KESTREL Wind Meters

[kozball]

Am thinking about investing in a "Kestrel" type device to help me to develope my rifle dope.
Looking at the 4500 because of the ability to calculate Density Altitude and it has a compass feature.

Does any one use such a device? What are the most important features for your use, and why?

Thanks in advance for your opinions.

[bkoenig]

I bought a Caldwell wind meter.  Seems to work ok, it only does wind speed and temp.  Of course, wind speed downrange is the most important and a meter doesn't help you much there.

[SemperFiGuy]

I've got a Kestrel 2000 Wind Meter that I bought to go with my be-yoooo-tee-ful carbon Kestrel Talon Road Bike.

Bought it used off eBay for about $50 bucks.   [The wind meter, not the road bike.   Road bikes start getting into Perazzi price range.]

Does this stuff:

Current Wind Speed
Maximum Wind Gust
Average Wind Speed
Air, Water & Snow Temperature
Wind Chill
With your choice of readout in English or metric.

I like it just fine.   Use it to gauge wind velocity on the Omaha bike trails.   Works for me.

Once you learn to read the various outdoor flags [Good Old Star Spangled Banners, mostly], you can gauge wind velocity within a coupla miles/hour without the Kestrel 2000.  But---you have to start with the meter in order to learn how to do it.   It's an acquired skill.

Wind is Tricky.    There's the Wind Where You Are At.   Which can be quite different from the wind 2-300 (or more) yards downrange.   I've seen two flags 150 yards apart, flying merrily in quite different directions.   Then there are the wind gusts..........always the gusts.   Totally unpredictable.

You can do like the 6mmPPC shooters at my gun club:  They have wind meters/vanes spaced at intervals all the way down the range with digital readout for each station back at the shooting bench.

With their wind vanes, readouts, shooting cradles, $5000 Swarovski scopes, and lotsa-lotsa other exotic stuff, they spend three hours setting it all up and getting it calibrated.    Then they spend an hour putting 6mm bullets through the same hole 300 yards out.   Then they spend three more hours packing up their stuff and go home.

And humidity.   Not to mention lighting conditions, which the Kestrel meter won't measure.   And ammo variations...........  Plus the barrel gets hot and dirty while you shoot, both of which change the variables...............

Pistol shooters have it easier.


sfg

[wallace11bravo]

The only thing truly useful on that model is DA. If you don't want to drop the dime, you can get atmo data from a nearby weather station from any number of websites, and plug it into a DA calculator on your phone. Is it as precise as what your kestrel can give you? No, but it is better than nothing, and DA isn't a precise measurement anyway. It is one number used to represent three different factors: Temp, Baro, and Humidity. (The latter of which has practically no effect, on DA or external ballistics) It is used for speed and simplicity, not precision.

As previously mentioned, a kestrel will only get you wind at the firing point. That is pretty much a useless, and potentially detrimental, piece of information. Many a shot I have missed because I was paying attention to the wind at the firing point and not what my indicators were telling me downrange. Watch the grass, trees, smoke, flags, whatever you can find to tell you what the wind is doing between your muzzle and your target. Watch the terrain for spurs, draws, valleys, hills, buildings, and other features that will change wind direction and velocity. This takes alot of practice, practice, practice.

I have seen 10mph full value winds (measured at FP) need no correction at 600, and I have seen near calm conditions at the FP needing near .75 mil corrections at 300. Why? Terrain features. How could I tell before breaking the shot? Indicators downrange.

For practicing wind estimation, an el-cheapo wind meter will do fine. Look at the meter, look at the indicators near you, then compare them to your indicators downrange. Not just the indicators at your target, but in the intermediate space as well. This can help give you a baseline to go off of.

[kozball]

I am under the impression that DA would be the best starting point for balistics variables based upon temp / pressure / humidity factors and elevation. Wouldn't it be more consistent than tracking different temps and different pressures?

i.e. 80 degrees at ENGC with 75% humidity has to be different than 80 degrees and 20% humidity at Chadron. I know John said that humidity is not a huge difference maker.

When trying to build dope, there has to be a consistent point of reference for environmental conditions.

So, I figure that the combination of factors that create DA would be better than just using temp at any given location. Am I wrong?
Environmental conditions has to be the first reference in building dope.

[wallace11bravo]

DA is one number used to represent three different effects:

1. Barometric Pressure: Density of air molecules.
2. Temperature: Speed at which air molecules are moving.
3. Humidity: Amount of water vapor in the air.

Elevation is not an issue, as the effects of that are inherently expressed in barometric pressure.

The thing to understand is that while these effects are interrelated, they are not dependent, and they do not affect your projectile equally. For example:

You can have high atmo pressure with cold temps. (i.e. a calm, sunny, summer day)
You can have low atmo pressure with high temps. (i.e. a summer thunderstorm)

You can also have:
high atmo pressure with high temps. (i.e. a calm, sunny, winter day)
low atmo with cold temps. (i.e. a blizzard)

So you are taking these three different effects and crunching them down to one number. But, you can see the same DA with wide variables. This wouldn't be a loss, except temperature affects a projectile in different ways than pressure.



Using the chart above: (which is hardly precise, but good enough for this demonstration)

Example one:
Temp is -18, Baro indicates a pressure altitude* is 8000
Example two:
Temp is 43, Baro indicates a pressure altitude* is 3000

*Pressure altitude: To keep from getting to into the weeds on this, think of pressure altitude as just a different way of measuring barometric pressure. Just a different scale, like millibars or inches of mercury.

The DA for both of those is approximately 6000 ft. But the conditions are wildly different, and a certain amount of precision is lost because the effects of temp and pressure are not equal.


Now, unless you are a benchrest shooter, the loss in precision is considered negligible compared to the gains in simplicity and speed for field use. In other words: you are interested in more practical long range marksmanship (be it for hunting, tactical, or more practical competitions A.K.A. PRS)

If that is what you are pursuing, then yes, I highly recommend using density altitude. I just want to make it clear that there is some loss in taking three different factors and condensing them down to one number.

Edit to add: I state that assuming you are not one of the people who will attempt to hump a ballistic calculator in the field. If you are, then feel free to use raw data since it is more precise. (Thats why many calculators still dont have a DA option)

To me, ballistic calculators are just another tool, like my reloading press, or my windmeter, that are great to have and can help you out, but I would never carry in the field (match or otherwise). I instead use small cards graduated for range in 50 yard intervals with both elevation and windage* corrections in mils, with a different card for every 1000 ft of DA.

*using a 10 mph FV base for British method

[kozball]

Now, unless you are a benchrest shooter, the loss in precision is considered negligible compared to the gains in simplicity and speed for field use. In other words: you are interested in more practical long range marksmanship (be it for hunting, tactical, or more practical competitions A.K.A. PRS)

If that is what you are pursuing, then yes, I highly recommend using density altitude. I just want to make it clear that there is some loss in taking three different factors and condensing them down to one number.

Edit to add: I state that assuming you are not one of the people who will attempt to hump a ballistic calculator in the field. If you are, then feel free to use raw data since it is more precise. (Thats why many calculators still dont have a DA option)

To me, ballistic calculators are just another tool, like my reloading press, or my windmeter, that are great to have and can help you out, but I would never carry in the field (match or otherwise). I instead use small cards graduated for range in 50 yard intervals with both elevation and windage* corrections in mils, with a different card for every 1000 ft of DA.

*using a 10 mph FV base for British method

PRS? absolutely.........sounds like it would be a fun challenge IF I had any clue of what I was doing.

My thought on the Kestrel is that the information available on it would give me a consistent basis to start building dope pages. Some form of weather conditions has to be the very first thing to be used to create AND sort the dope pages. That is why I thought that DA would give the best starting point, because it uses the 3 factors that affect ballistics. And I don't plan on using a calculator.

In my perfect world  I would go to some range North of York, pull out my Kestrel, get the conditions of the moment, pray that I have a dope page that is close to the readings, procede thru a stage by MIL ranging the available targets, make my scope elevation adjustments, and hit that 3 MOA target, adjust to the 2nd target, and so on.

So, not counting hardware, what is the best data to start your dope pages? and what is the easiest way to get that data accurately and consistently?

Would it be smarter to start with temp and baro press? Kestrel does that too.

[kozball]

Just saw the green chart after I posted my blather.

What I am seeing here........ At +500 DA vs +5500 DA with what ever cartridge this is, there is about 4.5 inches diff at 600yds and about 15.5 inches at 850yds. So at 600 yds the diff would still probably hit the target and at 850 could be a miss, elevation wise, if holding at center.

That is if shooting at a 3moa target which would be 24 inches at 800 yds?

[wallace11bravo]

PRS? absolutely.........sounds like it would be a fun challenge IF I had any clue of what I was doing.

My thought on the Kestrel is that the information available on it would give me a consistent basis to start building dope pages. Some form of weather conditions has to be the very first thing to be used to create AND sort the dope pages.


So, not counting hardware, what is the best data to start your dope pages? and what is the easiest way to get that data accurately and consistently?

Would it be smarter to start with temp and baro press? Kestrel does that too.

First step: Zero. Enter your data into your calc, and if your calc has the ability to record atmo data from zeroing, record and save. If it'll take DA, feel free to use it, but this info is not field relevant, so feel free to put in raw data. If your calc won't save your atmospherics, don't fret too much. 

Second step: Get an initial algorithm using baseline data from your calc. Unless you are shooting something very strange, don't bother with chronies. They lie anyway. Just use data from the calc's internal database, or pull info from the internet. Use the G7 model (!!!and G7 BC!!!), and make sure your atmo data is as close as you can get it. If you intend to use only DA, I would use only DA at this point.

Third step: True your algorithm. Shoot at least two, preferable more, targets at varying ranges, record the elevation corrections necessary to get a solid hit. The further out the better. Most decent calculators calculators have a truing function built in.

After you trued, double check your atmo to make sure it is up to date, and shoot/record again if there is any significant change to atmo. If you are still not on, you may have to tweak your BC.

It can become a bit of a problem solving exercise throughout, these steps are just meant as guidelines.

What I am seeing here........ At +500 DA vs +5500 DA with what ever cartridge this is, there is about 4.5 inches diff at 600yds and about 15.5 inches at 850yds. So at 600 yds the diff would still probably hit the target and at 850 could be a miss, elevation wise, if holding at center.

Not quite. Corrections are in Mils not MOA. A 0.5 mil difference in extreme DAs at 600 represents a linear deviation of 10.8".

You want to get as close as you can, but not so much to the point it is not practical in the field. It is a bit of a balancing act.

A mil is an angular measurement that subtends to an arc of 3.6" at 100 yards.


One more thing: Remember that getting your dope takes time, patience, and a solid understanding of external ballistics. It is problem solving, not a learned pattern of behavior.

[kozball]

OK, 1st problem. STEP ONE. I was hopeing to not use a ballistic calculator. 
Bad idea not to use, or is it a must have?  I don't have a phone so it would have to be a PC version if needed. Ya, I know, I really do not have a phone. 

Green chart math.
 DA 500 ft, 600 yds, = 5.2 ele....
DA 5500 ft, 600 yds, = 5.0 ele....

.2 mil = .72 inches x (6)00 yds = 4.32 inches

maybe this is where I get in trouble. You said that a mil is an angular measurement that subtends to an arc of 3.6" at 100 yards. So isn't that 7.2" at 200 and 18.0" at 500 ?
This might be where my phat head just don't get it.

[bkoenig]

Unless you are shooting something very strange, don't bother with chronies. They lie anyway. Just use data from the calc's internal database, or pull info from the internet. Use the G7 model (!!!and G7 BC!!!), and make sure your atmo data is as close as you can get it. If you intend to use only DA, I would use only DA at this point.

I noticed that as well.  My chronographed velocity data gave me a baseline to get me in the ballpark, but once I had my dope out to say 600 yards I ran the correction function on my calculator and found my "corrected" velocity was way higher than what my chrony measured.  Using the corrected velocity has gotten me much more accurate results.  Of course, even the ballistic calculator is only a way to get yourself into the neighborhood.  Real world dope is much more valuable from what I've seen.

Now, I just need more of it.....

[wallace11bravo]

OK, 1st problem. STEP ONE. I was hopeing to not use a ballistic calculator. 
Bad idea not to use, or is it a must have?  I don't have a phone so it would have to be a PC version if needed. Ya, I know, I really do not have a phone. 

It makes things about a billion times easier.

I've been known to take a laptop to the range.

If you are going to go true databook style, that is the really the only other option. Pretty much how you described it Record your DA, record your corrections, and reference closest sheet to current conditions.

Green chart math.
DA 500 ft, 600 yds, = 5.2 ele....
DA 5500 ft, 600 yds, = 5.0 ele....

.2 mil = .72 inches x (6)00 yds = 4.32 inches

Lowest DA value is -500ft, the correction is 5.5 at 600.

With what you were looking at, your math is correct. Given all other factors, especially the inherent imperfection with using DA, a .2 mil deviation is plenty enough to make the difference between a 1st round hit and a 2nd, even on a 3 MOA target.

Again, its about balancing speed and simplicity with precision. I've found 1000ft graduations work best for me, you may find otherwise.

[wallace11bravo]

And back to your original question, your atmo data is going to be whatever source you have. A Kestrel works fine, but, especially for DA, nearby weather stations are usually pretty in-the-ball-park if you are looking to save a few $$

Your initial atmo data for your starting point is literally whatever the conditions are when you record your first sheet.

[kozball]

And back to your original question, your atmo data is going to be whatever source you have. A Kestrel works fine, but, especially for DA, nearby weather stations are usually pretty in-the-ball-park if you are looking to save a few $$

Your initial atmo data for your starting point is literally whatever the conditions are when you record your first sheet.

And this is what it is all about. You must enter proper consistent verifiable conditions, otherwise the dope that you create that day is worthless unless the conditions can be verified and duplicated by whatever method of gathering that data.

So, do you use DA with your 1000 ft pages? And if so, how do you gather condition data?

[wallace11bravo]

So, do you use DA with your 1000 ft pages? And if so, how do you gather condition data?

Yes, that is what those numbers represent. I get my DA usually from my kestrel, but I also use local weather stations and a DA calc on my phone. I have never seen more than +/- 200 ft deviation from what my Kestrel says, and 200ft is not much to fret about (notice how I graduate in 1000ft intervals, and many I know would say even 1000ft is unnecessary). Temp and baro do not change very drastically over a few miles, unless a front of some sort is coming though, therefore DA does not change much over a few miles.

Go ahead and buy a kestrel if you want, but honestly, unless you are in some very remote area (no cell reception and/or no nearby weather station) you don't NEED one. Especially with new shooters, I always err on the side of not spending alot of money (except on glass, but that is a different topic for a different thread).

That being said, if my Kestrel broke, I would definitely buy another, because I don't like being dependent on my phone for that info (in matches or otherwise).

Another crazy option: I know at least one very avid shooter who can "Indian Guide" it... he can "guesstimate" DA, and I have never seen him be off by more than 300ft (granted I've only seen him do this on his own property, take him to a different location and he might be completely lost, IDK) I've tried this with no real success.

[by the way koz, none of this is directed specifically at you, I realize you said you don't have a phone , in your case, a Kestrel is most likely the way to go]

I just hate to see new people to this discipline who dump a bunch of money on peripherals, and end up either skimping on glass or not really sticking with LR shooting very long. In other words, they have ended up mis-allocating funds away from your most important (IMO) piece of equipment (glass) or wasting money on stuff they don't use because they don't shoot anymore.

Same reason I always tell new shooters to run with mil-ranging and check with GPS before dumping +$1000 on a capable rangefinder, or to get a factory gun before spending +$3000 on an AI or GAP, or... you get the idea

Now, skimping on glass, that is a whole other discussion

[wallace11bravo]

Using the corrected velocity has gotten me much more accurate results.  Of course, even the ballistic calculator is only a way to get yourself into the neighborhood.  Real world dope is much more valuable from what I've seen.

Believe the bullet. (Now I owe Frank Galli a royalty)

I currently am running a G7 BC of .39 for my algorithm with 175 SMKs, may not sound that crazy to some, but the published G7 BC is .24.....that is not a "tweak"... that is a BIG DIFFERENCE. But, using that BC on my calc, that I used to generate those cards you see above, I have been getting the best performance I have ever seen, from ~1000-4000ft DA, multiple locations, etc.

I have tried and tried to disprove it and show it as a fluke. It is possible there is something wrong with my calc, or my calc's G7 model. Now I know what you are thinking:

-I am very confident it is not atmospherics, as I have checked, double checked, and rechecked using both my kestrel (and when I suspected it may be lying to me) I checked it against a weather station that was 6 miles away (DA difference was 40sih ft, FYI).

-Target ranges lasered, then (when I suspected my LRF may have been lying to me) I walked it with GPS, and even mil-ranged them just to be sure my GPS and LRF weren't in a conspiracy to deceive me.

-I checked the algorithm against databook sheets going back a year and about 600 logged impacts (since I owned the stick) and it is all on.

It is extremely weird to see a G7 BC with that much variance, but at the end of the day, I don't care, because this is what is getting me REAL WORLD results (by far the best I have seen).

... And that, boys and girls, is why everyone should keep a databook, regardless of the other gadgets you have. Paper and steel are the only things that won't lie to you.

BTW, anyone who doubts this, feel free to come the SAPPRC rehearsal day, and I will demonstrate it. (I personally would call "bull$4!7" if someone told me this)

[kozball]

John, you're the man  Thanks for all the info.

So, I guess that I could get the Kestrel for about 3 months of Cell Service on most plans.
Been looking at the 4500NV, which is a top line model that has multiple data outputs including DA, night vision display, and a electronic compass. Not sure about the night vision, but the compass is intriguing.

As for dumping a bunch of money. My thought is that knowledge is priceless. When you are like me, just starting out, not knowing where to start is when I would spend money on things that are just not needed or flat wrong for the usage. That is why I am so bent on trying to figure out the best first step. Otherwise it gets frustrating and makes people just give up. And, I would bet that there are others watching this thread with interest, but, like me, are just not sure where to start, and may be too, what should I say, shy to ask. 

And, surprising to me, is the fact that only 2 people have chimed in on this subject of the Kestrel. I would of thought that more people would have a Passion for long range shooting that use some sort of device for the data of the day. Maybe not as popular as I thought.

 Now I need to figure out what G7 is.   

[JTH]

Now I need to figure out what G7 is.   

G7 is a specific type of drag model used for ballistic calculations, which may or not may match the type of bullet you are using.  There are a number of different models available, but for most people shooting for precision at distance, the type of bullet you are using (and the velocities needed) match the G7 far better than the others.

Mostly. 

...as for how many other people are NOT chiming in:  My bet is simply that most people don't shoot over 300 yards very often, and those that do participate in iron-sight competitions out to 600 at known distances and such, but not much else.

In other words---most people DON'T do this sort of shooting.  It is extremely specialized, AND requires a lot of mental work in addition to significant amounts of physical practice---with not a lot of shooting actually occurring in said physical practice compared to various other shooting disciplines. 

In other words, lots more people will use a pistol to plink at a soda can at 15 feet than will do the work necessary to make a first-shot hit on the same can at an unknown distance between 400 and 500 yards away.    Or a first-shot hit on 36-inch target at 1200 yards.

Precision distance shooting is a specialty that most people simply don't practice. 


ETA to fix typo  ("model" should have been singular, not plural)

[kozball]

So G7 is a "drag model" that is part of a ballistic program? And would be similar data from different companies that sell software? Everyone uses the G7 profile?

I thought that with "F - Class" type events aound the state that this would be more popular.
Isn't there a 1000yd range at Chardon? Elk hunters, etc.

Maybe Johns PRS match might notch up some interest. 

[bkoenig]

Maybe Johns PRS match might notch up some interest. 

I hope so.  Long range shooting is really, really, fun but it's hard to find places to do it.  The only formal 1,000 yard range I know of in the state is at Alliance. Having more facilities available would be nice.