-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Range Report Rem 700 308 Win handloads - range report
- Thread starter dmbleess
- Start date
Re: Rem 700 308 Win handloads - range report
I probably wouldnt go with the NF Benchrest scope unless that is a dedicated BR gun....the 1/8 MOA adjustments are to small and the elevation travel sucks in the BR models. Id go for the NXS
I probably wouldnt go with the NF Benchrest scope unless that is a dedicated BR gun....the 1/8 MOA adjustments are to small and the elevation travel sucks in the BR models. Id go for the NXS
Re: Rem 700 308 Win handloads - range report
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: deadly0311</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I probably wouldnt go with the NF Benchrest scope unless that is a dedicated BR gun....the 1/8 MOA adjustments are to small and the elevation travel sucks in the BR models. Id go for the NXS </div></div>
After reading a bunch of glowing reviews like this:
"I have this scope on my 50 BMG and can easily shoot 1000 yard targets and beyond very clear at all powers and extremely durable would recommend to anyone."
I suspect you are wrong. I have yet to see anything less than a 5/5 star review. I personally want the finest adjustment possible for 600-1000m shooting. I have yet to see a reliable report of lack of adjustment. Regardless, I will also be mounting on the recommended 20moa base.
I have regular access to a 600yd range and periodic access to 1000m plus ranges.
For me it is effectively a benchrest / F-class rifle scope but I have seen no report that it would be unsuitable as a long range varmint scope.
For the money saved, I have yet to see a reason to pay more for the NXS. The easier access to controls are convenient only when the rifle sees a wider range of users than this one will see.
The focus and parallax controls are set once and forget for my session purposes. I don't have two users trading it back and forth. The height of the turrets may be a bit of an annoyance but minimal and acceptable for the trades of savings and finer adjust.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: deadly0311</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I probably wouldnt go with the NF Benchrest scope unless that is a dedicated BR gun....the 1/8 MOA adjustments are to small and the elevation travel sucks in the BR models. Id go for the NXS </div></div>
After reading a bunch of glowing reviews like this:
"I have this scope on my 50 BMG and can easily shoot 1000 yard targets and beyond very clear at all powers and extremely durable would recommend to anyone."
I suspect you are wrong. I have yet to see anything less than a 5/5 star review. I personally want the finest adjustment possible for 600-1000m shooting. I have yet to see a reliable report of lack of adjustment. Regardless, I will also be mounting on the recommended 20moa base.
I have regular access to a 600yd range and periodic access to 1000m plus ranges.
For me it is effectively a benchrest / F-class rifle scope but I have seen no report that it would be unsuitable as a long range varmint scope.
For the money saved, I have yet to see a reason to pay more for the NXS. The easier access to controls are convenient only when the rifle sees a wider range of users than this one will see.
The focus and parallax controls are set once and forget for my session purposes. I don't have two users trading it back and forth. The height of the turrets may be a bit of an annoyance but minimal and acceptable for the trades of savings and finer adjust.
Re: Rem 700 308 Win handloads - range report
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sturgeon</div><div class="ubbcode-body">...I suspect you are wrong. </div></div>
He's not wrong.
The adjustments are 1/8 moa, and the elevation travel is limited. Only 50 moa on the 8-32x56, and only 40 moa on the 12-42x56.
Just know that going in.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sturgeon</div><div class="ubbcode-body">...I suspect you are wrong. </div></div>
He's not wrong.
The adjustments are 1/8 moa, and the elevation travel is limited. Only 50 moa on the 8-32x56, and only 40 moa on the 12-42x56.
Just know that going in.
Re: Rem 700 308 Win handloads - range report
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sturgeon</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: deadly0311</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I probably wouldnt go with the NF Benchrest scope unless that is a dedicated BR gun....the 1/8 MOA adjustments are to small and the elevation travel sucks in the BR models. Id go for the NXS </div></div>
After reading a bunch of glowing reviews like this:
"I have this scope on my 50 BMG and can easily shoot 1000 yard targets and beyond very clear at all powers and extremely durable would recommend to anyone."
I suspect you are wrong. I have yet to see anything less than a 5/5 star review. I personally want the finest adjustment possible for 600-1000m shooting. I have yet to see a reliable report of lack of adjustment. Regardless, I will also be mounting on the recommended 20moa base.
I have regular access to a 600yd range and periodic access to 1000m plus ranges.
For me it is effectively a benchrest / F-class rifle scope but I have seen no report that it would be unsuitable as a long range varmint scope.
For the money saved, I have yet to see a reason to pay more for the NXS. The easier access to controls are convenient only when the rifle sees a wider range of users than this one will see.
The focus and parallax controls are set once and forget for my session purposes. I don't have two users trading it back and forth. The height of the turrets may be a bit of an annoyance but minimal and acceptable for the trades of savings and finer adjust.
</div></div>
The NF BR model is just that, it's for benchrest, I think you may be in the wrong place, Deadly0311's advice is spot on for a Practical\Tactical rifle, if the later is your goal, show up at a match with the BR NF and you will get your ass handed to you.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sturgeon</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: deadly0311</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I probably wouldnt go with the NF Benchrest scope unless that is a dedicated BR gun....the 1/8 MOA adjustments are to small and the elevation travel sucks in the BR models. Id go for the NXS </div></div>
After reading a bunch of glowing reviews like this:
"I have this scope on my 50 BMG and can easily shoot 1000 yard targets and beyond very clear at all powers and extremely durable would recommend to anyone."
I suspect you are wrong. I have yet to see anything less than a 5/5 star review. I personally want the finest adjustment possible for 600-1000m shooting. I have yet to see a reliable report of lack of adjustment. Regardless, I will also be mounting on the recommended 20moa base.
I have regular access to a 600yd range and periodic access to 1000m plus ranges.
For me it is effectively a benchrest / F-class rifle scope but I have seen no report that it would be unsuitable as a long range varmint scope.
For the money saved, I have yet to see a reason to pay more for the NXS. The easier access to controls are convenient only when the rifle sees a wider range of users than this one will see.
The focus and parallax controls are set once and forget for my session purposes. I don't have two users trading it back and forth. The height of the turrets may be a bit of an annoyance but minimal and acceptable for the trades of savings and finer adjust.
</div></div>
The NF BR model is just that, it's for benchrest, I think you may be in the wrong place, Deadly0311's advice is spot on for a Practical\Tactical rifle, if the later is your goal, show up at a match with the BR NF and you will get your ass handed to you.
Re: Rem 700 308 Win handloads - range report
1/8th on the shooting range is fine. Out in the field, no way. Too many clicks to keep count of..You going to double every thing you have read or know.
1/8th on the shooting range is fine. Out in the field, no way. Too many clicks to keep count of..You going to double every thing you have read or know.
Re: Rem 700 308 Win handloads - range report
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: usmcMT</div><div class="ubbcode-body">1/8th on the shooting range is fine. Out in the field, no way. Too many clicks to keep count of..You going to double every thing you have read or know. </div></div>
Whoa, whoa, whoa, don't get so excited. I'm not active military or LEO. I'm no SWAT operator.
Please read my post. "F-Class and Varmint". My world is not "Practical/Tactical" nor urban high-speed-short-range-multiple-critical target engagement, nor is my competition.
Like I said, I am closer to being a plinker / hunter / casual competitor seeking high accuracy for F-Class and low-criticality varmint. For what *I* do, I think this scope would be more than suitable.
For paper, I am looking for closest to center on single-range target at mid-long range 550m+ out to effective range of the rifle.
For varmint, I am looking for high accuracy on relatively small targets at the longest range possible - 400m-800m or better.
As for the math, all you would have to do is think in terms of half-clicks if memory is a problem. The math involved in ballistics is a LOT tougher than a simple "x2 or /2" so THAT is a lame argument.
I *can* see that COUNTING double the clicks would be irritating and slightly slower for adjustment, but that is not what you said and the delay is certainly acceptable for varmint shooting where you have known distances, low stress, and adequate time. For my fixed distance targets, it is a non-issue after you set it once.
All competition around here that I am aware of is fixed distance for rote bullseye accuracy, not multiple distance for hitting an area object target like a popper.
I have no idea what competition you engage in, but if it entails multiple engagements quickly at varying distances, then it is no classic sniper competition. Classic sniper is single shot cold bore.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: MrSwede</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If you buy the 1/8th moa BR NF for practical/tactical long range, someone is in for a good buy when you sell it second-hand, hardly used, some months later.. </div></div>
If I use it for the purposes outlined above, I would think that it would be well used and never sold.
If I ever found other competition where I needed to be able to use my optics for the purposes you two ASSUME I was using it for, then that would come after I had time to save up enough money to buy a second scope and probably another rifle.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 427Cobra</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The NF BR model is just that, it's for benchrest, I think you may be in the wrong place, Deadly0311's advice is spot on for a Practical\Tactical rifle, if the later is your goal, show up at a match with the BR NF and you will get your ass handed to you. </div></div>
Not ALL snipers are urban SWAT. (Urban SWAT IMHO are more accurately termed a Designated Marksman)
As I understand it, true TRADITIONAL snipers take HIGHLY ACCURATE single shots and have a relatively long time to set up for them.
You have to add time and adjustment to the mix to make your (flawed) point.
In a pure *accuracy* competition, I don't see how a more finely adjustable scope would be any less desirable than one that is less adjustable.
Having said that, I'd say an argument could be made that YOU are in the wrong place.
(Just kidding, but I couldn't resist
)
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: deadly0311</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I probably wouldn't go with the NF Benchrest scope unless that is a dedicated BR gun....the 1/8 MOA adjustments are to small and the elevation travel sucks in the BR models. I'd go for the NXS </div></div>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: MontanaMarine</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sturgeon</div><div class="ubbcode-body">...I suspect you are wrong. </div></div>
He's not wrong.
The adjustments are 1/8 moa, and the elevation travel is limited. Only 50 moa on the 8-32x56, and only 40 moa on the 12-42x56.
Just know that going in. </div></div>
These are the two good recommendations. I think for my purposes this will be adequate with the proper 20MOA rail. Enough that I am willing to bet on it.
Especially after reading the review of the user with the 50BMG shooting 1000m or more.
If I ever do go longer than 800m, then that means I am shooting a better rifle than I have now, and I will be able to experiment with this cheaper scope to see if I will have to replace it on the longer reach rifle. If I do, then this one will simply stay on the 308 Win.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: usmcMT</div><div class="ubbcode-body">1/8th on the shooting range is fine. Out in the field, no way. Too many clicks to keep count of..You going to double every thing you have read or know. </div></div>
Whoa, whoa, whoa, don't get so excited. I'm not active military or LEO. I'm no SWAT operator.
Please read my post. "F-Class and Varmint". My world is not "Practical/Tactical" nor urban high-speed-short-range-multiple-critical target engagement, nor is my competition.
Like I said, I am closer to being a plinker / hunter / casual competitor seeking high accuracy for F-Class and low-criticality varmint. For what *I* do, I think this scope would be more than suitable.
For paper, I am looking for closest to center on single-range target at mid-long range 550m+ out to effective range of the rifle.
For varmint, I am looking for high accuracy on relatively small targets at the longest range possible - 400m-800m or better.
As for the math, all you would have to do is think in terms of half-clicks if memory is a problem. The math involved in ballistics is a LOT tougher than a simple "x2 or /2" so THAT is a lame argument.
I *can* see that COUNTING double the clicks would be irritating and slightly slower for adjustment, but that is not what you said and the delay is certainly acceptable for varmint shooting where you have known distances, low stress, and adequate time. For my fixed distance targets, it is a non-issue after you set it once.
All competition around here that I am aware of is fixed distance for rote bullseye accuracy, not multiple distance for hitting an area object target like a popper.
I have no idea what competition you engage in, but if it entails multiple engagements quickly at varying distances, then it is no classic sniper competition. Classic sniper is single shot cold bore.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: MrSwede</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If you buy the 1/8th moa BR NF for practical/tactical long range, someone is in for a good buy when you sell it second-hand, hardly used, some months later.. </div></div>
If I use it for the purposes outlined above, I would think that it would be well used and never sold.
If I ever found other competition where I needed to be able to use my optics for the purposes you two ASSUME I was using it for, then that would come after I had time to save up enough money to buy a second scope and probably another rifle.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 427Cobra</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The NF BR model is just that, it's for benchrest, I think you may be in the wrong place, Deadly0311's advice is spot on for a Practical\Tactical rifle, if the later is your goal, show up at a match with the BR NF and you will get your ass handed to you. </div></div>
Not ALL snipers are urban SWAT. (Urban SWAT IMHO are more accurately termed a Designated Marksman)
As I understand it, true TRADITIONAL snipers take HIGHLY ACCURATE single shots and have a relatively long time to set up for them.
You have to add time and adjustment to the mix to make your (flawed) point.
In a pure *accuracy* competition, I don't see how a more finely adjustable scope would be any less desirable than one that is less adjustable.
Having said that, I'd say an argument could be made that YOU are in the wrong place.
(Just kidding, but I couldn't resist
)<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: deadly0311</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I probably wouldn't go with the NF Benchrest scope unless that is a dedicated BR gun....the 1/8 MOA adjustments are to small and the elevation travel sucks in the BR models. I'd go for the NXS </div></div>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: MontanaMarine</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sturgeon</div><div class="ubbcode-body">...I suspect you are wrong. </div></div>
He's not wrong.
The adjustments are 1/8 moa, and the elevation travel is limited. Only 50 moa on the 8-32x56, and only 40 moa on the 12-42x56.
Just know that going in. </div></div>
These are the two good recommendations. I think for my purposes this will be adequate with the proper 20MOA rail. Enough that I am willing to bet on it.
Especially after reading the review of the user with the 50BMG shooting 1000m or more.
If I ever do go longer than 800m, then that means I am shooting a better rifle than I have now, and I will be able to experiment with this cheaper scope to see if I will have to replace it on the longer reach rifle. If I do, then this one will simply stay on the 308 Win.
Re: Rem 700 308 Win handloads - range report
I hope you're not planning on getting a NF 12-42X on a 20moa base. That combination will not reliably get out to 1000yds. I've seen them run out of elevation travel. The 12-42X has a very limited amount of reticle travel. You would need a 25-30moa base to be able to track out to 1Kyds, but then you would not be able to obtain a short range Zero closer than about 250-300yds.
I hope you're not planning on getting a NF 12-42X on a 20moa base. That combination will not reliably get out to 1000yds. I've seen them run out of elevation travel. The 12-42X has a very limited amount of reticle travel. You would need a 25-30moa base to be able to track out to 1Kyds, but then you would not be able to obtain a short range Zero closer than about 250-300yds.
Re: Rem 700 308 Win handloads - range report
The OP already has his mind set for the said scope, so any other recommendation will either be "wrong" or you are in the "wrong place". I said let it be, NF makes a great scope, the OP will make the 2nd owner of that scope a happy man.
The OP already has his mind set for the said scope, so any other recommendation will either be "wrong" or you are in the "wrong place". I said let it be, NF makes a great scope, the OP will make the 2nd owner of that scope a happy man.
Re: Rem 700 308 Win handloads - range report
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: buffybuster</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I hope you're not planning on getting a NF 12-42X on a 20moa base. That combination will not reliably get out to 1000yds. I've seen them run out of elevation travel. The 12-42X has a very limited amount of reticle travel. You would need a 25-30moa base to be able to track out to 1Kyds, but then you would not be able to obtain a short range Zero closer than about 250-300yds. </div></div>
You guys have convinced me that you simply cannot READ.
*POP QUIZ*
What is my PRIMARY range?
A 200yd
B 600yd
C 1000yd
Get off my ass for the EXTREMES and tell me why this isn't the best scope for my PRIMARY usage. The rest, (if I get it to work) is simply cake, BONUS capability. I have no illusions or expectations, but now it'd sure be funny if I got it to perform despite the naysaying.
If I want to shoot 75-300m, I'll shoot my AR-15.
If I want to shoot over 900m, I'll buy a 50bmg, CheyTac, or something similar.
This is a Rem 700 308 Win. What is the sweet spot experts? Hmmm? Good God. Quit giving me hell and think for a minute. Right tool for the job.
BTW, specs for NXS vs Benchrest
Sources:
http://nightforceoptics.com/nightforcesc...__12-42x56.html
http://nightforceoptics.com/nightforcescopes/SCOPES_OVERVIEW/BENCHREST_MODELS/benchrest_models.html
12-42x56
NXS 45moa elev. 35moa wind.
BR 40moa elev. 40moa wind.
(for 5 moa, I save about $400-500 - ** - and 5moa doesn't qualify as "sucks" in my book)
8-32x56
NXS 65moa elev. 45moa wind.
BR 50moa elev. 50moa wind.
(not interested, I want the extra magnification)
It isn't that I have preconceived notions, it is that I keep hearing unsubstantiated arguments based on flawed assumptions. You pick out a few words, take them out of context and go bananas.
Just because this scope doesn't match YOUR usage, it doesn't mean that it will not suit MY usage.
No one seems to be reading my posts entirely or basing their recommendations on MY usage. It isn't like I am not providing enough DETAIL.
Provide some USEFUL advice, not flame bait.
= = = = = # # # # # by the numbers # # # # # = = = = =
.308 Win 168gr Amax bc .475
2544fps 44.1 gr Varget
20moa rail (Effective 80 clicks (160 for me))
moves effective boresight / scope alignment to 600yds impact
(conservative estimate)
plus
travel of the scope = 20moa (half total travel) = another 80 clicks (160 for me)
moves theoretical max deflection to just over 900yds
(conservative estimate - 950 should be possible, 975 *may* be possible)
Anything beyond will require use of mil-dot drop calculations below center as alternate aim points or an alternate reticle situated below center.
I am looking at the NP-1RR which has four dropped alternate crosshairs which gains me a little more adjustment down if I need it. (About 5moa at max magnification)
Actual numbers = 600yds is 138 clicks (1/8) from 100yd zero (less than 20moa [160 clicks] and 650 is 157 for reference)
600-900yds = 142 clicks (1/8) which is again less than 160. This leaves me a theoretical 22+18 = 40 clicks (1/8) = 5moa to the stops for "fudge factor". Add another potential 5moa from the dropped crosshairs.
"True" full travel for distance = 320 clicks (160 adjust + 160 rail) equates out to a theoretical 975 yards on the ragged edge with this round. [about 1160 fps @ 975 yds]
Push comes to shove, I may even have some room to make the handload a little hotter to gain some more velocity, distance, and flatten the trajectory just a bit.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: buffybuster</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I hope you're not planning on getting a NF 12-42X on a 20moa base. That combination will not reliably get out to 1000yds. I've seen them run out of elevation travel. The 12-42X has a very limited amount of reticle travel. You would need a 25-30moa base to be able to track out to 1Kyds, but then you would not be able to obtain a short range Zero closer than about 250-300yds. </div></div>
Since the rail shims the scope to nearly zero at 640yd, I have travel 20moa each direction which gets me down to below theoretical 100 yards (-153 clicks) on one extreme end, and above 950 yds (+157 clicks) on the other. Add in the extra distance attainable by using dropped crosshairs in the reticle? Possible 5moa = 40 clicks = 197clicks = approx 1025yds - my highest calculation is 188clicks at 1000yds [1144 fps - nearly subsonic]
Well, maybe now you can see the source of my skepticism.
The math doesn't agree with your theories and reported experiences so far.
I won't know practical until I mount it and start shooting it, but the 20 moa rail should put me dead center in the sweet spot (650 yds / 600m) for this round. 600m is EXACTLY where I want to be. 600yds is my max distance at my home range. Based on hard MATH, I have plenty of adjustment *both* directions from that base for some SERIOUS fudge factor and potential for extra fun and utility.
Why is this bad again? A *little* inconvenience traded for finer tuning and a MUCH cheaper price?
There's no demonstrated game breaker here so far.
The complaints lodged don't pass muster and don't hold up against the math. Math says the adjustment is adequate, there are excellent markings on the turrets to count clicks quickly, and no one can tell me anything other than "you'll be sorry" and "you'll rip it off and sell it" for any substantial reason. I'm portrayed as being in denial, yet no one can demonstrate the math is flawed.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 427Cobra</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The NF BR model is just that, it's for benchrest, I think you may be in the wrong place, Deadly0311's advice is spot on for a Practical\Tactical rifle, if the later is your goal, show up at a match with the BR NF and you will get your ass handed to you. </div></div>
Why? The "Benchrest" designation means it can't be used for anything else?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: MrSwede</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If you buy the 1/8th moa BR NF for practical/tactical long range, someone is in for a good buy when you sell it second-hand, hardly used, some months later.. </div></div>
Why? The math refutes the other reasons given. what is yours?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Target In Sight</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The OP already has his mind set for the said scope, the OP will make the 2nd owner of that scope a happy man.</div></div>
But the responders are right and I am wrong.
Why?
Unless someone steps up, I get to be the one that gains the actual experience and see what really happens and why. I have demonstrated my math and research.
No one can tell me why this scope is destined for the garage sale before I have even bought it. I have demonstrated why I think it isn't and why I think the other users had operator error experiences. They don't mesh with the specifications provided.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: buffybuster</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I hope you're not planning on getting a NF 12-42X on a 20moa base. That combination will not reliably get out to 1000yds. I've seen them run out of elevation travel. The 12-42X has a very limited amount of reticle travel. You would need a 25-30moa base to be able to track out to 1Kyds, but then you would not be able to obtain a short range Zero closer than about 250-300yds. </div></div>
You guys have convinced me that you simply cannot READ.
*POP QUIZ*
What is my PRIMARY range?
A 200yd
B 600yd
C 1000yd
Get off my ass for the EXTREMES and tell me why this isn't the best scope for my PRIMARY usage. The rest, (if I get it to work) is simply cake, BONUS capability. I have no illusions or expectations, but now it'd sure be funny if I got it to perform despite the naysaying.
If I want to shoot 75-300m, I'll shoot my AR-15.
If I want to shoot over 900m, I'll buy a 50bmg, CheyTac, or something similar.
This is a Rem 700 308 Win. What is the sweet spot experts? Hmmm? Good God. Quit giving me hell and think for a minute. Right tool for the job.
BTW, specs for NXS vs Benchrest
Sources:
http://nightforceoptics.com/nightforcesc...__12-42x56.html
http://nightforceoptics.com/nightforcescopes/SCOPES_OVERVIEW/BENCHREST_MODELS/benchrest_models.html
12-42x56
NXS 45moa elev. 35moa wind.
BR 40moa elev. 40moa wind.
(for 5 moa, I save about $400-500 - ** - and 5moa doesn't qualify as "sucks" in my book)
8-32x56
NXS 65moa elev. 45moa wind.
BR 50moa elev. 50moa wind.
(not interested, I want the extra magnification)
It isn't that I have preconceived notions, it is that I keep hearing unsubstantiated arguments based on flawed assumptions. You pick out a few words, take them out of context and go bananas.
Just because this scope doesn't match YOUR usage, it doesn't mean that it will not suit MY usage.
No one seems to be reading my posts entirely or basing their recommendations on MY usage. It isn't like I am not providing enough DETAIL.
Provide some USEFUL advice, not flame bait.
= = = = = # # # # # by the numbers # # # # # = = = = =
.308 Win 168gr Amax bc .475
2544fps 44.1 gr Varget
20moa rail (Effective 80 clicks (160 for me))
moves effective boresight / scope alignment to 600yds impact
(conservative estimate)
plus
travel of the scope = 20moa (half total travel) = another 80 clicks (160 for me)
moves theoretical max deflection to just over 900yds
(conservative estimate - 950 should be possible, 975 *may* be possible)
Anything beyond will require use of mil-dot drop calculations below center as alternate aim points or an alternate reticle situated below center.
I am looking at the NP-1RR which has four dropped alternate crosshairs which gains me a little more adjustment down if I need it. (About 5moa at max magnification)
Actual numbers = 600yds is 138 clicks (1/8) from 100yd zero (less than 20moa [160 clicks] and 650 is 157 for reference)
600-900yds = 142 clicks (1/8) which is again less than 160. This leaves me a theoretical 22+18 = 40 clicks (1/8) = 5moa to the stops for "fudge factor". Add another potential 5moa from the dropped crosshairs.
"True" full travel for distance = 320 clicks (160 adjust + 160 rail) equates out to a theoretical 975 yards on the ragged edge with this round. [about 1160 fps @ 975 yds]
Push comes to shove, I may even have some room to make the handload a little hotter to gain some more velocity, distance, and flatten the trajectory just a bit.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: buffybuster</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I hope you're not planning on getting a NF 12-42X on a 20moa base. That combination will not reliably get out to 1000yds. I've seen them run out of elevation travel. The 12-42X has a very limited amount of reticle travel. You would need a 25-30moa base to be able to track out to 1Kyds, but then you would not be able to obtain a short range Zero closer than about 250-300yds. </div></div>
Since the rail shims the scope to nearly zero at 640yd, I have travel 20moa each direction which gets me down to below theoretical 100 yards (-153 clicks) on one extreme end, and above 950 yds (+157 clicks) on the other. Add in the extra distance attainable by using dropped crosshairs in the reticle? Possible 5moa = 40 clicks = 197clicks = approx 1025yds - my highest calculation is 188clicks at 1000yds [1144 fps - nearly subsonic]
Well, maybe now you can see the source of my skepticism.
The math doesn't agree with your theories and reported experiences so far.
I won't know practical until I mount it and start shooting it, but the 20 moa rail should put me dead center in the sweet spot (650 yds / 600m) for this round. 600m is EXACTLY where I want to be. 600yds is my max distance at my home range. Based on hard MATH, I have plenty of adjustment *both* directions from that base for some SERIOUS fudge factor and potential for extra fun and utility.
Why is this bad again? A *little* inconvenience traded for finer tuning and a MUCH cheaper price?
There's no demonstrated game breaker here so far.
The complaints lodged don't pass muster and don't hold up against the math. Math says the adjustment is adequate, there are excellent markings on the turrets to count clicks quickly, and no one can tell me anything other than "you'll be sorry" and "you'll rip it off and sell it" for any substantial reason. I'm portrayed as being in denial, yet no one can demonstrate the math is flawed.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 427Cobra</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The NF BR model is just that, it's for benchrest, I think you may be in the wrong place, Deadly0311's advice is spot on for a Practical\Tactical rifle, if the later is your goal, show up at a match with the BR NF and you will get your ass handed to you. </div></div>
Why? The "Benchrest" designation means it can't be used for anything else?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: MrSwede</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If you buy the 1/8th moa BR NF for practical/tactical long range, someone is in for a good buy when you sell it second-hand, hardly used, some months later.. </div></div>
Why? The math refutes the other reasons given. what is yours?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Target In Sight</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The OP already has his mind set for the said scope, the OP will make the 2nd owner of that scope a happy man.</div></div>
But the responders are right and I am wrong.
Why?
Unless someone steps up, I get to be the one that gains the actual experience and see what really happens and why. I have demonstrated my math and research.
No one can tell me why this scope is destined for the garage sale before I have even bought it. I have demonstrated why I think it isn't and why I think the other users had operator error experiences. They don't mesh with the specifications provided.
Re: Rem 700 308 Win handloads - range report
Just get the NXS either way you wont be disappointed..R1 Reticle with,Zero Stop... Can't go wrong...
Just get the NXS either way you wont be disappointed..R1 Reticle with,Zero Stop... Can't go wrong...
Re: Rem 700 308 Win handloads - range report
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sturgeon</div><div class="ubbcode-body">*POP QUIZ*
What is my PRIMARY range?
B 600yd
</div></div>
For 600 yards you want only 6X those of us with older eyes may push that all the way up to 8X-9X.
A 12X-42X scope is simply too much to TACTICAL uses inside 1500 yards--remember this is a tactical site, not a benchrest or plinking site.
There is no way that 24X can be useable for TACTICAL uses at 600 yards--heck even 12X is twice as much as recommended, and a full 40% larger thatn what's necessary with old eyes, the FoV is too small, the human operator inputs to the gun magnify the inability to hold the reticle over the target.
In my opinion, the ideal click rate is 0.1 mil (0.36 MoA). 1/8 MoA clicks will make you work 3 times as much on the turrets. For things of less than benchrest accuracies or more importantly TACTICAL accuracies; 1/4 MoA and 1/2 MoA (unles syou are lucky and have access to 0.1 mil) are prefered.
But if you have your heart set on a 12X-42X scope, buy it. Then use E-Bay in a few months when you figure out what we are talking about.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sturgeon</div><div class="ubbcode-body">*POP QUIZ*
What is my PRIMARY range?
B 600yd
</div></div>
For 600 yards you want only 6X those of us with older eyes may push that all the way up to 8X-9X.
A 12X-42X scope is simply too much to TACTICAL uses inside 1500 yards--remember this is a tactical site, not a benchrest or plinking site.
There is no way that 24X can be useable for TACTICAL uses at 600 yards--heck even 12X is twice as much as recommended, and a full 40% larger thatn what's necessary with old eyes, the FoV is too small, the human operator inputs to the gun magnify the inability to hold the reticle over the target.
In my opinion, the ideal click rate is 0.1 mil (0.36 MoA). 1/8 MoA clicks will make you work 3 times as much on the turrets. For things of less than benchrest accuracies or more importantly TACTICAL accuracies; 1/4 MoA and 1/2 MoA (unles syou are lucky and have access to 0.1 mil) are prefered.
But if you have your heart set on a 12X-42X scope, buy it. Then use E-Bay in a few months when you figure out what we are talking about.
Re: Rem 700 308 Win handloads - range report
Sturgeon, if you already had the BR well then id say tuff, still a nice scope, but not as good as the NXS for field use.
If your gun goes from safe, to case, to bench and then back to case and safe, then yeh maybe the BR model will be ok, particularly on a full custom BR gun.
But if you decide to put that scope on a rifle other than that, your just going to do your own head in.
The NXS has more than double the internal adjustments, double the speed of adjustments even on the stardard NXS, dont forget theres also the new quick turret version, AND to top it off the scope is inherently much more rugged.
TRUST ME
If you have the cash for it, go the NXS.
But if your heart is set on the BR model and you know 100% that it will fit its use completely if not better than the NXS, then go for it.
Sturgeon, if you already had the BR well then id say tuff, still a nice scope, but not as good as the NXS for field use.
If your gun goes from safe, to case, to bench and then back to case and safe, then yeh maybe the BR model will be ok, particularly on a full custom BR gun.
But if you decide to put that scope on a rifle other than that, your just going to do your own head in.
The NXS has more than double the internal adjustments, double the speed of adjustments even on the stardard NXS, dont forget theres also the new quick turret version, AND to top it off the scope is inherently much more rugged.
TRUST ME
If you have the cash for it, go the NXS.
But if your heart is set on the BR model and you know 100% that it will fit its use completely if not better than the NXS, then go for it.
Re: Rem 700 308 Win handloads - range report
Oh and just for the record, I see more NXS models on bench guns than I do Nightforce BR models.
Oh and just for the record, I see more NXS models on bench guns than I do Nightforce BR models.
Re: Rem 700 308 Win handloads - range report
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: vman</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
If you have the cash for it, go the NXS.
</div></div>
I don't have the cash. Maybe eventually. For my needs, this will suffice for now.
Reticle
Cold Bore Wide view
Zoomed to center
Hot bore, dirty, slow fire
This is now MY limitations, not the rifle or the scope.
More practice, continued technique refinements, and technical education. Also refinements to my handloads to improve their consistency.
Next time out, I work on 600yd (max distance available at my range)
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: vman</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
If you have the cash for it, go the NXS.
</div></div>
I don't have the cash. Maybe eventually. For my needs, this will suffice for now.
Reticle
Cold Bore Wide view
Zoomed to center
Hot bore, dirty, slow fire
This is now MY limitations, not the rifle or the scope.
More practice, continued technique refinements, and technical education. Also refinements to my handloads to improve their consistency.
Next time out, I work on 600yd (max distance available at my range)
Re: Rem 700 308 Win handloads - range report
Today's results:
Lot # 100925EDh168amax455V
308Win H305026-amax168gr Bc .475
Case Trim 2.005
Powder 45.5gr Varget
Primer CCI34
Comparator seat depth 2.306”
2705 fps avg
66F 30.27"Hg 40% Humidity
1180ft MSL
light primer cratering
Today's results:
Lot # 100925EDh168amax455V
308Win H305026-amax168gr Bc .475
Case Trim 2.005
Powder 45.5gr Varget
Primer CCI34
Comparator seat depth 2.306”
2705 fps avg
66F 30.27"Hg 40% Humidity
1180ft MSL
light primer cratering
Re: Rem 700 308 Win handloads - range report
Nice numbers BUT WHAT WAS THE ACCURACY?!?!?!?
And how many MOA elevation did you have left?
Especially at 600. You *did* shoot that, didn't you?
You make sound argument, BTW. Heck, I shot a 1,000-yard match with a Service Rifle and an ART-MPC scope once. Don't remember whether I clicked it up past the 9x/600-yd/m (depending on how you calibrated it...), or if I held over.
But I was willing to work within the limitation of what I had at the time.
Inquiring minds want to know...
Nice numbers BUT WHAT WAS THE ACCURACY?!?!?!?
And how many MOA elevation did you have left?
Especially at 600. You *did* shoot that, didn't you?
You make sound argument, BTW. Heck, I shot a 1,000-yard match with a Service Rifle and an ART-MPC scope once. Don't remember whether I clicked it up past the 9x/600-yd/m (depending on how you calibrated it...), or if I held over.
But I was willing to work within the limitation of what I had at the time.
Inquiring minds want to know...
Re: Rem 700 308 Win handloads - range report
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: HDC-Deadly</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I probably wouldnt go with the NF Benchrest scope unless that is a dedicated BR gun....the 1/8 MOA adjustments are to small and the elevation travel sucks in the BR models. Id go for the NXS </div></div>Not true 1/8 MOA are not to small. In F class it is great and the glass is very good
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: HDC-Deadly</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I probably wouldnt go with the NF Benchrest scope unless that is a dedicated BR gun....the 1/8 MOA adjustments are to small and the elevation travel sucks in the BR models. Id go for the NXS </div></div>Not true 1/8 MOA are not to small. In F class it is great and the glass is very good
Re: Rem 700 308 Win handloads - range report
Howdy all, Newbie here piping in with my $.02... I shoot F-Class TR out to 1000 yards.
Was at the range yesterday and did a ladder test with my Remington 700.
Barrel is 26" 1:10 twist
Niteforce NXS 5.5-22 50mm
100 yards
Five shot group. (I didn't write the 5th one on the target... (2705 fps, it's in there...)
44.3 gr Varget
Lapua brass trimmed to 2.007
Federal Gold 210M primers
Berger 185 Target HPBT
OAL = 2.964
seated right on the lands OGV = 2.307
Width= .805 MOA
Height= .223 MOA
ES=11
SD=5
This was done in a round robin ladder test in 5 groups of 5. Powder groups were 44gr to 45.2 in .3 grain steps.
All groups were sub-MOA with this one being the best... Granted, this is with a Sinclair bipod, BUT, all I gotta do is bolt the action to my AI and it will work for "tactical" purposes very well indeed...
I prefer the NXS over the BR. mine has 1/4 MOA adjustment. The new NXS is coming out with 1/8... Even shooting F-Class, I don't see the need for 1/8 click adjustment...
Howdy all, Newbie here piping in with my $.02... I shoot F-Class TR out to 1000 yards.
Was at the range yesterday and did a ladder test with my Remington 700.
Barrel is 26" 1:10 twist
Niteforce NXS 5.5-22 50mm
100 yards
Five shot group. (I didn't write the 5th one on the target... (2705 fps, it's in there...)
44.3 gr Varget
Lapua brass trimmed to 2.007
Federal Gold 210M primers
Berger 185 Target HPBT
OAL = 2.964
seated right on the lands OGV = 2.307
Width= .805 MOA
Height= .223 MOA
ES=11
SD=5
This was done in a round robin ladder test in 5 groups of 5. Powder groups were 44gr to 45.2 in .3 grain steps.
All groups were sub-MOA with this one being the best... Granted, this is with a Sinclair bipod, BUT, all I gotta do is bolt the action to my AI and it will work for "tactical" purposes very well indeed...
I prefer the NXS over the BR. mine has 1/4 MOA adjustment. The new NXS is coming out with 1/8... Even shooting F-Class, I don't see the need for 1/8 click adjustment...
Re: Rem 700 308 Win handloads - range report
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Grump</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Nice numbers BUT WHAT WAS THE ACCURACY?!?!?!?
And how many MOA elevation did you have left?
Especially at 600. You *did* shoot that, didn't you?
You make sound argument, BTW. Heck, I shot a 1,000-yard match with a Service Rifle and an ART-MPC scope once. Don't remember whether I clicked it up past the 9x/600-yd/m (depending on how you calibrated it...), or if I held over.
But I was willing to work within the limitation of what I had at the time.
Inquiring minds want to know... </div></div>
Well, I sort of got out to 600yd this last weekend. Weather and schedule finally cooperated enough to at least try.
(Must be a limit on in-line pics) The links seem to work though.
Gong painted and 8oz water bottle set up at 300m in case I needed to come shorter to zero. -Didn't need them.
Gong painted and 8oz water bottle set up at "400m".
Lower left corner was a zeroing strike. Adjustments made resulted in the other three hits. Oversize splash nearest center is two hits.
Water bottle was the final shot I took at "400m". It was semi-solid icewater. It exploded nicely the first shot I took at it.
For size reference, the GPS is 6.25" tall, 2.25" wide, and the display is about 2.25" tall and 1.5" wide.
From the bench I used, the "400m" gong measured in at an actual 385m distance. (420 yards)
Gong painted at 500m. First strike for zeroing was the bottom center one. Couldn't see it behind some shrubs between it and me but I heard the strike. I made an adjustment up on the scope, and aimed higher for the center of the top 1/3 of the gong. Top center was the next strike. Top right was shot #2 -a flier (I pulled it slightly). Then #3 was on the first and then I went after an empty gatorade bottle on the rail and missed. I returned to this gong and made another shot offset LEFT of the middle mark trying to get the same distance left as the miss right. I ended up a couple inches closer than I expected. I made the adjustment on the gatorade bottle and knocked it off the rail.
Measurement to the 500m gong right on the money.
501 meters = 548yards
A little more normal exposure with flash giving a better idea of the fading daylight.
Overexposed showing all five strikes.
The empty gatorade bottle with a huge hole. I had leaned a broken 3/4 clay in front of it to make it easier to see. I had to pick up the gatorade bottle and stand it back on the rail but these pieces of the clay were still on top of the rail. In the background partially covering the #13 lane sign is my 600y target.
502m
Best picture of the hole. To see the back bottom edge of the bottle and the raised center, you're looking through the hole.
Just after 5pm local 12/19/10
Winds almost calm. Temp 32F
![url]](http://[url="http://members.cox.net/dmbleess/range/aDSCN8066.JPG"]http://members.cox.net/dmbleess/range/aDSCN8066.JPG[/url])
Farthest target set. Used my target stands built for this purpose.
![url]](http://[url="http://members.cox.net/dmbleess/range/aDSCN8067.JPG"]http://members.cox.net/dmbleess/range/aDSCN8067.JPG[/url])
Target stands.
Behind them is the range competition "pits".
You can see part of the counterbalanced target frames that can be lifted on tracks.
![url]](http://[url="http://members.cox.net/dmbleess/range/aDSCN8068.JPG"]http://members.cox.net/dmbleess/range/aDSCN8068.JPG[/url])
547meters
598 yards
![url]](http://[url="http://members.cox.net/dmbleess/range/aDSCN8070.JPG"]http://members.cox.net/dmbleess/range/aDSCN8070.JPG[/url])
Light was fading and I was guessing at the scope setting. I couldn't see the hits at that distance on paper via the spotting scope so I just ran a dozen fairly rapid fire shots to get an average. I was aiming at the 1" red square (largest square) nearest the center of the entire target board. Smaller squares are 1cm, circle diameters from inside to outside are:
1cm, 1in, 2in, 4in, 8in, 12in. Radius measurements are marked on the larger circles 2", 4", 6".
![url]](http://[url="http://members.cox.net/dmbleess/range/aDSCN8071.JPG"]http://members.cox.net/dmbleess/range/aDSCN8071.JPG[/url])
Closer zoom.
I was aiming at the 1" red square (largest square) nearest the center of the entire target board. Smaller squares are 1cm, circle diameters from inside to outside are:
1cm, 1in, 2in, 4in, 8in, 12in. Radius measurements are marked on the larger circles 2", 4", 6".
![url]](http://[url="http://members.cox.net/dmbleess/range/aDSCN8072.JPG"]http://members.cox.net/dmbleess/range/aDSCN8072.JPG[/url])
Indoors better light and outer edge circled with green highlighter.
547meters
598 yards
Semi rapid fire in fading light.
![url]](http://[url="http://members.cox.net/dmbleess/range/aDSCN8167.JPG"]http://members.cox.net/dmbleess/range/aDSCN8167.JPG[/url])
Indoors better light and outer edge circled with green highlighter.
547meters
598 yards
Semi rapid fire in fading light.
![url]](http://[url="http://members.cox.net/dmbleess/range/aDSCN8168.JPG"]http://members.cox.net/dmbleess/range/aDSCN8168.JPG[/url])
547meters
598 yards
Semi rapid fire in fading light.
![url]](http://[url="http://members.cox.net/dmbleess/range/aDSCN8173.JPG"]http://members.cox.net/dmbleess/range/aDSCN8173.JPG[/url])
547meters
598 yards
Semi rapid fire in fading light.
Remington 700 VSF .308 Winchester
<span style="font-weight: bold">Handloads my lot# 101030ADh168amax445V</span>
4 shot Chrony:
2583 Low
2610 High
2597
2594
(2596 avg)
![url]](http://[url="http://members.cox.net/dmbleess/range/aDSCN8175.JPG"]http://members.cox.net/dmbleess/range/aDSCN8175.JPG[/url])
Not near perfect, but I couldn't see the strikes on paper with the spotting scope at that distance in that light. Fingers cold and frankly, ready to go. So I basically quickly threw lead to finish off the lot. I also wanted the brass empty for my shoulder bump revision for the next and future lots.
Travel adjustment information as requested:
Three number coordinate system. First digit is the turn #. Each turn is 6moa, each moa is divided into 8 clicks.
What I call "bottom" of travel on the scope is
0-0-5
Top is
7-0-5
(336 clicks total = 42moa)
4-0-6
385m (verified photos above)
4-5-4
500m (verified photos above)
5-2-2 (estimated semi-verified)
547m (598y)
6-5-3 (10 clicks travel remain)
709m / 775y (paper calculation / not verified)
using 15moa drop reticle,
6-5-5 (8 clicks travel remain)
914m / 1000y (paper calc non-verified)
--15moa drop reticle is the one on the ranging baseline for my reticle -second from bottom-- scroll back up to see reference photo in previous post on this thread ^^ above ^^
using 20moa drop reticle, (bottom most provided)
6-0-5
914m / 1000y (paper calc non-verified)
Which leaves 48 clicks of (potential) adjustment
48/8 = 6 more MOA adjustment
1000y should be into transonic for this load and it starts losing accuracy as it rattles back into subsonic flight.
I was by myself for this run. If I have help next time, I may put someone in the pits and try to finish the zero verification at 600y.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Grump</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Nice numbers BUT WHAT WAS THE ACCURACY?!?!?!?
And how many MOA elevation did you have left?
Especially at 600. You *did* shoot that, didn't you?
You make sound argument, BTW. Heck, I shot a 1,000-yard match with a Service Rifle and an ART-MPC scope once. Don't remember whether I clicked it up past the 9x/600-yd/m (depending on how you calibrated it...), or if I held over.
But I was willing to work within the limitation of what I had at the time.
Inquiring minds want to know... </div></div>
Well, I sort of got out to 600yd this last weekend. Weather and schedule finally cooperated enough to at least try.
(Must be a limit on in-line pics) The links seem to work though.
Gong painted and 8oz water bottle set up at 300m in case I needed to come shorter to zero. -Didn't need them.
Gong painted and 8oz water bottle set up at "400m".
Lower left corner was a zeroing strike. Adjustments made resulted in the other three hits. Oversize splash nearest center is two hits.
Water bottle was the final shot I took at "400m". It was semi-solid icewater. It exploded nicely the first shot I took at it.
For size reference, the GPS is 6.25" tall, 2.25" wide, and the display is about 2.25" tall and 1.5" wide.
From the bench I used, the "400m" gong measured in at an actual 385m distance. (420 yards)
Gong painted at 500m. First strike for zeroing was the bottom center one. Couldn't see it behind some shrubs between it and me but I heard the strike. I made an adjustment up on the scope, and aimed higher for the center of the top 1/3 of the gong. Top center was the next strike. Top right was shot #2 -a flier (I pulled it slightly). Then #3 was on the first and then I went after an empty gatorade bottle on the rail and missed. I returned to this gong and made another shot offset LEFT of the middle mark trying to get the same distance left as the miss right. I ended up a couple inches closer than I expected. I made the adjustment on the gatorade bottle and knocked it off the rail.
Measurement to the 500m gong right on the money.
501 meters = 548yards
A little more normal exposure with flash giving a better idea of the fading daylight.
Overexposed showing all five strikes.
The empty gatorade bottle with a huge hole. I had leaned a broken 3/4 clay in front of it to make it easier to see. I had to pick up the gatorade bottle and stand it back on the rail but these pieces of the clay were still on top of the rail. In the background partially covering the #13 lane sign is my 600y target.
502m
Best picture of the hole. To see the back bottom edge of the bottle and the raised center, you're looking through the hole.
Just after 5pm local 12/19/10
Winds almost calm. Temp 32F
Farthest target set. Used my target stands built for this purpose.
Target stands.
Behind them is the range competition "pits".
You can see part of the counterbalanced target frames that can be lifted on tracks.
547meters
598 yards
Light was fading and I was guessing at the scope setting. I couldn't see the hits at that distance on paper via the spotting scope so I just ran a dozen fairly rapid fire shots to get an average. I was aiming at the 1" red square (largest square) nearest the center of the entire target board. Smaller squares are 1cm, circle diameters from inside to outside are:
1cm, 1in, 2in, 4in, 8in, 12in. Radius measurements are marked on the larger circles 2", 4", 6".
Closer zoom.
I was aiming at the 1" red square (largest square) nearest the center of the entire target board. Smaller squares are 1cm, circle diameters from inside to outside are:
1cm, 1in, 2in, 4in, 8in, 12in. Radius measurements are marked on the larger circles 2", 4", 6".
Indoors better light and outer edge circled with green highlighter.
547meters
598 yards
Semi rapid fire in fading light.
Indoors better light and outer edge circled with green highlighter.
547meters
598 yards
Semi rapid fire in fading light.
547meters
598 yards
Semi rapid fire in fading light.
547meters
598 yards
Semi rapid fire in fading light.
Remington 700 VSF .308 Winchester
<span style="font-weight: bold">Handloads my lot# 101030ADh168amax445V</span>
4 shot Chrony:
2583 Low
2610 High
2597
2594
(2596 avg)
Not near perfect, but I couldn't see the strikes on paper with the spotting scope at that distance in that light. Fingers cold and frankly, ready to go. So I basically quickly threw lead to finish off the lot. I also wanted the brass empty for my shoulder bump revision for the next and future lots.
Travel adjustment information as requested:
Three number coordinate system. First digit is the turn #. Each turn is 6moa, each moa is divided into 8 clicks.
What I call "bottom" of travel on the scope is
0-0-5
Top is
7-0-5
(336 clicks total = 42moa)
4-0-6
385m (verified photos above)
4-5-4
500m (verified photos above)
5-2-2 (estimated semi-verified)
547m (598y)
6-5-3 (10 clicks travel remain)
709m / 775y (paper calculation / not verified)
using 15moa drop reticle,
6-5-5 (8 clicks travel remain)
914m / 1000y (paper calc non-verified)
--15moa drop reticle is the one on the ranging baseline for my reticle -second from bottom-- scroll back up to see reference photo in previous post on this thread ^^ above ^^
using 20moa drop reticle, (bottom most provided)
6-0-5
914m / 1000y (paper calc non-verified)
Which leaves 48 clicks of (potential) adjustment
48/8 = 6 more MOA adjustment
1000y should be into transonic for this load and it starts losing accuracy as it rattles back into subsonic flight.
I was by myself for this run. If I have help next time, I may put someone in the pits and try to finish the zero verification at 600y.
Re: Rem 700 308 Win handloads - range report
I too have a Garmin 60CSX. I never thought about using it as a range finder. How accurate was it?
I too have a Garmin 60CSX. I never thought about using it as a range finder. How accurate was it?
Re: Rem 700 308 Win handloads - range report
If Sturgeon used the Garmin to get 502 m (549 yd) as the picture indicates, the accuracy is pretty decent. I lasered that rail at 553 yds last week, so less than 1% difference than with what I measured. Depending on where Sturgeon was firing from, the Garmin may actually have been more accurate than my Leica CRF1200.
Sturgeon, great shooting! Nice to see some other posts with pics from ENGC. If you ever need a spotter as you mentioned, send me a PM. FWIW, I'll be at the 600 yd range most of the day on Christmas. Can't get to where my family is located until mid-January, so what better way to spend Christmas day?
If Sturgeon used the Garmin to get 502 m (549 yd) as the picture indicates, the accuracy is pretty decent. I lasered that rail at 553 yds last week, so less than 1% difference than with what I measured. Depending on where Sturgeon was firing from, the Garmin may actually have been more accurate than my Leica CRF1200.
Sturgeon, great shooting! Nice to see some other posts with pics from ENGC. If you ever need a spotter as you mentioned, send me a PM. FWIW, I'll be at the 600 yd range most of the day on Christmas. Can't get to where my family is located until mid-January, so what better way to spend Christmas day?
Re: Rem 700 308 Win handloads - range report
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: matt33</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I too have a Garmin 60CSX. I never thought about using it as a range finder. How accurate was it? </div></div>
Not so much as a rangefinder in the strictest sense. I have to visit both points with it to measure the distance. I set a waypoint at the bench I used (The coordinates are on the screen in the pictures), then took the GPS with me to measure the distance back to the bench from every target location I shot at afterwards when I visited the targets to photograph or clean them up/take them down.
60CSx generally self reports 12ft accuracy. When they were hot and heavy in Iraq and were updating satellites every pass I was getting 8-9ft.
I have a rangefinder but I had forgotten it in my golf bag. A reflective target on the front faces of my target stands -to help measure laser distance to them is my next modification.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: matt33</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I too have a Garmin 60CSX. I never thought about using it as a range finder. How accurate was it? </div></div>
Not so much as a rangefinder in the strictest sense. I have to visit both points with it to measure the distance. I set a waypoint at the bench I used (The coordinates are on the screen in the pictures), then took the GPS with me to measure the distance back to the bench from every target location I shot at afterwards when I visited the targets to photograph or clean them up/take them down.
60CSx generally self reports 12ft accuracy. When they were hot and heavy in Iraq and were updating satellites every pass I was getting 8-9ft.
I have a rangefinder but I had forgotten it in my golf bag. A reflective target on the front faces of my target stands -to help measure laser distance to them is my next modification.
Similar threads
