past two days I’ve visited a public range that’s new to me. They have electronic targets at 100 yards and 600 and 1000. They put appropriate nra targets on each so you have scoring rings and an “x” in the center to aim at. However, they don’t change the paper often and you’re not allowed to go downrange all day so they get pretty shot up and it can be hard to tell which holes are yours.
Luckily I showed up early and was able to see enough room in the x ring to see my holes at 100.
Interestingly, the iPad plotted my shots but showed them more than 4” from where they actually were the first day and more than 10” off the second day. Two different lanes. In both cases they were “recalibrated” by range staff and remained in the ballpark for the rest of my hour.
Obviously that raised the question of how in the world you’d know where you’re actually hitting at 600 and 1000 where you can’t actually see holes. I was super unimpressed.
After calibrating I fired two groups of 6 and 10 with my impact 6dasher (same as Walkalong thread). Pictured is second group. It claimed the first group was .65” and second was .97”. They looked the same size to me through my 40x leupold spotter but who knows? (First group was centered on x and I held half mil low for second group)
Interestingly it gives the velocity of each round and an average. 3 rounds into the first group I attached my magnetospeed and there was apparently a bit of shift as it was .35” with the first three and then the group moved slightly right for the next 3. The second group was different ammo but all fired with magnetospeed. In any event the point was that my mv avg for the 10 rounds was 2818 FPS and shooter says it’s 2658.7 at 100 yards. As you can see from the pic the target thinks the bullet was going 2625 FPS. 24 FPS difference is .2 mile or 7.2” difference at 1000 yards for me. So I’m sort of conflicted in thinking that’s not good enough for me but still way closer than I thought you could get from an electronic target. Idk.
Overall, definitely not a fan. Curious what experience other have had though.
Luckily I showed up early and was able to see enough room in the x ring to see my holes at 100.
Interestingly, the iPad plotted my shots but showed them more than 4” from where they actually were the first day and more than 10” off the second day. Two different lanes. In both cases they were “recalibrated” by range staff and remained in the ballpark for the rest of my hour.
Obviously that raised the question of how in the world you’d know where you’re actually hitting at 600 and 1000 where you can’t actually see holes. I was super unimpressed.
After calibrating I fired two groups of 6 and 10 with my impact 6dasher (same as Walkalong thread). Pictured is second group. It claimed the first group was .65” and second was .97”. They looked the same size to me through my 40x leupold spotter but who knows? (First group was centered on x and I held half mil low for second group)
Interestingly it gives the velocity of each round and an average. 3 rounds into the first group I attached my magnetospeed and there was apparently a bit of shift as it was .35” with the first three and then the group moved slightly right for the next 3. The second group was different ammo but all fired with magnetospeed. In any event the point was that my mv avg for the 10 rounds was 2818 FPS and shooter says it’s 2658.7 at 100 yards. As you can see from the pic the target thinks the bullet was going 2625 FPS. 24 FPS difference is .2 mile or 7.2” difference at 1000 yards for me. So I’m sort of conflicted in thinking that’s not good enough for me but still way closer than I thought you could get from an electronic target. Idk.
Overall, definitely not a fan. Curious what experience other have had though.