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
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Long Range Scopes and Other Optics
Rem 700 VS w/ 20 moa mount question
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="NZZYTB" data-source="post: 15985" data-attributes="member: 1011"><p>Matt 27,</p><p></p><p>I have only tried the scope with the 20 moa Badger mount. It seemed to me that if I went to a Nightforce 40 moa mount, then I would only need to dial the scope 10 moa UP in elevation, leaving me 55 moa to get all the way out to 1000. </p><p></p><p>Do you guys think I am looking at this wrong to think that 20 moa additional elevation in the mount would result in 20 moa less elevation needed in the scope elevation?</p><p></p><p>Let me know what you think.</p><p></p><p>Milanuk,</p><p></p><p>I am dialing the scope UP in elevation to get the bullet to zero at 100 yards. I have to use almost half of my available scope elevation adjustability just to get to zero. It seemed to me that I needed to go to the 40 moa mount, but I thought I'd see if any of you had run into this problem.</p><p></p><p>I will definitely try the 175 grain Sierra MK and see where I go, but the guys I shoot with load their 175's with the same load as their 168's. I'm also going to try varying seating depths to see what affect it has on required elevation to get to 1000.</p><p></p><p>I was hoping that someone else had run into this before. My assumption is that the receiver is off just enough to require more cant in the scope mount to be able make full use of the scope's total available elevation.</p><p></p><p>Any additional comments are certainly welcomed. Thanks.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="NZZYTB, post: 15985, member: 1011"] Matt 27, I have only tried the scope with the 20 moa Badger mount. It seemed to me that if I went to a Nightforce 40 moa mount, then I would only need to dial the scope 10 moa UP in elevation, leaving me 55 moa to get all the way out to 1000. Do you guys think I am looking at this wrong to think that 20 moa additional elevation in the mount would result in 20 moa less elevation needed in the scope elevation? Let me know what you think. Milanuk, I am dialing the scope UP in elevation to get the bullet to zero at 100 yards. I have to use almost half of my available scope elevation adjustability just to get to zero. It seemed to me that I needed to go to the 40 moa mount, but I thought I'd see if any of you had run into this problem. I will definitely try the 175 grain Sierra MK and see where I go, but the guys I shoot with load their 175's with the same load as their 168's. I'm also going to try varying seating depths to see what affect it has on required elevation to get to 1000. I was hoping that someone else had run into this before. My assumption is that the receiver is off just enough to require more cant in the scope mount to be able make full use of the scope's total available elevation. Any additional comments are certainly welcomed. Thanks. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Long Range Scopes and Other Optics
Rem 700 VS w/ 20 moa mount question
Top