Trijicon 10 mile tracking test today

[Barbourcreek]

I was doing tall target test today on the Trijicon 10 mile again, this is my personal scope measured out 301 feet which comes out to 100.33 yards dialed 25 Moa which means expected point of impact or reticle movement is 26.262 actual point of impact reticle movement was 26.1875 which means the scope tracks 1.00285
This is what I will put in the site scale vertical on the ballistic program

 

[Barbourcreek]

Remeber formula
Is
Range x moa dialed x .01047
Divided by
Actual movement or point of impact

 

[ShtrRdy]

Wow, less than 0.3% error. Sweet!

 

[Barbourcreek]

Error is pretty big

 

[ShtrRdy]

It looks like there is a correction factor of 0.98 in one picture and 1.002 in the other. Should one of those be 1.000?

 

[Barbourcreek]

It looks like there is a correction factor of 0.98 in one picture and 1.002 in the other. Should one of those be 1.000?

No I was comparing actual tracking to a scope that only tracked .98

 

[Barbourcreek]

Virtually the same 1. To 1.002

 

[ShtrRdy]

Oh, okay. With a correction factor of 0.98, that is a 2% error. That's quite a bit more than 0.2% error.

 

[Pdvdh]

No I was comparing actual tracking to a scope that only tracked .98

So you've presented correction info for a different scope in Posts #4 and #7, rather than the Trijicon 10 Mile scope in Post #1?

Because I see a 1.00285 correction factor for the elevation turret on the Trijicon scope in Post #1 ... which would round up to 1.003.

 

[Barbourcreek]

So you've presented correction info for a different scope in Posts #4 and #7, rather than the Trijicon 10 Mile scope in Post #1?

Because I see a 1.00285 correction factor for the elevation turret on the Trijicon scope in Post #1 ... which would round up to 1.003.

Would not have mattered I just did not round up. But yes from 10 mile
Here you go no change

 

[Taylorbok]

.98 vs 1.002 is misleading, especially considering your correction factor is actually netting you zero correction.

 

[Barbourcreek]

.98 vs 1.002 is misleading, especially considering your correction factor is actually netting you zero correction.

No not misleading it is showing the difference between a scope that tracks great and one that has error and why it is important nothing more. This entire conversation is to educate people on the sight scale vertical in the ballistic program. And how to find it. No need to look into .002 or .003 error. Its not the point.

 

[Taylorbok]

No not misleading it is showing the difference between a scope that tracks great and one that has error and why it is important nothing more. This entire conversation is to educate people on the sight scale vertical in the ballistic program. And how to find it. No need to look into .002 or .003 error. Its not the point.

Ok, I definitely missed your intent.
That being said I've tested some pretty low end scopes. even an Athlon Argos had under 1% of error.

 

[RockyMtnUT]

"dialed 25 Moa which means expected point of impact or reticle movement is 26.262 actual point of impact reticle movement was 26.1875"

Help me understand... I'm the slow one.
I get the dialed 25Moa. But I am not understanding how you are determining the 26.262?