Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics 6x grouping ability?

Yes.

None.



Dave

As others have already said, adjust target so that the scope reticle pinpoints the aiming point.

Example: With my eyes the narrow part of the wide duplex in a 6X Leupold subtends very close to 7/8" at 100 yds . Making a cross of dark blue 7/8" masking tape on a white background for an aiming point, it is possible to see an aiming error of 1/8" depending on the ambient light.

A wider tape makes a 1/8" aiming error harder to see.

Somebody already mentioned some of my previous writings on this, but we can actually figure out the difference in potential aiming ability with various scope magnifications.

Most people think 20/20 vision is "perfect," but in reality it's only average: It's what most humans see at 20 feet. Some people have 20/15 vision (meaning they can see at 20 feet what most people see at 15) and a few have even better vision.

Somebody with 20/20 vision can "define" just about an inch at 100 yards, meaning they can tell the difference between alternating half-inch black-and-white lines. Beyond 100 the lines disappear and look gray, just like a zebra a long way away.

Scopes will shrink how much somebody with 20/20 vision can define at 100 yards by the amount of magnification. A 10x scope shrinks it to 1/10 inch--and a 6x scope to 1/6 inch. 1/10 of an inch is, of course, .1" and 1/6 of an inch .1666". The difference in aiming error is .0666", slightly more than 1/16 of an inch, which ain't much.

Consequently, it's usually obscured because of other factors, such as not firing enough groups to be able to find it, common among handloaders who settle on a "pet load" due to one small group.

Other factors are scope parallax (not many shooters know how to look for it, much less compensate for it), the built-in error of most handloads, and unsuitable targets for the reticle.

But probably the biggest is wind, something very few handloaders consider when testing ammo at 100 yards. A 1-mph breeze (which most would consider dead calm) will drift a typical .30 caliber, 150-grain spitzer boattail at 3000 fps just about exactly as much as the difference in aiming error between 6x and 10x.

I think you meant the difference in aiming error is .0666?

Thanks, fixed it. Am recovering from a bad case of food poisoning and am not tracking exactly right now!

I suspect, based on my own experience, that aiming error is not necessarily directly proportional to resolving power, but that the aiming mark and sight design play a part too. For example, with a ring foresight of suitable diameter to suit a black circular aiming mark, it is quite feasible regularly to shoot groups smaller than 1 moa, even if the naked eye could not resolve better than 1 moa at that distance. Back when I was shooting ISU smallbore I was doing it regularly, from prone unsupported, week in and week out. Change the foresight, or the aiming mark, and it becomes more difficult, though the eye's resolving power is the same.

With scopes with a crosshair/duplex reticle, I personally find that an aiming mark in the form of an X, preferably with each of the four legs tapered to a point at the intersection, makes it a great deal easier to wring out the accuracy of the rifle than, say, a circle or square. I also find that, all else being equal, the lower magnification sight picture looks rock steady, which helps confidence.

OTOH a bit more magnification, all else being equal, helps when the aiming mark is less than ideal - a small dull-coloured object against a dull background, for example. However, all else isn't really equal, as there are trade-offs to be made as you up the magnification, in such things as FOV, depth of focus, mirage etc.

In saying the foregoing I'm not taking a position on it, just reflecting on my own experience.

I probably should have answered the questions too


1. Yes

2. With a suitable target (see above) not at all

Those forced to start their rifle scope magnification at 6x because they have average eyesight must start there for that reason.

Others with stronger eyesight can use rifle scopes with less magnification so as to be able to scope moving game at closer ranges.

Variable power scopes are another advantage also.

My first scope was 6x. I really see no need for a higher magnification except to better see prairie dogs expand after a high velocity bullet hits them.

1/4 MOA is what I consider as good as it gets out of my firearms. But I don't shoot bench rest. I mainly hunt and do a little lever action silhouette with iron sights. No, I don't get 1/4 MOA with my 32 Special or my 30-30 with iron sights. . If I consistently shot 3 MOA with either of those off hand I would be quite happy. As it is - no way. A 6x scope can easily do that 1/4 MOA, even with my cataract eye sight. A 4x scope can do 1/4 MOA too.

I used to have 20/15 sight. Now not so much.

But using higher power scopes means more weight, more visible shaking etc. There is no way any advantage for me other than stated PD shooting to using > 6x scopes. Granted I have a couple 3-9x scopes, but they do not get set higher than 6x and they do not often go hunting.

I like to keep my game shooting < 350 yards. To me hunting involves stalking, otherwise it is shooting, not hunting.
I would rather shoot something at 35 yards than over too.

You can shoot 1/4 moa w/out a bench? What is your technique?


mike r

I'll bet if you could consistently hit a quarter at 100 yards...you're pretty much shooting MOA. Maybe that's what he meant...

I like a 6x with a fine crosshair.

Check out Hunter Benchrest on line, look at some of their groups...

DF

This.

In my mind a quality 6x or even 4x will be better than a cheapo 9x.

When sighting in a rifle at 100 yards I can shoot smaller groups with 9x-10x than 6x. Never really thought about targets matching the reticle. So I'll continue sighting in at the scopes highest power and then adjust down when hunting.

I have shot 1/2 moa groups at 300 with my SS 6x. I have shot moa at 550 (that is how far my range goes). It may be easier with higher power, if you are worried about target groups, but it is more than good enough for the hunting that I do. I am not a super-range shooter.

I wouldn't have believed it until I saw it, but some of the best groups I've gotten from my most accurate rifle were with an old steel-tubed El Paso K6. They're honest to goodness 1-holers and I'm sure I couldn't have done any better at 12x.

I like to use little tiny neon-colored dots as targets.

Aim small.

This is on a hunting rifle of course; if I were bench rest shooting I might have different thoughts but small fractions of an inch just don't matter a ton to me.