G&R Tactical
Page 2 of 17 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 162

Thread: Zen of the 100 Meter Zero

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    FL
    Posts
    9,156
    Feedback Score
    26 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Renegade View Post
    I do not shoot human sized targets. I shoot hog sized targets. I also prefer not to have to hold over, or do all that calculation and stuff you showed. I prefer to just put the red dot on the target and presto, dead hog.
    That's what "all that math" shows.
    From 0 to 25, just hold about 2.2" high and you are good to go on 3" circles, and really, unless you need to maintain a smaller than 3" shot placement window, you can just hold 1.5" high from muzzle to 200 meters.

    I can't think of anything easier than that unless I can guarantee that the thing needing to be shot will only appear at an exact certain given distance.

    Really, if you are happy with what you are doing, rock on.
    FWIW, I have never heard of anyone that is well versed in the 100 meter zero changing to another zeroing scheme unless for a specific purpose, whereas I have seen users of every other scheme abandon them for the 100 meter zero.

    Whatever floats your boat though.
    Jack Leuba
    Director, Military and Government Sales
    Knight's Armament Company
    jleuba@knightarmco.com

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    2,571
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Failure2Stop View Post
    That's what "all that math" shows.
    From 0 to 25, just hold about 2.2" high and you are good to go on 3" circles, and really, unless you need to maintain a smaller than 3" shot placement window, you can just hold 1.5" high from muzzle to 200 meters.
    Are you shooting 3 inch targets or human sized targets? I thought you said human in first post.

    If you are shooting human sized targets, why hold over from 0-25? Put the dot in his chest, and at most you are 2.8 low using your optic.

    I guess it is not the zero distance I am confused about, but why you think you need to hold over vs a human at close ranges under standard battle conditions (sniper etc, I can see need for more precise targetting).

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    FL
    Posts
    9,156
    Feedback Score
    26 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Ironman8 View Post
    Trident mentioned this, so as long as this doesn't turn into a threadjack (and instead adds to the value of this thread), why would one sight at 100m with a RDS, yet sight at 200m with a magnified optic?
    I personally use a 100 meter base zero on everything.
    That being said, for long range applications I maintain recorded data out to as far as I can shoot, in 100 meter increments (or even better in 50 meter increments past 600 yards), so I can dial to a true zero and then apply wind hold.

    If shooting at unknown distances it is common to dial to a specific range and then employ mil-holds for stuff at closer range.

    Further, if shooting for precision at long range, the mil-holds for sub-200 are pretty easy (and the 0-50 isn't a big concern), and it puts you several clicks closer your greater distance zeroes.

    I put this firmly into the "user preference" category.
    Jack Leuba
    Director, Military and Government Sales
    Knight's Armament Company
    jleuba@knightarmco.com

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    FL
    Posts
    9,156
    Feedback Score
    26 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Renegade View Post
    Are you shooting 3 inch targets or human sized targets? I thought you said human in first post.

    If you are shooting human sized targets, why hold over from 0-25? Put the dot in his chest, and at most you are 2.8 low using your optic.

    I guess it is not the zero distance I am confused about, but why you think you need to hold over vs a human at close ranges under standard battle conditions (sniper etc, I can see need for more precise targetting).
    This is about effectively dealing with human threats, not "human sized targets". The size of the vital areas selected for destruction are much smaller.
    To reliably instantly shut down a human threat, your target area in the head is a roughly 3" circle in the center of the head. Sometimes parts of the head can be obscured by hard cover or things I don't want to put bullets into.

    Common loop-holes in walls (murder holes) can be as small as 3" and still permit the bad-guy to aim through them while shooting. Putting bullets through them and not around them end the fight a lot faster.

    The precision requirement of a "W" in a gunfight is greater than most people understand.
    Jack Leuba
    Director, Military and Government Sales
    Knight's Armament Company
    jleuba@knightarmco.com

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    LasVegas
    Posts
    98
    Feedback Score
    0
    Thank You for your time and sharing your knowledge!

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    2,571
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Failure2Stop View Post
    This is about effectively dealing with human threats, not "human sized targets". The size of the vital areas selected for destruction are much smaller.
    To reliably instantly shut down a human threat, your target area in the head is a roughly 3" circle in the center of the head. Sometimes parts of the head can be obscured by hard cover or things I don't want to put bullets into.

    Common loop-holes in walls (murder holes) can be as small as 3" and still permit the bad-guy to aim through them while shooting. Putting bullets through them and not around them end the fight a lot faster.

    The precision requirement of a "W" in a gunfight is greater than most people understand.
    Gotcha.

    Despite decades of practice, I have never been able to consistently make 3 inch head shots out to 300 meters on a moving target. Thus I aim more for chest core, which I miss more often than not anyway unless really close.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    FL
    Posts
    9,156
    Feedback Score
    26 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Renegade View Post
    Gotcha.

    Despite decades of practice, I have never been able to consistently make 3 inch head shots out to 300 meters on a moving target. Thus I aim more for chest core, which I miss more often than not anyway unless really close.
    Yeah, those 1 MOA moving targets hits are rough

    For anything past 200 meters, unless I have a lot of time, I am happy with good upper torso hits from a "fighting" AR with an optic that supports perfomance down to 3 meters. Change those variables to "precision rifle" and higher magnification optics and expected performance changes.

    Glad we got on the same page.
    Jack Leuba
    Director, Military and Government Sales
    Knight's Armament Company
    jleuba@knightarmco.com

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    2,805
    Feedback Score
    34 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Failure2Stop View Post
    I personally use a 100 meter base zero on everything.
    That being said, for long range applications I maintain recorded data out to as far as I can shoot, in 100 meter increments (or even better in 50 meter increments past 600 yards), so I can dial to a true zero and then apply wind hold.

    If shooting at unknown distances it is common to dial to a specific range and then employ mil-holds for stuff at closer range.

    Further, if shooting for precision at long range, the mil-holds for sub-200 are pretty easy (and the 0-50 isn't a big concern), and it puts you several clicks closer your greater distance zeroes.

    I put this firmly into the "user preference" category.
    Thanks for the input.

    Now I see that "side" of it. However, I'll probably just stick to a 100m zero like you said...

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Chicago, IL.
    Posts
    2,395
    Feedback Score
    14 (100%)
    Outstanding! I will be sure to refer to this if my department ever decides to get on the ball with our rifle policy.
    "The future's uncertain, and the end is always near." Jim Morrison

    "Fortuitous outcomes reinforce poor training and tactics"

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    485
    Feedback Score
    3 (100%)
    Thank you for taking the time to make this thread. This has been book marked. Appreciated!

Page 2 of 17 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •