Welcome guest, is this your first visit? Create Account now to join.
  • Login:

Welcome to the NZ Hunting and Shooting Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.

Black Watch NZGR


User Tag List

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 41
Like Tree37Likes

Thread: Tall target test

  1. #16
    Member stug's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Oxford, Canterbury
    Posts
    2,433
    Quote Originally Posted by Gibo View Post
    Could it be your bc?
    I don't think so. If it was the BC I'd think I'd be seeing things before I got to 700 yds.
    When I had the scope on the 7saum I had a correction factor because the scope was moving too far. I think now it is on a different rifle the 100yd zero is in the part of the scope adjustment where the clicks are 1/4 MOA but when I get past 700 I'm getting into the part of the adjustment where the clicks are more than 1/4MOA, probably closer to 1/3MOA.
    To get to 700yds I need 14.7 MOA, to get to 800 I need 18.2 MOA, so an extra 3.5 MOA. If the clicks are 0.3MOA it will actually move 4.2MOA, which will be 5.6" high.
    At 980 yds I need 25.1 MOA, which if the clicks are 0.3MOA would actually move 27.18 MOA, and I'd be 20" high.
    This pretty much agrees with what I've seen in practice.
    So i've got to do the check against a grid to see where the click values change, if they do.
    Puffin likes this.

  2. #17
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Middle Earth
    Posts
    1,679
    Hey Stug , I guess the test of the scope fixed on a fixed platform and moving along a ruler at a 100 would tell you the thing.
    Other wise it could be the tip of your amax melting down ;-) you need to shoot the eld's said the advertisement!
    Norway and stug like this.

  3. #18
    GWH
    GWH is offline
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Napier, Hawkes Bay
    Posts
    1,862
    Quote Originally Posted by stug View Post
    I don't think so. If it was the BC I'd think I'd be seeing things before I got to 700 yds.
    When I had the scope on the 7saum I had a correction factor because the scope was moving too far. I think now it is on a different rifle the 100yd zero is in the part of the scope adjustment where the clicks are 1/4 MOA but when I get past 700 I'm getting into the part of the adjustment where the clicks are more than 1/4MOA, probably closer to 1/3MOA.
    To get to 700yds I need 14.7 MOA, to get to 800 I need 18.2 MOA, so an extra 3.5 MOA. If the clicks are 0.3MOA it will actually move 4.2MOA, which will be 5.6" high.
    At 980 yds I need 25.1 MOA, which if the clicks are 0.3MOA would actually move 27.18 MOA, and I'd be 20" high.
    This pretty much agrees with what I've seen in practice.
    So i've got to do the check against a grid to see where the click values change, if they do.
    If that's the case, it sounds like a right pita Stu.
    Gibo likes this.

  4. #19
    Member stug's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Oxford, Canterbury
    Posts
    2,433
    it's more of a technical problem rather than a practical, I've never shot at an animal further than 650yds. My average shot is just under 350yds so 700 yds is far enough. Once I know if it is the case it won't be hard to work out a cheat sheet.

  5. #20
    Sending it Gibo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    The Hill
    Posts
    17,633
    Sell it
    Werawhakaui?

    Rule 4. Identify your target beyond all doubt.

  6. #21
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    574
    Quote Originally Posted by stug View Post
    I'm going to have to do something like this. My elevation is good out to 700yds, past there I'm shooting high. I'll probably try something like Greg Duley does, but it is an absolute bugger getting everything set up so nothing moves.
    You're not the only one. I'm typically 1 low/600 and 3 low/900. I just quantify it and then remove it. I don't know where the actual error is, but the trajectory is perfect after this.

  7. #22
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    574
    Quote Originally Posted by Friwi View Post
    Other wise it could be the tip of your amax melting down ;-) you need to shoot the eld's said the advertisement!
    Yeah, I just binned my Amax and bought ELD. You should all do the same! The recycling bin is just outside my house

    But seriously, look at some of the new ELD bcs. The .30 225gr arrived yesterday, damn that is a missile...

  8. #23
    Member Dead is better's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Auckland
    Posts
    771
    I'd wondered about the entire point of actually firing during this test at all. Wouldn't it be a lot cheaper just to put a measuring tape down a 1-2m board and then fix your rifle down so it can't move. Then just click up 100clicks to check you did rise 1m at 100m (milrad). Test that it returns to zero. Same left /right.

    Why shoot?

  9. #24
    Terminator Products Kiwi Greg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Nelson
    Posts
    4,153
    Quote Originally Posted by Dead is better View Post
    I'd wondered about the entire point of actually firing during this test at all. Wouldn't it be a lot cheaper just to put a measuring tape down a 1-2m board and then fix your rifle down so it can't move. Then just click up 100clicks to check you did rise 1m at 100m (milrad). Test that it returns to zero. Same left /right.

    Why shoot?
    Try it sometime & you will find its much easier just to shoot it

  10. #25
    Member stug's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Oxford, Canterbury
    Posts
    2,433
    Only problem with shooting is you do need a very accurate rifle to get a good idea, but yes setting up a scope/rifle to do the test without shooting is a real pain.

  11. #26
    Member zimmer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    1,769
    Quote Originally Posted by Dead is better View Post
    I'd wondered about the entire point of actually firing during this test at all. Wouldn't it be a lot cheaper just to put a measuring tape down a 1-2m board and then fix your rifle down so it can't move. Then just click up 100clicks to check you did rise 1m at 100m (milrad). Test that it returns to zero. Same left /right.

    Why shoot?
    Yep, IMO only way to do it i.e. statically, no shooting. After all you are only wanting to test the scope at this stage not the loads or the shooter's ability. Although having said that some faults in scopes may not show until wound to their extremities and require recoil to show up issue. But that is a different topic altogether.

    I do the same as @6x47 posted. I have a chart made up of 2 A3 sheets joined together. The charts are printed accurately by using a cad program with the grid set at 1 MOA (1.047"). Some printers donít always replicate the cad dimensions so there may be a need to fudge to get the correct result on paper. Some printers also may not give a linear result thru the total grid but as long as you have an accurate end point she should be good as. The two A3s joined together gives me 30 MOA to check with which should be adequate for the most shooting out to 1000 yds. I do a mid point check as well.

    The range (100yds) I initially measured using a quality steel tape - only did that once. Happy now to believe my Zeiss rangefinder.

    Yes, errors can creep in at each stage but still better than not knowing your scopeís true value. Even some of the top quality scopes can be out.
    Puffin likes this.

  12. #27
    Member stug's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Oxford, Canterbury
    Posts
    2,433
    Other thing to remember is that if tying the rifle down and dialing scope that dialing UP makes the reticle go DOWN. So have zero at the top and 20 or 30 MOA at the bottom.
    Puffin and timattalon like this.

  13. #28
    Member rossi.45's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Central Otago - formally 30yrs in the Buller
    Posts
    507
    call me crazy but i am sticking with the test . . . because . . when my RF says its 100, 200, 300, 400 whatever thats what i have to use in the field . . . it maybe a little out but that doesnt matter, is it consistent, does my click value line up with what the RF is telling me.

    why take the shooter out of the equation . .. if they dont understand there gear, if they can't shoot a decent group every time, everything they do is suspect . . this is not for the novice . . but that doesnt mean you shouldnt try, by failing we learn, untill we either give up or hopefully succeed . . . call me crazy.

    i still have verify everything at the ranges i shoot, still have to fiddle with the balistic app to make everything fit . . . but i enjoy doing it . .. i am crazy, but it keeps me off the street, keeps me shooting . . thats good.

    R.
    GWH likes this.
    without a picture . .. it never happened !

  14. #29
    GWH
    GWH is offline
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Napier, Hawkes Bay
    Posts
    1,862
    Quote Originally Posted by rossi.45 View Post
    call me crazy but i am sticking with the test . . . because . . when my RF says its 100, 200, 300, 400 whatever thats what i have to use in the field . . . it maybe a little out but that doesnt matter, is it consistent, does my click value line up with what the RF is telling me.

    why take the shooter out of the equation . .. if they dont understand there gear, if they can't shoot a decent group every time, everything they do is suspect . . this is not for the novice . . but that doesnt mean you shouldnt try, by failing we learn, untill we either give up or hopefully succeed . . . call me crazy.

    i still have verify everything at the ranges i shoot, still have to fiddle with the balistic app to make everything fit . . . but i enjoy doing it . .. i am crazy, but it keeps me off the street, keeps me shooting . . thats good.

    R.
    Yep I agree fully.

    The tall target test is also a great way of making sure your scope is properly level, as if it's not you induce a windage error as your dial up elavation.

    Been there made that mistake
    rossi.45 likes this.

  15. #30
    Member zimmer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    1,769
    Quote Originally Posted by rossi.45 View Post
    call me crazy but i am sticking with the test . . . because . . when my RF says its 100, 200, 300, 400 whatever thats what i have to use in the field . . . it maybe a little out but that doesnt matter, is it consistent, does my click value line up with what the RF is telling me.

    why take the shooter out of the equation . .. if they dont understand there gear, if they can't shoot a decent group every time, everything they do is suspect . . this is not for the novice . . but that doesnt mean you shouldnt try, by failing we learn, untill we either give up or hopefully succeed . . . call me crazy.

    i still have verify everything at the ranges i shoot, still have to fiddle with the balistic app to make everything fit . . . but i enjoy doing it . .. i am crazy, but it keeps me off the street, keeps me shooting . . thats good.

    R.
    I use the same or similar method Greg D uses - mmm I am sure he understands his gear and is a capable shooter of groups.
    The static test, which is only the starting point of the whole process, is just to confirm the value of the clicks, which can then be inputted into your ballistics program. And correct, it doesn't take the place of verifying at actual ranges the POI which then brings into play all the other variables eg shooter's ability, rifle's capability, calibre's capability, dealing with wind on the day, inaccurate distance measurements, dodgy BC claims by manufacturers, and so on.

    And yes it's good to get shots down the barrel but my options of shooting regular sight in sessions at 1000 yds are zilch, so when I do lay down to shoot at 1000 yds for real I like to eliminate as many of the variables as possible before hand.
    gadgetman, Puffin and 6x47 like this.

 

 

Similar Threads

  1. That tall skinny kid from Wairoa
    By Gapped axe in forum Off topic
    Replies: 95
    Last Post: 01-11-2015, 07:34 PM
  2. Test
    By Shamus in forum Questions, Comments, Suggestions, Testing.
    Replies: 57
    Last Post: 28-05-2014, 08:56 PM
  3. test
    By Gibo in forum Firearms, Optics and Accessories
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: 07-01-2014, 09:56 PM
  4. Replies: 20
    Last Post: 18-12-2012, 09:04 AM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Welcome to NZ Hunting and Shooting Forums! We see you're new here, or arn't logged in. Create an account, and Login for full access including our FREE BUY and SELL section Register NOW!!