Ken Waters did an awful lot of load development in sporting rifles and cartridges with the lowly 4X. I would say power is nothing to worry about if you design or use a target which shows good contrast, definition and repeatable sight picture with your reticle
Well this is a fine pickle we're in, should'a listened to Joe McCarthy and George Orwell I guess.
JWP "Which" scopes or "Switch" scopes ? Although I do believe at times my scopes are "bewitched' or maybe just "haunted" because at times I see "Images". Just "spooken" ya!
What power of magnification do you use to shoot load development. Does it matter, in respect to group size.
Load development for what application? Hunting rifle? Competitive benchrest?
For a hunting rifle with modest magnification it is extremely helpful to use a target that closely fits the reticle at the testing distance. On a capable rifle this will allow you to shoot well below MOA. I use targets that will show me if I'm canting as well, not just a round spot target.
Well said Mathman. The older I get, the less I know which way is up. When I post my targets on the back stop, I go to the trouble to use a plumb line to get them perfectly plumb. It does make a measureable difference in group size. Even if your scope is not dead true plumb, it does introduce a level of uniformity from shot to shot which is almost as good as perfection.
Well this is a fine pickle we're in, should'a listened to Joe McCarthy and George Orwell I guess.
You can shoot some very small groups with a 6X scope, but match your aiming point to the power. I find a 2" black outlined square with a 1" white square center works very well for initial work at 100 yards using at least 4X. Others designs will work well, but use the smallest aiming point you can clearly see that doesn't cause eyestrain for whatever power you are using at whatever distance you are shooting.
For load development, I employ a couple of different methods but in all cases I use the max magnification. None of my scopes are more that 16 power. More importantly for me (hunting or competition) I try to remove as many variables as possible: Shoot on a clear day with low wind; use a shooting bench / lead sled; in my case, try to minimize heat...I put my ammo on ice. I mean its 108 degrees out in the summer.
Remember, not everyone has a happy ending, so be happy when you can
Magnification doesn't add much when comparing loads. My prewar SG '06 would shoot tighter groups at 20x, but at 2.5x can still see same difference between loads it likes vs those it don't.
"Allways speak the truth and you will never have to remember what you said before..." Sam Houston Texans, "We say Grace, We Say Mam, If You Don't Like it, We Don't Give a Damn!"
The higher the magnification the lower the margin of error, or to put it another way the better you can resolve aiming errors.
That was pretty common knowledge when I was a kid. One of the old gun writers, Jack O'Connor perhaps or maybe he was quoting somebody else, wrote an article listing the potential error as you went from open sights to peep sights to low power scopes to higher power scopes. Like 1/2" for open sights, 1/4" for peep sights, then 1/8" for 4x and so on. Those are just for illustration, I completely forget the actual numbers but the progressive reduction in aiming error is what's important.
There is a reason bench rest shooters use 36x scopes or I think some go even higher, they want to get the lowest possible margin of aiming error. Now that said, you needn't go crazy, just use a little common sense and match the scope to the rifle's capability.
Fwiw, I have a 12x M8 Leupold that's 33 years old but it's tried and true, I'll generally mount it on new rifles to work up loads at 100 yards. That's enough magnification to let a good rifle and load shoot in the .2's which is about as good as I'll ever shoot anything.
Gunnery, gunnery, gunnery. Hit the target, all else is twaddle!
Ken Waters did an awful lot of load development in sporting rifles and cartridges with the lowly 4X. I would say power is nothing to worry about if you design or use a target which shows good contrast, definition and repeatable sight picture with your reticle
^^^ this ^^^
I prefer classic. Semper Fi I used to run with the hare. Now I'm envious of the tortoise and I do my own stunts but rarely intentionally
6x minimum for a fixed power scope. If variable, then at max magnification.
Are you developing loads at 100 or 200 and beyond?
I beg to differ. The highest magnification used in these load development groups is 5X. The 9.3x62 is a Leupold 4X Compact which is actually about 3.3X. The first group with the Whelen is a Leupold 2.5x Alaskan. It's all about making the target suitable for the reticle, as folks smarter and better shots than me have already mentioned. And I have to caveat I am talking about hunting rifles. Bench Rest, or maybe even PRS would need something higher, I suppose.