Visit the SWFA.com site to check out our current specials. |
Turret backlash?? |
Post Reply | Page 12> |
Author | |
fourinone
Optics Apprentice Joined: January/14/2006 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 169 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Posted: October/12/2009 at 09:12 |
Hi, A number of years ago I purchased Leupold Vari X-III 6.5-20's from Premier Reticles that was modified by them in respect to a power boost and the reticles. Anyway they sent their own instructions with the scopes. I'll quote this one statement; " A hint to improve the accuracy of the adjustments is any time a counter-clockwise adjustment is made to always go beyound your new setting by 1-2 minutes and then come back to it in a clockwise direction. This procedure will eliminate any backlash in the adjustment assembly". My question to you is this still necessary today with a scope like the Nikon Tactical 2.5-10 or even the scope Weaver just discontinued Classic Extreme illuminated riticle 2.5x10x50mm & 56mm scopes? Also can following the above procedure have an adverse effect on the desired point of impact with any of todays higher end scopes?
|
|
Can you see me now...
|
|
8shots
Optics Jedi Knight Lord Of The Flies Joined: March/14/2007 Location: South Africa Status: Offline Points: 6253 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I do this as a matter of habit, but not only in counter-clockwise adjustments. I cannot see that it could have any adverse effect.
|
|
Dale Clifford
Optics Jedi Knight Joined: July/04/2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 5087 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Have quite a few Leos with side AO's and have never had the dreaded leo backlash problem. Personally I llike to start at infinity with a side AO and dial back anyway as it gives a really good idea of the size, location, and speed of the mirage.
|
|
fourinone
Optics Apprentice Joined: January/14/2006 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 169 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Thanks Dale, but I should have made my question more clear. I'm asking more specifically about the elevation & windage adjustments. And this instruction sheet sent to me by Premier Reticles was also referring to elevation & windage. Back in those days Leupold did not have the side parallax on the Vari X-III scopes.
|
|
Can you see me now...
|
|
Dale Clifford
Optics Jedi Knight Joined: July/04/2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 5087 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
oh that type of backlash, it used to called a rubber mallet, or a screw driver handle whack. personally if I had to do that with a scope I would get rid of it --especially a tactical. None of the tacticals (or regulars) that I use need this extra step.
|
|
Al Nyhus
Optics Apprentice Joined: March/08/2009 Status: Offline Points: 127 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
fourinone: I think it's a good idea to go past and then back to load the adjustments. Another thing that I've found helpful for reliable tracking is to periodically run the w/e adjusters to both ends of their travel and then back to your zero.
Edited by Al Nyhus - October/13/2009 at 04:59 |
|
"Marsupials scare me".
|
|
8shots
Optics Jedi Knight Lord Of The Flies Joined: March/14/2007 Location: South Africa Status: Offline Points: 6253 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Dale,
I have a Leo, and that gives backlash problems on the AO, or put differently, seem to loose focus.
Interesting observation you made about playing with the focus in order to pick up mirage.
|
|
Dale Clifford
Optics Jedi Knight Joined: July/04/2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 5087 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Sometimes running the elevation totally out and leaving it for a couple of days is a good way to find out how bad the scope really is, --if you do a lot of long range shooting with the scope you are using at least 2 revolutions all day long, (unless using an Erek or IOR mil). Most rifle/load combinations aren't going to see differences in a couple of clicks, even if the shooter could tell the difference. I believe Mr. Nyhus shoots ultra high end bench guns off of solid rests and coupled with his skills hysteresis could show up. In action shooting matchs with time pressure this isn't an option.
|
|
fourinone
Optics Apprentice Joined: January/14/2006 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 169 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Well the more I think about it, the more I feel it has to do more good than bad. There are tolerances in all machined parts, and therefore it stands to reason there would be some amount of "PLAY" when changing direction with the turrets. Thanks for each of yours input.
|
|
Can you see me now...
|
|
Dale Clifford
Optics Jedi Knight Joined: July/04/2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 5087 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
stands to reason there would be some amount of "PLAY" when changing direction
not a question of good or bad--- any play in the mechansim is off set by 10 times the amount of play in the shooter.
|
|
fourinone
Optics Apprentice Joined: January/14/2006 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 169 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I agree with the human factor, It's hard to tell how many times a scope gets blamed for a flier that was due to the shooter. I have even second guessed my scopes when making adjustments in windage and or elevation and not get the intended result with the next shot. This is one of the reasons why I asked this question to begin with. I wanted to zero a hunting rifle for a max point blank range with a new scope and mount system and me shooting. All sorts of questions come to mind in this process when a flier occurs. So if nothing else, it can help with the process of elimination. I guess if the shooter is off by .001" in the way he or she aims at a target that can be how far off at 100 yards? There's 3,600 inches in 100 yards. Would that be 3.6 inches??
|
|
Can you see me now...
|
|
danjojoUSMC
Optics Journeyman Joined: August/20/2009 Location: NE Ohio Status: Offline Points: 329 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I don't think it works like that with the being off by .001" in aim thing....
Your aim isn't the same as the other stuff you are thinking about.
Only way would be if you was using iron sights and you always used them incorrectly but consistently....say putting the 10" target circle on top of the post at each range of 200, 300, or 500....then you will have differing amounts of bad aiming.
EDIT - Actually that would be the same off-aiming as well....it's pretty hard to goof up aiming to a large degree without intentionally doing it. You would need to be using the middle of the post in the above scenario...with the top of the post being the correct spot for bullet placement. If you sight in with the same part of your sight or reticle and continue to use it you are good regardless. Edited by danjojoUSMC - October/13/2009 at 14:29 |
|
"When I let go of what I am, I become what I might be"
"Every part of life comes into focus just as you are about to pull the trigger." |
|
Jon A
Optics Journeyman Joined: March/14/2008 Location: Everett, WA Status: Offline Points: 670 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I agree there will always be a human factor but it should be to a lesser extent at the times where most people will be using the turrets (medium to long range from a solid rest or prone). In such a situation, any decent shooter with a fairly accurate rifle certainly would notice (or be messed up by) the adjustment being a couple of clicks off.
With many scopes going past your intended adjustment and coming back is necessary to ensure it isn't being "lazy," but if you do much shooting at extended distances this gets really old. And that's the last thing you want to have to remember to do when a shot really counts (be it hunting or competition or whatever). So naturally I advise for that type of use if you find your scope doing that, replace it with one that doesn't. Of course if you won't mess with the turrets much after zeroing, or only do on a more casual/occasional basis, it may not be that big a deal to you. None of the higher level tactical scopes I've used have needed this technique and even some cheap non-tactical ones haven't seemed to need it. The problem is knowing--you can test for it and find an obvious problem, but if a scope only "sticks" 1/10th of the time, the only way you'll likely discover that is through a lot of use. |
|
fourinone
Optics Apprentice Joined: January/14/2006 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 169 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I was not sure about my way of figuring this, that is the main reason I ended it with the question mark. It seems those 10,20,30moa bases were something like .001" for each moa gain?? I can't remember for sure. Someone here knows this off the top of their head and I did too at one time or another. But I think that when making an adjustment the gun is not likely to rest in your bag the exact same way to aim at the same target you just shot at prior to the adjustment. So I'm not sure what effect this could also have in not getting the expected point of impact change?
|
|
Can you see me now...
|
|
Al Nyhus
Optics Apprentice Joined: March/08/2009 Status: Offline Points: 127 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
My periodic running of the w/e adjustments to their travel limits and then back to 'zero' is obviously not done in a hunting or competition scenario.
Testing is one thing.....competition when the timer is running is another. -Al
|
|
"Marsupials scare me".
|
|
fourinone
Optics Apprentice Joined: January/14/2006 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 169 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Just an update on the subject. I have a friend who is one of the best machinist in the country and was involved with a very respected tactical scope manufacture who has their own line of tactical scopes now. Anyway he said in a scope with internal windage & elevation adjustments, backlash is unavoidable because threads have to be able to move when you turn them, so there is at least enough clearance for them to turn. As a result you will have backlash. He did say that this company recommends turning past the setting and then go back to the desired setting.
|
|
Can you see me now...
|
|
Dale Clifford
Optics Jedi Knight Joined: July/04/2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 5087 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
yes-- but does he ever shoot?
|
|
Jon A
Optics Journeyman Joined: March/14/2008 Location: Everett, WA Status: Offline Points: 670 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
While the threads do need enough clearance to turn, adequate spring pressure on the erector "takes out the slack" such that it should not be an issue. The end result for a scope with this problem, is the erector being in two different locations for the same turret setting depending upon if you went past the mark and came back or not. The interface between the two and obviously the spring pressure that holds them together is not up to the task.
|
|
Dale Clifford
Optics Jedi Knight Joined: July/04/2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 5087 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Well put Jon--- I was thinking something like hysteresis is a non-deterministic system usually of at least 3rd order (the hysteresis loop), involving at least two attractors in which the system will return to basin of attraction unless pushed out by an outside force and if done rapidly enough will oscillate. Systems,mechanical and electrical engineers try to linerize the problem to make the system as deterministic as possible by removing the small time interval components associated with the system. (linear time invariant). Two non-deterministic systems (the shooter and a scope) working in harmony is a difficult goal. Would the amt. of error taken out by overshoot then back be off-set each time by a correct sight picture on the part of the shooter? Not likely. Is the statistical bell-curve for the error produced by the backlash within the sighting error of the shooter. Most likely. (especially in good expensive scopes). I would really like to know the name of that scope maker.
|
|
Al Nyhus
Optics Apprentice Joined: March/08/2009 Status: Offline Points: 127 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
It's worth noting that manufacturers of high end, precision measuring tools recommend periodic stop-to-stop travel of the instruments be done to avoid the mechanical lag that happens when a system with a range of adjustment is operated within a relatively narrow window of it's total range for an extended time.
$19.95 micrometers need not apply.
|
|
"Marsupials scare me".
|
|
Post Reply | Page 12> |
Tweet
|
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |