Scopes

[Baron Hurlothrumbo IIX 0]

The SA80's SUSAT is lauded as being able to be removed and reattached without losing zero... but obviously, it's not perfect. It'd still be close enough for most purposes, but not great. We routinely switch the SUSAT for the CWS(nightsight) when patrolling at night.

There's also the collimator tool, but they aren't that useful. They can help to bring a new weapon/ sight pretty close to zero, but it'll still need zeroed.

[Mister Frag 0]

There are firearms that do come zero'd from the factory / armory, but that will be for a specific ammunition type, and typically just the iron sights. Nobody in their right mind would actually rely on the zeroing done at the factory before trusting their lives to it.

On the other hand, if zeroing can be done for iron sights at the factory, there is no reason why H&K can't do it for the integrated optics of the XM8. Holding the zero during the removal and reinstallation cycle of the sight isn't an issue, since it can't be removed by itself AFAIK.

[madmedic 0]

There are firearms that do come zero'd from the factory / armory, but that will be for a specific ammunition type, and typically just the iron sights. Nobody in their right mind would actually rely on the zeroing done at the factory before trusting their lives to it.

On the other hand, if zeroing can be done for iron sights at the factory, there is no reason why H&K can't do it for the integrated optics of the XM8. Holding the zero during the removal and reinstallation cycle of the sight isn't an issue, since it can't be removed by itself AFAIK.

A firearm zeroed at the factory is very different than an aftermarket sight sold by itself. (which I believe is what was referred to)...cant be done.

[beno_83au 1369]

Could I take a SAW, fire a couple hundred rounds with ironsights, and then quickly add a scope?

Yes, i have to do it. I zero the gun's iron sights then put on a scope (x4 magnification, makes no sense using it on a gun, I love iron sights) and have to zero that, just gotta make sure you put the scope on the right spot each time.

[Baron Hurlothrumbo IIX 0]

There are firearms that do come zero'd from the factory / armory, but that will be for a specific ammunition type, and typically just the iron sights. Nobody in their right mind would actually rely on the zeroing done at the factory before trusting their lives to it.

On the other hand, if zeroing can be done for iron sights at the factory, there is no reason why H&K can't do it for the integrated optics of the XM8. Holding the zero during the removal and reinstallation cycle of the sight isn't an issue, since it can't be removed by itself AFAIK.

What are you talking about. Ever single individual holds and fires a weapon differently: every single individual needs to have their own zero for a specific weapon. Some people are really similar, yes, but thats quite rare. A perfectly zeroed weapon for one soldier, handed to another, is not zeroed for them.

A perfectly zeroed rifle from the manufacturer is bugger all use to anyone.

[USSoldier11B 0]

What do you mean zeroing is a pain? You should be able to zero your M4/M16 in 6 to 9 shots. Three shots per grouping. Zeroing a scope is much easier if you have it bore sighted, at least you will be on the paper the first time you attempt to group. The M145 optical sight for the M24O/M249 weapons systems can be zeroed once, then taken off the the weapon and put back on without re-zeroing, provided it's the same weapon. This is true for most of the newer combat opitcal sight systems.

[madmedic 0]

There are firearms that do come zero'd from the factory / armory, but that will be for a specific ammunition type, and typically just the iron sights. Nobody in their right mind would actually rely on the zeroing done at the factory before trusting their lives to it.

On the other hand, if zeroing can be done for iron sights at the factory, there is no reason why H&K can't do it for the integrated optics of the XM8. Holding the zero during the removal and reinstallation cycle of the sight isn't an issue, since it can't be removed by itself AFAIK.

What are you talking about.  Ever single individual holds and fires a weapon differently: every single individual needs to have their own zero for a specific weapon.  Some people are really similar, yes, but thats quite rare.  A perfectly zeroed weapon for one soldier, handed to another, is not zeroed for them.

A perfectly zeroed rifle from the manufacturer is bugger all use to anyone.

Actually, a properly "zeroed" weapon, is a "zeroed" weapon

"point of aim" is "point of aim"...especially if it is a scoped weapon.

In fact...a rifle should ideally be zeroed from a bench rest.

If my rifle is properly zeroed, you should be able to fire it accurately...

And if your rifle is properly zeroed, I should be able to fire it accurately.

"Sight alignment, and trigger squeeze"...You either look down the sights, and fire the weapon correctly, or you dont.

If two people fire the same rifle, and one consistently hits the 10 ring...while the other consistently misses, then one of two possibilities exist:

1) the rifle is not properly zeroed, and one shooter comensates for it

2) the rifle is properly zeroed, and one shooter is not aligning the sights correctly, or is commiting some other poor shooting habit like "flinching", or "pulling"

If the rifle is sighted in to accomidate the shooter with poor shooting habits, then it is not "zeroed"...and you cant zero a rifle to make up for things like flinching.

Now...You may have a "preference" for...say, "pumkin on a post", vs. "dead on" sighting of your front sight post.

That would make someone else shoot your rifle either high, or low...if you didnt tell them your rifle was sighted that way.

But if they knew...they should be able to shoot accurately.

That being said...weapons that are "zeroed" at the factory, are usually just "on the paper"...and YES, you should always zero your own weapon

As stated above...you should be able to do it in 10 rounds or less. (usually not that many)

[USSoldier11B 0]

Quote[/b] ]If two people fire the same rifle, and one consistently hits the 10 ring...while the other consistently misses, then one of two possibilities exist:

1) the rifle is not properly zeroed, and one shooter comensates for it

2) the rifle is properly zeroed, and one shooter is not aligning the sights correctly, or is commiting some other poor shooting habit like "flinching", or "pulling"

I don't find this to be true at all. Zeroed weapons vary greatly between shooters. Besides the fundamentals of sight, acquire, fire, breath control, and trigger squeeze, a person should shoot however he feels comfortable and performs the best. Also you have to take into account the effect of biomechanics and biology in general. A bigger person is going to have a different sight picture than a smaller one. People's eyes are not the same distance apart, nor do they have the same length of nose..etc etc etc I think you get the point.

[beno_83au 1369]

If my rifle is properly zeroed, you should be able to fire it accurately...

And if your rifle is properly zeroed, I should be able to fire it accurately.

True that. The last time I zeroed a styer I fired my first 3 shots as a proper group and it was spot on and left it at that. And bugger firing the other 20 that I had.

3 rounds = easy to clean

[USSoldier11B 0]

I almost always fire 9. 3 initial, 3 with adjustment, and then 3 more to double check. I've seen some soldiers take hours to zero because they can't get a good shot group.

[beno_83au 1369]

Yeah I've seen that too, but I hardly ever zero a rifle, do one about every 2 months, I'm usually zeroing my gun, that doesnt take long either.

[madmedic 0]

Quote[/b] ]If two people fire the same rifle, and one consistently hits the 10 ring...while the other consistently misses, then one of two possibilities exist:

1) the rifle is not properly zeroed, and one shooter comensates for it

2) the rifle is properly zeroed, and one shooter is not aligning the sights correctly, or is commiting some other poor shooting habit like "flinching", or "pulling"

I don't find this to be true at all. Zeroed weapons vary greatly between shooters. Besides the fundamentals of sight, acquire, fire, breath control, and trigger squeeze, a person should shoot however he feels comfortable and performs the best. Also you have to take into account the effect of biomechanics and biology in general. A bigger person is going to have a different sight picture than a smaller one. People's eyes are not the same distance apart, nor do they have the same length of nose..etc etc etc I think you get the point.

"zeroed" is zeroed...The persons size, or the distance between their eyes, or length of their nose have no bearing on the point of aim of a rifle.

You have to look through the sights at the same angle...period.

There is only one setting where the rifle will shoot to point of aim...

Quote[/b] ]Besides the fundamentals of sight, acquire, fire, breath control, and trigger squeeze

None of this has anything to do with the zero of the weapon, this stuff is all shooting technique...and it is either right, or wrong.

[Baron Hurlothrumbo IIX 0]

Quote[/b] ]If two people fire the same rifle, and one consistently hits the 10 ring...while the other consistently misses, then one of two possibilities exist:

1) the rifle is not properly zeroed, and one shooter comensates for it

2) the rifle is properly zeroed, and one shooter is not aligning the sights correctly, or is commiting some other poor shooting habit like "flinching", or "pulling"

........

"zeroed" is zeroed...The persons size, or the distance between their eyes, or length of their nose have no bearing on the point of aim of a rifle.

You have to look through the sights at the same angle...period.

There is only one setting where the rifle will shoot to point of aim...

None of this has anything to do with the zero of the weapon, this stuff is all shooting technique...and it is either right, or wrong.

You are talking UTTER garbage sir.

Even with proper sight alignment, hold, breathing, release and follow through, NO TWO PEOPLE ARE THE SAME.

Wrong, Wrong, WRONG.

Two people, both using faultless weapon handling drills, will not hit in the same place with an unzeroed weapon. Two people, both using faultless weapon handling skills, will not hit in the same place with a boresighted weapon.

Both WILL, however, get < 30mm groups with a bog standard SA80.

[madmedic 0]

Quote[/b] ]If two people fire the same rifle, and one consistently hits the 10 ring...while the other consistently misses, then one of two possibilities exist:

1) the rifle is not properly zeroed, and one shooter comensates for it

2) the rifle is properly zeroed, and one shooter is not aligning the sights correctly, or is commiting some other poor shooting habit like "flinching", or "pulling"

........

"zeroed" is zeroed...The persons size, or the distance between their eyes, or length of their nose have no bearing on the point of aim of a rifle.

You have to look through the sights at the same angle...period.

There is only one setting where the rifle will shoot to point of aim...

None of this has anything to do with the zero of the weapon, this stuff is all shooting technique...and it is either right, or wrong.

You are talking UTTER garbage sir.

Even with proper sight alignment, hold, breathing, release and follow through, NO TWO PEOPLE ARE THE SAME.

Wrong, Wrong, WRONG.

Two people, both using faultless weapon handling drills, will not hit in the same place with an unzeroed weapon.  Two people, both using faultless weapon handling skills, will not hit in the same place with a boresighted weapon.

Both WILL, however, get < 30mm groups with a bog standard SA80.

Right, no two people are the same...but a zeroed rifle is a zeroed rifle...period

Claiming that one person can not shoot a rifle accurately because the rifle is not zeroed for the particular person is complete and utter bull...

point of impact...is point of impact it does not change.

there is only one setting, and one angle you can look through the sights where pont of impact at a given distance lines up with proper sight picture.

"zero" is where "point of aim", and "point of impact" meet at whatever distance the weapon is being zeroed.

there is only ONE correct angle to look through the sights...and if you change the angle of the sights, you are changing POINT OF AIM, but NOT changing POINT OF IMPACT

The two only match up at one spot, no matter who is firing the weapon.

To simplify it..."zero" is purely mechanical.

The best way to get an absolutely "perfect" zero would be to have the rifle clamped into a rifle vise, shooting from a solid bench.

Human error has absolutely NOTHING to do with a particular rifle's "zero".

[Baron Hurlothrumbo IIX 0]

Right, no two people are the same...but a zeroed rifle is a zeroed rifle...period

Claiming that one person can not shoot a rifle accurately because the rifle is not zeroed for the particular person is complete and utter bull...

point of impact...is point of impact it does not change.

there is only one setting, and one angle you can look through the sights where pont of impact at a given distance lines up with proper sight picture.

No, what you are claiming is bull. Go talk someone who knows about shooting, specifically training others to shoot. I was at Bisley not 2 weeks ago, with some of the best military shooters in NATO. None of whom have the same sight settings on their weapon. None. Despite hitting HPS regularly on some of the hardest shoots in the world. But according to you they aren't zeroed properly. OK.

Quote[/b] ]

"zero" is where "point of aim", and "point of impact" meet at whatever distance the weapon is being zeroed.

there is only ONE correct angle to look through the sights...and if you change the angle of the sights, you are changing POINT OF AIM, but NOT changing POINT OF IMPACT

The two only match up at one spot, no matter who is firing the weapon.

WRONG. Depending on who is firing the weapon, point of impact changes, and therefore point of aim needs to change. And they ARE holding the weapon correctly.

Quote[/b] ]

To simplify it..."zero" is purely mechanical.

No, it is not. Zero is dependent on the shooter AND the rifle. Hence why EVERYONE ZEROES THEIR OWN WEAPON. If this pish you are talking were true, there would be no need for that.

Quote[/b] ]

The best way to get an absolutely "perfect" zero would be to have the rifle clamped into a rifle vise, shooting from a solid bench.

Rubbish again. Having a rifle held in a vice totally changes the aim point because the hold is different and the vice does not push against the recoil in the same way as a shoulder. That would get you the smallest possible group the rifle can do - but its fuck all use for checking zero.

Quote[/b] ]

Human error has absolutely NOTHING to do with a particular rifle's "zero".

Correct, but its not human error, its simply different physiology and minor differences in strength of grip, etc. None of which are errors.

[Baron Hurlothrumbo IIX 0]

Let me clarify this for you:

Zeroing is the act of adjusting a rifles sights so that they result in an accurate hit on target. Assuming proper position, hold, sight relief, steady pull and follow through and aiming, NO TWO PEOPLE HAVE THE SAME ZERO ON ANY SPECIFIC WEAPON.

Following all drills and skills properly, the two shooters will have two different groups. Both will be small and tight. If the groups were not small and tight, that would be evidence that they were performing bad shooting habits such as flinching or pulling.

Regardless of where the group is, if it is small and tight, and all drills are done properly, the firer is not at fault and the rifle needs zeroed.

*edit again*

Note I'm not saying they won't be very similar - maybe even unnoticable at 100m - but once you start going back to decent distances, it becomes more apparent.

*/edit*

[Balschoiw 0]

Quote[/b] ]Claiming that one person can not shoot a rifle accurately because the rifle is not zeroed for the particular person is complete and utter bull...

Ermm...

I disagree. I understand your technical point madmedic but people do have different eyes, "eyeholes", lenses and a different lens to "eye-reflection" distance. I could possibly hit something with a gun from another soldier in my squad, but I still get the best results (scoped) with my own setting. That´s just natural.

If there was a universal zeroing, companies would include it in their fabrication.

Today´s status is that we still have to zero the gun for ourselves and we will not have the same results with a gun zeroed by another one.

That´s why we do it individually, not even scopes alone, but also ironsights.

[madmedic 0]

Right, no two people are the same...but a zeroed rifle is a zeroed rifle...period

Claiming that one person can not shoot a rifle accurately because the rifle is not zeroed for the particular person is complete and utter bull...

point of impact...is point of impact it does not change.

there is only one setting, and one angle you can look through the sights where pont of impact at a given distance lines up with proper sight picture.

No, what you are claiming is bull. Go talk someone who knows about shooting, specifically training others to shoot.  I was at Bisley not 2 weeks ago, with some of the best military shooters in NATO.  None of whom have the same sight settings on their weapon.  None.  Despite hitting HPS regularly on some of the hardest shoots in the world.  But according to you they aren't zeroed properly.  OK.    

Quote[/b] ]

"zero" is where "point of aim", and "point of impact" meet at whatever distance the weapon is being zeroed.

there is only ONE correct angle to look through the sights...and if you change the angle of the sights, you are changing POINT OF AIM, but NOT changing POINT OF IMPACT

The two only match up at one spot, no matter who is firing the weapon.

WRONG.  Depending on who is firing the weapon, point of impact changes, and therefore point of aim needs to change.  And they ARE holding the weapon correctly.

Quote[/b] ]

To simplify it..."zero" is purely mechanical.

No, it is not.  Zero is dependent on the shooter AND the rifle.  Hence why EVERYONE ZEROES THEIR OWN WEAPON.  If this pish you are talking were true, there would be no need for that.

Quote[/b] ]

The best way to get an absolutely "perfect" zero would be to have the rifle clamped into a rifle vise, shooting from a solid bench.

Rubbish again.  Having a rifle held in a vice totally changes the aim point because the hold is different and the vice does not push against the recoil in the same way as a shoulder.   That would get you the smallest possible group the rifle can do - but its fuck all use for checking zero.

Quote[/b] ]

Human error has absolutely NOTHING to do with a particular rifle's "zero".

Correct, but its not human error, its simply different physiology and minor differences in strength of grip, etc.  None of which are errors.

Baron...I do train others to shoot, and I compete in high power, and 3 gun matches.

I had a long, drawn out post ready, when something dawned on me...

You are basically mis-understanding what I was trying to say, and I was mis-understanding what you, and USSOLDIER11B were saying.

When I say "a zeroed rifle is a zeroed rifle", I mean that if a rifle is zeroed to shoot point of aim, with the front sight post properly centered in the rear aperature...then it does not matter who fires it if they properly center the front post in the rear aperature

It may not be the most comfortable for them to do, and they may have to adjust their cheek weld...but if they are firing with the front post not centered in the rear aperature...then they are not looking through the sights correctly...

What you were speaking of, was basically adjusting the sights to make it so the other guy can properly line up the sights without adjusting his cheek weld, ect.

I realized that when I read the final sentence of your last post.

I was basically speaking strictly of sight picture vs. point of aim/impact

If you look a few posts back...I DID say that everyone should zero his own weapon.

Oh, and the comment about the bench vise was in reference to zeroing a scope, or other "parralax free" sight...not iron sights, and was merely an attempted illustration that a rifle sighted in mechanically would shoot to exactly the rifle's point of aim.

Basically...I started out talking about optical sights (which the original poster asked about)...and got off on Iron sights without realizing it.

[madmedic 0]

Quote[/b] ]Claiming that one person can not shoot a rifle accurately because the rifle is not zeroed for the particular person is complete and utter bull...

Ermm...

I disagree. I understand your technical point madmedic but people do have different eyes, "eyeholes", lenses and a different lens to "eye-reflection" distance. I could possibly hit something with a gun from another soldier in my squad, but I still get the best results (scoped) with my own setting. That´s just natural.

If there was a universal zeroing, companies would include it in their fabrication.

Today´s status is that we still have to zero the gun for ourselves and we will not have the same results with a gun zeroed by another one.

That´s why we do it individually, not even scopes alone, but also ironsights.

Balschoiw...

I dont dis-agree with you...(see my last post)

My statement was to the effect that you should still be able to fire a rifle accurately even if someone else properly zeroed it...providing you use the sights properly.

Might not be the best for you...but you can certainly do it...and it shouldnt be very difficult.

I had the impression that other people were saying it is impossible.

[Baron Hurlothrumbo IIX 0]

Baron...I do train others to shoot, and I compete in high power, and 3 gun matches.

I had a long, drawn out post ready, when something dawned on me...

You are basically mis-understanding what I was trying to say, and I was mis-understanding what you, and USSOLDIER11B were saying.

When I say "a zeroed rifle is a zeroed rifle", I mean that if a rifle is zeroed to shoot point of aim, with the front sight post properly centered in the rear aperature...then it does not matter who fires it if they properly center the front post in the rear aperature

Well I don't shoot iron sights often. Our rifle has a SUSAT as standard for infantry. But that is not true either. I don't know how many times I have to repeat this: with hypothetical shooters, both DOING PROPER RIFLE DRILLS (which includes proper sight relief and aiming,) the rifle will NOT hit in exactly the same place. The groups may be quite close to each other, or they may not.

Quote[/b] ]

It may not be the most comfortable for them to do, and they may have to adjust their cheek weld...but if they are firing with the front post not centered in the rear aperature...then they are not looking through the sights correctly...

I am NOT talking about people not looking through the sights properly. Even when they are looking through the sights properly, this happens.

Quote[/b] ]

What you were speaking of, was basically adjusting the sights to make it so the other guy can properly line up the sights without adjusting his cheek weld, ect.

No, I am not. Do not put words in my mouth.

Quote[/b] ]

I was basically speaking strictly of sight picture vs. point of aim/impact

If you look a few posts back...I DID say that everyone should zero his own weapon.

You said everyone should zero their own weapon because they wouldn't be zeroed properly at the factory... not because everyone shoots differently.

Quote[/b] ]

Oh, and the comment about the bench vise was in reference to zeroing a scope, or other "parralax free" sight...not iron sights,

And is equally wrong when shooting a scoped weapon, as I shoot with, and the other shooters shoot with.

Quote[/b] ]

and was merely an attempted illustration that a rifle sighted in mechanically would shoot to exactly the rifle's point of aim.

But not to the shooters point of aim - making it....... NOT ZEROED.

Quote[/b] ]My statement was to the effect that you should still be able to fire a rifle accurately even if someone else properly zeroed it...providing you use the sights properly

When I say 'zeroed' I mean 'zeroed' not 'hitting the target.' 2 inches off is not zeroed. Of course someone could use someone elses rifle and at least hit the target - and if not any decent shooter could adjust by splash - but that doesn't make it zeroed.

[madmedic 0]

Baron...I do train others to shoot, and I compete in high power, and 3 gun matches.

I had a long, drawn out post ready, when something dawned on me...

You are basically mis-understanding what I was trying to say, and I was mis-understanding what you, and USSOLDIER11B were saying.

When I say "a zeroed rifle is a zeroed rifle", I mean that if a rifle is zeroed to shoot point of aim, with the front sight post properly centered in the rear aperature...then it does not matter who fires it if they properly center the front post in the rear aperature

Well I don't shoot iron sights often.  Our rifle has a SUSAT as standard for infantry.  But that is not true either.  I don't know how many times I have to repeat this: with hypothetical shooters, both DOING PROPER RIFLE DRILLS (which includes proper sight relief and aiming,) the rifle will NOT hit in exactly the same place.  The groups may be quite close to each other, or they may not.

Like I said, I mis-understood your point...I have only played with a SUSAT sight once, an old one on a FAL...not enought for me to form an opinion.

But I have used MANY different "red dots", and own an Aimpoint, and a C-More.

Both are parralax free, and will shoot to the same spot if your eye relief, and angle are not correct.

The same is not true for iron sights.

Quote[/b] ]

It may not be the most comfortable for them to do, and they may have to adjust their cheek weld...but if they are firing with the front post not centered in the rear aperature...then they are not looking through the sights correctly...

Quote[/b] ]

I am NOT talking about people not looking through the sights properly.  Even when they are looking through the sights properly, this happens.

Yes...but they should be reasonably accurate if their sight picture is proper, and their technique is sound.

I was merely under the impression that you were saying one shooter would be completely "wild"

Quote[/b] ]

What you were speaking of, was basically adjusting the sights to make it so the other guy can properly line up the sights without adjusting his cheek weld, ect.

Quote[/b] ]No, I am not.  Do not put words in my mouth.

Wasnt trying to put words in your mouth.

I thought you were talking about zeroing the sights to a particular shooter?

Quote[/b] ]

I was basically speaking strictly of sight picture vs. point of aim/impact

If you look a few posts back...I DID say that everyone should zero his own weapon.

Quote[/b] ]You said everyone should zero their own weapon because they wouldn't be zeroed properly at the factory... not because everyone shoots differently.

No, thats not what I said (or meant anyway)...

I said that rifles "zeroed" at the factory are "on the paper" (which is not zeroed at all)

THEN I said you should zero your own rifle.

Did not intend for it to mean because factory zero is no good.

Quote[/b] ]

Oh, and the comment about the bench vise was in reference to zeroing a scope, or other "parralax free" sight...not iron sights,

Quote[/b] ]And is equally wrong when shooting a scoped weapon, as I shoot with, and the other shooters shoot with.

and was merely an attempted illustration that a rifle sighted in mechanically would shoot to exactly the rifle's point of aim.

Quote[/b] ]But not to the shooters point of aim - making it....... NOT ZEROED.

Again...agreed...but not the point I was trying to make

And the point I was trying to make was a response to my mis-understanding of what you were saying...so its a moot point.

Quote[/b] ]My statement was to the effect that you should still be able to fire a rifle accurately even if someone else properly zeroed it...providing you use the sights properly

Quote[/b] ]When I say 'zeroed' I mean 'zeroed' not 'hitting the target.'  2 inches off is not zeroed.  Of course someone could use someone elses rifle and at least hit the target - and if not any decent shooter could adjust by splash - but that doesn't make it zeroed.

Well, a 2" group at 100m may not win you any matches, but would be considered reasonably accurate as most battle rifles are concerned (we are talking about iron sights, right?)

Please understand that I am not trying to argue with you...

All im saying is basically this:

If a rifle is properly zeroed...any accomplished shooter should be able to do reasonably well with it (certainly well enough to qualify by basic military standards)

I have fired U.S. qualifying courses, they are not that hard.

Will it be absolutely perfect? probably not...But I know that I have fired many other peoples rifles, and let them fire mine (it is almost a ritual around here at the range to let everybody check out your toys).

I have NEVER found that I could not fire someone elses rifle reasonably accurately by simply ensuring proper sight alignment and technique...and I have NEVER heard someone else comlpain "this rifle is zeroed for YOU, thats why I cant shoot it well"

Also...I regularly shoot several rifles of my OWN that are vert different in configuration (AR15s in both full length, and M4 configuration, an FAL, several AK variants, Remington 700PSS, ect.) and have no problem adapting between them.

Im not talking about precision shooting BTW (except for the PSS)...just battlefield zero

I also tend to get too "wordy", and likely dont type/speak the Queens English with the eloquence you are accustomed to...so bear with me.

APPARENTLY...I DONT UNDERSTAND THESE QUOTE BRACKETS EITHER

[Balschoiw 0]

Quote[/b] ]Balschoiw...

I dont dis-agree with you...(see my last post)

My statement was to the effect that you should still be able to fire a rifle accurately even if someone else properly zeroed it...providing you use the sights properly.

Might not be the best for you...but you can certainly do it...and it shouldnt be very difficult.

I had the impression that other people were saying it is impossible.

Ok madmedic , I already thought that it was an "understanding" problem only. You just know to much about weapons to be flawed here. But on a sidenote, scoped weapons with 20x or 40x magnitude are in fact very user bound once they are zeroed for the user. Minimal differences in eye - lense position have big effect then.

But anyway

Watson, let´s have some tea, case solved.

[Baron Hurlothrumbo IIX 0]

Settled: A rifle zeroed to one person is not zeroed to another, but will be fairly close given that they are doing all drills and skills properly; enough to hit the target, but probably not exactly where they are aiming.

ok.

*edit* and not hitting the bull doesn't mean someone is a bad shooter, neccesarily.. when we're picking potentials for the team its usually on how good their group is, not where it is.