Rifle Scopes Scope perfection the myth

[Jaeger308]

I have read many, many threads of opinions about which scope or manufacturer is best, have issues or downright suck. I also have an opinion, but it is not about which one is best, but an opinion that they need to do several things well, and that they all can and will break and ALL fall short of perfection, regardless of how much you paid for them.

Question too all folks here;

-How many of you truly calibrate your new scopes? Not just barber pole the reticle, ladder test or box test, but run elevation and windage travel on a scale set at exactly 100 yards and then use that percentage of error in firing solutions? I have yet to find a scope that is perfect some have come close, some not so much. If the scope tracks equal but not at true MOA or MIL deal with it, if it slips during tracking then you have a bad one.
I am a land surveyor now, I calibrate $15,000-20,000 survey total stations several times a year, they are not perfect, and knowing how to deal with error is part of the process.

-How many of you just hold a quality scope in your hand, have an orgasm saying WOW this thing is bigger than my dick and thinking I just spent X amount of dollars, this thing is perfect?

- How many of you check point if impact changes at different power settings?

- How many of you just run elevation and windage knobs feeling the detents and say they feel nice or are mush, never really understanding true travel vs actual travel, refer back to my first question?

-Bottom line here is we have all seen scopes go tits up for differing reasons; perhaps some go more than others? Sure, but let’s keep in mind they are all manmade, running a SWS is as much about your self gained confidence in it, as in its perceived perfection from other opinions.

-A quote from a wise man “Beware of the man who owns only one rifle, he probably knows how to use it.”

 

[Ratbert]

Re: Scope perfection the myth

It seems like a lot of scope purchases are similar to high-end watch purchases. People buy them but then get frustrated because none of their friends know enough to be envious. So, off to the computer to compose a "review."

 

[Advokaten]

Re: Scope perfection the myth

I do and I have.

optics are just a means to a goal, hit it.

Best regards Chris

 

[Switchblade]

Re: Scope perfection the myth

I have an ST-10. When I was trying to get my groups down to a 1/2 MOA size, I made a 1" grid of 5mm red dots on paper and took it to 100M. To shoot each red dot I would make adjustments to get to the next dot. Other days I would just move my POA to the next dot. When actually using elevation and windage adjustments I would hit the dots, but POI would shift to the outer edges of the tertiary dots and not come back to center until I moved back to my original dope. Extremely close? Yes. Dead On? No. Within tolerance of 1/2MOA groups to 300M, and 400M?(My max range at that range) Yes.

To see exactly how much error I have, will bagging the rifle moving 10MOA work at 100M on paper? I do not see how with all things considering error can be accurately measured at 100M with only a 4 click(1MOA) movement of the knobs. We are talking about a difference of 1" and 1.047" which can be duplicated by slight movement in the bag, or slight movement when firing.
Definately makes a guy think a little though

 

[Jaeger308]

Re: Scope perfection the myth

I made a jig out of hard wood that I mount a scope with rings onto, this jig gets clamped down onto a bench, using shims under the base I aim it at an index zero point on a scale based on true MOA 1.047” or MILs I have plotted out from Auto Cad.
I run the travel up and down 40 MOA or so and left to right 10-12 MOA of my index zero recording true travel as I go along. I also use a steel 100 foot tape (not a range finder), and setup exactly 100 yards or meters from target face to centerline of turret mechanicals on a scope. Once clamped down it is rock solid and does not move or drift, and then run this several times and reproduce results. Taking the true travel and converting it into a percentage of true MOA or MIL, then factor that into firing solutions from ballistic programs, FFS does a nice job with this by the way.
I currently am running a USO SN-3 that is not stellar in its tracking but is constant, understand its error and work it out. I like the scope and with knowing and managing its error, it works fine for me.
The point of my post is learn and understand error in scopes, as long as it is a constant it is workable. Does this mean my USO should be bashed or flamed on the forum? I say not, deal with it and work it out.

 

[Lindy]

Re: Scope perfection the myth

I have made the same kind of rig, and use it about the same way. Very handy.

Standard tolerance for error in scope adjustments is in the 1-2% range. Many scopes don't meet that standard.

If it hasn't been tested, you don't know what you've got.

 

[orkan]

Re: Scope perfection the myth

I've wanted to make a jig just like you are saying, but I'm not a cad guy so I didn't really come up with how to make the scale.

Do you mind sharing the details of your setup, and can you email me the cad image to use?

In the past, I've only done box test as well as map the entire elevation using turret. Generally I know if a scope will work after running the box and taking a few long range shots.

If it doesn't work, it doesn't work... no matter the money spent.

However, I must admit that every magnified optic I own is bigger than my dick, and I might have had a little orgasm when I touched my premier for the first time.

 

[decodeddiesel]

Re: Scope perfection the myth

Great thread, and a good reality check. This reminds me of my time in artillery using the aiming circles. We had to quantify the optical error in the aiming circles and it was a very similar process ot the one you have described.

OT: Still thought I must say something about the "beware of the man with one gun." I think it's straight BS. To me that means the guy doesn't give a shit about guns he just has one to bring out every couple of years, pop a couple rounds at a zero target and then try to get an elk or deer with it. These are the guys that show up at the rifle range, sweep everyone on the line with their weapons, then when they clear it at the command of the RSO oops out pops a live round from the chamber. "Guess that must have been left over from last year."

 

[clmayfield]

Re: Scope perfection the myth

That jig is an awesome idea. I need to build one. I do box tests, but with shifty winds, they can't be as accurate as this method.

 

[gunderwood]

Re: Scope perfection the myth

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: decodeddiesel</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Great thread, and a good reality check. This reminds me of my time in artillery using the aiming circles. We had to quantify the optical error in the aiming circles and it was a very similar process ot the one you have described.

OT: Still thought I must say something about the "beware of the man with one gun." I think it's straight BS. To me that means the guy doesn't give a shit about guns he just has one to bring out every couple of years, pop a couple rounds at a zero target and then try to get an elk or deer with it. These are the guys that show up at the rifle range, sweep everyone on the line with their weapons, then when they clear it at the command of the RSO oops out pops a live round from the chamber. "Guess that must have been left over from last year."

</div></div>

Perhaps a reference scale is needed based on how "tac-cool" the gun is?

 

[BOLTRIPPER]

Re: Scope perfection the myth

i just yesterday saw and shot on a huge sheet of paper that was almost the size of the plywood backer it was stapled to....and printed on the paper in very subtle ink was the gradation to check the reticule and tracking....it was huge...at least five foot tall....for the life of me i can't remember the company that supplied it.....

 

[JRose]

Re: Scope perfection the myth

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BOLTRIPPER</div><div class="ubbcode-body">i just yesterday saw and shot on a huge sheet of paper that was almost the size of the plywood backer it was stapled to....and printed on the paper in very subtle ink was the gradation to check the reticule and tracking....it was huge...at least five foot tall....for the life of me i can't remember the company that supplied it..... </div></div>

Horusvision offers such product BR...
CATS

 

[chpprguy]

Re: Scope perfection the myth

While this is not nearly as accurate....
I dialed amounts in elevation and windage and then held that amount with my reticle (all at 100yards)
to verify that turrets and reticle match....
I went 4 mils in every direction in half mil increments....

Is this a reasonable test?
thoughts?

 

[orkan]

Re: Scope perfection the myth

The jig to eval the scope, and one of those big ass pre-printed targets to evaluate the alignment on the gun. Nice.

 

[BOLTRIPPER]

Re: Scope perfection the myth

we are so technical...........

 

[Rob01]

Re: Scope perfection the myth

Do all that on every new scope I get. Always a good idea.

 

[THUNDERBOLT68]

Re: Scope perfection the myth

^

 

[Jaeger308]

Re: Scope perfection the myth

When I find some time I will take photos of my setup for this with notes, not that my way is the only one, perhaps with more input and ideas we all could better the system. I can print 42" wide by whatever long on my plotter. I first started this with a plot of whatever reticle I was using scaled up to match exactly 100 yards and did an overlay checking only the reticle as I adjusted power settings. It needs to be right at 100 yards for this to work.

The travel test was an afterthought from that, with input from Blaine Fields at FFS, his program takes your actual travel and gives both solutions the mathematical and your corrected one. Understand with a USO 1/2 MOA elevation that difference may only be in rounding up or down to the nearest increment. But with a MIL elevation you will see more.

Like Lindy said 1 to 2% is in the manufactures tolerance but I have seen upwards of 5-6% on some scopes, they will still work as long as you correct for them and it is constant throughout the travel.

 

[Helidriver]

Re: Scope perfection the myth

Hey Jaeger, do you think your jig would work with just a picatinny rail on it? Then use the rings from the rifle. Your set up is just really to hold the scope solid, correct?

 

[Jaeger308]

Re: Scope perfection the myth

That was the way I was heading when I first made the jig out of 3/4" maple boards. I was going to mount a spare P-rail on top, but my badger rings clamped nice, right on the side of the wood, so kept it simple.

All the jig is are two peices of board screwed together making a "T", the base big enough to hold clamps and the upright high enough to get the scope up and out of the way. I use door hanging shims under the base to adjust the cross hair on and then clamp down tight.

 

[sobrbiker883]

Re: Scope perfection the myth

PSW has a calibration target print option. if you can fix the scope and have a calibration target set at a measured distance you don't need to fire a shot to check out your scope-I prefer it this way, because I suck shooting on paper, and my error in shooting groups is wider than any of the decent scopes I've had.

While I'd like to say I do it everytime I get a scope, I can't. I usually mount and then verify that the reticle and adjustments match over a 10mil span then shoot. I collect DOPE and tweak my ballistic program to match and save it on my PDA, then make a range card for the usual conditions at me home range. May not be 100% but it works for me.

I do like to "spin" a scope in, and then see if the mechanical and optical centers are close to each other, too much of a variation there and it goes back to the manufacturer (if its not built for a certain offset).

I'm a grading foreman, so I'm used to checking the surveyor

 

[Jaeger308]

Re: Scope perfection the myth

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sobrbiker883</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I'm a grading foreman, so I'm used to checking the surveyor

</div></div>

Come on now the stake out is correct, you are just reading the lath backwards

 

[sobrbiker883]

Re: Scope perfection the myth

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Jaeger308</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The travel test was an afterthought from that, with input from Blaine Fields at FFS, his program takes your actual travel and gives both solutions the mathematical and your corrected one. Understand with a USO 1/2 MOA elevation that difference may only be in rounding up or down to the nearest increment. But with a MIL elevation you will see more.

Like Lindy said 1 to 2% is in the manufactures tolerance but I have seen upwards of 5-6% on some scopes, they will still work as long as you correct for them and it is constant throughout the travel.
</div></div>

Blaine has done much to try to make FFS the best for precision shooter's needs, and he's come a long way in doing so. One of these days by gov't handout money will come rolling in and I'll be able to buy a copy. I remember helping beta test PSW, man, FFS has come a long way!!

When you see the 5% tolerance, folks need to keep in mind that that's pretty much the difference between TMOA and SMOA (many USO's that people say are 5% out are IPHY scopes that have "moa" on the turrets-and then some are just off).

Biggest trick is know what your turrets are doing in relation to your POI and your reticle.

 

[sobrbiker883]

Re: Scope perfection the myth

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Jaeger308</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sobrbiker883</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I'm a grading foreman, so I'm used to checking the surveyor

</div></div>

Come on now the stake out is correct, you are just reading the lath backwards

</div></div>

"/then" or "//and then" from the hub, and don't go trying to take up my tolerances on the staking, I get a tenth, not you!

 

[Jaeger308]

Re: Scope perfection the myth

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sobrbiker883</div><div class="ubbcode-body">When you see the 5% tolerance, folks need to keep in mind that that's pretty much the difference between TMOA and SMOA (many USO's that people say are 5% out are IPHY scopes that have "moa" on the turrets-and then some are just off).

Biggest trick is know what your turrets are doing in relation to your POI and your reticle. </div></div>

Yes the percentage differnce from TMOA 1.047" and SMOA 1.000" is 4.5%.

For that correction POA to POI errors work out to be 10.5" at 500 yards and 21" at 1000 yards.

 

[sobrbiker883]

Re: Scope perfection the myth

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Jaeger308</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sobrbiker883</div><div class="ubbcode-body">When you see the 5% tolerance, folks need to keep in mind that that's pretty much the difference between TMOA and SMOA (many USO's that people say are 5% out are IPHY scopes that have "moa" on the turrets-and then some are just off).

Biggest trick is know what your turrets are doing in relation to your POI and your reticle. </div></div>

Yes the percentage differnce from TMOA 1.047" and SMOA 1.000" is 4.5%.

For that correction POA to POI errors work out to be 10.5" at 500 yards and 21" at 1000 yards. </div></div>

Sheesh, you surveyors......sure your decimal is in the right place on the 500?

500yds (308) is about 3mils, therefore:

3 (adjustment) X 3.6" (mil subtension per 100yd) X 5 (distance) X .045 (correction) gets me a 2.43" correction at 500 yards.
My dope (9.3 mils) gets me about a 15.1" error at 1000.



For those of us on the cheap, JBM's output can be configured in whatever percent of your chosen unit of measure you like for just such purposes as well. I used it when I hade my IPHY USO Sn3 for all my ballistics cards.

 

[DALLAS ROOTS]

Re: Scope perfection the myth

I've been a surveyor for the past 15yrs and I have always found it funny that people get a $3000 scope and think there is not any error in it, or that it tracks perfect, not going to happen.

I can turn an angle or shoot a point 100 times and never get the same measurement, this is with a laser and $20,000 equipment.
Nothing is perfect, every measurement we take has error factored in. Temp,pressure,humidity all factor in on a day to day basis that affect accuracy with survey equipment.

When it comes to scopes, many shooters don't really think about how temp,pressure and humidity affect the moving parts in a scope, so your scopes error is changing day to day.

I would think this scope error test should also be done on many different weather days to see just how much the error changes with cold and heat to get a good average for error to be factored in to your dope log.

 

[Jaeger308]

Re: Scope perfection the myth

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sobrbiker883</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Biggest trick is know what your turrets are doing in relation to your POI and your reticle. </div></div>

Yes, how many folks acually, one think about this and two test this?

 

[smokshwn]

Re: Scope perfection the myth

Holy shit...in all honesty I had not considered a good amount of this info...now I need an aspirin

One question though...after doing all this when do you guys find the time to shoot ?

 

[clmayfield]

Re: Scope perfection the myth

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: smokshwn</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
One question though...after doing all this when do you guys find the time to shoot ? </div></div>

Sure, you have less time to shoot, but I will take that over finding more time to miss