Load Development Targets - feedback wanted

Glassaholic · Mar 28, 2018

pell1203 said:
wjm308, I am here in the US (western WA), just find it much easier to use mils, a 1 cm grid and to multiply and divide by ten vs dealing in MOA (1.047" @ 100yd), 0.36" grids, and dividing and multiplying by 4. Nothing wrong with MOA, it's just more mentally taxing to me than mils and base ten math.

Fortunately, in my home range we have access to distances out to 600 yards and on the 200 yard ranges we can place targets at any distances between 25-200 yards. Conveniently, there is a 100 meter distance marked as well.

No rush on this, but once all comments and improvements have been rolled in, it would be nice to get the four across target for load development converted to a cm grid. Everything is very usable and well thought out as is, so converting is more of a nitpick than anything else. Thanks again for your effort!

Hey pell, oh gotcha, you're here in the US. Help me understand something though, .1 mil is .36" at 100 yards, these are not MOA targets, they are mil targets for 100 yards. So if you setup the target at 100 yards, the grid represents the clicks on a mil/mil scope; however, if your range has a 100 meter range and you would prefer to shoot at 100 meters then yes, the mil value grows in that extra 28 feet to equal almost 1cm (about .9999cm). Remember that mils are not linear measurements like inches and cm's, they are angular measurements which translate at different distances to different linear measurements. Since most ranges in the US are setup to be in yards, it makes sense to have mil targets setup for 100 yards, not 100 meters. A mil is still a mil whether it's 100 yards or 100 meters so I want to make sure I'm not misunderstanding something here. Just to reiterate, these are not MOA based targets, they are mil based targets meant to be used at 100 yards. If you want to use 100 meters for load development I am totally fine with that; however, you can still use your mil/mil scope at 100 yards with these targets and have accurate .1 mil clicks, does that make sense?

straightshooter1 · Mar 28, 2018

wjm308 said:
Hey pell, oh gotcha, you're here in the US. Help me understand something though, .1 mil is .36" at 100 yards, these are not MOA targets, they are mil targets for 100 yards. So if you setup the target at 100 yards, the grid represents the clicks on a mil/mil scope; however, if your range has a 100 meter range and you would prefer to shoot at 100 meters then yes, the mil value grows in that extra 28 feet to equal almost 1cm (about .9999cm). Remember that mils are not linear measurements like inches and cm's, they are angular measurements which translate at different distances to different linear measurements. Since most ranges in the US are setup to be in yards, it makes sense to have mil targets setup for 100 yards, not 100 meters. A mil is still a mil whether it's 100 yards or 100 meters so I want to make sure I'm not misunderstanding something here. Just to reiterate, these are not MOA based targets, they are mil based targets meant to be used at 100 yards. If you want to use 100 meters for load development I am totally fine with that; however, you can still use your mil/mil scope at 100 yards with these targets and have accurate .1 mil clicks, does that make sense?

Excellent explanation!

But . . . again, for "load development", does it really matter? When comparing one group to the next to see what the load it doing, the grid can be used to see small relative changes. As long as POA is the same, POI measurement of any individual shot is not so important as is the size of the group and how the group moves according to the load and its configuration. Now, if one is sighting in their scope or shooting for accuracy, then that's a different matter and different targets can be used. Anyway, that's how I see it.

pell1203 · Mar 29, 2018

wjm308 and straightshooter1, completely agree with all of your comments and explanations put forth above.

No misunderstandings here, but folks are eventually going to convert the milliradian (mRad or mil) angular measurements, even though there is no actual need to do so, to its linear equivalent at some specified distance. It is in these situations I find the base 10 system lots easier to use than yards, inches and quarter clicks.

Your target sheets are GREAT!

Glassaholic · Mar 29, 2018

pell1203 said:
wjm308 and straightshooter1, completely agree with all of your comments and explanations put forth above.

No misunderstandings here, but folks are eventually going to convert the milliradian (mRad or mil) angular measurements, even though there is no actual need to do so, to its linear equivalent at some specified distance. It is in these situations I find the base 10 system lots easier to use than yards, inches and quarter clicks.

Your target sheets are GREAT!

No problem pell, I can make a 100 meter version... would you like it in the x4 version with 4 bullseyes?

Glassaholic · Mar 29, 2018

Okay everyone, I've taken your feedback and incorporated a few other changes, here are the latest versions, let me know what you think.

pell1203 · Mar 29, 2018

wjm308 said:
No problem pell, I can make a 100 meter version... would you like it in the x4 version with 4 bullseyes?

Bill, no need to create a special target for me at 100 meters. These are perfectly usable as is!

Only difference would be the size of the grid, and frankly, I would just be using the grid to compare relative points of impact from one target to another during an OCW test. Exact grid size not that important, only that one be present to make comparisons easier. Calipers would be used for any actual measurements.

_Windrider_ · Mar 29, 2018

wjm308 said:
Okay everyone, I've taken your feedback and incorporated a few other changes, here are the latest versions, let me know what you think.

You could put these in resources area and if you make changes do it there instead keeping the thread alive.

Nice job. You put a ton of work into these.

Glassaholic · Mar 29, 2018

TacticalDillhole said:
You could put these in resources area and if you make changes do it there instead keeping the thread alive.

Nice job. You put a ton of work into these.

Thank you TDH, that is a good idea once I'm done and I think (hope) I am almost done

Finally getting a chance to get to the range tomorrow so plan on using these new versions to see how they look and function.

straightshooter1 · Mar 30, 2018

wjm308 said:
Okay everyone, I've taken your feedback and incorporated a few other changes, here are the latest versions, let me know what you think.

VERY nice work indeed. And THANK YOU for all the work you put into this and sharing it. These will be very useful to me and I'm sure to many other's too. To keep my file clutter down, I've combined those into one pdf file.

Only . . . where to I put Case Capacity and Run-Out?

Naaah, just kidding.

Glassaholic · Apr 5, 2018

I think I'm finally there, took the targets out last Friday and realized my small dots were just too small for my taste at 100 yards, even with the fine dot on my MR4 reticle I liked the larger dots better as it allowed me to "center" the dot better, everything else seemed just about right. So I decided to just eliminate the small dot versions altogether and narrow the selection down to 3 target options. I didn't have any ammo really to do load development (because I'm still unpacking all my reloading gear) so just shot these with factory ammo to get a sense of how they work in the real world. I appreciate all of you who've provided input on these targets, moving forward these will help me and hopefully help others as well. I looked at the Resources section of the Hide but couldn't figure out how to upload things there, so if someone knows please help me out.

Here's just a couple of the targets where I realized a little adjustment could help with the data section sizes as well as changing up some of the sections a bit:

I actually preferred shooting with the larger center dots, this was my first target with this rifle hence the 2 cold bore shots

Glassaholic · Apr 5, 2018

Here are the final targets, I'll update my original post as well, looks like Version 5 is it -

straightshooter1 · Apr 5, 2018

wjm308 said:
I actually preferred shooting with the larger center dots, this was my first target with this rifle hence the 2 cold bore shots

Yeah . . . I've tried on a few occasions to use small dots and like you, I found it made it somewhat more difficult to center up on the dot (though the vertical and horizontal cross lines help). So, I prefer the larger dot as you've designed going out 200 even. But, for small bore rifle at 50 yds, the small dot works just fine as a target.

Glassaholic · Apr 6, 2018

straightshooter1 said:
Yeah . . . I've tried on a few occasions to use small dots and like you, I found it made it somewhat more difficult to center up on the dot (though the vertical and horizontal cross lines help). So, I prefer the larger dot as you've designed going out 200 even. But, for small bore rifle at 50 yds, the small dot works just fine as a target.

I even took the 2x target out to 300 and was still able to see the larger dots although the center dot and crosshair of my reticles covered them up when I centered.

downrange67 · Apr 13, 2018

Looks good!!

D̷e̷v̷i̷l̷D̷o̷c̷A̷Z̷ · Sep 26, 2023

Can’t believe it’s been 5 years since @Glassaholic designed these targets!

Lost my file and had one heck of a time finding this old thread.

Curious if anyone else is still using these or if you have moved on to something different.

straightshooter1 · Sep 26, 2023

D̷e̷v̷i̷l̷D̷o̷c̷A̷Z̷ said:
Can’t believe it’s been 5 years since @Glassaholic designed these targets!

Lost my file and had one heck of a time finding this old thread.

Curious if anyone else is still using these or if you have moved on to something different.

For load development, I regularly use this one:

D̷e̷v̷i̷l̷D̷o̷c̷A̷Z̷ · Sep 26, 2023

straightshooter1 said:
For load development, I regularly use this one:

View attachment 8236333

It checks all the boxes and then some.

david walter · Sep 27, 2023

I’m glad I stumbled upon this. It’ll be pretty handy.

Glassaholic · Sep 28, 2023

D̷e̷v̷i̷l̷D̷o̷c̷A̷Z̷ said:
Can’t believe it’s been 5 years since @Glassaholic designed these targets!

Lost my file and had one heck of a time finding this old thread.

Curious if anyone else is still using these or if you have moved on to something different.

I can’t believe it’s been five years either. I need to double check and make sure i provide updates

D̷e̷v̷i̷l̷D̷o̷c̷A̷Z̷ · Sep 28, 2023

Glassaholic said:
I can’t believe it’s been five years either. I need to double check and make sure i provide updates

My only request is updating your user name on the target so I can search for it easier

Glassaholic · Sep 28, 2023

D̷e̷v̷i̷l̷D̷o̷c̷A̷Z̷ said:
My only request is updating your user name on the target so I can search for it easier

Wow, its been that long.

Thats an easy update.

Watch Out for Scammers!

Load Development Targets - feedback wanted

Optical theorist and conjecturer

Private

Stay Focused!

Optical theorist and conjecturer

Optical theorist and conjecturer

Attachments

Stay Focused!

Shiner of shoes

Optical theorist and conjecturer

Private

Attachments

Optical theorist and conjecturer

Optical theorist and conjecturer

Attachments

Private

Optical theorist and conjecturer

Sergeant

Banned x2 🤪

Private

Banned x2 🤪

Insightful commentator

Optical theorist and conjecturer

Banned x2 🤪

Optical theorist and conjecturer

Similar threads