Sniper & Sharpshooter Forums banner

New scope is not consistent

3K views 14 replies 7 participants last post by  natelive 
#1 ·
Is it me? Is the barrel too hot? A few shots from a Savage Stealth 110 in 300 win mag @ 200 yards are perfect. Then suddenly it feels like they’re veering off at no fault of my own. Is it a common experience that the scope was mounted slightly loose? First day e we other the scope. It’s a Nikon FX1000 6-24x50. Is it m? Or is the rifle too powerful for the scope and knocking if off line.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
#3 ·
It is very possible that the Nikon is not holding zero. I have very limited experience with scopes, and I have personally seen two Nikon's give out.

It is also possible that the scope is loose. Have you checked all of the mounting screws in base and rings?

It is also possible that the barrel is heating up enough in those few shots that it is wandering.
Does it return to zero when it cools?

It is possible that an unbedded stock is allowing the barreled action to move in the stock causing zero shift. Stock may also be flexing causing contact with barrel which will throw shots.

could be a lot of things. These are a few to try.
 
#4 ·
“It is also possible that the barrel is heating up enough in those few shots that it is wandering.
Does it return to zero when it cools? “

That’s a new thing to me about the barrel getting hot enough to throw off the shots a few inches at 200 yards. I’ll try that. But I also had a Nikon scope where the reticle busted. It was a $150 scope so I didn’t mind, plus Nikon replaced it for free. So, maybe if it’s not holding zero, should I just return the scope? Or is it a mounting issue?
 
#5 · (Edited)
X2 bad experience w Nikon rifle scopes. I also had two not hold zero. I took them back to BP for a refund. I also had a pair of binos that I left on my boat. Moisture got into the unit. I sent it back for warranty and they said I dropped it in the water. Let’s just say their warranty is NOT “No Questions asked”, More like we’re going to try like heck not to back the product. They eventually sent a replacement after more conversations than I care to ever have again. This occurred about 8 years ago. Maybe they changed their behavior.
 
#6 ·
If the scope is not holding zero, then I would send it back and sell it when you get it back. There are many things at play here though that need to be sorted through before you know for sure that it is the scope.
 
#7 ·
I have 2 more weeks to return it for a refund. So I’ll try some other things before sending it back because the price was very good. But I’m thinking it may be me. I’ve only been shooting long guns since July 2019. I don’t have anyone really good at my local range to test the scope and eliminate human error. The employees are all forbidden from shooting during work hours. Maybe one of them can shoot my set up after work as a favor.
 
#8 ·
One thing you do need to be careful of is if your over tighten the rings on a Nikon, the scope may not function properly. Check with Nikon as to what they recommend but I believe the specs are somewhere around 14-18 inch pounds of torque. If you tightened it my hand you may have over done it. Check with the manufacturer regarding their recommended torque specs.... and if you don't already have one, borrow or get yourself a FAT Wrench they're great for getting the right torque on not only rings, but also scope bases, action screws/bolts etc.
 
#9 ·
Testing barrel spacing



An easy way to find out if it is heat expansion, take a dollar bill and wrap it around the barrel and sliding it up the barrel towards the scope and all the way to the barrel lug. Do this both hot and cold. If there is any resistance, the barrel is beginning to press against the stock as it heats up. An easy fix is to substitute a strip of fine sanding belt for the dollar bill and work it up to the barrel lug, pulling the sand paper back and forth to widen the free float gap. Just my two bits worth.
 
#11 ·
I think it was me. I took it out yesterday and used a Caldwell 7 Rest. I hit 3 connecting shots at 200yds. Then after I was shooting wider, I hit the 100 yd target and it was still bullseye. I didn’t let it get too hot. I shot 40 rounds in an hour.

I also noticed that I shot better when I had the zoom all the way back to 6x than when I had it on 24x. Not sure why that is.

Again, all this success was on a “7 Rest”. So it’s not like a Lead Sled, but it’s better than sandbags.
 
#13 ·
I actually removed my scope cause I was storing it and the scope made the gun too big for my safe with the other long guns in it. When I put it back, that’s when I had some more success. I think you nailed it. It wasn’t just the Caldwell 7 Rest. That just made me realize it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
#15 ·
(this is not about saying bubble levels permanently attached to scopes are trash, that's something very different than initial scope mounting and alignment)

Whenever any topic about scope mounting comes up, anything even tangentially related, half the people commenting don't even understand what a properly mounted scope is. I blame the tools that have come out and are so popular nowadays (and such trash). Because of these tools, most people, even on this sub, will tell you a properly mounted scope is level with the rifle because that's what they did with the tools. This is wrong, and it makes people ignorant to what is actually going on and important, which makes them ignorant of other foundational parts of long range shooting. Please stop this.

A correctly mounted scope has nothing to do with a level rifle, zero, zilch, fuckall. Any tool that attaches to, places anything on, or has a level for your rifle should go in the trash. You are not trying to level your scope to your rifle. Hell, you aren't really even trying to level your scope. You are trying to bisect the bore of your barrel with the elevation travel of your scope. It's that simple, everything else will fall in place. First, we will learn WHY then we will learn HOW to do this (hint, it's not with overpriced tools bolted to your barrel/reciever/turrets etc).

What level doesn't matter? No, that's wrong, you're an idiot, what do you mean? Lets ponder what would happen if your "level" scope was off to the left side of your "level" rifle by a couple inches (think M1D). Use your fancy bubble level mounting kits on this setup, go ahead. You zero in at 100 yards, but in order to do so, your scope of course has to be windage adjusted horizontally to the right, in toward your barrel. Great, perfect hit, now dial your elevation to and shoot at 600 yards, wait, what the hell you are shooting WAY off to the right now? Well your scope elevation is not bisecting your bore, those fancy tools didn't do **** to properly mount your scope and while having both the scope and rifle "level" kept your dialed elevation true, the misalignment totally messed your windage up, congratulations, you just missed your target. This is an extreme example meant to drive home the point that level doesn't matter. These tools do not aim to properly mount scopes and they only get close to doing so by chance. This example is horizontal misalignment.

OK ok I get it, elevation travel needs to bisect the bore, but I spent $100 on these fancy bubble levels! What if;

My scope is perfectly centered in the rings (probably)

My ring mounts perfectly center the scope on the rail (nah)

My rails is perfectly centered on the receiver (good chance on a custom action, not a factory one)

My barrel was threaded and mounted perfectly centered in the receiver, and the bore is perfectly centered in the profile of the barrel

Also, my turrets/whatever I am using for scope level is perfectly level with my reticle.

BOOM, now If I level my receiver and level my scope I'm good right, right?.... Lets pretend I say yes for a second here, are you comfortable making all those assumptions? Because you are going to be wrong a lot of the time. But yes, assuming you can read a bubble level perfectly at high precision (you can't) in this case the tools would achieve a scope mounting with elevation travel bisecting the bore.

Oh wait, did I forget to mention?, it's possible that your scopes elevation travel might not actually travel level with your reticle and/or scope bodies "level" and even though you leveled it, you didn't achieve bisection? You just missed your target again, woops, my bad. This doesn't happen often, but it does happen, and you had no idea, because you used a tool that doesn't aim to do what it's actually supposed to.

So, what is the right way to do this? Simple, throw out all those shitty tools, or if you really must, use them to get the mounting close before proceeding.

Zero at 100 yards

Draw a 40" tall PLUMB line with a target dot at the bottom

Align your vertical reticle with the plumb line and shoot the target to confirm zero.

Dial 30 MOA of elevation, or the most you can while staying 5-10 MOA from your maximum (maximum elevation can cause windage shifts as an off centered tube is forced to the center of the radius)

Make sure your vertical reticle is still aligned with the plumb line and shoot again.

Your bullet should hit 30" high. Oh what's that? It impacted off to the left or right of the line? NO ****, because those crappy tools didn't align your elevation travel to the bore like I keep telling you, so with your reticle/scope level with the plumb line you effectively horizontally offset the scope like the above example of the M1D. How do we fix this? If you shot to the right of the line rotate the scope counter clockwise, and vise versa, repeat procedure. Once you are on the line, congratulations. Now that your scope is aligned.

Your shitty tools may or may not show that the scope is correctly mounted at this point, if they do that does NOT mean they are precise and you should use them. They probably would have shown proper alignment when you were shooting 1 MOA off to the sides of the line as well, they are not precise instruments, throw them in the damn trash.

But, I used my fancy tool, did the above, and I got really close to the line the first shot! Congratulations? Would you also want to be patted on the back for hitting that duck somewhere behind the duck you were actually aiming for? Achieving a good result by aiming for a different result is not to be praised.

Also to note; this is basically same reason that we try to keep scopes as close to the barrel as possible. The difference here is that the horizontal misalignment (like the M1D example) starts from your zero distance to your actual target distance, where the misalignment caused by scope height takes effect from your dialed elevation distance to your actual target distance (which is always a much smaller factor, unless you regularly hold over 1000 yards of elevation). That's why we can get away with scope 2 inches above the barrel, but you would be totally screwed with a scope 2 inches in horizontal misalignment. Even a couple MMs of horizontal misalignment is over a tenth of an MOA.

If you want to argue with me that this method cannot work "because math" go argue with Horus page 22 instead please. Much obliged.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top