Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Long Range Hunting Tall target test

Wondering if you guys have done the tall target test to confirm your scopes tracking? Seems like an interesting thread topic, and a good check for your longrange rifles. Even though most of you probably confirm on hard targets, like I do when finding dope. Anyway, I've done some tests on some of my Nightforce SHV 5-20x56 rifle scopes and found only 1 is tracking real true. The others are all climbing just a little more than the dial reads. The one ATACR I have is spot on as well:

Tikka CTR 6.5 Creedmoor, 7-35x56 ATACR:




Today's testing included a Winchester model 70 308 Winchester and a Tikka T3 Varmint 22-250. Both set up with a Nightforce SHV 5-20x56 MOAR reticle.

I was burning up some ammo from another rifle, so the Tikka was not shooting to its full potential accuracy wise. However, this is a tracking confirmation test:




And the target shot earlier today:

Zero consisted of the Winchester's load slightly off to the left side of the orange dot, and the Tikka's load slightly right of the orange dot, so as to not confuse the groups. As you can see, I ran out of elevation adjustment with the scope on the 308. However, it gets me to 1,000 yards. The 22-250 still had some left. The ATACR has a chidt ton of elevation left. 75 moa total, to be exact.

This guy Bryan Litz seems to think the tall target test is worth doing. Check out the video:


This is also a good test, if you are seeing POI shift at long range. Your scope may not be tracking in a vertical plane, or you could be canting the rifle/scope. My buddy is sending his Vortex Razor in because it fails a windage tracking test.

If any of you have done a tall target test, share your results here. Thanks!

Good stuff. Thanks for posting.

I second that.

Never tried a tall target test, but I will now. Thanks

I do this with all my rifles now.

Did one for a friend with his 7PRC before a hunt in Kurdistan for stag and Ibex. Nailed his stag with a 750 yard shot.

I live in the desert eastern Washington state and have lots of friends who are busy in PRS. It’s mandatory for them to be competitive.

You can order tall targets for testing over on Snipershide.

With my long range iron sighted prone rifles this is required with every new barrel set up. Both the front and rear sight adjust vertically and the front sight needs to be rotated to ensure both are tracking on the same vertical plane. Click adjustments can be easily verified with a dial indicator setup without firing at all.


I like to set them up so that the POI at 30 MOA elevation is about 3/4 MOA left of the vertical plumb line at 100 yards. That compensates for spin drift and keeps your no wind zero pretty well centered with increasing distance.

I don't run scopes up as high as they are used for hunting out to mid range distances only.

How come y'all running MOA targets? I thought everyone was gunning with Chickens + MILs

Cool info on the iron sight set up mike. I know you will be happy that the Winchester model 70 308 kicked the Tikka's azz yesterday. I know you like your 308's. I like to shoot these with a non bias and can admit when one does better than the other.

Next time out, it will be these 2:


The best tracking scopes of the bunch, and 2 of my better shooting rifles. I'd like to put the ATACR on the CTR with the Mcmillan A3 edge, but that rifle shoots very well as is. The SHV just has some tracking error. Like I said though, I shoot hard targets and make note of the actual dope out to 1,000 yards on all of these. Happy Thanksgiving guys!!!

Great advice on the targets. Thanks David.

Happy Thanksgiving guys.

You moa guys, make sure you understand the difference between smoa and tmoa before you run a ton of minutes up and scratch your head.

Plumb on the line is critical.

I did the same tall target test on a 4.5-14 Leupold CDS , it passed on one day before I took it to a steel test the following day. All went well until I went from 350 to 450 with a light 6.5 SAUM, I hit the fence post holding my 10" steel target with my first 2 shots and then it corrected to the center of the 10" steel.

As much as I wanted the Leupold to track it did not. It did well for 2 years with minimial dialing and I did connect on a 625 yard antelope on the first shot. Perfectly placed 130 JLK.

The same scope after Leupold FIXED it, it failed this year double, grouping 3" from shot to shot. I had 2 really nice sub 3/4" groups 3" apart.

I am still looking for a solution, who TF wants to put a 2 lb scope on a 5 lb rifle?

I have to add that when they returned the scope it tracked very well on several trips shootig steel Until it went south.

That sucks. I had 2 VX3 Leupold CDS scopes go bad. Fail to even adjust. Couldn't even get zeroed. They worked good for a few months of use, not even hard use, but occasional shooting at the range. Since those failed, I have a hard time trusting Leupold anymore. They were the straw that broke the camel's back. Oddly enough, I've had some older Vari-x IIc models that track alright. One I am hanging on to. I'll use it until it dies...


It would be interesting to see how those target turrets track on this tall target test.

If it won’t pass this test, send it back and switch brands.

Well that is helpful AF

If you send a scope back and it comes back no better, it’s a QC issue.

Hence, switch brands.

Better?

Well Heck yea.

After seeing your post on your new 22 Creed shooting groups that should be in the shotgun thread I'm all ears.
Certainly you are the guy I should listen to on a Long Range THREAD

Roger that on the minutes of angle. Many don't realize the constant commonly used for milliradians is a rounded number as well.

To which constant are you referring?

6400

Who uses that to approximate 2000*pi?

The US military does.

Whatever for?

uhhh, ME...... I'll take something that works, at a small weight penalty, every frigging time.

Same here, I gave up on trying to make light scopes work. I'd rather suffer the ounces and enjoy reliability.

Great write up BSA. Always enjoyed seeing your targets and notes. Keep em coming

I've gone as high as 21 ounces.

Nice buck Mike!

I like the rifle as well!

Huntsman, I noticed on some other threads you were telling guys there were some Bushnell LRHS for sale in the classifieds. I believe Jordan and some others use those as well. I'm sure they track exceptionally well and have very good glass. Care to share what you think on them? Thanks.

Sweet rifle, probably a damn good shooter too. Mike needs to fill us in on specifics. Looks like it's set up very well. Compact edge, 1955 or there abouts pre 64 model 70 with custom #1 contour stainless barrel, beefy Leupold with M1 turret in S&K mounts. He needs to tell us about the rifle. What is it chambered in, how does she shoot? Don't say 308 win though!!! I'm thinking the rifle weighs in around 7.6 pounds?


Thanks Dre, I appreciate that. Hope you had a great Thanksgiving my friend!!

In a whole different ballpark than some of you guys, but I just run the cheap azzed Burris FFII 3-9x40 with ballistic plex reticle scopes on 90% of my hunting rigs. Teaching my girlfriend how to use them on her new 243 too. They are 13oz's and a great set and forget that gets me out to 500. Like I said though, a whole different level than what you guys are using, and probably shouldn't even be brought up in a tall target test thread!!!

Military lensatic compasses are calibrated with 360 degrees for dismounted land navigation and 6400 "mils" for adjusting mortar and artillery fire. Our mortar sights had a 6,400-mil scale and we based our FDC calculations on 6,400 mils.

Per wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milliradian),


I'm guessing that when you only have a few weeks to teach a bunch of people to adjust indirect fire, you simplify it as much as you can and accept a slight loss of precision.


Okie John

This.

The 6400 is a simplified rounded up used by the military. I used it 40+ years ago with mil surp Swiss made WILD T16 survey theodolites.

The actual geometric number mathman references is right around 6283 mils in 360 degrees. Pretty much like rounding MOA to exactly one inch.

Extremely interesting stuff there. I've always been taught that math is the "universal language", weird how they try to teach different philosophies in regards to this??? You say to make it easier, but if it's wrong, it's wrong. I'm not a math major though. I usually wait for mathman to fill us in on things regarding math, even though I have used it a lot in my line of work. Mainly trig and simple but useful pythagorean theorem. It's always nice when you can use a "constant" too, as Mike suggested. Constants are the layman's friend.

Specifics on the rifle are:

1959 action, Edge stock, 6.5-06 Rock 5R 1-8 barrel w/3/4" cylinder, Jewell trigger and the Mark 4 10x scope. Shot out the original .270 barrel and this one is pretty much done as well. Have Kreiger chambered and ready to go I'll install after I use up the last of the ammo for this one. Smithed by myself and a good friend for the barrel work. Forget the weight, but without the sling or ammo 7.6 pounds sounds pretty close.

Other pictures here:

https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/11613018/1

Absolute killer rifle. We might shop at the same store..



This is just a plain old 30-06 though and comes in a hair under 8lbs as it sits though. It’s really a great hunting rifle.

We may, I used it's near twin to shoot a Coues buck last Monday. Great rifle.

Love those rifles mike and Scotty.

Anyone else here have any tall target tests they can share with us? I know in another thread, mathman suggested shooting these on a windless day. He is absolutely right. However, sometimes it's almost impossible to find one of those.

Luckily around here, the winds have been lighter, over the last month. I'd suggest making note of the wind on the target, if you happen to try this when the wind speeds are higher than about 5 mph. I know guys are always suggesting wind flags. Use those too, if you need to. I don't find that they increase group size by very much, but they can push your group over a bit. Something that needs to be noted here is I do not wait for the barrel to cool between shots. That is absolutely unnecessary. I'll let it cool between groups, and in these tests, I leapfrog the rifles being shot, so they are cooling down a little, but not much. Using 2 rifles to compare side by side is always a fun test, whether shooting at steel or paper targets way out there, or these tall target tests. Either way, dueling rifles is always fun.

The other day, I was shooting one of these targets in 5-9 mph winds, and you can see where it effected both rifles. Winds started picking up a bit when shooting at the 20 moa to 35 moa, then backed off again. However, the little 53gr v-max I was shooting didn't seem to be affected as much as the 140gr ELD-match I was using in the Tikka CTR. Strange since the 53 has a much lower bc. (around .291 vs .625, if I remember right). Another weird thing I've noticed is that same 53gr V-max has shot some very tight groups at 4-600 yards. Sub 1" at 400 and sub 3" at 600 yards. You guys can examine these targets and see what you think:






Check that Nightforce SHV 5-20X56 out, it's tracking higher with every group. At 37 moa up, it is about .8-1 moa out, when hitting the 38 moa orange dot. That is 3 out of the 4 SHV's that I have that are tracking in a similar manner. Just something to watch for, if you decide you want to buy one. Otherwise an exceptional scope for the money. I love the glass and like the MOAR reticle on these ones.

Great write up bsa. Appreciated on my end for sure, will need to do this myself soon

Thanks Cert, I appreciate it! It would be cool to see how the scope I sold you fares. I'll bet it will be spot on. I hope you guys had a great Thanksgiving.

Good test if you do everything right. IE.. action is precisely level, scope is mounted precisely level and reticle travels precisely vertically to the center or the earth, bubble level mounted simultaneously to ensure everything is aligned when doing the shooting


Or you can have your scope mounted precisely (accurate to .001” at 6”), ran through its entire travel while aligned with a laser-leveled, precisely marked board in MOA and Mil, and anomalies noted while the barreled action is held in a heavy fixture.

And not shoot 20 rounds






If any discrepancies are noted in travel dialed to actual movement, the actual click values can be calculated and input into your ballistic program to have perfectly accurate output solutions


But if you can’t send your rifle and scope to Score High Gunsmithing for the precision mount, the tall target test will do if you have the time to devote

BSA, I suspect your scopes are actually tracking as they should, I have owned several NF scopes and checked I think 3. ALL of them track spot on and have ZERO error I could find. I can detect a tracking error within 1%. This brings up an issue I have talked about for years but the board mocks me and makes fun of my methods. Frankly I don't care because I know what I have come up with works. if it didn't I would quickly see the scopes not RTZ if they moved and weren't held firmly. IMO there isn't a way to truly test tracking unless its done statically and mounted in or on something that allows the scope to be adjusted without shooting it. Nightforce actually tests this in their factory, They themselves test tracking without shooting it, but rather banging it and putting back in their own fixture.

The problem with actually shooting the gun to check this is even on a steady benchrest your zero can wonder slightly. Bench technique is hard to maintain exactly enough because how the gun recoils off the bags effects its zero, heck even the way you are sitting at the bench does too. I see this magnified with my AR15's because the form of the rifle is hard for me to have consistently ride the shooting bags. Then of course you have accuracy of the rifle, which may be effected by barrel heat and lots of other factors.

lastly recoil resistance and holding zero. I personally think the actual scope will hold zero better than most people think, I have a theory that what people are seeing is scopes shifting in the rings ever so slightly, which is often seen in some sort of impact, which could include recoil.


kudos to you for testing this BSA, I wish more people would. it also shows you're interested in what exactly is happening.

Interesting, however the ATACR is spot on on every test I've done with it. The SHV on the Winchester model 70 308 also holds true in these tests. The 3 other Nightforce SHV 5-20x56 are showing the same exact issue. They climb ever so much with each increment on the dial. I see that as a mechanical issue within the scope itself. Like I said in an earlier thread though, this does not matter as much as some would think, as long as you know it's happening and you verify on hard targets at distance. One reason, among a few, that ballistic calculators have always been close, but not exact.

These tests are great for those wanting to make sure their scope is tracking true in the vertical plane, along the vertical axis. However, as some have mentioned before, what will get you is the wind. It will also show if you cant your rifle and your scope is not level to the world when you pull the trigger. Those that are interested, should check out their equipment to make sure there are no huge variances in the tracking, as well. I'm sure we have seen some scopes that showed weird results, even when trying to zero a rifle at 100 yards.

Just the science behind this, if a test shows me that a certain scope is tracking in a certain manner (even after a few tests), I can ascertain that the mechanicals of the scope are causing it. Not saying that they are bad, just that maybe the pitch on a screw inside the adjustment system may be slightly askew. Again, some of you guys should shoot this and see how your equipment fares. There's only one way to find that out, and a static test is often times misleading. Actual real world recoil from the rifle is the only way to be totally sure about what it's going to do in the field.

Method seems solid.........

Adapt, Improvise, Overcome.

I remember being taught Gradians at one point in time. 100 grads = 90 deg. Seems easier than Milrad.

That joker must be trolling for a visit from the homicide investigators.

Yeah! What an idiot!

Spot on

Guy has to be kin to Big Stick.

Totarry!

Still as classic as its original release date…

Agreed. Makes my guts hurt I laugh so hard.

Scope manufacturers do not, however. March got caught up in this early on when they were using 6400 “MRAD” per revolution. People thought the scopes were adjusting incorrectly until it was discovered that March was using the old military standard. They then changed to the proper 2000*pi mrad per revolution, like everyone else.

Math is the universal language, but we all need to agree on the rules, including rounding and approximation rules.

Since I'm not shooting artillery fire.....not worried about it!

https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbt...ic-uhd-hunting-scope-review#Post17363385

John

Interesting test...have you tried it at 50 yards? I am assuming you are shooting at 100 yards. I don't see how you can verify tracking when you have so many things which can affect your results that you can't control. What about the wind, repeatable bench technique, mirage, shooter fatigue, 3 shot groups, canting, and the inherent accuracy of the rifle? I wonder if shooting closer at 50 yards would allow you to get a closer approximation to verifying tracking. Moving the scope adjustments changes your point of aim, now you are using your point of impact to verify the change in point of aim. Just some food for thought. Testing like this and discussing it will get us all closer to the truth.

The point of aim remains the same. The adjustments alter the point of impact only.

The accepted norm for most load testing is groups at 100 yards, it only makes sense to test a scope at 100 yards in this way. A known rifle, with a known load, will yield recognizable results regarding the center of a group size at the point of impact.

Wind ~ first of all pick a day with minimal wind conditions. Second of all, that's part of the point of testing a load or scope at 100 yards. Far less chance of wind influence than at say, i dunno, 1000 yards?

Bench technique ~ most folks who would bother with a test like this already possess more than adequate bench technique. Personally, I don't like a bench. Bipods and rear bag. I test the same way I would shoot.

Mirage ~ wonderful wind indicator if your lucky enough to see it when your shooting.

Shooter fatigue ~ eat your Wheaties, get some sleep.

3 shot groups ~ two less than 5. Shoot whatever floats your boat. We are testing a scope, not a load.

Canting ~ time to install an anti-cant device if canting is an issue.

Inherent accuracy of the rifle ~ dunno about you but I'm not putting a scope worthy of long range on a rifle that isn't.

Point of aim ~ in this test your point of aim always remains the same. Optimally at the bottom center of the target. You are testing the erector of the scope by comparing the actual point of impacts with the amount of MOA or MILS dialed into the scope. IOW, does inputting 5 MILS in the scope actually move the point of impact UP 5 MILS above your POA? Does 10 MILS dialed move the impact UP 10 MILS above your POA? When you dial back to your zero stop do the impacts actually return back to your actual "ZERO"? These are important things a long range shooter needs to know about his rig. Thus, the test.

I do center fire at 100, rimfire at 50.

In both cases, minimizes the effect of wind on the outcome

Yeah, that's where I'm at as well. No need to shoot a centerfire rifle ever at 50 yards, unless a nice bull is standing broadside in front of you.

Excellent thread John. I always appreciate your input. I know you are a shooting sob!!! That Tract scope looks like it's doing a great job. One of my buddies back in Washington uses Tract scopes on some of his precision rifles. The glass is pretty nice.

Great post buddy. I appreciate that. Hopefully barm understands all that. One thing I'd like to mention is, even though I am calling this a "tall target" test, it is really more than that, as you have explained. I like to use this test to also confirm the load and rifle, and how it shoots as the barrel heats up: Or if it shifts POI as it heats up.

Also, as long as you make note of what the wind is doing and it pushes your group over, you know that is what caused it. You'll notice on some of my targets, that I made note of that. With the "long range" competitions I shoot, you are also dealing with barrel heat, because you can not wait long between shots because they are a timed event. Not like some of my other shoots, where you do slow fire: 1 shot per minute.

In this test, I am firing roughly 18 rounds without letting the barrel cool. Unless I'm shooting 2 rifles. Then the barrels have just a little time to cool. I'll shoot the groups pretty quickly, especially if its windy.

Last week I was thinking about this thread and figured I should add this information in, so guys know exactly what my intent is with this test. I think you explained it well though. Thanks

Put your rifle in a vise and place the cross hairs on your target. Start moving your elevation turret, what happens? Don't touch the rifle or try to move it. Does your point of aim move?

Place your rifle in the same vise and place the cross hairs on your target. Shoot a group on the paper. Now place a piece of cardstock that has been folded between your barrel and the forend of the stock. Slide it back with enough force that it wedges in the gap with force and won't go back to the receiver. Shoot another group. Does the group change it's location on your target? Remember your scope is still on the target and you have not made any adjustments to the elevation knob. Did your scope fail the test?

Next place your rifle in the same vise and get the bore perfectly level to the target. Now shoot a group. Where did it hit? I am sure it is low, correct?

These examples should illustrate that point of aim and point of impact are not the same. We use scopes and sights on a rifle to move our point of impact. That doesn't mean point of impact will accurately measure changes to the point of aim. To measure the accuracy of a scopes adjustments you need a test which measures changes in point of aim.

I am not trying to crap on the test. I am really glad to OP went to the trouble of doing it and sharing his results with us. It is valuable information that he provided. I am trying to get all of us to put our heads together and determine a way to get the answers we all want.

That's a LOT of words to say you don't understand what's going on here.

There are also "scope checker" fixtures available where two scopes are mounted parallel to each other to verify tracking off the rifle. One scope remains locked on the starting point where the other is tracked/checked on a grid. I have never seen one used, but some of our local F Class competitors have them.

I ve seen it done with a scope checker you have to have a frozen fixed scope on the checker to test your scope against. Its the only way to test a scope properly.
Think about it, how may thou does it take to build in 20 moa into scope rings.
I think .001 = 1 moa

Feeling generous today, and I have a few minutes. I'll address that paragraph. The rest of it you're just inventing unrealistic scenario.

We start with a zeroed rifle. That would be a scope that is adjusted to cause the trajectory of the bullet to intersect your line of sight at a prescibed distance. Typically 100 yards.

An optic with elevation turrets allows you to internally adjust your line of sight, to cause a change in the attitude of the barrel, to cause a taller trajectory, so that the bullet will intersect your line of sight at distances beyond your initial zero. Everyone knows the same can be done with reticle hold overs, but the turret allows the line of sight to remain centered in the scope.

If your data calls for 11.2 MILS to intersect your line of sight at 1000 yards with a rifle that is zeroed at 100 yards, dialing 11.2 MILS will cause a bullet to pass over your line of sight 11.2 MILS high at 100 yards, or roughly 40.3 inches above line of sight. The easiest way to SEE that is to have the bullet strike a tall target at 100 yards.

The entire point of THIS test is to see if the scope actually produces 11.2 MILS of adjustment, meaning you're causing the exact amount of elevated attitude of the barrel for the bullet to strike the point of aim at 1000 yards.

You can do the same exact test AT 1000 yards if that suits you, seeing if your bullet strikes low or high from POA, but you're dealing with wind as well and likely skewing your results. Wind doesn't just affect lateral movement of the bullet, it can affect elevation as well. A scope passing this test at 100 yards leaves you with concentrating on atmospheric conditions instead of factoring in scope adjustment error as well.

Great post. Where was the range that you shot? MTG

barm, the main intent of this test is to test the scopes for accuracy of the elevation turret adjustment. This test is best done with the recoil from the rifle vs. a static test in a vise. There are some scopes that will pass a static test, but fail a test that is done when recoil is added. Formid did one a while back, on Rokslide, with the same type of scope my buddy was having issues with. This is the reason I decided to check my scopes. As it turns out, I have 3 Nightforce SHV rifle scopes that have about a 3% tracking error. The other 2 Nightforce rifle scopes I have are pretty much spot on. I have also checked these scopes multiple times, and they show the same error. That confirms the errors are consistent, and one of the reasons they do not match up exactly with the ballistic calculators I've used.

I also want to add that this test can be done with any scope, as long as it has a numbered turret. Even a cheap Burris...


...like what I use on my AR's can be tested and checked^^^^.

Moral of the story, if you twist your dials at all and you have noticed some kind of anomaly or error on targets downrange, then a test like this may tell you what you need to know. When I say downrange, I mean past 400 yards.

It's easy enough to do at 100 yards. Hang your target plumb, shoot at one point (the bottom dot on my targets for example), and adjust your turret and see how it matches up with your measured increments. When I do this test, I am also testing my natural point of aim, to see If I am holding the rifle so the reticle is perfectly plumb. If you find that you cant your rifle when you shoot, that could throw the POI off to one side or the other. So like I said in another post, it's not just about the tracking of the scope. When shooting this test, you are testing many factors that may cause a miss downrange. However, most importantly is if your scope is dialing as it should.

Thanks buddy. This is in Nevada.

The things I’m confirming when I do the test are alignment with the bore, and that it tracks accurately and returns to zero.

If it tracks accurately and returns to zero, that beats a lot of scopes.

If it doesn’t track accurately, alignment past 300 yards or so doesn’t matter, and that’s where I usually start dialing.

I have a friend that shoots PRS who uses a night force ATACR with the tremor3 reticle. Once alignment is confirmed, he shoots dope using the reticle without dialing.

That is a good suggestion. I use my MOAR reticle as well sometimes. It's real quick for shots out to 600 yards and even further. Many ways to skin that cat. Also, I was thinking about this in my post yesterday, but if you have a reticle that is very accurate, like the MOAR in the Nighforce scopes I use, you can check your target with it to confirm you have measured out your points correctly. I did this each time, with every scope, and the reticles were spot on. But like I said, there was tracking error in 3 out of the 5 scopes tested. Not including my buddies Vortex Razor HD. That thing was whacked out in the horizontal adjustment and actually moved (shifted POI horizontally) during recoil. That was pretty frustrating.

He does that like just about every other PRS shooter does. There's no time in a stage to fool with turrets, none. My match partner and I would dial for one target, usually the closest, and hold for the rest. Occasionally some stage rules we would shoot would not let you dial anything, you had to use holds. Came home many a time with dope scribbled on my hands. I never dialed wind ever, always held for wind.

That is why I own a herd of NF's.

Don't ever think a NF is immune to problems, I saw one go completely to [bleep] on the line at Deep Creek in Missoula, MT. I saw another not do so well with a scope checker.
There was alot of BR shooters had problems few years ago with the 15-45 NF thats why you saw alot of them for sale.
They are a good scope I have 2 - 4- 32 NX8 on my LR hunting rifles

Thanks for the info sherm. I know a few guys that run these same cheaper SHV 5-20x56 rifle scopes and dial them a lot in our long range varmint silhouette matches here. Haven't seen one fail yet, but I am always keeping an eye on stuff like that.


I've wondered why the various NF target scopes were less expensive. I'll stick with the SHV and ATACR then..

BSA, how often do you shoot those matches?

Classic.

The point of my post was dont just assume because it is a NF its bullet proof or any scope for that matter.
I've seen guys i know migrate over to March.

I go often enough. I may go to a longrange speed match on the 16th. In that shoot, I'll be using holdovers, not twisting the turrets.

Was hoping to add some context to your statements on reliability of the SHV scopes. Seemed like you only shot a couple of those matches a year...