Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
Long-range i streljastvo / Re: Kako uci u LR streljastvo?
« Last post by ompdux on January 20, 2018, 08:29:39 PM »
Toske, da li mozes da ostavis neki kontakt za klub, gde se nalazi i sl informacije. To mu zvuci kao idealan klub!
2
Znanje na poklon / Re: MALA SKOLA RUCNOG PUNJENJA BY DEVIJANTNA LICNOST
« Last post by Snowman on January 19, 2018, 03:53:53 AM »
So, do I measure that from the scope to the target or the muzzle to the target? I’ve read that different scope manufacturers may use different approaches on this, so their calibration could be tuned towards one way or the other. Luckily, the guys at Horus had already thought a lot about this, and had a good approach itemized in the user manual for their calibration targets:

The question usually arises: Do I measure from the middle of the riflescope or from the muzzle to the target? Both are equally important as the rifle does the shooting and the scope provides calibration adjustment. To resolve this issue, establish an imaginary point located midway between the middle of the scope and the rifle muzzle. If you place your rifle at this shooting position, you have approximately ±10 inches to adjust your rifle to a comfortable position. Remember, there are 3600 inches in 100 yards; this 10 inch zone produces a +/- error of approximate 1/3 of 1% (= .0033).

Since I wasn’t mounting on the scope on a rifle, I didn’t need the ± 10 inches of variance to adjust the rifle, so this should be even more accurate than what was explained above. I simply setup my fixed mount so the scope would be the correct distance behind that imaginary line. I used a common 24” barrel for calculating the exact distance.

Rifle Scope Mechanical Review

It is not only important to ensure the target is perpendicular with the shooter (see right angle in previous diagram), but the vertical ladders on the grid should also be precisely vertical as well (see right angle in the next diagram). That ensures if the scope is level, it should track straight up the line on the target. Once again, a very long level was used to set and double-check that the target was vertically plumb.

I also “broke in” the scope knobs before I started any of these tests, by rotating each knob through its entire range 50 times! This ensures any quirks from new, stiff mechanics should be settled down. I’m not sure there would be any on these high-end scopes, but I definitely didn’t want to take a chance of it skewing the results.

Each scope started at the bottom of its elevation travel. Once I had a scope secured in the fixed mount, I aligned them with the 20 mil reference line towards the top of the target using fine adjustments built into my custom fixed mount. You can see what the view from the scope looked like in the diagram below. When the crosshairs were perfectly aligned with the 20 mil horizontal line and the center vertical line, I would start turning the elevation knob to increase the adjustment. When you increase the elevation adjustment on a scope, this causes the reticle to lower on the calibration target. This might sound counterintuitive, but if your reticle goes down you have to raise the barrel to get to the same aiming point, giving your trajectory more arch. I’d continue to turn the knob until the crosshairs were aligned with the mark that was 5 mils below the original aiming point. Once I was satisfied that the crosshairs were perfectly even with the 15 mil mark (as shown below), I’d raise my head and see how many clicks it actually took on the turret to get that 5 mil adjustment, and I’d record that value. Sometimes it might be exactly 5.0 mils, other times it might be 4.9 or 5.1. Occasionally the crosshairs might be just short of the line at 4.9 mils, but past it at 5.0. In those instances, I’d record 4.95 mils to indicate the precise adjustment was “in between clicks.”

Long-Range Scope Reviews

After the first 5 mil adjustment, I’d get back behind the scope and continue to turn the knob until the reticle was perfectly even with the 10 mil line on the target. Then I’d look up and record how many clicks it actually took to get it there. I’d repeat this for 3rd and 4th adjustments.

This “no live fire” approach worked well because all of these scopes have extremely high magnifications. If you were testing a typical 3-9x hunting scope, this may not have worked. But the lowest power scope in my group was 18x, with most around 25x and some up to 30x. Even at 18x, you could still clearly see the Point of Aim (POA) with precise granularity.

This seemed like a very clean approach to testing mechanical calibration, especially because each time I adjusted the scope to a point on the calibration target, I wouldn’t raise my head to check the knob until I was satisfied the crosshairs were perfectly aligned. This seemed like a very honest approach, and ensured I wasn’t inserting some kind of bias into the results. I ran through this test at least twice for every scope, and found my results were completely repeatable. This gives me a lot of confidence in the data.

The Results
While several scopes performed very well, only 4 scopes were perfect all the way through 20 mils of adjustment:

Hensoldt ZF 3.5-26×56
Kahles K 6-24×56
US Optics ER25 5-25×58
Valdada IOR RECON Tactical 4-28×50
I can’t say how impressive that is. After I had tested several scopes from big-name brands, I started to doubt whether it was even possible for a scope to be 100% accurate all the way out to 20 mils. I was recording variances down to a ½ click, which was 0.05 mils on most scopes. So at the extreme adjustment of 20 mils, that means an error as small as 1/4 of 1% was identified (0.05 mils ÷ 20.0 mils = 0.0025). But, even with that absurd level of scrutiny, there were still 4 scopes that were flawless all the way through 20 mils of elevation adjustment. Wow.

Most of the scopes had adjustments in mils/mrad, but a few were MOA, and the Zeiss Victory scope was actually in Shooter’s MOA. All were tested to approximately the same amount of overall travel and increments.

Best Scopes Reviews

Once again, you can see the Hensoldt, Kahles, US Optics, and Valdada all tested perfectly at 5, 10, 15, and 20 mils. But, you can see most of the scopes tested very well. The Leupold Mark 6 was only off by 1 click at 20 mils, and the Leupold Mark 8 was just 1/2 a click off at both 15 and 20 mils … which is very close to perfect. The Nightforce BEAST was off 1/2 click at 10 mils and 15 mils, and a full click at 20 mils. The Nightforce ATACR was dead on at 5 and 10 mils, but was off by 1 click at 15 mils and 1.5 at 20 mils.

I asked Nightforce how much the erector tube actually moves inside the scope body with each click of the turret, and while they said the exact amount varies by model, it would be around .007 inches per click for these scopes. That means that with each click the erectors are moving the tube by the width of a single hair. Honestly, considering that each click is making those microscopic adjustments, most of the scopes performed impressively … although some were better than others.

Many shooters don’t need to adjust beyond 10 mils, because that is enough adjustment to take most modern cartridges to 1,000 yards. Here is a little larger list with scopes that performed perfectly up to at least 10 mils:

Hensoldt ZF 3.5-26×56
Kahles K 6-24×56
Leupold Mark 6 3-18×44
Leupold Mark 8 3.5-25×56
Nightforce ATACR 5-25×56
US Optics ER25 5-25×58
Valdada IOR RECON Tactical 4-28×50
And here are few scopes that were very close to perfect up to 10 mils. These scopes weren’t off by more than a 1/2 click at either 5 mils or 10 mil adjustments, which is still great performance:

Bushnell Elite Tactical 3.5-21×50
Nightforce BEAST 5-25×56
Nightforce NXS 5.5-22×50
Schmidt and Bender PMII 5-25×56
Valdada IOR 3.5-18×50
Steiner Military 5-25×56
You might notice that the Leupold Mark 6, and Nightforce ATACR both have “2nd scope” by their label, and the March 3-24×42 scope has “Average of 2 scopes.” The first time I ran through the mechanical tests, those 3 test scopes showed more error than others in the test. I thought the results might be a result of a defective unit, so I contacted each manufacturer. First, I completely understand that it is impossible (and impractical) for every scope to be perfect, so I always want to give a manufacturer a chance to fix something like that before I publish results that may not be representative of the typical unit. At the same time, I’m committed to being completely transparent and honest with my readers. So if I run into something like this, I give the manufacturer a shot at fixing it, and then in the article I mention the issues I ran into and how it worked out in the end. That seems like the most respectful and fair approach for both the manufacturers and readers.

So Leupold, March, and Nightforce were all kind enough to send me another test scope (I didn’t have time to wait on the units I had to be repaired, since this project was already running behind schedule). When I retested the new Leupold Mark 6 and the Nightforce ATACR scopes, they both performed considerably better than the original scopes. The first Leupold Mark 6 had an average of 3.7% of error in the elevation adjustment through 20 mils, while the replacement performed stunningly with an average of just 0.1% of error. The Nightforce ATACR followed suit with the original coming in with an average of 1.8% of error in the elevation adjustment through 20 mils, and the replacement coming in with 0.4% of error. In both of those cases, I feel like it was an issue with the particular scope and the original results were not indicative of what you can reasonably expect from Leupold or Nightforce. Either of those companies would quickly repair any scopes that performed like the original set of scopes I tested. So in both cases, I’ve only included how the second scope performed in the charts and scoring.

However, the replacement March scope that Kelbly.com sent unfortunately didn’t follow that same pattern. In fact, while the 2nd March scope performed similar to the original, it was actually slightly worse overall. The original scope had an average of 2.2% of error in the elevation adjustment through 20 mils, and the replacement had an average of 2.7% of error. I really didn’t know exactly what to do with those results, because with similar results this didn’t seem to simply be due to a defective unit like the Leupold and Nightforce scopes. I decided the best approach was to simply average the results from both scopes and publish that as my results for the March scope.

Here is another way to look at the same data. In this chart, I looked at what percent each scope was off at each of the 4 adjustments and then averaged those together.

Tactical Scopes Reviews

One note here is that the Zeiss Victory Diavari 6-24×56 didn’t have enough elevation travel to reach the 4th adjustment. It had less overall elevation travel than the other scopes, and only adjusted 58” at 100 yards. The 4th adjustment here was around 72” at 100 yards. I didn’t want to decrease the range I was testing all the other scopes at just because the Zeiss didn’t have enough travel to get to the last adjustment, so I averaged the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd adjustments for the Zeiss here and just wanted to note that.

Does a 1% error matter?
While 1% isn’t much, this might depend on who you ask. Let’s look at a practical example to wrap our head around what that means. If it takes exactly 10.0 mils of elevation adjustment to hit at 1,000 yards (ballistics similar to a 308 Win), what does a 1% error do to our point of impact?

Long Range Scopes

For this example, 1% error essentially means you’re off by 1 click, and 2% error would be 2 clicks off. If you were shooting at a relatively small 1 MOA target, being off 1% would still result in a hit … as long as you perfectly accounted for all other variables. It would be 1.5” from the edge of the target, so there isn’t much margin for error. At 2%, you’d be well off target. In this example, a 1.5% error would push you off the edge of the plate.

Here is another example showing a 1.5% error for a 20 mil adjustment at a 1 mile target (ballistics similar to 338 Lapua Magnum). This example is shown with a larger 2 MOA target, since that’s more typical at that distance. You can see you’d be off plate at that distance, even on the larger target. Being off by 1.5% of 20 mils, is the same as being 3 clicks off (assuming 0.1 mil clicks).

1 Mile Rifle Scope

Although we’re talking about small numbers, there could be a hidden danger with these small errors. Bryan Litz explains:

“The importance of understanding sight adjustments can be illustrated with a very typical example that’s played out countless times in all disciplines of long range shooting. Let’s say a serious shooter diligently measures his muzzle velocity and all the atmospherics for his given location. He’s using a very accurate BC (hopefully referenced to the G7 standard), and he’s accounted for the sight height and even knows the cold bore zero of his rifle. He’s got a target at 1000 yards, and the carefully generated, ultra accurate firing solution tells him his bullet will have 314.1” of drop, which is exactly 30 MOA at that range. So he carefully turns his scope knobs up 30 MOA and fires. As he watches his bullet sail 2 feet over the target, he scoffs at the supposed accuracy of his expensive software and PDA and gives up on the possibility of reliable trajectory predictions altogether. The fall of the shot is noted in a log book, and revered as the true drop of the bullet at 1,000 yards for that rifle in those conditions, while the firing solutions of the PDA are from that day on, treated as an unreliable guideline of uncertain accuracy.” – Bryan Litz in Applied Ballistics for Long-Range Shooting

Even if the error isn’t enough to throw you off target, it still makes you question the accuracy of your ballistic solution. Error in scope adjustments is one of the most common reason someone’s firing solution doesn’t match up with their impacts in the field. Most shooters immediately start changing the inputs of their ballistics until it matches the number on the turret when they got a hit. They call it truing, but really, they’re adjusting the solution to better fit their erroneous turret. This can actually work … mostly. But it can also have unintended consequences, not the least of which is undermining your confidence in the computer-generated trajectory predictions.

Actual Results May Vary
I want to make it clear that these results shouldn’t be taken as universal. I tested one or two scopes of each model, and while this may provide a rough, ballpark idea of the mechanical calibration you can expect from different brands … you shouldn’t assume every scope will match these results. Actually testing your scope using the tall target test is one of the first steps of any serious shooter. There is no substitute for knowing how your scope tracks.

Enjoy this type of data-driven information? That’s what this website is all about. Sign-up to receive new posts via email.
Other Post in this Series
This is just one of a whole series of posts related to this high-end tactical scope field test. Here are links to the others:

Field Test Overview & Rifle Scope Line-Up Overview of how I came up with the tests, what scopes were included, and where each scope came from.
Optical Performance Results
Summary & Part 1: Provides summary and overall score for optical performance. Explain optical clarity was measured (i.e. image quality), and provides detailed results for those tests.
Part 2: Covers detailed results for measured field of view, max magnification, and zoom ratio.
Ergonomics & Experience Behind the Scope
Part 1: Side-by-side comparisons on topics like weight, size, eye relief, and how easy turrets are to use and read
Part 2 & Part 3: Goes through each scope highlighting the unique features, provides a demo video from the shooter’s perspective, and includes a photo gallery with shots from every angle.
Summary: Provides overall scores related to ergonomics and explains what those are based on.
Advanced Features
Reticles: See every tactical reticle offered on each scope.
Misc Features: Covers features like illumination, focal plane, zero stop, locking turrets, MTC, mil-spec anodozing, one-piece tubes
Warranty & Where They’re Made: Shows where each scope is made, and covers the details of the warranty terms and where the work is performed.
Summary: Overall scores related to advanced features and how those were calculated.
Mechanical Performance
Part 1: Shows how precisely calibrated the clicks are on each scope.
Part 2: Reticle cant, measured elevation travel for each scope, and other mechanical tests
Summary: Overall scores related to mechanical performance.
Summary & Overall Scores: Provides summary and overall score for entire field test.
© Copyright 2018, All Rights Reserved.
3
Long-range i streljastvo / Re: Kako uci u LR streljastvo?
« Last post by toske on January 18, 2018, 04:44:24 PM »
Možeš da se učlaniš kod nas u Streljački klub "GT", mi imamo sekciju u Klubu za dalekometno streljaštvo i za sada jedini organizujemo takmičenje na 1000 metara, ali i na manjim daljinama.
4
Znanje na poklon / Re: MALA SKOLA RUCNOG PUNJENJA BY DEVIJANTNA LICNOST
« Last post by Snowman on January 16, 2018, 01:18:09 AM »
Odlucili smo se za SPUHR montazu za sve nase mehanicke testove. To jeste najskuplja montaza, ali radi-li-ga-radi, tj. nema shanse da teleskop mrda u toj montazi.

Spuhr Scope Mount

Spuhr montaze imaju neke kvalitete, koje su nam bile od narocite vaznosti za ovaj test. Te montaze su iz jednog dijela koji je napravljen iz jednog bloka aluminija. - sto opet znaci da nije potrebno smirglati prstenove. To u stvari znaci da se prstenovi ne prave posebno, nego su zajedno s bazom izrezani iz istog bloka aluminija : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JDytytj7m1k .


Samim time sto se montaza ( ukljucujuci i prstenove ), izreze iz istog bloka metala, nema nikakvog xtresa na tubus teleskopa.
Taj stres na tubus je neminovan kod prstenova koji se prave nezavisno od baze. U tom scenariju - dolazi do ogrebotina na tubusu, distorcije koncanice + teskoca u podesavanju. SPUHR montaza ima integrisanu vaser-vagu ( bubble level ) sto pomaze kod niveliranja montaze.



Nevjerovatni su ti Beogradzani s Crvenog Krsta. Neki od njih ( Beogradzana s Crvenog Krsta ) imaju problema s Piratima, i evo kako su rijesili taj problemchich : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nWklz-zGvf0


Iako Spuhr nudi  29 razlicitih one-piece picatinny modela
( u stvari, ovaj tekst je iz 2014. SPUHR sada nudi vise od 29 modela ), ima kojekakvih odioznih teleskopa koji traze nestandardne montaze, recimo
Valdada IOR RECON Tactical 4-28×50 ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F2gHnmpjfWU ) ima nestandardni tubus od 40 mm, tako da smo zxa montiranje koristili prstenove koje proizvodi  American Rifle Company ( https://www.americanrifle.com/ ).

Drugi odiozni teleskop je bio US Optics ER25 5-25×58 ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J1Zfc3Kn_zM )
koji ima neobicno dugacak turret box ( to mu dodje kao kutija mjenjacha : https://www.google.ca/search?q=us+optics+turret+box+image&rlz=1C1GGRV_enCA751CA752&tbm=isch&source=iu&ictx=1&fir=wXGThsNe9t5mdM%253A%252CD1_PLDF1exGLFM%252C_&usg=__DnkEfSjBG-FQz4EoeFO9Z6Es6To%3D&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiVvN6Ij-PYAhWNq1MKHfSWCaEQ9QEIKzAB#imgrc=aU6JFFQCKVqcAM: )
i nije se mogao uglaviti ni u jednu od 6 SPUHR montaza, koje su nam bile na raspolaganju, tako da smo morali koristiti  US Optics pestenove.


Horus CATS Scope Test Target 0280F

( https://www.google.ca/search?q=Horus+CATS+Scope+Test+Target+0280F+image&rlz=1C1GGRV_enCA751CA752&tbm=isch&source=iu&ictx=1&fir=ufbXQKHL9jc4SM%253A%252CNCvhLPcCSTRqMM%252C_&usg=__gWrxMzDNDF0sByJiz7AAc_Pvr8k%3D&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiIqoef3t_YAhVOSt8KHeK_DQoQ9QEIKzAA#imgrc=ufbXQKHL9jc4SM: )


Umjesto da koristimo standardne mete, kakve koristi Brajko, tj. 4' visoke mete s vertikalnom linijom, koristili smo
Horus Calibration and Training System (CATS) mete, koje su napravljene za testiranje optickih instrumenata.

Te mete su iz  0280F MIL/TMOA serije + ogrrrrrrrrrrrrromne : 8 stopa visoke i 3 stope siroke.

Ovdje cemo napraviti malu digresiju. Iako je MRAD de-facto standard + mnogo logicniji sistem za upotrebu, od MOA, ipak i tu vlada nesto zbrke, a naravno, zahvaljujuci Amerima, koji, kako je vec objasnjeno ne vare metricki sistem. Naime, Ameri cesto miliradijanom zovu JEDNU DESETINU ( 0.1 mil iliti 1/10 miliradijana ), a zato jer KLIK na tockicima Mil/Mil teleskopa, klikuje NE MRAD, nego 0.1 MRAD iliti 1 cm/100 m.
Mislim, da ce definitivno pomoci da se Postovanom Publikumu, objasni istorijat, lik i delo, NATO MRAD standarda.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milliradian

 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> :


A milliradian, often called a mil or mrad, is an SI derived unit ( The International System of Units assigns special names to 22 derived units, which includes two dimensionless derived units, the radian (rad) and the steradian (sr).

 ) for angular measurement which is defined as a thousandth of a radian (0.001 radian). Mils are used in adjustment of firearm sights by adjusting the angle of the sight compared to the barrel (up, down, left or right). Mils are also used for comparing shot groupings, or to compare the difficulty of hitting different sized shooting targets at different distances. When using a scope with both mil adjustment and a reticle with mil markings (called a mil/mil scope), the shooter can use the reticle as a "ruler" to count the number of mils a shot was off target which directly translates to the sight adjustment needed to hit the target with a follow up shot. Optics with mil markings in the reticle can also be used to make a range estimation of a known size target, or vice versa to determine a target size if the distance is known, a practice called "milling".

Milliradians are generally used for very small angles, which allows for precise mathematical simplifications to more easily calculate back and forth between the angular separation observed in an optic, linear subtension on target and range. In such applications it is useful to use a unit for target size that is a thousandth of the unit for range, for instance by using the metric units millimeters for target size and meters for range. This coincides with the definition of the milliradian where the arc length is defined as
1
/
1000
 of the radius. A common adjustment value in firearm sights is 1 cm at 100 meters which equals
10 mm
/
100 m
 =
1
/
10
 mil.

The true definition of a milliradian is based on a unit circle with a radius of one and an arc divided into 1000 mils per radian, hence 2000π or approximately 6283.185 milliradians in one turn, and rifle scope adjustments and reticles are calibrated to this definition.[1] There are also other definitions used for land mapping and artillery which are rounded to more easily be divided into smaller parts for use with compasses. For instance there are artillery sights and compasses with 6400 NATO mils, 6000 Warsaw Pact mils or 6300 Swedish "streck" per turn instead of 360° or 2000π, achieving higher resolution than a 360° compass while also being easier to divide into parts than if true milliradians were used.

Range in
meters
   1 mil subtension in mm   ​1⁄10 mil subtension in mm   1 mil subtension in cm   ​1⁄10 mil subtension in cm
 100 m                   100 mm                            10 mm                             10 cm                         1 cm   
 200 m                   200 mm                            20 mm                             20 cm                         2 cm
 300 m                   300 mm                            30 mm                             30 cm                         3 cm
 400 m                   400 mm                            40 mm                             40 cm                         4 cm
 500 m                   500 mm                            50 mm                             50 cm                         5 cm
 600 m                   600 mm                            60 mm                             60 cm                         6 cm
 700 m                   700 mm                            70 mm                             70 cm                         7 cm
 800 m                   800 mm                            80 mm                             80 cm                         8 cm
 900 m                   900 mm                            90 mm                             90 cm                         9 cm
1000 m                 1000 mm                          100 mm                           100 cm                       10 cm


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milliradian#/media/File:Pso-1onsvd.jpg 

A PSO-1 telescopic sight mounted on a Dragunov SVD rifle. The top center "chevron" (^) is used as the main aiming mark. The horizontal hash marks are for windage and lead corrections and can be used for ranging purposes as well. In the bottom-left corner is a stadiametric rangefinder that can be used to determine the distance from a 1.7 meters (5 ft 6.9 in) tall object/person from 200 m (2) to 1000 m (10). For this the lowest part of the target is lined up on the bottom horizontal line. Where the top of the target touches the top curved line the distance can be determined. The three lower chevrons in the center are used as hold over points for engaging erea targets beyond 1,000 meters (the maximum BDC range setting on the elevation drum). The user has to set the elevation turret to 1,000 meters and then apply the chevrons for 1,100, 1,200 or 1,300 meters respectively. The 10 reticle hashmarks in the horizontal plane can be used to compensate for wind or moving targets and can also be used for additional stadiametric rangefinding purposes, since they are spaced at 1 milliradian intervals, meaning if an object is 5 m wide it will appear 10 hashmarks wide at 500 m. This reticle lay out is also used in several other telescopic sights produced and used by other former Warsaw Pact member states. The PSO-1 reticule can be illuminated by a small battery-powered lamp.


Amount : 25 angular mils (mil of angle)
Equals : 84.38 minutes (' , MOA / angle)
Fraction : 84 19/50 minutes (' , MOA / angle)


Image result for mil to moa conversionwww.impactdatabooks.com
There are 21,600 MOA in a circle, so a little quick division determines there are 3.4377 MOA per mil. At 100 yards, 3.4377 MOA equals 3.599 inches (3.4377 x 1.047). Rounded up, one mil equals 3.6 inches at 100 yards.Feb 18, 2011


Series targets, which are enormous at 8 foot tall by 3 foot wide. They feature a 25 mil ladder (and an 83 MOA ladder) in the vertical direction. This target was specifically designed to validate the accuracy and repeatability of the numerical values and the click adjustment on a scope’s elevation knob. It also provides an extremely accurate method to check cant.

Horus has their CATS targets printed by a drafting company, instead of a typical printing company. Although drafting companies are much more expensive, they have intense tolerances to ensure the scales are ridiculously precise.

The enormous CATS target allowed me to more than double the elevation range tested. Since all of these high-end scopes are designed for long-range, I didn’t want to just test up to 30 MOA. Instead, I tested in 5 mil increments up to 20 mils (i.e. 5 mils, 10 mils, 15 mils, and 20 mils). I had similar increment sizes for the few MOA scopes I tested, with those going up to 70 MOA. 20 mils is 72” at 100 yards, and 70 MOA is 73.29” at 100 yards. And the Zeiss Victory scope actually had clicks that were 1/4 inch at 100 yards, which is more commonly referred to as Shooter’s MOA. I found a way to accurately calibrate that scope using this target as well. So the elevation adjustments tested were similar regardless of the units. Any error present in a scope’s adjustment is compounded with each turn of the turret, so I wanted to push these scopes to see what they’re capable of.

The setup of this test is extremely important. First, the distance to the target has to be precisely 100.00 yards. To do that I used a Leica Disto E7400x Laser Distance Meter ( https://www.itm.com/product/leica-disto-e7400x-laser-distance-meter-120m?gclid=CjwKCAiAhfzSBRBTEiwAN-ysWB3bomhGwgrr_tys9o2V1c_d0VBM4PLH9MREo3vNGvfZKtbD1QYmuxoC01sQAvD_BwE ) , which is accurate to ± 0.1 mm. That should do! This isn’t a typical rangefinder, because it only reads out to 400 feet. It is a precision instrument used in the construction industry, and it’s far more accurate than using a steel tape or survey chain that could deflect or follow the contour of the land.
5
Long-range i streljastvo / Re: Kako uci u LR streljastvo?
« Last post by ompdux on January 11, 2018, 11:08:41 PM »
Eh, svestan sam da je bilo sta vezano za posedovanje oruzja u Srbiji juris na vetrenjace od samog starta. Opet moze i gore da bude kao u nekim drzavama tako da nisam siguran da li da se zalim ili da cutim.

Dakle moze clanstvo u bilo kom streljackom klubu? To dosta olaksava stvari. Jos jedno pitanje vezano za te kurseve za rukovanje eksplozivnim materijalima. Da li se zna gde to moze da se poloci? Cena jeste nerealna ali verujem da se na duze staze isplati sto finansijski sto u smislu manjih grupa na papiru.
6
Long-range i streljastvo / Re: Kako uci u LR streljastvo?
« Last post by Ljudmila on January 11, 2018, 11:02:35 PM »
Koliko ja znam moras da budes clan streljackog kluba,ne mora pod obavezno da ima u sebi naziv dalekometno steljastvo(long range),na primer "streljacki klub Soko",a punjenje municije u kucnjoj varijanti je dozvoljeno i kod nas samo sto moras da prodjes obuku za rukovanje eksplozivnim materijalima itd,itd, a i cena obuke je prava "sitnica" , negde oko 33000 dinara,cista globa,registracija oruzija "C" kategorije je bila 800 dinara a kada su videli da se samo to uglavnom i prodaje odmah su digli na 1850 dinara,sta reci,lopovska druzina upravlja drzavom i ne zna kako da puni budzet osim dizanjem poreza i taksi da opeljese jos vise ovaj siromasni narod.
7
Long-range i streljastvo / Re: Kako uci u LR streljastvo?
« Last post by ompdux on January 11, 2018, 10:34:32 PM »
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zACesi2KiLU&t=646s
 Ako vladas engleskim jezikom u prvih par minuta ovog video klipa ti je sustina.

Twingi hvala na videu. Odgledao sam masu ovakvih klipova, manje vise ceo kanal Tiborasaurusrex-a (inace preporucujem da overite ako niste), subovan sam na 8541 Tactical i sl. Mene vise interesuje kako procedura ide kod nas u Srbiji. Da sam u americi, vec bi sastavljao reloading presu u garazi.

Da budem malo precizniji i konkretniji,

Po onome sto sam uspeo da procitam o novom zakonu o oruzju i municiji, postoje dva nacina da se dodje do dozvole za karabin.

Jedna je da se bude clan sportskog drustva i time obezbedi dozvola za sportski karabin (sto ja cenim da je optimalna varijanta), a druga je da se bude clan lovackog drustva s tim sto u tom slucaju treba proci obuku za lovca i ko zna sta jos (sto se meni iskreno ne radi bas iako sam obozavam lov i bavio sam se time jedno vreme preko).

Dakle potrebno je da budem clan nekog kluba. Po onome sto sam ja uspeo da iskopam po netu, kod nas ima masa IPSC klubova ali nisam jos nasao nijedan klub posvecen bas LR streljastvu. Pretpostavljam da je moje pitanje da li postoji takav neki klub, to jest kako se vi aktivni strelci organizujete?

Iskreno nadam se da ne davim sa ovim pitanjima ali stvarno nemam gde drugde da postavim. Ovo je bukvalno jedina online zajednica kod nas za ovu temu, bar sto sam ja uspeo da nadjem.

Kad krenem sa celom ovom pricom, voleo bih da zabelezim uredno korak po korak kako je isao proces da bi mozda sutra neko kao ja imao sve resurse na jednom mestu.

8
Karabini / Re: Beegara B14
« Last post by ompdux on January 11, 2018, 10:24:23 PM »
Bergaru je ranije uvozio Balkan hanter,ovaj model b14 je bio oko 90000 dinara,nadji na internetu broj radnje pa pozovi.

Hvala Ljudmila, uputicu im poziv ovih dana.
9
Karabini / Re: Beegara B14
« Last post by Ljudmila on January 11, 2018, 05:24:23 PM »
Bergaru je ranije uvozio Balkan hanter,ovaj model b14 je bio oko 90000 dinara,nadji na internetu broj radnje pa pozovi.
10
Long-range i streljastvo / Re: Kako uci u LR streljastvo?
« Last post by twingi on January 11, 2018, 12:28:41 PM »
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zACesi2KiLU&t=646s
 Ako vladas engleskim jezikom u prvih par minuta ovog video klipa ti je sustina.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10