AR Sponsor
Posted: 1/2/2011 6:27:27 PM EDT
Is it me or is this chart all kinds of wacky? 
ETA3: Chart should be read vertically, but seems laid out (and is explained by the instructor in the video) to read horizontally. ETA: If you watch the video, the instructor explains the chart as if it reads horizontally ETA2: The Target Distance and Zero labels need to be swapped. And it'd make more sense if the left side distance labels extended out to 200-300yds. Chart is from a screenshot of the following video posted on Ruger's website under Tactical Carbine Tips. Link Below: ––––––––> Ruger Video <––––––––- 
|
|
Quoted:
You realise that you read that chart vertically, and not horizontally? There's our answer!!! If you watch the video, the instructor explains the chart as if it reads horizontally. I'm surprised he didn't catch it. It makes sense vertically but it's still a poorly laid out chart. I'm well aware of all the standard AR zero charts out there and all of Molon's posts and have no problem zeroing my own rifles. This chart along with its incorrect explanation in the video just struck me as weird and I think it will mislead any newcomers watching it. And to the above poster... what is this "gravity" you speak of? |
|
Quoted: Quoted: You realise that you read that chart vertically, and not horizontally? There's our answer!!! If you watch the video, the instructor explains the chart as if it reads horizontally. I'm surprised he didn't catch it. It makes sense vertically but it's still a poorly laid out chart. I'm well aware of all the standard AR zero charts out there and all of Molon's posts and have no problem zeroing my own rifles. This chart along with its incorrect explanation in the video just struck me as weird and I think it will mislead any newcomers watching it. And to the above poster... what is this "gravity" you speak of? Its poorly laid out because the data is place in it to read vertically. But the way the header and left margin are laid out it should read horizontally. |
|
I think the chart is correct and you are confusing what it is saying with a chart that shows the concept of bullet trajectory. You think it is saying that when you shoot at a 25 yard yard target with a 25 yard zero, the other targets at the indicated distances are being hit at the indicated heights. For instance, if you line up a 25, a 50, a 100, and a 200 target one behind the other and shoot through the bullseye of the 25 yard target, you think it is saying that by the time the round hits the 200 yard target, it will be -1.16 inches. That isn't what it is saying.
It is saying that if you line up your sights on a 200 yard target with your sights set to a 25 yard range, it is going to be low by 1.16 inches. Conversely, let's say your sights were zeroed to the 100 yard target and you had invisible targets at the 50 and the 25 yard lines. If you aimed, fired, at hit at the 100 yard bullseye, that chart is not saying that the rounds would impact the 50 yard target at 1.39 inches high and the 25 yard target at 5.86 inches high. The 50 yard target would only impact 1.39 inches high if you were aiming at the 50 yard target with the 100 yard zero, and the 25 yard target would only impact at 5.86 inches high if you were aiming at the 25 yard target with the 100 yard zero. |
..and the light is bright!
| There is nothing wrong with the chart. You can even confirm that by looking at the 50 yard zero row. It falls right in line with the generally accepted "50/200" yard zero. By the chart, if you zero at 50 yards, the round will be 1/10th of an inch low if you use the same sight setting and aim at a 200 yard target. I'm not sure about you guys, but in my book, 1/10th of an inch is pretty much a hit at the same spot. |
|
Reading it as you are though, would put you 2.25" high at 25yds which we all know isn't the case. Not to mention, if you read it horizontally, which we've already discovered is wrong, your example is about the only "intersection" on that chart that makes any sense.
It's already been figured out.... Chart reads vertically but it's put together awkwardly and: (my main point the whole time) THE INSTRUCTOR EXPLAINS IT INCORRECTLY IN THE VIDEO AS READING HORIZONTALLY . I didn't post this to ask for help zeroing my rifle. I have used the 50/200 zero for years and have no problems with it. Only posted it cause the freaking chart makes no sense as its explained in the video. DID ANYONE EVEN WATCH THE STUPID VIDEO BEFORE POSTING?!?!?!?!?!?! 
Quoted:
There is nothing wrong with the chart. You can even confirm that by looking at the 50 yard zero row. It falls right in line with the generally accepted "50/200" yard zero. By the chart, if you zero at 50 yards, the round will be 1/10th of an inch low if you use the same sight setting and aim at a 200 yard target. I'm not sure about you guys, but in my book, 1/10th of an inch is pretty much a hit at the same spot. |
AR Sponsor