huntingfish
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- Quebec City
I'm far from a great shooter, but I was expecting something like 1.5" - 2" groups or something along those lines?
Dissappointing range outing
- Thread starter huntingfish
- Start date
I'm far from a great shooter, but I was expecting something like 1.5" - 2" groups or something along those lines?
huntingfish
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- Quebec City
I don't think so but you are making me very worried I might of done this.Checklist for next range outing:
- Check all screws beforehand
- Bring multiple boxes of different kind of ammo
- Dont rest barrel on rest
- Dial down magnification
huntingfish
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- Quebec City
Well, I checked the torx screws on the rings and everything is tight.
Most probably will be a few weeks before I can get back to the range but will try a couple of things suggested here! I'll post back with whatever fixed it.
Cheers everyone and thanks for chipping in
David
Most probably will be a few weeks before I can get back to the range but will try a couple of things suggested here! I'll post back with whatever fixed it.
Cheers everyone and thanks for chipping in
David
The Remington ammo is ok, but I find that it is often less accurate than others brands, at least in the rifles and calibers that I shoot. Try other brands; I’ve had good success with the Federal Blue Box and also the Fusion line... If everything was tight, trying a few loads might help to find what works best for you...
You did not mention the rifle used. Not all rifles can achieve sub-moa. Sometimes, about 2 inches is all that can be done, and that can be plenty good for hunting purposes. Think how large the vital zone is large on a moose, for instance.
You did not mention the rifle used. Not all rifles can achieve sub-moa. Sometimes, about 2 inches is all that can be done, and that can be plenty good for hunting purposes. Think how large the vital zone is large on a moose, for instance.
Last edited:
huntingfish
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- Quebec City
I thought I had said which rifle I was using, but here goes again! ;-)
I got a brand new Zastava M70 in 300 win mag in a synthetic stock, with a Nikon Prostaff5 4-16x42mm.
David
Oops, it was in post #12. Should have read the entire message string more carefully. Good luck resolving your issue. The torque applied to the stock bolts can also play a role. You may also want to check that out too and try various combinations, to see if that helps.
And check that the locking lug is tight against the cross bolt, if so equipped. I am not familiar with that rifle, I have never seen one up close.
And check that the locking lug is tight against the cross bolt, if so equipped. I am not familiar with that rifle, I have never seen one up close.
A brand new rifle and scope, shot on a hot day and with admittedly not enough time to cool between strings, with one factory load? And the scope has been mounted by a "gunsmith"...or by a guy working behind the counter in a gunshop? There is a big difference.
OP, pardon my assumptions here, and I mean no offence...but reading between the lines here I am getting the idea that you are a fairly new shooter? The 16x scope on a moose rifle sorta adds to that impression. What is your typical accuracy like on your other rifles? And did you achieve that accuracy first time out, with the very first ammo you tried?
Nowadays, I think that most decent bolt action new rifles...and yours certainly would fall into that category..can be expected to produce MOA or very close to it, with a bit of load experimentation and perhaps some very simple tweaking of screw tension, barrel floating, etc. A 3-inch group at 100 yards may not be cause for celebration, but it sure doesn't spell disaster either. It's way too soon to call this rifle a dog.
OP, pardon my assumptions here, and I mean no offence...but reading between the lines here I am getting the idea that you are a fairly new shooter? The 16x scope on a moose rifle sorta adds to that impression. What is your typical accuracy like on your other rifles? And did you achieve that accuracy first time out, with the very first ammo you tried?
Nowadays, I think that most decent bolt action new rifles...and yours certainly would fall into that category..can be expected to produce MOA or very close to it, with a bit of load experimentation and perhaps some very simple tweaking of screw tension, barrel floating, etc. A 3-inch group at 100 yards may not be cause for celebration, but it sure doesn't spell disaster either. It's way too soon to call this rifle a dog.
Can you get a known good shooter of magnums to rest the rifle to their specs and shoot a few groups with different ammo? If shooting magnums off the bench isn’t an everyday thing, or it’s been months for you, things may not be as bad as you think. Free floating the barrel and some other ammo are right up there too.
huntingfish
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- Quebec City
What? So when Nikon wrote "100" on the parallax knob, it's supposed to mean what exactly?
Actually, if you are adjusting to be parallax-free, you adjust until the reticule does not move on the target.
When you move your head sideways or up and down. The reticule should stay centered on the target. If the
reticule moves at all, you are not parallax-free at that distance. This SHOULD also be where the target is
the clearest, but I have seen cases where this is not true. [obviously this is a problem that needs attention]
On telescopes that have no parallax adjustment, the factory usually sets them parallax free at 100 or 150 yards.
The small amount of parallax evident at other distances is inconsequential on a hunting rig.
Regards, Dave.
When you move your head sideways or up and down. The reticule should stay centered on the target. If the
reticule moves at all, you are not parallax-free at that distance. This SHOULD also be where the target is
the clearest, but I have seen cases where this is not true. [obviously this is a problem that needs attention]
On telescopes that have no parallax adjustment, the factory usually sets them parallax free at 100 or 150 yards.
The small amount of parallax evident at other distances is inconsequential on a hunting rig.
Regards, Dave.
Eagleye has it right! Personally, I find parallax adjustment nothing but a PITA on a hunting scope. Maybe I would feel differently if I were an extreme long-range hunter...which I am not...but for any hunting out to at least 500 yards an adjustable parallax is just one more unnecessary thing to screw around with. Learn to shoot properly and consistently...with a good consistent cheekweld that centers your eye behind the scope...and parallax simply doesn't exist. It's only when you have your eye badly off-centre, so that you aren't even seeing a proper circular field of view, that parallax becomes a "thing"; at that point you are essentially looking around the side of the reticle at the target, and the results are easily visible as you move your head closer or further from its correct position.
The numerous shooters who point to parallax as an excuse for poor shooting should set up a rifle in a solid rest, carefully center their eye behind the scope, and then observe what happens when they move their head away from that central sweet spot. The amount by which parallax can cause you to miss will be visible; you will actually see how far the crosshairs move on the target as your eye position wanders. It isn't nearly as far as many folks seem to think it is.
The numerous shooters who point to parallax as an excuse for poor shooting should set up a rifle in a solid rest, carefully center their eye behind the scope, and then observe what happens when they move their head away from that central sweet spot. The amount by which parallax can cause you to miss will be visible; you will actually see how far the crosshairs move on the target as your eye position wanders. It isn't nearly as far as many folks seem to think it is.
BigUglyMan
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- New Scotland
Not to be a ####, but the 300WM is, generally, more than most people can handle. If you are already a self-described as a poor shot, a not only heavy but fast recoiling rifle like a 300 will exacerbate that. Personally, I think that you are over-gunned.
Nothing like Tough Love and brutal honesty...
Myself, I find any range trip outing a good time away from the daily drivel of this covid19.
There can be lots to glean from the trip..cheap therapy if you will.
Happy Canada Day Gun Nutters and You too BUM !!
Hopefully the clouds part and I get a good ride in on less crowded streets and bi-ways.
Rob
- Location
- Somewhere on the Hudson Bay Coast
The test is to have someone you know to be a good shot fire your rifle. If their group size is similar to your own, you have a rifle, ammo, or a scope problem; if their groups size is significantly smaller than yours, you have a marksmanship problem. But first, as others have said, go over your action and scope mount screws and if they are all tight, then try a different brand of ammunition. If you have an equipment problem, change out one element at a time so you can identify where the problem lies. No point in changing out the scope if you just have an ammo problem. But if changing ammo doesn't resolve the problem, swap out the scope with one you know holds zero.
If you have a marksmanship problem, fire 3 round groups rather than 5. If you can't hold for 3 rounds, fire pairs. If you can't hold for pairs, find a lighter load, then over time, slowly work up to full power, heavy bullet loads. You might be able to find "managed recoil" factory loads, but its easier and less expensive to handload reduced loads with lighter bullets. If you haven't considered handloading now might be a good opportunity.
If the rifle hurts you when you fire it, change what offends you. If a swept back design, the bolt handle might hit the back of your hand, or if the pistol grip of the stock crowds the trigger guard, your knuckle hits the trigger guard in recoil. Either of these conditions will have an effect on your shooting. The bolt can be straightened and a knuckle deflector can be mounted behind the trigger guard. Maybe the comb of the stock is too high and the recoil jars your head and pounds your cheek, in which case the scope can be mounted a bit higher, or the height of the comb can be reduced. Perhaps the stock is too long, exasperating the felt recoil, and needs to be reduced an inch. Perhaps a better quality recoil pad should be installed. Perhaps the rifle is too light, in which case weight can be added to the stock. Perhaps you're afraid of being hit by the scope, and the scope needs to be mounted further forward.
Dry fire might prove to be beneficial as well. With the rifle supported the same way as it would be for live fire, dry fire and see if your reticle moves on the target when the striker falls. If you can see movement on the target, you need to work on your trigger technique. If you don't see any movement on the target, try balancing a quarter on top of the barrel near the muzzle, then see if you can dry fire without having if fall off, this you can do in the comfort of your living room. When the quarter stays there, try a dime.
huntingfish
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- Quebec City
Ah ok. I guess this is exactly like the previous poster wanted to say but it's explained with a bit more details. Thanks for that. Makes sense.
Parallax only comes into play when eye-scope alignment isn't perfect though, right?
huntingfish
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- Quebec City
Well, by poor shot, I mean I don't shoot cloverleaf groups. But I've shot my fair share of moose, a few (1-2) at longer distances (300yd). Albeit, that was with my 30-06.
