Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Hunting
Long Range Hunting & Shooting
2nd Thoughts -- Vortex Viper PST?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Tensilon" data-source="post: 1620525" data-attributes="member: 29503"><p>Hey, I recently got an FFP vortex scope. Haven't had a chance to work it over yet. I set up and work over my own rifles for long range shooting...mainly used on paper but ready to go for hunting. I reload my own ammo for precision and when I say I work the rifles over I mean that I bed them, pillar them, float them, lap the barrels and often the rings, bed the ring mounts, and square up the recoil lugs. Most generally anything that can be done to increase consistent behavior from the rifle. Same thing goes for the ammo. I have quite a few calibers that I have done this for and a couple more that I am working on now including 300 WM, 6.5 mm Creedmoor, 7 mm Rem Mag, 270 Win, 243 Win, and a 25-06. I have quite a few Bushnell Elite tactical scopes...at least 2 that are 4.5 x 30 x50 SFP. I go through each scope that I put on using the tall ladder test and the box test to see if they return if to POA. What I have found is that while a scope may indeed track very well there can be considerable variation as to the distance that each scope moves with each click. I prefer 1/4 moa clicks for my scopes. When they say 1/4 moa clicks I find that often they do not measure in at exactly 0.250 moa per click and if I assume that 0.250 is what the click is without checking it on the ladder test and figuring out exactly what the measurement is then I find that using my ballistics programs will give me dope that is off especially at distance. For example, for one of my Elites the click value is consistent at 0.263 per click. This works out to 1.052 inches for 4 clicks at 100 yards. Well, we all know that 1 moa is 1.047 inches at 100 yards. It may seem like splitting hairs but at range this little bit of difference adds up therefore I always use the correction element in the ballistics programs to correct the click value to exactly what I determined it to be, to the best of my ability, the actual click value for each scope. I have had good luck with this. I have also found that if you find a 1/4 click moa scope that actually measures exactly 0.250 inches per click then that is somewhat of a rarity. So, shoot the box for sure but then shoot the ladder to determine what the actual click value is for each of your particular scopes and for each particular rifle setup that you are going to use it on. Like I said, this seems to work for me pretty well either that or I have just been pretty lucky through the years. The equipment available now has gotten so much better than it used to be years ago. I guess you kinda have to like to fiddle around quite a bit to do these things, but isn't that kind of what we all rather enjoy doing with our rifle setups anyway<img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite2" alt=";)" title="Wink ;)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=";)" /> The older I get the more I find I guess I agree with the old Townsend Whelen axiom that says "Only accurate rifles are interesting".</p><p>FWIW</p><p>Tens</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Tensilon, post: 1620525, member: 29503"] Hey, I recently got an FFP vortex scope. Haven't had a chance to work it over yet. I set up and work over my own rifles for long range shooting...mainly used on paper but ready to go for hunting. I reload my own ammo for precision and when I say I work the rifles over I mean that I bed them, pillar them, float them, lap the barrels and often the rings, bed the ring mounts, and square up the recoil lugs. Most generally anything that can be done to increase consistent behavior from the rifle. Same thing goes for the ammo. I have quite a few calibers that I have done this for and a couple more that I am working on now including 300 WM, 6.5 mm Creedmoor, 7 mm Rem Mag, 270 Win, 243 Win, and a 25-06. I have quite a few Bushnell Elite tactical scopes...at least 2 that are 4.5 x 30 x50 SFP. I go through each scope that I put on using the tall ladder test and the box test to see if they return if to POA. What I have found is that while a scope may indeed track very well there can be considerable variation as to the distance that each scope moves with each click. I prefer 1/4 moa clicks for my scopes. When they say 1/4 moa clicks I find that often they do not measure in at exactly 0.250 moa per click and if I assume that 0.250 is what the click is without checking it on the ladder test and figuring out exactly what the measurement is then I find that using my ballistics programs will give me dope that is off especially at distance. For example, for one of my Elites the click value is consistent at 0.263 per click. This works out to 1.052 inches for 4 clicks at 100 yards. Well, we all know that 1 moa is 1.047 inches at 100 yards. It may seem like splitting hairs but at range this little bit of difference adds up therefore I always use the correction element in the ballistics programs to correct the click value to exactly what I determined it to be, to the best of my ability, the actual click value for each scope. I have had good luck with this. I have also found that if you find a 1/4 click moa scope that actually measures exactly 0.250 inches per click then that is somewhat of a rarity. So, shoot the box for sure but then shoot the ladder to determine what the actual click value is for each of your particular scopes and for each particular rifle setup that you are going to use it on. Like I said, this seems to work for me pretty well either that or I have just been pretty lucky through the years. The equipment available now has gotten so much better than it used to be years ago. I guess you kinda have to like to fiddle around quite a bit to do these things, but isn't that kind of what we all rather enjoy doing with our rifle setups anyway;) The older I get the more I find I guess I agree with the old Townsend Whelen axiom that says "Only accurate rifles are interesting". FWIW Tens [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Hunting
Long Range Hunting & Shooting
2nd Thoughts -- Vortex Viper PST?
Top