Rifle Scopes Reticle Cant?
- Thread starter al22300
- Start date
Re: Reticle Cant?
If I understand your question and values correctly, around 1.3 degrees. That is if you meant in your example that a 30 mil elevation adjustment also gave 0.7 mil windage change. Solve this by taking the inverse sine of the fraction the elevation adjustment is converted into windage (inverse sine of 0.7/30, if I'm interpreting your values correctly).
If I understand your question and values correctly, around 1.3 degrees. That is if you meant in your example that a 30 mil elevation adjustment also gave 0.7 mil windage change. Solve this by taking the inverse sine of the fraction the elevation adjustment is converted into windage (inverse sine of 0.7/30, if I'm interpreting your values correctly).
Re: Reticle Cant?
there is no such thing for leupold, that's normal is what they told me.
there is no such thing for leupold, that's normal is what they told me.
Re: Reticle Cant?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: gstaylorg</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If I understand your question and values correctly, around 1.3 degrees. That is if you meant in your example that a 30 mil elevation adjustment also gave 0.7 mil windage change. Solve this by taking the inverse sine of the fraction the elevation adjustment is converted into windage (inverse sine of 0.7/30, if I'm interpreting your values correctly).
</div></div>
Yes that is what I was trying to say. So if I am using a max of 10 mils elevation is that something that would bother you?
That would be a total of about 8 inches of windage error in 10 mils. Is that correct?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: gstaylorg</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If I understand your question and values correctly, around 1.3 degrees. That is if you meant in your example that a 30 mil elevation adjustment also gave 0.7 mil windage change. Solve this by taking the inverse sine of the fraction the elevation adjustment is converted into windage (inverse sine of 0.7/30, if I'm interpreting your values correctly).
</div></div>
Yes that is what I was trying to say. So if I am using a max of 10 mils elevation is that something that would bother you?
That would be a total of about 8 inches of windage error in 10 mils. Is that correct?
Re: Reticle Cant?
I also come up with ~8" added windage for a 10 mil elevation adjustment at 1000 yd: [sin(1.34) x 10 mil x 36"/mil @ 1000 yd = 8.4"]. If you mounted your scope using the feeler gauge (spacer) alignment method and the reticle was out of alignment with the scope body by 1.3 degrees, then this is about what you'd expect.
I recall reading about reticle alignment tolerances for Leupold a while ago and I seem to recall a number something like 3 degrees??? Don't hold me to that, it's been a while since I read that thread.
In any event, if the reticle is not in perfect alignment with the scope body, and it was mounted using the spacer method, you could possibly minimize the windage error somewhat by aligning the scope using the plumb line method instead, which aligns the reticle directly, rather than the scope body. However, you'll be introducing additional adjustment error because the windage and elevation turrets will no longer be perfectly aligned in the vertical and horizontal axes, thus affecting their adjustments. So you'd potentially be trading one issue for another.
It is possible that you could use this approach to get both your windage and elevation errors as small as possible, but they won't go away completely. Could you get it better than 8.4"? I'm not really expert enough to answer that question. I normally use the plumb line method to align scopes, but 1.3 degrees (or less) is a pretty fine increment to try and cut in half so as to minimize the effect of both reticle alignment and scope body alignment using a plumb line. Doing the math is pretty simple, but perhaps you'd get better advice on what (if anything) you can do to minimize the adjustment errors in your particular case from someone that has a lot more practical experience than I do like Lindy or another knowledgable member of the forum. Sorry I can't be of any more help than that and let u know if you find a good solution to the problem. Good luck.
I also come up with ~8" added windage for a 10 mil elevation adjustment at 1000 yd: [sin(1.34) x 10 mil x 36"/mil @ 1000 yd = 8.4"]. If you mounted your scope using the feeler gauge (spacer) alignment method and the reticle was out of alignment with the scope body by 1.3 degrees, then this is about what you'd expect.
I recall reading about reticle alignment tolerances for Leupold a while ago and I seem to recall a number something like 3 degrees??? Don't hold me to that, it's been a while since I read that thread.
In any event, if the reticle is not in perfect alignment with the scope body, and it was mounted using the spacer method, you could possibly minimize the windage error somewhat by aligning the scope using the plumb line method instead, which aligns the reticle directly, rather than the scope body. However, you'll be introducing additional adjustment error because the windage and elevation turrets will no longer be perfectly aligned in the vertical and horizontal axes, thus affecting their adjustments. So you'd potentially be trading one issue for another.
It is possible that you could use this approach to get both your windage and elevation errors as small as possible, but they won't go away completely. Could you get it better than 8.4"? I'm not really expert enough to answer that question. I normally use the plumb line method to align scopes, but 1.3 degrees (or less) is a pretty fine increment to try and cut in half so as to minimize the effect of both reticle alignment and scope body alignment using a plumb line. Doing the math is pretty simple, but perhaps you'd get better advice on what (if anything) you can do to minimize the adjustment errors in your particular case from someone that has a lot more practical experience than I do like Lindy or another knowledgable member of the forum. Sorry I can't be of any more help than that and let u know if you find a good solution to the problem. Good luck.
Re: Reticle Cant?
8 inches at 1000 yards seems like a lot to live with ( I guess that would depend on if I used a full 10 mils of elevation at that distance). I know how bad Leupold scope reticles can be since I have measured quite a few. Most of them were hunting scopes without turrets so not really a problem I guess.
It seems to me if I leveled the scope with the feeler gauge method that it would possibly help the problem because the entire reticle assembly would move up and down in alignment with the interior of the scope, am I wrong? The problem as I see it would be the reticle not appearing level and that bothers me.
8 inches at 1000 yards seems like a lot to live with ( I guess that would depend on if I used a full 10 mils of elevation at that distance). I know how bad Leupold scope reticles can be since I have measured quite a few. Most of them were hunting scopes without turrets so not really a problem I guess.
It seems to me if I leveled the scope with the feeler gauge method that it would possibly help the problem because the entire reticle assembly would move up and down in alignment with the interior of the scope, am I wrong? The problem as I see it would be the reticle not appearing level and that bothers me.
Re: Reticle Cant?
If the reticle is in perfect alignment with the scope body and turrets, no problem; the feeler gauge method will do the trick. I guess I interpreted your info to suggest that the reticle itself was actually out of alignment with the the scope/turrets by 1.34 degrees. If it's just the whole shebang (scope/turrets/reticle) that are off, it's an easy fix. Remount it by whatever method you choose that allows you to get it correctly aligned.
If the reticle itself is canted with respect to the scope body, using the feeler gauge method will still leave you with a canted reticle. If you use the plumb line method, you can get the reticle aligned, but then your tuurets will not be perfectly plumb, so it's kind of a catch .22 in that scenario. That is why I was thinking the best you could do is to minimize either source of error (ie. something like halfway in between), which may not be achievable realistically.
If the reticle is in perfect alignment with the scope body and turrets, no problem; the feeler gauge method will do the trick. I guess I interpreted your info to suggest that the reticle itself was actually out of alignment with the the scope/turrets by 1.34 degrees. If it's just the whole shebang (scope/turrets/reticle) that are off, it's an easy fix. Remount it by whatever method you choose that allows you to get it correctly aligned.
If the reticle itself is canted with respect to the scope body, using the feeler gauge method will still leave you with a canted reticle. If you use the plumb line method, you can get the reticle aligned, but then your tuurets will not be perfectly plumb, so it's kind of a catch .22 in that scenario. That is why I was thinking the best you could do is to minimize either source of error (ie. something like halfway in between), which may not be achievable realistically.
Similar threads
