Shooting Technique - Sight Picture through a Scope

[TargetShooting]

I didn't shoot well today at 200-yard with my AR, group got a lot bigger - I think I am hitting a bottleneck or something.

Tell me, how is it possible for anyone to ensure his/her pupil is 100% lined up at the center of scope?

This is a perfect sight picture.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/2b/Edit_4x_rifle_scope.jpg/1146px-Edit_4x_rifle_scope.jpg


Theoretically it is impossible to place your eye exactly on the central axis from rear lens to front lens, right? So realistically our sight picture is always like this or somewhat so.

1461

But if you aim like this and fire, which everyone does, you'll miss the target by hitting on its side.

Is there any scope that tells you when you are Dead-On at the Center-Axis?

[YankeeFingergasm]

Get back to your basics. Make sure your parallax is right, focus is fine enough for you. Do the ole head wobble WITHOUT touching the rifle and seeing if the reticle moves. Focus on your breathing and gently squeeze the trigger. Use proper follow through the natural recoil. Proper cheek weld and eye relief.

[TargetShooting]

Get back to your basics. Make sure your parallax is right, focus is fine enough for you. Do the ole head wobble WITHOUT touching the rifle and seeing if the reticle moves. Focus on your breathing and gently squeeze the trigger. Use proper follow through the natural recoil. Proper cheek weld and eye relief.

Is that I asked called "parallax"? But there's no way to tell if parallax is 100% right, still.

[YankeeFingergasm]

http://www.longrangehunting.com/forums/f18/parallax-vs-focus-1988/

also

http://www.longrangehunting.com/articles/what-is-parallax-2.php

[Rumbler]

Bingo. Yankee nailed it. Except for that "squeeze" part. I would describe it as a "gentle press" - ideally, straight back.

I don't break the shot unless I see something like the large picture you posted.

. . well, that is not true. Sometimes I do. But that is when the bullet impacts somewhere except where I wanted it to. :p

David, you were shooting one inch or less at 200 yards yesterday pretty consistently. I saw you doing it. Ask yourself what in your technique is different. Do you use ANY muscle tension to get a cheek weld, or keep the rifle on target? Is your cheek weld solid and consistent? Trigger press straight back and gentle? If the answer is "nothing is different", then look to your equipment.

Are you shooting match grade ammunition? "Standard" NATO ammo is specified to shoot 3 inches at 100 yards. Extrapolating that to six inches - if you are lucky - at 200 yards, is realistic in my opinion. That is not to say it can not be better. But that is the NATO specification, so "precision" has a very different meaning for a soldier, and a benchrest (or tactical) shooter.

[YankeeFingergasm]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=omorj3H-Yjw

[TargetShooting]

Damn it was already covered in bob's class, Simply by moving the eye around to see if crosshairs stay on target...

I need to take the class again.

[TargetShooting]

I know why I asked this stupid question - neither scope on my 2 long guns has parallax dial...duh!

[TargetShooting]

Bingo. Yankee nailed it. Except for that "squeeze" part. I would describe it as a "gentle press" - ideally, straight back.

I don't break the shot unless I see something like the large picture you posted.

. . well, that is not true. Sometimes I do. But that is when the bullet impacts somewhere except where I wanted it to. :p

David, you were shooting one inch or less at 200 yards yesterday pretty consistently. I saw you doing it. Ask yourself what in your technique is different. Do you use ANY muscle tension to get a cheek weld, or keep the rifle on target? Is your cheek weld solid and consistent? Trigger press straight back and gentle? If the answer is "nothing is different", then look to your equipment.

Are you shooting match grade ammunition? "Standard" NATO ammo is specified to shoot 3 inches at 100 yards. Extrapolating that to six inches - if you are lucky - at 200 yards, is realistic in my opinion. That is not to say it can not be better. But that is the NATO specification, so "precision" has a very different meaning for a soldier, and a benchrest (or tactical) shooter.

I was shooting the AR today.

[Rumbler]

I know. You said that in your first post. :cool:

The exact same techniques - fundamentals - apply with either gun.