This looks like a good idea, but can you watch the bubble "WHILE" looking through your scope?
http://xtremehardcoregear.com/arlevel.html
http://xtremehardcoregear.com/arlevel.html
AR Tactical Level : Anyone use it?
- Thread starter tickled pink
- Start date
I'd bet money that lowlight's response to this would be screw that pc of kit and use your own natural shooting position,,,, which I'd agree. I know some guys use these, but what is the fun of looking through your scope, back down to the level, back in the scope, 2nd guessing yourself and looking back down at your level, blah blah blah. When it comes to putting foot to ass in a RL situation, you're not going to have time for all of that BS.
If anything, when I think of the word tactical, then I'm thinking "fast" and "responsive". If anything,,,, this level should be called AR "precision" level.... Then again I would most likely not use it.
If anything, when I think of the word tactical, then I'm thinking "fast" and "responsive". If anything,,,, this level should be called AR "precision" level.... Then again I would most likely not use it.
I use one when shooting at 1,000 yds. with my 6mm Norma BR. bolt gun and it helps me keep my shots in the center of the target instead of shifting the shots to the right or left by canting the rifle even a little bit.
I do have levels on some of my LR bolt guns, they're set up so I can see the level while I'm looking through the scope. As someone who kind of likes having a scope level, I still can't see where this thing would be in any way helpful.
Your windage will vary significantly without a level, even at 300yds. I see it all the time when shooting positions, or even shooting bipod prone on uneven terrain.
I agree that a level that is in your natural FOV when eying the scope is more comfortable to shoot with, which is what I personally use, whereas the one in the OP focuses on a streamlined, snag-free approach, which is better than nothing.
For someone equipped with this type of low-profile level, I would encourage a training regimen where looking at the level is a checkpoint as you get into position like this:
* OODA loop sequence initiated by target detection
* Seek cover while maintaining Direction, Distance, and Disposition of the target, while auto-range from memory kicks in for hold-offs (ex: TGT is ~600m, my elevation hold is 3.4 Mils)
* Decide on position from cover with stand-off from cover, with wind direction, value, and speed consideration
* Get into position while looking at level and tightening 2-point sling, reducing breathing respirations
* Search for target in scope FOV, continue to down-throttle breathing and fine-tune NPOA for 3.4 Mil + wind hold
* Maintain best sight picture possible while taking the shot and assessing the hit during follow through for rapid follow-up
This scope level would make a suitable tool for providing leveling solution to hasty positions in my opinion. Would I put it on a heavy F-class gun for 800-1000yd competition, absolutely not.
If you have an SPR or DMR type blaster, this would make a nice low-profile addition to a commonly-overlooked aspect of practical intermediate and long-range shooting. One consideration would be de-conficting BUIS rail space in an organization that requires a BUIS configuration.
I agree that a level that is in your natural FOV when eying the scope is more comfortable to shoot with, which is what I personally use, whereas the one in the OP focuses on a streamlined, snag-free approach, which is better than nothing.
For someone equipped with this type of low-profile level, I would encourage a training regimen where looking at the level is a checkpoint as you get into position like this:
* OODA loop sequence initiated by target detection
* Seek cover while maintaining Direction, Distance, and Disposition of the target, while auto-range from memory kicks in for hold-offs (ex: TGT is ~600m, my elevation hold is 3.4 Mils)
* Decide on position from cover with stand-off from cover, with wind direction, value, and speed consideration
* Get into position while looking at level and tightening 2-point sling, reducing breathing respirations
* Search for target in scope FOV, continue to down-throttle breathing and fine-tune NPOA for 3.4 Mil + wind hold
* Maintain best sight picture possible while taking the shot and assessing the hit during follow through for rapid follow-up
This scope level would make a suitable tool for providing leveling solution to hasty positions in my opinion. Would I put it on a heavy F-class gun for 800-1000yd competition, absolutely not.
If you have an SPR or DMR type blaster, this would make a nice low-profile addition to a commonly-overlooked aspect of practical intermediate and long-range shooting. One consideration would be de-conficting BUIS rail space in an organization that requires a BUIS configuration.
Last edited:
I got out my rifle that has the Vortex 6-24x50mm PST FFP MOA scope with an offset bubble level attached to the scope. I looked through the scope and tried to look at the level at the same time (left eye on level + right eye in scope). Even though I am used to using this level attached to the scope it is not as easy to watch while holding the reticule on target. I then shouldered my M4 and while looking through my Bushnell AR/223 scope with 4.5-18x40mm zoom. It looks to me that the bubble that attaches to the back end of the Picatinny rail is visible with the same eye while you are aiming through the scope. I was very surprised and will be ordering one. I don't need the rear iron sight since I am replacing the upper with an 18" WOA Varmint with a 1 in 7" twist.
Attachments
Last edited:
I've a S/A 700 with a 20min Nightforce base, med rings and a 3.5X10X40 Mk4, from ctr to where the swivel stops using a 6-9 notched Harris bi-pod at 600 yds there is but 1/2 moa of change each way. Found only 3/4 moa each way with my 300wm that has a 58mm bell. Trust me you cant a weapon that much, you will know it's canted. I've found up to 3-4 degrees is nothing, and most folks can see anything past 2 to begin with if they have shot long enough.
Canting is over rated for most shooting in my book.
Canting is over rated for most shooting in my book.
I was wanting one of those. Are your eyes still pretty good? That level is going to be under your scope's eyepiece probably 4-4.5" from your eye. I kinda mocked-up something similar on my 20" flat-top to see if it was something I could do and, well, I can't. It's just too close for my old eyes to focus on.
I had one of the rail-mounted US Optics bubble levels. I could stick that further out so it worked OK. Think I accidentally threw it away though.
I currently use 2 and like it better than the vortex level that I have on another rifle. It's easier to look very slightly down(or the AR level only very slightly out of focus when focused on the reticle) than to focus my left eye on the bubble then the right eye on the reticle. A level of some type just helps eliminate minor human error. I use one on a bolt gun and can be used on most any type of picatinny mount, so it's not just for ARs.
Maybe on a flat range, but in natural terrain, the human inner ear and eyes have a hard time determining what level is. Todd Hodnett wouldn't be a big advocate of them if there wasn't merit to bubble levels.
Your telling me you can not see a 3-5* or better change w/o a level, while in the field? We did not use such for how many years and now we can't shoot long w/o one? I admit I fell for them as I wanted to my sticks to be tacticool, but I returned to my old days, lite is right. If it's not needed for the ranges I engage why am I carrying it? Again from lock to lock on my Harris I only get 1moa of cant induced change at 600 yds, granted 600 yds is a give me when you get to pick your ffp. Lock to lock is far past 3-5* and even trees or grass do not grow that much off. Been Shooting sense uncle gave me the finer points in 64, never needed one then to do my job, and still don't need one. Maybe others do, don't know don't care, but to me it's just another point of failure or something to get snagged on. Like many here I don't get 1099's and such for touting gear, my words only reflect what I experience, an granted that is not much anymore.
600yds is pretty close out in the Western US. When shooting positions in terrain that hasn't been graded, and you are trying to hide or use concealment, I think the level is a tool that will increase your hit probability at distance.
We never had them on our Sniper Systems in any of the units I was in, but we rarely made 1st-round hits much past 600yds either. A lot has changed then, and most of it has been developed on the civilian side, and carried over to the military. Modern ballistics programs combined with a few other tools, like a level, significantly increase 1st-round hit probability at distance, even on smaller targets.
The scope level is a valid tool for long-range shooting, especially in rugged terrain.
We never had them on our Sniper Systems in any of the units I was in, but we rarely made 1st-round hits much past 600yds either. A lot has changed then, and most of it has been developed on the civilian side, and carried over to the military. Modern ballistics programs combined with a few other tools, like a level, significantly increase 1st-round hit probability at distance, even on smaller targets.
The scope level is a valid tool for long-range shooting, especially in rugged terrain.
1 MOA at 600yds is over 6"s which is dramatic in any type of shooting. Anyway, a level becomes most helpful for those who have a mil/moa style reticle and use it for holdovers. Cant error seems more obvious when using the reticle for holdovers.
"Effects of Rifle Canting at Long Range — David Tubb Explains
Eleven-Time NRA National High Power Champion David Tubb knows a bit about long-range shooting. One of the key factors in long-range accuracy is making sure that the tilt/cant of your rifle does not change throughout your shot string. In the clip below, the first in McMillan’s Master Class Video series, David Tubb explains the importance of keeping your rifle level. He explains that, at 1000 yards, your Point of Impact can change dramatically by canting the rifle either right or left. David states that, when shooting at 1000 yards, if your rifle is level and your shot is centered-up on a 72″ (six-foot) square target, you can actually put your next shot OFF PAPER by canting your rifle. That means you can move Point of Impact (POI) three feet or more, just by canting your rifle!
Bryan Litz confirms Tubb’s observation. Bryan tells us that, as a general rule of thumb (for common cartridges), a 1° cant will produce five (5) inches of lateral displacement at 1000 yards. Thus, if you cant your rifle just 8°, the POI would move 40″ from the center of the target, putting the shot off the edge of a 72″-wide target."
Another tid bit
“This component of cant error becomes more significant at more distant targets due to the increased original included angle between the line of sight axis and the bore axis (more elevation compensation) at the vertical hold. Use of large-diameter objective scopes, mounted high off the barrel, exacerbates the cant error problem. To keep the scope elevation knobs centered for maximum adjustment, precision shooters sometimes use elevation-compensated scope mounting rings or bases. Although this solves the adjustment problem, it greatly exaggerates cant error because the distance between the bore axis and the line of sight axis increases and the included angle between the sight axis and the bore is larger, producing more windage error when canting.”
“This component of cant error becomes more significant at more distant targets due to the increased original included angle between the line of sight axis and the bore axis (more elevation compensation) at the vertical hold. Use of large-diameter objective scopes, mounted high off the barrel, exacerbates the cant error problem. To keep the scope elevation knobs centered for maximum adjustment, precision shooters sometimes use elevation-compensated scope mounting rings or bases. Although this solves the adjustment problem, it greatly exaggerates cant error because the distance between the bore axis and the line of sight axis increases and the included angle between the sight axis and the bore is larger, producing more windage error when canting.”
Take a look at the distance between the scopes and the barrels of my two rifles. With the much larger distance between the scope on my AR and its barrel will make more error of the POI with cant than with my hunting bolt action. This is why I am going to order the X-treme bubble for my AR. When I look through my scope the bubble will be out of focus, but I think I will still be able to see if the rifle is canted or not. I won't know for sure until I receive it and put it on.
PS: You can see the B-Square bubble level attached to the rail on my M4 in the last picture.
PS: You can see the B-Square bubble level attached to the rail on my M4 in the last picture.
Attachments
Last edited:
So David Tubbs, Brian Litz, and Todd Hodnett all emphasize the importance of using a scope level. Noted
One thing I do is level the rifle in a vice with insulators in the jaws, level the scope using a plum line in the FOV downrange, and then level the scope level to the scope.
When you factor in wind-reading error, a little bit of imperceptible cant by the shooter, and stress to make a shot, you're going to have a windage miss 9/10 in my experience, unless the target is really close (within the 1 Mil wind deflection threshold of the conditions and caliber), and a larger target.
In Art of the Precision Rifle, you see guys with very solid long-range shooting backgrounds (USMC Scout Sniper/Force Recon senior NCO) miss because of rifle cant, which Todd Hodnett calls as a cant issue, and the follow-up shot is POA/POI once the rifle was leveled.
As InkedIan mentioned, you really see how pronounced this becomes when using reticle holds for elevation as you get down past 2 or 3 Mils. I'm very anal about setting up my scopes, to include:
* Scope height to cheek weld height: The center of the FOV needs to be in line with my natural cheek weld.
* Proper eye relief and exit pupil trouble-shot from various positions: I want natural sight picture and reticle acquisition as fast as possible from kneeling, modified seated/kneeling, standing supported, and prone.
* Scope reticle needs to be level: I usually dial down to the lowest magnification, and plum the bottom duplex-type bar through the center of the barrel if I can see it on low power, while the gun is in the vice. Then I true it with the plum line hanging out in the FOV, which I can align with the vertical crosshair.
* Then attach the scope level, ensure reticle is still plum, and level the level.
As bad as I am, I need all the help I can get.
One thing I do is level the rifle in a vice with insulators in the jaws, level the scope using a plum line in the FOV downrange, and then level the scope level to the scope.
When you factor in wind-reading error, a little bit of imperceptible cant by the shooter, and stress to make a shot, you're going to have a windage miss 9/10 in my experience, unless the target is really close (within the 1 Mil wind deflection threshold of the conditions and caliber), and a larger target.
In Art of the Precision Rifle, you see guys with very solid long-range shooting backgrounds (USMC Scout Sniper/Force Recon senior NCO) miss because of rifle cant, which Todd Hodnett calls as a cant issue, and the follow-up shot is POA/POI once the rifle was leveled.
As InkedIan mentioned, you really see how pronounced this becomes when using reticle holds for elevation as you get down past 2 or 3 Mils. I'm very anal about setting up my scopes, to include:
* Scope height to cheek weld height: The center of the FOV needs to be in line with my natural cheek weld.
* Proper eye relief and exit pupil trouble-shot from various positions: I want natural sight picture and reticle acquisition as fast as possible from kneeling, modified seated/kneeling, standing supported, and prone.
* Scope reticle needs to be level: I usually dial down to the lowest magnification, and plum the bottom duplex-type bar through the center of the barrel if I can see it on low power, while the gun is in the vice. Then I true it with the plum line hanging out in the FOV, which I can align with the vertical crosshair.
* Then attach the scope level, ensure reticle is still plum, and level the level.
As bad as I am, I need all the help I can get.
You do recall me saying lock to lock correct? Now I don't know how much is in your Harris or what your mechanical off set is(mine is 1.72) but the LTL in my Harris is ruffly 26* total (13* each way) and that only produces ruffly 1 moa at 600. I never questioned how canting effected shot placement, but I can't read the wind to a grand or better within 1 mph either on the first shot, like everyone on the internet climes they can. Bottom line if you can't see a 3-5* cant in your scope let alone a 13* on the lock or 26* total, I doubt a level is going to help you much other than making you think it will. 1*/26*=0.0384 moa and 5*/26*=0.1923moa, at 600. Lets see, 1 moa at 600 is 6.282 inchs and 0.1923 moa (5*) at 600 is ruffly 1.208 inches. I'm guessing factors other than a level, come into play when group dispersal/size is larger than that?
I understand your train of thought but on the flip side it's a cheap (in price) product that you only have to buy once to help eliminate an error factor. You have guys in multiple shooting disciplines that will spend hundreds to thousands of dollars in order to tighten their groups an inch or 2 at 600+yds. So to say it's not needed or not useful is an opinion that I disagree with, but to each their own.
600yds is just where you really confirm that you're hitting for me anyway, or maybe do some ladder-testing at for OBT.
700-800yds, and farther, and the slightest degree of cant will cause a windage miss on small plates. Many of the areas I shoot have terrain that will throw you for a loop as to what level is if you try to use your own devices, even on flat ranges where the grading is sloped for draining, and the background skyline is opposite of that. Here's an example of a flat range where none of the background horizontal lines you see are level:
In my DM Course, we spend the morning of Day 1 on the bipod and bag only to prove that the gun and shooter can make hits at 600yds with a decent 5.56 or 7.62 DM carbine or rifle. The rest of the course is shot from positions. A low-profile level is very helpful for shooting positions when shooting even at closer ranges.
700-800yds, and farther, and the slightest degree of cant will cause a windage miss on small plates. Many of the areas I shoot have terrain that will throw you for a loop as to what level is if you try to use your own devices, even on flat ranges where the grading is sloped for draining, and the background skyline is opposite of that. Here's an example of a flat range where none of the background horizontal lines you see are level:
In my DM Course, we spend the morning of Day 1 on the bipod and bag only to prove that the gun and shooter can make hits at 600yds with a decent 5.56 or 7.62 DM carbine or rifle. The rest of the course is shot from positions. A low-profile level is very helpful for shooting positions when shooting even at closer ranges.
jhuskey's HardRock matches, just shoot 1 moa 20 times to clean it, from 600-1K, 5 shot at each range. No one has ever cleaned it, no one, and there has been many a well known shooter who has tried, using a .223 to 300wm, with most any piece of tacticool they wanted to. My thinking is if it was all or even mostly to do, with something as simple as canting the rifle, that course would have been cleaned long ago. Getting a shooting slot there is just a PM to DocB away.
