What can I expect with 1x - 3x magnification?

[android]

So I picked up an AR and an EOTech XPS a few weeks ago. I got it sighted at 50yds as recommended and was shooting about 2" groups at 50yds and just keeping it on the black 6" shoot n C at 100yds. Meh, not too excited.

Since I could barely see the 6" target at 100yds, I decided to get the 3x magnifier. OK after wiggling around stuff to fit on the rail and zeroing again at 50yds, I'm getting quarter sized groups at 50yds, and about 3-4" groups at 100. I can see thing much more clearly at 100yds now. I also think I can still do better at 100yds with a lighter 2 stage trigger.

Anyway, I don't really have much experience with sights, so is there some kind of rule of thumb for magnification needed at different distances for desired group sizes? I see scopes and magnifiers anywhere from 2x up to 48x.

It seems like my 3x should get me good shots out to maybe 200yds or so which is about as far as I'll be wanting to shoot anyway. But I'm curious about how the scope vs. distance stuff works.

[WildBill]

IMO, the choice about magnification is going to depend on how you are going to shoot. I have a 24X scope for my .222 Rem that I shoot benchrest style. At this magnification you can count the number of legs on a fly at 100 yards, but the field of view is very small. It has 1/4" adjustments so you can zero it in very acccurately. With this kind of magnification, trying to shoot without firm and steady support you will have a problem trying to find the target, let alone hit it. Higher magnification is not always better. If I use my 12X scope I can keep the groups almost as tight as with as with the 24X.

If you are shooting offhand or with some type of support at 100-200 yards, I think a 3X is a good choice.

[Oldgringo]

I would like to find a 1-3x or 2-5x old style (straight tube) for my brand spankin' new CZ 452 .22 LR Mannlicher. That would be just about right for 25-50 yard .22 LR target shooting AND the appearance of the rig...don't you think?

[RECIT]

If you are wanting to put down tiny little groups then the higher magnification is going to help out a lot. The 3x magnifiers are great for combat accuracy and still give you a huge field of view. I have a 3-9x variable power Trijicon on one of my EBRs and it is plenty to put tiny little groups at 100yds.

[tb7475]

Higher magnification,narrower field of view.

[mr surveyor]

magnification isn't always the major factor in optics. In my line of work, optics are an essential tool and we have our share of optical instruments I've collected for about 30 years. The resolving power is necessarly a requirement for obtaining the target, but the quality of the optical glass itself, as well as size of the objective lense are more often the inportant attrubutes. Also, the precision of the crosshair construction in the instrument as well as the "width" of the crosshair being deciding factors. Obviously the resolving power is going to be a factor in target acquisition at given distances, but by the very nature of optical instruments in general the clarity and resolution is going to be much greater at the lower end of the magnification of the device.

Personally, I prefer the lowest optical setting available that allows me to acquire a good sight window and place my crosshairs on the center of the target zone. I would think that a quality 3x magnification optic should cinsistantly produce moa (or sub moa) groups at 100 yards, aimed center of 6 inch target. With crosshair width of 1 moa, the crosshair itself is covering 1 inch width of target, which would leave the reamining visible portion of the 6 inch corcle divided into 4 equal quadrants of 2 inch'... very adequate dimensions for centering on the target.

Choice of optics is very dependant on one's needs. What style of shooting (offhand standing, sitting, kneeling, prone, bench rested), and what distances would most often be considered.

It's just my personal opinion from over 30 years of dealing with optics (NOT necessarily rifle optics) that in many cases less is better when considering magnification. Some, many or most may disagree.

surv

[gigag04]

An aimpoint with 2MOA dot and a magnifier....

OR an ACOG mounted on top, and a T-1 Micro mounted on a 45 degree right offset for MOUT.

I'm sticking mainly to combat proven optics...if this rifle is for competition or plinking and lives won't depend on it you can def get by with "better values" in that dept.

[Beiruty]

One has to ask, how is it possible to keep steady hold (off hand) a cross hair on 4" target at 200-300 yrd even with 30X magnification. Without a sturdy bipod, the mission is almost impossible. minute hand shaking will be amplified so mcuh that cross-hair will keep wobble all across the target.

I have a lot of admiration for long range shooters.

[The Annoyed Man]

Eotech offers a 3X and a 4X magnifier, but there's about a $200-$250 difference in price between the two. A significant part of your accuracy is going to depend on a couple of things which have nothing to do with your optics or trigger.

Here are concerns that can affect it:

1. What is your barrel profile? M4? HBAR?

2. What is your barrel's twist rate?

3. What bullet weight are you shooting?

4. Is your barrel free floated or not?

Those three things can have a profound effect on an AR's accuracy. For instance, generally speaking, a barrel twist of 1:7 will stabilize heavier bullets (65-85 grains) better than a 1:10 twist, while the 1:10 will stabilize lighter bullets (45-55 grains) better than a 1:7 twist. A 1:9 twist is a good compromise twist which will handle medium range 55-68 grain bullets real well.

All other things being equal, if you're not shooting a bullet weight well suited to your rifle barrel's twist rate, it will have a dramatic effect on your accuracy.

As a general principle, a heavy barrel will deliver greater accuracy than a light barrel. All barrels vibrate under fire, but heavier barrels vibrate less than lighter barrels. The vibration has a lower amplitude in the heavier barrel because it is stiffer. This is important because the direction the bullet leaves the bore in is dependent on which direction the bore is pointed in at the time of bullet exit. Picture the end of barrel "wagging" ever so slightly as the bullet exits. The amplitude of the "wagging" will determine group size down range.

Free floating the barrel removes any side pressures which can put just enough "warp" into a barrel to affect how it vibrates and how far off true center the muzzle is pointed between shots.

All of those things can very significantly affect your accuracy - even with a $2,500 U.S. Optics sniper scope. If the above things are not accounted for, all the optics will do is enable you to see your large group size more easily than with the naked eye. And having a nice, two stage competition trigger is a pretty sweet thing, but if the barrel/cartridge combination isn't working, a good trigger isn't going to make up for it.

That's not to say that optics and trigger aren't important. They are. But they aren't going to make up for what's happening in the barrel as the bullet goes through it.

[The Annoyed Man]

It's just my personal opinion from over 30 years of dealing with optics (NOT necessarily rifle optics) that in many cases less is better when considering magnification. Some, many or most may disagree.

surv

I believe you're right. Clear is important at any distance or magnification, and if you are going to use your reticle to range targets with mil-dots for instance, you'll want a higher power magnification, but once you've got the range and made the corrections, you're better off backing out the magnification a bit so you can gain some field of view and some eye relief. Snipers are commonly taught this technique. Also, even fixed power sniping scopes are generally only 10X, which is enough power to shoot to 1,000 yards without giant magnification.