Turret Reliability Improvement

[nksmfamjp]

Sometimes I'm using scopes that I don't trust the turrets. Will turning past my adjustment in both directions and the setting it result in improved reliability?

Basically if I need to dial up 1 MOA, am I better off to just dial 1 MOA? …..or dial up 2 MOA, back down to 0, then dial to 1 MOA? Just a thought I'm having about system hysteresis.

Your thoughts? I know, buy better optics, but these are not always optics I have a choice with, like when they are not mine or when they are antiques.

 

[entoptics]

There's something to "backlash" (i.e. always approach the adjustment from the same direction) in precision instrumentation, but I don't think your idea of essentially doubling up on the adjustment motions will make a difference, unless something is truly wonky, and the turrets need "worked" to free them up or something.

No real way to tell if the minor slop in the adjustment mechanism will respond favorably to backlashing, or your idea of "working it", other than to test it on a tall target.

You can always try the "whack it a few times to settle it"...

 

[nksmfamjp]

You can always try the "whack it a few times to settle it"...

Unfortunately, that "action" made me question that there must be a better way!

 

[Bravo 4]

There is some curriculum in the Army that tells you to do both; dial turrets past the intended spot and then back down and to tap the turrets to make sure there was movement. I know I was instructed to do this years back on the Leupold M3 Ultra on the M24 (and the ACOG).
A couple years back we had some optics training by Leupold and we're told that they expect their scopes' turret adjustments to get better the more they're used. Also to turn the turrets all the way up and down at least 50 times to break it in.

 

[CaneBrake]

There is some curriculum in the Army that tells you to do both; dial turrets past the intended spot and then back down and to tap the turrets to make sure there was movement. I know I was instructed to do this years back on the Leupold M3 Ultra on the M24 (and the ACOG).
A couple years back we had some optics training by Leupold and we're told that they expect their scopes' turret adjustments to get better the more they're used. Also to turn the turrets all the way up and down at least 50 times to break it in.

That's because Leupold knows their stuff doesn't track. Haha. None of my issued Leupolds tracked right except the Mark 8 and it ended up breaking midway through a deployment anyway. Those experiences really turned me away from Leupold. Mind you, it was issued stuff so it probably seem 3 other guys.

 

[Phil Rizzo]

In my younger days, filled with vari x3 scopes, either you tapped the turret after making changes or wasted the next bullet before the change actually occurred.
Empty shell casing worked.
I do not miss any part of that history.

 

[Buttermilk]

I think if you are dialing away from the erector spring, then dialing beyond the correction and back down is the way to go. If dialing towards the erector spring the it may not be as important to dial beyond the correction and then back.

This should help with any slack in the system as well as allow the erector spring to overcome any friction and catch up to the turret before dialing back to desired correction.

If I dial left windage, I dial to my correction. If I dial right windage, I dial passed my intended corrected then back. If I dial up, I dial passed my correction and back down. If for some reason I dial down (not likely ever gonna happen as I zero at 100), I would dial to my correction.

 

[WapitiBob]

If I had to dial past or tap my scope I'd throw it in the garbage. I wouldn't hunt with anybody that had to do that nonsense either.

 

[BlackTail30]

Buttermilk alluded to this but this video does a pretty good job of explaining it. Jump to about the 2:25 mark for just turret correction but the first couple minutes are informative too!

 

[7mm man]

only but US, Japanese or European made scopes. Chinese turrets can't be trusted. Sometime the Philippine ones are ok, but they can't be trusted 100%.

 

[Greyfox]

While I remember vividly having to go through the "dance" described in the above video a decade or two ago with the usual "adjustable turret" design scopes of the day, advancements in scope design/mechanicals, at least with the many of the tier one level scopes have dealt with these "lash" issues….. It's easy enough to test/evaluate your particular scope for fine turret adjustment response. There ARE scopes that are designed to effectively eliminate it. Unfortunately, they are generally priced accordingly. The decision is whether you wish to operationally correct for lash as described in the video, or invest in a scope that has dealt with it. IMO.

 

[nksmfamjp]

While I remember vividly having to go through the "dance" described in the above video a decade or two ago with the usual "adjustable turret" design scopes of the day, advancements in scope design/mechanicals, at least with the many of the tier one level scopes have dealt with these "lash" issues….. It's easy enough to test/evaluate your particular scope for fine turret adjustment response. There ARE scopes that are designed to effectively eliminate it. Unfortunately, they are generally priced accordingly. The decision is whether you wish to operationally correct for lash as described in the video, or invest in a scope that has dealt with it. IMO.

You see that he is showing a Nightforce Competition scope as his example, right? They are a solid optic. He just won't trust his Fclass championship to any optic! It is a proven good scope.

 

[BrentM]

Sometimes I'm using scopes that I don't trust the turrets. Will turning past my adjustment in both directions and the setting it result in improved reliability?

Basically if I need to dial up 1 MOA, am I better off to just dial 1 MOA? …..or dial up 2 MOA, back down to 0, then dial to 1 MOA? Just a thought I'm having about system hysteresis.

Your thoughts? I know, buy better optics, but these are not always optics I have a choice with, like when they are not mine or when they are antiques.

Google leupold turret video. There is a really good educational point in that video that addresses the issues with turrets and lot of myths about how a scope is built. The short cut is that tactical scopes need to be worked to prevent retention springs from gaining memory. Working a turret based scope is not a bad thing but most people are freaked about it.

 

[Greyfox]

You see that he is showing a Nightforce Competition scope as his example, right? They are a solid optic. He just won't trust his Fclass championship to any optic! It is a proven good scope.

I agree that the NF is a good scope but I would still override and back off turret settings with them, particularly the older 1/8MOA target scopes, a couple that I have owned/used for Benchrest work. Also, I would definitely not change the magnification or parallax once set up for a target with them.