g7 br2

[mo3]

Anybody got a g7 br2 rangefinder do they do what they say on the tin and is there a dealer in the uk thank you chris

[brown dog]

Looks like snake oil to me.

G7 'goes wrong' from about 500m out and gets worse the further out beyond that that you go.

So a 2000m LRF calculating G7 solutions at 1km+ distances will deliver misses.

[Rols]

Chris

 

I've been looking at these as well. Having watched the product video on YouTube they recommend G1 BC but does give the option to use G7

 

I'd also be interested to hear from anyone who has hands on experience of one...

 

Rich

[brown dog]

You fellows are looking for the silver bullet. This is a laser and a ballistic program. It's normal stuff, it's clever marketing, but it ain't magic.

[Rols]

You fellows are looking for the silver bullet. This is a laser and a ballistic program. It's normal stuff, it's clever marketing, but it ain't magic.

 

A silver bullet, where can I get one :-)

 

I agree about the clever marketing BD, thats why i was wondering if anyone had any actual experience of the unit. I'm not likely to be rushing out and buying one, but I can see the benefits of having it all wrapped up in one unit

 

I'll wait for Chris to buy one and have a look at his ;-)

[brown dog]

I'll wait for Chris to buy one and have a look at his ;-)

 

 

That's the best R&D strategy!

[AckImp]

Looks like snake oil to me.

G7 'goes wrong' from about 500m out and gets worse the further out beyond that that you go.

So a 2000m LRF calculating G7 solutions at 1km+ distances will deliver misses.

 

Can you elaborate on this? I've recently adjusted to using G7 based on what I've read from Bryan Litz regarding using modern boat tail bullets.

[brown dog]

Can you elaborate on this? I've recently adjusted to using G7 based on what I've read from Bryan Litz regarding using modern boat tail bullets.

 

Sure, read my first post here: http://ukvarminting.com/forums/topic/9715-g7/

 

The biggest step forward with BL's G7 is that it's empirically derived.

 

But it's not 'perfect' it's still a 'best fit' approximation; and it approximates pointy spitzers out to about 500m and then begins to diverge from reality; and diverges significantly from about 700m; and gets worse the further out you go. That's the nature of approximations. BL doesn't claim anything other than this, but many shooters seem to have morphed this into believing that by using G7 in a point mass solver they've somehow turned it into a 6DOF numerical solution. BL doesn't even vaguely claim that G7 does that, but it seems to have come to be seen that way by many.

 

In the example I've linked, G7 delivers 40cm elevation errors at 1000m (ie more than a 1 foot 4 inch elevation miss).

 

In stark contrast, below 500m it's as good as doppler derived data.

 

The major error (BC-wise) lies in using manufacturer's claimed BCs.

[AckImp]

Thanks for that, hadn't seen that first post before. Interesting to see solutions laid out against actual data. If only every manufacturer would publish their doppler information.

 

I see your point regarding where the largest error lies. Claimed BCs never seem to match real life.

 

My method these days has been using JBM and manipulating the data until it matches what I've seen at the range at various points. I'd love a proper "silver bullet" solution. I've never been able to generate results that exactly match real life but I've kind of resolved myself to the fact that there are an awful lot of variables.

 

Apologies to the OP for a bit of a hijack on their thread regarding the Range Finder.