Rifle Scopes Scope Tracking, Normal? UPDATED 9/14/2020

[USMC22]

So I used a Hide Tall Target and the Hide weighted Picatinny “Scope Tracker”. @ 100 yards I’ve got a scope that’s tracking right on the money until about 8 Mils. At 8 Mils It’s about .3 off. I don’t want to get into brands and models... lets just say its not a budget scope. Is this a normal “tracking error”? Return to zero and left / right are more limited given both the target and available windage.

UPDATE 9/14/2020

I measured out 300 feet (100 yards) with a tape measure.

My Gunwerks BR2500 ranged it at 103 yards.

I used my Gen 2 Plumb Bob which can be seen in the first picture. Leftover arrow shaft, nocks and yellow braided fishing line with a 1/2 oz weight on the bottom. Previous version was inner line from 550 cord and a knife.

Set the target up and leveled it with the plumb bob.

Took a while to get the scope tracking tool to line the reticle up with the target as I was using a big rock. If someone say this rock doesn’t provide enough stability I’m going to loose it.

Results:
- The scope checked out lining up on the correct elevation for the 10 Mils tracked on the target.
- The “graduations” on the scope don’t line up “in line” so that may have added to the confusion yesterday (Will try to get a picture of this... the ‘0’ lines up with the ‘I” on the scope but when dialing numbers the actual amount dialed is to the ’left’ of the scope indicator. This is a replacement elevation cap as Nightforce said in the manual to do 10 inch pounds on the OUTSIDE turret screws... this stripped the original when using a torque wrench. When I talked to them they acknowledged this had happened a few times and to only do it “snuggish”.

I checked it several times up and down, dialing the full elevation and back and forth and it lined up and returned to zero every time. I guess yesterday was user error... Thanks for all the help folks and words of encouragement.

 

[screaminweasil]

Not acceptable. What scope?

 

[USMC22]

Not acceptable. What scope?

A very expensive one. I’ll try running the test again. I know the yardage was on, the target was plumb and all other ”Mils” tracked on the target... I just got setup to check the tracking and “take the shooter“ out of it.

 

[screaminweasil]

Anything more than 1/10 off at 8 mils is unacceptable to me. I'd send it back if you confirm that it truly is 3/10 off at only 8 mils.

 

[nn8734]

Agree with the above; .3 off seems a bit too high for just 8 mils of adjustment. I’d call the manufacturer tomorrow and get a return service order started.

If it’s a top tier scope, I’m sure the maker will get things right for you (just a guess given you aren’t disclosing the scope manufacturer). Hopefully it’s someone with a State-side service center.

 

[want2learn]

May i ask, are you doing the tracking test with ammo or without?

 

[theLBC]

defect if repeatable.

 

[USMC22]

It’s alpha glass for sure. I don’t have any doubt they won’t take care of me... I’m not trying to hide anything... I just don’t want to be another person talking shit on the internet either. I’ve got the 2nd Sig Sauer course this thursday and Friday so sending it outs not an option till after that.

 

[USMC22]

May i ask, are you doing the tracking test with ammo or without?

Without.... using this: http://www.targetsusa.com/scope-tools.html and the Hide’s tall target.

 

[USMC22]

defect if repeatable.

It’s repeatable and returns to zero. Checked multiple times with the same result

 

[want2learn]

sorry about that, wasn't familiar with that tool

 

[USMC22]

sorry about that, wasn't familiar with that tool

No need to be sorry and legitimate question.

 

[nn8734]

It’s alpha glass for sure. I don’t have any doubt they won’t take care of me... I’m not trying to hide anything... I just don’t want to be another person talking shit on the internet either. I’ve got the 2nd Sig Sauer course this thursday and Friday so sending it outs not an option till after that.

Sorry to hear as this is always frustrating. I have two rifles that I deem critical for a variety of reasons and both have back up scopes as these things can always go down.

Anyway, does the scope have a reticle that you can use to hold over elevation for the purposes of competing in your upcoming class?

 

[USMC22]

Sorry to hear as this is always frustrating. I have two rifles that I deem critical for a variety of reasons and both have back up scopes as these things can always go down.

Anyway, does the scope have a reticle that you can use to hold over elevation for the purposes of competing in your upcoming class?

It does have mil reticle that I can use. The PSR #2 Course at Sig Sauer is for doping your rifle out to 1,000 yards. This error (if I’m doing my math right) is 10.8 inches at 1,000 yards. I don’t have a back up rifle / scope set, this is it (put all my money into 1 rifle and high end optic). I’m sure with time I will have a 2nd and back up but for now I’ve just been dumping money and time into training and ammo.

 

[nn8734]

It does have mil reticle that I can use. The PSR #2 Course at Sig Sauer is for doping your rifle out to 1,000 yards. This error (if I’m doing my math right) is 10.8 inches at 1,000 yards. I don’t have a back up rifle / scope set, this is it (put all my money into 1 rifle and high end optic). I’m sure with time I will have a 2nd and back up but for now I’ve just been dumping money and time into training and ammo.

Yep, good places to invest in. Good luck with it man. Hope you’re back on target with it sooner rather than later.

 

[308pirate]

Anyway, does the scope have a reticle that you can use to hold over elevation for the purposes of competing in your upcoming class?

Who cares?

The error is repeatable. It become dope until it can get fixed.

 

[dzander]

I doubt there isn't a scope mfg'r that's never had a tracking issue. I've had one bad right from the factory and another that went bad , not necessarily tracking but wouldn't hold a group. Mfg'r said they rebuilt the erector on that one. The one that wouldn't track mfg'r replaced with a better model.

 

[308pirate]

It does have mil reticle that I can use. The PSR #2 Course at Sig Sauer is for doping your rifle out to 1,000 yards. This error (if I’m doing my math right) is 10.8 inches at 1,000 yards. I don’t have a back up rifle / scope set, this is it (put all my money into 1 rifle and high end optic). I’m sure with time I will have a 2nd and back up but for now I’ve just been dumping money and time into training and ammo.

If the error is repeatable in both magnitude and in origin then update your dope and drive on until you can get it fixed.

To be honest, if it's that repeatable I might not even send it in.

 

[nn8734]

Who cares?

The error is repeatable. It become dope until it can get fixed.

If he leaves it at zero and holds over, then the adjustments don’t come into play. He just has to confirm his zero POA=POi is repeatable and validate his hold overs using only the reticle.

Are you saying the reticle is going to move even if the turrets remain untouched after resetting/confirming zero at 100?

 

[308pirate]

If he leaves it at zero and holds over, then the adjustments don’t come into play. He just has to confirm his zero POA=POi is repeatable and validate his hold overs using only the reticle.

Most scopes don't have nearly as many visible subtensions on the vertical stadia as they do on the horizontal stadia, so your elevation adjustment is far less precise using the reticle than it would be if you dialed.

A known, consistent error is no longer an error. It's a bias that can be accounted for and trusted.

I'm not sure why that's difficult to grasp.

Are you saying the reticle is going to move even if the turrets remain untouched after resetting/confirming zero at 100?

I don't know WTF you're talking about. I certainly haven't even insinuated anything close to that.

 

[oniak]

Without.... using this: http://www.targetsusa.com/scope-tools.html and the Hide’s tall target.

Interesting tool. I had not seen those before. Did you measure the actual tall target hash marks to make sure that the target itself is spot on and there was not a printing error that slightly changed the proportions of the target graphic? This is probably unlikely, but it wouldn't take much time to just confirm.

 

[hlee]

I wonder how often it is that someone says “my dope calculator is off at x range, what do I do?” and the reply is “true your calculator,” that the “issue” is a systematic scope tracking error that goes undiagnosed...

 

[USMC22]

I wonder how often it is that someone says “my dope calculator is off at x range, what do I do?” and the reply is “true your calculator,” that the “issue” is a systematic scope tracking error that goes undiagnosed...

Not sure but that’s why I’ve been building data on the gun. Got it shooting good, solid data from my chrono / loads I’m shooting and have moved on to mechanical stufff, i.e. the scope tracking. After a lot of research I bought the tool to rule out me as the “factor” (as much as possible). I won’t be able to shoot again tomorrow but will be able to set the target and scope up again. Going to triple check it.

 

[theLBC]

lowlight has covered this in this tracking demo, however he is only giving the offset over 10 mils, so i suppose it depends on your app?
is it spot on up to 8mils and then .3 under from then on?
you could also dial up to 7 and hold over for the rest,.
adjust your dope for the difference if the app can't add .3 to every solution over 8mils , you can do it in your head.

 

[USMC22]

Interesting tool. I had not seen those before. Did you measure the actual tall target hash marks to make sure that the target itself is spot on and there was not a printing error that slightly changed the proportions of the target graphic? This is probably unlikely, but it wouldn't take much time to just confirm.

I’ll double check it, guess anything is possible.

 

[nn8734]

Most scopes don't have nearly as many visible subtensions on the vertical stadia as they do on the horizontal stadia, so your elevation adjustment is far less precise using the reticle than it would be if you dialed.

A known, consistent error is no longer an error. It's a bias that can be accounted for and trusted.

I'm nor sure why that's difficult to grasp.

I realize a repeatable error is inconsequential if the it can be accounted for. He’s tested it once and will test again later this week per his above post. Hopefully the results are consistent with what he saw today so he can compensate for it with some confidence that it will hold through his class.

Personally, I default to using the reticle if/when I suspect a deviation or defect in the adjustment regardless if it displays consistently at the time of discovery until it can be repaired. That’s simply because I don’t want to assume it will always maintain that same numerical deviation. The reticle itself isn’t going to move once the turrets are reset to zero and confirmed (Unless the scope has problems beyond an out of calibration elevation turret)

In the short term, I also agree that compensating for what so far is a repeatable error is a viable solution if it remains consistent as well.

my bad - the last question about the reticle “moving” was poorly worded and didn’t intend to insinuate you were claiming something of the kind.

 

[USMC22]

I’ll double check it, guess anything is possible.

To answer the question about it being an out of scale target... target is spot on when measured. The .1 of a mil white ”aiming box” at the top of the target to the dead center is 36” exactly (10 Mils)

 

[oniak]

To answer the question about it being an out of scale target... target is spot on when measured. The .1 of a mil white ”aiming box” at the top of the target to the dead center is 36” exactly (10 Mils)

Yeah, I thought it was unlikely but the thought popped into my head. When you send it in after your course I'm sure the manufacturer will get you squared away.

 

[_Raining]

To answer the question about it being an out of scale target... target is spot on when measured. The .1 of a mil white ”aiming box” at the top of the target to the dead center is 36” exactly (10 Mils)

What is the measured value at 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 MILs?

 

[USMC22]

UPDATE 9/14/2020

I measured out 300 feet (100 yards) with a tape measure.

My Gunwerks BR2500 ranged it at 103 yards.

I used my Gen 2 Plumb Bob which can be seen in the first picture. Leftover arrow shaft, nocks and yellow braided fishing line with a 1/2 oz weight on the bottom. Previous version was inner line from 550 cord and a knife.

Set the target up and leveled it with the plumb bob.

Took a while to get the scope tracking tool to line the reticle up with the target as I was using a big rock. If someone say this rock doesn’t provide enough stability I’m going to loose it.

Results:
- The scope checked out lining up on the correct elevation for the 10 Mils tracked on the target.
- The “graduations” on the scope don’t line up “in line” so that may have added to the confusion yesterday (Will try to get a picture of this... the ‘0’ lines up with the ‘I” on the scope but when dialing numbers the actual amount dialed is to the ’left’ of the scope indicator. This is a replacement elevation cap as Nightforce said in the manual to do 10 inch pounds on the OUTSIDE turret screws... this stripped the original when using a torque wrench. When I talked to them they acknowledged this had happened a few times and to only do it “snuggish”.

I checked it several times up and down, dialing the full elevation and back and forth and it lined up and returned to zero every time. I guess yesterday was user error... Thanks for all the help folks and words of encouragement.

 

[USMC22]

Scope graduation marks I did a horrible job explaining.

 

[TheOE800]

Turret caps not lining up and slipping is why I got rid of my ATACR.

 

[USMC22]

Turret caps not lining up and slipping is why I got rid of my ATACR.

Haven’t had slipping knock on wood. What did you goto?

 

[AllenOne1]

I think you did yourself a big favor by rechecking your results rather than jumping off the cliff. A little needed scope correction factor would be fairly normal but .3 seems like a lot. Nightforce seems to be among the best at tracking. Really glad you got it sorted out prior to your training class you don't need to be focused on this type of error when you are trying to learn something new.

 

[USMC22]

I think you did yourself a big favor by rechecking your results rather than jumping off the cliff. A little needed scope correction factor would be fairly normal but .3 seems like a lot. Nightforce seems to be among the best at tracking. Really glad you got it sorted out prior to your training class you don't need to be focused on this type of error when you are trying to learn something new.

Thanks Bud,

Been really trying to “get back to the basics” and focus on fundamentals and build confidence in my gear versus buying a bunch of new stuff. Looking forward to the class now.

 

[SBRSarge]

I want to jump in here and commend USMC22.

He encountered a problem with a highish end optic. He asked some questions here about it without getting into a brand-slamming rant. He listened to the answers from our experts. He went and double checked his results. He figured out his issue, corrected it and then followed through to let us see what happened for all of us to learn from.

All in all, a class way to solicit input on resolving a problem.

 

[Guthwine]

Scope graduation marks I did a horrible job explaining.

Maybe you could try to zero the turret with the arrow a bit more left leaning on the line to make this error a bit smaller? But as long as the deviation is consistent it's nothing tragic, only annoying.

 

[USMC22]

I want to jump in here and commend USMC22.

He encountered a problem with a highish end optic. He asked some questions here about it without getting into a brand-slamming rant. He listened to the answers from our experts. He went and double checked his results. He figured out his issue, corrected it and then followed through to let us see what happened for all of us to learn from.

All in all, a class way to solicit input on resolving a problem.

I appreciate the kind words and help.

 

[USMC22]

Maybe you could try to zero the turret with the arrow a bit more left leaning on the line to make this error a bit smaller? But as long as the deviation is consistent it's nothing tragic, only annoying.

It is consistent. Just something I’m going to have to pay attention / keep track of. It’s got a “button” that locks into “zero” and allows you to dial below zero so there isn’t really any room for the Kentucky windage so to speak as went tightening it up it kind centers in that “locking point”

 

[TheOE800]

Haven’t had slipping knock on wood. What did you goto?

On that rifle I went to a 3.5-18x50 Vudu as it was replacing a 4-16x42 ATACR. Haven’t really found the ideal scope, but the Vudu works.

 

[ctso030]

i had this problem with a high end scope, sent the scope back several times. Tried everything, when you get past a certain distance if a scope has a flaw you will find it. Try another scope

 

[BigJimFish]

I checked it several times up and down, dialing the full elevation and back and forth and it lined up and returned to zero every time. I guess yesterday was user error... Thanks for all the help folks and words of encouragement.

- The “graduations” on the scope don’t line up “in line” so that may have added to the confusion yesterday (Will try to get a picture of this... the ‘0’ lines up with the ‘I” on the scope but when dialing numbers the actual amount dialed is to the ’left’ of the scope indicator. This is a replacement elevation cap as Nightforce said in the manual to do 10 inch pounds on the OUTSIDE turret screws... this stripped the original when using a torque wrench. When I talked to them they acknowledged this had happened a few times and to only do it “snuggish”.

It is easy to make mistakes doing scope tracking tests. The test target distance has to be very close to perfect or you will get erroneous results. Frank spoke about this a month or so ago in one of his podcasts. The fellow who set up the test target at their class used a rangefinder that turned out to be off by a few yards and they were getting 3% errors on adjustment size scope after scope because being off 3yds in 100 yards is a 3% error. For my part, each year when I first set up the test target for scope reviews I measure the distance twice with the measuring tape and then verify it on a previously tested scope. I then mark the placement in the grass with paint which I refresh every few weeks all year so I don't have to measure it again that year.

As for the dials not lining up. Some scope makers seem to have issues with this. Users seem split on whether to be enraged by this or to not care at all. For my part I probably wouldn't care much at $1k if the scope was otherwise a good performer and would be quite unimpressed at $3k. 10inch/lbs does seem like a lot for the little set screws most scope makers use. You really do have to be gentle with those things while understanding that if your too gentle, the turret will slip and loose zero. It is a feel thing and is really more touchy than it should be.

 

[PlinkIt]

@BigJimFish check out the leica disto laser tape

1/62" accuracy at over 300' should get you there easier than pulling 300' tape out frequently

Some models also have camera with cross hair so you don't even need to be able to see the laser to get distance