Zeroing your weapon ...

[LRRP-87]

Well I was wanting to know what the problem is with zeroing your weapon at 25 meters with a reduced target? I was watching the show Tactical Impact, and one of the instructors(Kyle Defoor) said that on today's battlefield the 100 meter zero is better.
I remember every year qualifying with my M16A1 with a 25 meter set zero, and qualifying expert most of the time. I also talked to a Marine Recon friend, and he said to use what works for me.
So before I reset the zero on a few platforms, I wanted to get some other opinions, and beta on the matter from some knowledgable shooters. Thanks in advance guys.

[REdTula]

From my understanding of the reduced chart when you zero your rifle at 25 meters you will be on target at 300 yards right? So Kyle is saying to zero your rifle for CQB? That leaves a larger compensation at longer shots. I'm not sure if I would want to do that.

[orionz06]

I know Defoor was speaking on zero distance, and I inferred target size as well. Leaving the zero distance as preference, the target size is questionable.

Mathematically, shooting 25 yards on a reduced target can be the same as 500 yards on a larger target, but I think he was getting at rather than shooting a smaller target up close, zero at the actual intended range.

For handguns, I can shoot pretty good on a reduced target up close, but the equivalent at the true distance results do not scale the same. If you get 1/2 MOA at 25 yards do you get 2 MOA at 100, or can you hold better/worse? I believe he was also speaking to knowing what your weapon does at that range. If you use a 50/225 zero, shoot it at 225, or at least thats what I gathered.

[Molon]

[REdTula]

^Help me understand that chart because I don't see how the bullet drop would be any different based on ones zeroing distance. Or am I misinterpreting the chart?

[orionz06]

^Help me understand that chart because I don't see how the bullet drop would be any different based on ones zeroing distance. Or am I misinterpreting the chart?

it compares the 3 zeros mentioned...

to the OP, Kyle is a member here, send him a message to understand the intent of his comments.

[LRRP-87]

On the Tactical Impact episode he says "100 meter zero", not 100 yard zero. He also says that when using the 25 meter target you'll be off a little sometimes. What is Kyle's user name here? I'll ask him like you suggested.

[DWood]

^Help me understand that chart because I don't see how the bullet drop would be any different based on ones zeroing distance. Or am I misinterpreting the chart?

The chart shows that each zero will cross the line of sight twice, once at the zero, and once again further down range. You will notice that the deviation from line of sight is less with the 50 yard zero from 50 to 250 yards than it is with a 25 or 100 yard zero. A 25 yard zero is almost 10" high at 200 yards, while the 50 yard zero is never off more than 2" high or low all the way out past 200. It crosses the line again right around 225. Some believe that the most accurate way to zero is at the longer distance where the bullet crosses the line of sight again. I just zero at 50. You can shoot effectively to 250 without any adjustment for elevation.

Using smaller targets has nothing to do with zeroing; in theory zeroing is on a single, bullet sized point at what ever distance you choose. You try to make one hole so target size is not relevant. Smaller targets are said to be used to simulate longer ranges, but I don't think it's the same.

[orionz06]

On the Tactical Impact episode he says "100 meter zero", not 100 yard zero. He also says that when using the 25 meter target you'll be off a little sometimes. What is Kyle's user name here? I'll ask him like you suggested.

I use meter/yard as the same in this instance, but the idea is the same. I believe his user name is "Kyle Defoor". The idea of the smaller target is valid, for a quicker zero, use the reduced target and then confirm at the true distance.

[Molon]