Darn autocorrect. Savage-Anschutz 141 from the sixties.Is that an Anschutz?
Just wonderin’...
Darn autocorrect. Savage-Anschutz 141 from the sixties.Is that an Anschutz?
Just wonderin’...
LOL! I think you may want to edit that to AnschutzAuschwitz 141 with 6-18 BDC scope, 100. .
25 yards, It is very close at 50 yards. I don't think it's very practical to shoot 100 yards with 22 LR when a Magnum or .17 is much better at that range. Of course many people think a 35 or 40 foot tree is 75 feet tall. Most 22 Lr. Rifles and shooters aren't accurate enough to zero for 50 yards. Target rifles and a good shot are another story.
My guess is that you are an experienced shooter with decent rifles and know how to use them. Where we disagree is with the percent of average shooters and rifles that are that capable. My experience as an instructor, helping at the range and actual competition as well as groups posted on here tells me a lot of rifles are not real accurate and the average shooter is not very good. I was thinking a consistent 1 inch group from a field position. My opinion is that is realistic for you maybe. For sure with my 540XR. I think so maybe with my competition winning CZ 452. And I beat most people and rifles I shoot against usually by a good margin .Experienced shooters. I am not impressed by most shooters or their rifles. My guess is less than 25% of the typical guy out there that shoots and hunts can consistently shoot and inch or even two inches every shot supported or not with rifles like Marlins, Savages and Rugers. People can tell all the stories they want but I have seen too much to believe them. And most people are very poor at estimating distance as well. I try to educate people but it's not much use.I have to partially disagree. I think most modern .22s with a load they like and a half decent scope are quite capable of hitting varmint sized targets to 50 yards. When you figure in the shooter, the percentage drops, but it is still significant. Lets use the head of a cottontail as a yardstick here. I'd say the majority of "good" shooters are capable of connecting on this shot at 50 yards with a decent sporting .22 and a good load proven accurate in the rifle with an improvised rest or solid field position. Yes, a 25 yard zero is "close" at 50, the amount of deviation depends on a few factors, but I prefer to add the fudge factor on closer ranges where the margin for error is greater, and be zeroed at the longer.
As for longer ranges, absolutely a .17 or .22 mag is the right tool. A .223 would be even better, but many, like me, only keep one rifle in the barn for pests. A coyote, opossum, raccoon or other chicken thief likely won't hang around for me to retrieve heavier artillery. I want my good old .22 to hit close to the sights out there. As for specific holdovers, doing some longer shooting at smallish targets will quickly give one a feel for it. Holdover on a RF ram silhouette at 100 yards with a 50 zero and s.v. target ammo can be quickly dialed in with a little practice. Likewise for Hyper velocity and 100+ targets with a 100 yard zero. It does become more akin to long range HP rifle shooting in terms of wind once you get out there though.
I'm not professionally trained, or have any real training. I wouldn't consider my ccw classes much of anything other than legal jargon to basically say you know the laws. My equipment is nowhere near high end competition level. But I try to shoot 2-3 times a month and I am not the guy at the range spraying lead. I go to try to get better. In my personal opinion I'm a decent shot at least with my pistols not a pro by any means. I take my son and he loves it. We go for fun.
My 29 year old son and I went shooting yesterday, about 5 hours. Fun day of AR plinking and point shooting training with pistols.16" barrel AR with a CMMG 22 LR conversion
I realize my son's 22 is not a match grade rifle by any means and he shoots close distance.
25 yards, It is very close at 50 yards. I don't think it's very practical to shoot 100 yards with 22 LR when a Magnum or .17 is much better at that range. Of course many people think a 35 or 40 foot tree is 75 feet tall. Most 22 Lr. Rifles and shooters aren't accurate enough to zero for 50 yards. Target rifles and a good shot are another story.
I set my scopes on .22LRs and other rifles so the image fills the tube perfectly, so if it's not centered, I notice it quickly, preventing parallax-related misses. Sighted-in for 50 yards for the outdoor season, then 50 feet for indoor offhand practice.The big thing with a scope on a .22 is parallax. Most .22 scopes have the parallax set for 50 yards, but big game scopes are set at 100 yards. Unless you have an adjustable objective lens on the scope so you can set it for the distance you are shooting, you have to be very conscious of your cheek weld and head position on the gun. If you don't get your head in the same position on the gun you will see the cross hairs move on the target.
Most 22 Lr. Rifles and shooters aren't accurate enough to zero for 50 yards.
25 yards, It is very close at 50 yards. I don't think it's very practical to shoot 100 yards with 22 LR when a Magnum or .17 is much better at that range. Of course many people think a 35 or 40 foot tree is 75 feet tall. Most 22 Lr. Rifles and shooters aren't accurate enough to zero for 50 yards. Target rifles and a good shot are another story.
This is even from a clone Charger..No buttstock to get in your way
I don't. I don't think that is a representative sample. I am certain that many shooters are capable of far greater range that that as many have posted. And that thread proves many common rifles can't shoot accurately at a range at a measured distance from a bench or rest.I think the “Prove It” thread last year would discredit this sentiment.
I said good shots are an exception. I probably should not have said Target rifles.It is just drop and drift.
No sense in limiting what others have done and continue to do.
100 yards is not a big deal, and neither is 200 yards, or even further, when the conditions are good.
This is even from a clone Charger..No buttstock to get in your way
I don't think that is a representative sample.
I suppose that’s a fair observation, although I didn’t really consider the Prove It thread as a test of shooters as much of a test of rifles. Firing supported, after all. But it’s probably fair to say the voluntary participants in this forum, and further the subset of voluntary participants in that contest (if that’s what it was?) may not represent a valid representative distribution of “the average shooter”.
But...
There were plenty of 50 yard groups in that thread which demonstrated sufficiently small groups to satisfactorily define center for zeroing the rifle though, even by low cost rifles. The Savage I shot in the thread, for example, was only a $500 rifle, and there were a couple $450 CZ’s which shot exceptionally well. I think it was @someguy2800 who shot even a scoped pistol which was clearly accurate enough to warrant a 50 yard zero.
I suppose, technically, my Charger pictured here is “zeroed” at 325 yards, since I dialed to hold on target. Walking my shots into the 8” plate, I could tell when most shots were on the plate, but some falling below the plate, then the next click, all shots were on the plate, as were the next click, but the 3rd click up meant shots started slipping off of the top. In other words, the pistol shoots about 7” at 325 yards with Remington Golden Bullet crap ammo, but I could still sufficiently zero to be within +/-1/2 click at that range. So I KNOW all of my personal 22LR rifles can easily be zeroed at 50 yards, and I also know with a large enough volume of fire, I can zero that Charger at 325 yards too.