View Full Version : Zeroing for Long Range
I made a couple videos to make sure that I get my zero correct. Keeping in mind that the end result is being able to hit a target from long range, these are the steps that I consider from the get-go to make sure the data is accurate.
**edit for new versions of this material**
(I saw the other 'zero' threads here, so I debated between here and the precision threads. Mods, please move if you would like.)
Failure2Stop
08-04-13, 18:19
Honest criticism:
Very little value in the media chosen for the delivery style. Here's what I see:
Dude off camera talking to a dry erase board.
A power point and professional appearing graphics with relevant text would have accomplished more, and given the viewer the ability to easily review skipped/missed stuff.
If you want to do a video, do a real video of the stuff that benefits from that media.
This is not saying anything negative about you, your knowledge, our your information, simply providing constructive criticism as you requested.
Typos brought to you via Tapatalk and autocorrect.
Honest criticism:
Very little value in the media chosen for the delivery style. Here's what I see:
Dude off camera talking to a dry erase board.
A power point and professional appearing graphics with relevant text would have accomplished more, and given the viewer the ability to easily review skipped/missed stuff.
If you want to do a video, do a real video of the stuff that benefits from that media.
This is not saying anything negative about you, your knowledge, our your information, simply providing constructive criticism as you requested.
Typos brought to you via Tapatalk and autocorrect.
Thank you for your honest opinion. I asked for it, and you gave it. I execute enough PowerPoint at work; I don't even have PowerPoint (or any of the Microsoft office suite.....or even word processing) at my home.
Are you willing to provide an example that highlights the changes that should be made?
Most important to me: Is the information accurate?
Failure2Stop
08-04-13, 18:36
Is the information accurate?
Frankly, I skipped through them hoping to "see" something.
I'll watch them all the way through if you want.
Maybe I misunderstood the purpose of the post; I thought that you were offering it as instruction to others and seeking criticism on your delivery.
Typos brought to you via Tapatalk and autocorrect.
Frankly, I skipped through them hoping to "see" something.
I'll watch them all the way through if you want.
Maybe I misunderstood the purpose of the post; I thought that you were offering it as instruction to others and seeking criticism on your delivery.
Typos brought to you via Tapatalk and autocorrect.
No, I can work on delivery and presentation. It's more of the information that I was trying to fact check. Thus, watching a video is a lot faster than reading out a 17 paragraph post. Also, it's why I kept the videos shorter (around 6 minutes, iirc)
I've edited my original reply to your post. I'm trying to make this into something useful for someone who is trying to get a good zero with the end goal of predictable hits at farther ranges.
I don't even have PowerPoint (or any of the Microsoft office suite.....or even word processing) at my home.
You don't need MS Powerpoint at home.
For free use at home Download Open Office:
http://freedownloads.us.com/lp/openoffice/suite/index.php?pk=905465&s=google
I have been using MS products at work and OO at home for year.
Althought the interface is not just like MS PP, you can work with it and it reads and saves ppt, xls, doc files.
Failure2Stop
08-04-13, 19:08
No, I can work on delivery and presentation. It's more of the information that I was trying to fact check. Thus, watching a video is a lot faster than reading out a 17 paragraph post. Also, it's why I kept the videos shorter (around 6 minutes, iirc)
I've edited my original reply to your post. I'm trying to make this into something useful for someone who is trying to get a good zero with the end goal of predictable hits at farther ranges.
Ok.
I've watched all three.
First, you seem like a good dude, so that gets you a leg up.
Criticism on data presented:
Always confirm distance through actual measurement; tape can work, but laser gets my vote.
The problem with using reticle subtention is that sometimes reticles are slightly off, any angle will induce error, and measuring with a less than 2% error is tough thorough an optic. Laser range finders are easy, and eliminate a lot of error elements.
Truing:
Is a method for long range precision, however, lots of folks jump into it before really having all the pieces of the puzzle. A slight zeroing error at 100 can give the wrong impression of what's going on down range. Data gathering is hugely important (at least, according to my school of thought on long range marksmanship).
Typos brought to you via Tapatalk and autocorrect.
Ok.
I've watched all three.
First, you seem like a good dude, so that gets you a leg up.
Criticism on data presented:
Always confirm distance through actual measurement; tape can work, but laser gets my vote.
The problem with using reticle subtention is that sometimes reticles are slightly off, any angle will induce error, and measuring with a less than 2% error is tough thorough an optic. Laser range finders are easy, and eliminate a lot of error elements.
Truing:
Is a method for long range precision, however, lots of folks jump into it before really having all the pieces of the puzzle. A slight zeroing error at 100 can give the wrong impression of what's going on down range. Data gathering is hugely important (at least, according to my school of thought on long range marksmanship).
Typos brought to you via Tapatalk and autocorrect.
Is truing the reticle helpful for when you want to get a shorter range shot? (Ex: true at farther distances to get a more accurate medium distance shot.)
Understand all about the reticle not being cut accurate in the scope. I'll have to actually check that out in mine to see if there's a difference. I'm trying to resist the LRF madness. Maybe I can get one and have it pull double duty at the golf course!
Suwannee Tim
08-04-13, 19:15
I'm with Mr. Stop on this. I think Powerpoint is a better medium than video for this application.
Is truing the reticle helpful for when you want to get a shorter range shot? (Ex: true at farther distances to get a more accurate medium distance shot.)
Understand all about the reticle not being cut accurate in the scope. I'll have to actually check that out in mine to see if there's a difference. I'm trying to resist the LRF madness. Maybe I can get one and have it pull double duty at the golf course!
If you use a range finder at the golf course you'll not be without one again. I first bought the bushnell 1500 that runs off a 6v battery but I kept using it to shoot and would get to the golf course and find out I had forgot it. So I left it in my range bag and bought a bushnell v2 that runs off of a 3v lithium battery that stays in my golf bag. I don't have over $300 in either one.
Both are supposed to go to 1,000 yards but I've not used either at over 300 yds. Don't know if that's long enough of a distance for you or not.
If you use a range finder at the golf course you'll not be without one again. I first bought the bushnell 1500 that runs off a 6v battery but I kept using it to shoot and would get to the golf course and find out I had forgot it. So I left it in my range bag and bought a bushnell v2 that runs off of a 3v lithium battery that stays in my golf bag. I don't have over $300 in either one.
Both are supposed to go to 1,000 yards but I've not used either at over 300 yds. Don't know if that's long enough of a distance for you or not.
It's plenty long enough for me. I'm not a long range expert, by any stretch of the imagination.
Failure2Stop
08-05-13, 08:48
Is truing the reticle helpful for when you want to get a shorter range shot? (Ex: true at farther distances to get a more accurate medium distance shot.)
It isn't not helpful, if that makes sense.
I'd rather have 2" of error at 200 than 8" at 800.
If you don't have a laser range-finder, you are taking a lot of things as fact that are not verified.
Highly recommend getting a decent one, such as this:
http://www.amazon.com/Leupold-RX-1000i-Rangefinder-Mossy-Break-Up/dp/B004IGIF54
*Doesn't have to be in Mossy Oak, just happens to be a decent price right now.
ETA: one in black-
http://www.amazon.com/Leupold-112179-RX-1000I-TBR-DNA/dp/B004I8Q8T2/ref=pd_sbs_sg_1
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.