![]() I use to level our robot test stands with a calibrated machinist level and then check these cheap plastic bubble levels from time to time and tossed many of them out. Working with those style of bubble levels for the past 15 year I can say that they are anything but accurate. ![]() Originally Posted By: cmacclelOriginally Posted By: abersfelderamiHow accurate is a 1" long bubble level? I am always interested in the scope to the gun and shooter relationship though. Some of you know me and know that I don't get to shoot a lot. Has anyone ever figured out which way would be better? Say if your reticle was 3 degrees canted, would you be better off to level using the plumb line or the scope to gun method? It seems to me that depending on the type of shooting you are doing that would be the deciding factor for which method of leveling you would use if indeed you had a scope that had some serious cant to the reticle. ![]() If you level the scope to the gun as long as you were to use the center aiming point you could move the turrets as you would stay on track but if you used holdovers you would start to veer away from your inteded target(s). But as soon as you dialed the turrets any decent amount you would start to veer off your intended target(s). In this case as long as you used the holdover points and didn't touch the turrets you would be accurate. If you use a plumb line and the gun is level you now have the reticle plumb to the bore. It seems to me that if the scope to reticle cant is off an appreciable amount you will have either one or two issues: Guys, I would like to chime in here for a second. Re: using a plumb line to align the scope ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |