What method do you use to level a scope?

[hogpatrol]

Use this to get barrel and scope in vertical alignment, then level with bubble level. At that point everything is aligned vertically and level. I attach a wheeler professional level to barrel and match the bubble with the EXD device as it's hard to see a plumb line at 100 yards with the EXD device in place. Remove the EXD level and with wheeler level reading level in a rest, align reticle with plumb line at 100 yards and Robert is your mothers brother. Works for me and stopped all the cock-eyed eye ball leveling. The electronic levels in the Leupold VX-6s seemed to be malfunctioning when using top of turrets to level, in reality the turret tops and reticle were not in alignment. With the EXD device and plumb line, all the electronic levels have agreed.

https://www.brownells.com/gunsmith-...ers/vertical-reticle-instrument-prod6097.aspx

A video showing the above tool being used:

 

[Will Henry]

Nothing wrong with leveling a scope to the rifle. But its a very common misconception that a rifle scope needs to be level to the rifle to ensure long range hits. The scope must be level world not the rifle. So when talking about cant and how much it effects the bullet, its the scopes cant to gravity, not the rifle itself. When the turret assembly is canted in relation to gravity, you turn elevation into windage and will hit low and in the direction of the cant.

And here you go. If one canted the rifle so badly that the line of sight was offset by 1/2 inch and sighted the rifle to hit point of aim at 100 yds, the point of impact would be off by 4.5 inches at 1000 yds.

 

[Dgd6mm]

I think.... I'm learning from this thread: scope leveling is not that crucial. You fellas do know, you're taking one of my excuses away from me.

 

[xr650rRider]

Cant doesn't stop when a bullet reaches its apex, it effects on the way up and the way down.

A 5 degree cant, with a rifle that takes 27 MOA to get to 1000 yards would be off target 24.6"

https://www.accurateshooter.com/optics/canting-effect-on-point-of-impact/

 

[Alex Wheeler]

And here you go. If one canted the rifle so badly that the line of sight was offset by 1/2 inch and sighted the rifle to hit point of aim at 100 yds, the point of impact would be off by 4.5 inches at 1000 yds.

You would have mount the scope with about 18 degrees of cant to achieve this error. 5 degrees is pretty visibly canted.
As you know a decent level is in the hundreds of dollars and a good one in the thousandths. The cheap ones are about useless for any precision task.

 

[KY_Windage]

Eye ball it, theres no reason a scope has to be level to the rifle. It's turret assembly should be on the same plane as gravity but theres no reason it needs to be level to the rifle.

I don't know what "level to the rifle" means. Level to the receiver? To the rail? Anyway, it does not matter because what is important is that the reticle be pointed at the center of the bore. If it isn't, then when you crank up you are going to have windage error.

I don't try to do the "math" on 5 degrees of error, I just create it, crank up, shoot it and see how much I am off. It puts me off an inch or two at a mere 100 yards. That means I am off by 10 - 20 inches at 1,000 yards.

I also find that most people's scopes are off by more than 5 degrees. It might be "level to the rail" or whatever, but it misses pointing at the bore by more than 5 degrees, usually more like 10 degrees. I see them routinely off to the left or right by 3 or 4 feet at 1,000 yards on a flat-calm day.

Of course, once you get your reticle pointed at the exact center of your bore, you still have to hold the reticle level (to the earth) while shooting. Hence the popularity of scope levels.

 

[KY_Windage]

A 5 degree cant, with a rifle that takes 27 MOA to get to 1000 yards would be off target 24.6"

Yeah, that is just about what I would have guessed - two feet.

 

[Alex Wheeler]

I don't know what "level to the rifle" means. Level to the receiver? To the rail? Anyway, it does not matter because what is important is that the reticle be pointed at the center of the bore. If it isn't, then when you crank up you are going to have windage error.

I don't try to do the "math" on 5 degrees of error, I just create it, crank up, shoot it and see how much I am off. It puts me off an inch or two at a mere 100 yards. That means I am off by 10 - 20 inches at 1,000 yards.

I also find that most people's scopes are off by more than 5 degrees. It might be "level to the rail" or whatever, but it misses pointing at the bore by more than 5 degrees, usually more like 10 degrees. I see them routinely off to the left or right by 3 or 4 feet at 1,000 yards on a flat-calm day.

Of course, once you get your reticle pointed at the exact center of your bore, you still have to hold the reticle level (to the earth) while shooting. Hence the popularity of scope levels.

Ideally the scopes turret assembly is in line with the center of the bore. Thats what guys are trying to do when they level a scope to the rifle. Levels get you close, they are all made very cheap and cheap levels are not worth much, not to mention canted rails or barrels not on the centerline of the action. So the point I am making is that all the fuss over leveling a scope to the rifle is mostly over nothing. Scope cant to the rifle makes very little difference down range, and Id argue I can level them better by eye than with a cheap chinese plastic bubble level mounted on surfaces that don't correlate to the erector tube travel or the center of the bore. The real problem arises when the scope's erector is canted to gravitational pull. Im trying to help people understand the difference. A scope mounted with a 5 degree cant to the rifle's bore will put you off less than 2" at 1000 yards if the scope is level to the earth (erector travel in line with gravity) If the scope is mounted perfectly on the rifle but the scope is canted to gravity 5 degrees then you get your huge windage error.

What we should worry about is that when your scope level is level, the crosshair tracks up and down a plumb line without any horizontal deviation when you dial the scope. You can not rely on external surfaces or the crosshair.

 

[KY_Windage]

What we should worry about is that when your scope level is level, the crosshair tracks up and down a plumb line without any horizontal deviation when you dial the scope. You can not rely on external surfaces or the crosshair.

Couldn't agree more. That is why I position every scope (well, every one I might ever dial up much) by using the Tall Plumb Target test I described on page 1. Nothing to buy, takes only a few minutes and then I KNOW I am not going to create any windage error no matter how much I dial up.

 

[hogpatrol]

I use the dayglo orange weed whacker line on the plumb bob against a white background @ 100 yards. I have a home made fixture that cradles the barreled action. I level the fixture then align the crosshair with the line.

 

[tobnpr]

I use an adjustable parallel.

Well crap, that's a lot simpler than gage blocks!

 

[hoz53]

I use an adjustable parallel.

thats a good idea. better than trying to fit the right gage pin in there.

 

[Will Henry]

Here's the thing. When I shoot offhand, I cant the rifle to an extent which varies according to how much angle there is on the butt. When I build an offhand stock for myself, I angle the toe out to compensate. With a straight stock, I'm going to cant the rifle. For this reason, I set the scope to be level in relation to gravity, as described by Alex Wheeler.
If I'm shooting BR, the rifle is leveled by the rest and this is mostly the case in "F" class as well. Shooting prone with a sling, I still cant but not as badly as when shooting offhand. Still I want the scope to be level with the world when I am in a comfortable position. This helps to insure things don't change when I am fatigued. If the scope is leveled with the action raceway and the stock doesn't fit, I am adapting myself to the rifle to hold the scope level. If I get tired and allow the rifle to cant (as it wants to do) I'm going to start missing even more than usual. WH

 

[Cigarcop]

What I do is stick the barreled action in my vise, level the rail which really is just a reference point, mount the scope, lock the rings to the base but don’t tighten the tops.... I use a little jig I made with a plumb line hanging, .....I shine a light thru the objective and use the eye piece to focus and make the reticle clear on my board...... I get it plumb with the line hanging, snug the tops and run the scope up 30 minutes or so and see if it runs true or if there’s any deviation to adjust for until it’s running perfect up and down, lock the rings and at that point I set the level I’ve put on the scope which will be inline with the plumb line but the scope itself may actually be off level but the reticle is what matters to the level on your scope.

 

[Will Henry]

Out of curiosity, I had a closer look at some of my rifles and scopes to see just how much I cant them. On my CZ 452 silhouette rifle, the stock is fairly straight although I was able to cheat a bit when grinding the pad and kick the toe out about 1/4 inch. I cant this rifle enough that the scope ends up 3/8 inch offset in relation to the bore (I shoot left handed so the offset is to the right. The scope is set in the rings so it is level to the world but it is far from level inrelation to the receiver.
The other SB silhouette rifle is stocked so that I hold the rifle level so the scope is level to the receiver. On this one, the toe of the stock is kicked out 7/8" while the heel is centered on the bore so the butt is twisted.
By way of explanation, my left shoulder is a little deformed from a motocross incident and subsequent surgery so this makes it more comfortable for me to cant the rifle or angle the butt to compensate. The point is, the amount of offset which can result from the cant doesn't really mean much as long as the scope reticle is level when I'm shooting.
In silhouette, whether small bore or high power, I am only adjusting about 11 -12 moa but I still need the scope to be level when I shoot. I don't care how it looks with the rifle leveled up in a vise.
In prone matches, of course, the amount of elevation (to go from 300m to 900m) is much greater and having the scope level to the world is even more critical but again, I don't much care if the scope is canted in relation to the receiver if that is how it is most comfortable. A fraction of an inch of offset is meaningless. Because I don't cant as much, prone, the offset is only about 1/16" anyway and I can't judge the wind that close at any range. WH

 

[243Lapua]

I learned something new a couple of month ago while at "Speedies" shop in SA. Mr Cook was using Starrett parallels. Bought my own set and been using it with good success. Insert the parallel between the top portion of the action and the bottom portion of the turret area. And use a good inch-pound torque.

 

[KY_Windage]

but again, I don't much care if the scope is canted in relation to the receiver if that is how it is most comfortable.

That is fine if you always shoot at the same distance, always get plenty of sighters before it counts or don't mind carrying "dual dope" -- both elevation and windage corrections for every distance you might want to shoot at.

It isn't important that a scope be level. What is important is that you be consistent. You could cant the rifle 45 degrees and still shoot 1/4 minute groups with it, so long as you hold it exactly 45 degrees off every time. That is not practical to do, but keeping the bubble centered in your scope level every time is pretty easy to do.

So, you could have your reticle plumb when the rifle is canted 45 degrees and still shoot accurately. You're just going to have a hell of time trying to dial up for longer distance.

I don't care about "comfort" and instead want my reticle aligned with my bore perfectly and also exactly plumb every shot. That way I can dial up from 100 yds to 1,000 yds and not introduce systemic windage error.

But if you are shooting at a fixed distance, or don't mind carrying dual-dope, there is certainly something to be said for canting your rifle until it is comfortable and then making your scope plumb, as you are doing.

It just depends on what is important to you.

 

[Will Henry]

No. As long as the scope tracks vertically dialing up for range is no problem. If the scope is offset to the right by 1/2 inch, one can allow the group to form 1/2 inch right at 100 and it will be 1/2 inch off all the way out; as long as the scope is level to the world. If one adjusts so that the group is centered at 100, the group will be 1/2 inch left at 200 and 4.5 inches left at 1000. this is because the scope reticle and scope adjustment are on the same vertical line as the bullet trajectory. This is totally different than the amount of error one will see by canting the scope to the world.
I don't have to carry dual dope simply because my point of impact is only off by about 3/16 inch if I don't compensate. I can dial my scope from 300 m to 900m with no error introduced because the reticle IS plumb. With the silhouette rifles, there is no significant variation in windage from 200m to 500m. Again there is no windage error introduced because the adjustment is still vertical. If the adjustment was vertical to the receiver, then canted, the adjustment would no longer be vertical and you would see a significant error. I can and have demonstrated this on the range.
When I sight in those rifles which do end up with the scope offset, I go ahead and let the group form to the side; equal to the offset. So, about 3/16" at 100 yds with the one rifle That's less than one click on that particular scope. The group is then going to be roughly that much to the side all the way out as I adjust. By the time I get to 300m, where the rifle is grouping about 5/8 moa, 3/16 inch is pretty well lost in the shuffle, even in dead calm conditions. I don't shoot from a rest or bipod anymore ,unless I am shooting BR or "F" class, so I want the rifle to be comfortable to hold. Then the hold is better. Off a benchrest, the rifle is level, the scope is level, everyone is happy. From unsupported positions, this may not be the case. If one can adjust the stock so as to keep the rifle vertical, then the scope can be leveled to the receiver because, in shooting, the receiver should always be level. WH

 

[ljmontano]

Scope jack quick and easy

 

[Kittitas George]

I use a piece of 'key stock' 4" long, 1/4 square. To this I attach a 'line level' about 2+" long, used to level a string line for construction of forms etc. I 'scotch tape' the level to the top of the key stock. Mount the scope bases and lower 1/2 of the rings. Anchor the key stock to the scope base with a small 'craft magnet' or two. Now level the rifle and secure. Place the scope in the rings. I use the Newlon Turret Level Cap (Sinclair International) or use a second 'line level' on the turret cap. Set the scope in the rings install the top 1/2 of the ring and screw down gently, a little on the right, a little on the left, keeping it level. At some point the eye relief must be set, remove the levels, set the eye relief, install the levels, level the gun and scope, continue to tighten the screws to the proper torque. The little gap on each side of the ring should be equal. I have used this method for many years on many rifles, just mounted a 6.5 X 20 Leupold on a Rem. 700 yesterday, using Weaver bases which I wasn't familiar, went smooth and quick except for visiting. I've missed quite a few prairie dogs at long range, I couldn't use the 'scope outa plumb' excuse.