Do you think that unlimited scope magnification = better shot placement?

T

Tone

Guest
If you could have a 100x magnification scope would that mean better shot placement?

I shoot Airgun benchrest in the UK so the ranges I shoot at are fairly limited compared to some of you on the forum.

I have found that there is a cross over point so if I am using a variable mag scope say at 20x, my scores do not go up if I go to a higher 32x mag, and some instances drop off.

Do you find that sometimes it is better to have just enough scope magnification rather than too much?

Regards

Tony
 
The answer to your question will most likely be personal preference. As for me though, I've recently gone up in magnification from 20x to 36x for 600 yard competition. It seems to have helped me and my scores though mirage is worse. The scope I used before was a variable Leupold 6.5-20x, now I'm using a Weaver T36 and it was the right move for me though I do miss having the flexibility of a variable.
 
try a bulseye pro 3x on the 6.5-20....maybe a more...that would be about 26x but with the variable....i shoot a 8.5 to 25 30mm tube with a 3x which is aprox 11x to 32x...
 
I think the quality of the image is more important than the amount of magnification. More of either one means more money, and to have both means really a lot of money.

If you look through some of the really high end optics out there, you'll see that there really is a benefit to paying more. Not saying what you get is worth more money all the time.

Now, at what point in your shooting do you get to where better optics actually help with your shooting? Well, when you look at how well some shooters do with lower power optics, it's fairly easy to see that the cost/benefit ratio might be leaning toward cost.

Here's a good rule of thumb. If you have x amount of money to spend to improve your shooting, and you say to yourself, "I don't think x can be spent on anything that will help me more than a new scope", then it's time to spend it on the optics you want.
 
Up to a point more magnification allows the shooter to hold closer to where he wants the bullet to go, assuming proper scope adjustment, but after a certain point more can be less. If the lenses aren't ground perfectly and everything else don't perfectly you've just got a highly magnified blur. The inexpensive "astronomical" telescopes with 500X or 600X magnification are an example. Another problem with more magnification is that focus becomes more critical, and the higher the magnification the more critical it becomes in my experience.

What's more important than magnification is light gathering ability. In general the light gathering power increases as the square of the objective lens, i.e., double the diameter of the objective lens and the light gathering power is quadrupled. The only problem with rifle scopes is that there's a limit to how large the objective lens can be. Also if the scope tube, internal optics, etc can't make use of the light it's a waste.

4Mesh has pretty much hit it on the head IMHO.
 
If your airgun benchrest competition is similar to our rimfire matches wherin you shoot as many as 25 tiny bullseyes at close range (50 yards) under a time restraint then by far the higher mag scopes (especially the 36X and even the 45X Leupys) rule the roost.
I don't think it's so much that you can center them much better on the small dot since they often shoot a perfect score with 6X scopes in the sporter class.... but more that it allows you aim and shoot faster and that is critical when shooting 25 shots in 20 or 30 minutes and while your condition is holding.
 
twentytwoguy said:
I don't think it's so much that you can center them much better on the small dot since they often shoot a perfect score with 6X scopes in the sporter class
Click to expand...

Thanks guys for all your replies and it is twentytwoguy's statement that intersets me, i.e. perfect scores can be obtained at 50yrds at 6x.

I know when it comes down to it it is a personal thing and there is no set formular to success but it does interest me and its what I like about benchrest is that you need to get all parameters to come together - which is what I guess we are striving for.
 
Vern said:
Is wind an issue that you face when shooting airguns?
Click to expand...

Can be, no more than any other outside target shooting though - you dont have such a large 'crack' as you do with live rounds going off though.
 
Tone said:
Thanks guys for all your replies and it is twentytwoguy's statement that intersets me, i.e. perfect scores can be obtained at 50yrds at 6x.
Click to expand...
Again tho, those are some pretty nice 6x scopes (as 6x scopes go). Then too, in cross-course disciplines, score differences from scoped to open sights are very slight. The downside to not having good optics in most benchrest disciplines is the loss of time, the fact that it takes longer to decide you're aimed properly with lesser optics (or none).

I know when it comes down to it it is a personal thing and there is no set formular to success but it does interest me and its what I like about benchrest is that you need to get all parameters to come together - which is what I guess we are striving for.
Click to expand...
Next time you're at a match, ask someone with an IOR or March to let you sit down behind one of them. Now, these are pretty pricey glass, but one look through it and you'll be a believer. Personally, I'd have to say the 35mm IOR is the nicest optics I've ever looked through. It's not in my price range, but, a great wish list item. Do I think something like that could improve my shooting?.... ehhh, yea, I do. How much? Well, I don't think it would make a huge difference on any given day. But, I think on the days where conditions are poor, the additional resolution would really show up as better groups and scores. Jmo. High end glass only really shows how valuable it is, on bad days.
 
Tone said:
If you could have a 100x magnification scope would that mean better shot placement?

I shoot Airgun benchrest in the UK so the ranges I shoot at are fairly limited compared to some of you on the forum.

I have found that there is a cross over point so if I am using a variable mag scope say at 20x, my scores do not go up if I go to a higher 32x mag, and some instances drop off.

Do you find that sometimes it is better to have just enough scope magnification rather than too much?

Regards

Tony
Click to expand...

So do I think that more power would mean better shooting or better placement of shots? In short range BR, (group shooting especially).... Absolutely not. 36x to 45x is plenty of power for 100, 200 and 300 yards. I don't shoot airgun, but on occasion I shoot .22 rim fire position shooting (prone standing sitting).

About 18 years ago I was discussing this with Dwight Scott, as it relates to BR shooting and his explanation was that while you are trying your hardest to get the higher magnification scope aimed to get that last .020" (Twenty Thousandths) adjustment made, you ignore the flags for an instant and miss a 3/4" reversal.

Having shot 6x hunter and Varmint hunter class at 100 and 200 yards I can tell you... these rifles are more accurate than most people can aim them... It's common to shoot 15 to 18 x's at 100 yards, a nd not unheard of to shoot 20x's with a 6 power scope.

With the Anschutz .22 position rifle, you get your sights on the bull and (BRAS) breath relax aim squeeze. There is no room in there for (re-aim) or (aim better). good enough is just that, good enough! If you need to get better, practice... sooner or later it will still be BRAS, only the Breath Relax Aim Squeeze will be better.

Paul
 
I shoot Prairie Dogs and have found around 30 power works for me.

I shoot 22 BR and use a 50 power March. I was using a 36 power Leupold.

These powers work best for me. May not be the same for everyone.

KG
 
kgcoker said:
I shoot Prairie Dogs and have found around 30 power works for me.

I shoot 22 BR and use a 50 power March. I was using a 36 power Leupold.

These powers work best for me. May not be the same for everyone.

KG
Click to expand...

I've tried higher powers for shooting prairie dogs, but about 20X is all I can stand especially when the mirage is bad. Watching a sod poodle boogey around on a hot day at even 20X drives me nuts. Crank the scope back to 12X or so and he's a goner though because he's standing still. Just my experience. The guy I usually shoot with mostly uses 15 to 20X scopes too.
 
I would imagine there is some mathematical relationship between CEP (circular error probability), distance and magnification beyond which there is little to be gained.
 
More about acuity

TomD said:
I would imagine there is some mathematical relationship between CEP (circular error probability), distance and magnification beyond which there is little to be gained.
Click to expand...

For me these days the amount of magnification I need in a scope relates to my failing visual acuity. At 200yards I need at least 36x just to see the moth ball. About 45x to see bullet holes. Go back 20 years and I could do both with a 25x.
Andy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top