Yesterday Earl shot his LaRue .308 with a Burris XTR II on top. The scope performed flawlessly all day, as I expected.

At the end of the day we went to zero a second rifle, brand new unfired rifle. I asked if he cleaned the brand new barrel and he had. I bore sigted it, reassembled the rifle (AR again) and told Earl lets fire one round at 100 yard paper. I was using my spotting scope, we had great lighting, and almost no wind at 100 yards. His first shot was a bit high and a bit left. I measure it in Mils, but this scope's turret was in MOA. So I converted my Mil correction to MOA.
(Mil value X 3.43 = MOA) We dialed in the appropriate MOA correction. I told Earl lets get 5 rounds down the barrel, take your time and make good shots, but we probably need to foul this barrel in some. 3 shots of 168 FGGM grouped .5 Mil tall and only .2 Mil wide. Cooled off a bit, and I said lets shoot 3 more. The group tightened up into a 1" triangle, but was right, and low. Dialed in the appropriate correction and the POI moved double what we told the scope to do. OK, this thing doesn't track for crap, took half the correction out, and finally got the scope zeroed. Then tried a 200 yard hold and he was .5 Mil high, maybe it's ammo, try another one, .5 Mil high. Ok, lets go back to 100 yard paper. Zero was high and way left.

Scope mount was tight to the rifle, ring screws were tight, rifle/ ammo shot consistently but wouldn't shoot where we told it to. All this equals a brand new bad scope. The lesson I think Earl picked up and maybe this is new information for some people, or a remidner for others, but when you're actually testing three things at one time, slow down and isolate two of them right off the bat. The two to isolate is rifle/ammo. Get it on paper, and leave the scope alone on an unknown shooting rifle. Your first bore sight shot, will be off where you want final zero, but if you're fairly close, don't start dialing on the scope right away. Lets see how this thing shoots before we try to make the scope perfectly zeroed. If the rifle and ammo are only capable of 4" at 100 yards, you're going to chase your tail cranking on the scope adjustments after every shot. In this case, we learned the rifle/ammo were capable of 1" at 100 yards, so once knowing that, then lets get the scope to come to zero. After that, we learned the scope was bad. What if all three were bad? You wouldn't know which one was the problem if you didn't isolate possibilities.

Scope was a Redfield Mil reticle, 1/4 MOA exposed turrets, which is an abomination in itself.

You are SO right. My 223, when new and when working up loads, drove me nuts. Turned out to be a bad scope, and the first but not last new scope that wasn’t right on that same rifle. When you have absolutely no load data, and starting from scratch, everything is an unknown. All is well now, but I used up mucho powder and bullets.

I was waiting for the scope brand expecting it to be a Vortex. Not surprised it was a Redfield/Leupold.

In the Army we always grouped before zeroing. Shoot a nice tight group then make adjustments to get perfectly zeroed. I rarely zero this way any more but it has its purpose.

Well, I'm still not convinced one "needs" first focal because it almost always comes as an additional cost if you do an honest comparison. HOWEVER, I totally now see the light on having at the very least the reticle match the turrets, mil/mil or moa/moa. And even between the 2, i do like mils. It's just easier to talk in increments of 10.

Just taught the woman yesterday how to use her sfp mil/mil nikon. Before that, she never wanted to know details or how to make corrects. A 2 min conversation and all the sudden she was reading and dialing corrections at 50 and 100 with her 17. All she has to remember is that it's second focal so all measurements must be taken at max power. Btw, the zeroing of the turret on the Nikon m tactical is awesome; just lift, turn and re-engage back down. I have no clue how durable it is but hold on a 17hmr

I prefer SFP up to 10x. I’m going FFP on high magnification optics.

Yeah that was definitely a lesson and a shocker for me. I know $200 isn't a lot for a scope, but I expected more out of that Redfield/Leupold. I would have never thought it would be as inconsistent as it was. I've spent the same money with Nikon before always with good results but that one sure wasn't up to snuff.

After using that FFP Burris XTR2 5-25x50 all day looking thru that SFP 3-9x40 was sort of a shock

Earl

JG, are you sure your AR cooties didn't affect the scope as well?

The LaRue began failing to eject later in the day. Pull the bolt, add oil, and it was fine. So no, my AR cooties have been fought off.

Nice reminder, it's sometimes easy to get distracted, anxious, and start the tail chasing.
So far I've been lucky and only had 1 bad scope but it was easily identified, a hair came detached at 1 point and was dangling.

Lesson refresher is don’t buy a Redfield or mid grade Leupold

You guys stink at this bore sighting, confirming groups, and zeroing thing. DH3 would have went through that entire process, fixed the scope, and reconfirmed everything in just 4 shots. Rookies

I don't know, we have a few Redfields and none have had that problem.