Scope reticle level confirmation

[Wilfong9]

Let’s see if I can keep from getting blasted for asking an “uneducated” marksmen question, in the uneducated forum...haha

I want to confirm my scope reticle is perfect, both from manufacturing and my install and tools.

Assume I took all the proper steps thus far and the scope is on the rifle as level as my tools allow.

My understanding seems like the center of the reticle shouldn’t be too affected by a scope partially rotated, or reticle manufacturing error with tilt. Where it seems the shooter will most be affected is when trying to use hold-over subtensions.

First off I have a Leupold Mk5 with the new pr-1moa reticle. I know there are other methods of testing the reticle (tall target test, ect). What do you guys think about simply dialing in 60 moa of elevation then using the 60moa hold under and seeing if the shot lands as aimed? Then doing the same thing along the windage axis?

I apologize about the jaded tone but kinda got bashed for no particular reason by one of the members in one of the last posts for no real reason. I think everyone is trying to better themselves and I’m just looking for education

 

[_Windrider_]

The best way, use a plumb bob. Line the reticle up with it. Best to do this off the rifle, but if you can’t to this make sure the rifle is level as well

 

[Lowlight]

Plumb line or level, Tall Target Test 100% of the travel if possible

 

[ShtrRdy]

You can get a partial answer by mounting the scope in a fixture and seeing if it tracks a plumb line. But to check the entire weapon system out I think you need to do a tall target test and really pay attention to the scope level while releasing the shot.

 

[corey4]

I recall a discussion about leveling the scope to the shooter, not the rifle. Everyone is going to hold the rifle a bit different and some people have a natural cant to the rifle.

 

[Carlos Danger]

I thought the scope and rifle should be matched so that the scope adjustments reflect the location the rifle is placing the bullet?

 

[corey4]

There was some back and forth discussion on which is correct, level to the shooter or rifle. I thought I had it saved in my "watched threads" but it's not there. Maybe it was on the scout hide or I just didn't subscribe to it. I tried s quick Google search but didn't find anything.

I'll try a Google search in a day or two. I'm gonna be a bit busy this weekend.

 

[_Windrider_]

The reticle MUST ALWAYS be level to gravity. The rifle however can be canted to fit the shooter. This the video you are thinking about where @Lowlight discusses this



The best way to do this as lowlight and myself have said is with either a plumb line or use a level. It’s best to do this with a jig and mount the scope in the rings or base when off the rifle. Then you simply mount the scope on the rifle and go. If you want to do the context rifle level scope approach it takes 2 people to do it effectively and right. Shooter gets behind rifle and gets it set in shoulder. With the scope mounted to rifle but loose enough where it can be rotated the second person rotates the scope while the shooter looks through it and when the reticle lines up with the bob or level, torque the rings. Now you have a canted rifle and a level reticle.

I’ll say it again, the reticle must be level. If not you are already failing.

 

[corey4]

That's what I was talking about, thank you. Level to gravity is a good way to put it, not level to shooter.

 

[Vodoun daVinci]

I apologize about the jaded tone but kinda got bashed for no particular reason by one of the members in one of the last posts for no real reason. I think everyone is trying to better themselves and I’m just looking for education

No such thing as stupid questions when we are here to learn. Some folks are gonna bust yer chops just because....the Ignore function on SH works fabulously and keeps me from wading thru stuff that isn't constructive.

The question has been answered perfectly - use a level or plumb line and level the reticle to gravity. I have had decent luck with leveling the whole rig so that when my reticle is level, the whole gun is level as a unit.

VooDoo

 

[_Windrider_]

You can get a partial answer by mounting the scope in a fixture and seeing if it tracks a plumb line. But to check the entire weapon system out I think you need to do a tall target test and really pay attention to the scope level while releasing the shot.

Tall target tests are for scope turret tracking but you can see cant effects as well as long as when you hang the target you take the extra time and attention to make sure the target is perfectly level.

 

[eastexsteve]

Maybe I make it hard on myself, but I make sure the reticle/scope is level with the rifle. Then, I adopt a shooting position that allows me to hold the whole thing level. A trick I rely on here in the Texas piney woods is that tall pine trees tend to grow straight up and down, no matter if the ground they are growing on is level or not. Next time you have a field of tall timber in your scope view, test it out.

 

[Namekagon]

I could be wrong, but I think OP is asking how to verify the subtensions of his reticle are correct.

 

[_Windrider_]

I could be wrong, but I think OP is asking how to verify the subtensions of his reticle are correct.

The reticle subtensions are likely perfect to withina thou. The only thing that isn’t 100% guaranteed is if the reticle is perfectly perpendicular to the turrets, hence the use of a plumb bob.

 

[Namekagon]

That’s what I thought, but wasn’t sure enough to be willing to say.

I suppose it could be possible for a reticle to be canted inside the scope, i.e. reticle vertical doesn’t match turret vertical. Just not sure how a guy would test for that. A tall target
test would make the scope ( leveled by an imperfect reticle) appear to not be tracking perfectly vertically, but how would you figure out if it’s the turret or reticle that was to blame?

 

[_Windrider_]

That’s what I thought, but wasn’t sure enough to be willing to say.

I suppose it could be possible for a reticle to be canted inside the scope, i.e. reticle vertical doesn’t match turret vertical. Just not sure how a guy would test for that. A tall target
test would make the scope ( leveled by an imperfect reticle) appear to not be tracking perfectly vertically, but how would you figure out if it’s the turret or reticle that was to blame?

You test it by hanging a plumb bob and twisting the scope until the reticle is aligned with the bob which is perfect with the fall of gravity. Putting a level on top of the turrets and leveling that will get you by for a while, but it isn’t the correct way to do it.

 

[Namekagon]

Right, I understand the leveling process. My point is, say the reticle and the turrets aren't correctly aligned with respect to each other. Using the reticle to plumb the scope would result in a turret that isn't plumb. This would reveal itself on a tall target test. As you dial up, you would also see left/right movement.

My question is, once you see that result on a tall target test, then what? Either its a turret that doesn't track perfectly vertical, or its a misaligned reticle. Its probably going back to the manufacturer either way, but is there a way to tell which problem you have?

 

[_Windrider_]

Right, I understand the leveling process. My point is, say the reticle and the turrets aren't correctly aligned with respect to each other. Using the reticle to plumb the scope would result in a turret that isn't plumb. This would reveal itself on a tall target test. As you dial up, you would also see left/right movement.

My question is, once you see that result on a tall target test, then what? Either its a turret that doesn't track perfectly vertical, or its a misaligned reticle. Its probably going back to the manufacturer either way, but is there a way to tell which problem you have?

I’m editing this caus e I reread your post.

A reticle that is slightly off shouldn’t cause too much of an issue. If it’s feally really obvious the turret and reticle aren’t perpendicular, do as you say, send it back..

 

[Vodoun daVinci]

I'm a newbie as well but have discovered that many scopes will deviate for plumb at extreme travel of the turret. If I dial from 0 to the maximum elevation on a decent scope there will usually be some deviation from "perfect". In good scopes it is minimal and able to be compensated for with experience.

In my opinion, tracking is more important than glass quality. If you dial elevation to the extremes and it doesn't stay perfectly level it will require a trip back to the manufacturer to resolve. Luckily I have not encountered this yet. None of them are perfect - the best scopes are certainly very close.

I always hang a line at 100, 200, or more yards and dial it. Roll the elevation from top to bottom and see how it stay level or doesn't. One can also sight vertical objects at distance and average it out. Telephone poles, the sides of buildings, communication towers etc. If I'm sighting a communications tower at 1000+ yards and my reticle stays plumb from 0 to max I call it good.

VooDoo

 

[beetroot]

Maybe I make it hard on myself, but I make sure the reticle/scope is level with the rifle. Then, I adopt a shooting position that allows me to hold the whole thing level. A trick I rely on here in the Texas piney woods is that tall pine trees tend to grow straight up and down, no matter if the ground they are growing on is level or not. Next time you have a field of tall timber in your scope view, test it out.

I would advise against this, as others have said it doesn't matter whether the rifle is canted or not, but the reticle needs to be perfectly vertical.

Much in the same way you need to set up your natural point of aim before taking a shot, you want the rifle to naturally sit level in your shoulder, you don't want to be muscling the rifle to keep it level (and therefore your scope) as you will likely cant the rifle to the natural point as you pull the trigger.

Easiest way to level your scope is set up a plum bob with the scope loose enough in the rings you can turn it, but with some friction.
With a good steady rest aim at the plum bob string and close your eyes, let the rifle settle in it's natural position and then look at the plum bob again. If the reticle has canted, adjust accordingly and do it again, keep repeating until the reticle stays vertical with the plum bob when your rifle sits naturally in your shoulder.

If you wish you can replace the plum bob with a level at least 2ft long, or even just hang something heavy on a string.

A friend of mine set up his scope and rifle perfectly level with a bubble level on the scope. The rifle was way off the natural position and took a lot of effort too hold it level, as soon as I looked away from the bubble I'd naturally can't the rifle instantly.
Twas a huge pain in the arse.

 

[_Windrider_]

I'm a newbie as well but have discovered that many scopes will deviate for plumb at extreme travel of the turret. If I dial from 0 to the maximum elevation on a decent scope there will usually be some deviation from "perfect". In good scopes it is minimal and able to be compensated for with experience.

In my opinion, tracking is more important than glass quality. If you dial elevation to the extremes and it doesn't stay perfectly level it will require a trip back to the manufacturer to resolve. Luckily I have not encountered this yet. None of them are perfect - the best scopes are certainly very close.

I always hang a line at 100, 200, or more yards and dial it. Roll the elevation from top to bottom and see how it stay level or doesn't. One can also sight vertical objects at distance and average it out. Telephone poles, the sides of buildings, communication towers etc. If I'm sighting a communications tower at 1000+ yards and my reticle stays plumb from 0 to max I call it good.

VooDoo

This is true of any scope. When you are at top end of travel the lens is already wonky. We talked about this somewhere else recently. It’s because of the erector mechanisms and the way they move internally. But yes good scopes it’s not as pronounced.

 

[Wilfong9]

Seems to me like all techniques listed above would require a scope level mounted to the scope tube, not the Picatinny rail of the rifle, and level to the reticle and plumb line? That would allow you to shoulder the rifle as accurate as the bubble level allows when looking at steel or a deer and not a plumb. I guess if you do both those, and can confirm your reticle is perfectly perpendicular across windage and elevation axis from manufacturing, the bullet should fall with both gravity and the reticle. My point with the manufacturing is if you dial elevation and hold wind, like most do it sounds, the vertical (plumb) is much less critical as the windage subtensions. Obviously both have to be perfect though for holding windage but has to be confirmed somehow.

Are these assumptions sound accurate?

 

[_Windrider_]

Seems to me like all techniques listed above would require a scope level mounted to the scope tube, not the Picatinny rail of the rifle, and level to the reticle and plumb line? That would allow you to shoulder the rifle as accurate as the bubble level allows when looking at steel or a deer and not a plumb. I guess if you do both those, and can confirm your reticle is perfectly perpendicular across windage and elevation axis from manufacturing, the bullet should fall with both gravity and the reticle. My point with the manufacturing is if you dial elevation and hold wind, like most do it sounds, the vertical (plumb) is much less critical as the windage subtensions. Obviously both have to be perfect though for holding windage but has to be confirmed somehow.

Are these assumptions sound accurate?

Bubble levels are a crutch. They are nice in the beginning but really not necessary. If you focus on the fundamentals and really perfect your shoooting position, you can feel and see when it’s not right on any terrain. Of course I’m not saying a bubble level is dumb, I’m just saying they can become a crutch and they can move.

Mounted on scope is preferred but mounted on gun only if you made the rifle and reticle perfectly level. If you did the intentional cant as discussed it’s a bad idea because if you level the gun at that point, guess what the reticle is now canted

 

[Wilfong9]

Yea that was exactly what I was getting at. If the scope and gun aren’t exact the level on the gun will never do anything for you.

I’ve found myself shooting in so many crazy positions over the years that it would be really hard for me to know my gun is level. I also shoot archery with the bubble in my bow sight. It’s crazy when you’re hanging out of tree stand how easy it is for you’re world to be slightly tilted.

 

[Braunschweiger]

@TangoSierra916 - this is a good thread on the debate you and I had in regards to scope leveling

 

[eastexsteve]

Bubble levels are a crutch. They are nice in the beginning but really not necessary. If you focus on the fundamentals and really perfect your shoooting position, you can feel and see when it’s not right on any terrain.

That's the point I was trying to make in a post earlier. I've always made sure that the scope/reticle was mounted level with the rifle. I have done it this way so long that I naturally seek to hold the rifle level, and reference the reticle with tall trees, distant horizon, etc to make sure that I was holding the rifle level. Actually, I probably came by this practice from many years of using iron sights.

Maybe I'm wrong, but it seems to me the whole idea of precision shooting depends upon eliminating variables. If your scope/reticle is not perfectly aligned and your rifle is canted, then your reticle is not in line with the center of that rifle barrel and you have just introduced a variable that shouldn't be there.

 

[G17C]

Maybe I'm wrong, but it seems to me the whole idea of precision shooting depends upon eliminating variables. If your scope/reticle is not perfectly aligned and your rifle is canted, then your reticle is not in line with the center of that rifle barrel and you have just introduced a variable that shouldn't be there.

IMO, you are not wrong. I believe those who are leveling the reticle to their natural POA are zeroing at a known distance, and then shooting at known distances in competition. In that controlled setting, they know how much windage correction to hold at non-zero distances to compensate for the lateral scope-to-bore offset...if they even bother to do so. I suspect that in comparison with the typical competitors' wobble zone, it's entirely inconsequential.

For extreme-range/extreme-precision shooting with the rifle fully supported, I agree that maintaining precise vertical alignment of the scope to the bore is one less variable to have to account for.

 

[JOS]

My receiver has the picatinny rail as part of itself. Not added but machined and I am assuming perfectly level. That is where I start. Level the reticle to that. Got a level that attaches to the rail which I am again assuming makes it zeroed to the action and the reticle. I can see the level while aiming. I can also see that canting the rifle while the level says level will cause me to miss at 700 yards. Still testing a SendIt. Used the Spuhr level for a while but had to move head out of shooting position. Level mounted to scope body was affected by weather and made the bubble different sizes. Still able to cant while "level" and miss at 700 yards. A ceramic ball level was better but still missing. Scope reticle leveling to action needs to be much easier.