Mathmatician needed ....

[Greg Culpepper]

Its been pointed out but worth repeating that the mechanical motion of elevation adjustment must be in the vertical plane to prevent the introduction of windage error. This is not neccessarily the same thing as getting the crosshairs lined up. The crosshairs should be but are frequently not indexed exactly to the mechanism of the scope at the time of manufacture. If you set the scope on the rifle so the mechanism is lined up with the bore and the crosshairs are not you're going to cant the rifle to get the view through the scope to look right and you'll get your windage error right back. The scope needs to be right itself.

Greg

 

[Larry Willis]

The crosshairs should be but are frequently not indexed exactly to the mechanism of the scope at the time of manufacture.
Greg

Greg ....
I understand exactly what you're saying, and theoretically I agree. However, there gets to be a point of splitting hairs that goes a little over the top for most of us.

There is a manufacturer that makes (2) levels that has one sitting on top of the scope turret for scope alignment. I agree that it would not take the internal mechanism of the scope into consideration. My design is different. This shows what my scope level looks like when mounted for scope alignment (or for shooting). My level compares the crosshair to the surface of your scope base, and in actual shooting, the potential difference in windage error would be too small to measure even at 1,000 yards.

However, it's always good to hear all sides of the puzzle. Thanks for the math lesson. I must have been out shooting when during that class was going on.

- Innovative

 

[Boyd Allen]

I have had one for years, and wouldn't be without it. Using it and a Kokopelli lapping bar I can do a pretty fair job of mounting a scope.