Hello. I've a question about the best way to level a scope. I use a one piece picatinny rail on my bolt guns with Warne QD rings and 2 Innovative Technologies magnetic scope levels. I put 1 on my rail, if aluminum I use a tight rubber band from end to end & around the stock, and 1 on my elevation turret without the cap. When my rail is square & level I use the 1 on the turret to level my scope then tighten rings while watching the level for a change. To me the cross hair is level but some of my friends pick up the gun & say the scope needs to roll either R or L which brings me to a big question. If your center POI is the same at 400 yards, vertically, as it is at 100 yards, doesn't that indicate your scope is mounted square with the bore? I would love to hear any suggestions on mounting a scope. Thank you very much,
Jim D

I use one of these, though mine is the original with no level.

Yep...same here.

Your friends may be canting the rifle when they shoulder it. Everyone is built different and therefore don't hold exactly the same way.

keep it straight for your eye and to hell with your friends

Our very own Hi_Vel here on the campfire, designed and patented just such a device. It is smple and effective and can get your scope mounted squarely even if the rifle is canted...

Where's Huntsman22, he has a patented scope leveler too.

Ha ha...

I've been using this gadget for about a year or 2 now. Works pretty slick. Can be a little challenging aligning a fine reticle with it though..

He's probably working on his jack 2000 shooting rest..

I wonder how many of us think that we have our scopes 100% level, but then when it comes time to shoot, hold them a bit canted and still manage to hit what we are shooting at.

Mine are good enough for confirmed 700 yard 1 shot kills on mulies. That's all I care about..

Like Shrapnel,

I too use He-Vel's.

It is simple, it works, and it saves a ton of time second guessing.





Plus it is made in Montana, by Americans.


He also has a new one out for ARs, that have A3/Flattop type receivers. I have not had a chance to use it yet, but it is one nicely machined piece of material.

I have one of those I'm testing. It's top notch.

I'll be submitting a test, and some pictures soon.

I use a weighted string behind the gun cradle. If you line the string up to the center of the bore and the center of the cross hairs you can see the vertical plane and twist the scope to eliminate the cant. A flashlight shined in will illuminate through to the wall behind it and it becomes easy to see.

Lots of devices for leveling a gun while shooting.

Mackay, do you contact him for one or are they available elsewhere?

I had a guy look through the scope on my Rem 7600 and say my scope was canted. I told him I bet it's not! I put a magnetic level on the side of the receiver and used a plumb bob.
I know all levels aren't created equal but I'm sure the scope was closer then the guy was!

http://parabola-llc.com/purchase/

I need to pick one of those up from Hi_Vel.

I've used plumb bob, window panes, simple levels with a vice. They all work.

I've eye balled a lot of them. Some of them looked canted but were close enough at 300 to leave it alone.

If you use DNZ mounts the nevel is quick, easy, and works. I used a piece of scotch tape to tighten it a little.

If your level says it's good and it tracks plumb on a tall target test, you're GTG.

+100 on hi-vels little gizmo. In fact, I just used it again yesterday while moving the scope on the new chassis.....

Can someone describe how that gizmo works?

http://parabola-llc.com/links/

Here's the new AR model. The machining on this tool is about as close to perfect as possible...That's just how Hi_Vel rolls. Perfectionist is an understatement.

On this model, instead of having two points to line up, there are index marks on the lower part that allows you to use it to square up the charging handle. It works perfect.

Thanks guys. Where can I purchase the Hi_Vel tool? I'll order one today.
Jim D

http://www.parabola-llc.com

I have the AR model as well. Incredible tool !!

Yep, it beats everything else available by a long ways, in both convenience and accuracy.

I've yet to find any reticle-leveling tool that includes a small spirit level to work very well, partly because it's just about impossible to make a small spirit level that's very accurate AND lines up with the rest of the tool. In fact have used Hi-Vel's tool to straighten a bunch of crooked scopes that were supposedly set up straight with spirit-level tools.

http://parabola-llc.com/links/

The videos at the link do a much better job than me typing, and you can order from the website.

It should be noted that at first glance, the product looks fairly simple. In usage, it is. In development, I can tell from communicating with Hi-vel it was definitely not.


Many have heard of "Occam's Razor". This is a metaphysical/problem solving principle that essentially states that the simplest answer is usually the correct one.

Hi-Vel fine tuned this down to the simplest, user friendly form. I think he nailed it.

I also use the Reticle Tru. It's the best thing going for mounting scopes that don't have flat bottom erector housings, and are not sitting on one-piece rails. In those cases, a simple feeler gauge placed between the flat scope bottom and the one-piece rail as the scope rings are tightened gets the scope square with the receiver. For everything else, the RT is amazing.

My Stabila is gay-ron-teed to .029 degree of accuracy......ha!

But wait. There's more.....

Add the integrated rangefinder mount, proprietary clamping system, electric trigger AND the 'Keyboard Kommando' interface to your ballistic smartphone, and there is just about NO way to miss......

Don, don't forget to show the balsa wood airplane propeller, anemometer!

I need a Retical-Tru as well.

Just watched the video.

Seems like it's "Ok", but far from a precision scope mount.

I'm coming a bit late to this conversation, but I thought I would put in my $.02.

I have a bore sighter. It's a $30 BSA model I got off Sportsman's Guide many years ago.

http://www.sportsmansguide.com/product/index/bsa-boresighter-kit?a=1174794



The interesting thing about this boresighter is that besides giving you a decent boresight, it also works as a leveler in a backhanded sort of way. When I explain, you'll see what I mean.

If you have a scope in the process of being mounted, your scope can conceivably roll in the rings. There is one position that brings the scope's crosshairs perfectly aligned up and down.

Then you have the boresighter. It works by attaching an appropriately sized arbor and stuffing it down the barrel. Again, there is only one position that brings the boresighter's grid perfectly level, but the axis it turns on is different than the scopes. There is one and only one configuration that bring the boresighter's grid and the scope's crosshairs exactly aligned, and that is one where the scope and the boresighter are rotated to the exact position they should be. If the scope is even a little bit off, the grid on the boresighter will not align. The rifle itself can be cocked off-level, but there is still only one solution that works.

As a result, I stuff the boresighter in the bore before I have the screws fully screwed down. I rotate the scope and the boresighter until the grid and the crosshairs are aligned. Then I tighten the screws on the rings down to 20 ft/lbs. Then I adjust the scope so that it lines of to the dark zero lines on the the boresighter grid. My final test is mounting the scope with the forearm resting on the flat of my left palm and doing a final offhand check.

Since I started using the boresighter, I have gone from having trouble hitting a double page of newspaper at 100 yards to being on an 8.5"X11" sheet of paper at 100 yards with my first shot. The boresighter has more than paid for itself in ammo saved getting on the paper. It has also removed the problem of unleveled scopes.

My suggestion to folks is that anything but a boresighter that works off an arbor in the barrel is redundant. I recommend eschewing all other methods and springing for the boresighter.

Thanks.

Don.... Can't wait to see in person!!

Need to get the patent paperwork done before someone steals your idea

That won't work all the time. This is an exaggeration of a scope that is not level, but you can see that even on 2 different axis, it is possible to align the grid and the crosshair and not even being close to level...

I've always used the magnetic levels i'll have to check these out

You're still just eyeballing it with that device. A real level like Innovative Technologies and a verified vertical line down range is fool proof.

It makes you wonder with the millions of scoped rifles there are in America, how anyone hits anything at all...

Wow, that's a great unit by Hy Vel. For 99 percent of mounts, that's the ticket. A simple v'block and slot....
I've used combinations of machinist levels, plumb bobs and other ricky-tick set-ups, but that looks fast and sweet.

Shrapnel, you aren't a long range shooter. I'm sure your slow twist rifles and canted reticles are suitable for your endeavors.

dogcatcher,

I stand by my post: Any scope-leveling device that depends on a small spirit level isn't going to be all that accurate, except with some luck. The ONLY way such scope-levelers can work is if:

The small level is precisely lined up with the tool.
The surfaces of the rifle's action are absolutely square.
The reticle is absolutely square inside the scope.

All of these things can occur, but the odds are against it, especially with most scopes and factory rifles.

Hi-Vel's tool--which you have obviously not used--eliminates the error of "eyeballing" as much as possible, especially if you learn to use it according to the directions. It squares the RETICLE with the action, regardless of whether the "square" surfaces on the action and scope are square with the reticle.

The ultimate test of reticle squareness with a rifle, of course, is actual shooting, whether doing an extreme elevation adjustment test at 100 yards or more shooting at longer ranges. So far I've had better SHOOTING results with Hi-Vel's tool properly applied, than any tool depending on small spirit levels and the flat surfaces of actions and scopes.

+1. I've been using Hi Vel's reticle device for over two years now, and it's superb. Easy and simple, quite accurate.

I love simple- because simple works. Every time.

I've had Hi Vel's Reticle Tru device for a couple of years. I've used it to square up scopes on all my rifles and on a lot of my friend's scoped rifles.

Not to mention it's made by a great guy!

Can't beat it...

Two weeks ago I mounted up a 16x Super chicken on a .300 WM, using Hi-vels device. I was shooting 210 Bergers. I had only put it on paper at 100 yards.

I went to a private ranch on a particulary windy day with a couple of guys who are PRS shooters, and the first target engaged was at 1K.

Using my Kestrel (applied ballistics) for validation of velocity, and a wind correction, I was able to achieve a 2nd round hit on a USPSA sized plate.

The rest of the shots matched the wind calls. That is pretty darn accurate to me.

Where do I get one?

You are doing it right and the tool works great!!! I have one as well. Don't pay any attention to dogcatcher, he wouldn't know his azz from a hole in the ground. He has a hard enough time just shooting his rifles, let alone getting any measurable amount of accuracy out of them...

John,

I really can't understand how you can state this, being as astute and reasonable as I think you are.

All the device is doing is letting you see where the vertical crosshair is without looking through the scope. From that point, it's a total EYEBALL SITUATION to align the scope with the two points on top and bottom to the centerline of the bore.

A level on the action and on top of the turret while sighting at a laser-leveled perfectly vertical line drawn on a shop wall, while far from being perfect, would be much better

There are several links posted earlier in the thread.

This has been a bunch of knowledge put together. Thanks kindly for all the help.
Jim D

Rick,

Dunno how you came to the conclusion that the Reticle-Tru doesn't involve looking through the scope.

I stated why levels don't work consistently in my post. It's because there's no guarantee of a level surface either on most rifles or scopes, and secondarily because small levels aren't usually square with whatever they're mounted on. Have a whole drawer full of various level-based reticle devices that people have sent for testing. None of them have worked consistently, and some have resulted in reticles being off more than five degrees.

The Reticle-Tru works by aligning the vertical crosshair with the center of the bolt, thus avoiding all the error possible in using at least two levels on small surfaces that may or may not be square anyway.

I can't understand how anyone who hasn't used a device knows how well it works.

I wish I was that smart.

Next time I go to Huntsman's, I'm gonna borrow his and use it to see how close mine are to square. Hopefully it won't be an eye-opener, pun not only intended but hilarious.

So combine the laser leveled vertical line (or plumb bob) with the tool being discussed and it would be pretty darn hard to be off.

All I can say is that it has saved me a bunch of time. I tend to have folks come over wanting help with their stuff, and usually the first thing I do (if the scope is of OK-decent manufacture) is toss the base and rings, and set them up with Talley lightweights.

Then the optic gets set up using Hi-Vel's device. Once that is done, the action goes back in the stock and torqued to spec. This usually fixes the vast majority of non optic related problems.

Shrapnel:

Now you've got me scratching my head. I'm not saying I'm doubting you, I'm just trying to imagine the geometry that would produce that picture.

You realize, of course, I'm going to have to go down to the shamanic secret underground test facility and try to duplicate your results. You also caught me at Turkey Camp, so I'm a good 63 miles and a day or so away from getting there. This is going to bug the snot out of me.

One question come to mind: Who made your boresighter? Mine is a BSA. I can rotate it on the arbor, but I cannot make it turn like that.

I also am curious how you accomplished that photo. The reticle must be adjusted to the stops on both axis.

I have had pretty good results using my cheap Tasco bore sight to level scopes.

As long as the reticle is centered and scope is mounted pretty close to the center of the bore, the bore sight will show scope canting as well as any spirit levels I have used.

I am not faulting the fine inventions shown earlier in this thread. I am sure they work well.

I will say that my experience agrees with Shaman's. If a bore sight is what you have, it will get the job done.

John, serious questions - just taking a WAG, what percentage of the scopes on rifles do you figure are perfectly level?
Moving further along, is this one of those things where one person who is very knowledgeable will evaluate a scope as level using his tools/methods and another who is very knowledgeable will say that it isn't, using his tools/methods? Thanks, John

Seems like this tool will get you more reliable and accurate 'level'.

Been using the small level system, which gets good result if you are not twisting turrets, close enough for hunting out to 300 yds or so.

For the long range game scopes are tested with the tall target.............and a scope level installed once everything is square to level.

John,

You misunderstand. I meant the device acts as an external indicator of the position of the vertical crosshair. From there, the user actually has to eyeball what position the scope is in the rings with the top and bottom points on the indicator as related to what he visually estimates is the center of the action or barrel.

While the installer may get lucky or the user has no need for a better level of precision, this device is far from optimal.

To really do it correctly so that everything functions properly in the field, the action has to be perfectly level and the centerline of the scope and the centerline of the rifle’s bore are both exactly in the same vertical plane. Then, dial the elevation knob through it’s entire range while looking through the scope making sure the crosshair’s center never leaves a perfectly vertical plumb line.

Good post.

Rick,

Apparently you misunderstand the level of precision at which the tool works, since you've never used one. Yes, it is all "eyeballing," but the eyeballing results in far more precision.

One of the nice things about turkey hunting is that it does not require a whole lot of precision. For a couple of months out of the year I don't have to think with precise logic. Riding around in a truck with a dog hanging out the window is about as complex as it gets. Blowing a turkey's head off with a 12 GA is easy at 15 yards.

However, I'll try and get back into a more sophisticated frame of mind and venture a guess as to how this was done. The picture shows the matrix grid of the bore sighter in such a way that the scope is cranked to near-minimum power. Second, the black margin in the left of the pic indicates the camera is not dead on to the scope.

I know for a fact that if I use my bore sighter with the scope at its minimum power, the ability to align it properly is attenuated. On a 3-9X scope I usually do the work at 6 power or so. There is a slight ( it may be my imagination) misalignment of the horizontal crosshair to the bore sighter such that the right side is up a bit. My guess is that if you were to set the scope to a higher power, that misalignment would be more pronounced.

In regards to the black margin, I know for a fact that you must have your eye centered in the scope and seeing the full view in order to bore sight successfully. This takes quite a bit of work. I put my rifle in a vise and then screw my cheek down to the stock in as close to the final position for shooting as I can. I even arranged my gunsmithing bench so that I could accomplish this. If my eye is not aligned properly to the scope I either do not see the full view (too far back) or a black margin in one quadrant or the other (eye not on center).

Therefore, without making the trip back home and testing it, I would say that Shrapnel has committed two no-nos with his bore sighter.

1) He's not using optimal magnification
2) He's taken the picture from a position that does not match where his eye should be.

The only other thing I can suppose is that his boresighter has an extra adjustment to roll the grid that my cheap BSA does not have.

My brain is aching. The thrust into complexity was too much for it. I'm going back out to scout, and after that, I'm going into town and let both dogs hang out the window and bark at the cows. I may bark at them as well.

Bsa1917douche: I shoot more in a week than you do all year. Here is the Innovative Technologies level at work a few days ago when shooting 1100 yds...

Here is another gun getting levels adjusted for a tall target test. (Note scope level does not match gun level yet). Innovative level on gun, level on scope, reticle verified on vertical line.

WHY?

Let's just say,for example, that I am shooting my 260 Rem with a 120 A-max at 2900 fps. And let's say that I mounted the 10X Super Sniper with a 1/10 degree cant with the right side of the reticle low.

Next, I meticulously align the scope reticle to the target frame and zero the rifle at 300 yds. Then I move to the 1000 yd target. Again, I have a vertical side to the target frame, and am able to level the scope. But obviously the rifle must be canted 1/10 of a degree.

This puts the scope out of vertical alignment with the barrel by some 1/1000ths of an inch.

I am not handy enough with the trig to figure the induced error, but my guess is a couple tenths of an inch from a 300 yd zero to a 1000 yd target.

For the past fifty-plus years, I have been mounting scopes and leveling them by locking at the world through the scope. If they look level, I tighten up the screws. If they look canted, I twist them a little and then tighten up the screws. I do the same whether the rifle is a hunting rifle, an "F" class, BR, or silohuette rifle. The "F" class rifles are fired from 300M to 900M and I've not had any real surprises on the target which could be attributed to anything other than my inability to recognize a change in the wind speed or direction. GD

That pretty well describes my method too. It works well enough that my 100 yard zero's check out pretty near perfect at 200 yards and has allowed me to hit woodchucks pretty consistently out to 300. I have no need nor even a place to take shots farther than that so all is well in my world. I'm thankful I don't need to dick around and stress out over whether my scope is dead nuts perfectly level or not.

Silly bugger!

Everyone knows Tikkas don't shoot!

They're only good to a mile or so, then accuracy falls off.

If a scope is mounted purposely canted or turned in the rings (turned in the rings even a tiny, possible unperceived amount), in a ZERO WIND SITUATION the impacts at various ranges will progressively be right or left (depending on which way the scope is turned in the rings ) and low.

This gives the wrong feedback to the shooter, giving the illusion of wind effect that isn't there.

For most shooters who are ignorant of this and who don't require the precision to benefit from a good scope mount, it doesn't matter.

If the scope is mounted canted in relation to the rifle but the shooter cant the rifle so that the scope is level the point of impact will be reasonably consistent as far as windage is concerned. If, for instance, the scope ends up offset by 1/8inch (fairly extreme)and the rifle is sighted to hit center at 100 yds, it will be 1 1/8 inches off at one thousand. Since most rifles don't shoot well enough to see 1/8 moa at any range, I don't consider this to be a major issue.
In most cases where a scope is purposely canted in the mount, it is done to compensate for the shooter's tendency to cant the rifle (this is often a stock fitting issue but one can address one or both to compensate). Ultimately consistency in hold and/or set-up will produce good results. If one feels a spirit level set-up is the answer for him, he should have one. GD

It is very similar to the bore sighter you have, this one is Bushnell and well made from decades ago before China. The bore sight is not rotated on it's axis in line with the bore, it is off center and actually tipped right of TDC in relation to the bore of the rifle.

I had pondered your idea myself and continued with a linear concept of aligning 2 separate grids of the scope and bore sight, but after playing around with it, you can see that alignment can happen with with the bore sight off center...

False

Yep, absolutely false. The center of the reticle has to be directly above the middle of the bore--which is how David Tubbs sets up his rifles. The reticle is canted in relation to the action, but the mounts put the center of the reticle directly above the bore.

If the center of the reticle isn't directly above the center of the bore, then the shots will land to the side of the aiming point, in the direction the reticle is off-center.

But if there is nothing in line in relation to the scope/bore you can still have the scope lined in one a single point that the rifle will shoot, but it will only be one point at one distance...

Well, yeah.

Same here. It works as advertised, and Hi-Vel himself is a great guy.

This is what always gets me with Talley screw and lever detachable rings, they aren't centered over the bore. For the life of me, no one will tell me why. I've called, written, sent pictures, etc. They'll admit they're not centered, but can't say why...

It's a bit of a brain teaser for sure. At the end of the day, I'm with Jordan; if it is very close to level on the rifle, and passes a tall target test, then it's GTG.

I would add that all of this is so much sturm und drang unless you are using a level mounted to the scope when shooting. And THAT level needs to be calibrated against "true plumb".... that's more important than if the scope is very slightly canted in the rings. A very slight cant (defined as the vertical crosshairs not bisecting the centerline of the bore), manifests only as a tiny offset. What matters is that it's pretty dang close to bisecting, and that the scope tracks plumb to the reticle, and that the level mounted to the scope is carefully aligned using a true plumb, and the shooter observers that level.

.... Or so it seems to me. Bit of a multi-variable equation and then there's the fact that rifles tend to lack flat surfaces to use as a reference.

You are a whiney little bi otch. All I ever hear out of you is "I can't get this rifle to shoot" You are a fu cking crybaby. No truer words can be said and you know the truth hurts sometimes. Keep shooting, maybe you'll get good some day. Maybe, if you haven't developed too many bad habits already...

These threads explain it all. I don't give a fu ck how much shooting you do. Even if all or most is just shooting off your mouth:

https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbth...61794/Finicky_rifles_suck...#Post7861794

https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbth...o_has_had_a_custom_rifle_tha#Post9777314

https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbth...26289/Explain_these_groups..#Post9326289

http://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/7920207/The_7.5lb_dud...#Post7920207

https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbth...y_would_a_rifle_suddenly_hat#Post3323404

https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbth...t_digging_my_280AI_so_far...#Post3301644

https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbth...9340/Signs_of_a_dying_scope?#Post2369340

https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbth...emington_Mtn_rifle_accuracy?#Post1690364

Thank you, no applause necessary...

Bsa1917douche: My standards of a gun that "shoots" are higher than most. Guns that i conclude dont shoot, would have you drooling. Don't be scared to shoot once in awhile, you might actually learn something.

Jeff,

That's exactly why the Reticle-Tru works so well: It cuts out the error possible in using tiny spirit levels (which are are rarely accurate, except by chance) on supposedly level surfaces on the scope and rifle action. Instead it adjusts the reticle to the center of the action, bypassing several other possible errors.

Hi-Vel knows about the possible accuracy of spirit levels, because he worked for years building buildings. He knew tiny levels don't cut it, especially when they're mass-produced in China and combined in a small tool that retails for a few bucks. Instead he designed a precisely-machined (in America) tool that works off the center of the action.

Yes, it involves "eyeballing," but the human eye is capable of considerable accuracy, especially some somebody takes the time to measure the centerline of, say, the butt-plate of a rifle and the rear of the bolt.

It's not "rocket surgery," as some jokers put it. Instead it's an elegantly simple solution to a problem many shooters try to make complex, apparently because they prefer to believe in more complex solutions to relatively simple problems.

Hell, I've just used two string levels and a vertical plum line as insurance, but I can't shoot past 600 yds.

Never seen Hi-Vel's device before opening this thread. Really like the concept.

Yep, Hi_Vel is a great guy...

He sent me the latest Reticle-Tru, one set up for black rifles. I had written an eval. on the original, Delrin version. The bottom pointer won't clear a flat top black rifle, so the latest one has a flat bottom.

The blue tape on the Delrin one helps with gloss finished scopes, the tool slipped too easily, the the blue tape added some friction. I don't find that to be the case with the aluminum version; I had no problem with the Deldrin one and matte finished scopes, just gloss.





I'm not a big AR fan, but do have a couple. This one is a Colt Carbine lower, an Olympic Arms upper. As you can see, the new version works, the original won't. With bolt guns, I like the original with the midline pointer that I can line up with the bolt. With this one, lining up the middle mark does about the same thing. I line up the Picatinny/charge handle with the bottom of the Reticle-Tru, finding true parallel lines is pretty easy.



As you can see, I mount the scope about even with the charge handle. I had the scope eyeballed pretty well. When I applied the Reticle-Tru, I found it to be slightly rotated to the left.

of course assuming those great scenarios wherein the receiver is true, and barrel is true--ie., both running along the same axis, and base mounting holes correctly aligned/bored, scope free from what i call "reticle cant" within the tube, etc.


i view it as an issue that is based upon "Foundation":

aligning the base or bases so that they are oriented with the receiver/barrel centerline (often, two piece bases are off-line with respect to each other--an oft missed gremlin);

setting the rings so that they are aligned with each other, while in addition, aligned parallel with the "centerline" of the barrel;

setting the scope so that the vertical crosswire is aligned with the vertical/central axis of the firearm;

keeping the vertical crosswire vertical in orientation while firing...

square, level, plumb, and true...

coming from a construction background--it's a lot like building a house. you start with square, level footings--straight, square, level, and plumb foundation--and many happy things proceed from that. a mistake in the chain and its an "agony of errors" to try to correct for...

John, an interesting take on Tubbs' set-up of his rigs. i talked with him about some of this about 4 years ago. unfortunately--as Robert R. once said, "most of us folks ain't Tubb", which is why square, level, plumb, and true is best/solid for most all individuals...

while i've messed/tinkered with these things most of my days--there's always something new to learn/discover, which can humble one to near amateur status all over again...

Hi-Vel sent me one of those gizmos...Im gonna hafta get JB to show me how to use it, cause Ive never had much success with it....


But then again, if I can screw in a lightbulb without getting hurt, I'm having a good day....

The original thread started about leveling a scope. If you are leveling the scope, you are assuming the scope is already in line with the bore. With all the posts that have gone astray, I need to bring it back on course and illustrate what is necessary to line that scope up with the bore.

This is the first tool by Hi_Vel when he started designing these scope tools. It allows you to set the rings in line with the bore before you even mount the scope. Once this tool is utilized your scope is now in line with the bore and once this is accomplished, you can go back to leveling your scope...

None of the important things you mention in either constructing a building properly or mounting a scope properly can be done with any degree of repeatable accuracy without accurate tools to measure "level" or "plumb".

Shrapnel, I can see how this would be particularly useful with those old school Sako rings.

RC,
Level and plum would only be a reference point in this instance and only have relative bearing on the task of aligning a bore to the sighting system.

Tom,

The big problem I've seen when people use the Reticle-Tru is getting their eye too close, apparently believing closer is better. Instead, you need to back off, especially with your dominant eye well behind the tool, as close as possible to the center-line of the action/barrel/scope. The slot works better if, like an aperture sight, the vertical reticle is allowed to center itself naturally in the light of the slot--and backing off as much as possible definitely helps there.

Some people apparently can't perceive the center-line of the rear of the bolt very well. Some bolts have an obvious dot in the middle of the cocking piece, but if not ,measuring the center-line and drawing a line on the cocking piece can help.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^


This....would be me.



Plus I have had troubles getting too close...but backing up much doesn't seem to work with varilux trifocals


Also, just getting the gizmo straight up and down on my Ruger #1 was completely confounding....



Thank you for answering my plea...but you of all members here know how good my mechanical inclination is....even with the simplest gadgets....

This may help the mentally slow guys that shoot but miss a lot more than they want to...

For the record, the same mental faculties/mechanisms are employed when judging whether the spirit level's bubble is centered between the lines. The Reticle-Tru provides a reference allowing the eye to see the two planes simultaneously and align them. A task humans are generally capable of successfully completing.

Shrap...

Now, that's gotta be some kinda HOT load, the way that bullet jumps and heads skyward just as it leaves the barrel...

DF

It must be a fast twist. . .

While this is true enough, the amount of error is, as I said insignificant unless the amount of cant is gross. The resulting offset from canting the rifle to compensate is small. I'm not going to take the time to do the math but if you mount a scope 1 1/2 inches above the bore, tilt it ten degrees, then cant to compensate, the offset will amount to less than 1/8 inch. Now, if you sight the rifle to be 1/8 inch off in the appropriate direction, it will remain 1/8 inch off all the way out. If you sight the rifle to be centered at 100 yards, the bullet will cross the line of sight at that point and be 1/8 to the opposite side. It will continue to diverge at this same rate (1/8 moa). If you sighted to be centered at 25 yards, you would multiply the divergence by a factor of four so that at 100 yards the error would be 1/2 inch and the shot would continue to diverge at this rate (1/2 moa). I am not good enough to be affected by 1/8 moa of divergence but I figured I could see 1/2 minute. At 300M, I could indeed see significant effect but I was trying to cause it to be visible. I had the scope canted way over and I sighted center at close range to magnify the effect. Once I re-adjusted to hit center at 300M, the ammount of error when I went back to 100 was insignificant. This is because I was not tilting the bullet trajectory, The trajectory was still vertical but divergent in relation to the line of sight. If I had sighted so that the trajectory was parallel to the line of sight, the error would have remained constant in measurment, not moa, all the way out.
The truth is, when I shoot at 900m, I am likely to have to adjust by a half minute or so anyway since I frequently misjudge the wind by at least that much at that range. If my scope is offset by 1/8 inch, it's pretty well lost in the shuffle.
Now, if I have the scope mounted plumb and everything is all fine but I cant the rifle, the picture is entirely different. Now I have tilted the bullet path and introduced an angular error. My shots will hit to the side and low and the error will increase drastically with increased range. GD

Not to under value Shrap's diagram, but this link has bunch of illustrations depicting the effects of cant on bullet impact relative to the line of sight axis. I particularly like Figure 3.

http://www.riflescopelevel.com/cant_errors.html

Greydog, that was what I was trying to say with "offset" due to slight cant. But you said it far, far better.

Effing great thread. Time to shut up and listen!

It's just one way to skin the cat and seems like a fairly good one.

Other ways work as well. I know because I've seen guys pegging scheit at 1200 yds that used other methods.

To claim spirit levels can't achieve good results, means I now know 5 people who have experienced miracles...

Hallelujah

I didn't say spirit levels can't produce good results, just that the odds against it are considerable, especially when using two tiny spirit levels mass-produced for the least amount of money possible. Those weren't miracles, they were accidents--if the only factor in zeroing at 1200 was the use of cheap spirit-level reticle devices.

Both I and more than one precision gunsmith have tested a number of cheap spirit-level devices and have yet to find one that produces consistent results when used on several rifles.

The beauty of the Reticle Tru is simplicity, eliminating potential variables introduced by levels, devices, external reference points, etc. As mentioned, level qulaity and precision varies. Going direct, reticle alignment with action axis, is about as simple as it gets.

KISS.

IMO, the Reticle Tru wins the KISS award, hands down.

DF

If your scope is mounted improperly, you won't know if the reason you have to adjust is due to misjudging the wind, canting the rifle because you don't have a properly installed bubble level, or a scope mounted improperly turned in the rings.

Yep. That's why I don't use a head space gauge to measure how far I'm bumping the shoulders when I size my brass, use a scale to weigh powder charges, use a caliper and a bullet comparator to seat bullets, a concentricity gauge to check bullet seating straightness, or even calipers to measure case length to determine when to trim.

I just eyeball those things. There's just too many errors induced by measuring tools.

Gotta Keep It Simple....

You are eyeballing them. You use your eyeball to operate each of those tools and determine the measurement

I agree. It does an outstanding job.

As I mentioned earlier, I had "eyeballed" the AR pictured, thought it was was perfect.

When I used the Reticle Tru, I saw that it was not as perfect as I thought.

Eyeballing is good, Reticle-Tru makes it more precise...

DF

I want a Reticle-Tru now.

Regarding mass produced spirit levels and the vagaries thereof... that would be potentially problematic if using a spirit level as a tool for leveling the scope in the rings and if it was your only reference.

Instead, use a plumb line! Gravity does the work, and it's pretty much perfect. Then, with the vertical stadia exactly true to the plumb line, use a cheap mass-produced spirit level that is attached to the scope and calibrate it such that it shows level.

Now when you are shooting, if you arrange the rifle such that that wanky little level shows level, you know your vertical stadia is at true plumb.

Further, if you run a tall target test with a true plumb line on it, and your reticle tracks up the plumb line, then you know you've got it nailed... as a practical matter.

So the only eyeballing required is to get that vertical stadia bisecting the bore. When I visualize a slightly "off" condition, meaning the vertical stadia isn't exactly bisecting the bore, what I come up with is a STATIC error; an offset. Meaning, if you are off by 1/64" in the horizontal direction from a true bisection of the bore, you've introduced a 1/64" offset to either side. But that is not a diverging error; it doesn't grow with distance.

So to me the beauty of the Reticle-Tru is that it adds precision to that one step that you cannot properly quantify and nail down-- getting the vertical stadia to bisect the bore.

It's almost like someone has already thought all this through! Hmmmm....

Good job Hi-Vel!

This is a Precision Scope Mount. If you want your equipment to be set up as well as humanly possible, it's necessary. You'll need to go to Score High Gunsmithing to get it done as well.

For shooters who are shooting 1 to 2 MOA targets and at Long Range, it's a requirement.

For the dude who's shooting deer and elk at 200 yards, it's a choice. The Reticle Tru will probably be perfect for him.



1. Insure that the scope and action (center of the bore) are in the same vertical plane

This is critical and must be done with an apparatus that can rigidly hold the action. It also must be done with "U"-shaped, accurately-machined metal fixtures that fit over the scope and action simultaneously. The fixtures must fit tightly over the scope tube and action. If any slop exists, thin feeler gauge strips must be added around the action to eliminate the slop.

A "not cheap" level must be used on top of the fixture to level it exactly.

2. Sight through the scope with the rings loose enough to allow adjustments at a perfectly laser-leveled plumb line and turn the scope in the rings to align the vertical crosshair to the plumb line.

3. Tighten the rings. This is tricky because tightening each screw will minutely move the scope and position of the vertical stadia. It may actually take a couple of trys slightly tightening in round robin fashion.

4. Once the scope is tight in the rings and the vertical stadia is perfectly aligned with the plumb line that is perfectly vertical to the center of the Earth, run the elevation knob to each limit while viewing its tracking on the plumb line. It shouldn't leave the line. The scope mounted in such a way that the vertical centerline of the bore and the vertical centerline of the scope has no more variation than one thousandth (.001) of an inch in six inches.

It's common for some scopes to leave the line toward the end of travel. Where they do is considered the top end of "Reliable Travel" and should be noted. Just because the scope is able to dial more before it stops doesn't mean that travel is reliable.

At this point, install a bubble level on the scope while it is in the fixture and perfectly level. Pay attention to it when you're shooting!






From Score High:

Wow, Rick. What a set up.

All that is way beyond my level of equipment and expertise, probably for 99+% of rifle shooters.

For the rest of us, the Reticle Tru is about the right level of sophistication...

That's impressive.

DF

I just ordered one of these in each size.

Why go through all the hassle? Just buy the nylon POS, eyeball it dead nuts to the bolt shroud that's perfectly centered to the barrel bore and you're good to go!

Could you possibly be any more supercilious? There are several shooters who've commented on their use of the Reticle Tru who do much more than shoot deer and elk at 200 yards.

All that trouble to mount a Leupold...

I'm going to keep using my thumb and the whiskey eye.

Hate to keep repeating this but if it tracks right up a plumb line on a tall target test, then all the rest is kinda academic.... isn't it? I mean if it's not, please educate me... not trying to be abrasive here.

Hey Azzhole,

WTF is wrong with my statement? For 200 yards at targets that big, the Reticle Tru will get the scope mounted well enough to kill them even if the level of precision is less than optimal.

Other than that, GFY you cantankerous SOB!

Technically, nothing. It's just supercilious.

When people like Pat, MD, and Jordan endorse a product that you've never used ("how does this gizmo work?") and then you say "it's perfect for the guy who just wants to shoot elk and deer at 200 yards," it just shows that your opinion of yourself is exceeded only by your ignorance of the product.

Shyt, anybody who needs a scope to shoot deer at 200 yards is either half blind or a pitifully poor rifleman. That's well within iron sight range for someone who can shoot.

After watching the educational video on the product's website for sales and comparing it to the correct way to mount a scope with some experience, the choice is simple.

I couldn't care less who endorses the product and their reasons for doing so. With the obvious differences in precision, an endorsement of the product in question as "best" would indicate ignorance on the proper way to do the job.

This includes the Pope as well at Pat, MD, and Jordan

FWIW, I've seen shrapmetal hit tinier stuff around the 350-375 mark with suck BC bullets from factory tubes, leveled by an apparently bad apparatus.

I can't imagine what he'd be like if he used his powers for evil.....

Thanks for the honest answer.

As an ole fart, I resemble that remark...

My rifle skills exceed my eyesight...

So, I have need of a scope, am years beyond irons with any precision.

With a good scope, I'm still dangerous...

DF

Yes but apparently only out to 200 yards.

Is super silly ass the ultimate form of silly ass?

I may be an ole fart with imperfect eyesight, shooting a non A/O scope, but you wouldn't want me shooting at ya at long range, stretching WAY beyond 200...

That could prove detrimental to one's health and well being...

DF

Good lord RC. What did the world do before that jig?

gravity,a plumb bob and a tiny bit of know how applied while SHOOTING is the end all, no matter how precise your jig.

Charley does build a hell of a rifle, but believe it or not a scope can be accurately mounted without that jig.

Nothing wrong with that and I'm getting there myself. I've killed deer in excess of 300 yards with irons when I was younger but 200 is probably about as far as I'd try it now. Back then I could hold 1-1.5" groups at 100 and 4" at 200 with an aperture rear and 1/16" ivory bead front. Now 2" at 100 seems to be about the best I can muster. I can however, still manage to hold into .5 MOA out to 200 {the longest range I have to shoot} with my poorly mounted scopes.

I would just like to report to y'all that I just got off the phone with Shrapnel. He has assured me that his picture of the bore sighter accurately depicts what he claimed.

This intrigues me. I intend to test and find out one way or the other.

By the way, Mister Shrapnel is a very nice guy. I would like to thank him for his time in explaining things to me.

More later.

Looks like an expensive pile of metal that a $.99 deck of cards could have gave the same outcome in that scenario...

That may be, but shooting at me could also prove detrimental, I'm a cantankerous SOB and that'd just piss me off.

Did this for years!

Same jig he used to come to the conclusion that leupold tracts perfectly. You ca t make this [bleep] up

The shaman tripped a little coming down the last flight of stairs to his secret underground reloading room, gunsmithing center and ballistics test facility. Ed, the guard, had been enjoying morning cup of coffee, but nearly poured it on his uniform; he was that startled.

"Careful with the stairs, Mister Shaman." said Ed. There's still that wet spot.

"I think the cistern that holds water for the flume trap is leaking again." replied the shaman. " I'll have to look into that. How's the alligator? All fed?"

"Yes, sir!" replied the guard. "He was fed and the pit cleaned up before the time lock engaged."

"Speaking of which. . ." the shaman cocked his ear to the door. At that very moment, there was a click and then a whirr and then a noise as though tons of steel were suddenly set to motion. ". . . Ah, right on time. The time lock is set to perfection."

Ed motioned for the shaman to stand away. "Be careful sir, the drawbridge will be moving soon." A quarter of an hour later, the guard and the shaman had the last door open. At first, there was the distinct odor of a menagerie after feeding time. The shaman threw a few scraps to the attack falcon and tested the trap door gingerly. Sometimes the latch did not hold and that is why the shaman always made sure the alligator beneath was always well fed.

"Ed, if you'll stay with me today, I have something you can help me do."

"That's fine, Mister Shaman, Always happy to help."

The shaman proceeded to a bin marked "Tomato Stakes" and pulled out a Remington 742 with Weaver Pivot Mounts on it. "Put this up on the bench, while I find the rest of the stuff." Ed complied. The shaman soon rooted up a couple scopes, a Tasco and a BSA.

"This should be good enough." he said. Within a few minutes, he had the first of the scopes mounted, and bade the guard to hand him the box containing the bore-sighter.

"Have I ever taught you how to mount a scope?"

"No, Mister Shaman. I keep myself happy with the J.C. Penny Catalog."

"That's not what I mean, Ed. Oh, never mind. Look here. I have a normal sort of scope mounted on a normal sort of deer rifle and I am trying to get it straight up and down with a normal sort of bore-sighter. Look through the scope and see what you think." The shaman had to demonstrate. Ed started off looking through the bore-sighter.

"Now, I am twisting the scope 10 degrees counterclockwise in the rings and attempting to compensate with the bore-sighter. If all goes well. . ." the shaman twisted and torqued things for a bit. ". . . if all goes well, there will be a noticeable difference. See what you think." The guard stepped over and peered into the scope.

"It looks crooked." replied the guard. "You turned it to the left."

"Yes, but do the lines all line up?"

"Yes."

"Look carefully?"

"Yes."

"Do you see a mis-alignment?"

"No."

"You don't?"

"No. I mean yes."

"Why did you change your mind?"

"Because I don't want to be wrong."

"There is no wrong answer. What do you see?"

"I don't see anything wrong."

"Yes, but are the lines completely parallel?"

"I suppose?"

"You don't see difference?"

"No. . . I mean yes. . no. . ."

"That's okay Ed. Thanks for your help."

See, this is where you have it all over the rest of us; you have an assistant. As everyone knows, two heads ar better than one. It could be argued that Ed may not double the mental capacity here but then maybe he does.
If I decide my life needs more precision I'll bet I could use my Forster drilling jig along with one of the Starret machinist levels to set up my next scope. It should work a lot like the jig shown. I'll probably still miss those stupid chickens but I will at least do it with a perfectly level scope. GD

For sure...

DF

Shaman - good job of covering the topic.

Probably a decade ago, I noticed that there was a slight difference in the way the lines lined up in a scope that was true to the bore-sighter and any other way I could set it up. I have been using that as part of my scope mounting routine lo these many years.

I "knew" going into this that I could see a minor difference between a well-aligned scope and one that is otherwise. However, two scopes later, I'm beginning to wonder. It kind of reminds me of a story Chin tells:

"So there was a farmer who started missing a shovel. He knew the son of the neighboring farmer had taken it.

"' That boy just looks like a thief.' he said to his wife.

"One day he found the shovel under some sacks in the back of the barn, and realized he had left it there the season before.

"'That boy is beginning to look less and less like a thief.' he told his wife."

I do not know anymore.

On the other hand, I am primarily a deer hunter who sets all his rifles up to be about 2 inches high at 100 yards and leave them for years at a time.

I kind of think that scope alignment falls into the same category as the man with two watches.

Ah Oh........the assschewing you and EHG are gonna get from RC is gonna be serious.

I mount my scopes out of square to allow for spin drift, moon phase and daylight savings time

I've always struggled with the daylight savings time component in my trajectory calculations. If I had $3800, I just get the new Night Force with their daylight savings time compensation reticle. For now I'll just have to stick with this...

If a person takes his rifle/scope south of the Equator, is it necessary to adjust for the difference in the Coriolis Effect?

No, but you have to turn the windage and elevation dials the opposite way.

Accuracy also suffers if the barrel does not have the twist going in the opposite direction.

Yep. Fast twist becomes an extremely slow negative twist...

It warms my heart to see this subject getting the kind of attention that it deserves.

My $69 Tasco has that feature and its only $69.. not $3800...

of course it won't impress your buddies as much...

but then most guys on the campfire, think you're better off being blind than owning a rifle that sports a Tasco, and then also mount it using Weaver rings...

oh and my Tasco came with a digital stop watch... made in China of course...

I have a simple method of scope leveling. I place a parallel on the action raceway and set a small square on the parallel. Square the reticle to the action. To check the work or fine adjust I have the rifle in a vice, level it from the parallel and aim at a plumb object as big and far as possible. Back off the scope power and ensure too and bottom line up.....done. it's a 3 minute event.

I use a devise that was discovered at Stonehenge. It is a plumb line and a sundial. It's called a Syphilitic Druid. The only drawback is it only works at noon.

I've seen lots of pictures of the Alaskan Pygmy version, but it requires lots of silly gravel and stream christening rituals and all the instructions are written in an angsty hobbit pidgin.

High Country,

Your method is as good as most. I don't fault it. But it does raise the question: if it is not uncommon for factory rifles to have slightly misaligned chambers, and less than perfectly round chambers, should we assume that all action raceways are perfectly level?

Good enough for hunting rifles, but maybe not for the 1,000 yard line, I think.

I don't know how I missed this. Slick!

Thanks, I didn't know that. I showed your post to my Optics Sensei, Balthazar Nimblesnatch, and he is familiar with that method.

Now I want to try one of the Reticle-Tru levelers after reading this discussion.

Does anyone have one of the plastic one for sale?

Yeah. The guy that makes them. That's what he does. Makes them to sell them. Have you thought about going to the source? If, 'after reading this discussion', you still don't know who makes them, might I suggest remedial reading classes?

It's only as hard as you make it.

Jerry's only making the aluminum version right now...

I've had a number of emails from folks asking when the acetal model reticle-tru will be available again. rather than continue trying to answer these one at a time, i thought it might be easier to just make a post.

currently, i'm just making the aluminum model reticle-tru. in addition, as soon as testing on the aluminum reticle-tru AR model is complete--if testing results are good--i will be offering those as well in the near future.

regarding the acetal model--it has been a great item, and in all the sales made over the past 3 1/2 years, i've only received one back for a refund. meanwhile, as runs were machined, occasionally some would get a scratch or some such cosmetic defect. rather than destroy those, it was a logical solution to sell them as "blems", as they were mechanically/functionally the same as a zero defect part.

one thing that was happening from the get go was the occasional black speck in the material--like a speck of pepper down inside the stock. when the part was machined, these specks would show up near the surface on occasion, and subsequently, they too would be sold as a blem (along with any that had gotten a scratch, etc.). early on there were about 3 or 4 of these reticle-tru's with a black speck in a run of 100 machined. as time went on, this was showing up more often, even though we were purchasing certified material.

therefore, i decided to switch to aluminum--somewhat of a set back. during this time the AR model was also conceived. once this is complete, the idea is to once again look at addressing the acetal supply issue....

for what it's worth, from those guys that i've heard back from who have both the aluminum and the acetal model device, they do indeed prefer the aluminum part. it is heavier, "giving a sense of being more sustantial." however, with smaller oblective bells/ lenses, it will be more inclined to "scope tipping" in the mounting process, but this is easily overcome by following the suggested tip for this situation.

a potential negative of the aluminum part is that if accidentally dropped on a wood stock, it will likely cause a more significant dent than the lighter acetal model...

i really appreciate the many good words....

These threads crack me up.

Gadgets,.......

A fool and his money,.......

Buddy of mine holds/has held held roughly 35 world records in benchrest and 1K yard matches as uses none of these gizmos. I have a sneekin' suspicion he knows what he's talking about so I'll continue to do it the way he does.

Carry on.

I'm definitely interested in hearing the scope mounting method of someone who holds records for shooting one million yards.

If you think of it as only a little over 568 miles, it's not nearly as impressive.

Shooting that far, you would have to consider the time of flight. I haven't shot 1,000,000 yards before, but wouldn't you have to consider the earth's rotation while the projectile is in the atmosphere?

The circumference of the earth at almost 24,000 miles and the rotation of the earth making a complete revolution in 24 hours would mean the earth is spinning at 1000 mph at the equator. The farther you get to each pole, the less the speed of rotation and the angle which you shoot would have to be allowed for.

24,000 X consign€ with a + or - of the distance to the North or South Pole using the most common Stick factor as a constant, it could be easily calculated how much the earth does rotate underneath the bullet while it is in the air.

How the scope was mounted wouldn't really be significant with a shot like that, as you certainly wouldn't want it verticals to the bore...

284LUVR,

I know several very successful long-range shooters, and every one of them uses SOME sort of system for initial mounting of a scope to get it as square as possible. But they then test-shoot the rifle considerably to make sure everything's square, tweaking the scope's mounting in necessary.

As far as I know, nobody claims the Reticle-Tru precisely squares up every scope, every time, especially for shooting at 1,000,000 yards. Instead it's designed to get things started in the right direction, and many people have found it far more effective than other tools designed for the job.

Besides, once you're sighted in for a given distance, say 1000 yards, you're sighted in. It's when you start dialing in/out a lot of vertical correction for widely varying distances that errors show up.

John, I edited my post to read 1K. Sorry,Sir.

Reticle-Tru ??? Using your shooting eye draw an imaginary centerline from the top of your vertical crosshair to the centerline of your bolt or tang. Do this several times as the human eye can pick up minute variances. After you're satisfied put your "toy Reticle-Tru," on the scope and you will find that the crosshairs are dead nuts on. It's unnecessary. Been doing it for 30 years. Same principal without using a gadget.
Hope this isn't taken in the wrong light as it wasn't meant to be as I have some Sako questions for you and want you to be of a clear head and not aggitated. Just kidding !!

Cheers, 284

alas, us mere mortal fools--who've surely been reduced down to having to suffer the use of a "gadget or a gizmo"...

like me, they too have to suffer the inconvenience of using "a gizmo" such as a razor in the morning.

followed by the handicap of stuffing breakfast into the yap via a fork, or spoon "gizmo"...each time while doing so, are reduced even further by having to use these inconvenient "gadgets"--all the while wishing they never were....

rotating tires? must suffer the inconvenience of using "gadgets" like the lug wrench and jack...

powder scale?? never mind....

after a lifetime, i've tired of suffering the use of these handy "gadgets and gizmos"...

subsequently, i made a decision this morning to inlet/bed 568 rifles before lunch. use my chisels and barrel channel scraper?? not a chance. never removed those "gizmos" from their leather case.

don't ask about this secret--because i'll never divulge....



i've always thought it best, that folks use what works best for them.

you're probably a decent guy--but i always wonder about folks that comment on some specific thing, without using it first...

Some people say God is dead.

He's not dead, He's just busy winning 1,000,000-yard rifle matches.....

Sorry if I offended but generally I avoid talking out my a$$. I bought the tool a year or so ago following another similar thread here. My friends method uses the same principle without the tool.

Sure is fun to tinker though and adds considerably to the enjoyment of our hobby.

Peace, 284.

284LUVR,

I've used exactly the technique you suggest when mounting scopes with very good success, hundreds of times over the years.

However, over even more years I've decided there are two kinds of humans: Those who assume everything they can do or use is the cat's ass, and those who have a certain amount of what the poet William Butler Yeats called "negative capability," which means several things, among them an ability to acknowledge that not all humans are exactly like our wonderful selves.

Most humans lack the understanding that other humans may not have their own abilities. This is so common that it occurs in almost every Campfire thread, and even applies to many gun writers, who somewhat surprisingly, are also humans. Many write their entire careers about THEIR perfect choices in firearms, ammo, techniques, etc., often implying that anybody who doesn't prefer, or can't use, those choices is somehow stupid or basically flawed.

Others are able to observe other shooters and accept we're not all the same, and thereby come up with advice that might actually help, even if the advice involves a different firearm, ammunition or technique than the author finds useful. I try to maintain some negative capability, though sometimes fail, because of being human.

One thing I've noticed since starting to write about optics around 25 years ago is that many shooters are incapable of using the technique you suggest--and I have used often--even after personally demonstrating how to do it.

Which is why I've tested a bunch of reticle-leveling devices to see how they work. Some have proven so flawed in either design or execution to not work at all--but the Reticle-Tru works, and is usually helpful to shooters who for whatever reason simply cannot get a reticle square by the method you describe.

At the same time, when using the Reticle-Rtu I also learned that occasionally after a mounting a scope with the technique you suggest, the reticle wasn't quite as square as I thought it was. The reticle was never as far off as seen occasionally in scopes mounted by other people, but it was enough that the Reticle-Tru saved me some shooting time and ammo money to straighten the scope out.

John, you have my vote for the role of Philosopher King. That could very well be the best post I have seen in my years at the 'fire. Thanks, John

Couldn't agree more.

Since the fellow that retails the item does not allow sales outside the US you may feel free to sell me yours, I am interested in trying one as I am heartily sick of eye-balling the reticle.

And from what I have seen of other rifles around the district there are a lot of others here that could utilise one.

regards.

And he walked on water to go and check his targets too. 568 miles one way. Even though he is god, he was probably one tired son of a biotch when he got back...

And if you would have taken the time to read that 284LUVR said it was a typo,fixed it and he even apologized.

Fuggin' internet dickwads,............

No apology from 284 was necessary. It's not that big a deal; it was just a funny typo. Some find humor in it, some can't.

The Reticle Tru sounds like an interesting device. I use the Wheeler system of levels and then double check it on a plumb line and tall target.

I would think that the Reticle Tru would be faster, though.

Talk about a fool......what an asinine statement. I knew Barry Bonds.......didn't mean I could swing the bat like him now did it?

sbhooper,

The Reticle-Tru is very fast, and as I mentioned a long time ago in this thread, tends to be more accurate than many other tools because it directly "reads" off the center of the action. Which is why mine sits in the top drawer of my scope-mounting bench.

I just got done using my Reticle Tru. Again.

I really don't give a schit what anybody thinks of them. When I shoulder the rifle there's no cant in the scope. That's all I care about.

Now if I could just learn to bring the right ammo and find the animals I have tags for, I'd be all set...




Dave

Sir, if you originally purchased the Reticle-Tru tool from me and you are not satisfied with how it functions for you in your gunsmithing efforts--PM your name and address, and which model you purchased--as it will show up in my records. We can then arrange for the return.

After I receive the tool in the post, I'll fully refund the purchase amount, and the shipping costs. I want folks to be truly satisfied with their purchase--and to benefit from it...

It's a pretty simple process to not get it right...

DF

Don't worry about that Gentleman...sell one to me!

and this is why a lot or most shooters never have a clue about plum, level, cant or much of anything eles.

And probably the ones complaining the loudest...

DF

Yep...

DF

Chuck Norris mounts his scope canted and then levels the world...

Chuck Norris doesn't need a scope. Or a rifle.

Just an update on this older thread.

Jerry was nice enough to send me a unit, I took it to a mate's place and checked his working rifles and found that they were all canted to the right about the same amount as mine.
After I set my rifles up using the unit I shall drop it around to Redneck Shootin' Supplies and leave it with Tony for use on customers rifles.

Short answer being that the unit works as advertised and I am pleased with the purchase.

The testing on the AR samples has turned out favorably.

Interestingly, during that process, I found out from one of the testing individuals that they like it better than the standard model with top and bottom indicators...

I found that the AR model works well on bolt guns too--though for that specific application I do indeed prefer the standard model.

Subsequently, I finally got a few of the aluminum AR Reticle-Tru models made so they can now be sold from the website. A note of no real significance is that the indicator lines are somewhat changed from the testing sample shown in the photo above...

This is why Montana can never legalize marijuana...

I center on the bore, or the center of the block on a falling block rifle. Same method as yours.
I have a number of spuds, reticles, levels, and magnetic thingies in boxes. I always end up eyeballing and checking against a vertical line on the wall instead though.

I bought one from Jerry recently and ended up having to adjust a couple of my already mounted scopes after checking them on the Reticle-Tru. I had installed them them using the "eyeball a vertical line" method and it turns out that I must be a quarter bubble off. Which confirms what others have told me.

I also used it to mount up a new scope - fast, easy, and appears to be very accurate.

I've decided to do a limited offer to 24 Hourcampfire members of the Standard aluminum model Reticle-Tru for an approximately 25% discount, so you will be able to get one for $64.00 + $6.00 shipping, for a total cost of $70.00 (normal cost for standard model is $89.00 + 6.00 shipping).

You will not be able to buy one at this price from my shopping cart on the website--that cart will charge you the regular price. To get one at the reduced price, you will have to contact me via email at the email address provided on the contact page on my website--(not by PM, as I don't sign in on a regular basis). Subsequently, it will all have to be done the old fashioned way--by check--either a u.s. postal check, or money order, sent to me.

I can only do this with a handful of these devices, due to the high cost of machining these units. This particular offer is just for the Standard aluminum model Reticle-Tru (not the aluminum AR model, nor the Standard acetal model), and this particular offering will give some of you interested Campfire members an opportunity to get one at a reduced cost--with only one unit per person.

As a note of interest, this tool is not for occasional use. Obviously, besides gunsmiths and/or gunshops, retail or wholesale sporting goods stores, and serious gun cranks--it is also intended for those individuals who typically mount quite a few scopes during the year. If you only have a scope or two to mount on a rifle on occasion, it may not be the best device for you to invest your money in.