Search results

ya , 1.099 is close to following the formula 22/42*2=1.0476 moa between hashes , at 100y 1.0476 *1.047in per 1moa = 1.0968" which is pretty close to what your saying. the group sizes themselves are .75 inch at 300 , but this distance between the two different groups is 5.5inchs / 1.75moa when...

thats good advice, but this is a nf 12-42x benchrest, hardly crappy, and if i just wanted to always know i could stick with the 22 setting.

hi i did that already , looks to be 1moa @ 42x, but that doesnt explain the 5.5" between groups

i agree and have done so, but i'd like to know the actual distances for wind , angle to target , or other conditions i havn't tested.

thank you again. The formula i seen posted here would be (magnification/22)*2moa = moa from 1 hash to the next so (22/22)*2 = 2 moa per hash, makes sense therefore (42/22)*2=1.047moa per hash but like i said when i fire using center reticle the hit is 3.25inch low at 300, when i move to the...

Thank you for reading my post. Thats 2moa at 22x, im asking about 42x. n https://www.nightforceusa.com/nightforce-scope-reticles.aspx

yes i do. If it was a ffp it's be 2moa regaurdless of magnification, that is not my question. My question is what is the moa between hashes as 42x.

Hello. I have a nf 12-42 with a npr2, says 2moa at 22x. So i used this formula i saw where in order to determine the distance between hashes at 42x , 22/42*2 = 1.047 moa. So roughly 1 moa per hash. I set a zero at 200y, then holding over fired a group at 300y and it was 3.25 inchs low , almost 1...

temp doesnt matter, maybe if your trying to get the absolute most out of the tuner then ya, but from the worst possible setting to the best the temp is irrelevant(assuming your powder is temp sensitive enough). Truthfully, you dont even need a tuner if you adjust your brake lenght, barrel...

those case necks get dinged up on extraction, so what's the point ? plus you get alittle more exercise if you have to pick them up

No increase in velocity is worth trading reliability. And by your logic if a heavy buffer would work like the tubb cws, then why not just use a heavy spring ? and if thats true why not jam a spacer in the back of the buttstock to compress the spring ? And wouldn't adjusting the gas block to it's...

nightforce

you need to develope load data , you cant just get a ton of factory loads and expect it to work with a barrel , i mean if it was that simple wouldn't people just shoot 22 lr ? oh wait.... (length ( if you get a muzzle device of an optimal length thats the same as a tuner) profile , rifling ...

ask carl https://gunsmagazine.com/rifles/high-power-shooting/

the amount of people defending this stupid shit is shocking, the hide has changed.

not a single person points or tips bullets ? no meplat trim ? bsc ? or bullet sorting of any kind ? no case sorting ? concentricity ? just load and go huh?props to the only person who actually measures his coal but if he didn't sort bsc/length of those projectiles its not a great measurement...

in my experince i didn't notice a different in pressure , at least not significant, when using magnum primers comapred to br

i'd say get two cheap ass ones so you can put one infront of you and one downrange infront of the target and you can determine your bc from that... and when you finally nail the one downrange you won't feel too guilty about it.

Basically to get the best case senario for a single load to work for all your guns would need the same barrel profile, length, and same reamer used for all the barrels. If your chasing the best accuracy possible then no you cant make a single load that will give the best results for all your...

Not to sound like a dick but i'd say that semi auto barret wouldn't be very accurate either way. My guess is you woulnd't get the bullet close enough to the lands for COAL to matter and you'd be limited by the magazine length, with that being said the closer you get to the lands the better so...