<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: TECH Tip: How to Verify Your Scope&#8217;s True Click Values</title>
	<atom:link href="https://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/2019/05/tech-tip-how-to-verify-your-scopes-true-click-values/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/2019/05/tech-tip-how-to-verify-your-scopes-true-click-values/</link>
	<description>from AccurateShooter.com</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 03 Apr 2026 15:38:54 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=4.1.26</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rxlead</title>
		<link>https://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/2019/05/tech-tip-how-to-verify-your-scopes-true-click-values/comment-page-1/#comment-60808</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Rxlead]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 12 Nov 2022 15:06:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/?p=57829#comment-60808</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The sighting variation of 0.047 inch at 100 yards becomes 0.47 inch at 1000 yards. One thousand yards is 10 times 100 yards so the error is multiplied by 10.  The 337 inch drop you reference is caused by acceleration due to gravity.  This does not change due to sighting error.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The sighting variation of 0.047 inch at 100 yards becomes 0.47 inch at 1000 yards. One thousand yards is 10 times 100 yards so the error is multiplied by 10.  The 337 inch drop you reference is caused by acceleration due to gravity.  This does not change due to sighting error.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sank</title>
		<link>https://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/2019/05/tech-tip-how-to-verify-your-scopes-true-click-values/comment-page-1/#comment-57178</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Sank]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 May 2019 03:57:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/?p=57829#comment-57178</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Care to calculate what 47 thou at 100 yds turns into at 1000 yds with a 308? It matters more than you think! 4.7% error on 337 inch drop means you&#039;re off 16 inches!]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Care to calculate what 47 thou at 100 yds turns into at 1000 yds with a 308? It matters more than you think! 4.7% error on 337 inch drop means you&#8217;re off 16 inches!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jon spencer</title>
		<link>https://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/2019/05/tech-tip-how-to-verify-your-scopes-true-click-values/comment-page-1/#comment-57177</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[jon spencer]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 May 2019 02:03:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/?p=57829#comment-57177</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[That .047 of a inch might and only might be noticeable in that famed Houston Texas warehouse and with one of their better benchrest guns.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>That .047 of a inch might and only might be noticeable in that famed Houston Texas warehouse and with one of their better benchrest guns.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Boyd Allen</title>
		<link>https://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/2019/05/tech-tip-how-to-verify-your-scopes-true-click-values/comment-page-1/#comment-57174</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Boyd Allen]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 28 May 2019 17:22:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/?p=57829#comment-57174</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[There is guessing/assuming, and there is knowing. One method worth considering is to build a bench scope mount so that the scope cannot move as adjustments are made, and to use piece of graph paper for a target at a carefully measured distance, close enough to see the details, and far enough for the scope to be focused , to check tracking. In the benchrest game the issue of holding a point of aim from shot to shot has been an issue, and relatively affordable means of testing are available.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There is guessing/assuming, and there is knowing. One method worth considering is to build a bench scope mount so that the scope cannot move as adjustments are made, and to use piece of graph paper for a target at a carefully measured distance, close enough to see the details, and far enough for the scope to be focused , to check tracking. In the benchrest game the issue of holding a point of aim from shot to shot has been an issue, and relatively affordable means of testing are available.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Harry</title>
		<link>https://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/2019/05/tech-tip-how-to-verify-your-scopes-true-click-values/comment-page-1/#comment-55573</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Harry]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Jul 2018 06:38:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/?p=57829#comment-55573</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A big factor also is the scopes manufacturers. Cheap glass aren’t reliable in adjustment increments. Stick with Leopold, Nightforce, Schmidt and Bender, Vortex, Sig Sauer and US Optics and Bushnell and Burris and EOTech. I’ve found over the years that you get what you pay for. Also depends on caliber and projectile weight. Using the 7.62x51 with 168gr out of a 20” tube is pretty much dead on with good glass in my experiences. My 6.5C is also really close also. Not enough deviation to effect combat or target accuracy. Semper Fi and lets stay a country of riflemen.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A big factor also is the scopes manufacturers. Cheap glass aren’t reliable in adjustment increments. Stick with Leopold, Nightforce, Schmidt and Bender, Vortex, Sig Sauer and US Optics and Bushnell and Burris and EOTech. I’ve found over the years that you get what you pay for. Also depends on caliber and projectile weight. Using the 7.62&#215;51 with 168gr out of a 20” tube is pretty much dead on with good glass in my experiences. My 6.5C is also really close also. Not enough deviation to effect combat or target accuracy. Semper Fi and lets stay a country of riflemen.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lance Hopper</title>
		<link>https://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/2019/05/tech-tip-how-to-verify-your-scopes-true-click-values/comment-page-1/#comment-55572</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Lance Hopper]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 15 Jul 2018 20:40:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/?p=57829#comment-55572</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Anyone denying that even the best/most expensive brands of scope don&#039;t leave the factory with something other than the stated click value is living in a state of denial. Pure and simple. Even if the scope tracks perfectly for the first 20 moa, there is no guaranty that the next 10 will too. I am in the trust but verify camp. Would I send a 1/4 moa scope back that tracked perfectly, but at 1/4&quot;. No. but at least I know how to adjust for the discrepancy. In the day of ethical 600+ yard shots on game, it would be unethical not to confirm what your scope really does. I have had to send Mark 4 Leupolds back because they didn&#039;t track, and have friends that had to send Nightforce&#039;s back. It happens. Thankfully not often, though.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Anyone denying that even the best/most expensive brands of scope don&#8217;t leave the factory with something other than the stated click value is living in a state of denial. Pure and simple. Even if the scope tracks perfectly for the first 20 moa, there is no guaranty that the next 10 will too. I am in the trust but verify camp. Would I send a 1/4 moa scope back that tracked perfectly, but at 1/4&#8243;. No. but at least I know how to adjust for the discrepancy. In the day of ethical 600+ yard shots on game, it would be unethical not to confirm what your scope really does. I have had to send Mark 4 Leupolds back because they didn&#8217;t track, and have friends that had to send Nightforce&#8217;s back. It happens. Thankfully not often, though.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Richard</title>
		<link>https://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/2019/05/tech-tip-how-to-verify-your-scopes-true-click-values/comment-page-1/#comment-50119</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Richard]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Mar 2016 19:57:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/?p=57829#comment-50119</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[@ The Editor.

We are at an interesting point in human history and optical equipment where manufacturing techniques are such that the easy explanation of &quot;scope failure&quot; that we could use up to the first years of the 21st century no longer apply.

A well made scope from a number of named manufacturers are precision pieces.  What they do show, more often than not, is an error in reloading, technique, set up that the shooter is not prepared to accept and therefore the scope is broken.

By all means do a box test if it makes you feel happy.  But buy the best scope you can afford and concentrate more on reloading and shooting technique.

Richard: I think it&#039;s incorrect to suggest that the latest generation scopes won&#039;t fail. I have seen premium scopes from various makers &quot;go south&quot; or, not work to spec when new. I have seen a National record holder replace a $2800 scope in the middle of the Nationals because it failed.

With an accurate rifle a box text DOES reveal important facts. If you have a 2 MOA rifle, or are shooting from a wobbly rest, different story. But things do break or fail. Specific Example. My own &quot;L-brand&quot; 8-25X LRT. At a 600-yard match, we zeroed on steel, confirmed with sighters. Then went for record and put 3 shots inside two inches on paper. The final two shots went straight down to 6 o-clock, 18&quot; below the group. Vertical test performed after match showed erratic vertical of Multiple MOA. Scope shipped to Oregon. Returned 1 month later with a list of 15+ internal parts that were replaced by the manufacturer due to &quot;internal components failure&quot;.

But box testing is not just to confirm breakages. For long-range shooting it is vital to determine if your &quot;1/4 MOA click&quot; is actual 1.047&quot; at 100 yards/4 or something else. Some scope are closer to 1.000&quot;. A click-by-click test can also reveal lash issues that also still affects some modern scopes.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@ The Editor.</p>
<p>We are at an interesting point in human history and optical equipment where manufacturing techniques are such that the easy explanation of &#8220;scope failure&#8221; that we could use up to the first years of the 21st century no longer apply.</p>
<p>A well made scope from a number of named manufacturers are precision pieces.  What they do show, more often than not, is an error in reloading, technique, set up that the shooter is not prepared to accept and therefore the scope is broken.</p>
<p>By all means do a box test if it makes you feel happy.  But buy the best scope you can afford and concentrate more on reloading and shooting technique.</p>
<p>Richard: I think it&#8217;s incorrect to suggest that the latest generation scopes won&#8217;t fail. I have seen premium scopes from various makers &#8220;go south&#8221; or, not work to spec when new. I have seen a National record holder replace a $2800 scope in the middle of the Nationals because it failed.</p>
<p>With an accurate rifle a box text DOES reveal important facts. If you have a 2 MOA rifle, or are shooting from a wobbly rest, different story. But things do break or fail. Specific Example. My own &#8220;L-brand&#8221; 8-25X LRT. At a 600-yard match, we zeroed on steel, confirmed with sighters. Then went for record and put 3 shots inside two inches on paper. The final two shots went straight down to 6 o-clock, 18&#8243; below the group. Vertical test performed after match showed erratic vertical of Multiple MOA. Scope shipped to Oregon. Returned 1 month later with a list of 15+ internal parts that were replaced by the manufacturer due to &#8220;internal components failure&#8221;.</p>
<p>But box testing is not just to confirm breakages. For long-range shooting it is vital to determine if your &#8220;1/4 MOA click&#8221; is actual 1.047&#8243; at 100 yards/4 or something else. Some scope are closer to 1.000&#8243;. A click-by-click test can also reveal lash issues that also still affects some modern scopes.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Garry</title>
		<link>https://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/2019/05/tech-tip-how-to-verify-your-scopes-true-click-values/comment-page-1/#comment-50117</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Garry]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Mar 2016 17:13:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/?p=57829#comment-50117</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I agree with Richard. There are so many variables that affect shot precision. Trust the reputation of a good quality scope and then get out and shoot it under all conditions. My experience has been that the scope is right more often than me!

Editor: If you have never done a box test from a good benchrest set up you should. Bryan Litz also advocated this procedure. You may be surpised with what you find. If nothing else it can give you confidence in the optic -- and you may also be able to confirm a problem when something has gone wrong. I have had two major brand scopes go bad, with inexplicable vertical shifts. The problems appeared in a match and were later confirmed with vertical click tests.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree with Richard. There are so many variables that affect shot precision. Trust the reputation of a good quality scope and then get out and shoot it under all conditions. My experience has been that the scope is right more often than me!</p>
<p>Editor: If you have never done a box test from a good benchrest set up you should. Bryan Litz also advocated this procedure. You may be surpised with what you find. If nothing else it can give you confidence in the optic &#8212; and you may also be able to confirm a problem when something has gone wrong. I have had two major brand scopes go bad, with inexplicable vertical shifts. The problems appeared in a match and were later confirmed with vertical click tests.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Richard</title>
		<link>https://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/2019/05/tech-tip-how-to-verify-your-scopes-true-click-values/comment-page-1/#comment-50112</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Richard]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Mar 2016 19:33:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/?p=57829#comment-50112</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Tend to find this is an exercise in futility for internet heroes seeking clickbait.  There are far too many variables in this approach; changing heat during the test, vibration, material used for the platform, etc etc.

An industrial collimator is the only machine that gives accurate and repeatable readings.

Best way to learn your scope is to get out and shoot with it.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Tend to find this is an exercise in futility for internet heroes seeking clickbait.  There are far too many variables in this approach; changing heat during the test, vibration, material used for the platform, etc etc.</p>
<p>An industrial collimator is the only machine that gives accurate and repeatable readings.</p>
<p>Best way to learn your scope is to get out and shoot with it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Guy</title>
		<link>https://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/2019/05/tech-tip-how-to-verify-your-scopes-true-click-values/comment-page-1/#comment-50111</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Guy]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Mar 2016 17:16:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/?p=57829#comment-50111</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Always a good idea to box the scope]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Always a good idea to box the scope</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
