Scope level to ground or target?

[Ledd Slinger]

I think some of you are missing my point. Maybe it’s simpler than I think. I understand why everything should be level as can be. But, you can’t control how the target is set. If you have everything level on your end but the target isn’t level and you are holding off, you could get a level water line, but the POI is off the water line because the target is not level. Is this clear as mud? Now to throw another wrench into it are the ET. The paper target isn’t level but the ET is level. Now what difference does this make?

Not sure how that possible when the scoring rings are circular in shape.
Whether or not the target is leveled by the square shape of the paper in which the circular rings are located makes no difference. A circular shape does not care about a water line. The ground could be at a 45 degree angle in your image of the target and as long as your adjustments at the bench are running a true level, then all directions of reticle travel would be straight thru center across entire circle no matter which way it is oriented. If your reticle is not moving flat and centered from one side of the circle, thru dead center, and ending centered on the other side of the circle, then it’s most likely a leveling issue on your setup, not the target

 

[Steve Blair]

I'm sure this will get me excommunicated from the forum, but I've never leveled a scope beyond "just eyeballing it". I eyeball the reticle of the scope with the target face at matches.

I don't feel like I've suffered because of it.

Mike - How do you know? It's likely you're pretty close but points are lost at the margins.

 

[Fairchaser]

Mike, this is exactly what I do. I level the horizontal cross hair with the numbers on the target face. At least it makes me feel like everything is squared up.

 

[Steve Blair]

For my .284 Shehane shooting 180 Hybrids ~2936, the effect of ½° cant is ~2.9" at 1000 yards. This effect increases as the trajectory maximum ordinate increases. For my Shehane load, it's ~85".

Maybe this seems insignificant, but I don't like to leave anything on the table, especially when it's easy to minimize as a factor.

 

[Fairchaser]

For my .284 Shehane shooting 180 Hybrids ~2936, the effect of ½° cant is ~2.9" at 1000 yards. This effect increases as the trajectory maximum ordinate increases. For my Shehane load, it's ~85".

Maybe this seems insignificant, but I don't like to leave anything on the table, especially when it's easy to minimize as a factor.

I agree Steve, you lose points in the corners. I don’t think it matters on E Targets since you are adjusting your poi based on the feedback on your screen and not the actual target.

 

[sdean]

Mike, this is exactly what I do. I level the horizontal cross hair with the numbers on the target face. At least it makes me feel like everything is squared up.

Steve is right. An unlevel scope only works center x ring. Etarget included. As soon as you hold off you are out of wack. You owe it to yourself to put some effort into scope alignment. I even do that much.

 

[MikeMcCasland]

Steve is right. A unlevel scope only works center x ring. Etarget included. As soon as you hold off you are out of wack. You owe it to yourself to put some effort into scope alignment. I even do that much.

Just shoot Xs then. Seems pretty simple to me.

Seriously though, ya'll have guilted me into it.

 

[tmwinds]

I’m still trying to get my head around how a circular target can be out of level. No matter how you rotate it the scoring circles remain fixed and the X is always the center. Maybe I misunderstood the question.

 

[sdean]

I’m still trying to get my head around how a circular target can be out of level. No matter how you rotate it the scoring circles remain fixed and the X is always the center. Maybe I misunderstood the question.

Don't lose any brain cells over it. Maybe they can't be level or unlevel.

 

[Ned Ludd]

This should not be so difficult. On a target with circular scoring rings, the widest part of any scoring ring is on the line that goes through 3:00 and 9:00, regardless of where the printed images on the target face happen to fall. If the target or the target carrier is slightly crooked, so be it. Just ignore that, it has no impact on leveling the scope whatsoever, nor should it. A slightly canted target face or frame won't have any effect on the fact that the widest part of a scoring ring is located at 3:00 and 9:00. A circle always remains a circle no matter how it is rotated about the center point. Then, set your reticle as close to horizontal (i.e. perpendicular to the imaginary straight line between you and the center of gravity) as possible. With a load that maintains consistent vertical, that will buy the most forgiveness (i.e. scoring ring width) possible.

 

[Jason Boersma]

Shooting from a bench I have never cared if the rifle or scope was level, if it’s the same for every shot that’s all that matters. I level the scope when it’s first mounted then that’s it because every bench is different everywhere you go. Works for me but I’ve always done things different

 

[Albany Mountain]

It's going to be a longgggg winter.

 

[Fairchaser]

As an extreme example to prove a point, what if you aim at the target number on the outside edge of the target as your reference for wind. Your scope line is different from the target horizontal line. Say they are on different planes. Wouldn’t the poi hit on a different plane as well? This is why I match these two lines up.

 

[jelenko]

As an extreme example to prove a point, what if you aim at the target number on the outside edge of the target as your reference for wind. Your scope line is different from the target horizontal line. Say they are on different planes. Wouldn’t the poi hit on a different plane as well? This is why I match these two lines up.

If the target is round and the scope is leveled to gravity, for scoring, there is no horizontal 'line' on the target.

 

[mac86951]

It's going to be a longgggg winter.

Yes indeed and warm enough here to go shoot some more.

If sighting in, with spotter and unlimited rounds I'd say "level" is a preference call. If your set-up isn't at the same conditions as when you verified your scope install (shoot the box, do a vertical scope test, was your rifle level then?) then the drawbacks of a canted setup are that a single windage adjust affects vertical as well; vise versa for the vertical adjustment on a canted rifle. If you're a scope adjuster mid-match instead of a hold-over'er then those mid-match adjustments can really bite you.

Sight in, and maintain rifle in that position works great for many; move to another competition / range / bay / universal railed mount / truck / gun case / shooter / etc... and all bets are off.
My preference is to bubble level the rifle on sight rail (and bags where i can) and on scope install align the scope with a tall target test IE make sure a vertical adjustment is as much vertical only as i can. Then at a match, it's set up rifle to bubble level

Now, if only i can get that windage knob to stop shifting the wind every time I reach for it.

-Mac

 

[Medic505]

As an extreme example to prove a point, what if you aim at the target number on the outside edge of the target as your reference for wind. Your scope line is different from the target horizontal line. Say they are on different planes. Wouldn’t the poi hit on a different plane as well? This is why I match these two lines up.

An extreme answer not to prove a point. Your scope has a windage knob on it.

Have anymore questions you'd like to tell us the answers to?

 

[Fairchaser]

An extreme answer not to prove a point. Your scope has a windage knob on it.

Have anymore questions you'd like to tell us the answers to?

Many competitors including me, during string fire don’t touch their windage knobs. If the wind dies off or changes directions, they would need to go back to their no wind zero without trying to remember or taking the time to change back. My question was hypothetical and you answered with a practical answer. Thanks anyway.

 

[kzin]

As an extreme example to prove a point, what if you aim at the target number on the outside edge of the target as your reference for wind. Your scope line is different from the target horizontal line. Say they are on different planes. Wouldn’t the poi hit on a different plane as well? This is why I match these two lines up.

If the target isn't level and you hold off for wind using one of the scoring numbers(eg aiming at the 8 that should be at exactly 3 oclock but isn't) then the vertical on your hold off will be wrong. I'm with you up to there.

You want to fix the situation by making the reticle follow the false level of the target?
I don't think that works, might even make it worse.

Much better to have the reticle as a true level that proves the target is not level and the hold off point can't follow the target.

 

[kzin]

apparently some of you don't use targets that have a very clear horizontal line defined by the numbers

 

[Steve Blair]

apparently some of you don't use targets that have a very clear horizontal line defined by the numbers

And when your target looks like this, are your numbers still horizontal?