Re: Importance of bubble level in the real world
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Paul Stafford</div><div class="ubbcode-body">"George won it several times without one, I was 2nd more than once without it, how do you account for the winners who didn't use it. "
1) Statistically inconsequential. Survivorship bias. You could just as easily ask - how many low-scoring shooters didn't have one, and would have done better with one? Correlation doesn't imply causation.
2) There are many optical illusions due to slope. Our minds, inner ears and eyes have many perceptual flaws. To follow the pilot thread, there are well-known illusions associated with down or up-sloping runways. Simply Googling "slope illusion" will produce great (and fun!) examples of our flawed perceptions.
I think a more productive discussion might revolve around:
Are these very small levels accurate in and of themselves? (certainly there is a large price range)
What is the correct procedure to mount them so that level, reticle, etc are internally consistent?
Are there situations where they can be unhelpful?
When does cant error exceed other errors (and thus needs to be guarded against)
Data, not assertions, would make this and other threads more useful. But I wont hold my breath, because I suspect many enjoy the entertainment value of threads without...</div></div>
It's been addressed in varying forms and for every point you make regarding this issue one way or another someone will come in and say,"well it works for me"
Just as in the Spin Drift discussion for everyone acknowledging there is such an effect, we find post after post where a shooter started "adding in SD to their shooting" and now feel they are more successful. The problem is, that number they use grows and grows with every retelling of the tale. People are dialing as much as 2 MOA of SD -- which isn't SD, same thing here, People talk about 5 degrees of can't or more, as if you'd miss that much angle in your rifle.
No, it's best to let people just be happy in their use of the tool as they see fit. Forget the Fact I have been to Scope Factories, and talked with manufacturers in great detail and most will tell you they don't guarantee a reticle better than 3 degrees straight, a good company shoots for 2 degrees, but as much as 3 is not uncommon. So, right there if you never checked your scope correctly, calibrated the clicks, tested the tracking is it worth adding another tool to the tool box when the ones you have and need aren't being used correctly.
it's one thing to blame a cant for a windage error, but what if that error is without an elevation issue ...is it cant or something else.
Lots of caveats, lots of questions, but the fact people are paying money for the device, the emotion of the purchase is going to override the practical nature of its benefits and limitations.
As I stated earlier, how may of the people who posted here, actually checked level on their rail mounted device... because if if the manufacturer is charging $40 you can bet the device cost at least 4x less. It only took me 1 minutes to see the one I had here was off, and not truly leveling the rifle but in fact doing quite the opposite.
Take it for what its worth, but understand this is a relatively new fad to add these to the rail, or scope. And people were hitting quite well for decades without them. Angles or otherwise.
