Leupold VX5 HD 3-15x44 Tracking Test

[alf]

Hi, what is a 22-204? Is that just a 222 mag?

No....not even close.....

Here's a visual of the different 22 caliber cases for comparison:

221 FB - 222 - 223 - 223 AI - 222 RM - 22-204 - 22-204 w/80 VLD - 22 Dasher - 22x47 Lapua

 

[LeddSlinger]

Typical amount of Leupold tracking error. It will get the job done for the ability of the rifle no doubt. As long as you know how to calculate error and punch the scope correction factor into an app like Applied Ballistics, then the app will work it all out for you. Very nice shooting tho!

It's too bad the NF scopes are so dang heavy! They will most definitely track better than Leupold on any given day

 

[alf]

Typical amount of Leupold tracking error. Start below the line and end up quite a ways above it with any significant amount of adjustment. It will get the job done for the ability of the rifle no doubt. As long as you know how to calculate error and punch the scope correction factor into an app like Applied Ballistics, then the app will work it all out for you. Very nice shooting tho!

It's too bad the NF scopes are so dang heavy!

The "error" starts on the 2nd revolution, but as long as it's repeatable, which it appears to be, it can be dealt with.

Funny, when Leupold came out with the CDS turret, people bitched about it turning too easy, and it was limited to only one spin of the dial. Now that both of those "issues" have been eliminated, the only thing left is to bitch about tracking....ha ha....

BTW, getting the barrel fluted, switching scopes, and trading out the NF base for a Seekins, dropped the weight 25 ounces.

 

[LeddSlinger]

The "error" starts on the 2nd revolution, but as long as it's repeatable, which it appears to be, it can be dealt with.

Funny, when Leupold came out with the CDS turret, people bitched about it turning too easy, and it was limited to only one spin of the dial. Now that both of those "issues" have been eliminated, the only thing left is to bitch about tracking....ha ha....

BTW, getting the barrel fluted, switching scopes, and trading out the NF base for a Seekins, dropped the weight 25 ounces.

The POI started out well below the horizontal Zero line then the POI was creepin up above the line by 10 MOA of adjustment. There's a decent amount of error the whole way up. But I agree that as long as its consistent, you plug it into an app and you're good to go

 

[LeddSlinger]

The correct amount of tracking error is hard to calculate accurately by firing rounds down range. The only way to determine the true tracking ability of a scope does not need any rounds fired at all. But it does take two scopes to achieve it and laser rangefinders cannot be fully trusted.

I hang a 'double yard stick' (72") in a tree and measure the distance with a 300 ft logger's tape measure. Place the scope to be tested along with a reference scope into my 'scope checker'

The reference optic never gets adjusted after setting the reticle on a good reference mark. Then I can adjust the elevation on the scope being tested. If things get moved, and they will, it doesnt matter because I just adjust my tripod head so that th reference scipe is back on its mark then look in the tested scope to see exactly how far it has traveled up the yard stick with the adjustment given. The method is completely fool proof and does not rely on the accuracy of a rifle or laser range finder. It will no doubt give you an extremely accurate correction factor calculation down to one-tenth of 1 percent (0.1%).

No need to pack up and move to a shooting range, you can do it right in your back yard. Any scope will work as a reference optic. I usually test tracking error at 25 yards because it's easier judge movent accurately and any distance can be plugged into the calculation and it will come out with the correct solution.
Pictures and error correction factor calculation listed below.

Adjustment Error Correction Factor for MOA
(Actual distance to target in yards) x (Amount of MOA dialed) x 0.01047 = Expected turret travel in inches

(Expected turret travel) ÷ (Actual turret travel) = Adjustment Error Correction Factor (%)


Double yard stick

Two scopes on my scope checker and tripod.

 

[alf]

Don't forget, on the gawd awful long scope tracking thread on Accurate Shooter, that it took the firing of the gun to show tracking or return to zero faults on many of the scopes.

 

[LeddSlinger]

Don't forget, on the gawd awful long scope tracking thread on Accurate Shooter, that it took the firing of the gun to show tracking or return to zero faults on many of the scopes.

That's a recoil test. Totally different. That is for checking the mechanical POA reliability in a scope.

Also another type of test I conduct with the scope checker in the photo above. However, a recoil test requires the use of a mechanically "frozen" reference scope. I use a frozen Leupold BR 36x scope as a reference for recoil testing mechanical zero hold reliability.

Tracking tests are just looking for how accurate the angle of adjustment is in the scope turrets. Whether or not the scope can hold that adjustment under recoil is a whole different story and requires a separate recoil test to get that answer.

 

[alf]

That's a recoil test. Totally different. That is for checking the mechanical POA reliability in a scope.

The test was for poi holding ability.

 

[LeddSlinger]

People get POI and POA mixed up or accidentally use them in the wrong context. POINT OF AIM is where the scope settles the reticle on target. POINT OF IMPACT is where a bullet actually lands on target.

During a recoil test it makes absolutely no difference where the bullets land down range. No need to even look at them. Of course a POA shift will effect POI, that's given. But we are not looking at the actual bullet POI because that means nothing during a recoil test.

It's all about inducing shock to the optic and seeing if the reticle stays put.