For those of you new to long range shooting, especially those in PRS or NRL style competitions, check out this video on how to true your ballistic data.
I picked up a mpa 338 lapua last week and I can’t wait to shoot it. Y’all make a great product. I’m in Michigan and we’re in winter. Not to mention we’re having storms every other day ,can’t get out to my shooting spot but bet you’re ass as soon as I can I’ll be out there singing the song of freedom!!
2870fps is the exact velocity I'm getting with my 6BR shooting 108gr eld's and leverevolution. In my B e a utiful Masterpiece arms chassied Savage Target. Phil was kind enough to machine a chassis in an action they previously did not offer. I was the first one to request zombie green ceracote and it is awesome! You just can not find a better bunch of people! I now own two of their chassis and love them!
Using g7 will drastically reduce the need for truing bc. When I used g1 I had to do this, but switching to g7 and just using chrono mv its pretty balls on accurate straight up.
Great video - even 2 years later. Question: At 500 yards, if you would have been 2 inches high, are you saying you would have adjusted the velocity (down) until your shot aligned with the line, then continued on with adjusting the B.C. (as you did in the video)?
Very well done explanation! Only thing missing was a screen shot or video clip of what adjusting your b.c. actually looked like on your Kestrel. By the way, what brand/model is your brass catcher, and where can I buy one? Bob P. Dakota Dunes, SD
Bob, that is an MPA Brass Catcher. They are on our website. I actually decided to shoot that video on the way to the range on Saturday. I didn't have anyone with me to provide the additional video footage of the actual adjustments on the Kestrel. That would have been a nice touch.
Great question. My experience has been every time I run it back down to 500, the data tracks perfectly. I thought about including this in the video, but dang, it was already 11 minutes long.
I just recently bought the mpa 30t and the 30 round magazine that came with it won’t load comfortably more than 15 rounds. Then it gets to fat to go into the gun and won’t slide all the way in and when you try to remove the ammo the spring won’t stretch back out it stays down. Very disappointed for a $900 gun...
@ 1:55 .....He mentions using a G1 BC. *edit* That goes against ballisticians recommendations. It’s best to use a G7 B.C reference in your kestrel! If you need the G7 BC for any particular bullet, check out the G7 BCs provided by Applied Ballistics for the commonly used bullets.
Not very wrong. You can get perfectly acceptable ballistic data using G1. Most long range shooters run a G7 especially on boat tail projectiles, but in the case of projectiles running supersonic, it matters very little. Also, do ever wonder why a company like Berger puts a G1 BC on their boxes? When you visit Sierra's website, why do they only list G1 on their bullet data? I understand the argument, but using a G1 BC is by no means "very wrong." Also, here is a comparison between G1 (0.610) and G7 (.305) on the 108 EH, running 2870 out of my BR... 1100 yards (8.85 G1/8.88 G7) 1000 yards (7.53 G1/7.56 G7) 900 yards (6.33 G1/6.33 G7) 800 yards (5.21 G1/5.22 G7) 700 yards (4.19 G1/4.20 G7) 600 yards (3.27 G1/3.27 G7) 500 yards (2.42 G1/2.42 G7). This was calculated using a G7 of 0.610 and a G1 of 0.305). If following standard dialing procedures, the only distance this would have any difference is at 1000 yards. You would round up to 7.6 mils using a G7 and round down to a 7.5 with a G1.
@@cncmts Fair enough! However, Bryan Litz suggests to always reference a G7 bc standard, as it most closely represents the drag model for boat tail bullets used in long range shooting. Perhaps I’m way out of line(and I’ll be the first to admit it), but if a man of his intellect and specialty regarding external ballistics suggests to only use a G7 BC standard, I would tend to agree and use his word as fact on the matter. If the same results are accomplished by using either one, then by all means! Use the G1 🙂👍🏻 But, as velocity decreases at extended ranges, I believe the G7 is a more reflective drag model of what the bullet flight path is actually doing. Particularly, as it reaches the transonic range distances. In Applied Ballistics for long range shooting, written by Litz, he writes on pg.39: “Its just a matter of time until the collective masses recognize the handicapping effects of using BC’s referenced to the old G1 standard.” There’s more than one way to skin a cat right? Either way, great content and love the channel!
@@cwoodside907 I can agree with that. Bryan is a smart fella and if Im shooting at ELR distances, Im certainly using a G7, but for the purpose of this video, and the audience it was intended to help, either will work.
@@cncmtsLitz believed/claimed that maximum range of 5.56x45 mm NATO (S109) was over 3800 yards in standard arm. cond. Then a ballistician from Yuma proving grounds joined the discussion and said that in their tests Ss109 never flew over 3400 yards 😜
Do you true-up even when using a CDM from Applied Balistics? Problem with trying to true up with CDM's is that there is no way to change your BC as it's a set number within the balistic calculator. I guess you could always just bag the CDM if it isn't working and just try truing the G7 instead...
Any reason you choose G1 over G7? Or is it just a number and doesn’t really matter ? I ask because I have always heard G7 matches ballistics better on the low drag tangent ogive bullets. Great video as well sir
When I 1st started shooting long range, I used G1 and that is what Im used to. I know many that prefer G7, and I have tried both. Cant tell the difference between the 2 TBH. I know some "snobs" would balk at that, but as long as the shooter is truing the data at distance, I just dont think it matters.
If given the opportunity, I will repeat this procedure, but in a more condensed manner. Maybe go straight to 1000 yards and verify the atmospherics in my kestrel are functioning. Then verify the data.
Seems to me you are “trueing” your BC to achieve impact variations that are actually caused by variations in either velocity or density altitude (temp/bar pressure/altitude). Bullet manufacturer’s know the correct BC and it won’t change so if you true velocity the only major variable left is DA. So what’s the advantage to trueing BC over trueing velocity or trueing DA?
Nice info Phil. Seems like after adjusting your bc at 1000, your bc’s at distances between 6-800 are slightly off. Is this technique more accurate than using Applied Ballistics custom drag curves?
What I did not do in this video, mainly because it was already 11 minutes, was shoot the targets back down to 500 yards. I have always found that when following the method shown in the video and the bullet is trued at 1K, it always tracks back to the waterline at shorter distances.
Also, I have seen far too many times that when shooters are using custom drag models, problems seem to occur. Not sure why. But using the "Bryan Morgan" method, it always works.
@Masterpiece Arms Measuring drop at one range to predict drop at others is how Art Pejsa's formula works. He claimed it could get within half an inch at 1000 yards. Maybe Kestrel will consider his approach as an option someday. I am curious what atmospheric conditions your Kestral reported if you have them noted. I ran your bullet and velocity and the 0.560 G1 number you gave (the Berger site has it as 0.559 now, but not significantly different) in two exterior ballistic programs with your 2.1" sight height. You said the Kestral wanted a come-up of 2.64, and you used 2.60. Both QuickTarget Unlimited and one of the JBM trajectory calculators suggest that at a standard atmosphere, it would be about 8.80 MOA or 2.56 mils (milliradians) or 2.607 mils (NATO mils). Barometric pressure would have to be about 32.6 inches to get 2.64 milliradians. If your sight is using NATO mils, then it would be 2.607 mils in a standard atmosphere as the other programs predict it, and since your 2.60 setting shot right on the bottom edge of the line, I'm thinking that's a perfect match to NATO mils in a standard atmosphere. The Kestral uses milliradians, and the fact it came up with a number that requires pretty dense air suggests it is recommending high values, which may account for its failure to track further out. I'm just curious to find out what the cause of the elevation recommendation error is.
You can use the exact same process on 22LR. Depending on the ammo and range distance, I would probably try to "true" the velocity at 50 yards and the BC at 300-400 yards.
Long range shooting has spread like Covid19 among many shooters. I have seen the hoopla with the 6mm variance and how well they do pass 750 yds and up to 1,200, 1,500 yds., etc. Now, I wonder how many hunters need that long range bullet when most of the time the average shot is between 100 and 300 yds. Sometimes less and sometimes maybe up to 500yds. With the price and scarcity of ammo and even the reload components, it's mind boggling to see how many videos are done on long range shooting. What's wrong with ol' reliable 308 that can bring down just about any animal in the lower 48 with it's versality of different bullet grains? I have brought down elk, mule deer, etc., up to 500 yds with a 308 without any problem.
Good point. The 308 has been an excellent cartridge for decades, and rightfully so. But shooting long range is highly addictive. Hard to explain, but Im hooked.
Your question is, how many hunters need long-range shooting skills? I have no idea. I know long-range hunting has become a thing and that there is a long-range hunting forum on the web, but have no idea what the actual field participation level is. I think a lot of us get hooked on shooting matches as part of the implicit obligation the citizen-soldier has to keep in practice in case Uncle Sam calls on us. But the only practical example I've seen was during the Iraq war when the CMP fielded some top competitors as coaches to help the military train their Squad Designated Marksmen.
Thank you for taking the time in producing this video. I hope more are on the way. 👍😎
Brilliant video and the best instruction I have seen on this topic. Thanks !!
I picked up a mpa 338 lapua last week and I can’t wait to shoot it. Y’all make a great product. I’m in Michigan and we’re in winter. Not to mention we’re having storms every other day ,can’t get out to my shooting spot but bet you’re ass as soon as I can I’ll be out there singing the song of freedom!!
Soooo spot on.... You only know what you can prove !
2870fps is the exact velocity I'm getting with my 6BR shooting 108gr eld's and leverevolution. In my B e a utiful Masterpiece arms chassied Savage Target. Phil was kind enough to machine a chassis in an action they previously did not offer. I was the first one to request zombie green ceracote and it is awesome! You just can not find a better bunch of people! I now own two of their chassis and love them!
Thank You. I have always only adjusted the velocity and the Data was close but never spot on at every distance. I will definitely try this.
Brilliant, as usual! Phil Cashin and MPA are the best in the business!
Amazing consistency and a beautiful rifle.
Great video! That's why MPA is simply the best. Between them and Vudoo you really can't go wrong.
This helped me understand trueing. Thanks for doing this video.
Great video! Thanks
Excellent Video. How do we true data for longer ranges if you only have access to a 300 yard range?
Good video man.
Using g7 will drastically reduce the need for truing bc. When I used g1 I had to do this, but switching to g7 and just using chrono mv its pretty balls on accurate straight up.
Great video - even 2 years later. Question: At 500 yards, if you would have been 2 inches high, are you saying you would have adjusted the velocity (down) until your shot aligned with the line, then continued on with adjusting the B.C. (as you did in the video)?
Good stuff
Very well done explanation! Only thing missing was a screen shot or video clip of what adjusting your b.c. actually looked like on your Kestrel. By the way, what brand/model is your brass catcher, and where can I buy one? Bob P. Dakota Dunes, SD
Bob, that is an MPA Brass Catcher. They are on our website. I actually decided to shoot that video on the way to the range on Saturday. I didn't have anyone with me to provide the additional video footage of the actual adjustments on the Kestrel. That would have been a nice touch.
Shout out to Masterpiece Arms for having the brass catcher's wire frame made here in the U.S.A.
Brian Litz from Berger already validated Berger bullets and several others.
But were they validated with YOUR barrel ??? NO... we MUST validate out own data !!!
Would like to see you come back to 500,,,, will it run true at your bc setting??
Great question. My experience has been every time I run it back down to 500, the data tracks perfectly. I thought about including this in the video, but dang, it was already 11 minutes long.
@@cncmts well this kind of stuff is worth watching no matter how long....another few minutes would be ok by me.....great info for sure
@@cncmts Why bother with a chrono if you’re not going to use it?
Phil, if you were to run out to 13-1400 yds would you just make another BC adjustment if your impacts were above or below the water mark? Thanks
Awesome information. What model of brass catcher are you running?
MPA Brass Catcher. Its on our website
I just recently bought the mpa 30t and the 30 round magazine that came with it won’t load comfortably more than 15 rounds. Then it gets to fat to go into the gun and won’t slide all the way in and when you try to remove the ammo the spring won’t stretch back out it stays down. Very disappointed for a $900 gun...
@ 1:55 .....He mentions using a G1 BC. *edit* That goes against ballisticians recommendations. It’s best to use a G7 B.C reference in your kestrel! If you need the G7 BC for any particular bullet, check out the G7 BCs provided by Applied Ballistics for the commonly used bullets.
Not very wrong. You can get perfectly acceptable ballistic data using G1. Most long range shooters run a G7 especially on boat tail projectiles, but in the case of projectiles running supersonic, it matters very little. Also, do ever wonder why a company like Berger puts a G1 BC on their boxes? When you visit Sierra's website, why do they only list G1 on their bullet data? I understand the argument, but using a G1 BC is by no means "very wrong." Also, here is a comparison between G1 (0.610) and G7 (.305) on the 108 EH, running 2870 out of my BR... 1100 yards (8.85 G1/8.88 G7) 1000 yards (7.53 G1/7.56 G7) 900 yards (6.33 G1/6.33 G7) 800 yards (5.21 G1/5.22 G7) 700 yards (4.19 G1/4.20 G7) 600 yards (3.27 G1/3.27 G7) 500 yards (2.42 G1/2.42 G7). This was calculated using a G7 of 0.610 and a G1 of 0.305). If following standard dialing procedures, the only distance this would have any difference is at 1000 yards. You would round up to 7.6 mils using a G7 and round down to a 7.5 with a G1.
@@cncmts Fair enough! However, Bryan Litz suggests to always reference a G7 bc standard, as it most closely represents the drag model for boat tail bullets used in long range shooting. Perhaps I’m way out of line(and I’ll be the first to admit it), but if a man of his intellect and specialty regarding external ballistics suggests to only use a G7 BC standard, I would tend to agree and use his word as fact on the matter. If the same results are accomplished by using either one, then by all means! Use the G1 🙂👍🏻 But, as velocity decreases at extended ranges, I believe the G7 is a more reflective drag model of what the bullet flight path is actually doing. Particularly, as it reaches the transonic range distances. In Applied Ballistics for long range shooting, written by Litz, he writes on pg.39: “Its just a matter of time until the collective masses recognize the handicapping effects of using BC’s referenced to the old G1 standard.” There’s more than one way to skin a cat right? Either way, great content and love the channel!
@@cwoodside907 I can agree with that. Bryan is a smart fella and if Im shooting at ELR distances, Im certainly using a G7, but for the purpose of this video, and the audience it was intended to help, either will work.
@@cncmtsLitz believed/claimed that maximum range of 5.56x45 mm NATO (S109) was over 3800 yards in standard arm. cond. Then a ballistician from Yuma proving grounds joined the discussion and said that in their tests Ss109 never flew over 3400 yards 😜
Do you true-up even when using a CDM from Applied Balistics? Problem with trying to true up with CDM's is that there is no way to change your BC as it's a set number within the balistic calculator.
I guess you could always just bag the CDM if it isn't working and just try truing the G7 instead...
Excellent shooting mate
Any reason you choose G1 over G7? Or is it just a number and doesn’t really matter ? I ask because I have always heard G7 matches ballistics better on the low drag tangent ogive bullets. Great video as well sir
When I 1st started shooting long range, I used G1 and that is what Im used to. I know many that prefer G7, and I have tried both. Cant tell the difference between the 2 TBH. I know some "snobs" would balk at that, but as long as the shooter is truing the data at distance, I just dont think it matters.
@@cncmts agreed. I have thought it’s a number so as long as you do the work it should work. Hey thanks for video and the reply sir. Take care
Do you make a separate profile for each 100 yard increment by adjusting the bc won’t that make it high back at 500
Do you true your data at the shoot location if there is a large change in elevation or do you trust your electronics to be accurate?
If given the opportunity, I will repeat this procedure, but in a more condensed manner. Maybe go straight to 1000 yards and verify the atmospherics in my kestrel are functioning. Then verify the data.
Seems to me you are “trueing” your BC to achieve impact variations that are actually caused by variations in either velocity or density altitude (temp/bar pressure/altitude). Bullet manufacturer’s know the correct BC and it won’t change so if you true velocity the only major variable left is DA. So what’s the advantage to trueing BC over trueing velocity or trueing DA?
Nice info Phil. Seems like after adjusting your bc at 1000, your bc’s at distances between 6-800 are slightly off. Is this technique more accurate than using Applied Ballistics custom drag curves?
What I did not do in this video, mainly because it was already 11 minutes, was shoot the targets back down to 500 yards. I have always found that when following the method shown in the video and the bullet is trued at 1K, it always tracks back to the waterline at shorter distances.
Also, I have seen far too many times that when shooters are using custom drag models, problems seem to occur. Not sure why. But using the "Bryan Morgan" method, it always works.
Thanks Phil.
@Masterpiece Arms Measuring drop at one range to predict drop at others is how Art Pejsa's formula works. He claimed it could get within half an inch at 1000 yards. Maybe Kestrel will consider his approach as an option someday.
I am curious what atmospheric conditions your Kestral reported if you have them noted. I ran your bullet and velocity and the 0.560 G1 number you gave (the Berger site has it as 0.559 now, but not significantly different) in two exterior ballistic programs with your 2.1" sight height. You said the Kestral wanted a come-up of 2.64, and you used 2.60. Both QuickTarget Unlimited and one of the JBM trajectory calculators suggest that at a standard atmosphere, it would be about 8.80 MOA or 2.56 mils (milliradians) or 2.607 mils (NATO mils). Barometric pressure would have to be about 32.6 inches to get 2.64 milliradians. If your sight is using NATO mils, then it would be 2.607 mils in a standard atmosphere as the other programs predict it, and since your 2.60 setting shot right on the bottom edge of the line, I'm thinking that's a perfect match to NATO mils in a standard atmosphere. The Kestral uses milliradians, and the fact it came up with a number that requires pretty dense air suggests it is recommending high values, which may account for its failure to track further out.
I'm just curious to find out what the cause of the elevation recommendation error is.
Any idea what the scaled down distances would be for truing .22lr with this method?
You can use the exact same process on 22LR. Depending on the ammo and range distance, I would probably try to "true" the velocity at 50 yards and the BC at 300-400 yards.
I use a 25 yard zero, then true MV 100 yards past zero which would be 125 yards, then true your DSF at 300 yards
@@paulwatson4616 That works!
Does the magnetospeed charge POI?
Using our Rat Magnetospeed Adapter, the bayonet does not touch the barrel and wont change POI.
Use G7
I'm done with this channel, laterm
Long range shooting has spread like Covid19 among many shooters. I have seen the hoopla with the 6mm variance and how well they do pass 750 yds and up to 1,200, 1,500 yds., etc. Now, I wonder how many hunters need that long range bullet when most of the time the average shot is between 100 and 300 yds. Sometimes less and sometimes maybe up to 500yds. With the price and scarcity of ammo and even the reload components, it's mind boggling to see how many videos are done on long range shooting. What's wrong with ol' reliable 308 that can bring down just about any animal in the lower 48 with it's versality of different bullet grains? I have brought down elk, mule deer, etc., up to 500 yds with a 308 without any problem.
Good point. The 308 has been an excellent cartridge for decades, and rightfully so. But shooting long range is highly addictive. Hard to explain, but Im hooked.
Your question is, how many hunters need long-range shooting skills? I have no idea. I know long-range hunting has become a thing and that there is a long-range hunting forum on the web, but have no idea what the actual field participation level is. I think a lot of us get hooked on shooting matches as part of the implicit obligation the citizen-soldier has to keep in practice in case Uncle Sam calls on us. But the only practical example I've seen was during the Iraq war when the CMP fielded some top competitors as coaches to help the military train their Squad Designated Marksmen.