Two clicks up, one click down?

[AccelR8]

"Tasco Tap", "Leupold Tap" in some circles I've heard it call the National Match hammer

Scopes like the attached image, the Nightforce and Valdata, they use a coil spring, no? I would think this would have much less friction ("sticktion") than a leaf spring. Is that the case?

 

[300_whisper]

If my scope needs convincing to adjust it’s not going to be my scope anymore.

I can’t imagine shooting a match, worse an animal with a scope I’m not confident it did exactly what I told it to do.

if you won’t put up with a rifle tossing fliers why excuse a scope not doing its job

You don’t know what you’re talking about. You keep a penny in the capped turrets so you can take it out to tap them when you dial. That’s the reason why I don’t run exposed turrets. I need somewhere to keep the penny.

 

[rijndael]

I do have a habit of adjusting my parallax from the same direction, from infinity back down. But I don't do that with POI turrets. I've box tested my NF scopes and I couldn't tell a difference. 10 Mils Up or 10.1 Up and .1 Down ... the POI was the same.

In my matches, I'm dialing up and down all the time. Usually under a time pressure. It's pretty rare I miss a target based on elevation; it's almost always wind calls.

I get the theory of it, but practically speaking, how much of a difference on paper have you all seen this matter?

 

[DangerRanger]

IMHO
i like boyd's plan
for those that said they proved their scopes, lets see the targets.
some of you may not understand the precision and accuracy involved in long range BENCHREST competition.
ALL threads have clearance, which can be a place of movement.

One would expect such a demanding discipline would demand their scopes track correctly instead of settling with smacking it like an old remote and saying “that fixed it!”

I still have the old file of all the targets from the scope checker threads of a few years ago, considering the Br community led the way on requiring more from our manufacturers in terms of retaining zero I expected the community to be a bit more avid in the same for tracking.

 

[6bra1k]

One would expect such a demanding discipline would demand their scopes track correctly instead of settling with smacking it like an old remote and saying “that fixed it!”

I still have the old file of all the targets from the scope checker threads of a few years ago, considering the Br community led the way on requiring more from our manufacturers in terms of retaining zero I expected the community to be a bit more avid in the same for tracking.

wishin and a hopin' don.t make it so...just because they are the best does not mean the user cannot learn how they work and use that to his advantage. you choose not to, fine with me

 

[300_whisper]

I ain’t wishing’ and hopin’ that’s why I come prepared with a penny.

 

[Bill Clifton]

I go farther past when adjusting counterclockwise. When you are screwing a turret in (clockwise) you have positive displacement of the erector tube. Going the other way, you are counting on the bias spring or springs to overcome all of the friction in the system and follow the retracting turret foot perfectly; sometimes it does not. I may go a half inch or more past counterclockwise and then come back to my intended setting, finishing clockwise. This was explained to me by Dick Thomas when he was running Precision Reticle, which at the time, among other things was a Leupold approved warranty station. When the direction of your adjustment is clockwise don't go past, just go directly to your intended point of adjustment.

This^^^ its a basic yet solid mechanical practice. Same way you would operate a torque wrench or many things.

 

[jelenko]

Hmmm. I thought many scopes had two springs for each adjustment so that there is spring pressure pushing back either way the turrets are turned. For example, Leupold VX 3xxx

 

[BoydAllen]

Hmmm. I thought many scopes had two springs for each adjustment so that there is spring pressure pushing back either way the turrets are turned. For example, Leupold VX 3xxx

This is about the difference between theory and fact. It is a fact that many scopes have had this issue, despite the intentions of their designers. No one designs a scope with the goal of it having unreliable tracking,

 

[300_whisper]

I would just do a turret tracking test and run it through its total adjustment. If it tracks awesome. I would get lost in my turrets clicking 1-2 forward and then back.

 

[Orr89rocz]

I would just do a turret tracking test and run it through its total adjustment. If it tracks awesome. I would get lost in my turrets clicking 1-2 forward and then back.

Thats how I understood it. Tracking tests with those precise targets of exact dimensions, everything level, and the gun/scope 100% locked down cant move…if you dial the turrrets and see the cross hair follow commanded path, then there is no clearance play in the threads affecting it. And the increments of adjustment are doing as predicted, else there could be some calibration issues but if its repeatable then all is good. IE dial 5 mils get 5.1 every time. Its doing what it is suppose to do. Everything internally is moving as it should. Im just a hobbyist but my sightron on my 300 wsm follows true. I dial it 18.4 mils max allowable in the scope, and with a bit of hold over to shoot a mile, back it down to 0 and poi at 100 is always the same.

 

[gunsandgunsmithing]

Thats how I understood it. Tracking tests with those precise targets of exact dimensions, everything level, and the gun/scope 100% locked down cant move…if you dial the turrrets and see the cross hair follow commanded path, then there is no clearance play in the threads affecting it. And the increments of adjustment are doing as predicted, else there could be some calibration issues but if its repeatable then all is good. IE dial 5 mils get 5.1 every time. Its doing what it is suppose to do. Everything internally is moving as it should. Im just a hobbyist but my sightron on my 300 wsm follows true. I dial it 18.4 mils max allowable in the scope, and with a bit of hold over to shoot a mile, back it down to 0 and poi at 100 is always the same.

The only threads that I know of to have zero clearance are pipe threads. Besides that, we're not just talking thread clearance here.

 

[6bra1k]

the scopes

I ain’t wishing’ and hopin’ that’s why I come prepared with a penny.

the scopes we are talking about have finger adjustable turrets...we are talking precision not your grandfathers hunting scope.

 

[300_whisper]

Oh silly me. I thought I was on long range hunting. I’ll head over to that forum.

 

[6bra1k]

Thats how I understood it. Tracking tests with those precise targets of exact dimensions, everything level, and the gun/scope 100% locked down cant move…if you dial the turrrets and see the cross hair follow commanded path, then there is no clearance play in the threads affecting it. And the increments of adjustment are doing as predicted, else there could be some calibration issues but if its repeatable then all is good. IE dial 5 mils get 5.1 every time. Its doing what it is suppose to do. Everything internally is moving as it should. Im just a hobbyist but my sightron on my 300 wsm follows true. I dial it 18.4 mils max allowable in the scope, and with a bit of hold over to shoot a mile, back it down to 0 and poi at 100 is always the same.

how small is your 5 shot group at one mile ???

 

[6bra1k]

you are ignoring recoil on threads that have clearance...it just aint that simple...

 

[jelenko]

This is about the difference between theory and fact. It is a fact that many scopes have had this issue, despite the intentions of their designers. No one designs a scope with the goal of it having unreliable tracking,

Interesting. So, does the issue occur in both directions? I.e., up and down; left and right?

 

[gunsandgunsmithing]

you are ignoring recoil on threads that have clearance...it just aint that simple...

...and all threads have clearance or they gall. Otherwise, scopes wouldn't even need a spring here.

 

[Orr89rocz]

how small is your 5 shot group at one mile ???

Idk, never shot a group, but i got a few on 16” plate with many just off so near moa my guess, even tho its done 1/3 or so at 100.
Its done 3 shot at 1390 within 7-8” or so

But how is that relevant?. Theres far more changes to bullet poi from wind and drift than scope.

It tracks up and back. Every time. Idk what else you are looking for

 

[Orr89rocz]

The only threads that I know of to have zero clearance are pipe threads. Besides that, we're not just talking thread clearance here.

Well it was mentioned as play in the threads. You say you watch reticle move. Yeah that’s exactly what those tracking tests are doing. It moves. So why go 6 clicks and back 3 just to move 3? I never had to do that on finger adjustment turrets on good scopes