Is a scope level needed?

[Unofficial Gun Addict (UGA)]

Perhaps for distances out past 600 yards... A level might be necessary, I'm not sure. However, the human eye is incredible and the ability to visually determine whether the reticle is squared up even while the gun is not, is not challenging. At extreme long distances, perhaps, but I know that when I focus on the reticle and adjust it so that I square it up... I can shoot out to at least 600 yards without drift right or left due to cant. Spin drift obviously does create drift, but once accounted for, visual inspection and adjustment of the crosshairs is sufficient to place 6 shot groups where they need to go. Perhaps if a persons spacial awareness skills aren't great... Then a level might be necessary, or at extreme long distance... But under most circumstances, I personally don't believe a level in the field is required, just one when setting up the scope initially.

Now some sort of angle indicator is a whole other matter... Especially as angle and distance increase.

 

[jmitchell135]

Perhaps for distances out past 600 yards... A level might be necessary, I'm not sure. However, the human eye is incredible and the ability to visually determine whether the reticle is squared up even while the gun is not, is not challenging. At extreme long distances, perhaps, but I know that when I focus on the reticle and adjust it so that I square it up... I can shoot out to at least 600 yards without drift right or left due to cant. Spin drift obviously does create drift, but once accounted for, visual inspection and adjustment of the crosshairs is sufficient to place 6 shot groups where they need to go. Perhaps if a persons spacial awareness skills aren't great... Then a level might be necessary, or at extreme long distance... But under most circumstances, I personally don't believe a level in the field is required, just one when setting up the scope initially.

Now some sort of angle indicator is a whole other matter... Especially as angle and distance increase.

As I previously stated, I would like to see some other's findings by actually going out and printing on paper. You will be extremely surprised by your findings, especially in uncomfortable field positions.

 

[idaho elk hunter]

Not arguing either way but lets put this to a test. Hopefully a few of you will join in. I have done it and proved to myself, on paper, in real life, which works and which doesn't.

Next time you go to the range, get a tall piece of paper and post it up. Put your target all the way to the bottom. shoot a group on your target. Spin your turret up 20-30moa or so. now shoot another group using the original target at the bottom as an aiming point. Now use a 4' level or plumb bob to see how straight up and down your groups are.

I hope a few of you do this and we can get some real data.

Yep, you said it best. PAPER!

 

[cohunter14]

I agree with everything Phorwath said. Until I mounted a level on my gun, I never knew how far off I was. An easy test to see if you can get a gun level is to mount it to your shoulder and try to level it without looking at a bubble level. Then check the level and see how good you are. This might be easier to do when shooting off a bench or on flat ground, but I can tell you that what I think is level and what actually is level is not always close. As someone else also said, there have been times where I look at my rifle and wonder if the level is off, then I realize it is just me and I am that far off.

Maybe I am alone in that, but I doubt it. Bottom line: why not use a cheap and easy to use tool like this to take the questioning out of it? Long range hunting is a lot easier when you eliminate variables that can cause mistakes. If I have a choice of taking a shot with or without the level, I will take the level every time to eliminate that variable.

 

[bigngreen]

I personally don't know a single long range shooter who is capable of long range COLD BORE shooting who does not us a level. Many times I'm on when I set up but every once in a while due to terrain I'll find I'm not even close. I have a spot I shoot set up with targets from 900 yards to 1890 yards, the lay of the land will put every single person canting right and you will NOT touch a target cold bore without a level.
I use Hollands levels of set to the weak side, I simply shift my eye slightly and I check the level with my of eye, no breaking of position. I've checked level while putting rounds through a bull elk and it was no hindrance. I use a level on my walk around rig also, reference level and I can keep it as I track with an animal, most times I'm close but sometimes I'm not.

At 600 yards a 6 degree cant on my 308 will yield a 2.1 MOA windage error, at 1000 yards it's a 4 MOA windage error.

Some are content with missing and blaming it on the wind and walking the next rounds in, some miss and ask themselves what the heck just happened and how do I fix it. A cheap level is all it takes to take one major possible error out of your windage allowing you to focus on actually learning to read wind!

 

[Pdvdh]

I personally don't know a single long range shooter who is capable of long range COLD BORE shooting who does not us a level. Many times I'm on when I set up but every once in a while due to terrain I'll find I'm not even close. I have a spot I shoot set up with targets from 900 yards to 1890 yards, the lay of the land will put every single person canting right and you will NOT touch a target cold bore without a level.

Shooters that focus their efforts on extended range shooting, like the 900 - 1890yds in bigngreen's Post, know the consequences of their canted rifles from actual experience. However there is no mystery to the cause and effect of canted rifle-caused POI error. Canted rifle caused errors in POI can be precisely pre-determined (calculated), the same as windage, elevation, and coriolis sources of error. So there's no debate on the effect a canted rifle will have on point of impact.

The only subject up for debate, is do you think you have a special innate ability to keep your rifle plumb vertical in all environmental and topographic settings, simply based on your keen sense of level. Good luck with that...

At closer distances you can even hold your rifle horizontal with little ill-effect. I once shot a black bear in alders by doing exactly that, because the topography was miserably steep and uneven and the alder limbs were all laying horizontal. The only opening I was able to find was a horizontal window free of alder limbs. The shot was, obviously, relatively close range.

 

[MontanaMarine]

When I put levels on my LR rigs, my wind calls sure did improve.....grin.

I didn't appreciate how much I was canting the rifle. My brain thought I was level, but I wasn't. I suspect being in uneven terrain without any visual references is tougher than being on relatively flat ground, with a flat skyline, target frames, berms, or other reference to level that the brain would subconsciously work with.

 

[CBS]

Perhaps for distances out past 600 yards... A level might be necessary, I'm not sure. However, the human eye is incredible and the ability to visually determine whether the reticle is squared up even while the gun is not, is not challenging. At extreme long distances, perhaps, but I know that when I focus on the reticle and adjust it so that I square it up... I can shoot out to at least 600 yards without drift right or left due to cant. Spin drift obviously does create drift, but once accounted for, visual inspection and adjustment of the crosshairs is sufficient to place 6 shot groups where they need to go. Perhaps if a persons spacial awareness skills aren't great... Then a level might be necessary, or at extreme long distance... But under most circumstances, I personally don't believe a level in the field is required

I have been in your shoes and it took real life experience to change my mind. two things I think you may reevaluate:
1- your eyes are not as good at determining level as you think. I was in your shoes a few years ago and thought my buddy was wasteful in buying a level. On a hunting trip i grabbed his rifle to take a shot at a distant rock. I Have always thought I had a keen eye for "level". at 750 yds I leveled the rifle on very uneven ground at a target that was on a sloping hill. I then checked his level fully expecting it to confirm that I was a master of "level".......I am now aware that I am just like everyone else and and do not have any super human ability to determine "level" in hunting situations and have installed levels in almost every rifle i own.

2- spin drift is not having as much affect on your shots as you think at those ranges. If you are experiencing "spin drift" under 750 yds you are misreading the target. It is cant that is the culprit.

 

[Canadian Bushman]

Absolutely necessary and used on every shot!

Terrain will play awful tricks on your eyes and without a level you will never know.
Very few things in nature are perfectly flat or round.

 

[EXPRESS]

I think that the reason everyone's opinions differs on this is because our perception also differs.
I need a level on most rifles. I think it has to do with how I settle them into my shoulder, but it's also my perception of what is plumb. It's wired because I'm good at gauging and eyeballingeasurents, as well as what is level and plumb in construction. But once I get the tunnel vision effect of the scope, I my perception of level goes off plumb, interestingly enough, by about he same amount, to the same side.
Each to their own. I would like to install a tiny bubble level flush into my stock where I can see it without having to lose sight picture.

 

[Unofficial Gun Addict (UGA)]

I have been in your shoes and it took real life experience to change my mind. two things I think you may reevaluate:
1- your eyes are not as good at determining level as you think. I was in your shoes a few years ago and thought my buddy was wasteful in buying a level. On a hunting trip i grabbed his rifle to take a shot at a distant rock. I Have always thought I had a keen eye for "level". at 750 yds I leveled the rifle on very uneven ground at a target that was on a sloping hill. I then checked his level fully expecting it to confirm that I was a master of "level".......I am now aware that I am just like everyone else and and do not have any super human ability to determine "level" in hunting situations and have installed levels in almost every rifle i own.

2- spin drift is not having as much affect on your shots as you think at those ranges. If you are experiencing "spin drift" under 750 yds you are misreading the target. It is cant that is the culprit.

CBS... Out of curiosity, I decided to see if what you are saying matches up with my field experience by examining my first sighting in of my tikka t3 tactical out to 600 yards. The gun had already been sighted both at 100 and 200 yards, a velocity average was put into my dope solution and I was verifying dope out to 600 as this is the actual maximum distance I wanted to be shooting.

My horizontal zero was dead on at both 100 & 200 and I was working with these first 6 shots to see where I was vertically, so I could sort out my elevation dope at 600. Spin drift was disabled in my android version of Shooter. This summer when I started working up these loads, I, like you, didn't think that spin drift would have any meaningful effect on my shots out to 600 yards. I was using a 168 VLD Hunting bullets, over 42.8 gr of Varget, muzzle velocity estimated at 2540fps.

If you look at the target attached, you'll see that my shots group around 2.5" to the right of center. Barrel is a right 1in11. Spin drift at 600 yards with this setup actually accounts for 2.2" shift right. So without a level, and just squaring up the reticle by eye... It appears that cant isn't an issue. The shift right was due to spin drift and had I taken this into account for my dope, these shots would have grouped vertically center, albeit, about 7" low. I must admit I was on a fairly flat surface shooting at a hill in the distance, so if I was on uneven terrain, perhaps I might find cant creeping into the works, but as I said before... it just doesn't seem that challenging to true up my scope by eye at least out to 600. I'll find out if I experience issues as distance increases as I'm intending to get some 215 hybrids worked up for my 300wm to shoot out to 1k. Something that I'll definitely keep my eye on now that this has been brought up...

...and yes, pun absolutely intended!

 

[EXPRESS]

Another consideration; that the distance doesn't my make it any harder to level your reticle. Given that at liger distance you usually have more in the reticle, there is more to take reference from.
Obviously at longer ranges any error will be exaggerated, but I thinks it's just as easy to misjudge the level at 200 yards in unfamiliar mountain terrain on a slope than it is further out, but the difference it will make to you shot is going to be almost negligible.

One trick I have used for hunting in the mountains is to look at the animals' forelegs, from a broadside view they will usually be plumb.

 

[Greyfox]

I have either a Holland or Flatline on my LR rigs. For quick close hunting shots ithe circumstances dictate whether I use it or not.For shots beyond 500 yards I always use one. With practice can be quickly checked in your secondary vision if it is properly placed. It becomes very necessary when shooting in uneven terrain. IMO.

 

[Tikkamike]

I have spend hundreds of dollars on levels in the past and I agree with the theory and feel that if they are truly alligned correctly they will help.. however for me it just didnt seem practical. I do a little long range shooting (not as much as I used to(long range being anything over 600 yards) and I just never got to where it was part of the fluid motion of shooting. when I am shooting a lot and feel proficient at say 1000 yards I have not felt like the level made a difference that I could see.