Entry level long range scope

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

  • No ad networks!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Pinecone

    Ultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    Feb 4, 2013
    28,175
    The PEPR mount is fine for a 1-Yx scope. But I agree, I would not use one for a long range setup.
     

    Major03

    Ultimate Member
    Except the scope does not need to be leveled to the rifle.

    The scope needs to be leveled to the world, when you are shooting it (normal hold).

    Quite true, good point.

    Really just offering a cheap alternative to the scope leveling kits out there, which cost a lot of money and do the same thing as a deck of cards. Most people will take their new rifle / scope to a gun shop and have the scope leveled to the rifle, and it's a pretty easy job to do yourself.

    Different from putting a leveling bubble permanently on your scope so that you know that the reticle is plumb to the world when you take your shot, which as you shoot further out makes more and more of a difference.

    Connected issues. One can either build their position to fit the rifle, or fit their rifle to their position. The second is a arguably a better choice as your natural point of aim will not be effected as much.

    For me, I like to level it to the rifle because if I shoot from different positions, I don't have the same check weld and I find it more difficult if my scope is canted to where it would more naturally fall if I'm in the prone.

    But your point that the reticle should be plumb to the world (and not the horizon) when the shot breaks is well taken.
     

    smdub

    Ultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    Nov 14, 2012
    4,644
    MoCo
    Poor man's scope leveling trick...take a feeler gauge
    ...
    It might not be as precise as the scope leveling kit / bubbles

    Its likely more accurate than 99% of people levels. You can pretty much guarantee the adjustment mechanism is square to the housing. The reticle could still be mounted canted and it would work right.

    Except the scope does not need to be leveled to the rifle.

    The scope needs to be leveled to the world, when you are shooting it (normal hold).

    I don't think this is correct. If the scope isn't in the same vertical plane as the rifle AND square then any distance change will introduce windage errors. Negligible at 100m but at long distance the errors add up quick.
     

    Bountied

    Ultimate Member
    Apr 6, 2012
    6,893
    Pasadena
    Its likely more accurate than 99% of people levels. You can pretty much guarantee the adjustment mechanism is square to the housing. The reticle could still be mounted canted and it would work right.



    I don't think this is correct. If the scope isn't in the same vertical plane as the rifle AND square then any distance change will introduce windage errors. Negligible at 100m but at long distance the errors add up quick.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eCoHG23TQcY

    The rifle can be canted, as long as the scope is level. The most important thing is if you are using a bubble level that the bubble and the scope are leveled perfectly. You could mount the scope on the bottom of your rifle and it wouldn't matter if your scope is leveled perfectly.
     

    smdub

    Ultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    Nov 14, 2012
    4,644
    MoCo
    You could mount the scope on the bottom of your rifle and it wouldn't matter if your scope is leveled perfectly.
    Underneath is fine. I said scope/bbl in same vertical plane. Below is still vertical;)

    So taking your example to only half as extreme, hold the rifle sideways (vs upside down.) Typical height over bore on an AR w/ a big scope is 3"-ish. If you zero at 100 yds, at 1000yds you'd be 30" off windage. The sine error is small for small angles and may be smaller error that you and/or the gun are capable of but to say "it doesn't matter" is wrong. FOr a gun tha is tilted you actually need to set point of aim @ your zero distance to be the same as the horizontal mechanical offset and not on the crosshairs. There is a reason that precision stocks have adjustable drop/offset/cant buttplates.
     

    Bountied

    Ultimate Member
    Apr 6, 2012
    6,893
    Pasadena
    Underneath is fine. I said scope/bbl in same vertical plane. Below is still vertical;)

    So taking your example to only half as extreme, hold the rifle sideways (vs upside down.) Typical height over bore on an AR w/ a big scope is 3"-ish. If you zero at 100 yds, at 1000yds you'd be 30" off windage. The sine error is small for small angles and may be smaller error that you and/or the gun are capable of but to say "it doesn't matter" is wrong. FOr a gun tha is tilted you actually need to set point of aim @ your zero distance to be the same as the horizontal mechanical offset and not on the crosshairs. There is a reason that precision stocks have adjustable drop/offset/cant buttplates.

    I guess you misunderstood. What I meant is that the rifle can be in any orientation as long as your crosshairs are leveled to the ground with the elevation turrets facing up. When the bullet leaves the barrel gravity will do its thing. If your scope is canted and you adjust for elevation or use holdover to compensate at further distances your impact will be off left or right depending on the cant. As long as your zero doesn't change and you keep your scope level every shot, the cant of the rifle is irrelevant.

    Did you watch the video?
     
    Last edited:

    Pinecone

    Ultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    Feb 4, 2013
    28,175
    Its likely more accurate than 99% of people levels. You can pretty much guarantee the adjustment mechanism is square to the housing. The reticle could still be mounted canted and it would work right.



    I don't think this is correct. If the scope isn't in the same vertical plane as the rifle AND square then any distance change will introduce windage errors. Negligible at 100m but at long distance the errors add up quick.

    It is correct.

    Say the center of the cross hairs are 1 inch to the side. Say to the right.

    If you zero POA=POI at 100 yards, then at 200 yards, you will be 1 inch off to the other side (left). 2 inches at 300 yards, etc. So 9" at 1000 yards.

    For my .308 load, 1 MPH change in the wind speed (or mistake in wind call) is 10.6 inches.

    Or, you can sight in such that at 100 yards, the bullet impacts 1 inch to the right of the POA. And at 200 yards, it will still be 1 inch off, and at 1000 yards, still 1 inch off.

    And a 1 inch offset is HUGE. You are looking more at 1 - 2 tenths. So you are off by 1 - 2 inches at 1000 yards. If this is too much for YOU SHOOTING YOUR RIFLE, I tip my hat to you. :D

    And the errors for having the retical canted, and dialing in an elevation change are MUCH greater than that.

    https://www.riflescopelevel.com/cant_errors.html

    If you have your reticle canted 3 degrees, that works out to about 24" to the side due to the cant, versus 9" for having a 1" offset to the scope.

    BTW a 3 degree cant is moving the reticle about 0.1 inches from the vertical centerline. So you are going from a 0.9" error at 1000 yards (offset) to a 24" error at 1000 yards (cant). 27 times the error. Which one would you prefer to have?

    http://www.accuracy-tech.com/scope-level-necessary/
     

    smdub

    Ultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    Nov 14, 2012
    4,644
    MoCo
    It is correct.
    It isn't correct and you just used the EXACT same types of examples as I did to prove it. I even mentioned the sine angle error will be typ small. :sad20:

    Which one would you prefer to have?
    I am aware of scope cant error. I can do that math too. You know it doesn't have to be an either/or proposition. There is also a neither option. :D
     

    Pinecone

    Ultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    Feb 4, 2013
    28,175
    It isn't correct and you just used the EXACT same types of examples as I did to prove it. I even mentioned the sine angle error will be typ small. :sad20:


    I am aware of scope cant error. I can do that math too. You know it doesn't have to be an either/or proposition. There is also a neither option. :D

    The point is, the error from offset, under normal conditions is minimal. The error from can is much higher.

    And again, if you take into account the offset when siting in, it is a constant difference. And if you cannot live with the POI being 1 - 2 tenths of an inch off the POA, then put the money into that fully adjustable stock.

    And yes, you can have a fancy stock to eliminate cant, but for most people and most flies, that is not possible.
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    274,921
    Messages
    7,258,988
    Members
    33,349
    Latest member
    christian04

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom