Hey can anyone tell me if theres pros to collecting DOPE in the traditional sense anymore? I see everyone using these apps and stuff and not sure what’s easiest and most efficient. Thanks!
I 100% believe that there is sense in validating your DOPE the traditional sense, but I would caveat with it being more of a confirmation of DOPE.
Your apps and computers work off of a formula that is more or less a VERY accurate hypothesis.
As we have seen before there are many different ones and they are only as good as the individuals who make them, for example Hornady 4DOF and Applied Ballistics are very reputable and tested solvers.
But even these will have slight deviations as you look through the DOPE cards that they provide, I have noticed that they both work very well inside of 7 yards and after that there are many factors that contribute to a miss so it is hard to truly tell if it was the solver.
This is why there is trajectory validation or truing, you can confirm that the DOPES are good or if they need minor tweaking.
The best way to do it in my opinion is to use the solver, but then confirm with real bullets because then you know for certain that the DOPE is correct because you hit and centered it vertically.
Absolutely. Technology fails. Having a general baseline given what your atmospherics are at that time can help you build DA cards (density altitude). This is essentially a combination of the atmospherics put together that will tell you what your dope would be at a said given altitude. A great tool to have whether going to compete or going on a hunt.
There have been times I ditched my kestrel and looked at what dopes I have hit targets at before, and as long as the atmospherics are relatively close, I will most likely be successful.
%20(3).png)
Awesome thanks so much
Awesome thanks so much
I 100% believe that there is sense in validating your DOPE the traditional sense, but I would caveat with it being more of a confirmation of DOPE.
Your apps and computers work off of a formula that is more or less a VERY accurate hypothesis.
As we have seen before there are many different ones and they are only as good as the individuals who make them, for example Hornady 4DOF and Applied Ballistics are very reputable and tested solvers.
But even these will have slight deviations as you look through the DOPE cards that they provide, I have noticed that they both work very well inside of 7 yards and after that there are many factors that contribute to a miss so it is hard to truly tell if it was the solver.
This is why there is trajectory validation or truing, you can confirm that the DOPES are good or if they need minor tweaking.
The best way to do it in my opinion is to use the solver, but then confirm with real bullets because then you know for certain that the DOPE is correct because you hit and centered it vertically.
- Solo
Cool much appreciated
Absolutely. Technology fails. Having a general baseline given what your atmospherics are at that time can help you build DA cards (density altitude). This is essentially a combination of the atmospherics put together that will tell you what your dope would be at a said given altitude. A great tool to have whether going to compete or going on a hunt.
There have been times I ditched my kestrel and looked at what dopes I have hit targets at before, and as long as the atmospherics are relatively close, I will most likely be successful.