Well I've read through the 2014 Best Scope Shootout thread and appreciate the hugh amount of work that he has put in this experiment and the big thing I took from the thread was that I need to start checking my scope tracking. I've done simple box test before and have read all I could find on how to do a tracking test however it seems that, to be accurate, the scope needs to be rock solid and the distance needs to be spot on. So my question is how is everyone anchoring their scope for this test and how is everyone measuring the 300 feet exactly? Now I know that I can shoot the test but my rifle/skills keep me in the 3/4 moa range and I'm not sure that is good enough. Maybe it is. I've always used my rangefinder to find the 100 yards however that probably isn't close enough after reading everything that I have about the test. I don't have a surveyors chain nor access to a rangefinder such as the one that calz used so what's a good alternative? Thanks in advance.
-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Rifle Scopes Checking scope tracking
- Thread starter kansas
- Start date
I used a steel 100 ft tape and pinned out 100yds.
Backer board at gun club was within a few inches.
For a rest a nicely built up pile of sand bags and a FTW rear bag.
Where I got sloppy was in measuring MOA points on the paper.
A caliper or ruler and a level to get a good vertical line.
Backer board at gun club was within a few inches.
For a rest a nicely built up pile of sand bags and a FTW rear bag.
Where I got sloppy was in measuring MOA points on the paper.
A caliper or ruler and a level to get a good vertical line.
A surveyor's chain is a great option. The laser distance meter I used was WAAAAYYYY overkill, and I really just used it to ensure people didn't raise objections to that part of the test ... but it isn't even close to necessary. As long as you ensure there aren't major deflections in the chain, you should be good.
And this test did the same thing for me. I was shocked at the results. I just assumed that test would probably be a waste of time, but now I know ... and I'll check every scope I buy for the rest of my life.
And this test did the same thing for me. I was shocked at the results. I just assumed that test would probably be a waste of time, but now I know ... and I'll check every scope I buy for the rest of my life.
Last edited:
I assume that many are using a gun vise to hold the complete rifle. If so which brand are you using? Does it work well? I've seen here on the hide a scope mounting fixture that would also work. Is anyone using one of these for tracking?
Personally I find it is so much easier to use my laser rangefinder at the range when I check tracking. What I did was check my rangefinder against a 300ft steel tape, and once I convinced myself the rangefinder was accurate have since only used the rangefinder.
I test the scope shooting on a rifle I know is able to produce acceptable accuracy (around 1/2 moa at 100yds), and shoot 3 shots at each point to make sure the results are believable.
My primary concerns are
1) Is the elevation tracking true to around 6-7mils.
2) Are the reticle subtensions accurate.
3) Are there any issues with return to zero with repeated turns of the turret.
There are others that do much more, but those are the things I am most concerned with.
I test the scope shooting on a rifle I know is able to produce acceptable accuracy (around 1/2 moa at 100yds), and shoot 3 shots at each point to make sure the results are believable.
My primary concerns are
1) Is the elevation tracking true to around 6-7mils.
2) Are the reticle subtensions accurate.
3) Are there any issues with return to zero with repeated turns of the turret.
There are others that do much more, but those are the things I am most concerned with.
Just so everyone understands, this does not have to be done a 100yards. I routinely do this in my backyard at 25 yards. Instead of spacing the mil points at 18" apart, I space them at 4.5" to simulate 1/4th of the distance.
I also use a Monfrotto tripod with hog saddle. It is stable enough to just turn elevation and windage knobs. It gets the job done.
I also use a Monfrotto tripod with hog saddle. It is stable enough to just turn elevation and windage knobs. It gets the job done.
In my opinion, you need a fixture onto which you mount the scope, and can clamp onto a table or shooting bench. It helps to have the fixture actually contact the benchtop via 3 fine-thread bolts (leveling jackscrews) so that you can put a level across the pic rail of your fixture and level it.
Yes, you can perform a test under live fire, but they you are adding marksmanship, ammunition quality and rifle repeatabililty to the list of variables. It's really best to eliminate those and test JUST the scope.
Yes, you can perform a test under live fire, but they you are adding marksmanship, ammunition quality and rifle repeatabililty to the list of variables. It's really best to eliminate those and test JUST the scope.
Did you ever find a scope you didn't have to return? Mil spacing should be .9" at 25 yards by my math. Or do you mean your mil "points" are 5 mils apart? But, speaking of "points", you bring up a good point that the test doesn't have to be done at 100 yards.
Yes i should have been more specific. Every 5 mils is 4.5" which is how i space them. Every 5 mils. My fault people.
I finally got a gun vise so I could do this test. Ended up ordering a Hyskor from Cabelas. Not ideal however I liked that it had a strap to hold the gun down and elevation screws to level the whole thing. Ideally I think that it would be best to have a fixture with a picatinny rail that you could attach your scope and rings to and that you could bolt down or anchor firmly to a bench however I was pleased with how stable this setup was. I was able to return to zero time after time so I'm not sure how much more a fixture would tell me in a test. Overall everything was repeatable. I started at 75 feet since that is an easy distance to measure accurately however I found the Razor Gen I wouldn't focus that close so I moved out the 50 yards, which was still easy to measure accurately and probably gave me a more accurate test. I was setting the vise up in my garage so 100 yards was going to be hard to pull off. I used marks at 3.6 inches which works out to 2 mils per mark at 50 yards. I used enough marks so I could easily measure 20 mils. Overall everything was repeatable. I had three scopes to test and wasn't surprised by the results after reading the Scope Shootout test that calz did. The Gen I Razor was .1 mil low from 2 mils to 8 mils and .2 mils low from 10 mils to 16 mils and .3 mils off at 18 mils. My son's ATACR was dead on until 8 mils then was low .1 mil from 8-10 and .2 mils from 12-14 and .3 mils from 16-18. My new Gen II Razor 3-18 was dead on from 2 mils clear through 20 mils. I repeated each test several times while in the vise then tore everything down and went to another scope repeating each test twice. Everything repeated on all three scopes so I feel that my test are accurate. The information on the Gen I Razor coincided with my range result closely and we haven't shot the ATACR enough to know how well this information relates to our dope. The Gen II Razor hasn't had but 10 rounds under it so it may perform differently after being ran a couple of seasons. The ATACR is fairly new with less than 200 rounds under it and the Razor Gen I is a couple of years old with 1000-1500 rounds under it.
As I said earlier I'm not surprised by the results and not really disappointed in them. I'm very pleased with the accurate tracking of the Gen II though. With this test I was also able to verify the 1/2 power of the ATACR so we know how to hold for wind at less than full power. Also was able to verify how close the focus knob marks are for both the Vortex scopes. The ATACR doesn't put distance numbers on their focus knobs. Also all mil marks in the reticle were right on the mark. I did limited testing on windage which was on the money out to 2 mils however I usually hold for wind so I wasn't very concerned with those measurements.
I guess the real reason I haven't tried this test in the past was I wasn't sure how much effort it would take to make the test accurate but was pleased with results with not a lot of effort or expense. I feel like I learned a lot from the time I spent in testing and actually enjoyed it all. I think it will give me more confidence in my equipment KNOWING how they will perform. It's easy to lose confidence in you shooting if your shots start falling short or high of your dope and you haven't checked your tracking.
As I said earlier I'm not surprised by the results and not really disappointed in them. I'm very pleased with the accurate tracking of the Gen II though. With this test I was also able to verify the 1/2 power of the ATACR so we know how to hold for wind at less than full power. Also was able to verify how close the focus knob marks are for both the Vortex scopes. The ATACR doesn't put distance numbers on their focus knobs. Also all mil marks in the reticle were right on the mark. I did limited testing on windage which was on the money out to 2 mils however I usually hold for wind so I wasn't very concerned with those measurements.
I guess the real reason I haven't tried this test in the past was I wasn't sure how much effort it would take to make the test accurate but was pleased with results with not a lot of effort or expense. I feel like I learned a lot from the time I spent in testing and actually enjoyed it all. I think it will give me more confidence in my equipment KNOWING how they will perform. It's easy to lose confidence in you shooting if your shots start falling short or high of your dope and you haven't checked your tracking.
Because doing so introduces several new variables such as rifle accuracy and consistency, ammo accuracy and consistency, and marksmanship.
A live fire test is certainly better than nothing (way better), but its simply not as good as a collimation as done in this example.
Do the math. One mil at 100 yards is 3.6 inches so one tenth mil (one click) is .36 inches. My rifle is a solid 3/4 moa rifle so if I center the group, which is hard to do in itself, then some hits will be one click above and some hits will be one click below the mark. It's hard to tell if the scope or the gun. Plus the fact that to test 20 mils you're going to need 6 of berm. I don't have that. And with 3 scopes to check we are talking about $10-20 worth of ammo. I've ran box test by shooting a target but it's just doesn't give as much correct information as this did.
Because you can't detect this problem by shooting!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x_xJ-3NH8JM&list=UUvjdJ1CUvaJpPNfJSmm9cSw
Most scopes tested strayed by 0.2 mils at 100 yds. Even S&B and the rest.
You wouldn't detect 0.2 mils by shooting. It could be wind, it could be you. How do you know it's the scope? That's 7 inches at 1K yards. That's a lot!
and that can be a miss!
if you are an extreme precision shooter, who shoots extended distances, or matches, 0.2 mils off at 100 yds is something you might want to know.
Sometimes as you ll see if you look at all the scopes tested by the maker of that video, some are off by 0.1 mils right, but not left. Some up but not down.
Some even jump like that vortex you see up there. Doing it by strapping the scope saves you ammo and gives you precision.
In MOA days, I had a scope that when dialed to 9 Minutes would actually give me 10. That's a full inch at 100 yds. So knowing that, I would dial 9 when I needed 10 minutes.
Someone once said to me that most of the time what people think is truing is actually the scope not giving them what they expect, and instead of knowing that they correct it with FPS. Think about it. Now if you are a hunter, 0.2 mils off will not matter
Last edited:
WHAT?
You personally can detect whether or not a scope is off by 0.2 mils left, right up or down at 100 yards by shooting? Really? that's 0.72 inches. Assuming you have a 0.25 MO rifle your scope could be
off by 0 inches all up to to 0.47 inches and anything in between because 0.72 - 0.25 = 0.47
So how would you know ur scope is not off by 0, 0.1, 0.3, but infact 0.47 MOA?
Again a 0.25 MOA rifle doesn't always shoot 0.25 MOA, you might shoot 0.1 MOA at times, 0.2 at others. So from shot to shot you will not dectect the exact 0.72 inches off from your scope but rather 0.5, or 0.4 because your rifle is shooting 0.1, 0.2 sometimes for a maximum of 0.25 MOA. So again how would you know? And that's considering a perfect wind call and perfect marksmanship because wind a 4mph mind will get the bullet off course by 0.1 mils, which alone will f*ck up your detection of the 0.2 mils, but let's leave that aside. How would you detect 0.2 mils again by just shooting?
With a 0.5 MOA rifle it's even worse, cause rifle error will cover your scope error, and that's not even factoring shooter or wind error. Can you explain how exactly you would pin point the 0.2 mils or 0.72 moa?
Last edited:
Rather than waste barrel life shooting groups at 100, I run tracking tests with a laser boresight. Setup the tall target, sandbag the rifle on a small point on the bottom of the target and mark the laser center. Dial up 5 mil and when you are centered on the aiming point, mark again, repeat every 5 mils to full travel. Now you are checking actual travel with precision and you don't need a fixture or a place to shoot. Certainly you can shoot, but it's not a better way to get this done.
I would however avoid doing a test at ranges shorter than 100 yards, as the margin for error in your measurements gets way to small. At 25 yards, .1 Mil = .09 inches, so 20 mils = 18". 18.18" would be a 1% error in tracking. it's going to be pretty hard to see .18 inches over 18" at 25 yards.
I would however avoid doing a test at ranges shorter than 100 yards, as the margin for error in your measurements gets way to small. At 25 yards, .1 Mil = .09 inches, so 20 mils = 18". 18.18" would be a 1% error in tracking. it's going to be pretty hard to see .18 inches over 18" at 25 yards.
Apparently none of us do.
Anyway, the beauty here is we can all decide for ourselves how best to accomplish this task - or if needs to be done at all.
Continue with your live-fire testing regimen if it's working for you. Me? I'll collimate by putting the scope in a fixture as the video above shows.
I guess today is argument day!
Can anyone help me get it? Because again if my rifle produces 0.25 MOA maximum error, it is a 0.25 MOA rifle. But sometimes it shoots 0.1 MOA, other times 0.15, other times 0.20 MOA, but never more than 0.25MO
My scope is off my 0.72 MOA. The only way I can detect the 0.72 MOA error from my scope is to:
Exactly know before a shot what accuracy my rifle is going to produce, which is impossible unless you have a rifle shooting in the zeros, you are a perfect marksman and you got the wind super right, and the ammo is exactly what it's supposed to be, no BC variation, powder weight differences and temperature differences.
So you would say because I have psychic powers, even though I have a 0.25 MOA rifle, I know this next shot will be exactly 0.1 MOA, but since I got 0.82 MOA, therefore my scope is off by 0.72 MOA which is 0.2 mils.
In that case you would have correctly determined your scope error, but that involves knowing in advance using psychic powers what the precise performance of that rifle will be exactly, precisely on every actual shot! And that's why you can't detect a 0.2 mil error by shooting! And again I didn't include wind or marksmanship, because if I do then it's not even worth the debate! Ontop of that, you have to do it left, right up and down for every click on your scope. Because the error can show up at click 20 left, but not click 19 left. So again, I don't see how you figure all that out. I just don't
You can say 0.2 mils doesn't matter, even though it's still 7 inches at 1K, but don't tell me that you can detect it by shooting. It's physically impossible!
Strap the scope to a table and dial, and look at where the reticle points. You save ammo, and you get a definitive answer for every click on your scope.
Can anyone help me get it? Because again if my rifle produces 0.25 MOA maximum error, it is a 0.25 MOA rifle. But sometimes it shoots 0.1 MOA, other times 0.15, other times 0.20 MOA, but never more than 0.25MO
My scope is off my 0.72 MOA. The only way I can detect the 0.72 MOA error from my scope is to:
Exactly know before a shot what accuracy my rifle is going to produce, which is impossible unless you have a rifle shooting in the zeros, you are a perfect marksman and you got the wind super right, and the ammo is exactly what it's supposed to be, no BC variation, powder weight differences and temperature differences.
So you would say because I have psychic powers, even though I have a 0.25 MOA rifle, I know this next shot will be exactly 0.1 MOA, but since I got 0.82 MOA, therefore my scope is off by 0.72 MOA which is 0.2 mils.
In that case you would have correctly determined your scope error, but that involves knowing in advance using psychic powers what the precise performance of that rifle will be exactly, precisely on every actual shot! And that's why you can't detect a 0.2 mil error by shooting! And again I didn't include wind or marksmanship, because if I do then it's not even worth the debate! Ontop of that, you have to do it left, right up and down for every click on your scope. Because the error can show up at click 20 left, but not click 19 left. So again, I don't see how you figure all that out. I just don't
You can say 0.2 mils doesn't matter, even though it's still 7 inches at 1K, but don't tell me that you can detect it by shooting. It's physically impossible!
Strap the scope to a table and dial, and look at where the reticle points. You save ammo, and you get a definitive answer for every click on your scope.
Last edited:
Not to derail the thread, but can I please ask where you are shooting out past 2000m? I'm in the Bay Area as well, and I don't know where to find a range past 200 yards around here. I know that Sacramento has at least 1000 yards, but you need to be a member.
Thanks in advance for the information.
I appreciate the response. I'm new to all of this and being new usually means catching shit or worse.
I knew about Sac from reading here. ( I read 1k X's more than I would ever think of posting. Just trying to learn). I know of Coalinga, only by name because a friend of mine shoots there from time to time. I haven't been able to find any information about the range anywhere. (Not from lack of trying)
I missed the boat about getting into shooting years ago when we were all growing up. My friends and their dads were into hunting and me and my dad were into sports and racing. I was either in the middle of an organized sport during the day or wrenching on race cars at nights.
If and when I did get the go shooting, I hit whatever I aimed at.
It wasn't until 2 years ago when California started tightening up the stranglehold on the gun laws that I became aware it was time to at least get some things into my possession before it was too late. Being left handed didn't help much. I picked up a really nice Browning Satori from a client I was building a house for. He had hundreds of guns and literally gave me a left handed $3k shotgun for $50. Soon after I bought a Sig P226 because handguns laws were tightening. When getting that, I learned what all the fuss was about black guns and built an AR15 from a stripped lower. That lead me to the Sniper's Hide and the next thing I know, I am the proud owner of a GAP-10.
I appreciate the offer to show me some of the places you shoot. I would hate to disappoint due to lack of experience. All of the guys I mentioned before all seem very jaded to the fact that they have been hunting and shooting for years and they get bored going to a range. So I've been on my own and now sort of self taught. I probably have far too many bad habits already.
I do hit what I shoot at, and I do that pretty well. But lack the experience of any distance or having to deal with wind. I also know I have the limit of shooting a .308 with box match ammo.
I ride my motorcycles out to places in Nevada frequently, but have very little knowlege as far as pulling into open space and setting up something to shoot.
If you ever get bored and need someone to help set up or want to head to an established square range, please let me know.
Thanks
Sorry for the hijack.....
I knew about Sac from reading here. ( I read 1k X's more than I would ever think of posting. Just trying to learn). I know of Coalinga, only by name because a friend of mine shoots there from time to time. I haven't been able to find any information about the range anywhere. (Not from lack of trying)
I missed the boat about getting into shooting years ago when we were all growing up. My friends and their dads were into hunting and me and my dad were into sports and racing. I was either in the middle of an organized sport during the day or wrenching on race cars at nights.
If and when I did get the go shooting, I hit whatever I aimed at.
It wasn't until 2 years ago when California started tightening up the stranglehold on the gun laws that I became aware it was time to at least get some things into my possession before it was too late. Being left handed didn't help much. I picked up a really nice Browning Satori from a client I was building a house for. He had hundreds of guns and literally gave me a left handed $3k shotgun for $50. Soon after I bought a Sig P226 because handguns laws were tightening. When getting that, I learned what all the fuss was about black guns and built an AR15 from a stripped lower. That lead me to the Sniper's Hide and the next thing I know, I am the proud owner of a GAP-10.
I appreciate the offer to show me some of the places you shoot. I would hate to disappoint due to lack of experience. All of the guys I mentioned before all seem very jaded to the fact that they have been hunting and shooting for years and they get bored going to a range. So I've been on my own and now sort of self taught. I probably have far too many bad habits already.
I do hit what I shoot at, and I do that pretty well. But lack the experience of any distance or having to deal with wind. I also know I have the limit of shooting a .308 with box match ammo.
I ride my motorcycles out to places in Nevada frequently, but have very little knowlege as far as pulling into open space and setting up something to shoot.
If you ever get bored and need someone to help set up or want to head to an established square range, please let me know.
Thanks
Sorry for the hijack.....
Sorry if this is a dumb question, but if you test a $1000+ scope and get results like in that video of the Razor, do you send it back in for repair, or is that just as good as it gets and you note somewhere the corrections you need from the dialed elevation, and move on?
Funny thing is, if you read the comments to that video? Vortex actually commented and asked the user to send the scope back. In fact Vortex was the first entity to comment on that video, which is very interesting, and which is why I encourage everyone to test their scopes. It keeps scope manufacturers on their toes. Imagine blaming your marksmanship for years, losing points in matches for something that technically isn't your fault. Or for that matter drawing an erroneous drop table based on "actual" bullet impact when your scope is lying to you!
Now, PrecisionRifleBlog did a test of a lot of high end scopes, and they found that most scopes were off by 0.1 mil, even S&B, and all the big dogs. Some were worse!
Those tests tell you nothing is really perfect, except for Henny, Khales, and their second Mark 6, because their first Mark 6 was so off, they had to send it back. The second was perfect. So again this seems to be on a scope to scope basis. The lesson is test your scope, it's easy! And the other lesson is, even if your scope is off, as long as you know that, you can under-compensate or over-compensate.
0.1 mils might not matter, but one should always remove predictable errors wherever they can, because wind and marksmanship are out there to get ya!
Vortex's comment to the video:
Hey guys, we saw this video and just from what we were seeing in your demonstration, it led us to believe that there is probably something wrong with this scope. I was shocked to see it since the Razor has been such a good scope for us, but we want to get this taken care of. Please give our customer service center a call and they can get this scope one in for a look. The number is 800-426-0048 ext. 6. Thanks, guys, and sorry for the inconvenience. - Jimmy, [email protected]
Last edited:
I want to be out of the equation. One less variable to confirm and mechanics are what they are...
I have to give a hand to Vortex. Like many, I have issues with scopes from several high end mfg's and nobody seems as responsive as Vortex.
I had an erector on a Razor that would track up and down very well. You could then shoot it and it would hold the zero, but when I ran it up shot it, then latter shot it at zero it did not. Then the readjusted to zero held while shooting at that new zero. Customer service seem very interested in the scope as they told me had not heard of this exact problem. After a few minutes of discussion they asked me if I wouldn't mind taking off my scope leaving the rings intact and sending the whole unit back so they could shoot it. I don't know if they actually did, but I was impressed with there attention to detail.
Anyway, turns out they actually diagnosed a failure of my high dollar snap on toque wrench! (I still have the POS, even after it was sent Snap on and returned still malfunctioning). Anyway, they replaced the erector that was sticking and the scope has been working ever sense.. Still needs a correction factor of 1.021
Jt
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD[/QUOTE]
Let me guess....you torqued your rings too tight? They said this to every one I know that had issues with a razor. They must have some thin tubes cause anything over 15 inlb caused issues with the erector and parallax.
I agree! But ontop of that, now they have the VIP thing, which is crazy!!! tells you that they are serious about their jobs. It doesn't matter if you damaged the scope, they will take care of it! That's just crazy!
Last edited:
I want to be out of the equation. One less variable to confirm and mechanics are what they are...
Are you kidding me? Did you bolt the thing to concrete? Can we send you scopes for eval? You should be the resident scope evaluator! You even painted the damn thing!
By the way, here's the link to the mechanical test: Tactical Scopes: Mechanical Performance Part 1 | PrecisionRifleBlog.com
Scroll down to see results!
Last edited:
Similar threads
