Armory Sponsor
Posted: 10/24/2025 9:47:10 AM EDT
[Last Edit: GroundhogOZ][Edited]
|
I am writing this because of a youtube "video" that popped up in my feed today by a well known "guntuber" with all the gear, seemingly zero idea about optics, MLAMS and what a parallel "zero" is. I'll make this simple, short range convergent zeros are not a solution. Parallel alignments are incredibly simple and are dependant on three variables (1) height above bore of your zeroed reticle. (2) height above or below bore of your laser (3) distance of the laser from the bore to the left or right of the bore Note standardised military zero targets are weapons system specific because they use a specific MLAM, firearm and optic. For the Holosun IRIS RD3 red laser on my pest reduction firearm mounted in the 12 oclock position the pertinent information is as follows (1) height above bore of zeroed reticle cross hairs is 6.3 cm or 2.5 inches (real world, center of bore to center of scope) (2) height above bore of the laser 3.5cm or 1.4 inches (3) distance of the laser to the right of the bore 2cm or 0.8 inches. Subtract 6.3cm from 3.5cm = 3.8cm or 1.5 inches For any zero distance, the laser should be 2cm or 0.8 inches to the right of the cross hairs and 3.8cm or 1.5 inches below the cross hairs. The laser is slaved parallel to the zeroed cross hair - it is that simple. |
|
Originally Posted By GroundhogOZ: I am writing this because of a youtube "video" that popped up in my feed today by a well known "guntuber" with all the gear, seemingly zero idea about optics, MLAMS and what a parallel "zero" is. I'll make this simple, short range convergent zeros are not a solution. Parallel alignments are incredibly simple and are dependant on three variables (1) height above bore of your zeroed reticle. (2) height above or below bore of your laser (3) distance of the laser from the bore to the left or right of the bore Note standardised military zero targets are weapons system specific because they use a specific MLAM, firearm and optic. For the Holosun IRIS RD3 red laser on my pest reduction firearm mounted in the 12 oclock position the pertinent information is as follows (1) height above bore of zeroed reticle cross hairs is 6.3 cm or 2.5 inches (real world, center of bore to center of scope) (2) height above bore of the laser 3.5cm or 1.4 inches (3) distance of the laser to the right of the bore 2cm or 0.8 inches. Subtract 6.3cm from 3.5cm = 3.8cm or 1.5 inches For any zero distance, the laser should be 2cm or 0.8 inches to the right of the cross hairs and 3.8cm or 1.5 inches below the cross hairs. The laser is slaved parallel to the zeroed cross hair - it is that simple. While "short range convergent zeros are not a solution" long range convergent that is overlapped to your already zeroed optic is "the solution." Since most if not all MFALs have a very course adjustments of up to .5 MOA or more a parallel zero may seem close at 100 yards but if you view them under NODs at distance they can be off quite a bit. IMHO for the best zero overlap your "IR" not vis laser to your already zeroed optic at the furthest distance possible. From the your zero point all the way to the apex of where your optic's dot/reticle and your IR laser meet will not be further between the both of them @ 2.5" at the widest point and will only get closer you get to where they converge. The benefit of a converging zero at distance is that you do not have the likely hood of your parallel zero to veer off from one another at distance. No silly parallel target, reflective tape spaced so far apart, or even a need to send rounds down range trying to parallel zero your rig that may be ineffective at distance. |
|
Originally Posted By MunnyShot: While "short range convergent zeros are not a solution" long range convergent that is overlapped to your already zeroed optic is "the solution." Since most if not all MFALs have a very course adjustments of up to .5 MOA or more a parallel zero may seem close at 100 yards but if you view them under NODs at distance they can be off quite a bit. IMHO for the best zero overlap your "IR" not vis laser to your already zeroed optic at the furthest distance possible. From the your zero point all the way to the apex of where your optic's dot/reticle and your IR laser meet will not be further between the both of them @ 2.5" at the widest point and will only get closer you get to where they converge. The benefit of a converging zero at distance is that you do not have the likely hood of your parallel zero to veer off from one another at distance. No silly parallel target, reflective tape spaced so far apart, or even a need to send rounds down range trying to parallel zero your rig that may be ineffective at distance. Agreed. And thankfully OP said a “well known YouTuber” so it’s not me 
|
|
100+ yard converging zeroes are a good option. If I only have 50 yards then I prefer a parallel or dirty converging zero (all the rounds land between the parallel and converging points. Slaving the laser to the day optic gets it close but never perfect for me. I always need a slight adjustment to get it perfectly zeroed. I was zeroing a bunch of lasers last week. I slaved this Eotech OGL to a 50-yard parallel zero with the day optic, but it still needed a few clicks to center it up. Attached File |
"It seems that even Allah's promise of paradise loses a bit of it's luster when there's a dude reigning death on your buddies from 600 meters out." - John_Wayne777 on Battle for Al Najaf 04/04/04
|
Originally Posted By topgunpilot20: 100+ yard converging zeroes are a good option. If I only have 50 yards then I prefer a parallel or dirty converging zero (all the rounds land between the parallel and converging points. Slaving the laser to the day optic gets it close but never perfect for me. I always need a slight adjustment to get it perfectly zeroed. I was zeroing a bunch of lasers last week. I slaved this Eotech OGL to a 50-yard parallel zero with the day optic, but it still needed a few clicks to center it up. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/44195/IMG_6894_jpeg-3647158.JPG I just checked my IR laser zero for a night match in Dec. About 4" low at 50 yards! Dialed it in now. |
|
Originally Posted By GroundhogOZ: I am writing this because of a youtube "video" that popped up in my feed today by a well known "guntuber" with all the gear, seemingly zero idea about optics, MLAMS and what a parallel "zero" is. I'll make this simple, short range convergent zeros are not a solution. Parallel alignments are incredibly simple and are dependant on three variables (1) height above bore of your zeroed reticle. (2) height above or below bore of your laser (3) distance of the laser from the bore to the left or right of the bore Note standardised military zero targets are weapons system specific because they use a specific MLAM, firearm and optic. For the Holosun IRIS RD3 red laser on my pest reduction firearm mounted in the 12 oclock position the pertinent information is as follows (1) height above bore of zeroed reticle cross hairs is 6.3 cm or 2.5 inches (real world, center of bore to center of scope) (2) height above bore of the laser 3.5cm or 1.4 inches (3) distance of the laser to the right of the bore 2cm or 0.8 inches. Subtract 6.3cm from 3.5cm = 3.8cm or 1.5 inches For any zero distance, the laser should be 2cm or 0.8 inches to the right of the cross hairs and 3.8cm or 1.5 inches below the cross hairs. The laser is slaved parallel to the zeroed cross hair - it is that simple. The issue with parallel zero is that, in less time than it takes to read this post (let alone perform these measurements and adjustments), anyone with little experience Zeroing lasers can perform a converging zero at any reasonable preferred distance, and immediately transition to accurate hits on target at realistic night shooting distances appropriate for active aiming. The more night shooting classes you attend, the more you can see this principle play itself out. Imagine for a moment you have 12 people lined up who all need to establish zero with their rifles/LAMs. I can promise that you don't have the time to measure out people's individually different laser offsets and everything required for a true parallel zero. On the other hand, in 30 seconds you can have everyone perform a converging zero and then move on with life. Confirmation is a necessity with either, and there will be no practical difference between the results achieved with either method, however one of them is just way more simple and quick to accomplish. One is also far more easy to understand, and lends itself well to quick confirmations by checking if the pointer is slaved to one's optic and vice versa. I prefer the long/infinite range converging zero for simplicity, but even with what I would consider "short range" converging zero of 50 yards, I was really surprised to see no issues with a class of people all accurately engaging targets @200yd (well beyond NV PID range). Short range converging zero is one solution. Saying it isn't ignores the impacts on target that tell the simple truth. This of course is ultimately just like every other converging vs parallel zero argument. Truly personal preference, and honestly a dead horse that has long been flogged to a bloody pulp. Anyone really interested in the topic should just go perform both techniques in the field and see which nets them the best results for their application. I'll take the option that doesn't necessitate algebra One of the classic videos that discusses pros and cons of each: https://youtu.be/9omtdrgrEFM?si=wTu3Bqq1aznI4B8R |
|
It takes no time to parallel zero. A long range convergent zero at +600m for 5.56 is ok for a stop gap. There are many reasons to avoid convergent zeros, the number one being people line them up in their home or 25m. This is incredibly common. The other, if youneed to share/swap a firearm if everyone is on a parallel zero you know exactly what is happening. With convergent zeros you don't, hence all military use parallel zero. The number one reason people don't do a parallel zero is because they don't know how to do it correctly. |
|
Originally Posted By GroundhogOZ: It takes no time to parallel zero. A long range convergent zero at +600m for 5.56 is ok for a stop gap. There are many reasons to avoid convergent zeros, the number one being people line them up in their home or 25m. This is incredibly common. The other, if youneed to share/swap a firearm if everyone is on a parallel zero you know exactly what is happening. With convergent zeros you don't, hence all military use parallel zero. The number one reason people don't do a parallel zero is because they don't know how to do it correctly. A lot of truth in this post. Slaving the laser to the day optic is a lot like slaving a red dot to cowitnessed irons. It gets it really close, and it may be close enough for someone's intended use. Personally, it's always a little off on paper for me, so I fine tune it. There's no denying that it's faster with a line full of people, and if it's good enough then it's good enough. As for parallel vs converging, converging at distance is a good option, but parallel can work at any distance (though it's less precise closer in). There's a surprising number for professional users that will converge at 25 yards or closer not realizing the potential disaster they are setting themselves up for. One SWAT team converged their lasers at 7 yards because they only intended to use them on entries. Then they had an armed suspect manage to squirt out the back past the perimeter into a field, and they had to conduct a field search with hundreds of yards of sight line under NODs with lasers converged at 7 yards. An alarming number for professional users aren't NODs enthusiasts and see them as just another piece of equipment like a radio or gas mask. They may not understand parallel vs converging and how the horizontal offset makes it different than their day optic. I like using a 1/2" x 1/2" piece of glint tape for zeroing. For converging you just put it over the X ring. For parallel you place your muzzle over the X ring and place the glint tape underneath the laser and level with the X ring which is what I did on the target I posted above. |
"It seems that even Allah's promise of paradise loses a bit of it's luster when there's a dude reigning death on your buddies from 600 meters out." - John_Wayne777 on Battle for Al Najaf 04/04/04
9mm! .45!  The furthest a designator will be "off" is at the muzzle. Generalizing, using a "standard" LAM layout - POI will be 1" left and 1" low of the designator. In a *perfect* Parallel zero - this will be maintained. In a *Max Distance* (500, 800, 1000?) Converging Zero - the 'at the muzzle' offset is the same, 1/1 - but the designator gets closer to the POI out to the distance you converged at. POI will drop for both, obviously - to the point where the designator will be floating in the air above the target at long distances with either, but IMO, knowing that the designator is basically your reticle with a *max distance* converging zero - it's easier to mentally visualize whats going on. At longer range, your designator is a dinner plate anyway - I personally don't think one is better than another. But when the rifle falls off the back of the 5 Ton, it sure does seem easier to re-verify a *max distance* converging zero, than a parallel one. Up close (in the house) you are ~1" off no matter what you use - 1" ain't sh*t. |
|
Originally Posted By GroundhogOZ: It takes no time to parallel zero. A long range convergent zero at +600m for 5.56 is ok for a stop gap. There are many reasons to avoid convergent zeros, the number one being people line them up in their home or 25m. This is incredibly common. The other, if youneed to share/swap a firearm if everyone is on a parallel zero you know exactly what is happening. With convergent zeros you don't, hence all military use parallel zero. The number one reason people don't do a parallel zero is because they don't know how to do it correctly. Why would I do a parallel zero? Run a laser that is as near to in line as possible and converge it at 100. It will be off "within the size of the dot" at 200. Beyond that, Im likely not using my laser to engage targets. Also if I converge it, I can use my primary optic and it to verify zero. |
|
Originally Posted By JohnDough: Why would I do a parallel zero? Run a laser that is as near to in line as possible and converge it at 100. It will be off "within the size of the dot" at 200. Beyond that, Im likely not using my laser to engage targets. Also if I converge it, I can use my primary optic and it to verify zero. You can do what ever you like. And equally you're the exact reason why there are standardised approaches. Parallel works at all distance so long as you know your ballistics. Convergent zeros don't work at any distance for either windage or elevation bar one. They only work for the distance they are converged at. I used the example of 223/5.56 for a reason. At the end of the day people make their own choices but equally the consequences of their choices ultimately come home to roost. My advice was free, perhaps thats all its worth but those that know, know @mickdonaldson, true old designators are the size of dinner plates at distance, newer quality designators aren't, moreover they are much cleaner so they don't have the number and intensity of diffraction rings that old PEQ2/PEQ15s have. As always, people are free to choose what they do in the civ world but equally the consequences arrive without discrimination and those that make the most elementary mistakes always top the league tables for bad happenings. Devices like the DAGIR are infintely superior to the IRIS but that superiority comes with a price tag - a price that is worth it at the front end. Basic skill sets matter - like all training its put in place based on lessons learned and short cuts always have consequences as has been shown throughout history.
|
|
Originally Posted By GroundhogOZ: You can do what ever you like. And equally you're the exact reason why there are standardised approaches. Parallel works at all distance so long as you know your ballistics. Convergent zeros don't work at any distance for either windage or elevation bar one. They only work for the distance they are converged at. I used the example of 223/5.56 for a reason. At the end of the day people make their own choices but equally the consequences of their choices ultimately come home to roost. My advice was free, perhaps thats all its worth but those that know, know @mickdonaldson, true old designators are the size of dinner plates at distance, newer quality designators aren't, moreover they are much cleaner so they don't have the number and intensity of diffraction rings that old PEQ2/PEQ15s have. As always, people are free to choose what they do in the civ world but equally the consequences arrive without discrimination and those that make the most elementary mistakes always top the league tables for bad happenings. Devices like the DAGIR are infintely superior to the IRIS but that superiority comes with a price tag - a price that is worth it at the front end. Basic skill sets matter - like all training its put in place based on lessons learned and short cuts always have consequences as has been shown throughout history. "You can do what ever you like. And equally you're the exact reason why there are standardised approaches. Parallel works at all distance so long as you know your ballistics. " When you overlap/converge your "IR" laser to your optic your hold overs/unders are exactly the same from @ 50 yards out. Your ballastics are the same "Convergent zeros don't work at any distance for either windage or elevation bar one. They only work for the distance they are converged at." The distance between your "IR" laser and your reticles will be at the widest of the offset and will only get closer to the apex where they meet, just like a parallel zero they will both have an offset. "@mickdonaldson, true old designators are the size of dinner plates at distance, newer quality designators aren't, moreover they are much cleaner so they don't have the number and intensity of diffraction rings that old PEQ2/PEQ15s have. "IR/Vis designators are "not precision aiming solutions" When passively aiming with a RDS it will be impossible to see the difference between a parallel and converging zero, but since most MFALs have very coarse adjustments the parallel zero has a much bigger "potential" to veer off at distance while passively aiming. This can easily be checked by passively aiming at distance no matter how clean your aiming designator is. |
 Zeroing your laser...how, and why No rifle anyone in this thread is putting an mfal on is mechanically more accurate than the x-axis divergence from bore of my RaidXe |
|
Originally Posted By GroundhogOZ: You can do what ever you like. And equally you're the exact reason why there are standardised approaches. Parallel works at all distance so long as you know your ballistics. Convergent zeros don't work at any distance for either windage or elevation bar one. They only work for the distance they are converged at. I used the example of 223/5.56 for a reason. At the end of the day people make their own choices but equally the consequences of their choices ultimately come home to roost. My advice was free, perhaps thats all its worth but those that know, know @mickdonaldson, true old designators are the size of dinner plates at distance, newer quality designators aren't, moreover they are much cleaner so they don't have the number and intensity of diffraction rings that old PEQ2/PEQ15s have. As always, people are free to choose what they do in the civ world but equally the consequences arrive without discrimination and those that make the most elementary mistakes always top the league tables for bad happenings. Devices like the DAGIR are infintely superior to the IRIS but that superiority comes with a price tag - a price that is worth it at the front end. Basic skill sets matter - like all training its put in place based on lessons learned and short cuts always have consequences as has been shown throughout history. My laser is within 0.2mrad of the bore, regarding offset. If you are using older technology with greater offset, then I can understand your need to compensate for the limitations of your gear. My lasers and optics are 0.2mrad adjustment, and thusly I get as close to perfectly zeroed as possible. The rifle and ammunition combo I use is a 0.5mrad capable system with me behind it, so often I will "choose" where I want to be, if I want the laser a little right or left of the grouping's true center, etc. I usually place it to the right, because I am right handed and rail flex will improve rather than degrade the zero. Same with my main optic, so I can use them to verify zero shift off of each other as well as possible without live fire if I cannot at the time. |
|
Jamey Caldwell did a great interview on this and convinced me to parallel zero at 50y. Once outside of 100y or so that parallel zero will have my ability to aim a giant laser pointer under NODS to not be effective enough to discern a difference if it converged at the perfect distance vs being parallel at 50. So I just parallel mine w vis at 50y out the window using magnifier in daylight and confirm later. Easy peasy. Could a converging zero be better at some specific distance, yes, but you have to define that distance and then it is only better there. Especially if you decide to do max effective distance you actually need to be able to shoot at that distance to zero.  TIPS - Laser Zero Process with Jamey Caldwell, Nick Young & Maxwell Gates  Train Smart Podcast- Episode 11- Jamey Caldwell From 1 Minute Out Talks NVG's |
|
Originally Posted By DernHumpus: Jamey Caldwell did a great interview on this and convinced me to parallel zero at 50y. Once outside of 100y or so that parallel zero will have my ability to aim a giant laser pointer under NODS to not be effective enough to discern a difference if it converged at the perfect distance vs being parallel at 50. So I just parallel mine w vis at 50y out the window using magnifier in daylight and confirm later. Easy peasy. Could a converging zero be better at some specific distance, yes, but you have to define that distance and then it is only better there. Especially if you decide to do max effective distance you actually need to be able to shoot at that distance to zero.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qYFfEhtFkxo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mec2h2afGJg"Could a converging zero be better at some specific distance, yes, but you have to define that distance and then it is only better there". Exactly that's why you converge/overlap at the furthest distance you see which makes parallel zero obsolete. |
|
You basically have two angles and a parabola. There is no way they can always be in alignment. For me I zero my rifle red dot at 50 yards and go outside at night and on a building that is hundreds of yards away I get my IR laser and red dot to converge. Boom, IR zeroed without firing a shot. Then I take the rifle to the range shoot some targets at super close, CQB distances with the IR laser and figure out my height over bore. It’s actually a lot less of an offset then on the 1.93 dot sitting way up high. I recently shot a 2-gun NV match that had paper targets at almost contact distance, paper and steel at mid distance and steel out to 100 yards. I didn’t have any problem hitting everything I aimed at. I zeroed with the same method with my pistol laser, and although the flexible dust cover of a Glock isn’t the best platform for stability, it worked perfectly there too. From 20 yard shots to near contact distance, small plates and small target exposures behind no-shoots, I didn’t have any problem hitting what I was aiming at. The only difference I had to keep in mind was the rifle laser had to be a bit higher on the close targets to compensate for height over bore, and the pistol had to be a bit lower to compensate for height under bore. Zeroing an IR laser is super simple as long as you have a NV compatible day optic that is properly zeroed. I was surprised at the number of guys at the match whose IR laser was way off. |
|
Originally Posted By MunnyShot: "Could a converging zero be better at some specific distance, yes, but you have to define that distance and then it is only better there". Exactly that's why you converge/overlap at the furthest distance you see which makes parallel zero obsolete. Originally Posted By MunnyShot: Originally Posted By DernHumpus: Jamey Caldwell did a great interview on this and convinced me to parallel zero at 50y. Once outside of 100y or so that parallel zero will have my ability to aim a giant laser pointer under NODS to not be effective enough to discern a difference if it converged at the perfect distance vs being parallel at 50. So I just parallel mine w vis at 50y out the window using magnifier in daylight and confirm later. Easy peasy. Could a converging zero be better at some specific distance, yes, but you have to define that distance and then it is only better there. Especially if you decide to do max effective distance you actually need to be able to shoot at that distance to zero. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qYFfEhtFkxo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mec2h2afGJg"Could a converging zero be better at some specific distance, yes, but you have to define that distance and then it is only better there". Exactly that's why you converge/overlap at the furthest distance you see which makes parallel zero obsolete. |
|
Originally Posted By DernHumpus: I guess the other part I implied but didn't specifically state was this. In a real world use I don't think you would notice the disadvantages of a parallel zero, and I think the ease of zero with parallel (daylight with slaved laser and not even shooting) makes it very appealing. My converging zero is more accurate than a mawl using your method. Thats my point. Converging is the future. Old tech may require parallel, but not new stuff. |
|
Originally Posted By DernHumpus: I guess the other part I implied but didn't specifically state was this. In a real world use I don't think you would notice the disadvantages of a parallel zero, and I think the ease of zero with parallel (daylight with slaved laser and not even shooting) makes it very appealing. The problem zeroing with a Vis/slaved laser is it will only coalign at a set distance since you have 2 emitters. If you are able to see you VIS laser during the day you'll be able to overlap your VIS laser to your reticle/dot also. To beat a dead horse reverifying you IR to your red dot/reticle is defiantly the KISS way. Put the thing on the thing and your done. |
|
Originally Posted By MunnyShot: The problem zeroing with a Vis/slaved laser is it will only coalign at a set distance since you have 2 emitters. If you are able to see you VIS laser during the day you'll be able to overlap your VIS laser to your reticle/dot also. To beat a dead horse reverifying you IR to your red dot/reticle is defiantly the KISS way. Put the thing on the thing and your done. I check my VIZ and IR. My Viz and IR at 100 yards have a 0.2 to 0.4mrad divergence, depending on which Raid Xe I am using. That's 1.4" off, max, at 100 yards, and that includes the mechanical offset. Good enough, considering the dot size is about 1-1.5moa, itself. |
|
Originally Posted By GroundhogOZ: It takes no time to parallel zero. A long range convergent zero at +600m for 5.56 is ok for a stop gap. There are many reasons to avoid convergent zeros, the number one being people line them up in their home or 25m. This is incredibly common. The other, if youneed to share/swap a firearm if everyone is on a parallel zero you know exactly what is happening. With convergent zeros you don't, hence all military use parallel zero. The number one reason people don't do a parallel zero is because they don't know how to do it correctly. "hence all military use parralel zero" I knew this was blatantly incorrect, so I asked an acquaintance in an active Army special operations unit (commander) what the unit SOP is for their laser zero. This is the quoted response: "We always ran converging at long range. So like 200m Made it super predictable, minimal offset, and basically maxed out the laser at an effective range you could use the illuminater and nods" Again, idk why I feel the need to argue this, but it's important to step outside of your bubble and talk to multiple sources & people that use this stuff for a living. That way you don't make biased and incorrect blanket statements to argue your own point. The above statement isn't even an endorsement to use converging. I'm not a "military does this so this is what I will do" dogmatic kind of guy. It's just some perspective on what is being used by an army SOF unit in 2025. Again, I think it's a dumb argument. Use what you want and what works for you, given it actually works. |
|
Originally Posted By DernHumpus: Jamey Caldwell... Jamey Caldwell also sold masks during the $camdemic... so his knowledge and integrity is lacking in areas. Setting aside 'It probably doesn't matter at the end of the day (night)' - I'd be worried my Parallel Zero wasn't perfect, and my designator was actually moving further away at distance. That is impossible with Converging *at max distance*. |
|
Perhaps the ideal parallel zero is one that is on-line and above the weapon's bore axis -- avoiding major convergence issues closer than or further than your zero. Say you are using a Steiner In-Line Tactical Aiming Laser (ITAL) true-zeroed at 200 Meters or yards. Whether your target is nearer or farther your shot will impact higher or lower in a vertical line from true zero coincidence. Maybe not much of a concern with a carbine, but certainly for a precision rifle capable at further than 200 Meters. |
 Infrared Aiming Laser Zeroing Procedures - PFCtraining.com Thoughts on this? |
If a 147 grn 9mm at 1000 FPS is the hammer of Thor then a 165 grn. 40 at 1200 fps must a lightening bolt from Zeus!
|
This may have been discussed but i didn’t see it. How do you take into account the bullet drop at distance? My understanding is the laser is a straight line out ‘forever’. With 100y zero, it seems that at 300y I would be off 13.77” due to the need to hold over at that distance. (My ammo, gun combo and BC) Hope that all made sense |
|
Originally Posted By chaas67: This may have been discussed but i didn’t see it. How do you take into account the bullet drop at distance? My understanding is the laser is a straight line out ‘forever’. With 100y zero, it seems that at 300y I would be off 13.77” due to the need to hold over at that distance. (My ammo, gun combo and BC) Hope that all made sense How you zero your dot/reticle takes into account for your bullet drop over distance ie 50/200 POA/POI. Overlap it to your dot/reticle at the "furthest distance" possible and the hold over/unders will be exactly the same from @ 50 and out. |
|
It's a waste of time. Overlapping your dot/reticle initially takes @ 2 mins, doesn't cost anything, you never fire a round, and can be used to reconfirm your zero quickly and easily. |
|
Originally Posted By GroundhogOZ: For the Holosun IRIS RD3 red laser mounted in the 12 oclock position the pertinent information is as follows (2) height above bore of the laser 3.5cm or 1.4 inches (3) distance of the laser to the right of the bore 2cm or 0.8 inches. The laser is slaved parallel to the zeroed cross hair - it is that simple. This info could be combined with the blank target on page 71 in the manual for the Insight AM/PEM-1 (LBS 300), to create a laser offset target that can zero the weapon dry, so you only need to fire to confirm zero. And with the viz laser, you can do it in daylight, again only needing to confirm zero at night. The manual is LBS-TM-L804, and comes with the AM/PEM-1. |
Armory Sponsor