Guns Like firearms themselves, there's a wide variety of opinions on what's the best gun.

No-Shot Scope Change Technique: Fluke? Legit?

Old 12-03-2011, 07:02 PM
  #1  
Nontypical Buck
Thread Starter
 
Nomercy448's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Kansas
Posts: 3,913
Default No-Shot Scope Change Technique: Fluke? Legit?

We're mid-season for deer and I'd like to change scopes on my deer rifle, but obviously don't want to miss time in the field by spending time sighting in at the range.

I was BS'ing with a friend last night about it and he mentioned a technique he uses that he learned from a guide some-odd years back. I can't find any flaws in the logic, and he swears he's done it several times with perfect results, but I'm skeptical whether it's a fluke, or if it's the real deal...

Taking a rifle that has been live-fire zero'ed, he puts a target on the wall of his morton building at 100ft, and centers the crosshairs in a rifle vise on the bullseye. Then he puts a laser boresighter in the bore and marks on the target where the boresighter laser lands. Then he removes the scope, and installs the new scope. He sets the boresighter again on the previous reference mark, then zero's the scope to the bullseye.

He swears it's dead on every time. Logically, I can't see a flaw in it; the bullet should fly the same path away from the boresighter line every time, so if the crosshairs on the new scope are set to the same deviation from the reference point, it will still have the same POI, correct?

He also said that when he takes a scope OFF a rifle, he takes a target and makes a laser reference mark, in case he'll put a new scope, or even THAT scope back on the rifle. He hasn't "re-sighted" any of his rifles from scratch in years. He just uses this technique and then takes a few groups to verify he's on target. He said he replaced his 15-20shot "from scratch" sight in method with this method, plus 3-6 shots.

I'm too skeptical TODAY to try it, but I do believe I might spend some time after season swapping between scopes at the range and seeing how well this technique really works...

So is this a fluke, or is that legit? Has anyone ever heard of this technique before?
Nomercy448 is offline  
Old 12-04-2011, 01:49 AM
  #2  
Nontypical Buck
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: west central wi USA
Posts: 2,251
Default

It sounds like good system to me. In an emergency, I'd trust it. In a non-emergency, where I had time, I'd follow the procedure and confirm with shooting.
Wingbone is offline  
Old 12-04-2011, 05:09 AM
  #3  
Nontypical Buck
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: WY
Posts: 2,056
Default

I don't see the principle here as anything new, we've been using lasers to align crosshairs with the axis of the bore for awhile now. What's novel is the idea of "proofing" a boresight with refinements from actual shooting. This might be particularly useful for those who might find reason to question (as a result of impact, etc.) the validity of their zero without making a trip to the range. In a sense, use traditional boresighting to "get you on the paper," shoot and refine your zero at the range, then "reverse boresight" on a target at a repeatable distance - making no adjustments on the optic and simply recording where the laser hits the target and then filing the target for later use as described above.

Obviously, ammunition variance (lot-to-lot or switch to something else) will compromise the "proofed" information, so probably necessary to record ammunition information on the reference target as well (brand, bullet weight, velocity, BC, etc).
homers brother is offline  
Old 12-04-2011, 05:14 AM
  #4  
Nontypical Buck
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Pine Hill Alabama USA
Posts: 1,280
Default

It should work but the paranoid side of me would never let me hunt until I had actually fired it for confirmation. LOL!
Todd1700 is offline  
Old 12-04-2011, 05:23 AM
  #5  
Nontypical Buck
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: WY
Posts: 2,056
Default

Originally Posted by Todd1700
It should work but the paranoid side of me would never let me hunt until I had actually fired it for confirmation. LOL!
Nor would I. My understanding of the OP's description is that this method would not eliminate shooting, just reduce the number of shots potentially required.
homers brother is offline  
Old 12-04-2011, 06:20 AM
  #6  
Typical Buck
 
huntingkidPA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 872
Default

it worked for me. i had mine laser bore sighted at 25 yards. it was dead on. i moved to 100 yards. about a half inch low, made one adjustment and it was hitting perfect. i think it will probably save you a lot of rounds and time sighting it in.
huntingkidPA is offline  
Old 12-04-2011, 08:03 AM
  #7  
Nontypical Buck
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Southeast Missouri
Posts: 2,178
Default

I think it should work rather well...as mentioned a few real life shots are needed to verify the new scope is On-Target.Another thing I do at the Shooting Range is to have my Rifle in my Caldwell Lead Sled....I shoot at my target dead center starting out at 50 yards...if the bullet impact is down and to the left I simply hold my crosshairs where I aimed dead center and adjust the cross-hairs down and to the left where the bullet hole impacted/hit...then I shot again dead center on the target and see where I'm hitting.....usually I cut down on wasting bullets and the Rifle is dead on,then I resume shooting out to my 100 yard target!
GTOHunter is offline  
Old 12-04-2011, 04:09 PM
  #8  
Nontypical Buck
Thread Starter
 
Nomercy448's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Kansas
Posts: 3,913
Default

My buddy swears that the "confirmation shots" are always on target, and he only shoots to verify, rather than actually sight in. He said he'd be confident hunting it (to reasonable ranges, south of 400yrds at least) even without shooting it.

I'm going to spend a while at the range after season with different scopes and different rifles and see how it comes out.
Nomercy448 is offline  
Old 12-05-2011, 06:43 AM
  #9  
Nontypical Buck
Thread Starter
 
Nomercy448's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Kansas
Posts: 3,913
Default

Originally Posted by Ridge Runner
ht, and all screws torqued exactly the same, if the rings have windage adjusting screws, then they must be in the same position to ensure its all the same.
RR
And there it is, Ridge ladies and gentlemen, always the voice of reason.

I knew there had to be something simple I was over looking. Once I read this I thought about the crossing X's diagram and it all came together.

On the other hand, I'm fairly curious that a guy could do this same work up at 100yrds (for a 100yrd zero), rather than the shorter range, and it'd work better, even for different scope heights, rings, etc. I.e. at 100ft, it doesn't necessarily prove that your reference has any bearing on 100yrds, since your crossing X's aren't related. At 100yrds, I think the variability between crossing X's would be moot, so even if the scope were higher, they'd still cross at 100yrds (but then you'd have more dramatic "scope drift", per usual with any tall scope).

Dang, I was really hoping this wouldn't just be a fluke. I'm sure my buddy was using the same rings and bases, just dropping new 40mm scopes in the cradle, so he was "getting lucky" that the height and scope position wasn't changing much if at all, which is why it worked for him.
Nomercy448 is offline  
Old 12-05-2011, 02:24 PM
  #10  
Giant Nontypical
 
jeepkid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: ****ifornia
Posts: 5,052
Default

Why not just shoot it? Isn't that the point off having all these "toys", to use them? Unless your shooting custom bullets at $3 each, whats the big deal of shooting 10-15 rounds downrange?

But, I would like to see how your tests turn out...
jeepkid is offline  

Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.