Can holdover be more accurate than dialing in a hunting scope?

[HingleMcCringleberry]

300 yard zero? I'd love to see that "zero target".

 

[WeiserBucks]

300 yard zero? I'd love to see that "zero target".

Do you really?

 

[flathead#2]

Rangefinder and holdover hasn't failed me yet.

 

[HingleMcCringleberry]

Do you really?

Absolutely. Would be interesting to see what is considered "zeroed".

 

[WeiserBucks]

Absolutely. Would be interesting to see what is considered "zeroed".

Several years ago I decided that I needed a 300 yard zero for all the wrong reasons. So i established a 300 yard zero.
Once I established a 300 yard zero I had 17 rounds left and sent em all for verification.

I can't shoot like this everyday, but this is what a real 300 yard zero actually looks like.

 

[JohnJohnson]

Several years ago I decided that I needed a 300 yard zero for all the wrong reasons. So i established a 300 yard zero.
Once I established a 300 yard zero I had 17 rounds left and sent em all for verification.

I can't shoot like this everyday, but this is what a real 300 yard zero actually looks like.

I'm sorry, what range was this shot at and where was the aiming point?

 

[thinhorn_AK]

If I’m not dialing article, I set a basic plex scope up for MPBR. Works great for 300 yards or less.

 

[Outdoorsman12b]

No it isn’t. I’m not into coddling incorrect beliefs born of ignorance or incompetence.




Show me a modern scope that won’t dial correctly, but that stays zeroed?




Ok.



Yes. Until you add in between ticks, wind, stress, and time. Then misses and longer times to first shot happen.



To 400 yards it’s ok holding in no wind, with wind any more than 1 mil or so of hold (300 yards) and issue scome up. The Swaro is fragile and doesn’t hold zero. The Credo is ok, but why are you limiting it to those options? The Credo can dial.





I would get a Credo or Accupoint, check “tracking” and then dial.




At 300- maybe. In general it is not faster to hit when you add in time, stress, wind, moving animals, etc.




Well since I don’t live in a binary world- I will take one that holds zero and dials.

Thanks Form. Generally this response was useful but I will make clear that I did not request you to coddle me. Was looking for some legitimate discussion on this thought.

Your point regarding a scope that holds zero/dials correctly I agree. Why deal with two variables that lead to inaccuracy instead of just one.

My statement regarding shots under 400 yards I will clarify to my shots/experience. That was overreached to all which is not reasonable.

Thanks for the point to the Trijicon. Is there any models/reticles that you would recommend for me to take a look?

 

[WeiserBucks]

I'm sorry, what range was this shot at and where was the aiming point?

I'm not sorry and the range was 300 yards and the aiming point was the bullseye.

 

[JohnJohnson]

I'm not sorry and the range was 300 yards and the aiming point was the bullseye.

It was a 20 round group measuring about 0.4 MOA at 300 yards?

 

[WeiserBucks]

It was a 20 round group measuring about 0.4 MOA at 300 yards?

Damn skippy.

 

[Tmac]

I'm not sorry and the range was 300 yards and the aiming point was the bullseye.

Did you call that flyer all by itself, kind of, at the bottom of your group? Seriously, very nice shooting.

 

[PNWGATOR]

Well since I don’t live in a binary world- I will take one that holds zero and dials.

I too am non binary.

 

[JF_Idaho]

What was that? .09 MOA ?

 

[WeiserBucks]

What was that? .09 MOA ?

If you're referring to the targets I posted, it's sub 1/2, not .09

 

[JF_Idaho]

If you're referring to the targets I posted, it's sub 1/2, not .09

But that is sub .5 ÷ 3 yeah?

My math was bad, I was thinking 400 for a second.

A .4 inch group at 300 would be .133

 

[Outdoorsman12b]

I too am non binary.

I did ask you for a suggested scope without limitation, but ok.

 

[JohnJohnson]

But that is sub .5 ÷ 3 yeah?

My math was bad, I was thinking 400 for a second.

A .4 moa group at 300 would be .133

MOA is angular and is roughly 3" at 300. So 0.4 x 3 = 1.2" or so, which is about the size of the group on that target.

 

[mtwarden]

What were you using?

Leupold 2-7X Firedot. 200 yard zero (.308) the first dot above the cross hairs was 300 yds, the next 400 yds and the edge of the duplex 500.

I spent two full weeks (~20 rds/session) at our 200-500 yard range practicing, towards the end of the second week my proficiency (and confidence) was pretty good.

 

[BLJ]

Leupold 2-7X Firedot. 200 yard zero (.308) the first dot above the cross hairs was 300 yds, the next 400 yds and the edge of the duplex 500.

I spent two full weeks (~20 rds/session) at our 200-500 yard range practicing, towards the end of the second week my proficiency (and confidence) was pretty good.

Which model Leupold exactly? And which reticle? Thanks.