Field Target is an arms race.
- Thread starter Franklink
- Start date
21 pages... this has turned into a race of a different kind. Let's all go out and shoot more, Let's improve our scores the only way possible... behind the gun.
Upvote 0
The spherical type joint about which the erector tube pivots when we click the turrets:
That’s the only point along the line of sight where the apparent scope height does not change from vertical clicking.
Upvote 0
I know why I wasn't getting the correct numbers.
On the flat scope mount I was zeroed at 25y and was at 65 clicks for 55 and 60 for 10 yards. After moving to the 20moa mount I zeroed at 25 yards but shot to verify from 21 to 29 yards, there was very little difference between the zero at these distances. If my rifle shoots a 1/2" at 55 yards its going to shoot a 1/4" at 27.5 yards. I could not tell if 25 or 26, 24 or 27 was the true zero. I set it at 25 and moved on.
I measured the scope height, it was essentially the same (to within the calipers ability), so the old numbers in CG were correct but they did not match the clicks I had gathered with the new mount. On the new mount I was at 60 clicks for 55 yards and 59 for 10 yards, bringing me out of a full rotation for 55 yards (12 ft-lbs).
If I could calculate a pure zero point I would assume the two would be different, but in CG moving the zero point didn't account for the differences in the new mount at 55 yards. I had to fudge velocity and scope height to tune up the app to match my collected data.
And there is an overall point to this for this thread, in theory the triangles are the same, but with groups sizes around 1/4" at 25 yards using an inaccurate device to find a precise zero just isn't possible. Often in FT you need to create a work around to get things up and running, I typically question/doubt anything I have done like this until it proves itself in the filed. But to get out there and try it in the real world I had to let go of the fact that i'm not matching the CG results/theory for whatever reason (in this case a bad collected zero point).
Imagine what would happen if you had a bad chrony... Nothing would make sense in CG. And thus the reason why I had to use two profiles to get my clicks to work. 5fps, not a big deal, 30fps is problematic. Luckily mine was reading low or I would have risked being DQ'd at a match. Don't cheap out on your first chrony like I did (however it wasn't cheap), or if possible test it against a bunch of different units to see where it reads.
Last edited:
Upvote 0
The method I use doesn't require a scope height or a BC calculation...so it doesn't make any difference what those 2 variables are or how they are obtained. Get your velocity plus or minus 5 fps...zero you gun at the apex....get your actual clicks needed for 10 and 55y. That's it.
Chairgun will fill in the rest
Chairgun will fill in the rest
Upvote 0
Yep, now the only thing that is missing is; Parallax Wheel data, Scope shift data, gun/reg data, rifle fitment, altitude data, incline/decline data, projectile performance.. more than plenty of variables to geek out over and confuse the sh8t of ones head. Or as mentioned before, shoot more and let it become second nature.
The thing I noticed, the boys and girls from overseas don't even have fancy tapes, fancy turrets on theirs scopes. They just range and seem to know the clicks by heart.. They got so many clubs, and shoot so much, it is second nature to them. They laughed at the wind that had us all concerned and making all sorts of calculations..
Last edited:
Upvote 0