Leveling scope reticles - Page 6

DaleJ · #**151** 10-12-2013, 01:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by savage shooter

Lol. A demonstrated complete lack of understanding.

You don't have a clue. You're irritating someone that does. Vertical gives you distance, windage lines you up. If scope vertical is square to bullet path horizontal will be level with target waterline. The barrel beneath the sight can be turned any which way you like without changing bullets trajectory. My bullets run BC numbers higher than your IQ.

gitrdun · #**152** 10-12-2013, 01:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by savage shooter

Lol. A demonstrated complete lack of understanding.

Savage, you're arguing with a guy who manufactures desirable long range precision bullets (Chinchagas) and others who consistently hit the VBull at 1000 yards. All the diagrams and theories that you've come up with don't mean a hill of beans against real world experience from these shooters. If you are so adamant about your theories, then jump in the truck with Dale and Bob, head outto Kamloops for the running of the bulls and put your charts, mathematics, and geometries to the test and post the results when done.

savage shooter · #**153** 10-12-2013, 02:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gitrdun

Savage, you're arguing with a guy who manufactures desirable long range precision bullets (Chinchagas) and others who consistently hit the VBull at 1000 yards. All the diagrams and theories that you've come up with don't mean a hill of beans against real world experience from these shooters. If you are so adamant about your theories, then jump in the truck with Dale and Bob, head outto Kamloops for the running of the bulls and put your charts, mathematics, and geometries to the test and post the results when done.

He's clueless. There is a lot of documentation surrounding this phenomenon including from those professional shooters who also regularly shoot to that distance.

gitrdun · #**154** 10-12-2013, 02:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by savage shooter

He's clueless. There is a lot of documentation surrounding this phenomenon including from those professional shooters who also regularly shoot to that distance.

No he's not. You are. Shoot against him and make your point valid. If you choose to not shoot against him, then your point is nothing more than internet dribble, and we all know where that leads to.....the basement.

Will you shoot against him? Prove your point and put holes downrange. If no one theoreticall boosters aren't up to print paper, then really....you all ought to STFU.

See, that's the thing about a lot of you talkers. You talk, you claim, you quote. But the likes of you are never seen at any matches where you could be judged and weighted against your claims. Why is that?

DaleJ · #**155** 10-12-2013, 03:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by savage shooter

He's clueless. There is a lot of documentation surrounding this phenomenon including from those professional shooters who also regularly shoot to that distance.

Your phenomenon is ?? BS. I have shot 1000 yd BR, one mile shoots, 2000 yd shoots. I just changed a scope on a rifle to take to Kamloops in a couple weeks. I will square it up when I get to the range, this afternoon. It will have the horizontal cross-hair level to the target water line, so just in case my vertical is right on I can move horizontally without buggering up height. Capiche? If I was as good at shooting as you are at being an arse-pick I would win every match I entered. But, just for giggles, how should I level my scope? Its obvious you don't shoot much. If the question that caused this crap comes up again my reply will be the same except in a PM.

gitrdun · #**156** 10-12-2013, 03:19 PM

So....Savage Shooter, would you like to shoot against DaleJ for pink slips and finally put this to rest?

Seeing that there are "challenges" put up as of late, perhaps you might stand up to the plate?

SkytopBrewster · #**157** 10-12-2013, 03:21 PM

Man you guys are entertaining, hell with targets, I call cage match!

savage shooter · #**158** 10-12-2013, 03:59 PM

A shooting skill match to settle a misunderstanding about a well understood and documented principal of geometry and physics is akin to a dual over a misunderstanding of Pythagorean theorem. It wouldn't prove or disprove either position, it's just macho posturing.

There is a lot of reading and documentation on this phenomenon for those who wish to truly understand it.

Regards

SkytopBrewster · #**159** 10-12-2013, 04:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by savage shooter

A shooting skill match to settle a misunderstanding about a well understood and documented principal of geometry and physics is akin to a dual over a misunderstanding of Pythagorean theorem. It wouldn't prove or disprove either position, it's just macho posturing.

There is a lot of reading and documentation on this phenomenon for those who wish to truly understand it.

Regards

Doncha know a2 + b2 = e2

gitrdun · #**160** 10-12-2013, 04:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by savage shooter

A shooting skill match to settle a misunderstanding about a well understood and documented principal of geometry and physics is akin to a dual over a misunderstanding of Pythagorean theorem. It wouldn't prove or disprove either position, it's just macho posturing.

There is a lot of reading and documentation on this phenomenon for those who wish to truly understand it.

Regards

Sounds to me as though you are posturing yourself in a safe position in the likeliness that someone may challenge you. Too funny and predictable....

To put it more bluntly in terms that you may comprehend..... you and your theorems would simply get your sorry arse handed to you at a long range shoot.

MK2750 · #**161** 10-12-2013, 04:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gitrdun

Sounds to me as though you are posturing yourself in a safe position in the likeliness that someone may challenge you. Too funny and predictable....

Maybe they should race cars or arm wrestle instead. It would make as much sense.

It's grade 5 science not a shoot out.

I do believe that Dale does get it, typed what he was trying to say wrong and now is just too stubborn to admit it.

He now speaks of square to the bullet path that contradicts his earlier posts. In his earlier arguements his theory suggests that Newton could sit under a spruce tree and have an apple fall on his head.

gitrdun · #**162** 10-12-2013, 04:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MK2750

Maybe they should race cars or arm wrestle instead. It would make as much sense.

It's grade 5 science not a shoot out.

I do believe that Dale does get it, typed what he was trying to say wrong and now is just too stubborn to admit it.

He now speaks of square to the bullet path that contradicts his earlier posts. In his earlier arguements his theory suggests that Newton could sit under a spruce tree and have an apple fall on his head.

Awesome, can I expect an MK2750 and a Savage Shooter at any BR or F class or Silhouette shoot that are upcoming? Nawww, I didn't think so.

MK2750 · #**163** 10-12-2013, 04:51 PM

......

dogslayer403 · #**164** 10-12-2013, 05:05 PM

.

marxman · #**165** 10-12-2013, 05:33 PM

savage shooter and mk 50 or whatever his name is are right. in order for the bullet to track straight up along the vertical crosshair at all ranges the bore must fall on that crosshair it cant be offset which will happen if the rifle is canted with the crosshairs level

gitrdun · #**166** 10-13-2013, 07:09 AM

I need to chill over this and keep it civil. But I still maintain that those that oppose the argument of levelling to the water line should take a range day and find out for themselvex in the real world. My apologies if I seemeda bit offensive Savage Shooter. In the end, we'll level as we like and you can do likewise. Good luck hunting and making tiny groups close to center no matter which way you choose....all good.

Subaru297 · #**167** 01-16-2014, 03:31 PM

Sorry to drag this one back to the top but I had to mention something that I haven't seen in here yet.

First of all I absolutely agree with Savage Shooter. He is correct. If the bore of the rifle is not directly below the vertical post of the cross hair the bullet will not be following the line of sight of the scope. The bullet will pass through the line of sight twice in the vertical plane and once in the horizontal plane at the distance that it is zeroed.

Second this is important for a hunter that sights his rifle in for 100 yards and uses holdover or a BDC reticle to shoot out to farther distances. If the bore is not in the same plane as the vertical cross hair the bullet will not follow that path.

Third this probably isn't as important to someone like Dale who does long range shooting and adjusts his scope for these distances. He is re-zeroing his rifle for each distance and using the cross hair for aiming. I do agree though that there will be slight tracking errors if the bore and the vertical cross hair aren't aligned but they are probably negligible unless the cant is severe. If the rifle is a 1/2MOA rifle and the error in tracking is smaller than that with a 2° cant you probably won't notice anything.

And as Dale mentioned his scope all sound like they are well leveled anyway.

To further clarify I think Savage Shooter is arguing from the point of using a fixed zero and Dale is adjusting his zero and arguing from his experience of long range shooting. But you can't argue with math!

Cheers

catnthehat · #**168** 01-16-2014, 05:28 PM

I don't zero my hunting rifles at 100 yards , use BDC's or range finders for 90% of my hunting these days.

Instead I zero my rifles at 200 yards, and check the POI at 100 and 300 on my modern guns. that will take care and danged near any animal I shoot, and has done so for many years unless I am shooting long.
As far as long range match shooting goes , it's a different kettle of fish, and some argue that it is different with irons or scopes.

I tend to think that if one practices with a consistent form and system, it will work for that shooter.
Cat

Percher · #**169** 01-26-2014, 01:50 PM

Just watched an interesting segment on Wild TV on scope rings with a level built in to the top half of the rings with the scope mounted cross hair vertically in line to the bore. Then a demonstration on how canting effects long range shots. Three shots were fired at a 1000 yard target. First shot was taken with the rifle level with a direct hit on the target. Second shot was with the rifle canted right striking 3 feet to the right of the target. The third shot hit 3 feet to the left with the same amount of left canting.
If you are a believer then levels on scope rings make sense for long range shots. I always hang my targets so they are level then it's simply easy to correct canting. Of course distance is an increasing factor with canting.