What magnification for long shots?

Nathan · October 19, 2018, 11:24 AM

For a medium weight <20 oz scope, what magnification do you like for shooting deer/antelope/coyote/elk at 300 - 500 yds?

Let’s not talk about ethics here as we know how that conversation goes....

Along with that, I should probably ask how much is too much at 50-200 yards?

big al hunter · October 19, 2018, 08:40 PM

I like a variable scope. Low end around 3 or 4x. High end from 9 to 12x. I haven't had problems at very close range (25 yards). And 10x is plenty for any longer shots I want to take.

Your likely to get a wide variety of answers. But you probably know that already. I will be checking to see what others say

mehavey · October 19, 2018, 09:02 PM

If 4X is a "standard" at 100yds,
multiply that by 5 for 500 yds.

TXAZ · October 19, 2018, 09:31 PM

I'm with Big Al.
A variable scope is a lot more than just targeting.
With a lower power, it's much easier to scan a wider tree or brush line for game.
And if setup properly to match the gun and ammo, You can zero at 200 and likely Kentucky windage longer shots to 400 yards.

std7mag · October 20, 2018, 07:01 AM

My wife and i like the Vortex Crossfire II 4-12X44 with BDC for reaching out to 500 yards.
Lately have been using some Sightron scopes.
I really like the STAC 4-20X50 but it is heavy for a hunting scope.
Their SIH 3-9X40 has really surprised me with the quality at the price point.

BBarn · October 20, 2018, 11:25 AM

I like about 2X +/- on the low end. For the larger game, 6X will do at the upper end, perhaps 8X or so on coyote. More mag is fine for target/sight-in, but I prefer as little mag as necessary for field shots on game. Plus a lower mag scope generally means a smaller/lighter scope that can sit lower over the action and provide faster sighting with typical stock comb heights. And I also seem to be able to hold a lower power scope steadier when not using a bench.

Lots of good reasons for “lower” power scopes on hunting rifles. One drawback is the lesser ability to judge rack size at long range.

LineStretcher · October 20, 2018, 11:45 AM

Lots of talk about max power but for hunting you really need to consider field of view also. At max power you significantly reduce field of view so while you might be able to pick the fleas off a buck with a high power scope, if he moves you will probably loose it. This is where a long distance hunting scope shines. I have a Swarovski X5 long distance 3.5x18-40mm that I love. It's clear as a bell at 25 yards and 500 yards and has an improved BDC reticle with both hold over and hold under graduations. Yes, it is an expensive piece of glass but I felt it was a worthwhile investment. It is also a first focal plane scope . My shorter distance scopes rarely exceed 9x and for those I've come to like the Vortex Diamondback hunting series. They have good glass and good field of view and won't break the bank. They are second focal plane scopes but I still like them. I'd take one over my Leupolds any day, and I have several which sadly, I just cant recommend anymore.

T. O'Heir · October 20, 2018, 12:51 PM

The magnification issue(the scope weight is irrelevant) is about the field of view. That 17.2 ounce, Vortex Crossfire II 4-12X44 has a FOV of 8.4 feet at 100 yards on 12X. That'd be considerably less at excessive distances. Most hunters set the scope on one magnification and leave it there anyway. There's no time for fiddling with the scope when hunting unless you're sitting in a blind.
"...too much at 50-200 yards..." More about 50 or less.
It's not about ethics either. It's about ballistics. Most typical deer/elk cartridges with any bullet weight drop like bricks past 300 yards. Most, but not all, do not have enough remaining energy either.
And Wiley really shouldn't be on that list. He's waaaay smaller than any of the other critters.

mehavey · October 20, 2018, 01:21 PM

Gentlemen, the OP asked what magification was required at ~500yds.

The answer is based upon 4x being considered sufficient/standard detail/discrimination for most all hunting targets (woodchucks to deer) at 100 yds.

Multiply that 4X by the relative yardage for the same detail/discrimination:
200 yds --> (200/100)*4X = 8X
300 yds --> (300/100)*4X = 12X
500 yds --> (500/100)*4X = 20X

This is the answer to the question.
Makes, models, variable-powers, field-of-view, ballistics, drop calculators, etc are interesting . . . but the answer at 500 yds is 20X

Bfglowkey · October 20, 2018, 03:02 PM

Mehaveys thought process is interesting. I don't believe 20 is needed for 500. I have and many others have made successful, repeatable shots out to 1000 with 10x. Now this is paper or steel that is smaller than the avg deer. FOV is more useful, along with low light performance. So my answer is 10x for upper end. At that setting FOV is still decent.

BBarn · October 20, 2018, 03:07 PM

A decent rifleman needs no magnification for deer at 100yds. Perhaps a little magnification for coyote at 100yds. So the math says 5X to perhaps 8X for coyote and larger up to 500yds. That is, if you believe the math provides the correct answer.

RC20 · October 20, 2018, 03:27 PM

I agree on the 20x.

I have shoot our 300 meter range (so you can put it close to 1000 feet) and 20X was about right (target)

500 yards I believe it would be perfectly fine for game. As low as you can go but the limit is the max and you have to live with the minimum

mehavey · October 20, 2018, 04:17 PM

You can see below why I start w/ 4X (since the 50's)
as the departure point for general field work:

FrankenMauser · October 20, 2018, 04:57 PM

300-500 yards?...
That depends upon your personal preference. Most of my scoped rifles are topped with variables or fixed 4x. I'm fine with 4x for as far as the rifle will shoot.
But if I slap a variable on top of something likely to see potential kill shots on edible game at 300-600 yards, I usually go 10x to 14x on the top end. (And 3x or 4x at the low end.)

The rifle doesn't change the way it shoots if you use more magnification, it just makes you feel better about the shot because the target appears larger*.

The only scope that I have with greater than 14x on the top end is a 6.5-20x on a varmint rig. I find that much magnification to be unnecessary on big game rifles. (They weigh more, too.)

*Higher magnification also allows better/easier identification of potential targets. But that may be worthy of a separate discussion; and I don't care to address it further right now.

jmr40 · October 20, 2018, 06:56 PM

500 yards isn't long range. A common 3-9X40 hunting scope is more than adequate. There are people who shoot at 1000 with 10X scopes.

I like 2X or 3X on the low end for fast close range shots. I've shot out to 600 yards at targets and didn't feel at all handicapped with 9X on the top end, and have taken deer at 200 with 2X scopes. The quality of the scope is far more important than the number of X's. Having fine crosshairs helps at distance, while heavy cross hairs work better in low light. That is the reason why duplex style reticles are so popular.

Going to scopes with more than 10x has quite a few disadvantages. There is weight, they don't work as well in low light above 9X or 10X, and they cost a LOT more if you're seeking equal quality. A 3-9X40 scope is where you get the most scope for the dollar. And above 10X you have issues with mirage making it harder to see the target.

Pahoo · October 20, 2018, 07:40 PM

Quote:

I like a variable scope. Low end around 3 or 4x. High end from 9 to 12x. I haven't had problems at very close range (25 yards). And 10x is plenty for any longer shots I want to take.

I'm good with this reply. On hunters, I prefer a 40-42 bell. …..

Be Safe !!!

Nathan · October 21, 2018, 08:56 PM

Well, based on today’s shooting, 2-3x is pretty important!

Brian Pfleuger · October 21, 2018, 09:46 PM

I’ve never felt the need for less than 5x at any range. I like my Minox 5-25x for... well, any range.
Everything about optics in terms of usability is preference and experience. Where one guy might have target acquisition problems, another won’t. Where one guy is comfortable at 3x, another might want 10.
There is no “right” answer.

ms6852 · October 22, 2018, 02:48 AM

In my more than 50 years of hunting I have used a magnification factor between 6X and 9X. I find these settings regardless of the distances which easily exceed what you posted work best for me. Though my scope has a 16X max magnification I have never used it to shoot deer. I do use it to see and count the antlers or to insure there is nothing behind the deer that would keep me from shooting. In reality if the scope is a good quality scope not necessarily a $2000, all you really need is a 3-9X40 scope for hunting deer to the distances you posted.

RC20 · October 22, 2018, 04:31 PM

Quote:

500 yards isn't long range. A common 3-9X40 hunting scope is more than adequate. There are people who shoot at 1000 with 10X scopes.

Really? What kind of bullet drop do you have out there at 500 close yards?

How much wobble does it take for a total miss?

And snipers do not count, not only will those shots be from a stable position, with a spotter, scope dope etc, they are not after an ethical kill.

mehavey · October 22, 2018, 04:56 PM

RC, I'm going to make a sweeping observation that [most]
all the folks that talk big game hunting at 500-1,000 yds do
very little -- if any -- of it in reality.

Personally, I found "ethical" on such targets means PointBlank
ranges (at most ±4"), or 300yds w/ the 375H&H -- my ballistic standard.

Beyond those bounds, you're pretty much guessing, without a lot of range-finding/-
meteorology/wind/electronics --- and tested (not calculated) ballistics beyond 300.

Nathan · October 25, 2018, 08:59 AM

Why does this conversation always breakdown into one of ethics or “I don’t shoot long range, so you can’t either?...nevermind.

Thank you for your input....I see we have a lot of 3-9x shooters. That is fine, but 12x-16x has a lot of value to me when shooting over 300 yds.

MarkCO · October 25, 2018, 09:12 AM

Most of my hunting rifles have 2 or 3x on the low end and 7 to 12x on the top end.

For Deer and Pronghorn, I have used 3-9 mostly, 2-10 currently. Have used up to 20x (usually for 600+ yards). Last year, the far shot was a Coyote at 760 and I was on 13x, center punched him in the chest.

37 Elk, almost all have been with a 3-9x and ranged from 10 yards to 505 yards. Never felt 9x was not enough, but the one at 10 yards, I was on 9x and that was WAY too much. The ones that were not were open sights and under 100 yards with a pistol, 12g or Blackpowder.

I really like a good 2-7 or 3-9. While I like the 2-10, it is heavier than 20 ounces.

ms6852 · October 25, 2018, 11:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nathan

Why does this conversation always breakdown into one of ethics or “I don’t shoot long range, so you can’t either?...nevermind.

Thank you for your input....I see we have a lot of 3-9x shooters. That is fine, but 12x-16x has a lot of value to me when shooting over 300 yds.

There is a lot of value in having higher magnification like 12X to 16X but in West Texas depending on the time of year that I hunt going above 9X is not practical for me due to atmospheric conditions. In the summertimes the haze and mirage is so intense that using higher magnifications also magnifies the haze and mirage. When I target shoot I love using higher magnifications if atmospheric conditions allow it but in my type of shooting I love the higher magnification at short distances as all my rimfire rifles have high mag scopes and I shoot them at 200 yards.

Don Fischer · October 25, 2018, 11:43 AM

Maybe my though's aren't valid. I do not shoot at big game over about 300yds, a non no to me. And I've never needed more than 4x to see the game well enough to shoot. On rodents the sky is the limit. Something like a sage rat your pretty much gonna hit or miss clean. Don't see bad shot leave many wounded sage rats unless your shooting a rimfire. What I find with the higher power is the higher the power, the more I can see my flaws and the worse I shoot! Take that sage rat outat 300yds, probably need min 9x just to see it in the first place. Then, for me anyway, I get to watch my heart beat! I have a rifle I used to like to shoot out to 500 yds at target's, haven't done it in a long time. I mount a 3-9x for hunting with it but to shoot at 500 yds I have a 4 1/2-14x. Sure can see my heart beat with it at 14x. But I used it mostly at max 8x and not much problem. First of all a big target really seem's to help, just don't notice the movement so much. I like that scope but wouldn't want to carry it hunting, big sucker and I'd probably leave it on 4 1/2x and never move it in the first place.

Something I noticed at shorter ranges is that if the aiming point cover's over by the cross wire's I actually shoot better, seem's to eliminate the wobble in me, at least hides it. Get a larger aiming point I can't cover and I see the wobble again. I would suspect the same thing's happen at longer range and maybe to much power will actually handicap you. Without doubt the better you can see the better you should be able to shoot but also I think the more you see the worse you shoot! Your gonna have some wobble at any range but not noticing it really helps me!

October 19, 2018, 11:24 AM	#1
Nathan Senior Member Join Date: July 1, 2001 Posts: 6,327	What magnification for long shots? For a medium weight <20 oz scope, what magnification do you like for shooting deer/antelope/coyote/elk at 300 - 500 yds? Let’s not talk about ethics here as we know how that conversation goes.... Along with that, I should probably ask how much is too much at 50-200 yards?

October 19, 2018, 08:40 PM	#2
big al hunter Senior Member Join Date: March 12, 2011 Location: Washington state Posts: 1,558	I like a variable scope. Low end around 3 or 4x. High end from 9 to 12x. I haven't had problems at very close range (25 yards). And 10x is plenty for any longer shots I want to take. Your likely to get a wide variety of answers. But you probably know that already. I will be checking to see what others say __________________ You can't fix stupid....however ignorance can be cured through education!

October 19, 2018, 09:31 PM	#4
TXAZ Senior Member Join Date: September 5, 2010 Location: McMurdo Sound Texas Posts: 4,322	I'm with Big Al. A variable scope is a lot more than just targeting. With a lower power, it's much easier to scan a wider tree or brush line for game. And if setup properly to match the gun and ammo, You can zero at 200 and likely Kentucky windage longer shots to 400 yards. __________________ Cave illos in guns et backhoes

October 20, 2018, 07:01 AM	#5
std7mag Senior Member Join Date: June 23, 2013 Location: Central Taxylvania.. Posts: 3,609	My wife and i like the Vortex Crossfire II 4-12X44 with BDC for reaching out to 500 yards. Lately have been using some Sightron scopes. I really like the STAC 4-20X50 but it is heavy for a hunting scope. Their SIH 3-9X40 has really surprised me with the quality at the price point. __________________ When our own government declares itself as "tyrannical", where does that leave us??!! "Januarary 6th insurrection". Funny, I didn't see a single piece of rope...

October 20, 2018, 12:51 PM	#8
T. O'Heir Senior Member Join Date: February 13, 2002 Location: Canada Posts: 12,453	The magnification issue(the scope weight is irrelevant) is about the field of view. That 17.2 ounce, Vortex Crossfire II 4-12X44 has a FOV of 8.4 feet at 100 yards on 12X. That'd be considerably less at excessive distances. Most hunters set the scope on one magnification and leave it there anyway. There's no time for fiddling with the scope when hunting unless you're sitting in a blind. "...too much at 50-200 yards..." More about 50 or less. It's not about ethics either. It's about ballistics. Most typical deer/elk cartridges with any bullet weight drop like bricks past 300 yards. Most, but not all, do not have enough remaining energy either. And Wiley really shouldn't be on that list. He's waaaay smaller than any of the other critters. __________________ Spelling and grammar count!

October 19, 2018, 09:02 PM	#3
mehavey Senior Member Join Date: June 17, 2010 Location: Virginia Posts: 6,885	If 4X is a "standard" at 100yds, multiply that by 5 for 500 yds.

October 20, 2018, 11:25 AM	#6
BBarn Senior Member Join Date: December 22, 2015 Posts: 887	I like about 2X +/- on the low end. For the larger game, 6X will do at the upper end, perhaps 8X or so on coyote. More mag is fine for target/sight-in, but I prefer as little mag as necessary for field shots on game. Plus a lower mag scope generally means a smaller/lighter scope that can sit lower over the action and provide faster sighting with typical stock comb heights. And I also seem to be able to hold a lower power scope steadier when not using a bench. Lots of good reasons for “lower” power scopes on hunting rifles. One drawback is the lesser ability to judge rack size at long range.

October 20, 2018, 11:45 AM	#7
LineStretcher Senior Member Join Date: June 14, 2018 Posts: 619	Lots of talk about max power but for hunting you really need to consider field of view also. At max power you significantly reduce field of view so while you might be able to pick the fleas off a buck with a high power scope, if he moves you will probably loose it. This is where a long distance hunting scope shines. I have a Swarovski X5 long distance 3.5x18-40mm that I love. It's clear as a bell at 25 yards and 500 yards and has an improved BDC reticle with both hold over and hold under graduations. Yes, it is an expensive piece of glass but I felt it was a worthwhile investment. It is also a first focal plane scope . My shorter distance scopes rarely exceed 9x and for those I've come to like the Vortex Diamondback hunting series. They have good glass and good field of view and won't break the bank. They are second focal plane scopes but I still like them. I'd take one over my Leupolds any day, and I have several which sadly, I just cant recommend anymore.

October 20, 2018, 01:21 PM	#9
mehavey Senior Member Join Date: June 17, 2010 Location: Virginia Posts: 6,885	Gentlemen, the OP asked what magification was required at ~500yds. The answer is based upon 4x being considered sufficient/standard detail/discrimination for most all hunting targets (woodchucks to deer) at 100 yds. Multiply that 4X by the relative yardage for the same detail/discrimination: 200 yds --> (200/100)4X = 8X 300 yds --> (300/100)4X = 12X 500 yds --> (500/100)*4X = 20X This is the answer to the question. Makes, models, variable-powers, field-of-view, ballistics, drop calculators, etc are interesting . . . but the answer at 500 yds is 20X

October 20, 2018, 03:02 PM	#10
Bfglowkey Senior Member Join Date: May 27, 2018 Posts: 302	Mehaveys thought process is interesting. I don't believe 20 is needed for 500. I have and many others have made successful, repeatable shots out to 1000 with 10x. Now this is paper or steel that is smaller than the avg deer. FOV is more useful, along with low light performance. So my answer is 10x for upper end. At that setting FOV is still decent.

October 20, 2018, 03:07 PM	#11
BBarn Senior Member Join Date: December 22, 2015 Posts: 887	A decent rifleman needs no magnification for deer at 100yds. Perhaps a little magnification for coyote at 100yds. So the math says 5X to perhaps 8X for coyote and larger up to 500yds. That is, if you believe the math provides the correct answer.

October 20, 2018, 03:27 PM	#12
RC20 Senior Member Join Date: April 10, 2008 Location: Alaska Posts: 7,014	I agree on the 20x. I have shoot our 300 meter range (so you can put it close to 1000 feet) and 20X was about right (target) 500 yards I believe it would be perfectly fine for game. As low as you can go but the limit is the max and you have to live with the minimum __________________ Science and Facts are True whether you believe it or not

October 20, 2018, 04:17 PM	#13
mehavey Senior Member Join Date: June 17, 2010 Location: Virginia Posts: 6,885	You can see below why I start w/ 4X (since the 50's) as the departure point for general field work:

October 20, 2018, 04:57 PM	#14
FrankenMauser Senior Member Join Date: August 25, 2008 Location: In the valley above the plain Posts: 13,424	300-500 yards?... That depends upon your personal preference. Most of my scoped rifles are topped with variables or fixed 4x. I'm fine with 4x for as far as the rifle will shoot. But if I slap a variable on top of something likely to see potential kill shots on edible game at 300-600 yards, I usually go 10x to 14x on the top end. (And 3x or 4x at the low end.) The rifle doesn't change the way it shoots if you use more magnification, it just makes you feel better about the shot because the target appears larger. The only scope that I have with greater than 14x on the top end is a 6.5-20x on a varmint rig. I find that much magnification to be unnecessary on big game rifles. (They weigh more, too.) Higher magnification also allows better/easier identification of potential targets. But that may be worthy of a separate discussion; and I don't care to address it further right now. __________________ Don't even try it. It's even worse than the internet would lead you to believe.

October 20, 2018, 06:56 PM	#15
jmr40 Senior Member Join Date: June 15, 2008 Location: Georgia Posts: 10,805	500 yards isn't long range. A common 3-9X40 hunting scope is more than adequate. There are people who shoot at 1000 with 10X scopes. I like 2X or 3X on the low end for fast close range shots. I've shot out to 600 yards at targets and didn't feel at all handicapped with 9X on the top end, and have taken deer at 200 with 2X scopes. The quality of the scope is far more important than the number of X's. Having fine crosshairs helps at distance, while heavy cross hairs work better in low light. That is the reason why duplex style reticles are so popular. Going to scopes with more than 10x has quite a few disadvantages. There is weight, they don't work as well in low light above 9X or 10X, and they cost a LOT more if you're seeking equal quality. A 3-9X40 scope is where you get the most scope for the dollar. And above 10X you have issues with mirage making it harder to see the target. __________________ "If you're still doing things the same way you were doing them 10 years ago, you're doing it wrong" Winston Churchill

October 21, 2018, 08:56 PM	#17
Nathan Senior Member Join Date: July 1, 2001 Posts: 6,327	Well, based on today’s shooting, 2-3x is pretty important!

October 21, 2018, 09:46 PM	#18
Brian Pfleuger Moderator Emeritus Join Date: June 25, 2008 Location: Austin, CO Posts: 19,578	I’ve never felt the need for less than 5x at any range. I like my Minox 5-25x for... well, any range. Everything about optics in terms of usability is preference and experience. Where one guy might have target acquisition problems, another won’t. Where one guy is comfortable at 3x, another might want 10. There is no “right” answer. __________________ Nobody plans to screw up their lives... ...they just don't plan not to. -Andy Stanley

October 22, 2018, 02:48 AM	#19
ms6852 Senior Member Join Date: April 3, 2010 Location: Texas Posts: 1,394	In my more than 50 years of hunting I have used a magnification factor between 6X and 9X. I find these settings regardless of the distances which easily exceed what you posted work best for me. Though my scope has a 16X max magnification I have never used it to shoot deer. I do use it to see and count the antlers or to insure there is nothing behind the deer that would keep me from shooting. In reality if the scope is a good quality scope not necessarily a $2000, all you really need is a 3-9X40 scope for hunting deer to the distances you posted. __________________ ONLY TWO DEFINING FORCES HAVE GIVEN UP THEIR LIVES FOR YOU. ONE IS JESUS CHRIST FOR YOUR SOUL AND THE OTHER IS THE AMERICAN SOLDIER FOR YOUR FREEDOM. Last edited by ms6852; October 22, 2018 at 02:54 AM.

October 22, 2018, 04:56 PM	#21
mehavey Senior Member Join Date: June 17, 2010 Location: Virginia Posts: 6,885	RC, I'm going to make a sweeping observation that [most] all the folks that talk big game hunting at 500-1,000 yds do very little -- if any -- of it in reality. Personally, I found "ethical" on such targets means PointBlank ranges (at most ±4"), or 300yds w/ the 375H&H -- my ballistic standard. Beyond those bounds, you're pretty much guessing, without a lot of range-finding/- meteorology/wind/electronics --- and tested (not calculated) ballistics beyond 300. Last edited by mehavey; October 22, 2018 at 05:04 PM.

October 25, 2018, 08:59 AM	#22
Nathan Senior Member Join Date: July 1, 2001 Posts: 6,327	Why does this conversation always breakdown into one of ethics or “I don’t shoot long range, so you can’t either?...nevermind. Thank you for your input....I see we have a lot of 3-9x shooters. That is fine, but 12x-16x has a lot of value to me when shooting over 300 yds.

October 25, 2018, 09:12 AM	#23
MarkCO Senior Member Join Date: October 21, 1998 Location: Colorado, USA Posts: 4,307	Most of my hunting rifles have 2 or 3x on the low end and 7 to 12x on the top end. For Deer and Pronghorn, I have used 3-9 mostly, 2-10 currently. Have used up to 20x (usually for 600+ yards). Last year, the far shot was a Coyote at 760 and I was on 13x, center punched him in the chest. 37 Elk, almost all have been with a 3-9x and ranged from 10 yards to 505 yards. Never felt 9x was not enough, but the one at 10 yards, I was on 9x and that was WAY too much. The ones that were not were open sights and under 100 yards with a pistol, 12g or Blackpowder. I really like a good 2-7 or 3-9. While I like the 2-10, it is heavier than 20 ounces. __________________ Good Shooting, MarkCO www.CarbonArms.us

October 25, 2018, 11:43 AM	#25
Don Fischer Senior Member Join Date: March 2, 2017 Posts: 1,868	Maybe my though's aren't valid. I do not shoot at big game over about 300yds, a non no to me. And I've never needed more than 4x to see the game well enough to shoot. On rodents the sky is the limit. Something like a sage rat your pretty much gonna hit or miss clean. Don't see bad shot leave many wounded sage rats unless your shooting a rimfire. What I find with the higher power is the higher the power, the more I can see my flaws and the worse I shoot! Take that sage rat outat 300yds, probably need min 9x just to see it in the first place. Then, for me anyway, I get to watch my heart beat! I have a rifle I used to like to shoot out to 500 yds at target's, haven't done it in a long time. I mount a 3-9x for hunting with it but to shoot at 500 yds I have a 4 1/2-14x. Sure can see my heart beat with it at 14x. But I used it mostly at max 8x and not much problem. First of all a big target really seem's to help, just don't notice the movement so much. I like that scope but wouldn't want to carry it hunting, big sucker and I'd probably leave it on 4 1/2x and never move it in the first place. Something I noticed at shorter ranges is that if the aiming point cover's over by the cross wire's I actually shoot better, seem's to eliminate the wobble in me, at least hides it. Get a larger aiming point I can't cover and I see the wobble again. I would suspect the same thing's happen at longer range and maybe to much power will actually handicap you. Without doubt the better you can see the better you should be able to shoot but also I think the more you see the worse you shoot! Your gonna have some wobble at any range but not noticing it really helps me!