you are on very high land where air is less dense projectiles should fly further, and also in hot countries.

at long range you dont need a silencer, the weapon can't be heard. my Infinity at 140 yards doing 57ft/lbs can't be heard but the 31grain whizzing through air can be heard as loud as a whip if you are about 30feet from its line of path. im always amazed by how loud that subsonic projectile is.

[GEOFF]

This is what i did today at 150 yards, power set at 70fpe using bisley mag21.4,very light wind was left to right, it took me 20 shots to set up and shot a 10 shot string with 3 pellets not hitting the target at all, should be getting a vidi-cam-corder soon and will try again, don't think i will do much better as i hate paper shooting ;)
http://i197.photobucket.com/albums/aa47/GEOFF4CLAIRE/DSC00176.jpg

[Zico]

Nice one Geoff, very impressive.. What rifle?

[GEOFF]

Have a look on post 116 Zico ;)

[Robert .22]

Nice one Geoff, very impressive.. What rifle?

its a gunpower :eek:so much for crap guns :rolleyes:

[Zico]

its a gunpower :eek:so much for crap guns :rolleyes:


Yep, I thought it might be.. :cool:

Geoff, Re- PTFE lined barrell.. how did you do it and what made you choose PTFE over the superior, more wear resistant, UHMWPE ? I'd hazard a guess at melting point, or was it a coating thickness issue?

[GEOFF]

The PTFE is only on the barrel where the hammer (piston) runs, it makes the firing cycle much smoother. the hammer which has two PTFE rings fitted hits home much better ;) all this helps with consistency and accuracy

[Zico]

ah.. I see.