preferred magnification for off hand shooting

I use a fixed 3x power Nikon scope on my AR. Is more than adequate magnification for me. Any more than that and I do get that shaky image thing going on.
 
Too many variables!!!

Although too many variables, in general, without these variables or for an "all-around" or "do-all" scope...

I like 1X up to a maximum of 2X on the low end and 1X (or 2X) per 100 yards depending on the game...

So, my 1.1-4X, 1.5-6X and 2-12X are ideal FOR ME...

T.
 
Last edited:
"...heartbeat, not so much..." Sure you can. Diet, exercise, enough sleep, etc., etc.
Click to expand...

No, you can't. Diet, exercise, enough sleep, etc., can have an effect on your heart rate, but unless you're some kind of mystic fakir you can't "hold a beat, let it half way out, shoot, then finish letting out the beat" the way you can with your breath.

I have heard some people talk about "learning to shoot between heartbeats"
Not something I've mastered, I guess.

"To begin with, my internest is not so much in formal, Olympic-style shooting but rather the type of stance one would likely use when hunting."
Click to expand...
Kinda sounds like hunting to me, but he appears too be somewhat contradicting himself.
Click to expand...

Might sound like hunting, but isn't. :D
so, remarks about spotting and hitting various game at range, or where to set your variable in the field don't really address his question.
 
My limit is 5x for offhand/standing field position, while shooting at stationary or swinging targets @ 100 yards with a hunting rifle.

I found it extremely difficult for me to pick up a close range spooked/running whitetail deer with the magnification set at 4x.
 
I don't hunt, but for offhand target shooting any magnification greater than 3-4X is not necessary and probably counterproductive.

If you can hold very hard offhand (I can't) you might be able to use higher magnification.
 
because I thought everyone could visualize the type of stance I meant if I called it such (and because I don't know of a better name for it).
Click to expand...

Actually.I don't really know what you mean by "hunting stance"

If I have to shoot offhand,I prefer a balanced,upright standing position with my bones stacked naturally and my head erect.My balance/equilibrium is in my inner ears.Tilting my head to some "stance" makes me wobble.

Since I'm already looking at my target and my rifle and scope fit me,I just keep looking at the target as I bring the rifle to my eye.

For myself,I don't shoot at spooked/running game.


I my hunting has mostly been in Colorado. I'm not into big,heavy scopes.


For shooting at targets,I'm happy to use 10X to 14X.but my hunting rifles don't have those.
 
To HiBC...

I see what you mean... maybe my third try will be clearer. :rolleyes:

If you shoot with bone on bone support in a hunting situation, then I guess that's your "hunting stance," but I was envisioning a stance in which the weak hand is extended farther out on the forend and that arm is not supported by the body.



The reason I started this post to begin with is that I've recently been trying to extend my offhand shooting accuracy. I've been shooting at a 4.5" diameter steel plate with six different .22 rifles. I start around 35 yards, then progressively back up in 5-yard increments if I can hit consistently at each distance. Some of the rifles wear iron sights (2 receiver sights; 1 barrel-mounted sight); some are scoped (a fixed 4x, a 1-4x, and a 2-7x).

I've experimented a little with dialing my variable scopes up or down, and it just made my curious as to what worked best for other people.
 
I'm a geezer and eyes are pretty bad--if what you mean by freehand shooting is walking around and shooting from a standing or kneeling position...a good red dot is best IMO. I don't do it often--but if speed of acquisition was important, that's the way I would go. Anything magnified is a good option--but I find takes extra time to get the "dance" out of the sight picture.
 
All my hunting scopes are 3-9x and when walking, the power I choose depends somewhat on the surrounding terrain, but if I can expect to encounter a critter a hundred yards or so, it's set at 6X, closer than that, it's on 3 or 4X. It's never on 9X when I'm walking or even sitting when cover is less than 100 yards. It's not just the power, but field of view that I'm concerned with.

Even when sitting on a stool on a woods road, I rarely have the power above 6X, preferably at 4X, as long as I can spot antlers, if necessary.
 
I do most of my offhand shooting at the range with an AR15. I have a fixed 4x scope that I'll use once in a while. It improves my groups only marginally, if at all. The groups pretty much stay the same size, but with the 4x scope, the group will be on target a little better. The scope amplifies my movements and that makes me take a little longer for each shot. I have a 3-9x40 on a Marlin 22, but if I shoot that rifle offhand, I tend to use the irons. It has high rings so I can retain iron sight use and that makes it a little uncomfortable for offhand shooting utilizing the scope. My hunting rifle has a 3-9x40 that I generally keep at 3x. While in my stand, I have the luxury of a place to rest the rifle.
 
If you want to see at a lower power than the scope is advertised, you have to turn them around and look through the other end. ;)
 
In my case for deer hunting a 4 or 6X is plenty for shooting. I did shoot a little .22 silhouette and the scope I had was a 4 to 12X, I shot on 12X . I never had a chance to try it with higher magnifications.
I suppose it depends on what you are shooting at with what. I use 4X in the back yard on squirrels. with an air rifle.
 
When I took the old PR1 class at Gunsite I had a 10X mil-dot scope. In snap shooting it caused me trouble acquiring close targets fast because there were rows of targets and it was easy to land on the wrong one when shooting fast. That power was fine for sniper team shooting and did just fine as a solo scope at 800, 900, and 1000 yards. But for the field, I found it too much. I think the scout scope concept in the 1.5X to 2.5X range is probably best for the field as you can see around it easily to keep centered where you want to be. I find it is also worth having a large enough main objective to get a good bright image in low light. Something that is brighter than I see by the naked eye is normally what I look for in a field scope. For white targets in bright sun, though, I don't need the brightness and use something smaller.
 
I'm not "The Model" for other people to follow. Relative to other folks on TFL,I don't even call myself a good shot.
One of the times I'll MAYBE shoot offhand is I'm cresting a hill. My hat,eyeballs,and forhead are exposed to the game.The game has made eye contact .Its standing still.If I sit or kneel,I lose sight of the target. A decision gets made,shoot or pass.

Typically,there will be daylight between my ribs and upper arm.I don't stick my hip out or find a spot for my elbow.

I also don't do Elmer Fdd or Geraldo Revera "Cweeping up" poses.

As I said,I set up my rifle so however I'm standing and looking at my target,I do not have to "find the target" in my scope. I simply keep looking at the target as I bring the rifle up to my eye. The fit puts the rifle on my shoulder and spot weld.

That is largely why 6X works for me,even cottontail hunting.

If you shoot with bone on bone support in a hunting situation, then I guess that's your "hunting stance," but I was envisioning a stance in which the weak hand is extended farther out on the forend and that arm is not supported by the body.



The reason I started this post to begin with is that I've recently been trying to extend my offhand shooting accuracy. I've been shooting at a 4.5" diameter steel plate with six different .22 rifles. I start around 35 yards, then progressively back up in 5-yard increments if I can hit consistently at each distance. Some of the rifles wear iron sights (2 receiver sights; 1 barrel-mounted sight); some are scoped (a fixed 4x, a 1-4x, and a 2-7x).
Click to expand...


Given your 4.5 in target size,and a range of 35 yds,+ 5 yd increments


Its difficult for me to imagine optics of any power would be a significant advantage over a receiver peep till past 50 yds.


In other words,you will gain more from marksmanship basics than you will from magnification.


Consider those who shoot black bullseyes at ranges from 100 to 600 yds with an iron sighted M1 Garand >A fair number of those guys are old with failing eyes ,and the rifles might shoot 2 1/2 to 3 MOA.


Sure,a scope can help you. Bt there s no instant pudding magnification that will make you a good shot.


I suggest you let that go,and spend your money on 22 Rimfire ammo.


Its a very reasonable,attainable goal for an ordinary guy to pretty much put them all on a 4.5 in target at 50 yards (or more) using a 22 with a peep sight.


Look at an NRA 25 yd HANDGUN bullseye target and scoring rings. Iron sights,one handed. That will help you see reasonable goals.


A semi-meaningless old rule of thumb was 1 X for every 100 yds of range for a big game scope was adequate. On the 1903A4 sniper rifle a little 3/4 in tube Weaver 2 1/2 X scope was considered effective to 600 yds.


Yes,a scope can help,but focusing on magnification is a "miss"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top