Fixed parallax for the range, bad choice?

G

gyppo

CGN frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
15   0   0
Location
North Vancouver, BC
My wife just bought a Tikka T3 varmint in .223 after some handy advice from the precision forum. When we went into the store I didn't think she was ready to buy but she just decided to get it. Unfortunately I hadn't researched scopes, so she ended up grabbing a Leupold VX-3HD 4.5-14x40 with fixed focus that a couple guys at the store recommended.

I knew Leupold has a great reputation and solid warranty, and that their scopes are tough so she went with it. I figured there are tons of fizxed parallax scopes on the market so how bad could the error be? But after our first range visit I'm wondering if she should have gone with something else for target shooting. Trying out a bunch of ammo she was having a hard time getting anything to group well at 100, getting roughly 4-5" groups. Then at 200 she was getting the same group size - should be double the size, right? I then gave her my Zastava M85 in 7.63x39 loaded with Barnaul FMJ. It has a Bushnell Trophy 4-12x40AO on it, and she proceeded to shoot a 5-shot groups at 100m that was about 2.5". Hmmmmm....

I checked all the screws on her scope and everything is tight. It was mounted at the store with a torque wrench. I then started to wonder about the absence of a focus ring. I set the rifle down on the rest with the scope on the bullseye and the mag at 14x, and moving my head side to side resulted in the crosshairs dancing a full inch to either side! I know the parallax is set at 150 but I never expected the error to be so great at 100. At 50 yards it's even worse.

On my 25 year old Japan made Bushnell there's zero discernible parallax error when the objective is set for the correct distance. Should we be looking at getting her an adjustable focus scope for the range? We'll be doing load development at 100m, then there are gongs at 200 and 300 and she wants to eventually try her hand at shooting 400 or 500 once she gets better. What I worry about is that now she's not sure if she's missing due to her, or the scope. I couldn't get any better than 2.5" at 100m with her rifle either, and that was with PMC match ammo with 77gr sierras bullets, which I can do with my x39 pencil barrel Zastava on cheap ammo.

I've read the new Bushnells are nice, I looked through an Elite 4500 4-16x50 and the picture was really nice, except there's no lockable elevation. The Nitro 6-24x50 has that and is also on sale, it has the basic reticle, would she benefit from any kind of fancy reticle or just stick with the duplex?

Thanks!
G
 
If you are going to try to "make do" with that scope, as is, is possible to "over-ride" the parallax induced error - pull your head way back on the comb - you should see a ring of black when you are just outside the "eye box" area - with a "clear-ish" view in the centre. Align everything up to look "centered" - now slide your head forward - that is your "weld point" when you no longer see any black around the edge. Is apparently a physics thing that a set of lenses and a cross hair can only be aligned at one specific distance - further ranges or closer ranges will have that "parallax induced error" - what you see as target is coming in differently than what you see as cross hair - is an "error" - if you can precisely repeat your head position (actually, your shooting eye position), you will have the same "error" for each shot.

Or send it to Korth to have the "parallax" set to a particular distance that you specify - is a least one guy here on CGN who adjusts "parallax" himself at home - I do not know how he purges or re-seals his scope after adjusting it. But is the nature of that type of scope - it is going to be parallax error free at only one specific distance - is based on the physical positioning of the lenses to each other and to that cross hair. Most will tell you the error gets worse as your target closer - is actually same thing happening as you get further from your error free setting - but usually can not see the error out there. You might also think of it as an important difference between a scope for "hunting", versus a scope for "target work".
 
Definitely get a scope with an adjustable parallax, as it is a very beneficial feature, as you are seeing. The duplex reticle is simple but something like the P5 TMR reticle Leupold has would be better for making windage and elevation adjustments if you want to stick with Leupold. If you want to try a different brand, there is a plethora of choice.

As your plan is to shoot gongs at the 200 and 300, with intentions of trying shooting out to 400 and 500, an optic with 22X or more would be optimal. My Tikka CTR in .223 is comparable to your T3 Varmint and it sports a 4-32X50.

For what it's worth, you mentioned doing load development - My CTR and your T3 Varmint both have 1:8 twist rate barrels and I found Berger 60gr FB bullets to shoot the best (with Varget powder).

Hope this helps & happy shooting.
 
If the scope is set to 100-150y parallax then this isn't an equipment issue. Are the targets the same physical size at 100 and 200? Does she shoot better then 2" with another scope? How is she anchoring her head? Parallax error doesn't just mean you miss when it's too far from its set distance, it means you can move the reticle with your head position - if you always aimed at the same place, there's no" error"
 
If you want to see how much the parallax setting is capable of causing in error at your distance, move your head side to side and see how much the reticle moves against the target. If it's not much, and you keep your eye centred, then parallax isn't causing the issue.

The way you described the reticle only moving one inch one way and one inch the other when you moved your head side to side, suggests that parallax isn't the problem, unless she is shooting with her eye at one extreme one shot and the other extreme the other. The eye should naturally centre if you are at all relaxed and I would expect it to contribute an inch to the group size at most at the distance you described it moving an inch either way.
 
Last edited:
Anything over 10 power benefits greatly with parallax adjustment. It really sounds like the guys at the store sold you what they wanted to sell...
 
guntech has the answer there. I'd sell that to someone who will be happy with that level of accuracy, that might be OK for a deer at 100 but def Not at 200. Side parallax is more convenient that AO, but remember those numbers are 'guidelines', Not 'guaranteed exact'. A lot depends on the shooter's eye. Also, be sure the ocular is focused properly on the reticle.
And I think Both of you should go for the Nitro, just to be fair :rolleyes:
 
Grizzlypeg said:
The way you described the reticle only moving one inch one way and one inch the other when you moved your head side to side, suggests that parallax isn't the problem, unless she is shooting with her eye at one extreme one shot and the other extreme the other. The eye should naturally centre if you are at all relaxed and I would expect it to contribute an inch to the group size at most at the distance you described it moving an inch either way.
Click to expand...

I was thinking the same thing.

OP, I think your wife's issues are greater than just parallax on the scope. A consistent repeatable position behind the scope should largely mitigate any issues with parallax.
 
Shoot it yourself and see. I have found that with my focus adjustable scopes I have to use it where the fixed are much more forgiving about focus. Are they more forgiving about parallax? I don't know. But it's nice to shoot my mid power scopes and not think about parrallax. If she shoots 4 or 5 inches at 100 a fancier scope won't help
 
I believe the amount of parallax error capable is solely influenced by the objective size and the difference between the shooting distance and the parallax free distance. So effectively, the larger the objective, the more error you can induce at a given mismatched distance.

Using a 40mm objective (set to zero at 150), the max error at 50 yards would be .50" and then it decreases as you get closer to the set distance and begins to increase again to 0.50" at 250 yards and then 1.8" at 500 yards.
 
Last edited:
Jahnj0584 said:
If the scope is set to 100-150y parallax then this isn't an equipment issue. Are the targets the same physical size at 100 and 200? Does she shoot better than 2" with another scope? How is she anchoring her head? Parallax error doesn't just mean you miss when it's too far from its set distance, it means you can move the reticle with your head position - if you always aimed at the same place, there's no" error"
Click to expand...

THIS! Fixed parallax is not that big of an issue IF you have your marksmanship skills down.

The OP's wife needs to learn to position her head on the stock in relation to the scope, the same, every time. Then parallax becomes much less of an issue. I've spent years shooting gophers from 10' to 200 yds with a fixed focus scope. It can be done.

Along with positioning and cheek weld, she needs to work on her breathing and trigger pull. I suspect she got a bit lucky the first time out and is now learning there is no shortcut to marksmanship that doesn't involve practice. Shooting is much more of a zen sport that involves fine control of one's body and mind.
 
I Dont Care About You said:
THIS! Fixed parallax is not that big of an issue IF you have your marksmanship skills down.

The OP's wife needs to learn to position her head on the stock in relation to the scope, the same, every time. Then parallax becomes much less of an issue. I've spent years shooting gophers from 10' to 200 yds with a fixed focus scope. It can be done.

Along with positioning and cheek weld, she needs to work on her breathing and trigger pull. I suspect she got a bit lucky the first time out and is now learning there is no shortcut to marksmanship that doesn't involve practice. Shooting is much more of a zen sport that involves fine control of one's body and mind.
Click to expand...

Agreed, it sounds like this is a good opportunity for her to work on the fundamentals or marksmanship, I know when I’m not doing my part the groups will always let me know.

I don’t think a fixed parallax is that big of a deal to be honest, I have both and all my hunting rifles are fixed parallax scopes and I don’t find it a disadvantage. Hell my one .308 rifle wears a 2-7x32 shotgun scope with a fixed 75y parallax lol, I have zero issues shooting with accuracy to the 200m mark at the range. I initially was concerned there might be issues but after shooting it repeatedly and taking a deer with it I know it’s not a concern, If your technique is sound your groups should be good.
 
OP "Trying out a bunch of ammo she was having a hard time getting anything to group well at 100, getting roughly 4-5" groups. Then at 200 she was getting the same group size - should be double the size, right? I then gave her my Zastava M85 in 7.63x39 loaded with Barnaul FMJ. It has a Bushnell Trophy 4-12x40AO on it, and she proceeded to shoot a 5-shot groups at 100m that was about 2.5". Hmmmmm...."

Parallax is not the only problem here, though may be a small contributing factor. Change shooters and/or change scopes for more info
 
So many potential factors but I doubt in this scenario parallax is one of them.
To work backwards:
1) has this rifle combination been accurate as set up with this ammo by another shooter?
If so, your problem lies with something the shooter is doing.
2) if the rifle is inherently poor accuracy then the hardware has an issue.
My first thought in 223 is what specific ammo are you shooting and what twist is your barrel.
My second thought is have you tried more than one type of ammo.
3) if ammo hasn’t made a difference, is the gun , scope and mount new to you or was it bought used?
Either way what’s the round count and if you’re not knowledgeable in such matters have you had someone check it over?

Another question, I assume it’s a right handed gun and she’s right handed, (or left/left); what is her dominant eye?
My wife is right handed but left eye dominant and refuses to learn how to shoot left handed, instead sticking to right handed guns and having horrible accuracy…

While watching her shoot, is she doing anything that stands out as odd? (Poor form, using constantly different holds, moving her head lots, yanking the trigger, flinching, etc…).
Are the groups on center? Or predominantly where on the clock (12, 3, 6, 9).
Are the groups scatter gun 4-5” or 3 bug holes and a few fliers?

End of the day for this thread though is a properly functioning fixed parallax centerfire scope doesn’t loose a lot to an adjustable scope at 1-200 yards at moderate magnification and very likely has nothing to do with your issue.
 
i dont care about you said:
this! Fixed parallax is not that big of an issue if you have your marksmanship skills down.

The op's wife needs to learn to position her head on the stock in relation to the scope, the same, every time. Then parallax becomes much less of an issue. I've spent years shooting gophers from 10' to 200 yds with a fixed focus scope. It can be done.

Along with positioning and cheek weld, she needs to work on her breathing and trigger pull. I suspect she got a bit lucky the first time out and is now learning there is no shortcut to marksmanship that doesn't involve practice. Shooting is much more of a zen sport that involves fine control of one's body and mind.
Click to expand...

this
 
Yesterday was my first time using a scope with parallax adjustments, a Bushnell 6500 2.5-16 x 50 that I had and never really had rifle to put it on, but just got a 222 and thought it would be a good scope for that… hahaha long story short, didn’t really see anything different in use… maybe I don’t really know how to use it hahaha!
 
Some factors I speculate could be potential problems:

1. A light rifle and light scope are generally more sensitive to movement then a heavier setup.
2. 40mm objective scope zoomed to 14X will have a very unforgiving eyebox only 2.85mm (dial back the zooms to 10x or less for 100yds, and 6x or less for 50yds)
3. 223 is a light recoiling round but it is also a loud little bastard so a flinch could still be possible.
4. Rings or mounts may not be properly installed. Just because the store installed it doesn't mean they were done correctly.
5. Poor cheek weld or comb to low. What is the height rings are installed? Should be low rings with 40mm objective and the low comb stock of the Tikka rifle. perhaps add a cheek bag.
6. Shooting off a shooting bag? I see that the shape of the Tikka's foregrip is rounded and prone to rolling so make sure to use a rearbag for added stability. Or try a decent bipod with a rear bag.

From what I understand the primary use cases for a side focus /parallax adjuster is for shooting tiny things up close, think .22LR at 25yrds shooting dime size targets and having perfect focus. Or for precision shooting in awkward postions past 500yds (think PRS or military sniper) when 1 MOA of parallax shift can mean missing by 5 inches.

This is interesting:
"Trying out a bunch of ammo she was having a hard time getting anything to group well at 100, getting roughly 4-5" groups. Then at 200 she was getting the same group size - should be double the size, right?"

I think the randomness of these groups points to a scope mounting issue, rifle stability issue or a body positioning problem.

Cheers
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom