The OP is low 4" at 400 yards and you're puzzled whether an inconsistent anchor/alignment might cause 1 MOA's worth of difference.How exactly does sight alignment on a scoped rifle make the differences at the yardage here? Do you have any resources I can read up on that?
im not really following where your going with cheek weld either, he was still 4” low at 200yards. And it’s not to hard to see where bullets are impacting providing on the background is this 400 yard target stuck in dirt.... can see a bullet hit dirt at 400 yards pretty easy. Just for reference here’s a ridgeline, 20moa rail, 50mm scope and a piece of foam for a riser pad and was able to shoot out to 1150yards prior to even having the foam in itherinaz
Respectfully, I'm going to list a few things and leave it at that.
1. My question was intended to address and help the OP.
2. The OP described that he's shooting a 4" diameter target at 400 yards, misses, and represents that all the misses are 4" low. He's not hitting the little gong so somehow able to see where multiple invisible bullets are impacting 4" low at 400 yards distance?
3. Where I'm going with alignment: The OP has a 20 MOA rail + a 50mm bell + ring base height = he's probably 2" scope over bore and has a Ridgeline stock (low comb) with a little glue-on comb riser. Odds are he needs to lift his head too high to anchor a cheek weld.
4. Then this:
The OP is low 4" at 400 yards and you're puzzled whether an inconsistent anchor/alignment might cause 1 MOA's worth of difference.
I will agree in part and disagree in part. I don't like generalizations.It should be consistent, one thing I can assure you in Vortex consistently fail and don't hold 0.
Don't worry the repaired one will eventually lose 0 as well..
Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk
Just to add one more thing to this. There are so many possibilities that it’s hard to narrow down exactly what was going on but I‘m willing to be it’s shooter related. If you were hitting that target consistently at 411 yards then stopped for a break, got back on the rifle and was impacting in a different spot, it was likely due to you breaking your shooting position and then getting back on the gun with a different cheek weld, eye relief, etc. If it was a mechanical issue, it would to have happened the last time you pulled the trigger for that first session which leads me to believe it’s shooter related.So I'm new to long range hunting and this year I have dedicated a rifle build to do just that. I have a Christensen Arms Ridgeline chambered in 7mm Rem Mag. I have Vortex precision match rings mounted to a Talley 20 MOA 1 piece rail. I mounted a Vortex Viper PST Gen II 5-25 x 50 MOA rifle scope. Everything was torqued to spec and the rail was bedded to the action. I have a 5/8' sorbathane cheek riser from Gotta grip on the stock. Im shooting 162 gr Hornady Superformence (SST).
Yesterday I zero'd at 200 yards and got a sub MOA group. I dialed my optic to 3.75 MOA and was hitting a 4 inch steel target at 411 yards,. I was pretty pumped as it validated that I built a good shooting rifle. Well about 15 minutes later I shot at the same target and was hitting about 4 inches low. I then shot at a 200 yard steel target and was hitting around 3 inches low as well. I re-zero'd my rifle and dialed to 3.75 again and began hitting steel at 411 yards again and had no issues for the rest of the day (about 2 hours).
What do you think could cause this? Is there something that I should change or do you think it was from my inconsistencies as a shooter?
Any advice would help.
Any ideas what he could have done to enduce such a zero shift?Just to add one more thing to this. There are so many possibilities that it’s hard to narrow down exactly what was going on but I‘m willing to be it’s shooter related. If you were hitting that target consistently at 411 yards then stopped for a break, got back on the rifle and was impacting in a different spot, it was likely due to you breaking your shooting position and then getting back on the gun with a different cheek weld, eye relief, etc. If it was a mechanical issue, it would to have happened the last time you pulled the trigger for that first session which leads me to believe it’s shooter related.
I will agree in part and disagree in part. I don't like generalizations.
It is a sliding scale. All scope companies with low end models have high failure rates for us LR hunters at the bottom tier. Rates are still unacceptable to some at the higher mid tier. As you increase cost and quality the rate of failure increases. Vortex highest lines don't fail any more than others.
NF won't make cheap scopes, so they don't have failures. Its why I recommend the SHV as the best budget scope.
I would never buy some Vortex because of high failure rate, but it isn't 100% on their PST II, nothing close to that. Among other things, the variables in a scope are likelihood of failure. You have to talk models.
Yep, FX1000 is a solid scope that can be easily purchased for less than 500.00. I've got 1000 rounds through mine repeatedly dialing with 0 issues. That being said, it's on a varmint rifle.A Nikon... but you won't buy any Vortex. OK.
Any ideas what he could have done to enduce such a zero shift?
I have played with different positions trying to shift zero just with position. I can't get one unless I change the suppot. Like from bipod to bag, but it hasn't been that big for me.
I am curious about what mechanisms would move a zero.
rifle cant would be a left to right and low depending on which side its canted.... not just bang on but 4" low and there would be even less of a drop at 200 yards from a canted sight.In the realm of shooter error, Inducing “cant” in the rifle could more than explain a 4” error at 400 yards. Maybe I missed it but I didn’t read anything about the shooter having a level on his optic.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Mine's been very reliable so far. Couple of my buddies have had nothing but success with them. Nikon runs a pretty high QC on even their OEM stuff..I always figured Fx1000 and PST g2 were potato/potahto. Both made in phillipines and seen plenty of people claim issues with both.