Best bubble level?

[southpa]

I like the response of the Flatline Op levels. You don't have to buy their most expensive model.

RECON ACCU/LEVEL™ Rigid, Stationary

LEVEL WHATEVER FIELD YOU'RE PLAYING ON. This rugged no-frills scope level (non-articulating) is Flatline Ops’ smallest diameter scope level, fitting 1-inch scope diameters only. A long-range shot has many factors to take into consideration to be sure you are on target, and our ACCU/LEVEL™...

flatlineops.com

This seems like a nice level. There are many like it. But my comment was for a different style.

 

[southpa]

Might as well go MDT SEND-IT level for a few dollars more.

If you're into the whole electronics thing.

 

[M1A1ABRAMS]

I went with SG Pulse and Its 140.00 so about half price of Send It.

And how do you like it ? I seen them on here but would like to hear from someone else with hands on.

 

[Charles13]

And how do you like it ? I seen them on here but would like to hear from someone else with hands on.

I like it a lot. Makes it super easy to know im level. I added a piece of fiber optic and strapped it under my ocular lense so it is in plain sight even more. Also if you order from Gary at Paramount Tactical you can save a few bucks.

 

[Taylorbok]

If you're into the whole electronics thing.

That's the only reason I don't use one. I've already got enough batteries to remember.
I might have to try one though and see how it goes

 

[Charles13]

That's the only reason I don't use one. I've already got enough batteries to remember.
I might have to try one though and see how it goes

The SG pulse is rechargeable.

 

[huntinghuasna]

My new favorite for a hunting rifle is the Holland's Signature Series. Looks nice with smooth edges. The bubble size and distance between lines are perfect. Also, the viscosity of the liquid is well balanced, bubble tracks nicely.

Yes I shoot left handed

 

[Taylorbok]

The SG pulse is rechargeable.

for me that is probably worse. Then I can't just slap in new batteries when I forget to charge it.

 

[7Rum Slayer]

My new favorite for a hunting rifle is the Holland's Signature Series.

This is also my favorite. Very well made and nice and bright in low light. I have about 6 of these and no complaints with many years of use. Cheers, Jason

 

[southpa]

That's the only reason I don't use one. I've already got enough batteries to remember.
I might have to try one though and see how it goes

Ya batteries make sense for certain things. A bubble level isn't one of them on a hunting rifle IMO. Not to mention it's not legal to have electronics on your shooting systems here. Which I personally think should be a universal law.

 

[ntsqd]

Well, one would think, if you use your picatinny rail to level your rifle, then you level your scope to the leveled picatinny rail, then level your shooting level to you scope....all are level to whatever extent you and your tools are capable.

As long as the mounting surface of your pic rail and scope are perpendicular, not much else matters, as long as, the bubble level is also level to the perpendicular plain of the pic rail.

I have a Murphy Rail that sits on it's intended action with a .015" slope (low on the left) across the width of top flat of the rail. This was measured by making a tool to hold the action with it's bolt rails level in a mill vise, and then measuring the tilt with a dial indicator held in the quill of the mill. I strongly doubt that the problem is in the rail as I then tried a Leupold rail in the same set-up. It measured .012" low on the left. When I get back to that project I will making up a fixture to bed the Murphy rail square and level.

All that matters is the crosshairs are plumb to gravity when the shot goes off.
No need for the scope to be level to the top of the action/ pic rail

In one of those multiple threads on squaring the scope to the rifle it was demonstrated that error creeps in when the scope is laterally offset from the bore. I don't recall how physics of that worked, but I am convinced in correctness of this. If you know it's there it can be compensated for, but I am firm believer in not leaving myself those kinds of "traps", because I WILL forget that it is there.

 

[Taylorbok]

In one of those multiple threads on squaring the scope to the rifle it was demonstrated that error creeps in when the scope is laterally offset from the bore. I don't recall how physics of that worked, but I am convinced in correctness of this. If you know it's there it can be compensated for, but I am firm believer in not leaving myself those kinds of "traps", because I WILL forget that it is there.

Someone did the math.
Maybe If you are a sub 1.5" shooter at 1000 yards (wind included)

 

[ntsqd]

If people are factoring in the coreolis (sp?) effect then it matters. Like I said above I don't like leaving those kinds of traps for me to forget are there. Better to correct the parts until the rifle is all square and true.

 

[Taylorbok]

If people are factoring in the coreolis (sp?) effect then it matters. Like I said above I don't like leaving those kinds of traps for me to forget are there. Better to correct the parts until the rifle is all square and true.

... You can't shoot that good. Let alone call the wind that well.