What mag. are yall using when you shoot test loads for groups at 100 off bags? I am using 12-15x. I am just trying to find out if I am over magnifying.
Ryan
Ryan
Rifle Scopes What magnification do you use when shooting at 100 yds strictly for group size?
- Thread starter Punisher29073
- Start date
I use 20X, some times as low as 15X when shooting for 5 shot groups at 100 yards. Any more than that and mirage gets to bad.
I use the most I can with mirage being limiting factor. IF I got 42x, that's what I use. With my 32x and 42x NF. I can still be very precise.
I used 14x on my last range trip. I have a sheet of 1 inch squares that I post at 100 yards, then I zoom in the magnification to make the square a decent size, however big that might be. For load development, I line the bottom edge and the right edge of the square up with the -x and y coordinate of my reticule. The goal is to get the two edges of the square to touch the two lines of the cross hairs, essentially aiming at the bottom right corner of the black square. I have also found that using less magnification can also be helpful, as more magnification will sometimes cause a shooter to fuss the shot more.
Was shooting at 100 and 150 today.
Ran my XRS at 30x until the barrel heated up and mirage got annoying, then backed it down until it was less annoying, maybe 20x or so.
Joe
Ran my XRS at 30x until the barrel heated up and mirage got annoying, then backed it down until it was less annoying, maybe 20x or so.
Joe
OK Great. I guess the concensus is Im not turning it up enough. I will try that this weekend. Thanks so much for the input.
Ryan
Ryan
+1 i use nxs. put it bet 10-12 that makes it 11 i guess..the higher you go the more on sensitiity on cross hair...BUT ill try 22x next time
42X for bug holes at 100yrds in the early morning. 600 yards @ 20X for load load testing because 100 is too close IMHO for "the" most accurate load for a given High Power rifle.
Hola buenas noches y me presento, soy Agus del sur de España.
Un honor y placer poder meterme por aquí aunque no hable apenas inglés americano, ninguno en verdad que no sea el mío.
Soy partidario de poner el aumento al mínimo siempre que pueda ver con claridad el MOA y poder dividirlo con 4 porciones de pizza de 90º. También está claro que depende del tipo de retícula. Por ejemplo, en la retícula EBR-7C de mi Vortex imposible de afinar con el mínimo de 5X. Casi en 10x me quedo.
Por otro lado en la Smichdt & Bender PM 3-12x50 del AW me permite un buen zero con 4x a 100m retícula Mil-Dot.
Pero siempre el mínimo posible. Apunta a un botón de la camisa por ejemplo no al pecho.
Bajo aumento, visión pequeña en caso de error humano será pequeño.
Aumento grande, objetivo grande y posible error grande.
Un honor y placer poder meterme por aquí aunque no hable apenas inglés americano, ninguno en verdad que no sea el mío.
Soy partidario de poner el aumento al mínimo siempre que pueda ver con claridad el MOA y poder dividirlo con 4 porciones de pizza de 90º. También está claro que depende del tipo de retícula. Por ejemplo, en la retícula EBR-7C de mi Vortex imposible de afinar con el mínimo de 5X. Casi en 10x me quedo.
Por otro lado en la Smichdt & Bender PM 3-12x50 del AW me permite un buen zero con 4x a 100m retícula Mil-Dot.
Pero siempre el mínimo posible. Apunta a un botón de la camisa por ejemplo no al pecho.
Bajo aumento, visión pequeña en caso de error humano será pequeño.
Aumento grande, objetivo grande y posible error grande.
Funny,his post is on topic.
It must mean he is using his browser to translate.
Why didn't it translate back the other way ?
Obviously he's saying he uses a S&B PM3 set at 4x for 100 meter groups and says (with my shit spanish) that using a larger objective results in larger errors ????
I really hope I got that wrong because I have big scopes and little ones and have never seen any difference regarding objective size.
He’s using so much magnification he was able to look back in time and resurrect this thread from 9yrs in the past….
Your Spanish probably isn’t any worse than Apple’s. But, I think he’s saying that high magnification magnifies aiming errors. This, however, I don’t think is correct. Low magnification just prevents you from seeing the errors you are making…
Perdón por la traducción, por ser nuevo y comenzar por aquí.
Pienso que poder utilizar la menor magnificación posible, menor movimiento óptico, mejor agrupación. También mas exigente para el tirador.
¿Apuntas al pecho de un hombre? No, apunta al botón de la camisa que lleva ese hombre.
Cuando no comienzo a percibir con seguridad de buena parada en el centro del moa aumento magnificación.
Last edited:
If your scope is moving under high magnification, it is also moving under low magnification. You just can’t see the movement because of the low magnification.
To expand on the button versus shirt, a thread hole in the button provides a much more precise point of aim. But, you won’t see it without more magnification.
I have scopes with as much as 25x magnification. While I rarely use more than 12-15x for long distance shooting, I’m at maximum magnification for short range precision shooting. To that point, you can be assured I’m at 25x with a 22 long rifle at 25 yards.
In April of 2013 I posted I used 15X -20x. Now 9 years later with my aging eyes I use 21x to 25X on my AR's and on my AIAW I use a NightForce 8-32X56. Tough getting old.
I use 6X or 10X fixed, cause these are hunting rifles (22LR - 300WM). I use a 1/2" red dot sticker as my target. Easy to shoot sub-MOA with either at 100 yards.
For load development, even at 100 yards . I always take the golden eagle. For me it’s easier to focus on trigger control when the target appears as close as possible. Usually around 50x with a nice fine crosshair. That being said the recticle for me plays a huge role as well.
I also use a Rock BR in the front and a huge Protektor 4” long rabbit ear in the rear.
I also use a Rock BR in the front and a huge Protektor 4” long rabbit ear in the rear.
I mean, if we’re intent on resurrecting this thread... I find it just doesn’t matter. I’ve shot with 12x because that’s what I had, 4x because that’s what I had, 24x becaus that’s what I had, 16-18x because I wanted an “eye box” that didn’t suck, etc.
You’re stable on the gun or you’re not. Visual feedback is one way to get that information, but it’s a double edged sword if you’re allowing visual stimuli to degrade your trigger break. As long as you can make out a crisp POA on the target appropriate for your sights, you’re good.
You’re stable on the gun or you’re not. Visual feedback is one way to get that information, but it’s a double edged sword if you’re allowing visual stimuli to degrade your trigger break. As long as you can make out a crisp POA on the target appropriate for your sights, you’re good.
Similar threads
- Poll
