New KD Visual Aid for Modern AR15s

[308LIBERTY]

EDIT 4-15-16: Removed original (more confusing) chart. Replaced with 2 more simple charts. One showing 3 trajectories for purposes of depicting Battle Sight Zero. The second chart has only one trajectory, meant to show how to set up a "modern" type AR, 16" barrel, detachable carry handle, etc. to shoot out to 300 yards without come-ups.

EDIT 4-12-16: Included a much simplified chart showing only trajectories and shot placement. The only purpose of this chart it to show that there is a "Goldilocks" range (BS0) One trajectory is too high, one trajectory is too low, one is just right. Replaced the AQT target with a simple 20" circle, (because that's how we teach BS0) The "advanced" chart, which I started out with, will undergo some edits, based on the feedback I've received and further testing. Thanks for the feedback.

This is an idea I've been working on to use as a visual aid for teaching KD. Most of our current material for the AR15 is based on longer barrels and heavier bullets, so I wanted to come up with something more applicable to the more popular 16" barrels and 55 grain bullets. This is the result. It includes 3 different trajectories, range estimation, come-ups, wind and hold-overs. Probably a lot for one chart, but my goal is to blow it up to 18x24 and use it in sections. I may end up taking the extras off and printing them separately, but right now I'm going for efficiency. Comments welcome.

[stoneknives]

Good work my brother.  You got the talent fer sure.

[PHenry]

I like the graphic style. Have u tested the shot placement in real time?

[B.C.]

That is some mighty fine work there!

[308LIBERTY]

I'm planning more thorough testing later this week, since I'm especially intrigued by the 37.5 yard BS0. I'll follow up with my findings.

I like the graphic style. Have u tested the shot placement in real time?

[crobjones2]

Looks good
We had a conversation at the last KD I attended, about scope height over barrel. I see that you notated the sight height being 2.6" over barrel.

[sluggo]

Really great illustration.

[henschman]

I like the way the chart is set up to look 3D. 

What made you pick those particular zeroes?  I would show a 300m (330 yard) battle sight zero, because that's what the factory rear sight is set up to produce when zeroed at 25m; a 50 yard/200m zero because it is a very practical zero that is no more than a couple inches off POA at most practical distances and is what is produced by using the large aperture on the factory rear sight; and a 100 yard zero for illustration purposes.

Your 37.5/275 yd. zero is pretty cool ballistically -- it is pretty much the 250m BSZ the Army used to use on the M-16A1 -- but those are not very commonly available distances at shooting ranges.  The A1 was designed to be zeroed at 25m with the tall aperture and then flip to the short one to give this zero, but A1 uppers aren't very common anymore. 

To someone who's never seen this stuff before, your come-ups could be confusing.  It could be read that each one is how many MOA up from a 100 yard zero they are.  It needs to be made more clear that they are cumulative. 

It would be cool if the silhouette showing POI on the qual. target was to the same scale as your trajectory chart.  It wouldn't need to be made too much bigger.

With the intent of this chart in mind, it might also be nice to list the click values for he most common 16" AR setup (carbine length sight radius, square front post, and detachable carry handle): 1.5 MOA for front sight elevation, and 0.75 MOA for rear sight windage and elevation.

Nice work!

[Eroyle]

Nice Graphic!

[308LIBERTY]

Good advice. It's a work in progress, much like myself. I've already made some changes after coming to some realizations I overlooked (like the fact that the v ring isn't the perfect vertical center of the target, that the real KD target is actually 26" wide and that getting a zero using 6 o'clock hold isn't actually a true trajectory from that distance, etc. Some of it is "splitting hairs" but some of it makes a significant difference beyond 300 yards, so revisions will be forthcoming. I'm probably going to simplify the first chart for Sunday afternoon KD lecture, using center of target hold for everything and no hold-overs, then create an "advanced" chart later for KD. BTW, it was my understanding the factory sights were designed with a 20" barrel in mind and a 62 grain bullet? Click values will certainly be good to include. Thanks.

I like the way the chart is set up to look 3D. 

What made you pick those particular zeroes?  I would show a 300m (330 yard) battle sight zero, because that's what the factory rear sight is set up to produce when zeroed at 25m; a 50 yard/200m zero because it is a very practical zero that is no more than a couple inches off POA at most practical distances and is what is produced by using the large aperture on the factory rear sight; and a 100 yard zero for illustration purposes.

Your 37.5/275 yd. zero is pretty cool ballistically -- it is pretty much the 250m BSZ the Army used to use on the M-16A1 -- but those are not very commonly available distances at shooting ranges.  The A1 was designed to be zeroed at 25m with the tall aperture and then flip to the short one to give this zero, but A1 uppers aren't very common anymore. 

To someone who's never seen this stuff before, your come-ups could be confusing.  It could be read that each one is how many MOA up from a 100 yard zero they are.  It needs to be made more clear that they are cumulative. 

It would be cool if the silhouette showing POI on the qual. target was to the same scale as your trajectory chart.  It wouldn't need to be made too much bigger.

With the intent of this chart in mind, it might also be nice to list the click values for he most common 16" AR setup (carbine length sight radius, square front post, and detachable carry handle): 1.5 MOA for front sight elevation, and 0.75 MOA for rear sight windage and elevation.

Nice work!

[BeSwift]

Outstanding... consider this stolen     Thx! 

[308LIBERTY]

I attached a new simplified chart on the original post, for basic KD instruction on Sunday. The other chart needs some edits, which will be forthcoming, based on the feedback I've received and further field testing. Thanks.

[airplanejoe]

Overall very nice work! My humble observation/suggestions are that instead of a one sheet handout, morph it  into a multiple page handout similar to a pamphlet. For a beginner it is a difficult subject. As it is it's way too busy/distracting. I find even your basic chart a little confusing for "rookies". For example, Appleseed zeros at 25 yds, but your chart shows a 22, 27 and 100 zero trajectories (where is the 25 yd data?). I know you can do a credible job of interpolating, but why present that problem to someone who is just leaning the principles of riflemanship? "Tell it like is" is just might be a better option. But you should be commended for your work.
aj

[308LIBERTY]

Actually, Appleseed zeros at 25 meters which is 27 yards (plus a foot). When explaining Battle Sight Zero I need to show that at one trajectory, I'm shooting too high, at another I'm shooting too low, but the purpose of Battle Sight Zero is to shoot the maximum distance without missing the target, and without making any sight adjustments.

Overall very nice work! My humble observation/suggestions are that instead of a one sheet handout, morph it  into a multiple page handout similar to a pamphlet. For a beginner it is a difficult subject. As it is it's way too busy/distracting. I find even your basic chart a little confusing for "rookies". For example, Appleseed zeros at 25 yds, but your chart shows a 22, 27 and 100 zero trajectories. But you should be commended for your work.
aj

[FiremanBob]

Three, thank you for making and sharing this excellent teaching aid. It will become a standard element in my shoots.

[ItsanSKS]

Taking requests?

Would love to have this for an 20" AR & M1/M1A. 

[308LIBERTY]

Edit 4-15-16 Made minor changes to clarify some things and replaced the incorrect velocity at the bottom left.

Hoping to do further testing with my fairly stock, 20" AR in a couple days. I came to some fairly brilliant conclusions yesterday that I overlooked and can't wait to verify in the field. It all gets extremely simple, because Stoner was a genius.

Here's a question: When you sight in your own AR, (at 25M) do you sight in at a true zero or at 2 MOA high like we do at Appleseed, then shoot KD at 6 o clock hold from 100 yards and beyond?

It seems to me, also looking at old US Army sight in targets, we should be zeroing at center mass, (or with the point of impact at the BOTTOM of the square, not the center) then shooting our AQT target at 6 o clock hold throughout, which sets up a perfect trajectory to hit the v ring at 100, 200, and 300 without making any sight adjustments whatsoever until 400 yards, and then only a little. (almost as if it were designed that way, ya think?)

This makes the, so-called, "flatter" trajectories at 37 or 50 yards kinda pointless, because it wasn't meant to hit direct point of aim, it was meant to hit the "vital" area, roughly 6 inches above the bellybutton standing, or right where our V ring is on a prone target. Ya follow?

I attached a new chart to illustrate this. BTW, using this chart, when I make the proper come ups at 500 yards on my 6/3 rear sight (which has half MOA clicks), guess what number is on the drum? 

Taking requests?

Would love to have this for an 20" AR & M1/M1A.

[Cable___Guy]

I have found that I do not get the same muzzle velocity out of my 16 inch that the "box" states. They use a 20 inch to proof the rounds but I had to adjust the Velocity on my Ballistic Calculator to get its numbers to match what I found worked Real word at 2 Kd events. 

I had to drop my Muzzle Velocity to 2968 down from 3241  to get it line up.

[308LIBERTY]

I used 3080 on most of my ballistics data, but I ran it through multiple times with varying options. With the default 24" at max velocity, I get a little more extreme trajectory (which I'm told is about the most efficient barrel length for the round) If you look at the last chart I uploaded above your post, it still pretty much works, even with different ballistics. At higher velocity, it mostly pushes the 200 yard shot up a little. some trajectories, the 400 yard shot is still impacting the target low near the base, but the other shots are up in the head area. As a concept, if you zero at the bottom edge of the squares target at 25M, it pretty much sets up everything to work through 300 yards without applying any come-ups if you use 6 'o clock hold.

How did you zero, and what hold-overs or come-ups did you use when we did KD last month?

I have found that I do not get the same muzzle velocity out of my 16 inch that the "box" states. They use a 20 inch to proof the rounds but I had to adjust the Velocity on my Ballistic Calculator to get its numbers to match what I found worked Real word at 2 Kd events. 

I had to drop my Muzzle Velocity to 2968 down from 3241  to get it line up.

[ItsanSKS]

Here's a question: When you sight in your own AR, (at 25M) do you sight in at a true zero or at 2 MOA high like we do at Appleseed, then shoot KD at 6 o clock hold from 100 yards and beyond?

When I zero my 20" AR @ 25m, I use a 6 o'clock hold, and adjust for center of target impact.  I start with the rear elevation wheel set to 8/3 + 1 click.  When shooting KD, I use the 8/3 setting for 1-300m, and adjust to 4 @ 4, 5 @ 5.   6 o'clock holds throughout. 

[Cable___Guy]

Ok, So on your new model. If POA is center mass and POI is bottom of the square. We are low at 25 .
My calculator says a half inch low is at 25 meters is a 33 meter zero, which is getting closer to your  other zero.


At our Kd  I was 25 meter zerod, center mass.

Held 5 inches low a 100
7 inches low at 200
Dead on at 300
And top of target at 400. 

Worked to qualify at both Kd events.

[308LIBERTY]

No, the Point of aim and point of impact is the same spot, bottom of the square, using 6 o' clock hold. or center of target if using center of target hold. In other words, a true zero.

Ok, So on your new model. If POA is center mass and POI is bottom of the square. We are low at 25 .
My calculator says a half inch low is at 25 meters is a 33 meter zero, which is getting closer to your  other zero.


At our Kd  I was 25 meter zerod, center mass.

Held 5 inches low a 100
7 inches low at 200
Dead on at 300
And top of target at 400. 

Worked to qualify at both Kd events.

[BeSwift]

Taking requests?

Would love to have this for an 20" AR & M1/M1A.

[airplanejoe]

I have found that I do not get the same muzzle velocity out of my 16 inch that the "box" states. They use a 20 inch to proof the rounds but I had to adjust the Velocity on my Ballistic Calculator to get its numbers to match what I found worked Real word at 2 Kd events. 

I had to drop my Muzzle Velocity to 2968 down from 3241  to get it line up.

factory ammo

It probably always works that way. Using a 20 in barrel, I get deviations of 200-300 fps when shooting factory ammo through a chronograph (not match ammo). The legend in the box shows data using as close to ideal conditions as the manufacturer can get with only the ammo the box has. In plain Spanglish, Winchester white box 55 gr ammo will print different than Federal 55 gr ammo. If someone wants to be super accurate, he needs to handload/chronograph. Time consuming-yes.
aj

[StevenK]

Cannot open the links.

[PHenry]

In my experience, I have yet to see any software that works as well as holes in paper or the clang of steel at actual distances. I trust nothing but the tape on my buttstock or scribbling in my data book until I see it work. I roll my own or shoot mil surp and I find them both to be very consistent when applied to the same weather and elevation.

Not discounting ballistic software. pinpoint shots more than a mile out would be tough to get without it, but my requirements are more pedestrian. I want simple and I mean stupid simple, because simple is fast and dependable. In overhead diving we were taught to keep it very simple because when your eyes are saucer-like and your fine motor skills are toast - simple can save your life.

Still, I like the graphics on this and anything that can get the students to understand that the bullet begins to drop the instant it exits the muzzle, forcing them to angle the rifle up, but keep the sights straight on target is a good  thing. I'd say work up some drafts and take to the range for feedback, cause only holes in paper or the clang of ar500 at distance offer evidence of success. 

[Engineer shooting]

A 25 meter or 300 yard BSZ will put you in the black from point blank to 325 yards holding center of target. Beyond that you need to know your come up. A single chart with standard Appleseed come ups of 3,3,3,3 would be nice. It gets you on paper beyond that go to the range, then get out your DOPE book and shoot. Laminate the hold over/under for the particular rounds you're shooting to the butt stock. My battle cannon is calibrated for M80 ball out to 600 yards based on actual rounds down range.

[308LIBERTY]

All true. In fact I tell the students pretty much the same thing during my KD lecture now. Ballistics data can be helpful, but sometimes it can be misleading. You must take your own rifle and ammo to the range to get true results.  As you know, I've done this with my Garand out to 600 yards now. I've also got plenty of dope for it, with probably a dozen varieties of hand loads, commercial ammo and different holds on different MOA targets at different ranges. Still working out some bugs with my AR. For instance, mine has a mid-length gas system, which also changes it's ballistics due to the different distance between sights, pressures, yada yada. I'd intended to get some time on the range with it today, but alas, I was busy doing I.A.O. to get our range set up for this weekend. In fact, I've had very little range time this year at all. Must remedy that! And with the little time I have, it's helpful to me to have at least a good idea of what to expect downrange.

The problem with making any kind of chart is that some people want it stupid simple (only a few, LOL) and some will want it to be extremely detailed and even the most minor "inaccuracies" will result in tar and feathers, for sure. I'm going for simple, because I just want it to represent basic teaching aids for my students. Not as an end-all and be-all of rifle ballistics. I'm a very visually oriented person (being a graphic designer) so I like having lots of visual aids for teaching. Making the charts has been a good learning exercise for me as well, exploring possibilities that would take me days on the range. Now, the trick is just to make them as clear as possible, which is the real challenge.

Good luck EVERYONE this weekend. God bless and hope you all have an enjoyable and safe shoot.

In my experience, I have yet to see any software that works as well as holes in paper or the clang of steel at actual distances. I trust nothing but the tape on my buttstock or scribbling in my data book until I see it work. I roll my own or shoot mil surp and I find them both to be very consistent when applied to the same weather and elevation.

Not discounting ballistic software. pinpoint shots more than a mile out would be tough to get without it, but my requirements are more pedestrian. I want simple and I mean stupid simple, because simple is fast and dependable. In overhead diving we were taught to keep it very simple because when your eyes are saucer-like and your fine motor skills are toast - simple can save your life.

Still, I like the graphics on this and anything that can get the students to understand that the bullet begins to drop the instant it exits the muzzle, forcing them to angle the rifle up, but keep the sights straight on target is a good  thing. I'd say work up some drafts and take to the range for feedback, cause only holes in paper or the clang of ar500 at distance offer evidence of success. 

[airplanejoe]

In my experience, I have yet to see any software that works as well as holes in paper or the clang of steel at actual distances. I trust nothing but the tape on my buttstock or scribbling in my data book until I see it work. I roll my own or shoot mil surp and I find them both to be very consistent when applied to the same weather and elevation.

Not discounting ballistic software. pinpoint shots more than a mile out would be tough to get without it, but my requirements are more pedestrian. I want simple and I mean stupid simple, because simple is fast and dependable. In overhead diving we were taught to keep it very simple because when your eyes are saucer-like and your fine motor skills are toast - simple can save your life.

Still, I like the graphics on this and anything that can get the students to understand that the bullet begins to drop the instant it exits the muzzle, forcing them to angle the rifle up, but keep the sights straight on target is a good  thing. I'd say work up some drafts and take to the range for feedback, cause only holes in paper or the clang of ar500 at distance offer evidence of success. 

Once again I'll be a "voice in the wilderness". I used to think along the lines that PH thinks. That was before I really understood the merits of ballistic software. The last few years, my caregiver duties have kept me indoor with plenty of time to hit the books and just begin to understand the merits of technology. Not that much real range time, plenty of virtual range time verified by sessions at the range.
From my research, I can conclude that no ballistic computer will give you a near perfect solution "out of the box". You need to "true" the inputs. Otherwise, "trash in - trash out". If you are willing to invest in the time it takes to make accurate inputs to your ballistic software, the results will amaze you. What does it take? I refer you to Bryan Litz book "Accuracy and Precision for Long Range Shooting".
But none of that is really required in a vanilla Appleseed event.
I have strayed from the main theme of this thread, which is the handout 3-8 has put together. Excellent effort. My only input boils down to one thing, consistency. I explain, zero at 25 meters but shoot at targets which simulate distances in yards. One segment of instruction is inches minutes and clicks; not centimeters minutes and clicks. In the USA we use inches-feet-yards. Europe and Canada use the metric system. Nothing wrong with Metric, just that mixing the two doesn't appeal to me at all. I guess it would take a re-write of the instructor's manual.
aj

[308LIBERTY]

Yes, it does honestly drive me nuts that we do Appleseed in meters, then typically turn around and do KD in yards, because that's just how most of our ranges are setup. But the thing is, zeroing at 25M vs 25 yards does start to make a difference out beyond 300 yards. And when you factor in 2 MOA high (6 o clock hold), then your zero from 25M (27.34 yards) is technically more like 23 yards, and if done that way at 25 yards, then it's really even less, which sets up a higher trajectory and will likely push your 200 yard shots well above 10" high (if shot at center of target), which of course means a miss without a sight adjustment. I try to mostly stick with yards during basic instruction at Appleseed, but at some point, especially at KD, then it's going to come into play and should be understood.