So you think you need high BC and magnificantion for long range shooting....

The finish is a bead blasted finish but I use a special blast media that gives the stainless steel a deeper grey color then a standard glass bead finish. If someone wants some specific color, cerakote finish is always an option.

I may decide to go with that instead of the tungsten cerakote finish, for that looks **** good with that stock which is something similar to what I want to go with.

Also if needed we can always have it cerakote finished down the road.
 
Last edited:
I think some of you guys are missing my point. I am not saying that I would RECOMMEND this scope setup for 1070 yard shooting. Only showing that you CAN make accurate shots at long range with lower powered magnificantion. I have made this point many times in the past. In 2007, I made a killing shot on a rockchuck at a measured 2370 yards that won the longest shot of the year award from the Varmint Hunters Association. That shot was made with a 3-15x NF NXS scope and many said that would be impossible to make that shot with that power scope which is simply laughable. As are some of the comments on this post.

I suppose I could have targets a 3 moa rifle at this range, hit it in the middle every shot and made everyone happy with the same 3/4 class group size but again, that was not my intention. I shoot at very small targets, generally less then 1/2 moa. In fact, had this rifle been set up in its normal configuration, it would have had a 3-15x NF or 5.5-22x NF and I would have been targeting the very small round white rock that was low and left of the impact sight. This target was right at 1/4 moa in size measured off the NP-R1 reticle on the 5.5-22x NF mounted on a 280 AI I tested right before I tested this 375 AX.

Apparently none of you guys discrediting this video have never used a reticle to measure anything or feel its not an accurate method to get accurate size measurements at long range without actually putting a set of calipers on the target to prove its size.....

To each their own, this system works, works extremely well for testing 700 plus rifles that have shipped out of the shop. Works for me, if it does not make you guys happy, well...... life will go on.

Thanks for your input

You video did not highlight your point as the first shot I saw hit 6 feet away from the next . So how does this show that the lower power scope is as good as a higher power one at that distance what ever it was .
 
First shot was taken after testing with the 250 gr TTSX so that's the reason for the low impact. After a scope adjustment the rifle was landing within 1/2 moa of point of aim which was the white spot running diagonal in the center of the view.

You video did not highlight your point as the first shot I saw hit 6 feet away from the next . So how does this show that the lower power scope is as good as a higher power one at that distance what ever it was .

Looks like Kirby twiddled those little knobby things and move his point of impact, odd how that works :rolleyes:
 
You video did not highlight your point as the first shot I saw hit 6 feet away from the next . So how does this show that the lower power scope is as good as a higher power one at that distance what ever it was .

Just before I made that video, I had tested the 250 gr TTSX with the rifle zeroed on that same target rock. I did not make a scope adjustment simply because I wanted to see how the trajectory of the 350 gr TSX differed from the 250 gr TTSX.

OF COURSE IT HIT LOW ON THE FIRST SHOT!!!

This is not a finished rifle with a finished and tested and proven drop chart. These are the first 24 shots out of the rifle after being manufactured. The rifle was built, slapped a scope on it, headed to the range, bore sighted at 1070 yards, took a few shots to get point of aim to match up with point of impact at 1070 yards. Let the barrel cool and then shot a few three shot groups to confirm group size that the rifle would produce at 1070 yards. That was with the 250 gr TTSX.

Then what you saw on the video was the first group fired with the 350 gr TSX, again with no a scope adjustment for the first shot which landed low. I then made a scope adjustment and the following shots all landed into roughly a 3/4 moa group size at 1070 yards fired with a 6x scope.

You guys make it sound like this was a finished rifle that was that far off on the first shot and then I had to make an adjustment to get shots close to my point of aim. Not exactly sure what you guys are thinking I was trying to show here but simply the fact that a lower BC bullet and low powered scope can do pretty darn well at long range.
 
You video did not highlight your point as the first shot I saw hit 6 feet away from the next . So how does this show that the lower power scope is as good as a higher power one at that distance what ever it was .

Apparently you watched the video with the volume turned off??? Right after that first shot I clearly state that I made a scope adjustment after that first shot and then shot the rest with no additional scope adjustment. Turn your volume up!:rolleyes:
 
That's pretty impressive shooting with that scope and rifle.
Interesting, because I've shoot my Allen Precision .270 WSM, weighing just 6.8 lbs bare, as far as 1077 yards with Berger 140 gr VLD's and a .488 G1 BC. I got more like 1 MOA groups, but it's amazing what this little rifle can do.

As for the whiners in this thread, they are indeed missing the point.
Some people would bitch if they got laid.
 
That's pretty impressive shooting with that scope and rifle.
Interesting, because I've shoot my Allen Precision .270 WSM, weighing just 6.8 lbs bare, as far as 1077 yards with Berger 140 gr VLD's and a .488 G1 BC. I got more like 1 MOA groups, but it's amazing what this little rifle can do.

As for the whiners in this thread, they are indeed missing the point.
Some people would bitch if they got laid.

That is a 6.8 lb rifle compared to a 10 lb rifle. The 10 lbs rifle make it much easier for ME to shoot accurately and the 6.8 lb rifle depends much more on us humans to shoot it consistently at these ranges. 1 moa at 1077 yards with a sub 7 lb rifle is PRETTY **** IMPRESSIVE!!! Good shooting.
 
That is a 6.8 lb rifle compared to a 10 lb rifle. The 10 lbs rifle make it much easier for ME to shoot accurately and the 6.8 lb rifle depends much more on us humans to shoot it consistently at these ranges. 1 moa at 1077 yards with a sub 7 lb rifle is PRETTY **** IMPRESSIVE!!! Good shooting.

I agree completely. I find a 10 lb rifle to be much easier to shoot at long range.

I think 1 MOA at that range for such a light rifle is pretty amazing. For my part I was shooting prone with a bipod and a good size sand bag under the rifle butt. All I had to do was squeeze the trigger carefully, and watch the wind-which always kicks my butt.

My point was not about my shooting, but about the accuracy of this sweet little rifle!
 
A rifles accuracy is only 1/2 of the problem and the lighter the rifle gets the more that the shooter determines what happens down range. Obviously your piloting your rifle very well!!
 
If there is little wind and mirage, I am estatic if I hold them under 1 moa at that distance and that's with a 11 lb rifle sporting a 22 power scope............Nice shooting Kirby
 
Warning! This thread is more than 11 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Recent Posts

Top