Journey to Stop Smoking!

[yoderjac]

Well, I now don't know what to think. I just took a 100 yard shot at a doe. I set up bull bags on a desk. The does ran for about 150 yards before hitting open hardwoods. No sign of blood at the impact site or where she entered the woods. Worked the open hardwoods for another 150 yards with a FLIR. If the shot was good, I would have found her.

Maybe it is a scope issue or something else. I'm gonna have to get back to the range and play with it. Perhaps I should have done more preseason work with it.

 

[yoderjac]

Well, I went to the range today and I was not even on paper at 100 yards. My stomach sank thinking the scope may be bad. I check things over closely and found one of the leavers on the quick release rings had evidently been bumped and it was slightly loose. I locked it down and went to 25 yards. I was about 6" to the right at 25 yards. That would account for the deer where I aimed at the scapula and hit the neck not far from the head.

I don't know what happened the first time I went to the range and was only off an inch or two. It was off to the right. It could be that the ring was just beginning to work loose (which would not account for the first missed deer). Or, it could be the leaver was bumped after that trip to the range.

I burned up a bunch of supplies, but the gun is now sighted in at 100 yards and is consistent. I'll definitely keep my eye on those leavers. I'm really glad the scope is not damaged. It is an HD-6 4-24 x 52 and was not cheap. I'm sure they would fix it or replace it if necessary, but it would have killed my hunting season.

There may still be more range work to do after the season, but I'm feeling better now.

 

[Maddmatt]

Well, I went to the range today and I was not even on paper at 100 yards. My stomach sank thinking the scope may be bad. I check things over closely and found one of the leavers on the quick release rings had evidently been bumped and it was slightly loose. I locked it down and went to 25 yards. I was about 6" to the right at 25 yards. That would account for the deer where I aimed at the scapula and hit the neck not far from the head.

I don't know what happened the first time I went to the range and was only off an inch or two. It was off to the right. It could be that the ring was just beginning to work loose (which would not account for the first missed deer). Or, it could be the leaver was bumped after that trip to the range.

I burned up a bunch of supplies, but the gun is now sighted in at 100 yards and is consistent. I'll definitely keep my eye on those leavers. I'm really glad the scope is not damaged. It is an HD-6 4-24 x 52 and was not cheap. I'm sure they would fix it or replace it if necessary, but it would have killed my hunting season.

There may still be more range work to do after the season, but I'm feeling better now.

That is my biggest fear on quick release rings and has prevented me from putting them on a couple rifles. I wonder if a dab of one of the weaker loctites would be a good little bit of insurance

 

[yoderjac]

That is my biggest fear on quick release rings and has prevented me from putting them on a couple rifles. I wonder if a dab of one of the weaker loctites would be a good little bit of insurance

I have QRs on all mine. This is the first time it has happened to me. I think the leaver itself must have been hit. I don't think it worked loose from shock, but it is possible. Time will tell and I'll keep an eye on them.

 

[yoderjac]

Earlier in this thread, I asked about cleaning modules. Kyle suggested I don't use any mechanical cleaning. I can see why. they are an extremely tight fit in my encore. It is really hard to close the action with a module in place, but easy to close without one. I've already damaged a couple modules trying to load them. They are tight.

With all the shooting I've been doing lately between hunting and trying to figure out my issue, I've run low on ready supplies. So, today, I sized bullets, measured out powder, and primed modules.

I purchased a Hornady Lock-n-Load ultrasonic cleaner. I used their brass cleaning solution. I ran it for 20 minutes and 90% of the HIS modules came out looking like new. Several did not, so I ran them again for 5 minutes. A few still did not get clean. I'm presuming those that cleaned up well the first time had only been shot once. I kept running those that were still not clean for 5 minute increments until they all got clean.

 

[swat1018]

QR is junk. It's not if, but when they cause problems.

 

[Wind Gypsy]

QR is junk. It's not if, but when they cause problems.

Yeah, aiming device is not the place to compromise convenient features for rock solid reliability.

Resting on barrel, quick release scope mounts are definite possible issues. I’ve also gone to beefier scopes on all rifles. Leupold and many other high end light weight scopes are prone to losing zero if bumped around much, regardless of how much they cost.

 

[yoderjac]

Yeah, aiming device is not the place to compromise convenient features for rock solid reliability.

Resting on barrel, quick release scope mounts are definite possible issues. I’ve also gone to beefier scopes on all rifles. Leupold and many other high end light weight scopes are prone to losing zero if bumped around much, regardless of how much they cost.

With all the Leupold scopes I've owned over may years, this is the first issue I've had and the first QR issues I've had. While resting the barrel can definitely affect accuracy at longer ranges. I've ever had more than an inch or two of error at distances 100 yards and less. It certainly could be that this gun is different. It is new and I don't have a lot of shots through it. My best guess is the QR leaver got bumped. I'll report back after the season with any range results.

Let's just say for argument, I become dissatisfied with this scope, do you have some options you like better with similar glass quality in a similar price range?

Thanks,

Jack

 

[Wind Gypsy]

With all the Leupold scopes I've owned over may years, this is the first issue I've had and the first QR issues I've had. While resting the barrel can definitely affect accuracy at longer ranges. I've ever had more than an inch or two of error at distances 100 yards and less. It certainly could be that this gun is different. It is new and I don't have a lot of shots through it. My best guess is the QR leaver got bumped. I'll report back after the season with any range results.

Let's just say for argument, I become dissatisfied with this scope, do you have some options you like better with similar glass quality in a similar price range?

Thanks,

Jack

The scopes I have on all my hunting rifles come from a more tactical/precision rifle background and might not be one's first choice for point and shoot whitetails. I had scopes like the VX6 on up to a $3000 March scope on hunting rifles and now all my rifles wear a $600 3-9x42 SWFA SS or Bushnell Elite LRHS/LRTS series scope. All of these are FFP which isn't preferred by a lot of whitetail applications. Something like a nightforce SHV 3-10x42 could fit the standard SFP whitetail bill nicely. I consider the "glass quality" of all of these to exceed what is needed to serve their primary function, aiming.

 

[swat1018]

I'm an accuracy freak, I don't have it in me to give an inch for this and inch for that. Before you know it your whiffing shots and not even hitting deer, or worse yet wounding them.

 

[yoderjac]

The scopes I have on all my hunting rifles come from a more tactical/precision rifle background and might not be one's first choice for point and shoot whitetails. I had scopes like the VX6 on up to a $3000 March scope on hunting rifles and now all my rifles wear a $600 3-9x42 SWFA SS or Bushnell Elite LRHS/LRTS series scope. All of these are FFP which isn't preferred by a lot of whitetail applications. Something like a nightforce SHV 3-10x42 could fit the standard SFP whitetail bill nicely. I consider the "glass quality" of all of these to exceed what is needed to serve their primary function, aiming.

I can't speak to the others, but when I was young I had several Bushnell Elite scopes. It was a huge jump for me going to Leupold. Better glass and coatings and the larger objective provide much better low-light shooting. I don't know how that plays in a tactical environment, but for deer hunting, I find it a big plus. Perhaps it is just my eyes, but I find a big difference. I know there are other brands that make the same level quality scope as Leupold. I'm told Vortex is one, but I have no experience with it. I do have experience with the Bushnell, and I'm not going back that direction.

In my current environment, 3x9 would cover 95% of my shots. However there are a few stands where I can shoot beyond 200 yards. (I have not done this with the smokeless but I have with the .300 Win Mag and .30-06). I'm trying to get positioned for retirement where I may travel to hunt and do longer range shooting. The 2x24 seems to make that much more possible.

Thanks for the insights into the scopes you prefer for deer hunting,

Jack

 

[yoderjac]

I'm an accuracy freak, I don't have it in me to give an inch for this and inch for that. Before you know it your whiffing shots and not even hitting deer, or worse yet wounding them.

For me, accuracy is relative to the target. If I have a 9" kill zone and reduce that to 6" for field conditions, an inch or two still kills the animal humanely which is my objective.

 

[Wind Gypsy]

I can't speak to the others, but when I was young I had several Bushnell Elite scopes. It was a huge jump for me going to Leupold. Better glass and coatings and the larger objective provide much better low-light shooting. I don't know how that plays in a tactical environment, but for deer hunting, I find it a big plus. Perhaps it is just my eyes, but I find a big difference. I know there are other brands that make the same level quality scope as Leupold. I'm told Vortex is one, but I have no experience with it. I do have experience with the Bushnell, and I'm not going back that direction.

I've only used the elite tactical line, manufactured at Light Optic Works in Japan. They are a little different than the historic elite line. I could see that light gathering being a possible pro to some of the leupy/zeiss/swaro/leica options but my young (36) eyes don't struggle to see anything I should be shooting at in legal shooting hours with my current scopes. The only part of that "tactical" design part that benefits the common point and shoot hunter is that they are less prone to lose zero.

In my current environment, 3x9 would cover 95% of my shots. However there are a few stands where I can shoot beyond 200 yards. (I have not done this with the smokeless but I have with the .300 Win Mag and .30-06). I'm trying to get positioned for retirement where I may travel to hunt and do longer range shooting. The 2x24 seems to make that much more possible.

I have a safe full of LR rifle builds and I dont see the extra magnification always being a big benefit in hunting situations. It's nice to punch paper and not have to focus as much on the little details but I feel like more people have problems (finding animal, shooting wrong animal, spotting impact, struggling with quick follow up shots, etc) with high magnification than they get benefit in hunting situation. The sheep in my avatar was shot at 300 yards on 4 or 5x because the field of view was more important than zooming in in that situation. That hunt was a once in a lifetime deal that costed me more than any vehicle i'd ever owned and magnification would have been a negative rather than positive in that situation.

 

[yoderjac]

I find variable zoom to be a real advantage. I always keep my scope set on low magnification. When a buck trailing a does comes a long, you usually can't stop him long enough to mess with a scope, and the short distance shot doesn't require high magnification. However, when taking a long shot at a deer feeding in a field, there is generally plenty of time. I typically lock in on the deer at a lower power and then adjust to a high power. I've never had any of the issues you describe. There are several reasons I like the high power for longer shots. First, I can pick a more specific spot on the deer as my target. Second, and perhaps most important, is that high power magnifies shooting error and makes it obvious before the shot.

If I go to the range and site the target at low power, It looks like I have rock solid form. If I adjust to high power, I can see the impact of my breathing and other error sources. When I'm in the field and the adrenalin is pumping, it is easy to get caught up in the moment. Seeing that crosshair move around in high power is enough to remind me to take a deep breath, calm down, and execute a controlled shot.

Granted 24x is more than I need for my current situation, but if I travel to hunt after retirement, I'll be glad I have it.

 

[yoderjac]

Just a quick update. After my last range session, I thought I solved the problem. Tonight, I had a buck at 160 yards. Considering the previous issues I've had, I decided to pass. About an hour later, 3 does came out of the brush into the field. They were all between 100 and 120 yards. The biggest was at 100 yards so I decided to take her. I aimed at her shoulder again, exactly where I aimed at the other deer. All three does took off running into the brush after the shot. My heart sank.

After reloading and waiting for about 15 minutes, I decided to head out with a flashlight. It was hard to ID the exact impact site in an open field and I found no blood. It was now after dark. I decided to head in the direction the deer ran with the FLIR.

There she was dead as a door nail in the brush. She had run less than 50 yards but fell in a dip. The light was low enough when I took the shot that I did not see her fall with the other deer running. The shot impacted exactly at my aiming point on her shoulder. It left a huge hole and continued into her chest.

That really helped build begin building my confidence in the gun again!

Thanks,

Jack

 

[yoderjac]

So, that's the good news, but I am having a new issue. It has happened twice so far. The issue is that the module is slipping past the ejector. It happened once and I figured it was a fluke, but it happened again tonight. In both cases, I was able to slip a small screwdriver under the module where the ejector goes to pop out he module.

Tomorrow ends our muzzleloader season. So, after that hunt, I plan to do a disassembly and thorough cleaning. When I do that, I'll be removing the ejector and I'll examine it closely to make sure it is not bent or something. I can certainly imagine how It could have gotten bent given how much force it takes to close the breach sometimes.

Keep in mind this is my first smokeless muzzleloader. It certainly could have been user error when I first got the gun that cause the issue. I'll know more tomorrow night after the cleaning and examination.

 

[yoderjac]

Our muzzleloader season is now over and we are in middle of general firearms season. I've had some time to think about the scope issue I had earlier. I have been using high end Leupold scopes on many of my guns for a long time. Most all of them have quick release rings. This is the first time, a release leaver ever got bumped and came loose. On top of that, when I tightened the quick release leaver, I was not on paper. With every other gun, when I remove and then reinstall the scope, it need only a click or two of fine tuning at the range at most. Often, no adjustment is needed.

As I was contemplating this in the stand with my .300 Win Mag barrel on my Encore, it dawned on me. All of my other guns are drilled an tapped for the scope base, they they all have Leupold bases with their quick release rings. My smokeless that I bought from Jeff has a picatinny rail base. This makes sense now. When Leupold is machining both the rings and base, they are going to get much more precision than when they are producing quick release rings that fit weaver or picatinny bases.

It is all now making sense to me.

 

[Wind Gypsy]

Your base may be loose but if you installed the rings and base properly, different manufacturers aren’t the issue.

Picatinny rails and rings are a standard among many hard use applications and the rail and rings are different manufacturers most of the time. Custom actions come with the rail integrated in the receiver and they don’t manufacture rings yet there’s never issues like this.

 

[yoderjac]

Your base may be loose but if you installed the rings and base properly, different manufacturers aren’t the issue.

Picatinny rails and rings are a standard among many hard use applications and the rail and rings are different manufacturers most of the time. Custom actions come with the rail integrated in the receiver and they don’t manufacture rings yet there’s never issues like this.

Base is not loose. Rings were installed properly. The design of Picattiny and weaver does not have the same level of return to zero precision as the Leupod QR base and rings.

 

[Wind Gypsy]

Base is not loose. Rings were installed properly. The design of Picattiny and weaver does not have the same level of return to zero precision as the Leupod QR base and rings.

I see what you’re saying, sorry for misinterpreting.