-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Rifle Scopes Scope leveling
- Thread starter ingraham
- Start date
The problem I see with the Badger is that it assumes that the rail on the rifle is perfectly level on the receiver, and that the rings will mate exactly the same between the tool and the rail on the rifle. Additionally, it will only work on rifles with the scope mounted on a Picatinny rail.
For about 1/3 the price this tool takes those variables out of the equation and can be used with any scope mount;
https://www.brownells.com/aspx/search/productdetail.aspx?pid=6097
Essentially this tool ensures the vertical centerline of the scope is perfectly plumb with the centerline of the bore. From there you rotate the scope in the rings to align the recticle with a plumb bob. Using a bipod with cant adjustment on a sturdy bench makes the process quick and reliable.
For about 1/3 the price this tool takes those variables out of the equation and can be used with any scope mount;
https://www.brownells.com/aspx/search/productdetail.aspx?pid=6097
Essentially this tool ensures the vertical centerline of the scope is perfectly plumb with the centerline of the bore. From there you rotate the scope in the rings to align the recticle with a plumb bob. Using a bipod with cant adjustment on a sturdy bench makes the process quick and reliable.
Don’t need need a plumb bob.....
https://www.snipershide.com/shooting/threads/plumb-bobs-no-more.6878902/
Lot of different ways to skin a cat.
https://www.snipershide.com/shooting/threads/plumb-bobs-no-more.6878902/
Lot of different ways to skin a cat.
I’ll just say this, if the rail on your gun isn’t installed correctly, fix it or get rid of that gun. A 20 MOA rail isn’t level front and back to begin with. Second, pic a tiny is a mil spec standard. If the pic rail on your gun isn’t mil spec, trash it. The dead level works flawlessly. I’m not fan boying, I think you have a misunderstanding of what it does. The description of that tool on brownells is suspect. You line the reticle to the fall of gravity not the center of the bore. You level the dead level on whatever surface you are working on. Then you put your rings on it, place scope in rings. Look through scope at level or plumb bob and line up reticle. Torque rings. Verify reticle didn’t shift and boom. That scope can now go on any gun and the reticle will be plumb.
If you get on the gun and it doesn’t look level with your NPA, adjust the scope while you are on the gun in position. A friend is helpful, but not required..
You also don’t need anything fancy, the edge of a door or window makes a great plum bob as long as it isn’t an old house or barn.
Luckily for me, leveled to the rail, almost always feels correct when I am on the gun.. But I get on others that are set for their positions and it can drive me nuts.
Vertical alignment of the scope and bore is most certainly a factor.
In order to wrap our heads around this, think in extremes: what if the scope was mounted on the side of the receiver, like those side mounts used on AKs. That creates a horizonal displacement of the bore to the scope, requiring a windage adjustment to zero at any given range. If the scope was mounted on the left side of the receiver with an offset of one inch from the bore and the rifle zeroed at 100 yards, at 50 yards the POI would be .5" to the left, dead-on at 100, 5 inches to the right at 500 yards, etc. So even though the reticle is perfectly level to the rail it's mounted on, true horizontal POI will only be accurate at the zero distance.
The point is that any horizontal displacement of the bore axis to the centerline of the scope, regardless of how small it might be, is going to create this error. If when the reticle is perfectly level and an imaginary line extended from the vertical stadia of the reticle downward does not pass perfectly through the center of the bore, there will be horizontal displacement and changes in POI.
In the case we're discussing with leveling the reticle to the Picatinny rail, as long as perfect vertical alignment of the scope and bore is established, all is good. I cannot imagine an issue with an action with an integral rail, but something like a Remington 700 receiver (with all the known QC issues and documented pitfalls of attaching a rail to them) I'd rather take that variable out of the equation. For simply leveling the reticle to the rail, there are more cost-effective options available.
FWIW, I've used the tool I linked to with great success on multiple rifles with different mounting systems. Badger makes great stuff (I'm using their M5 Enhanced DBM bottom metal on my Rem 700 build) but I'm not sure I could bring myself to drop $165.00 on their Dead Level tool for what it does.
Last edited:
To expand a bit on my post above...
I prefer to set up the rifle with the scope perfectly aligned vertically with the bore axis. In this case, outside of exterior forces, the trajectory of the bullet will remain perfectly centered in the line of sight. As explained above, if the scope and bore are not vertically aligned, a horizontal component is added to adjusting POI to POA. This is especially true if the rifle was zeroed without the reticle perfectly level. So perhaps the most important alignment consideration is to make sure the scope bubble is set to indicate a perfectly level reticle, and do all zeroing (and subsequent shooting) with a level reticle (regardless of how you determine if it is level or not). As indicated in this thread and many others, perfectly leveling the reticle to the rail or bore axis is pretty small potatoes compared to not holding the reticle level when shooting.
As tiny the significance of a slightly canted rifle in relation to a level reticle, I prefer to start with the knowledge that if my scope bubble is indicating level, there is no artificially-induced horizonal component I have to deal with. Since I shoot my "precision rifle" almost entirely for recreational purposes off a bipod from the prone, the procedure used as follows works well for me;
EXD Engineering Vertical Reticle Instrument
With the rifle supported in a cradle, using a bipod or some other means, this simple yet ingenious tool will indicate when the rifle is positioned with zero cant of the bore axis to the centerline of the scope. A decent bipod that is adjustable for cant and can be locked down works fine. In this case, a custom-built Remington in a McMillan A5, supported with an Atlas 5H up front;
With the rifle aligned to a known plumb object, it's simply a matter of rotating the scope in the rings to align with the object and tighten the rings with the bubble level and the reticle aligned;
I originally leveled the reticle using a plumb bob, but used the neighbors chimney for illustration purposes. Once the reticle is leveled with the EXD Tool bubble centered, the scope bubble can be set;
No doubt, getting the bubbles and reticle perfectly aligned is a tedious process as everything wants to move when tightening the ring and scope level screws. Though my scope level is not set dead-nuts on, it is extremely close and within the hash marks.
Some have stated in other threads that up to 2 - 3 degrees of reticle cant is acceptable for most shots. Below is a photo that shows what 2.5 and 5.0 degrees of deviation from dead level looks like;
At 5 degrees of reticle misalignment to the bore, and assuming the centerline of the scope is 2.6 inches above the bore axis, it would equate to about .2 inches of horizontal bore displacement from true vertical center. Even if the rifle was zeroed at 100 yards with the reticle canted 5 degrees in relation to the rifle, this would equate to only about two inches of induced windage error at 1,000 yards.
As shooting (and precision rifle) enthusiasts, we want to make the most of our equipment. But at the same time I suspect many of us (myself included) get a bit too wrapped up in the technical minutia that has little if any impact on how well we can shoot. Going to great lengths and expenditure in the pursuit of that perfectly-level scope reticle (whatever it is we're leveling it to) may very well fall into that category.
I prefer to set up the rifle with the scope perfectly aligned vertically with the bore axis. In this case, outside of exterior forces, the trajectory of the bullet will remain perfectly centered in the line of sight. As explained above, if the scope and bore are not vertically aligned, a horizontal component is added to adjusting POI to POA. This is especially true if the rifle was zeroed without the reticle perfectly level. So perhaps the most important alignment consideration is to make sure the scope bubble is set to indicate a perfectly level reticle, and do all zeroing (and subsequent shooting) with a level reticle (regardless of how you determine if it is level or not). As indicated in this thread and many others, perfectly leveling the reticle to the rail or bore axis is pretty small potatoes compared to not holding the reticle level when shooting.
As tiny the significance of a slightly canted rifle in relation to a level reticle, I prefer to start with the knowledge that if my scope bubble is indicating level, there is no artificially-induced horizonal component I have to deal with. Since I shoot my "precision rifle" almost entirely for recreational purposes off a bipod from the prone, the procedure used as follows works well for me;
EXD Engineering Vertical Reticle Instrument
With the rifle supported in a cradle, using a bipod or some other means, this simple yet ingenious tool will indicate when the rifle is positioned with zero cant of the bore axis to the centerline of the scope. A decent bipod that is adjustable for cant and can be locked down works fine. In this case, a custom-built Remington in a McMillan A5, supported with an Atlas 5H up front;
With the rifle aligned to a known plumb object, it's simply a matter of rotating the scope in the rings to align with the object and tighten the rings with the bubble level and the reticle aligned;
I originally leveled the reticle using a plumb bob, but used the neighbors chimney for illustration purposes. Once the reticle is leveled with the EXD Tool bubble centered, the scope bubble can be set;
No doubt, getting the bubbles and reticle perfectly aligned is a tedious process as everything wants to move when tightening the ring and scope level screws. Though my scope level is not set dead-nuts on, it is extremely close and within the hash marks.
Some have stated in other threads that up to 2 - 3 degrees of reticle cant is acceptable for most shots. Below is a photo that shows what 2.5 and 5.0 degrees of deviation from dead level looks like;
At 5 degrees of reticle misalignment to the bore, and assuming the centerline of the scope is 2.6 inches above the bore axis, it would equate to about .2 inches of horizontal bore displacement from true vertical center. Even if the rifle was zeroed at 100 yards with the reticle canted 5 degrees in relation to the rifle, this would equate to only about two inches of induced windage error at 1,000 yards.
As shooting (and precision rifle) enthusiasts, we want to make the most of our equipment. But at the same time I suspect many of us (myself included) get a bit too wrapped up in the technical minutia that has little if any impact on how well we can shoot. Going to great lengths and expenditure in the pursuit of that perfectly-level scope reticle (whatever it is we're leveling it to) may very well fall into that category.
What really matters is that you hold your rifle the same as your scopes reticle being level. Another words lets say when you shoulder your rifle it just so happens that it is slightly canted as long as you mount the scope reticle level with the fall of gravity it wouldn't matter if your rifle was slightly canted assuming you hold it the same way for every shot.
All these fancy ways kinda blows my mind. Hang a plumb line. Get comfy behind the rifle. Loosen rings, align crosshairs with plumb line. Tighten. Install scope level, make it level when crosshairs line up with plumb line. Now you're good to go and that took maybe 5 minutes!
https://www.amazon.com/Arisaka-Defense-Leveler-Silver-OL-Combo/dp/B00W8AXZ98
This tool ensures that the elevation turret on the scope is perpendicular by indexing off the base of the elevation turret instead of the top turret cap (caps can be canted compared to the turret itself). It's the same premise as the Spuhr mount leveling system (Spuhr also sells a wedge leveling kit for picatinny rails, but it costs $35 and only comes with one height of wedge).
IMO making sure the turrets are leveled is more important than the reticle unless you plan to do a lot of holdovers. Reason being that if the turrets are properly leveled your dialing and the center of the crosshair will always be correct.
If you want to check the reticle itself it's best to just hang a plumb bob, level your rifle, and make sure there isn't a noticeable difference between the reticle and the line on the plumb bob. Most good quality scopes should have no issues with a canted reticle, though some defects do slip through the cracks.
This tool ensures that the elevation turret on the scope is perpendicular by indexing off the base of the elevation turret instead of the top turret cap (caps can be canted compared to the turret itself). It's the same premise as the Spuhr mount leveling system (Spuhr also sells a wedge leveling kit for picatinny rails, but it costs $35 and only comes with one height of wedge).
IMO making sure the turrets are leveled is more important than the reticle unless you plan to do a lot of holdovers. Reason being that if the turrets are properly leveled your dialing and the center of the crosshair will always be correct.
If you want to check the reticle itself it's best to just hang a plumb bob, level your rifle, and make sure there isn't a noticeable difference between the reticle and the line on the plumb bob. Most good quality scopes should have no issues with a canted reticle, though some defects do slip through the cracks.
The reticle is what needs to be leveled, not the elevation turret. A video by Vortex worth watching;
Interesting article entitled Leveling the Scope Reticle for Long Range Rifles by Bruce Walker succinctly discusses several of these things and a few others re scope leveling, bore alignment, etc.
Lowlight and Litz discuss similar things in their videos. It's deceptive how much has to go into this stuff that I tend to either not think about or not realize I should consider. Of course, that's just personal opinion...3" ain't much difference on IDPA steel @ 1,000 and it seems a fair guess that most of us mere mortals can't shoot well enough to notice that difference anyhow.
But my attitude is why not try to correct for everything that can be corrected for, in order to minimize the effect of the uncertain stuff (wind, MVV, etc)?
Lowlight and Litz discuss similar things in their videos. It's deceptive how much has to go into this stuff that I tend to either not think about or not realize I should consider. Of course, that's just personal opinion...3" ain't much difference on IDPA steel @ 1,000 and it seems a fair guess that most of us mere mortals can't shoot well enough to notice that difference anyhow.
But my attitude is why not try to correct for everything that can be corrected for, in order to minimize the effect of the uncertain stuff (wind, MVV, etc)?
The reticle is what needs to be leveled only if you intend to use it for hold overs, as I mentioned before. The scope will always, 100% of the time, track with respect to the angle of the turrets. If you are dialing your scope to take shots at distance it is more important to have the turrets leveled than the reticle, and if you are holding over it is more important to have the reticle leveled.
Many people's issues with scopes that "don't track" and are off by a few tenths are because they leveled the scope using the reticle rather than leveling based off the turrets. If the reticle is shifted slightly within the tube, compared to the turrets, this will translate into tracking issues.
As an example, here are the actual changes in elevation and windage based on the cant of the turrets when 20 MRAD of elevation is dialed (assuming the reticle is this far off from the turrets, and the scope is leveled to the reticle rather than the turrets):
0 degrees: 20 MRAD elevation, 0 MRAD windage
1 degree: 19.997 MRAD elevation, 0.349 MRAD windage
2 degrees: 19.9878 MRAD elevation, 0.698 MRAD windage
3 degrees: 19.9762 MRAD elevation, 1.047 MRAD windage
You'll notice that you won't see a whole lot of difference in the elevation with small cants to the turrets, but you will see some fairly large windage errors pretty quickly which is often attributed to the turrets by people saying their scopes don't track right. If you intend to dial your elevation turret, especially for shots beyond 1000 yards (which almost every reticle will require dialing for), then it is by far a better option to level off the turrets (using the base or body of the scope, NOT the turret caps) as compared to leveling off the reticle unless you want your wind holds to potentially be quite a ways off from what you intend.
On a high end scope it will not matter, because the reticle will nearly always be perfectly in line with the turrets. On a less expensive scope where this is not a guarantee it becomes a larger issue. For what it is worth, what I describe is exactly what is recommended by Schmidt and Bender when it comes to properly leveling their scopes (because I asked if leveling should be done with a plumb bob using the reticle or off the body of the scope using a tool such as what comes with the Spuhr mounts).
I made a power point slide with a vertical and horizontal line. Made sure my computer was level. Screwed my D.F.A.T in and then set the reticle to the vertical and horizontal lines. I'll check it with a tall target when I get to the range.
@ ThePretzel, I understand what you're saying.
See post #12 here - http://www.snipershide.com/shooting/threads/using-scope-turret-to-level-scope-fail.6595494/
Leveling scope by the reticle housing flat on the bottom of the scope is the correct method. I wouldn't count on the turret caps being an accurate indicator. Maybe this is what you mean and we're just talking past each other? (Edit: just re-read your post and see that is what you're describing).
FWIW, using feeler gauges between the rail and the flat on the bottom of my SWFA HD scope indicates it's square after using the method I described above.
See post #12 here - http://www.snipershide.com/shooting/threads/using-scope-turret-to-level-scope-fail.6595494/
Leveling scope by the reticle housing flat on the bottom of the scope is the correct method. I wouldn't count on the turret caps being an accurate indicator. Maybe this is what you mean and we're just talking past each other? (Edit: just re-read your post and see that is what you're describing).
FWIW, using feeler gauges between the rail and the flat on the bottom of my SWFA HD scope indicates it's square after using the method I described above.
Last edited:
Bingo...leveling using the turret caps is far from perfect. The link you specified describes the process perfectly and it is the method I have followed since reading it. It works extraordinarily well for me.
So in summary;
Obviously having the reticle square to the turret housing is hugely preferable, but a canted reticle is not the end of the world if you know how to deal with it.
If shooting using dialed-in elevation corrections, the scope should be installed by leveling by the turret housing to ensure accurate tracking. The scope level should be installed square to the turret housing.
If shooting using hold-over, the scope should be leveled by the reticle. The scope level should be installed square to the reticle.
If the reticle is square to the turret housing, it doesn't make any difference.
In all cases, the rifle should be used with the scope level bubble as perfectly centered as possible.
If we are in agreement with the above, here is what I think would be the practical scope-mounting method;Use something like this (or the deck of cards, feeler gauges, etc.) to install the scope with its turret housing square to the rail.
Use the EXD tool to position and hold the rifle with the scope plumb to the bore (zero cant) as shown in post #12 above.
Holding the rifle with zero cant, sight a plumb bob. If the reticle appears canted to the plumb bob, the reticle was installed canted in the scope. In that case decide whether you will use hold-over or dial-in elevation corrections and install the scope level accordingly.
If the reticle aligns with the plumb bob, the reticle was installed square to the turret housing. Install the scope level and use either hold-over or dialed-in corrections while shooting.
Obviously having the reticle square to the turret housing is hugely preferable, but a canted reticle is not the end of the world if you know how to deal with it.
Your process is a shade different than mine so I would like to double check my understanding:
- Level the bottom (flat) part of the turret housing to the rail using whatever tool or methodology you employ.
- Support the rifle so that it has zero cant.
- Sight a known good plumb line.
- If the reticle appears canted to the known plumb, then the reticle is not square to the housing. I agree with this point.
- If dialing, install the scope level now so that the bubble shows level. The scope level is now square to the turret housing. Rotate the scope until the reticle is aligned with the plumb. You now have a reticle aligned to the plumb and your level aligned to the bottom of the housing.
- If using holdover, rotate the scope in the rings until the reticle is aligned to the plumb and install the scope level so that it is square to the reticle. You now have a reticle aligned to the plumb and your level aligned to the reticle.
- Level the bottom (flat) part of the turret housing to the rail using whatever tool or methodology you employ.
- Shoulder the rifle in a prone position as you would normally.
- Sight a known good plumb line.
- Have a helper rotate the scope until the vertical stadia of the reticle aligns with the plumb line. Have helper carefully tighten screws a bit. This is when I truly appreciate the ARC scope rings with 1 screw.
- Have helper rotate the scope level until the bubble is correctly aligned and tighten so that it won't move. The level is aligned to the reticle by this method.
- Break position and torque ring screws and scope level screws to correct value
- Check that vertical stadia is still aligned with plumb
- Check that the position of the scope level's bubble is correct
As a footnote, I read a lot about plumb lines being problematic in wind conditions. Using a long piece of cardboard can also be problematic if the range does not have a good way of holding it properly. I have a non-elegant solution for this that works well. I bring a 6 foot level and large vise to the range when I do this. The vise is placed on the ground and one end of the level is clamped to the vise. I adjust the position of the level in the jaws until it shows level and then tighten the vise. Vise does not have to be on flat ground and the level will NOT move. Gives a perfectly stable plumb.
I look forward to your response.
Last edited:
His process is for someone who uses a bubble level on their picatinny rail or rings/mount to ensure the rifle itself is level when shooting. Hence why he said, "holding the rifle with zero cant". The bubble level on the scope is set at the very end, to ensure that it matches up with the level on your rail or mount/rings.
Shoulding the rifle will give you an inconsistent rifle cant if you don't have a bubble level to refer to each time you do it. It's the nature of pushing a squishy buttstock into a squishy shoulder. You'll never be able to get the rifle to the same angle every time you shoot and from every different position you're shooting in (barricades, prone, standing, etc.). Using a bubble level gives you an absolute frame of reference so that you can ensure the rifle is level each time you take a shot (and you can train yourself to begin to see when the rifle is canted by looking at only the reticle).
You can refer to the math I did above if you want to see hard numbers, but it works like this.
If your reticle is 2 degrees off from your turrets, then the turrets will be angled by 2 degrees when you level the scope using the reticle. This means that as you dial elevation, you will also be adjusting the windage of your aim (by .07 MRAD per 1 MRAD of elevation dialed in the 2 degree example) since the scope isn't tracking perfectly vertical but instead at an angle.
If your reticle is 2 degrees off from your turrets, then the reticle will be angled by 2 degrees when you level the scope using the turret body or a known flat on the scope (like the top of the elevation tumor on a Schmidt). If you try to use the reticle for holdovers, the elevation will be mostly correct (see math) but the windage can be off by a fairly significant margin (.07 MRAD per 1 MRAD of elevation held, in the 2 degree example).
You can mathematically compensate for the cant in the reticle or the turrets when holding or dialing, but it's much easier to choose one method and stick with it if you know your reticle is installed canted relative to the turrets. Otherwise you're just adding unnecessary math that will make shooting more difficult for you, especially if you shoot in competition or life and death scenarios with time constraints.
If your turrets aren’t exact with the reticle you have no way of knowing what the offset will be, if any, unless you do a tracking test. The turret doesn’t matter because we can account for that when we zero and do a tracking test, but if the reticle isn’t level you are wasting the fact that we have holdover reticles on our rifle scopes. What’s the point if you can’t holdover because you have absolutely no idea what angle of cant you have?
I understand the math...what I don't understand is the process discussed, namely, why the way the scope level is mounted is dependent on whether you dial or holdover. It makes no sense to me at all. I level my scope level to the reticle after the reticle is aligned to the plumb AND while the rifle is shouldered. My shoulder position is pretty consistent. I say that because if it weren't, then I would be missing a lot more than I am.
If the bullet is plumb to the fall of gravity when it leaves the barrel, there is zero to discuss. All the bullet knows is the force of gravity that is acting on it. It doesn't give a rat's ass about anything else. If your reticle is canted relative to the vertical centerline of the bore, it has a horizontal and vertical error component. If the rifle is canted due to your physical construction and the reticle is trued to a plumb, you only have a horizontal error component which can be proven to be minor. It is minor because it is a linear error. It is a fixed offset that grows linearly with respect to distance.
As I said, why this means jack with respect to scope level mounting is not clear to me. I level the reticle to plumb while shouldered and then fix the scope level to be aligned with the reticle. I always use the scope level to know when I am actually plumb even if the reticle looks like it is canted due to position.
Not trying to be argumentative...I just am trying to understand this point of view.
BTW, the commentary from S&B has been used before and proven to be inaccurate. I can dig up that link
If the bullet is plumb to the fall of gravity when it leaves the barrel, there is zero to discuss. All the bullet knows is the force of gravity that is acting on it. It doesn't give a rat's ass about anything else. If your reticle is canted relative to the vertical centerline of the bore, it has a horizontal and vertical error component. If the rifle is canted due to your physical construction and the reticle is trued to a plumb, you only have a horizontal error component which can be proven to be minor. It is minor because it is a linear error. It is a fixed offset that grows linearly with respect to distance.
As I said, why this means jack with respect to scope level mounting is not clear to me. I level the reticle to plumb while shouldered and then fix the scope level to be aligned with the reticle. I always use the scope level to know when I am actually plumb even if the reticle looks like it is canted due to position.
Not trying to be argumentative...I just am trying to understand this point of view.
BTW, the commentary from S&B has been used before and proven to be inaccurate. I can dig up that link
Last edited:
Excellent point and a most important part of the subsequent process for mounting a scope properly
Another vote for the Arisaka tool. Have found it to be most excellent so far.
If your scope is super low to the rail it does create a challenge though!
If your scope is super low to the rail it does create a challenge though!
The scope level isn't dependent on whether you dial or holdover. Once you've leveled your scope properly you adjust the scope level to match, simple as that. Regardless of how you level a scope, you always set the bubble level on the scope as the last step in the process since if you set it earlier it'll be wrong once you properly adjust the scope.
Great conversation! There is so much muddy water around this topic I think many get lost in the logic.
In regards to my last post...
If the scope is installed with the turret housing perfectly square to the rail (and assuming the rail is square to the receiver), then positioning the rifle with zero cant (using something like the EXD tool) should place the vertical turret perfectly square to gravity. This will allow one to see if the reticle was installed straight with the turrets by observing a known vertical line (plumb bob, side of building, etc.). I believe this might be the most practical way to make that evaluation.
Scenario 1 - Canted Reticle
If the reticle appears canted when doing the above evaluation, it would be reasonable to conclude the reticle was installed canted to the turrets when the scope was made. If that is the case (and assuming the scope is NOT sent back for correction), one will need to determine whether they will use hold-over or dial-in corrections because the bubble level cannot be squared with both the reticle and turrets simultaneously.
If one is using hold-over, the bubble level should be squared with the reticle to ensure the vertical stadia is held plumb to the fall of the bullet.
If one is using dial-in corrections, the bubble level should be squared with the turret housing to ensure it is held plumb to the fall of the bullet.
Scenario 2 - Straight Reticle
In this case, the reticle and turret housing are square to each other. Install the bubble level and use either hold-over or dial-in elevation corrections as a centered bubble in the scope level indicate both the reticle and turret are square to the fall of the bullet.
At the end of the day, the most critical thing I want to accomplish is to square my scope level to either the reticle or the turret housing (which will be one-in-the-same if the reticle was installed straight) and use the scope level to ensure I hold square to the fall of the bullet when I pull the trigger.
In regards to my last post...
If the scope is installed with the turret housing perfectly square to the rail (and assuming the rail is square to the receiver), then positioning the rifle with zero cant (using something like the EXD tool) should place the vertical turret perfectly square to gravity. This will allow one to see if the reticle was installed straight with the turrets by observing a known vertical line (plumb bob, side of building, etc.). I believe this might be the most practical way to make that evaluation.
Scenario 1 - Canted Reticle
If the reticle appears canted when doing the above evaluation, it would be reasonable to conclude the reticle was installed canted to the turrets when the scope was made. If that is the case (and assuming the scope is NOT sent back for correction), one will need to determine whether they will use hold-over or dial-in corrections because the bubble level cannot be squared with both the reticle and turrets simultaneously.
If one is using hold-over, the bubble level should be squared with the reticle to ensure the vertical stadia is held plumb to the fall of the bullet.
If one is using dial-in corrections, the bubble level should be squared with the turret housing to ensure it is held plumb to the fall of the bullet.
Scenario 2 - Straight Reticle
In this case, the reticle and turret housing are square to each other. Install the bubble level and use either hold-over or dial-in elevation corrections as a centered bubble in the scope level indicate both the reticle and turret are square to the fall of the bullet.
At the end of the day, the most critical thing I want to accomplish is to square my scope level to either the reticle or the turret housing (which will be one-in-the-same if the reticle was installed straight) and use the scope level to ensure I hold square to the fall of the bullet when I pull the trigger.
Manufacturers have tolerances. They will not replace the scope if reticle is off by a few degrees. I’ll say it again. The turret does not matter. If the reticle is level, you can account for turret tracking and hold over and dial. You are forgetting you dial out any variance when u zero. The bubble level, if u choose to use it and it’s completely unnecessary, should be level with the reticle. The reticle is your point of interaction with the bullet. Why would you not want that to be perfect with the call of gravity? I just don’t get it. The reticle is all that matters.Great conversation! There is so much muddy water around this topic I think many get lost in the logic.
In regards to my last post...
If the scope is installed with the turret housing perfectly square to the rail (and assuming the rail is square to the receiver), then positioning the rifle with zero cant (using something like the EXD tool) should place the vertical turret perfectly square to gravity. This will allow one to see if the reticle was installed straight with the turrets by observing a known vertical line (plumb bob, side of building, etc.). I believe this might be the most practical way to make that evaluation.
Scenario 1 - Canted Reticle
If the reticle appears canted when doing the above evaluation, it would be reasonable to conclude the reticle was installed canted to the turrets when the scope was made. If that is the case (and assuming the scope is NOT sent back for correction), one will need to determine whether they will use hold-over or dial-in corrections because the bubble level cannot be squared with both the reticle and turrets simultaneously.
If one is using hold-over, the bubble level should be squared with the reticle to ensure the vertical stadia is held plumb to the fall of the bullet.
If one is using dial-in corrections, the bubble level should be squared with the turret housing to ensure it is held plumb to the fall of the bullet.
Scenario 2 - Straight Reticle
In this case, the reticle and turret housing are square to each other. Install the bubble level and use either hold-over or dial-in elevation corrections as a centered bubble in the scope level indicate both the reticle and turret are square to the fall of the bullet.
At the end of the day, the most critical thing I want to accomplish is to square my scope level to either the reticle or the turret housing (which will be one-in-the-same if the reticle was installed straight) and use the scope level to ensure I hold square to the fall of the bullet when I pull the trigger.
This is where you are precisely 100% wrong.
Turrets DO matter, quite a bit, and any manufacturer with a decent reputation will repair or replace a scope with a canted reticle. You can account for turret tracking, yes, however this adds unnecessary complication that will run you out of time if you're on the clock in a competition.
You also seem to be discounting the fact that most people prefer to dial instead of hold over. Dialing is a more precise method of aiming than holding over in most scenarios, and allows you the greatest optical clarity and flexibility on magnification since the target will be near the center of your field of view. You may prefer to hold over (I, myself, actually prefer to hold over because it's faster when on the clock), but the majority of folks do not and will opt to dial their elevation.
Dialing elevation and having to account for a horizontal shift in your aim is a pain in the ass, because it's one more thing to remember under pressure and one more thing to manage on the clock.
I understand 100%.
I’m not saying holding over is superior and I know dialing is better. But just because your turret is level........how do you know the mechanism inside is perfect? Obviously I wouldn’t accept an offset between the ret and turret of more than a few degrees.
Let’s just agree to disagree.
You don't know it's perfect, but you do know the turret is perpendicular with the base of the turret on a properly manufactured scope. Any scope without that has a manufacturing defect that will be covered under the manufacturer's warranty, the same as any situation involving a canted reticle within the scope.
Turrets can't randomly move sideways, they're a threaded hole with detents that moves the lenses within the scope. If the turret is level (and it's incredibly easy to machine threads that are straight and perpendicular to a given surface like the base of the turret), then it will track straight up and down along that level unless the windage turret interferes and interacts with the elevation turret during normal operation.
When I sat back and re-read all of the responses again, we are spending a lot of time discussing a situation that should never really occur. I say that because to me, a rifle system HAS TO HAVE the following characteristics:
A rifleman's responsibilities are:
Just my 2 cents
- A rail (integrally machined) that is is true and level horizontally.
- A scope that has a reticle that is square to the turret.
A rifleman's responsibilities are:
- Know how to mount his optic using whatever method he is comfortable with.
- Ensure that the required rifle characteristics are met.
- Properly level the reticle to a good plumb when the rifle is in position. My rifle has an adjustable butt-plate so if my hold introduces a cant, I should be able to adjust that out without disturbing the mount. If the rifle meets the 2 characteristics above, there is no issue as the reticle and turret are square. There is no error. If the reticle is installed improperly or the turret is not true, it is junk. I really don't care if they can be compensated out or whatever...junk is junk. Return to sender.
Just my 2 cents
Exactly!
I read this entire thread and was hoping someone would say exactly what you did - so I didn't have to!
If it's off, it's junk. There is no linear compensation for an optic that was manufactured "incorrectly".
@ Nik H -
Yes, having the reticle installed by the manufacturer perfectly square with the turrets makes life MUCH easier! We expect that from a quality scope but unfortunately we don't always get that.
Another link of interest - https://bangsteel.wordpress.com/2013/05/19/canted-scope-or-canted-rifle-the-difference/
The take-away is that assuming a reticle that is square to the turrets (a common assumption in many discussions on this topic), the most critical piece of the puzzle is to hold the reticle level when shooting. The scope can be installed visibly canted on the rifle but as long as the reticle is held level, the error is very minor.
The Badger Dead Level tool remains a $165.00 mystery to me. It positions the tool rail perfectly level but then has the user set the scope in the rings by aligning the reticle to a plumb bob or other known vertical. In other words, it assumes that the reticle is perfectly square to the turrets and provides no means to verify that it is.
In the spirit of saving you $165, place your rifle and bipod on a solid surface (I place mine on the concrete floor of my garage). With a $10 torpedo level from Home Depot placed across the rail, adjust the cant of the bipod until the bubble is centered in the level. Then view through the scope at a known vertical line (like the corner of your neighbor's house), align the vertical stadia line to that vertical and tighten down the rings.
Squaring the reticle to the rail (or bore) is FAR less important than holding the reticle level when shooting. Take the $165 I just saved you and buy a nice anti-cant scope level.
Or, feel free to dismiss it all as "mental masturbation." ;-)
Yes, having the reticle installed by the manufacturer perfectly square with the turrets makes life MUCH easier! We expect that from a quality scope but unfortunately we don't always get that.
Another link of interest - https://bangsteel.wordpress.com/2013/05/19/canted-scope-or-canted-rifle-the-difference/
The take-away is that assuming a reticle that is square to the turrets (a common assumption in many discussions on this topic), the most critical piece of the puzzle is to hold the reticle level when shooting. The scope can be installed visibly canted on the rifle but as long as the reticle is held level, the error is very minor.
The Badger Dead Level tool remains a $165.00 mystery to me. It positions the tool rail perfectly level but then has the user set the scope in the rings by aligning the reticle to a plumb bob or other known vertical. In other words, it assumes that the reticle is perfectly square to the turrets and provides no means to verify that it is.
In the spirit of saving you $165, place your rifle and bipod on a solid surface (I place mine on the concrete floor of my garage). With a $10 torpedo level from Home Depot placed across the rail, adjust the cant of the bipod until the bubble is centered in the level. Then view through the scope at a known vertical line (like the corner of your neighbor's house), align the vertical stadia line to that vertical and tighten down the rings.
Squaring the reticle to the rail (or bore) is FAR less important than holding the reticle level when shooting. Take the $165 I just saved you and buy a nice anti-cant scope level.
Or, feel free to dismiss it all as "mental masturbation." ;-)
Last edited:
I have a suggestion. Buy better equipment. I’m not rich enough to buy junk. No scope I have ever purchased has had this issue. Problem solved. The Badger has the advantage of eliminating the need for leveling a rifle with multiple levels, etc. The cost is inconsiquential.
I already have a scope level and it is set properly and used every shot.
This whole thread is mental masturbation.
Buy good equipment and be done with it
So, you can "only afford" to buy S&B? Even NightForce only guarantees no worse than .5 degree reticle offset. Unless you have taken the time to actually evaluate your scopes, you'll never know if the reticles are canted or not (assuming you know how to do so).
"Buy good equipment and be done with it." And you keep bringing up masturbation..... ;-)
I can buy whatever I choose to whenever I choose to. I have Benders, NF, Khales, USO. All have pros and cons but none ever failed my criteria out of the box.
I have no real desire to argue about what my capabilities of evaluating my equipment are or how much time I spend in doing so. I don’t know you from Adam.
I am sure your capabilities and knowledge exceed mine. I’ll have to live with that.
Good luck to you and your choice of equipment.
I have no real desire to argue about what my capabilities of evaluating my equipment are or how much time I spend in doing so. I don’t know you from Adam.
I am sure your capabilities and knowledge exceed mine. I’ll have to live with that.
Good luck to you and your choice of equipment.
Not even close to the majority of shooters can afford S&B, Nightforce, Kahles, or US Optics. For the majority of shooters the best they can afford is Leupold, Bushnell, Vortex, or Athlon. All of these brands are more likely to have a canted reticle.
I agree that canted reticle scopes should be sent back for warranty repairs. That said, if you've got a match coming up the weekend after you get your scope you'll need to make do with what you have. This is where knowing if the reticle is canted becomes important to the technique you use to level your scope.
Besides, if the scopes you use are all as good as you say without a canted reticle why do you bother buying a stupidly expensive kit to level it over something like the Arisaka tool? It's slower and more difficult to use, by far. The Arisaka tool literally just has you place the insert on the rail and shove a wedge in there before torquing the screws on your ring or mount. No muss, no fuss, no levels required and a very cheap solution that takes 30 seconds to use.
I'm not debating.
I have used the Arisaka tool for a while and still do. It doesn't work well in some applications due to the clearance to the rail. I first saw the Arisaka concept when I bought my first Spuhr mount. Made perfect sense.
I have a Wheeler tool. It works but it is a pain to use.
I used automotive shims before the Arisaka and Spuhr and that was quick and worked.
I've used playing cards in a pinch as long as they were made by Bicycle...
Fact is I am always looking at new things to try. I always learn something. I honestly enjoy being able to mount and align my optics to my rifle. It doesn't take long. The tall target testing takes longer and is more important. You have to remember that there are a lot of people that actually pay someone to do all of this for them. It is self satisfying and critical to know your rifle/optic to that degree. Lots of people here take that for granted.
Time utilization is important to me. Truth be told, I don't have a lot of time so I prefer to be shooting.
Fact that many forget is proof is in the pudding. If you can meet your goals for performance by the gun, then you must be doing something right. Your process for eliminating any errors in your rifle system has to be solid or you wouldn't be meeting your goals.
Forgive me for saying but there are a lot of blowhards sitting behind keyboards and braggers on the range that are "having a bad day".
My pass/fail for my process is how well I do. It passes.
That is all I am trying to say.
Last edited:
Trust but Verify
The scope is the weakest link in your precision rifle system, you have to test it, especially with OEM products that are not assembled in the US or at the parent location. Most are batch tested.
There is a ton here to unpack, so don’t expect me to read every post, but a lot of what I have read is bad.
1. The true nature of the reticle is a Horus talking point, holding is not more precise, otherwise the other precision disciplines would be using it more. It’s a tlking point from a company that used to only have their reticles in cheap Asian scope, namely Hakko
The Reticles are never squared to the turrets, they use the flat at the bottom. Think about the construction of a scope. The turrets are screws that push or release on the erector which has tension from a spring. The erector has the reticle attached to it, that erector tube is placed inside the scope main tube and is not attached to the turrets, but held under spring tension. Because of that you are not just testing the tracking in terms of adjustment, but by design, some display a curve at the top end of the adjustment range. That curve is because of two round objects being moved in a linear way. If you get too far out to one side a curve will appear.
The spec for a company can vary, so whether it is .5 degrees or 2 degrees, there is a spec and that spec can display an error and still not be eligible for warranty.
The shot,
The bullet only cares about gravity, which is why the plumb line is still one of the best methods of alignment. Once the bullet leaves the barrel it only cares about gravity so you have to make sure the scope is aligned to the fall of gravity. Part of the tall target test, that curve I just mentioned. This is why a tiny 8.5x11 box test is useless. You need to compound the error to see it, that means a lot of travel dialed in.
The human factor,
We are the biggest error factor in the system. As Bryan Litz said on my podcast this week, we are not shooting via a video game. The human factor is still the most important variable to control. No matter how careful you are to square everything up, you are at a bigger disadvantage if you then induce a cant, regardless of how small vs setting up the rifle and scope to your natural hold. David Tubb talks about that a lot, your natural hold. It;s the reason his rifles will let you mount the rail off 0 (zero) . Your brain will subconsciously move things on you and induce canting if you are not careful or better, comfortable. I will say right now, your body is not square, so why is your rifle.
We start off one way, but new or less experienced shooters will quickly move one way or another and it usually takes a few shots and a growing number of degrees to notice it. Hence inconsistent groups and results down range.
Think about your car, if I walked out to your car right now and move either the seat or the mirror you’d notice. That is because we have hours, if not days or weeks behind the wheel. Most people are lucky to have an hour a month behind the wheel of their rifles. Lot harder to notice the changes. First thing we do with a new car is adjust it for us, then a month or so later we adjust it again to fine tune that feeling. It’s all subconscious after that, we can dance around the interior and stay between the lines. For rifles and scopes people just go, square rifle and square scope, and I am good. End of story, okay that is why you are 1/2 as good as you think you are.
We are driving a rifle, we have to set it up to the individual shooter.
That small ghetto cant in your rifle with your scope set to the fall of gravity is a much better way of doing business because we are addressing it on a subconscious level. Tom Cruise, no mind.
You have to test all these factors, travel and tracking, fall of the bullet to gravity, with the reticle aligned to gravity.
Don;t use the turrets and who cares about the barrel, the thing is round and the bullet is only concerned with gravity at that point, which is why people think holding is better. Trust but verify and understand the inner workings of your optic.
The scope is the weakest link in your precision rifle system, you have to test it, especially with OEM products that are not assembled in the US or at the parent location. Most are batch tested.
There is a ton here to unpack, so don’t expect me to read every post, but a lot of what I have read is bad.
1. The true nature of the reticle is a Horus talking point, holding is not more precise, otherwise the other precision disciplines would be using it more. It’s a tlking point from a company that used to only have their reticles in cheap Asian scope, namely Hakko
The Reticles are never squared to the turrets, they use the flat at the bottom. Think about the construction of a scope. The turrets are screws that push or release on the erector which has tension from a spring. The erector has the reticle attached to it, that erector tube is placed inside the scope main tube and is not attached to the turrets, but held under spring tension. Because of that you are not just testing the tracking in terms of adjustment, but by design, some display a curve at the top end of the adjustment range. That curve is because of two round objects being moved in a linear way. If you get too far out to one side a curve will appear.
The spec for a company can vary, so whether it is .5 degrees or 2 degrees, there is a spec and that spec can display an error and still not be eligible for warranty.
The shot,
The bullet only cares about gravity, which is why the plumb line is still one of the best methods of alignment. Once the bullet leaves the barrel it only cares about gravity so you have to make sure the scope is aligned to the fall of gravity. Part of the tall target test, that curve I just mentioned. This is why a tiny 8.5x11 box test is useless. You need to compound the error to see it, that means a lot of travel dialed in.
The human factor,
We are the biggest error factor in the system. As Bryan Litz said on my podcast this week, we are not shooting via a video game. The human factor is still the most important variable to control. No matter how careful you are to square everything up, you are at a bigger disadvantage if you then induce a cant, regardless of how small vs setting up the rifle and scope to your natural hold. David Tubb talks about that a lot, your natural hold. It;s the reason his rifles will let you mount the rail off 0 (zero) . Your brain will subconsciously move things on you and induce canting if you are not careful or better, comfortable. I will say right now, your body is not square, so why is your rifle.
We start off one way, but new or less experienced shooters will quickly move one way or another and it usually takes a few shots and a growing number of degrees to notice it. Hence inconsistent groups and results down range.
Think about your car, if I walked out to your car right now and move either the seat or the mirror you’d notice. That is because we have hours, if not days or weeks behind the wheel. Most people are lucky to have an hour a month behind the wheel of their rifles. Lot harder to notice the changes. First thing we do with a new car is adjust it for us, then a month or so later we adjust it again to fine tune that feeling. It’s all subconscious after that, we can dance around the interior and stay between the lines. For rifles and scopes people just go, square rifle and square scope, and I am good. End of story, okay that is why you are 1/2 as good as you think you are.
We are driving a rifle, we have to set it up to the individual shooter.
That small ghetto cant in your rifle with your scope set to the fall of gravity is a much better way of doing business because we are addressing it on a subconscious level. Tom Cruise, no mind.
You have to test all these factors, travel and tracking, fall of the bullet to gravity, with the reticle aligned to gravity.
Don;t use the turrets and who cares about the barrel, the thing is round and the bullet is only concerned with gravity at that point, which is why people think holding is better. Trust but verify and understand the inner workings of your optic.
Human error 9 times out of 10 is where I drop the ball. Still trying to become more tactically proficient out to 300. Add into the equation a very small amount of time to execute the delivery and it's the perfect recipe for me to fail. For me it all keeps coming back to the basics. Dialing in SOP.
Still learning.
Still learning.
Without a doubt, we all suffer that same problem. Even a basic rifle with a $500 scope is far more capable than the majority of those who own and shoot them.
I like Lowlight's analogy to driving a car. Like most other casual/recreational shooters, I don't spend even a tiny fraction of the time "driving the rifle" as do my car. The overwhelmingly vast majority of my time is spent like this, studying and discussing the minutia of both gear and technique. Through this process I can better judge potential gear upgrades and evaluate my technique, all with the goal of optimizing my limited time spent at the range.
If after each range session I can honestly say that improvement on some level has been made, I consider the time and expenditure well-spent. For some of us (including me), this is actually the most enjoyable part of the process.
My sincere thanks to all for sharing your thoughts and experiences.
Similar threads
Rifle Scopes
leveling a H34L Aimpoint, no bottom flat red dot
