• Winner! Quick Shot Challenge: Caption This Sniper Fail Meme

    View thread

Rifle Scopes Leveling a scope....no scratch that, leveling a reticle

_Windrider_

_Windrider_

Shiner of shoes
Full Member
Minuteman
Legend
    • Jun 26, 2012
    10,096
    13,726
    Orlando, FL
    #1
    @Lowlight please jump in

    Lots of threads lately on how to mount and make sure your scope is level.

    I’ll start off by saying this, who cares if your scope is level, it’s the reticle that matters. Obviously we don’t want a 45 degree offset between the turret and the reticle, but a degree or two is no biggie. This gets discussed on the hide a lot and to save everyone the trouble, please see this recent thread

    https://www.snipershide.com/shooting/threads/scope-reticle-level-confirmation.6925084/#post-7508011

    In addition, there are a few tools to aid in this process that are pricey but worth it. You will have a better more enjoyable shooting and learning experience if you invests in good tools as well as good equipment.

    Badger makes an awesome tool (I use it)
    http://www.badgerordnance.com/gunsmithing-tools/dead-level.html

    Targets USA makes a beast of a jig for mounting and turret tracking
    http://www.targetsusa.com/scope-tools.html

    And finally Short Action Customs just released this a few minutes ago. I have no other details other than this from instagram

    6AB4F546-A182-4061-87A6-E358128DB3C2.png


    So before we start another thread on this, look around. The information you seek is already available.
     
    Last edited:
    • Like
    Reactions: Braunschweiger
    #2
    Hmmm. Looks like the SAC attaches via arca.

    Wonder if it will have enough weight to do a tracking test, or will you be having to weigh down the tripod or mount?
     
    #8
    If it’s anywhere close in price to the one Frank had (can’t think of the name, USA something) made, I think that product is a better buy. You really need the weight for tracking tests.
     
    #13
    TacticalDillhole said:
    @Lowlight please jump in

    Lots of threads lately on how to mount and make sure your scope is level.

    I’ll start off by saying this, who cares if your scope is level, it’s the reticle that matters. Obviously we don’t want a 45 degree offset between the turret and the reticle, but a degree or two is no biggie.
    Click to expand...


    Isn't it the other way around? I would want my turret adjustments to be perfect plumb with gravity, and let my ret be off a degree, wouldn't I? I probably can't see that degree very easily through the scope. But if I dial up a bunch of elevation, I don't want that introducing any windage changes. This only applies when the ret and turret don't match each other. I guess I'm not sure how common an occurrence that is.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: shoobe01
    #14
    Namekagon said:
    Isn't it the other way around? I would want my turret adjustments to be perfect plumb with gravity, and let my ret be off a degree, wouldn't I? I probably can't see that degree very easily through the scope. But if I dial up a bunch of elevation, I don't want that introducing any windage changes. This only applies when the ret and turret don't match each other. I guess I'm not sure how common an occurrence that is.
    Click to expand...
    On quality scopes it’s rare. But I learned recently (sarcasm on) that Barska and nightforce have the same internals.

    Obviously you want both to be perfect but the reticle is what you aim with, not the turrets. It’s the reticle that is most important. You don’t need turrets, you can hold with a reticle. If the reticle is canted, you already missed (unless it’s intentional and you know how to account for it).
     
    • Like
    Reactions: Subwrx300
    #15
    Namekagon said:
    Isn't it the other way around? I would want my turret adjustments to be perfect plumb with gravity, and let my ret be off a degree, wouldn't I? I probably can't see that degree very easily through the scope. But if I dial up a bunch of elevation, I don't want that introducing any windage changes. This only applies when the ret and turret don't match each other. I guess I'm not sure how common an occurrence that is.
    Click to expand...

    Your outside turret housing that you would use to level likely won’t reflect if the internals are level.

    This is also why you perform a tracking test.

    When you crank the turrets up and watch the reticle on the plumb line, you can see if the reticle moves to the left or right.

    If it does, and it can’t be corrected with canting the optic slightly, you send it back.

    Short story, in a proper world, you always level the reticle and perform a tracking test.
     
    #16
    I'm still not convinced that it's okay if the rifle is canted as long as the scope is level. It seems to me that the vertical crosshair should run through the center of the barrel bore.

    What if you had a butt pad that you could cant? That would be the best of both.
     
    #17
    Agreed, leveling off the turret housing is a bad idea. I never meant to suggest that. My main point was that plumb reticle and plumb turret adjustment might be two different things. When observed to be slightly different, mounting the scope such that reticle movement was vertical would be my preference vs having a perfectly plumb reticle that tracks slightly crooked.
     
    #18
    ShtrRdy said:
    I'm still not convinced that it's okay if the rifle is canted as long as the scope is level. It seems to me that the vertical crosshair should run through the center of the barrel bore.

    What if you had a butt pad that you could cant? That would be the best of both.
    Click to expand...
    If I rotated the rifle 90 degrees, does the center of the bore which is a circle move? If it mattered where the top of the bore was we would have to have a pin and slot like AR’s to ensure the gas port lines up with the receiver. It matters not.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: Vodoun daVinci
    #19
    ShtrRdy said:
    I'm still not convinced that it's okay if the rifle is canted as long as the scope is level. It seems to me that the vertical crosshair should run through the center of the barrel bore.

    What if you had a butt pad that you could cant? That would be the best of both.
    Click to expand...

    Why are you not convinced?

    The bore is a circle. And the bullet is affected by gravity asap. Doesn’t matter.
     
    #20
    TacticalDillhole said:
    . But I learned recently (sarcasm on) that Barska and nightforce have the same internals.
    Click to expand...

    Damn near fell off my chair! I never should have sold my Barska for the NF 7-35! Totally wasted dollars!

    Lol; good thread. Would be cool to have costs for some of the options. It's about time to invest in a solid mounting system to ensure builds are tuned properly and have repeatable tracking test rig (like the Humbler a while back).
     
    • Like
    Reactions: _Windrider_
    #21
    Subwrx300 said:
    Damn near fell off my chair! I never should have sold my Barska for the NF 7-35! Totally wasted dollars!

    Lol; good thread. Would be cool to have costs for some of the options. It's about time to invest in a solid mounting system to ensure builds are tuned properly and have repeatable tracking test rig (like the Humbler a while back).
    Click to expand...
    Badger is like 150ish I think. Target USA one is like 325. No clue on SAC jig.
     
    #22
    Dthomas3523 said:
    Why are you not convinced?

    The bore is a circle. And the bullet is affected by gravity asap. Doesn’t matter.
    Click to expand...
    @ShtrRdy David Tubbs did a video on this a while back; while there is some effect of can't, it's very VERY small like tiny. well inside the precision level of our rifle system and wind calls. I'll see if I can find the link but, personally, I'd just trust the numerous guys here telling you the effect is worth ignoring.
     
    #24
    Subwrx300 said:
    @ShtrRdy David Tubbs did a video on this a while back; while there is some effect of can't, it's very VERY small like tiny. well inside the precision level of our rifle system and wind calls. I'll see if I can find the link but, personally, I'd just trust the numerous guys here telling you the effect is worth ignoring.
    Click to expand...

    Ya, we’re in spin drift at 1k and in territory at this point ?
     
    • Like
    Reactions: Subwrx300
    #26
    ShtrRdy said:
    I'm still not convinced that it's okay if the rifle is canted as long as the scope is level. It seems to me that the vertical crosshair should run through the center of the barrel bore.

    What if you had a butt pad that you could cant? That would be the best of both.
    Click to expand...
    This is what a lot of positional shooters do; they allow the rifle to be canted slightly but have the butt pad aligned perfectly to their shoulder pocket for repeatability. As long as reticle is CONSISTENTLY level shot to shot, no change in POI. If you let it wobble left/right, you get shots hitting low left and low right.

    The deviation off true centerline (in a perfect world) is something like .1MOA or .05moa offline at 1000yds for a 5 deg rifle cant relative to level scope. Nobody worries about that.

    Someone with more time and math skills can chime in with the angular divergence and resulting shift in POI.
     
    #27
    TacticalDillhole said:
    If I rotated the rifle 90 degrees, does the center of the bore which is a circle move? If it mattered where the top of the bore was we would have to have a pin and slot like AR’s to ensure the gas port lines up with the receiver. It matters not.
    Click to expand...
    We don't sight the rifle with the bore so I don't buy this example.

    From what I'm reading it seems the answer to a plumb scope and slightly canted rifle is that shot placement does get affected but the effect is small.

    The reason David Tubb can live with the canted rifle is because he is shooting at known distance targets. He can adjust windage and elevation to put the bullet on target.
     
    #28
    TacticalDillhole said:
    It reminds me of the badger dead level beefed up with a dovetail mount.
    Click to expand...

    It is the same mount on the barrel vice. Works nice.

    BTW I just screwed a pic rail to my bench and it is level. Didn’t cost me much, it is level and solid.

    For what it is worth, I level the reticle to gravity for a couple of reasons rather than adjust plum when I am on the gun.

    1. It is just easier to get it on the gun and shoot leveled to the base

    2. With so many positions at these crazy matches, neutral just ends up feeling more natural to me than if set up as perfect as I can for one static position like prone.

    3. It is easier to share guns

    4. Super easy to swap scopes
     
    Last edited:
    #29
    ShtrRdy said:
    We don't sight the rifle with the bore so I don't buy this example.

    From what I'm reading it seems the answer to a plumb scope and slightly canted rifle is that shot placement does get affected but the effect is small.

    The reason David Tubb can live with the canted rifle is because he is shooting at known distance targets. He can adjust windage and elevation to put the bullet on target.
    Click to expand...

    The difference in poi is not because the bore/rifle is “canted” it is because it’s impossible to have a perfectly straight barrel and a few other things.

    You can never get the “center” of the bore level to gravity be because it’s a circle.

    So, you could lay the rifle on it’s side and as long as you mounted the optic and leveled the reticle to gravity, once you get your zero (100, 1000, whatever) as long as you keep the reticle level when firing, it will do the exact thing over and over.

    The reason we level the reticle to gravity is because it is our point of visual interaction with the shot. The bore is not our point of interaction, therefore we do not factor this in with our level.


    You could turn the rifle upside down, and mount the optic on the bottom of the rifle if you wanted. Zero the rifle with the crosshairs leveled, and as long as you use the crosshairs/scope level to eliminate cant, you will be able to repeatedly calculate your poi with your optic.
     
    #31
    ShtrRdy said:
    We don't sight the rifle with the bore so I don't buy this example.

    From what I'm reading it seems the answer to a plumb scope and slightly canted rifle is that shot placement does get affected but the effect is small.

    The reason David Tubb can live with the canted rifle is because he is shooting at known distance targets. He can adjust windage and elevation to put the bullet on target.
    Click to expand...
    ?‍♂️ If you say so.

    I encourage you to try it. Come back after and then see if you still don’t buy it.
     
    #32
    Brownells sell an aluminum device with bubble level that rests against the barrel, with a height adjustable section that positions against the objective lens. Hang a weight on a cord at 50 yards, and its simple and accurate.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: G17C and ShtrRdy
    #34
    Skookum said:
    I wonder if D. Tubb's ELR scope is set up on a cant, or square to the rifle?
    Click to expand...


    He changes the angle on the stock with his current rifle set up. But his reticle is pre-canted to account for SD, so the reticle is technically not plumb.

    He uses a series of levels to adjust for the cant and monitor it

    At the end of the day, it's far worse to plumb a reticle and rifle then cant it vs plumbing the reticle to your existing cant and hold that. It's a subconscious thing, most people have no clue their are actually canting the rifle until well after the fact or they accumulate the error to point when they do see it, it's too late, it's now much bigger than they realize

    We can see it at 100 yards too now, when guys are canting the rifle.

    The Bipod has a far great effect on the cant then people realize.
     
    #35
    Lowlight said:
    He changes the angle on the stock with his current rifle set up. But his reticle is pre-canted to account for SD, so the reticle is technically not plumb.

    He uses a series of levels to adjust for the cant and monitor it

    At the end of the day, it's far worse to plumb a reticle and rifle then cant it vs plumbing the reticle to your existing cant and hold that. It's a subconscious thing, most people have no clue their are actually canting the rifle until well after the fact or they accumulate the error to point when they do see it, it's too late, it's now much bigger than they realize

    We can see it at 100 yards too now, when guys are canting the rifle.

    The Bipod has a far great effect on the cant then people realize.
    Click to expand...
    Totally makes sense.

    But what do you do where setting the gun on a barricade, obstacles and tripods feels best, most natural and repeatable one way, but prone maybe with a cant?

    In transparency my strategy, especially since I shoot less prone than the other ways and may share my rifles is to just level the scope and work on my positions.
     
    #37
    Lowlight said:
    It's natural in my shoulder, the same position I use for prone is translated to the other positions

    I can feel if I am off,
    Click to expand...
    How canted is your rifle to feel natural? I bet like mine, your npa is already leaving the gun with little if any cant.

    It seems like the unsupported prone guys and the angled shooters Almost always need angled butt plates etc.
     
    #38
    .5 degrees is about my natural cant, maybe .8 degrees depending on the rifle, but I am not off a lot.

    Most use 5 degrees as a reference point for cant, 5 degrees is HUGE, most are canting being .5 and 2 degrees before they really notice and for a scope company 2 degrees of errors is within spec. Once you hit 3 degrees it is super noticeable.

    What I see is, guys have their bipod too loose, they shoot their first shot square, they run the bolt pull the rifle over and shoot shot #2 slightly canted, then they shoot #3 even more canted, see it and reset, Shot #4 is square, and then Shot #5 is canted again just a tiny amount.

    When you see multiple groups or groups that trend in a specific direction this is happening.

    With a Squared up Rifle, this is a big problem. If you adjust the rifle and system to your natural hold your brain will instantly tell you, something is off, instead it subconsciously changes it on you, until you notice it.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: Dthomas3523 and Rebelirons
    #39
    ^ totally get that...

    Bipod shooting seems simpler than it is..

    I notice sometimes newer shooters who are bigger chested or thicker than I am, where I need 1 click on a CYLE or PRS, have theirs the same height or lower with no click. Set to low for them, they end up canting the rifle more than they might if the bipod was letting the butt plate fit the shoulder pocket better. Along with guys pushing with their toes or big guys on a bench going just the opposite direction with the thing maxed out in height, hips turned and back straight..

    Getting tiny groups, no poi shifts, self-spotting and not creating offsets takes good gun setup and fundamentals. I always am amazed how few are willing send $ after $ down range with messed up gun fit, buy stuff to shortcut, unknowingly not taking the only shortcut that works; taking a good PR class.

    Edited to add:
    My entire point has been canting the rifle is not necessarily the primary solution. Having somebody help you fix all of the other alignment issues that your body creates is the first thing to address. Then if final fit needs the cant, sure.
     
    Last edited:
    #40
    Diver160651 said:
    ^ totally get that...

    Bipod shooting seems simpler than it is..

    I notice sometimes newer shooters who are bigger chested or thicker than I am, where I need 1 click on a CYLE or PRS, have theirs the same height or lower with no click. Set to low for them, they end up canting the rifle more than they might if the bipod was letting the butt plate fit the shoulder pocket better.
    Click to expand...
    These are the same guys who think they still need to have the absolute lowest rings possible.
     
    #41
    TacticalDillhole said:
    These are the same guys who think they still need to have the absolute lowest rings possible.
    Click to expand...
    The low rings norm came from the real world need to use a rifle from a concealed firing position. Same reason for the old 40mm objectives and mounting spotting scopes upside down to lower your profile.

    There are times when not being seen is just as important as anything else. It isn't always about the next PRS match.
     
    #42
    Skookum said:
    The low rings norm came from the real world need to use a rifle from a concealed firing position. Same reason for the old 40mm objectives and mounting spotting scopes upside down to lower your profile.

    There are times when not being seen is just as important as anything else. It isn't always about the next PRS match.
    Click to expand...
    I know where it came from. It was also about older scopes and less turret travel and not giving up so much travel to zero. But in out modern world with 35 mil turrets, you can sacrifice a few to be comfortable behind the rifle so you aren’t muscling it around and making your already shit fundamentals worse
     
    #43
    Skookum said:
    The low rings norm came from the real world need to use a rifle from a concealed firing position. Same reason for the old 40mm objectives and mounting spotting scopes upside down to lower your profile.

    There are times when not being seen is just as important as anything else. It isn't always about the next PRS match.
    Click to expand...
    Actually, wasn’t low rings mandated by non-adjustable combs and the stock shapes?
     
    • Like
    Reactions: pmclaine
    #45
    Skookum said:
    The low rings norm came from the real world need to use a rifle from a concealed firing position. Same reason for the old 40mm objectives and mounting spotting scopes upside down to lower your profile.

    There are times when not being seen is just as important as anything else. It isn't always about the next PRS match.
    Click to expand...

    Just because it came from something that sounds good doesn’t mean that is correct as well.

    I can think of zero situations at work where I would be in more danger if I had rings .5” taller.

    This goes along the lines of “don’t walk around with you hands in your pockets because you’re slower to get to your tools.”

    Technically yes.......but no.
     
    #47
    I understand the use of those tools when "proofing" a scope but I dont understand the value when actually setting the scope to the rifle and shooter.

    I dont want my scope reticle level to my rings or rail.

    I want my scope reticle level to gravity and my rifle, typically an HTG stock, fit to my body as my anatomy dictates.

    With reticle level to gravity and rifle positioned for best NPA/comfort reticle and scope mount wont be level/level.
     
    #48
    TacticalDillhole said:
    I know where it came from. It was also about older scopes and less turret travel and not giving up so much travel to zero. But in out modern world with 35 mil turrets, you can sacrifice a few to be comfortable behind the rifle so you aren’t muscling it around and making your already shit fundamentals worse
    Click to expand...
    Fair enough. A lot of stuff done in the past (today as well) was done out of ignorance, some from necessity.
     
    #49
    pmclaine said:
    I understand the use of those tools when "proofing" a scope but I dont understand the value when actually setting the scope to the rifle and shooter.

    I dont want my scope level to my rings or rail.

    I want my scope reticle level to gravity and my rifle, typically an HTG stock, fit to my body as my anatomy dictates.

    With reticle level to gravity and rifle positioned for best NPA/comfort reticle and scope mount wont be level/level.
    Click to expand...

    ???????
     
    You must log in or register to reply here.

    Similar threads

    Gentleman4561
    Leveling scopes…tools?
    Replies
    16
    Views
    882
    JWG
    J
    rustyinbend
    Leveling my scopes
    Replies
    28
    Views
    2K
    Mike Casselton
    Mike Casselton
    U
    Range Report Level of Accuracy in "Leveling a Scope"
    Replies
    4
    Views
    507
    USMC22
    U
    thrashergrant
    SOLD Limited Edition Schmidt & Bender PMII PSR Scope - Tremor 2 Reticle
    Replies
    3
    Views
    813
    thrashergrant
    thrashergrant
    S
    My Review: Telson 5-32x56 Target Master Victory Rifle Scope
    Replies
    1
    Views
    161
    David.Jacob
    D
    Top Bottom
    Back
    Home
    Forums
    Merch
    Alerts