scope magnification question

[magpieman]

when i set the zero on my scope i was using x 6 mag. shooting over the same distance ive just played around increasing the mag to x 9 and ive noticed my groupings are a bit higher, is this a normal thing ? if so a brief explanation would be really cool =)

Edited May 15, 2013 by magpieman

[craig hill]

Shouldn't effect it, it will effect the mildots though

[magpieman]

i dont have mildots =( but how would it effect them, would it have the effect of expanding them with the increase of mag ?

[Good shot?]

i dont have mildots =( but how would it effect them, would it have the effect of expanding them with the increase of mag ?

 

Yes

[Beardo]

cheap scopes have a tendancy to do this - what make/model is it?

is it staying true to the vertical line though?

[magpieman]

its a tasco gold antler 4 x 9 x 40 i think, its just what came with the rifle when i bought it, it seems to be holding its zero ok as far as i can tell

yes its staying true to the vertical

it was only a small increase in the upwards direction when set to x 9 mag, nothing major, i was noticeable though

[Beardo]

i reckon that's just down to scope quality then rather than cant etc. it's an inxepensive scope so i wouldn't expect too much

[Dekers]

There was a thread about this topic not so long ago, (think it was this site) the fact is it shouldn't happen.

 

The reality is, it is down to the design/engineering/tolerances/quality/etc of the scope.

 

Unfortunately issues can go hand in hand with lower priced/budget scopes!

[magpieman]

what would be a good scope to get on a 50 quid limit ?

[NIGHT SEARCHER]

Have a look at www.jsramsbottom.com loads of scopes on there.

 

The Nikko Stirling mountmasters like the 4x12x50 with mounts for £35 are very hard to beat and are very good value for money and plenty good enough for air rifle ranges.

 

It`s all down to what you want to spend the Hawk scopes are excellent.

 

Lot`s of cheap copies on ebay from China so be careful they are not Bushnell or other top names.

 

Ramsbottoms own scopes are very good and they give you top service.

I have had 3 scopes of them and they have been excellent.

Edited May 15, 2013 by NIGHT SEARCHER

[team tractor]

its a tasco gold antler 4 x 9 x 40 i think,

That's a better quality scope than a lot of todays cheap rubbish but could be 20 years old now . I recently sold a silver antler scope I was given and the glass was better than a lot of todays .

[magpieman]

i know scopes old coz the rifle it came on has a good few years under its belt, it dont look cheap, the turrets have a nice sharp click to them when you adjust them and the picture through it dont seem to bad.

 

the consensus seems to be that for the money the nikko mount master mildot AO is the way to go,

[Guest]

Don't be so quick to blame the gear. I shoot tighter groups at x6 than x8 or x9 and so use x6 by default. As I limit myself to 25 yards this is not an issue (HW95K 0.22). For me cranking up the mag beyond x6 introduces potential problems like shoulder pulse so the extra zoom brings no benefit. If you can shoot well with x6 then leave it - it's enough.

[magpieman]

yeah just got my new nikko ao scope today, ive been using 6 x mag on it, next thing is to work out my mildots, the quest goes on =).

i did read some where that if you zero at 25 yards then you wouldnt need to deal with hold under, anyone one know any thing about that ? potentially technical question i know lol

[pauleamonn]

That's correct but the most important point is - how far out is the pellet's zenith? To explain it easily I'll use exaggerated distances as examples.

 

If you zero your scope at 10yds and then shoot through a paper target at the zero'ed distance so as the pellet carries on going (bad form, I know but humour me), the pellet would hit the target while on the rise and then will continue to rise until it reaches its zenith or peak on the other side of the target.

 

Equally, were you to zero at 35yds and then shoot through a paper target at the zero'ed distance in the same way, the pellet would be falling as it hit the target and then continue to fall after the target.

 

The trick to avoid hold under is to discover how far out (usually about 20-25yds with a sub 12ft/lbs air rifle) the pellet hits the zero'ed distance with the flight path level. In other words, the point of travel where the pellet neither rising or falling.

 

This will result in you being able to shoot at your targets at the zero'ed distance using the centre cross of the reticle. When shooting at anything closer or further away than the zero'ed distance you'll only need to use holdover.

[magpieman]

nice one paul, totally makes sense, my rifle is sub 12. i think it was a vermin hunters vid on youtube where i heard about it, si pittaway, he seems to know his stuff, but then he does have all the gadgets and gizmo's to work things out in a very precise way. also wondering how crucial it is to adjust the parallax for different ranges, or would setting it also to 25 yards do for most situations ?

[pauleamonn]

Yeah, if you follow Si's advice you won't go wrong.

 

Personally I think it is quite important for you to set the parallax correctly for each distance for two reasons.

 

The first one is that it means it's not so crucial that you align your eye behind the scope in exactly the same place each time you shoot (although you should try and do so by using the same hold and putting you cheek to the stock in the same place each time). If the parallax is not set properly and you don't put your eye in the same place your point of impact will change even if the crosshairs are in the right place. This will lead to missed shots and, if you are not aware of the importance of parallax, total confusion.

 

The other is that, if the distance you are shooting at is vastly different to 25yds, the target will be more in focus. This will help you achieve better results from your shooting.

[magpieman]

thanx again paul, ive read a few things about parallax that made "some" sense lol, the clearest description of it yet was like.... your sat behind the wheel in your car.... directly in front of you on the dash is the speedometer. as the driver, the position of the needle is giving a true reading, but to the passenger who's looking at it from an un square angle, the needle would appear slightly out against the face of the dial.

 

i use binoculars a lot, so im used to focusing on things at different ranges to get a clear picture, as im currently understanding it, when a object / target is clearly in focus at any given distance, the numbers on the objective bell should be the range to your target, only adjusting the focus on my scopes isnt as noticeable as adjusting my bino's, i guess i'll just have to play around with n get used to it, i only got the scope yesterday lol

[Beardo]

never trust the numbers printed on the scope....

[magpieman]

=( lol i guess it is just a question of trial and error then

[Beardo]

they are useful as a rough guide - but only that - you need to get out and see how it actually performs in the field

[Dekers]

never trust the numbers printed on the scope....

 

 

[pauleamonn]

Yep, I totally agree with Beardo and Dekers on the range finding aspect. Most 'normal' (cheap?) scopes are pretty **** at that. That is why the FT shooters who rely on parallax focus for range finding pay thousands of pounds for a scope. It's also why they have the very large wheels on the parallax turret. So they can minutely adjust the knob rather than swing it about like we mere hunters do.

 

If you want to use your scope as a range finder you'll need to go down the route of setting out some targets at known distances and then looking at them through the scope and adjusting the parallax until the target appears to be in focus. Then you can look at the numbers on the AO and make a comparison. If you note both the distance of the target and what the AO says, you can still use it for range finding even though the numbers are inaccurate.

 

 

Another way to see how parallax affects your POA/POI is to make rings out of your thumb and forefinger on each hand. Now hold the left hand ring at arms length and the right hand ring about a foot away from your face.

Now line up your dominant eye through both rings and look at an object a bit away from you. Now move your head a few inches to one side.

When you do this you will no longer be able to see the original object nor be able to see through both rings. In order for you to, once again, see through both rings (with your head still shifted to the side), you will need to move one of the rings and, once you do, you will no longer be looking at the original object. This is what you get if your parallax is not adjusted properly and you don't put your eye in exactly the same position behind the scope.

[magpieman]

so if im understanding this correctly, place a target at a known distance, then rotate the ao until the focus is clear, i would know it was correct coz if i moved my eye line slightly whilst looking through the scope the crosshair would "not" appear to slide / move over my POA ? =)

[pauleamonn]

Yep, that's about it. A bit crude but. short of getting a rangefinder, about all we've got. The combination of the clear view and the lack of reticle movement are the signs.