Have also found that shooters who use scopes with enough magnification to feature parallax correction are also more sophisticated about benchrest shooting techniques.
That hasn't been my experience. In fact I've often noted that blokes lacking in experience tend to buy scopes with more magnification than I'd choose to hunt with, and I think it is a bold assumption that those who choose a lower magnification scope aren't capable of shooting small groups off a rest. I rather doubt that the blokes using decent 4x scopes are typically newbies. Some of us are even aware of parallax and know how to effectively eliminate it's effect on accuracy when shooting over a rest. There again, I'm getting to be a crusty old fart, and I've shot hundreds of sub-moa groups with peep sights (and from the lying unsupported position too, let alone benchrests).
It does seem to me though that there's a risk of getting too bound up in load development, chasing degrees of improvement in accuracy which are largely meaningless. Sure, if you are going to compete in benchrest then that last tiny fraction makes a difference. If, like many hunters, you are looking to put a bullet through the vitals of a game animal at the sort of range at which that is usually done then it simply won't. IMHO there are other factors that are more important than that last tenth, or perhaps even half an inch or more of accuracy. The sort of rifle you'll put a 4x scope on to hunt with falls into that category, and that last 1/10 moa you might resolve with a 24x scope, is simply not going to be achievable nor matter when you swap it out for your 4x scope and go hunting big game. You'd do better to make sure that your ammunition is accurate enough, but also reliable and effective, and then spend the time practicing, from the positions you'll use in the field - or perhaps just get out hunting.
