Re: Remington Factory Barrel Problems
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LoneWolfUSMC</div><div class="ubbcode-body">It's been awhile since I have shot with a 20 degree spread on the same shooting day.
So, using a JBM ballistic calculator:
175gr SMK at 2620
0' ASL, 29.92 inHg, <span style="font-weight: bold">59* F</span>,
@1000yards I need 11.5 Mils (<span style="color: #FF0000">38.7 MOA</span>)
0' ASL, 29.92 inHg, <span style="font-weight: bold">79* F</span>,
@1000yards I need 11.2 Mils (<span style="color: #FF0000">37.7 MOA</span>)
0' ASL, 29.92 inHg, <span style="font-weight: bold">99* F</span>,
@1000yards I need 10.9 Mils (<span style="color: #FF0000">36.6 MOA</span>)
However:
0' ASL, 29.92 inHg, <span style="font-weight: bold">59* F</span>,
@200yards I need 0.6 Mils (<span style="color: #FF0000">1.9 MOA</span>)
0' ASL, 29.92 inHg, <span style="font-weight: bold">79* F</span>,
@200yards I need 0.6 Mils (<span style="color: #FF0000">1.9 MOA</span>)
0' ASL, 29.92 inHg, <span style="font-weight: bold">99* F</span>,
@200yards I need 0.6 Mils (<span style="color: #FF0000">1.9 MOA</span>)
<span style="font-weight: bold">So do we still think it's a "blanket rule" that we can apply on the fly?</span>
My problem with this rule is it has even been taught in police sniper schools.
This would lead a student to believe that if he zeroed his rifle at 100 yards on a 59* day and he is shooting at 200 yards on a 90* day he is going to have to hold four inches high. This will be a miss for our purposes.
There is a pretty good book out there written by John C. Simpson called "Sniper's Notebook". He is another one who won't believe it unless you can show him the math. He valiantly attempts to kill off some of the old myths. I am getting ready to post a review of his book. I picked it up after speaking with him for awhile during Sniperweek this year.
He addresses the temp myth starting on page 60.
http://www.trgus.biz/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=15&Itemid=1 </div></div>
You make a very good point here, and support it well. I am certainly going to explore this topic further. However, like you, I did think that 1 MOA sounded extremely excessive.
Your evidence indicates that is correct.