Scope mounting
-
- AAA Poster
- Posts: 684
- Joined: Tue Jun 11, 2013 3:07 pm
- Location: West Monroe, LA
Re: Scope mounting
You keep speaking on distances entirely irrelevant for smallbore or air rifle silhouette (and silhouette completely more than once). Highpower silhouette would be more sensitive to the issue due to distance.Jerry G wrote:If you have a 3deg cant at 500m the error will be about 1/2 inch. Everyone wants a 1/2 minute gun but some are willing to give up 1/2 inch by not mounting their scope the way they should. I guess I am a little confused. You could buy a cheep 1 min gun and mount the scope right for a lot less money than most spend on a silhouette rifle and get the same group. It really doesn't mater to me how you like to mount your scope. Mount it un-level and don't forget to crank in windage.
Canting the scope has no impact on the rifle's potential precision (read: precision, not accuracy) so yes, a 1/2 minute gun with canted scope is still more appealing than a "right" mounted scope on a less capable rifle simply because if there is a windage issue from scope mounting, a click or two or three depending on distance negates any problem you may have had. Remembering to turn a windage turret is no more difficult than to remember to adjust elevation between banks of animals. Maybe I'm young enough to not have a memory problem and I'm not giving an issue enough credit because it's not applicable to me. Who knows.
It makes total sense. It follows exactly what I do as well. The cant amount isn't consistent across all of my rifles either. Many are straight up. I find that the more vertical the grip is, the more likely I naturally cant the rifle which is lucky considering lever silhouette is removed from this entire conversation since there isn't a scope but doesn't have those type grips either. My "worst" rifle is my Feinwerkbau 601 as far as cant goes.acorneau wrote:Since a small amount of scope cant (relative to the rifle) is mostly insignificant, I cant the scope on the rifle so that the scope is horizontally aligned with the target when the rifle is held in the most comfortable position. I don't compromise my stance/hold to match a perfect scope/rifle alignment and I don't hold the scope/rifle so the reticle is off-kilter to horizontal.Doodaddy wrote: That's kind of what my lines of questioning are geared towards. Where are shooters compensating? Hold or scope? Does an unnatural hold become natural after a few thousand stubborn shots? Or is the natural stance more important? Just all curiosity.
Does that make sense? I does in my head but sometimes it's hard to convey in words.
Lastly, I should mention that my smallbore rifle's scope is canted for my best hold but my TX200 is nearly straight.
I am NOT Danny Hatch.
-
- Uber Master Poster
- Posts: 2746
- Joined: Wed Apr 12, 2006 2:34 pm
- Location: Casa Grande, AZ
Re: Scope mounting
I do shoot my 6.5 all the way from 200m to 1,200 yds so it does matter to me. If you can live with the introduced error, I am OK with that. And all the time I thought we all strived to get the most accuracy from a rifle. I guess I am wrong.
- Jason
- Uber Master Poster
- Posts: 3002
- Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2006 7:36 pm
- Location: Snohomish, WA
Re: Scope mounting
How is it introducing error? It just adds a windage adjustment value between animals like we all have elevation adjustment values. If I could get a steadier hold just by twisting my windage knob a few clicks between animals I would. On my previous smallbore rifle, I did cant a few degrees inward to get a better cheek weld. It ended up being one click of windage at turkeys and one more at rams. It wasn't that difficult to remember.
-
- AAA Poster
- Posts: 684
- Joined: Tue Jun 11, 2013 3:07 pm
- Location: West Monroe, LA
Re: Scope mounting
It's not introducing error unless the shooter is erroneous. It doesn't change accuracy unless the shooter is erroneous (precision is static). A windage change isn't any different than an elevation change by scope function or shooter's memory.Jason wrote:How is it introducing error? It just adds a windage adjustment value between animals like we all have elevation adjustment values. If I could get a steadier hold just by twisting my windage knob a few clicks between animals I would. On my previous smallbore rifle, I did cant a few degrees inward to get a better cheek weld. It ended up being one click of windage at turkeys and one more at rams. It wasn't that difficult to remember.
I am NOT Danny Hatch.
-
- AA Poster
- Posts: 317
- Joined: Sun Mar 08, 2009 5:42 pm
Re: Scope mounting
Regardless of the numbers involved, if the scope is capable of obtaining and repeating zero your last sentence is the answer for those who require their aiming point and wobble zone to be as concentric as possible. The key is to know exactly how much windage adjustment is needed (just like elevation).Jerry G wrote:If you have a 3deg cant at 500m the error will be about 1/2 inch. Everyone wants a 1/2 minute gun but some are willing to give up 1/2 inch by not mounting their scope the way they should.... Mount it un-level and don't forget to crank in windage.
I've used both the canted and square/level crosshair arrangements each for several seasons. There was no discernible improvement or decline in my scores with either. For at least the time being, I personally prefer not to be distracted by physical discomfort.
My sight alignment/trigger coordination and follow through have more to do with my success.
-
- Uber Master Poster
- Posts: 2746
- Joined: Wed Apr 12, 2006 2:34 pm
- Location: Casa Grande, AZ
Re: Scope mounting
You are right Boyd but why make it a little more complicated when truing the scope to the rifle is so easy?
-
- AAA Poster
- Posts: 684
- Joined: Tue Jun 11, 2013 3:07 pm
- Location: West Monroe, LA
Re: Scope mounting
He answered that in the post.Jerry G wrote:You are right Boyd but why make it a little more complicated when truing the scope to the rifle is so easy?
There are advantages on both sides, but I would rather move towards physical stability comfort even if it entails slightly more involvement on my part prep/memory wise.Boyd L. wrote:For at least the time being, I personally prefer not to be distracted by physical discomfort
I am NOT Danny Hatch.
- DavidABQ
- Expert Master Poster
- Posts: 1819
- Joined: Mon Jul 27, 2009 9:33 pm
Re: Scope mounting
I am using a DIP Weaver rail on my 1712: do you think those are level with the receiver after they are mounted?
Now Jerry has me believing that every time I miss the ram it is because I may be canting my rifle.
Now Jerry has me believing that every time I miss the ram it is because I may be canting my rifle.
-
- AAA Poster
- Posts: 684
- Joined: Tue Jun 11, 2013 3:07 pm
- Location: West Monroe, LA
Re: Scope mounting
I can't speak for DIP, but I would think the tolerances they maintain with their machining would be within the margin of error of our ability to measure with bubble levels which are hardly exact.DavidABQ wrote:I am using a DIP Weaver rail on my 1712: do you think those are level with the receiver after they are mounted?
Now Jerry has me believing that every time I miss the ram it is because I may be canting my rifle.
Don't let this impact your mental state of shooting. If you're doubting the equipment/yourself, that's what is in the forefront of your mind when pulling that trigger. That's a compromised shooter. If you're really concerned about a potential miss due to scope/bore alignment. Level the receiver of the scope the best you can (I would feel comfortable doing it from the DIP rail.) and then level the scope the best you can.
Continuing on with the theme of "no cant", the biggest variable is the shooter. Assuming the scope and bore are perfect, there is still chance of some degree of cant with your hold. The key is consistency (this holds true regardless of the scope/bore relationship).
If you really want to do some research on whether cant is a potential reason you miss at rams, confirm that the scope is as perfect as you can measure and then walk out to the ram with a level and check the rail that the rams are sitting on to see if that's level.
I know that seems a bit silly, but I say this because when you're holding your rifle your perception of what is canted/not canted is based on your point of reference of what you assume is level. Considering that most shooters are using magnification high enough to severely limit our field of view, every shooter likely references the rail the animals rests on in relation to the horizontal portion of their scope reticle for alignment. If that rail isn't level your scope isn't level and now you're introducing cant with your hold as you're basing the idea of level off the rail/reticle relationship. The point of reference can be an issue at any distance with any scope mounting configuration.
I am NOT Danny Hatch.
- DavidABQ
- Expert Master Poster
- Posts: 1819
- Joined: Mon Jul 27, 2009 9:33 pm
Re: Scope mounting
Hmmmm, find something level to compare my scope reticle to after I am confident that the scope is aligned with the action to see if I am canting.
That sounds wise.
That sounds wise.
-
- B Poster
- Posts: 78
- Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2006 7:56 am
- Location: Westminster, CO
- Contact:
Re: Scope mounting
Here's an article from Accurate Shooter quantifying the effect of canting the rifle. Both David Tubb and Bryan Litz offer explanations.
http://www.accurateshooter.com/optics/c ... of-impact/
http://www.accurateshooter.com/optics/c ... of-impact/
-
- Master Poster
- Posts: 1293
- Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 7:24 pm
- Location: Rural Mississippi
Re: Scope mounting
In the accurate shooter article mentioned above, Tubb and the others did not rotate the scope clockwise in the rings so that the scope was level when the rifle was in a counter-clockwise canted position for a right-handed shooter. The article does not take into consideration the scope being level with the rifle canted.
- DavidABQ
- Expert Master Poster
- Posts: 1819
- Joined: Mon Jul 27, 2009 9:33 pm
Re: Scope mounting
I am sleeping better now at night now that I removed the scope from my rifle and reinstalled it using a level to level my rifle and subsequently the scope as I remounted it.
The mental image of Jerry lecturing me about the importance of a level scope was too horrifying to endure.
The mental image of Jerry lecturing me about the importance of a level scope was too horrifying to endure.
-
- AAA Poster
- Posts: 517
- Joined: Wed May 27, 2009 4:45 pm
- Location: Janesville, WI
Re: Scope mounting
Yupper! Nuff Said?atomicbrh wrote:In the accurate shooter article mentioned above, Tubb and the others did not rotate the scope clockwise in the rings so that the scope was level when the rifle was in a counter-clockwise canted position for a right-handed shooter. The article does not take into consideration the scope being level with the rifle canted.
LH CZ 452 Amer, Free Floated, FX-3 25X40, D3 Rings, TAC-22
https://www.beloitrifleclub.org/shootin ... ilhouette/
https://www.beloitrifleclub.org/shootin ... ilhouette/