Scope failed tall target test....🤬

DocGlenn

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 23, 2005
Messages
109
Location
North Georgia
No insinuations intended, but shooting technique......trigger control, cant, parallax, recoil management.....??? Don't see any comments regarding avoiding cant during shooting. Effect of cant deviation increases with increasing elevation.....and can vary with each shot. Cant will cause predominantly horizontal shift like a clock hand moving off of vertical 12 o'clock, with vertical component becoming larger until vertical equals horizontal as cant reaches 1:30...45degrees. Did you level scope with bubble level on turret cap or turret edges? Or, adjustable parallel bar between pic rail and bottom flat of scope? Both methods assume reticle is true with those scope features......usually OK, but could be defective. How accurate is your level? Carpenter grade level versus machinist grade level can show significant deviation. An optical bore collminator (reference Brownells P/N 593-000-052WB; Bushnell P/N 743333) will confirm reticle vertical with bore. Have you verified reticle is plumb with a plumb bob string? Shine a bright light through the objective lens with light projecting reticle out of ocular lens onto nearby white plain wall. Place vertical line on wall and compare reticle to plumb line. Or, view plumb line hanging in front of scope at scope minimum parallax distance. Is your ocular lens truly adjusted for reticle clarity? That is a base starting point that you'd be surprised how many people miss this adjustment.
I used a level on the scope to try and hold plumb when shooting. The target was setup with a plumb line which was checked to the scope and the level in the scope. I’m not the best shot in the world and my technique could probably be better, but I made every effort to make sure everything was lined up and plumb. I’m going to look up one of collminators right now. Looks like a very useful tool to have. I really think lapping my rings will help. Check the photo I posted of the wear area on the front ring. That can’t be helping anything. 😬. The Burris Z rings seem like a very good idea to eliminate unwanted stress on the scope, but they are heavy and I’m try to keep this rifle as light as possible. I got drawn for a CO goat hunt, and I’m counting ounces, literally.
 

Gone Ballistic

Well-Known Member
LRH Team Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2010
Messages
580
Location
Orofino, Idaho
I used a level on the scope to try and hold plumb when shooting. The target was setup with a plumb line which was checked to the scope and the level in the scope. I’m not the best shot in the world and my technique could probably be better, but I made every effort to make sure everything was lined up and plumb. I’m going to look up one of collminators right now. Looks like a very useful tool to have. I really think lapping my rings will help. Check the photo I posted of the wear area on the front ring. That can’t be helping anything. 😬. The Burris Z rings seem like a very good idea to eliminate unwanted stress on the scope, but they are heavy and I’m try to keep this rifle as light as possible. I got drawn for a CO goat hunt, and I’m counting ounces, literally.
Why not try the Nightforce lightweights?
 

jgs8163

Well-Known Member
LRH Team Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2011
Messages
740
Location
Southern Arizona
Don't think so. His reticles were mounted level inside his scopes, not canted like mine are in my Leupold. Think he has a scope mount problem.
I didn’t really look at the pics. I just read it briefly where it stated 2x “I got very similar results from both scopes”. I agree on the mount problem.
 

Will16

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 17, 2020
Messages
219
Location
TN MS
I read what he stated 2x that he got very similar results from both scopes and he thinks it’s not a scope issue. Hence it’s something in the mounting. Bed base, bed rings.
He didn’t get similar results. Look at the targets, bullets don’t lie.
 

KY_Windage

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2018
Messages
274
Location
Frozen North
I read what he stated 2x that he got very similar results from both scopes and he thinks it’s not a scope issue. Hence it’s something in the mounting. Bed base, bed rings.
It would be easier to see with a more accurate rifle, but it appears Doc has the very common problem of the reticle not quite pointing at the center of the bore.

Imagine this rifle is locked in a gimbal that permits it to move only up and down along a plumb line. Instead of pointing at the bore, this reticle points to the right of the bore. The dots are places at varying distances the rifle can hit as it moves up and down. The reticle intersection is on the 100-yard dot, where the scope is sighted in.

But try to use one of the lower hashmarks and you will hit to the left of your POA. The lower the hashmark, to further off to the left your hits will be. Use you windage turret to put the bottom hashmark on the bottom dot, and it will no longer be correct for 100 yards. This is most likely what Doc's problem is. He could have a hundred other problems, but I'm guessing this is it because about 90% of the rifles I seen had this problem. Nearly every one of them drifted laterally when you cranked up, because no one had ever aligned the reticle with the bore.

 

uka

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2012
Messages
100
Yes, that is one reason I quit trying to shoot LR with anything but NF (NXS, ATACR and Comp.)

You can check tracking with a building but you have no idea whether the reticle is aligned with the center of your bore unless you shoot it, so back to the plumbed bullseyes. My bullseyes are printed on copy paper, so if I staple them edge-to-edge they are perfectly straight. The plumb-line gets them plumb. My plumb-bob is free and tells no lies, not even small ones.
yes as long as the wind aint blowing :)
 

uka

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2012
Messages
100
I agree with the BED EVERYTHING plan.
If I had to bed a scope and rings I would break out the chop saw hack them up and throw them in the garbage. IF I had to bed a rifle I would sell it
 

Trending threads

Top