Hello everyone, I have heard that if the scope of an air gun is as close as the barrel of a gun, then the accuracy of the gun is better because of it. Is that true, sir?
Plz Guide me some one about that
Plz Guide me some one about that
Airgun accuracy
- Thread starter Maarodigro
- Start date
Maarodigro,
As close as you can practically be and not interfere with the basic functions of you gun. For air guns and the distances they are capable of, you don't need to worry about a 13-25mm difference out to 100-200m as your scope will be fine.
Patrick
As close as you can practically be and not interfere with the basic functions of you gun. For air guns and the distances they are capable of, you don't need to worry about a 13-25mm difference out to 100-200m as your scope will be fine.
Patrick
Upvote 0
No the accuracy of the gun has nothing to do with the scope height at all.
Twisting and tilting your head excessively to see out of your scope because it is to low is not condusive to shooting well at all though.
If you want to shoot it accurately then the scope needs to be at a height that is comfortable for you to look through it. So, the scope must be in the right place for your individual body and facial features.
The height of the scope, over the barrel, will only affect the distance you need to hold over or under your target to hit it. Although this is important it can easily be adjusted for.
Your sight in distance can make quite a difference in your hold over or hold under distances.
It's mostly a personal preference thing.
Me, I like the trajectory of my projectile to not go over a couple of centimeters high so I don't have to worry about hold under and have a flat shooting gun from twenty to over forty meters.
It's each to their own in this arena though as the individual shooter will adjust their sight in distance to their own needs and according to the type of shooting they are doing.
Twisting and tilting your head excessively to see out of your scope because it is to low is not condusive to shooting well at all though.
If you want to shoot it accurately then the scope needs to be at a height that is comfortable for you to look through it. So, the scope must be in the right place for your individual body and facial features.
The height of the scope, over the barrel, will only affect the distance you need to hold over or under your target to hit it. Although this is important it can easily be adjusted for.
Your sight in distance can make quite a difference in your hold over or hold under distances.
It's mostly a personal preference thing.
Me, I like the trajectory of my projectile to not go over a couple of centimeters high so I don't have to worry about hold under and have a flat shooting gun from twenty to over forty meters.
It's each to their own in this arena though as the individual shooter will adjust their sight in distance to their own needs and according to the type of shooting they are doing.
Upvote 0
I agree with biohazardman. The biggest practical difference is between bullpups and conventional rifles. Bullpups have the action back under your cheek so you have to use high or extra high rings to see through the scope. So the distance from the bore center line to the scope center line is greater with bullpups. How much is a function of the guns design.
So if reduced height is a factor in accuracy bullpups would be less accurate. If you look at who wins accuracy contests for air rifles you will see a lot of fx impacts. The impact is a bullpup.
I have one bullpup and two conventional PCPs. I like the bullpup the best but that is just my preference. When I shoot them well they are all about equally accurate. But if I wanted to go hunting and knew a lot of my shots would be inside 20 yards, I would hessitate to take my bullpup. The holdover required is pretty large from 10 to 15 yards. Maybe twice what it is with my conventional rifles. If I knew most of my shots would be 35-40 yards, I would take the bullpup. I'm not sure it's zero is further out than my higher tuned Avenger but they are close and I like the bullpup better. If I ever shoot hunter field target, I probably will not use a bullpup. I hear a lot of the targets are in the range where it's holdover would be an issue.
It is not an accuracy issue but it does affect trajectory, in other words.
So if reduced height is a factor in accuracy bullpups would be less accurate. If you look at who wins accuracy contests for air rifles you will see a lot of fx impacts. The impact is a bullpup.
I have one bullpup and two conventional PCPs. I like the bullpup the best but that is just my preference. When I shoot them well they are all about equally accurate. But if I wanted to go hunting and knew a lot of my shots would be inside 20 yards, I would hessitate to take my bullpup. The holdover required is pretty large from 10 to 15 yards. Maybe twice what it is with my conventional rifles. If I knew most of my shots would be 35-40 yards, I would take the bullpup. I'm not sure it's zero is further out than my higher tuned Avenger but they are close and I like the bullpup better. If I ever shoot hunter field target, I probably will not use a bullpup. I hear a lot of the targets are in the range where it's holdover would be an issue.
It is not an accuracy issue but it does affect trajectory, in other words.
Upvote 0
Technically an air gun (or any gun) is just as accurate with iron sights, a crap scope or a good scope mounted "well", or no sighting at all.
i.e. your method of aiming does not affect the inherent accuracy of the gun. If a computer is aiming the gun using gimbals, gps beacons and array of visual sensors and pre-computed ballistics, that does help the practical accuracy, though.
If you had a special scope where you saw light rays that traced in reverse the trajectory of your shots, that would be the easiest way to aim. If you are looking at "normal" light rays that travel through space using electromagnetism, it all boils down to your understanding of your gun's ballistics.
i.e. your method of aiming does not affect the inherent accuracy of the gun. If a computer is aiming the gun using gimbals, gps beacons and array of visual sensors and pre-computed ballistics, that does help the practical accuracy, though.
If you had a special scope where you saw light rays that traced in reverse the trajectory of your shots, that would be the easiest way to aim. If you are looking at "normal" light rays that travel through space using electromagnetism, it all boils down to your understanding of your gun's ballistics.
Upvote 0
Nope, scope height has no relation to the accuracy of a gun. But it does affect the accuracy of the shooter.
Upvote 0
Doubloon,
Nothing wrong with your figure and it is useful to have it to look at instead of just words. But the trajectory is only part of the equation. The line of sight through the scope is a straight line. When that line starts over 2.5 inches above the start of the trajectory, it takes longer for the first point at which the two lines touch. In the case of my P35 is is almost 20 yard until that first intersection. But the next intersection is also further from the muzzle, nearly 40 yards for my P35. I sight to about a 1/4 inch (6mm) mid flight rise (a lot less than your figure).
Jim
Nothing wrong with your figure and it is useful to have it to look at instead of just words. But the trajectory is only part of the equation. The line of sight through the scope is a straight line. When that line starts over 2.5 inches above the start of the trajectory, it takes longer for the first point at which the two lines touch. In the case of my P35 is is almost 20 yard until that first intersection. But the next intersection is also further from the muzzle, nearly 40 yards for my P35. I sight to about a 1/4 inch (6mm) mid flight rise (a lot less than your figure).
Jim
Upvote 0
as long as you accurately account for the height over bore, it should have no detrimental affect on shot placement or consistency.
Upvote 0
True.
In the picture provided the red dashed line marked "LINE OF SIGHT" is the line of sight through the scope and it is shown as a straight line in the picture.
Also, although not marked, where the left end of the curved black line that represents trajectory touches "0" metres/yards on the graph represents the distance between the bore center and scope center (line of sight) and it is approximately 38mm/1.5".
Besides changing the height of the line of sight above the bore it's also good to keep in mind that changing the muzzle velocity of the projectile, the weight of the projectile and/or the ballistic coefficient of the projectile is likely to change the first zero point and, if there is one, the second zero point. Whether or not there is a second zero point will depend on how the combination was sighted, MPBR for scope height over bore being one option for example.
I guess as long as we're extrapolating this topic into infinity we should also make sure we consider the elevation of the target above or below the shooter. A shooter standing under a target, think shooting a bird at the top of a very tall tree from the ground, is going to change where the projectile intersects the line of sight in its path as well because gravity is pulling it in a different direction ... ignoring the arguments that gravity doesn't exist and it's the target that is moving toward the pellet.
Upvote 0
airgun accuracy has a lot to do with no rifle can't as well as other factors mentioned above. rifle can't with high mounted scope is easy to over. look! Jo-Al
Upvote 0