POI changes with zoom????

For the most part, IMHO, what changes is the point of aim. Esp. in a second focal plane scope, this is because the reticle covers much more of the target at lower powers than it does at higher powers. 

A descent quality scope should not have that issue.  A cheaper one will be more likely.

can occur with sfp scopes. In order for this not to occur the erector system would have to be a perfect mechanical assembly that repeated itself without error each time it moved. Since it doesn't a random variable or error can be introduced each time it is racked in and out. Most scopes used in the US are for hunters who don't shoot very much, and if the scope passes the 3 shot sight in it's good to go.  Also the box text of scope for a hunter is placing an empty box at 200 yds and if they hit it on the first shot its also good to go.
While the reticle covers more of the target on higher powers, the lack of reticle size increase allows for bisection of the target in a more precise manner, which leads to a predicable error. POI change  due to power increase/decease is random----it is not predictable. A big difference. Most higher quality scopes will probably due this less, NF,Zeiss etc. and if the degree of precision in the target is not necessary would probably not be observed.

Thanks for the advice.

Edited by shooter4 - November/26/2011 at 09:37

I think new 22's suck they seem to shoot all over the place and I remember the ones from years ago being a hell of a lot more accurate.  There are lots of variables here. First suspect is the rings and base make sure they are secure and of good quality. From there start testing the scope shoot a box  on a target to see how well the adustments of the knobs is working.  X ring up 4 inches right 4 inches down 4 inches left 4 inches and look at the target. Do this at different magnifications to try to figure out what is going on.  If you suspect something has gone wrong with the scope you can send it to Zeiss to be tested and repaired.  You can also put a different scope on the rifle and try to see if you still have the same problem or try that on a rifle you know is super acccurate.  I would be a lot more likely to eliminate the rifle as the culprit if it was a 17 hmr or a centerfire that was known to shoot a tight group.  22 ammo for the most part sucks these days years ago it was better quality or the barrels were not sure which.

Edited by Urimaginaryfrnd - November/26/2011 at 10:16

Have you checked your mounts? I know every time I think my 30 year old tasco has finally gone tits up on my .22...It has been that the rings have moved on the built-in dove-tail on the receiver. (I really want a new scope for that rifle, but the wife won't let me until it is dead.) 

Refer to Rule #1 ...

The unfortunate thing about that plan is my wife seems to be a bit more observant than most...Esp. when it concerns the guns she enjoys. The .45 is her favorite, but the 22 is a close second...

Well you failed to mention that it was HER GUN!!! its time to buy one of your own that one is Her's now.

I did see a Savage MKII at WallyWorld...

I have the MKII Savage with the thumb hole stock the mag only holds 5 rounds and the 10 round mags are about $20. I had a marlin bolt that was more accurate than the Savage and traded it thinking it was not accurate enough. Ive been full circle with 22s in the last three years.  Think if I was going to buy another one it would be a Ruger 10-22 they made one with a longer than average barrel that I like.  Here lately I had been wanting a 22mag and stumbled across a Marlin levermatic model 57M  built 1959 --- it came home with me. I used to have a Marlin 39A lever action now that was a 22 that would shoot.   Paul took the 22mag to the farm and says it shoots real well, I knew it would it was build when people cared about what they were making.

Edited by Urimaginaryfrnd - November/26/2011 at 10:57