Recommendations for a competition 22LR rifle?

[Longstud]

that really doesn't matter. Get it comfortable, figure out your drop tables, and the height over bore is really irrelevant. Being comfortable behind a rifle is. With a chassis set up like this, or done with a normal stock and an adjustable cheek riser, its easy to get it set up well.
The standard height was 1.5" above bore. With today's scopes, that's almost impossible to do with the bell end on most of them. Shooting, and learning why happens at the different distances will yeild the same accuracy, with accurate equipment.

exactly but this is where the levelling of the scope to bore axis becomes very important at long range. The higher the scope to the bore the more critical this relationship becomes. At greater distances this becomes huge hence most knowledgable shooters using bubble levels on their scopes tuned to the bore axis. If you don't think it matters, tilt ur gun 45 degrees and place the crosshairs on the center of your previous five shot group and youll see what im talkin about. Tip the optic to the right and group will move left and tip optic to the left and group will move right. At long range it will be significant and with the 22 rimfire youll really notice beyond the hundred yard mark.

 

[ScottMisfits]

exactly but this is where the levelling of the scope to bore axis becomes very important at long range. The higher the scope to the bore the more critical this relationship becomes. At greater distances this becomes huge hence most knowledgable shooters using bubble levels on their scopes tuned to the bore axis. If you don't think it matters, tilt ur gun 45 degrees and place the crosshairs on the center of your previous five shot group and youll see what im talkin about. Tip the optic to the right and group will move left and tip optic to the left and group will move right. At long range it will be significant and with the 22 rimfire youll really notice beyond the hundred yard mark.

Spot on.

 

[Maple57]

Is that your rifle? It looks like a 455 Varmint barreled action, not a 452.

That's an advertising picture I pulled a link from the internet, not my personal rifle. It's easier to find a link to a pic than it is to upload one of my own, especially when I only have a few minutes available.

I have two rifles with that Aeron stock on them. One is my CZ 452 and the other is my PCP air rifle FX Dreamline which I use for PRS practice in the basement.

The stock for the FX Dreamline was available from Air Gun Source and probably still is, but not the one for the CZ452. That as a stated, I got from the link I provided earlier.

A buddy has a (hard to find) Brno model 4 target rifle which we did put in the stock and it fits just as well. I don't think you would have a problem putting a 455 in it either.

 

[Maple57]

exactly but this is where the levelling of the scope to bore axis becomes very important at long range. The higher the scope to the bore the more critical this relationship becomes. At greater distances this becomes huge hence most knowledgable shooters using bubble levels on their scopes tuned to the bore axis. If you don't think it matters, tilt ur gun 45 degrees and place the crosshairs on the center of your previous five shot group and youll see what im talkin about. Tip the optic to the right and group will move left and tip optic to the left and group will move right. At long range it will be significant and with the 22 rimfire youll really notice beyond the hundred yard mark.

It's not the scope height that causes the canting problem you describe. That happens because the scope is dialed for a longer shot.

Think of it like a plumb line hanging from the hour hand of a clock. At 12, the plumb line is directly in line with the tip of the hour hand, so there is not cant error.

If you allow the rifle to tilt to 1 o'clock, the bullet impact will launch toward a line directly under the 1.

So the moral of the story is that it's not the scope height causing the problem, it's dial up.

Now, having said that, if you were to mount the scope 30 inches above the bore, which is clearly absurd, you would have roughly the same angular canting problem as dialing up 30 MOA with a scope close to the bore.

Another visual aid might be to view the reticle with the rifle canted at an angle. Drop always occurs in the direction of gravity, straight down. If you cant the rifle so the reticle is on a 1 o'clock line and hold high 30 MOA, the bullet will not magically drop along the vertical line of the reticle. It will fall directly downward.

 

[ScottMisfits]

Another visual aid might be to view the reticle with the rifle canted at an angle. Drop always occurs in the direction of gravity, straight down. If you cant the rifle so the reticle is on a 1 o'clock line and hold high 30 MOA, the bullet will not magically drop along the vertical line of the reticle. It will fall directly downward.

If the bore and the reticle aren't line up level with each other, you will get more tracking, left or right depending on which way the rifle is help. Take two pencils. Hold the top one flat, and the other at an angle. This represents what the scope and barrel are actually doing. The bullet will fly as true to the scope, only when they are level with each other, in an up and down fashion. If they are not plumb they will not track the same. More noticeable at longer ranges but you will constantly be adjusting your windage dials and be wondering why.

 

[grauhanen]

Here's a diagram showing the results of scope and/or rifle cant. It was originally made for airguns, but it applies just as well here.

 

[ScottMisfits]

I've never seen that diagram before but it illustrates what I was trying to say for sure.

 

[Maple57]

If you're interested, these are pictures of my actual rifles in Aeron chassis and fitted with MDT Arca rails.

The steel weights attached provide both weight for stability and improved weight forward balance point so the rifle can rest naturally on the obstacle as shown.

Both rifles also have adjustable scope rings that have been set to zero out 8 minutes up from the bottom of travel. This way I get close to 60 MOA of elevation and a defacto zero stop system.

CZ452

FX Dreamline

 

[Maple57]

If the bore and the reticle aren't line up level with each other, you will get more tracking, left or right depending on which way the rifle is help. Take two pencils. Hold the top one flat, and the other at an angle. This represents what the scope and barrel are actually doing. The bullet will fly as true to the scope, only when they are level with each other, in an up and down fashion. If they are not plumb they will not track the same. More noticeable at longer ranges but you will constantly be adjusting your windage dials and be wondering why.

This is not exactly true. They do not need to be plumb at all. It just needs to be fired on the same cant angle every time.

I think your point is that you cannot go off willie nillie and disregard what cant angle the rifle is on when shooting long range. To that I would agree.

Note that a rifle is rarely actually perfectly zero. You are usually up to one click either way of center. So in that alone is a certain amount of error.

You can deliberately cant the scope as is often done by top shooters like G David Tubbs to improve ergonomics and relax muscles when in the firing position.

I've seen Tubbs shoot down at Camp Perry and he sets the rifle on an angle of about 11:30. This reduces muscle strain. Google it. You might find his video discussing it somewhere on YouTube. I had it on VHS back when that was a thing. Actually here's a link

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DLXc4sK8fOI

This can also be done from bipod positions with a rear bag to counter the rotational torque under recoil. The offset rear bag can help keep the rifle tracking. I've done this for years shooting F Class.

If you set the scope level with the rifle canted to 11:30 and zero it that way, and so the zeroing shots are just a slight bit right of center, the bullet will track on that parallel line as far out as you want to shoot. (not considering spin drift.)

On the subject of spin drift, I've heard of guys deliberately canting the scope relative to the level on the scope, to offset the effects of spin drift.

 

[ScottMisfits]

No, it is true. In essence, they are pointed at different angles. You my be able to zero them at 50 yards. But as you stretch out, it will keep going sideways. There is only one point where this lines will meet son rather than just dialing elevation with them plumb, you will need elevation and wind age if they aren't.

 

[rgv]

Maple57 is correct.

A telescopic sight does not have to be plumb to the bore axis, it only needs to be shot with the reticle plumb at all times.

Obviously were talking about 1 or 2 degrees off of plumb with bore, not 45 degrees.

 

[ScottMisfits]

1 or 2 degrees has such a small effect you might not see or notice it, but it's still there. The worse the roll, the worse the effect. But the effect is still there.

 

[Maple57]

No, it is true. In essence, they are pointed at different angles. You my be able to zero them at 50 yards. But as you stretch out, it will keep going sideways. There is only one point where this lines will meet son rather than just dialing elevation with them plumb, you will need elevation and wind age if they aren't.

Seems like you are missing my point.

If you "zero" the rifle with the bore 1/2" (for example) to the right of the center of the optic, then you are creating a pigeon toe effect you describe that will magnify with distance. In this case your impact at twice the zeroing distance would be 1/2" to the left. Which by the way is not much in practical terms.

If we acknowledge that the bore is intentionally 1/2" to the right of the center of the optic and zero accordingly, so the bullet impact at your zeroing distance is 1/2" to the right of your point of aim, the bullet will track on that parallel line.

That 1/2" is all but meaningless in practical terms as distances increase and will get lost in the wash of windage and elevation changes.

Regardless of how you choose to set up your rifle, it is most important to fire the rifle as close as possible to the intended cant angle. Whether or not it is vertical is simply user preference.

 

[ScottMisfits]

I get your point, but I disagree with it. I can't seem to explain it in a way you will understand, but I'll try again.

When you mount your scope on to your rifle, assuming you use a flat rail or mount, the centerline of the bore and the centerline of the scope are parallel to each other. If you don't zero them, and leave the scope "centered" in it's internal adjustment range, the bullet will never hit the center crosshairs. Leaving the muzzle it will be 1.5" low, assuming a 1.5" scope height. The further the distance, the more the bullet drops. I think this is something that we can agree on.

Now, to get the bullet to hit the centerpoint, you have to zero using the elevation turrets. This, in effect, takes the rifle and scope from being parallel with each other, to making the lines become a wedge. This is also what lead people to believe that bullets rose as they left the muzzle. But in fact, the rifle had to be pointed up to make the bullet hit the zero.
If you twist the rifle and the scope, the bullet does not fly on the same line and more. You can get it zeroed at a given distance. A closer shot and the bullet will hit on one side of your zero, a further shot it will hit the opposite side of your zero. Think of a golf ball in flight. The only difference it that the bullet won't curl back like a golf ball does.
Another example that I can think of is a fighter jet and the machine guns mounted on them. If they mounted the guns pointed straight forward, there would be a large gap in the trail that it leaves. To counteract that they twisted the guns on them to cross at a given distance, lets say 300 yards as an example. So the left wing will be hitting left of zero until 300 yards, hit zero, and then be right of zero after 300 yards. Obviously this will be opposite for the right wing mounted gun.
That's a highly exaggerated example obviously but it's the same effect. One or two degree's, you probably won't notice it, even at longer distances, but it's there. The more the "twist", or the longer the distance, the more exaggerated this effect becomes.

 

[horseman2]

I don't know if the original post got his answer as he disappeared after page one.

Start by shooting what you got. As you develop your own abilities, your friends at various matches will help you along.

It is a game that will eventually require cash to keep up with those in the race to see who can buy the best equipment.

Going to a 100 Metre shoot today will see me dragging along $6-7000 worth of firearms and equipment.

Much like the definition of a boat . . . a hole in the water you pour money in to!

 

[Maple57]

I get your point, but I disagree with it. I can't seem to explain it in a way you will understand, but I'll try again.

When you mount your scope on to your rifle, assuming you use a flat rail or mount, the centerline of the bore and the centerline of the scope are parallel to each other. If you don't zero them, and leave the scope "centered" in it's internal adjustment range, the bullet will never hit the center crosshairs. Leaving the muzzle it will be 1.5" low, assuming a 1.5" scope height. The further the distance, the more the bullet drops. I think this is something that we can agree on.

Now, to get the bullet to hit the centerpoint, you have to zero using the elevation turrets. This, in effect, takes the rifle and scope from being parallel with each other, to making the lines become a wedge. This is also what lead people to believe that bullets rose as they left the muzzle. But in fact, the rifle had to be pointed up to make the bullet hit the zero.
If you twist the rifle and the scope, the bullet does not fly on the same line and more. You can get it zeroed at a given distance. A closer shot and the bullet will hit on one side of your zero, a further shot it will hit the opposite side of your zero. Think of a golf ball in flight. The only difference it that the bullet won't curl back like a golf ball does.
Another example that I can think of is a fighter jet and the machine guns mounted on them. If they mounted the guns pointed straight forward, there would be a large gap in the trail that it leaves. To counteract that they twisted the guns on them to cross at a given distance, lets say 300 yards as an example. So the left wing will be hitting left of zero until 300 yards, hit zero, and then be right of zero after 300 yards. Obviously this will be opposite for the right wing mounted gun.
That's a highly exaggerated example obviously but it's the same effect. One or two degree's, you probably won't notice it, even at longer distances, but it's there. The more the "twist", or the longer the distance, the more exaggerated this effect becomes.

Yup.. you missed the point, but I'm done with this conversation.

I can explain it for you, but I cannot understand it for you.

 

[ScottMisfits]

No, I got your point, you're just wrong. And I obviously can't explain it well enough for you to understand, and I'm not good enough with computers and graphics modeling to make a visual.

So on this topic, we will agree to disagree.

 

[Mystic Precision]

I'm in the Lower Mainland, BC. The centerfire match I attended in the fall was a BCPRL, Heffley Creek (you actually were giving me some pointers, Jerry).

Unfortunately, as a surveyor, I work out of town during the prime shooting season, and I never have a set schedule, which makes it hard to plan events in advance, so I'll attend whatever is possible (I'm often signing up last minute, which is not possible for most IPSC matches, so I haven't shot one of those in over a year).

I'd like to give myself as many options as possible (centerfire or rimfire), so that when I all of a sudden have a weekend off, I can jump into a match (the ones that fill up quickly don't really work for me).

Keith

[youtube]JxvOSNSSQU4[/youtube]

Teammate made a video while testing his 10/22. Simple upgrades for little investment. You can see his results at the end of the video.

Jerry

 

[Maple57]

No, I got your point, you're just wrong. And I obviously can't explain it well enough for you to understand, and I'm not good enough with computers and graphics modeling to make a visual.

So on this topic, we will agree to disagree.

If I can put fourth a few simple and practical questions for you....

In the example I proposed above with a rifle canted so the scope is 1/2" to the left of the barrel. The elevation is adjusted perfectly at 100 yards. The windage is adjusted perfectly in zero wind at 300 yards. (300 yards being a reasonable practical max effective range for a 22LR)

Assuming the rifle is fired as intended with the same amount of cant that was used for zeroing...

What is the total possible windage error that could occur between the muzzle and 300 yards?

Here's the answer:

It's 1/2" at the muzzle
Its 2/3rds of 1/2" at 100 yards 0.333"
It's 1/3rd of 1/2" at 200 yards 0.166"
It's zero at 300 yards.

Could you shoot the difference if you did not know that offset was there?

Could you shoot the difference if you did know the offset was there and made an effort to compensate for it?

 

[saunders278]

I don't know if the original post got his answer as he disappeared after page one.

Start by shooting what you got. As you develop your own abilities, your friends at various matches will help you along.

It is a game that will eventually require cash to keep up with those in the race to see who can buy the best equipment.

Going to a 100 Metre shoot today will see me dragging along $6-7000 worth of firearms and equipment.

Much like the definition of a boat . . . a hole in the water you pour money in to!

Yeah, I've got my answer, thanks. I'll mount my Vortex HST on my dad's 10/22, start shooting, and address the problems as they arise. There might not be many upgrades to be made, it's got a top-quality barrel, trigger, and stock. My main task will be getting the stock and scope to fit me perfectly.