Unreasonable scope expectations??

[rms65]

Hey everyone, I was shooting my 223 at a local range at 100yds and then moved out to 200yds. At 200 I was 2" using florescent orange target stickers. I was having a hard time getting a sharp edge on the stickers and seeing my hits. Sometimes I could and sometimes I couldn't. It was like I was straining my eyes to focus on the target. My hundred yard target was stapled above it and I could see that clearer. Was the florescent orange messing with my head.

[std7mag]

Your not giving us enough information.
What brand of scope?
What model?
What magnification?
Is your diopter properly set?
Is the paralax adjustable, and set correctly?

I'm using 1" orange stickers on white poster board at 300 yards with no issues.

[rms65]

Sorry you are absolutely right. Its a Nikon Prostaff 5, 3.5-14x40 side focus. It was set at 14x I could see the 3/4 inch dots at 200 but the reticle obscures them so I couldn't use them as aiming points. I don't know what you mean by diopter. If you mean the ocular focusing ring, I believe it was focused properly. I also focused the side adjustment until there was no more parallax and rechecked my ocular focus.

[rms65]

Originally Posted by std7mag

Your not giving us enough information.
What brand of scope?
What model?
What magnification?
Is your diopter properly set?
Is the paralax adjustable, and set correctly?

I'm using 1" orange stickers on white poster board at 300 yards with no issues.

Yes you are right see above reply thanks

[Hawg]

I don't know what you mean by diopter.

The eyepiece.

[rms65]

Originally Posted by Hawg

The eyepiece.

Thanks for clarification. I didn't know that's what it's called. I always associated diopters with peep sights and glasses

[LeverGunFan]

It's expensive to correct optics for all wavelengths of light, so it's possible that the design of your scope is not as well corrected for red light. Usually we are looking at objects nearer the center of the spectrum - yellow, green and blue - and I'd guess that's the wavelengths most scope makers correct the optics to. Try different magnifications to see if the scope is better corrected near the center of the zoom range, and try different colored spots and different sizes. The small spots you used were green, and your large spots were orange, so color could be a factor.

[Bart B.]

Most scopes don't focus exactly at the range they are set at. Tolerances in the lenses focal lengths cause this.

Adjust scope range focus to eliminate parallax, then adjust eyepiece for sharp reticle and target image.

A diopter is an optical unit for lenses, most peep sights don't have lenses.

[rms65]

Originally Posted by Bart B.

Most scopes don't focus exactly at the range they are set at. Tolerances in the lenses focal lengths cause this.

Adjust scope range focus to eliminate parallax, then adjust eyepiece for sharp reticle and target image.

A diopter is an optical unit for lenses, most peep sights don't have lenses.

Thank you. I am aware of inconsistent labeling on the scopes. I only use the marked distance on a parallax adjuster as a starting point. I use the adjuster to take out the parallax first then adjust diopter.

[spacemanspiff]

I could see the 3/4 inch dots at 200 but the reticle obscures them so I couldn't use them as aiming points.

Is your reticle just a cross hair? Or do you have any horizontal and vertical hashmarks? Wondering if you could place other stickers on the target in a pattern that allows you to obtain an aiming point. Perhaps in a vertical pattern?

[TXAZ]

Getting a scope optimized & parallaxed' takes some practice and patience.

[Don Fischer]

did you try using another color at 200 yds? Could be just the florescent!

[RC20]

I have had sight issue with orange. Seems like a good one but due to optic and light at the time may not be.

[rms65]

Originally Posted by Don Fischer

did you try using another color at 200 yds? Could be just the florescent!

Thanks, I'll try another color this week. I seen one guy there using a yellow and a red diamond about 3" across. I think I'll try that.

[Jimro]

Try using one of the corners of your reticle as your aiming point, not the place between the cross hairs if the reticle is getting in the way. I like the upper right corner of intersection, as you are looking through clear glass at the target.

If you are shooting for tight groups, you'll want an offset aiming point no matter what, so you don't destroy your aiming point on the target with bullet impacts.

[Bart B.]

If ones aiming eye is on the scope's main (outer) tube axis behind the eyepiece, there is no parallax regardless of the range it is focused at.

[Jim Watson]

Agree with Jimro, if you are using a small aiming point, just kind of nestle it into a corner of the crosshairs.

Note that most organized target shooting is done with black on white (or buff) targets, although I did see a winning score + group shot on a blue target.

[T. O'Heir]

"...the florescent orange messing..." It's entirely possibly that bright light can wash out the edges. Isn't your head though. It's your vision and it's not that it's bad. Like Don says, change the colour of the dots to black. More contrast.
"...It was set at 14x..." Try reducing the magnification. It won't help with the reticle covering 3/4" at 200 though.

[Bart B.]

Ajust the eyepiece for sharp reticle first, looking at the clear sky.

Then adjust range focus.

[cw308]

I make my own targets for that reason . From trial an error I found the outline thickness that I could see without straining , what works for me at 200 yards is three 1/4" black outline 1"boxes evenly placed vertically across a white 8.5 x 11 piece of 60lb paper . I shoot 3 ten shot groups .

[ms6852]

Please do not take offense but at 200 yards you may have exceeded the capabilities of your scope at that distance. At the price point of your scope, maximum magnification always incurs a drop off in optical quality, especially if your focus is a tiny target. I do not believe color has anything to do with it. You could try dropping your power to 9X or 10X if not, try using a black back ground with the orange stickers to give you a better contrast. I use the black background when I shoot my Sharps at 200 with vernier sights.

[cw308]

I had the same scope , It's a nice scope but I found the crosshairs too thick for long distances .

[rms65]

I looked at the reticle subtensions and the cross hair is 1/4" thick at 100 so it's 1/2" thick at 200, 3/4" at 300 and 1" thick @ 400. I switched my 200 yard targets to dark blue diamonds with 1" black dots. These were much clearer than the flo-orange. My groups weren't any better. I'm still not impressed with the glass on this $300 scope. I looked at the same targets at the same range with a $16 Walmart special, 3-9x40 Tasco and the image was both brighter, sharper and noticeably clearer than the Nikon. Time for a new scope. The larger diamond is about 7 inches tall and the smaller is about 4.5 inches tall.

[cw308]

rms65
Dark background is kind of hard to see the bullet holes , that's why I use a guarter inch outline . I'm using a Bushnell 6.5 x 24 x 40 it's a $ 300. Scope but works well at 200 yards , only drawback is it doesn't have alot of adjustment so scope setup is important . My rings and base are costly Ken Farrell there Rock solid .

[rms65]

Originally Posted by cw308

rms65
Dark background is kind of hard to see the bullet holes , that's why I use a guarter inch outline . I'm using a Bushnell 6.5 x 24 x 40 it's a $ 300. Scope but works well at 200 yards , only drawback is it doesn't have alot of adjustment so scope setup is important . My rings and base are costly Ken Farrell there Rock solid .

I wasn't expecting to see the hits in the dark blue. I just want to see if the image was sharper than the Flo-orange. It was. I'm still replacing the scope with a Vortex Viper HS-T 6-24X50. Optics planet had them 14% off and then they threw in a $150 gift card. Made a $650 scope effectively $400 plus tax. I ordered two. One for me and one for a bull barrel 223 Howa 1500 I just got for my girlfriend.