Running out of elevation adjustment (22lr long ranges)

[Medb]

This is an area that I'm not overly familiar with, and I was never very good at maths.

I've been trying to get into shooting 22lr at longer distances 200-500 yards, just mainly for some cheap fun, not doing any serious competitions. And I have my setup which I built for this following advice from various articles and discussions on the subject. The issue is with my setup I only have a small amount of elevation adjustment before I presumably am hitting the end of it's adjustment range. My scope is in MRAD with 0.1 mil adjustments and I can only dial up 2.7 mils from my 50 yard zero before hitting the wall. This means I can't even dial up the necessary amount for 200 yards and I have to use a holdover, and I can only just reach 300 by using a 9mil holdover and dialing up the full amount with HV ammo.

I realize what I am describing is totally normal for long distance 22lr shooting, but with my setup I thought I would have more adjustment range then I am getting.

My setup is as follows: Rifle is a CZ 457 with 24" barrel in a MDT ACC chassis, 30 MOA Area419 scope base, Sphur sp-5001 30mm/1.18" height 0 moa mount, scope is a Vortex Razor HD 5-20x50 FFP MRAD with 36 MRAD/125 MOA worth of total travel.

Is it really just a case of me needing to add even more height to the base/mount? I see the company that makes the 30moa base I am using also offers a 50moa version. If I were to just swap to that base and add 20 more MOA will that give me more room to dial up adjustments? and if so will I end up losing my 50 yard zero as a result since I only have 2.7 mils/9 MOA of adjustment currently?

What about if I were to change the height of the rings, what effect would that have on things? If I got lower rings, or higher rings which would give me more adjustment room? I'm totally confused

Any members who engage in this sort of long range .22lr shooting, or those that are more familiar with the finer points of scope height adjustment that could offer me any insights would be greatly appreciated.

[Johnno]

By using a shooting app such as strelok, it would be easy to see how much even a slight cross wind would move a 22 bullet for 300-500 yard shooting even if you could get the elevation to the same ballpark. We're talking errors of several meters, no noticeable groups, and it's easy to hit someone else's target.

[bladeracer]

I use the AR Optics 4.5-18x40, which gives me 105-minutes of elevation adjustment. I mount it in a adjustable mount, zeroed at the very bottom of the elevation turret. 105MoA is 3000mm high at 100m.

Centre the windage turret first, then wind the elevation all the way down.
Shoot a group and adjust the mount to zero the scope without touching the turrets.

You can try shimming the rear ring but I don't recommend it as it is possible to twist or bend a scope, though you don't need to be heavy-handed on a .22LR scope.

Zeroing at 50m gets me out past 300m, zeroing at 100m gives me enough for 500m with CCI Std Vocity.

[bladeracer]

Ring height has no effect, you need to cant the scope up at the rear.

[SCJ429]

I use 20 MOA cant to shoot subsonics out to 200 metres. I am using a 36x Weaver which does not have as much elevation adjustment as your Razor. I would think that 500 yards is a very long way for a rimfire.
Nice scope and rings on your CZ.

[bladeracer]

According to Vortex you should have 125-minutes of elevation, have you got the 30-minute rail the right way around?
https://vortexoptics.com/vortex-razor-hd-5-20x50-riflescope.html?vortex_reticle=828
You should be able to zero at 50m and still stretch out past 500m with 125-minutes of elevation.

What was the reasoning behind the FFP scope?

This is an area that I'm not overly familiar with, and I was never very good at maths.

I've been trying to get into shooting 22lr at longer distances 200-500 yards, just mainly for some cheap fun, not doing any serious competitions. And I have my setup which I built for this following advice from various articles and discussions on the subject. The issue is with my setup I only have a small amount of elevation adjustment before I presumably am hitting the end of it's adjustment range. My scope is in MRAD with 0.1 mil adjustments and I can only dial up 2.7 mils from my 50 yard zero before hitting the wall. This means I can't even dial up the necessary amount for 200 yards and I have to use a holdover, and I can only just reach 300 by using a 9mil holdover and dialing up the full amount with HV ammo.

I realize what I am describing is totally normal for long distance 22lr shooting, but with my setup I thought I would have more adjustment range then I am getting.

My setup is as follows: Rifle is a CZ 457 with 24" barrel in a MDT ACC chassis, 30 MOA Area419 scope base, Sphur sp-5001 30mm/1.18" height 0 moa mount, scope is a Vortex Razor HD 5-20x50 FFP MRAD with 36 MRAD/125 MOA worth of total travel.

Is it really just a case of me needing to add even more height to the base/mount? I see the company that makes the 30moa base I am using also offers a 50moa version. If I were to just swap to that base and add 20 more MOA will that give me more room to dial up adjustments? and if so will I end up losing my 50 yard zero as a result since I only have 2.7 mils/9 MOA of adjustment currently?

What about if I were to change the height of the rings, what effect would that have on things? If I got lower rings, or higher rings which would give me more adjustment room? I'm totally confused

Any members who engage in this sort of long range .22lr shooting, or those that are more familiar with the finer points of scope height adjustment that could offer me any insights would be greatly appreciated.

[Medb]

According to Vortex you should have 125-minutes of elevation, have you got the 30-minute rail the right way around?
https://vortexoptics.com/vortex-razor-hd-5-20x50-riflescope.html?vortex_reticle=828
You should be able to zero at 50m and still stretch out past 500m with 125-minutes of elevation.

What was the reasoning behind the FFP scope?

I did actually consider for a second the base could be on backwards causing me to lose elevation rather than gaining it, but it has markings and a bubble level inserted into the rear of the base to indicate that it is on the correct way.

Like you I find it very odd that I only have such a tiny range of upwards adjustment before it stops, as it currently stands if I had a 0 moa base instead of the 30 wouldn't that mean I couldn't even zero the scope at 50 yards?

Regarding it being FFP I didn't buy the scope specifically for this rifle, it was just an extra scope I had lying around that wasn't mounted on anything. It seemed like it would be a decent fit for this rifle and saved me from having to buy something else. I generally prefer FFP scopes as I like having accurate holdovers at any magnification, and don't do any serious BR style shooting where I need a really fine reticle.

I have considered the scope itself being faulty, It currently has the zero stop set so I'll have to remove that and see if I can really dial down the remaining 33.3 mils of adjustment that should be there.

[Medb]

Okay, so I did remove the zero stop and learnt a few things.

The short of it is the zero stop is not working properly and is preventing me from dialing up any further. With the zero stop removed I can dial up much further then it was letting me, I can dial up 20.5 mils or 69 moa which is more like what I was expecting. I can also dial down 15.5 mils from my 50 yard zero so I am getting the full 36mils/125 moa of travel.

I suppose I will have to contact Vortex and see what they say, possibly the zero stop has never been working properly as it always let me dial down 1 mil further than my actual zero (I just assumed it was designed like this in case you needed to dial down a small amount for a different load/closer target.)

With the zero stop not set the scope doesn't really function properly as you don't get any clicks when rotating the turret. No the screws were not overly tight or anything, even if you just tighten them the absolute minimum amount so clicks return the zero stop comes into effect and stops me dialing any further up.

edit: I also found this post which talks about removing the inner turret cap and resetting some sort of brass ring, nothing mentioned about it in the instruction manual, but according to this thread it's something vortex has told people to do who've had trouble with the zero stop. Too bad the pictures don't work although it doesn't sound very complicated.

https://calguns.net/calgunforum/showthr ... ?t=1045360

[straightshooter]

Melb
For the sort of ranges you are contemplating the attached table might help.
It is for standard velocity ammunition. HV will offer little or no advantage.
The most important point to understand is the projectile, due to time of flight, will be very wind affected.
For example, at 400 yards with a 10 mph cross wind you will need to adjust about 13 minutes.
So in order to have that amount of adjustment available in your scope, irrespective of what you might think the scope specs tell you, the elevation adjustment will need to be approximately centered due to the inherent mechanics of the adjustment system which is a limitation of most scopes. Also the scope will have to had to have been accurately centered for windage initially so as to have maximum available adjustment in either direction.
This isn't the province of most inexpensive scopes.
You might consider investigating scopes with true wide elevation and windage adjustment ranges to avoid frustrations in your endeavour.
Good luck.

[on_one_wheel]

I get out to 100m with the. 22 without adjustment when lining up with this part of my reticle (see arrow)

This might help if you have a similar reticle

20210217_124624.jpg (44.83 KiB) Viewed 6577 times

Alternatively you could look at a cheap mil dot scope or something similar.

20210217_125522.jpg (31.7 KiB) Viewed 6577 times

[bladeracer]

Melb
For the sort of ranges you are contemplating the attached table might help.
It is for standard velocity ammunition. HV will offer little or no advantage.
The most important point to understand is the projectile, due to time of flight, will be very wind affected.
For example, at 400 yards with a 10 mph cross wind you will need to adjust about 13 minutes.
So in order to have that amount of adjustment available in your scope, irrespective of what you might think the scope specs tell you, the elevation adjustment will need to be approximately centered due to the inherent mechanics of the adjustment system which is a limitation of most scopes. Also the scope will have to had to have been accurately centered for windage initially so as to have maximum available adjustment in either direction.
This isn't the province of most inexpensive scopes.
You might consider investigating scopes with true wide elevation and windage adjustment ranges to avoid frustrations in your endeavour.
Good luck.

Have you calculated this from the actual trajectory of a specific load?
CCI specifies a BC of .110 or thereabouts for their Std Velocity 40gn bullet at 1070fps.
I use .165 as it follows the real-world trajectory out to 300m. Past 300m, the trajectory steepens (for me at least) but group sizes at those distances make it difficult to precisely measure the drop, or velocity, to calculate the BC. I'm building a steel box to protect the chronograph to allow long-range velocity measurement. At long ranges, the bullet is coming down very steeply, requiring the chronograph to be mounted at a corresponding angle.

[bladeracer]

I get out to 100m with the. 22 without adjustment when lining up with this part of my reticle (see arrow)

This might help if you have a similar reticle

20210217_124624.jpg

Alternatively you could look at a cheap mil dot scope or something similar.

20210217_125522.jpg

The problem with holdover is cant. If you are holding a meter over your target at 200m, even one-degree (or 60-minutes) of cant each side of vertical in the reticle adds 72mm of lateral spread to your group (by quick mental calculation).

[on_one_wheel]

I get out to 100m with the. 22 without adjustment when lining up with this part of my reticle (see arrow)

This might help if you have a similar reticle

20210217_124624.jpg

Alternatively you could look at a cheap mil dot scope or something similar.

20210217_125522.jpg

The problem with holdover is cant. If you are holding a meter over your target at 200m, even one-degree (or 60-minutes) of cant each side of vertical in the reticle adds 72mm of lateral spread to your group (by quick mental calculation).

True....

[straightshooter]

I get out to 100m with the. 22 without adjustment when lining up with this part of my reticle (see arrow)

This might help if you have a similar reticle

20210217_124624.jpg

Alternatively you could look at a cheap mil dot scope or something similar.

20210217_125522.jpg

The problem with holdover is cant. If you are holding a meter over your target at 200m, even one-degree (or 60-minutes) of cant each side of vertical in the reticle adds 72mm of lateral spread to your group (by quick mental calculation).

True....

The effects of cant have little to do with holdover as such.
Think about it.
Whether you adjust the reticle center to be on point of aim or considerably above point of aim there is no physical difference in positioning of the scope tube in relation to the barrel bore.
In general, the effects of cant are exacerbated the higher the line of sight is above the line of the bore.

[on_one_wheel]

I get out to 100m with the. 22 without adjustment when lining up with this part of my reticle (see arrow)

This might help if you have a similar reticle

The attachment 20210217_124624.jpg is no longer available

Alternatively you could look at a cheap mil dot scope or something similar.

The attachment 20210217_125522.jpg is no longer available

The problem with holdover is cant. If you are holding a meter over your target at 200m, even one-degree (or 60-minutes) of cant each side of vertical in the reticle adds 72mm of lateral spread to your group (by quick mental calculation).

True....

The effects of cant have little to do with holdover as such.
Think about it.
Whether you adjust the reticle center to be on point of aim or considerably above point of aim there is no physical difference in positioning of the scope tube in relation to the barrel bore.
In general, the effects of cant are exacerbated the higher the line of sight is above the line of the bore.

I would have thought Blade was correct here as were referring to using the the bottom vertical line of the cross-hair rather than the centre cross and the scope is set up pointing down for a arched trajectory path which would make the impact point move to the right in the below example... but you've got me thinking, I might do a field test tomorrow.

20210218_093138.jpg (42.71 KiB) Viewed 6531 times

[Larry]

Blade is talking about cant differently to the accepted definition. He is talking about front to back inclination cant is the scope not having the horizontal axis of the scope in relation to the gun as per one wheels picture above.

[bladeracer]

Blade is talking about cant differently to the accepted definition. He is talking about front to back inclination cant is the scope not having the horizontal axis of the scope in relation to the gun as per one wheels picture above.

Cant simply means out of plumb (not vertical), sloped or leaning, it is not a reticle-specific term.

[bladeracer]

Rather than just thinking about it I suggest you try it for yourself.
Cant is still a problem when you dial the retical to point-of-impact, but holdover hugely exaggerates it.

Height of the scope above bore axis, or its angle relative to the bore (in any axis) has little effect on point of impact.

I get out to 100m with the. 22 without adjustment when lining up with this part of my reticle (see arrow)

This might help if you have a similar reticle

20210217_124624.jpg

Alternatively you could look at a cheap mil dot scope or something similar.

20210217_125522.jpg

The problem with holdover is cant. If you are holding a meter over your target at 200m, even one-degree (or 60-minutes) of cant each side of vertical in the reticle adds 72mm of lateral spread to your group (by quick mental calculation).

True....

The effects of cant have little to do with holdover as such.
Think about it.
Whether you adjust the reticle center to be on point of aim or considerably above point of aim there is no physical difference in positioning of the scope tube in relation to the barrel bore.
In general, the effects of cant are exacerbated the higher the line of sight is above the line of the bore.

[Larry]

Blade is talking about cant differently to the accepted definition. He is talking about front to back inclination cant is the scope not having the horizontal axis of the scope in relation to the gun as per one wheels picture above.

Cant simply means out of plumb (not vertical), sloped or leaning, it is not a reticle-specific term.

I know what cant is and what you wrote "Ring height has no effect, you need to cant the scope up at the rear." is not strictly cant. But it is the solution to this guys problem.

[bladeracer]

Blade is talking about cant differently to the accepted definition. He is talking about front to back inclination cant is the scope not having the horizontal axis of the scope in relation to the gun as per one wheels picture above.

Cant simply means out of plumb (not vertical), sloped or leaning, it is not a reticle-specific term.

I know what cant is and what you wrote "Ring height has no effect, you need to cant the scope up at the rear." is not strictly cant. But it is the solution to this guys problem.

I agree, cant is relative to plumb and level, or gravitational pull, which is only relevant if the rifle is actually set up level for some reason.
I shall try to stop using cant incorrectly in the future.
I appreciate being pulled up on it.

[on_one_wheel]

Scope cant & reticle cant...click here

[straightshooter]

Let's get something straight.
The word cant, when applied to rifle shooting, is, was and always will mean a voluntary or involuntary slight rotation of the rifle around the axis of the line of sight upon being fired.
This rotation, however slight, results in the barrel pointing in a different angular direction than it would have had the the whole assembly been maintained truely plumb from shot to shot.
This is a different effect from when the reticle is not level. Unlike simple 'aiming off' using mil dots to change the point of aim when the reticle is not true to the vertical axis of the line of sight and the barrel, whether for elevation or windage purposes introduces further complications.
The greater the parabola described by the projectile's flight then the greater the errors will be.

[deanp100]

You’re getting way too technical. I had a steel gong at around 500 metres for rimfire shooting at my old mans place. It was at the base of a gumtree. I took an extension ladder and a can of spray paint and marked gradient lines up the trunk. You don’t need fancy reticle, just fancy trees.

[straightshooter]

Sometimes the only way to correctly and unambiguously convey technical information is via concise terminology.
Otherwise you may as well write it out in crayon.