Calguns.net  

Home My iTrader Join the NRA Donate to CGSSA Sponsors CGN Google Search
CA Semiauto Ban(AW)ID Flowchart CA Handgun Ban ID Flowchart CA Shotgun Ban ID Flowchart
Go Back   Calguns.net > FIREARMS DISCUSSIONS > Optics, Mounts, Rails and Sights
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

Optics, Mounts, Rails and Sights If it aims your firearm, post about it here.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 10-24-2013, 5:00 PM
josh250's Avatar
josh250 josh250 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: So Cal
Posts: 415
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Default Scope Problems/Canting Crosshairs?

Hello everyone. I just got back from the range today after attempting to zero my rifle scope. I had many problems but was able to get groups within 3inches at 100 yards(bad i know). This is my second attempt at zeroing a scope on a rifle. I think my mistake may have been anticipating recoil and pulling off target. I also wasn't able to get perfect eye relief and as a result my cheek weld was too far forward and I ended up getting a nice hard tap from the scope onto the top of my left brow about 5 times. Had it not been for my eye protection, i think i may have cut my brow.

So I get home and want to check my eye relief. As I turn the scopes power down, i notice it feels odd. I look into the scope and my crosshairs are now canted. I check to see if the scope tube is loose, but everything is fine. The back of the scope (not sure of the name) is actually screwing off. I tighten it down as far to the right as possible, now its tight, but the cross hairs are totally canted.

Any solution to my problem would be greatly appreciated. I'm totally new to rifle scopes and am learning as I go, so please excuse my lack of knowledge on the subject. The scope is a inexpensive Bushnell Trophy 73-3940 3-9x40 that was handed down to me.

Last edited by josh250; 10-24-2013 at 5:55 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 10-24-2013, 5:42 PM
Merc1138 Merc1138 is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 19,560
iTrader: 9 / 100%
Default

No logo or indicator of manufacturer on the scope at all? Got a pic?

If you're talking about the rear most part that you look through(ocular end), there is typically a focus ring specifically for focusing the reticle that you should use. Odds are there's a separate lock ring as well to screw down against it so it doesn't move as easily. This should have been explained in the manual it came with.

How far canted are the crosshairs? Are we talking a couple of degrees or something wonky like a 45 degree tilt? Did you torque the rings to spec?
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 10-24-2013, 5:59 PM
brando's Avatar
brando brando is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Woodside
Posts: 3,673
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

If your scope is coming apart, you've purchased a piece of crap.
__________________
--Brando

If you’re driven by partisan tribalism more than ideology, if getting in rhetorical digs at liberals thrills you more than persuading adversaries or achieving policy victories, it makes sense that you would fight substantively inconsequential battles with no more or less vigor than any other…
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 10-24-2013, 6:02 PM
josh250's Avatar
josh250 josh250 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: So Cal
Posts: 415
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Default

Thanks Merc, for clarifying the ocular end for me. I also updated the post with the scope info.

Yes the rings are nice and tight and the tube is not moving. The focus ring is not the object that i am referring to. Its actually the whole ocular end. The crosshairs can be moved beyond 45degrees, its pretty extreme. I think i can unscrew the ocular end off if i keep unscrewing.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 10-24-2013, 6:06 PM
josh250's Avatar
josh250 josh250 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: So Cal
Posts: 415
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by brando View Post
If your scope is coming apart, you've purchased a piece of crap.
I really hope your right, lol. I want know for a fact that its a piece of crap and purchase a new one, than have a decent, inexpensive, scope in my hands, then trash it because I don't know much about the scope.

Last edited by josh250; 10-24-2013 at 6:23 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 10-24-2013, 6:33 PM
brando's Avatar
brando brando is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Woodside
Posts: 3,673
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Here's a good rule of thumb about scope values:

sub-$500 = crap, don't expect much. Save for .22LR plinking

sub-$1000 = economical, probably lacking in durability and optical quality, but great for overall plinking (ie not risking your life)

sub-$2000 = good value, average quality across the board with the occasional outlier (IOR optical quality or Bushnell tactical features)

sub-$3000 = quality of features goes up, better optical quality, feature rich, more durable, solid overall (ie don't be afraid to mount to a magnum).

That's a pretty loose breakdown based on my personal experience. Everyone has different budgets to work with and different needs in a scope, so your mileage may vary. FWIW, I ran a sub-$1000 on my 10/22, a sub-$2000 on my Mk12 clone, and sub-$3000 scopes on my bolt guns (with the occasional $3000+ scope because I can afford to be picky).
__________________
--Brando

If you’re driven by partisan tribalism more than ideology, if getting in rhetorical digs at liberals thrills you more than persuading adversaries or achieving policy victories, it makes sense that you would fight substantively inconsequential battles with no more or less vigor than any other…
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 10-24-2013, 6:49 PM
josh250's Avatar
josh250 josh250 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: So Cal
Posts: 415
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by brando View Post
Here's a good rule of thumb about scope values:

sub-$500 = crap, don't expect much. Save for .22LR plinking

sub-$1000 = economical, probably lacking in durability and optical quality, but great for overall plinking (ie not risking your life)

sub-$2000 = good value, average quality across the board with the occasional outlier (IOR optical quality or Bushnell tactical features)

sub-$3000 = quality of features goes up, better optical quality, feature rich, more durable, solid overall (ie don't be afraid to mount to a magnum).

That's a pretty loose breakdown based on my personal experience. Everyone has different budgets to work with and different needs in a scope, so your mileage may vary. FWIW, I ran a sub-$1000 on my 10/22, a sub-$2000 on my Mk12 clone, and sub-$3000 scopes on my bolt guns (with the occasional $3000+ scope because I can afford to be picky).
Wow, thanks for that breakdown Brando.

I've read you should spend more on your glass than you did on your rifle, and your breakdown seems to concur with that.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 10-24-2013, 6:55 PM
brando's Avatar
brando brando is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Woodside
Posts: 3,673
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

You should be willing to spend more on glass. It's sometimes not necessary and there are mitigating factors. It doesn't mean everything that's not S&B or Nightforce is crap nor that highend scopes are what everyone should be getting. Far from that. But having realistic expectations is important and unfortunately when you go cheap, it ends up costing you in the long run in most cases.
__________________
--Brando

If you’re driven by partisan tribalism more than ideology, if getting in rhetorical digs at liberals thrills you more than persuading adversaries or achieving policy victories, it makes sense that you would fight substantively inconsequential battles with no more or less vigor than any other…
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 10-24-2013, 7:10 PM
brando's Avatar
brando brando is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Woodside
Posts: 3,673
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Here's a good read for you....

http://www.shootingvoodoo.com/index....ics_selection/
__________________
--Brando

If you’re driven by partisan tribalism more than ideology, if getting in rhetorical digs at liberals thrills you more than persuading adversaries or achieving policy victories, it makes sense that you would fight substantively inconsequential battles with no more or less vigor than any other…
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 10-24-2013, 7:56 PM
josh250's Avatar
josh250 josh250 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: So Cal
Posts: 415
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by brando View Post
That was a very informative article. It was so informative I now have more questions than I did before, and that's always a good thing. I'm going to do some more digging around and research as much as possible. Thanks for the great reference.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 4:07 PM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Proudly hosted by GeoVario the Premier 2A host.
Calguns.net, the 'Calguns' name and all associated variants and logos are ® Trademark and © Copyright 2002-2016, Calguns.net an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.