.223 ballistic mystery...

[Duman]

The best correlation I've had between load data, ballistics calculator, and actual results were from Sierra loading tables and Sierra ballistics calculator.

There are only a finite number of things that can go wrong, all of which have been discussed.

The only way you can have a mid-range 'hit' higher than calculated, and short/long range hits on target, is a larger arc with a slightly slower bullet.
In your ballistics computer, can you input the hit points and back calculate velocity or other variables?

Or you can run the calculator forward and change input variables until you get an arc matching your hit points.

[bellavite1]

The "velocity calibration" feature does just that, but only allows a drop increase input.
To input a climb would mean entering a negative value and that is not allowed.
Therefore I attempted changing the velocity in the load data until it gives me a 2.5" climb: at 5000fps (maximum allowed velocity) I was getting about 2" climb at 100yds from a 50yds zero.
It would mean my load is more than 5000 fps...
If that was the case I would probably be dead rather than just confused...
These are the bullets I was using:
https://www.hornady.com/bullets/rifl...4-62-gr-fmj#!/
I will get an exact velocity figure out of a different rifle (to rule out any hardware issue) and try it again next week.

[ChickNorris]

If solving for your 'anomaly' is what you want to do then I would back up & start again. Youve already gone over the rifle & checked off what you could from the suggestions here with no apparent 'A-ha!' moment from anyone looking at the information provided or your review, yes?

In the interim, forget the percieved data anomaly & concentrate on a making groups as tight as possible to verify your zero distance. Prove this first & then move forward.

Back to basics. Being the biggest variable, I would be certain that I am minimizing my influence to as little as possible on the rifle during my zero procedure & that my fundamentals are solid. Then I would start/continue a check list & test each item on that list, individually & without making any other changes during each test.

Reason i suggest this is because currently you're trying to extrapolate from the circumstantial that hasn't been proven true @ zero. You need a control set/group first or everything thereafter is speculation. Repeatability & precision is the only way to prove your data is sound, or not - if you want to solve for the anomaly. To me, there are too many variables & not enough proof to even think about arguing 'known' trajectory data.

Review the fundamentals. We know/assume the rifle is minimally operational because you're on paper.
Switch the ammo, which youve already considered. Use match grade if possible.
Swap the optic. Perhaps try a different optic & repeat the zero process. If your results are not different, improved or solved then you can narrow your focus.
Replace the barrel, which youve already stated isn't particularly accurate. That's an issue in itself- you can either use what you have & try to find the ammo it shoots best or get a new barrel & start over.
...

Manually adjusting the mv to account for your bc at this point isnt going to solve for this, if anything its telling me that your actual zero probably isn't where you think it is. Revisit your zero.

[ray1970]

I will get an exact velocity figure out of a different rifle (to rule out any hardware issue) and try it again next week.

This makes no sense. Why would the ammunition velocity out of a totally different rifle have any bearing on your issues? Why would you not verify your velocity out of the rifle in question?

Just trying to understand your thought process here.

(Although perhaps I don't really want to understand it. From what I can tell you have a rifle that shoots 2+ MOA groups but being 1.5 MOA "off" at a certain distance seems to be a concern to you.)

[TEAMRICO]

Me: Zeros rifle
Ask myself ?Self, could you hit a communist with it at a given distance I?m confident in??
If answer is yes then Rifle is fine. No worries about math.

[ray1970]

Me: Zeros rifle
Ask myself ?Self, could you hit a communist with it at a given distance I?m confident in??
If answer is yes then Rifle is fine. No worries about math.

Yeah. All of my stuff is "minute of communist" out to 300 yards easily. My good stuff is even "minute of kitten".

[bellavite1]

This makes no sense. Why would the ammunition velocity out of a totally different rifle have any bearing on your issues? Why would you not verify your velocity out of the rifle in question?

Just trying to understand your thought process here.

(Although perhaps I don't really want to understand it. From what I can tell you have a rifle that shoots 2+ MOA groups but being 1.5 MOA "off" at a certain distance seems to be a concern to you.)

Exactly my point.
First, as prompted, find out exact velocity, ideally out of both rifles.
Then start to eliminate variables as rifle accuracy, see if that is the problem, if not, change ammo, and try to find the weak link.
I am very aware of the issues with my rifle, thank you.
What I don't understand is why the ballistic calculations don't match real life trajectory.
A 2"+ group that centers 1.5" higher than it should makes no sense.
It is a theoretical question, there must be something in my data input that is wrong.
I have been repeating this from post one but all I am getting is (well meaning) advice on rifle fundamentals.
Thank you all, but that is not what I was asking.
Never mind, forget I asked.
Mods, go ahead and close the thread, this is not going anywhere.

[Irving]

Have you tried putting in speeds far lower than what you expect to give you that rise? It doesn't make sense to me that the bullet would have to be going 5,000fps+, rather than much slower. I'm not great at this stuff, but I haven't seen anyone else suggest it so far.

Also, rage quitting your own thread out of frustration over some light miscommunication isn't going to get you anywhere.

[C Ward]

Go zero at 200 yds , crossover zeros suck if you want a 200 yard zero shoot at 200 yds . The group you posted at 50 yds was 4 moa and is nowhere good enough to determine what point is the actual zero inside the 4 moa circle . This alone makes huge differences in the ballistic path .

Crossover zeros have to be perfect to function and any small error is magnified exponentially at distance because of the angular measurements .

[ChickNorris]

When/if you zero @ 200 your 50 - 100 will then be better, with 100 less high & 50 just a bit low.