I'm reading Complete Book of Rifles And Shotguns by O'Connor. Originally published in 1961. GOOD book. In the sighting section he speaks in depth about not getting too much scope. The optimum scope for the majority of uses is 2.5x to 3x with a 4x scope being a really powerful one, too much so for many things.
I've had interesting conversations here about scoping my ordered and ever so slooooowly shipping 10/22 and the potential CF I may add for KD if I don't completely fall on my face. While not being that extreme they somewhat mirror the less is more theory.
Just found it interesting I got to that part of the book this evening and that was the idea then. Did I mention it's a GOOD book? I think all his writing is though.
I have a UTG 4X fixed power scope on my Tippmann M4-22 and it is more than adequate for 25 meters. Too much magnification will over-emphasize movement, causing the shooter to fuss the shot, and it can cause you to "see" your heartbeat if your sling is tight enough. Both of those issues are distracting to me when shooting.
A 3X9 is more than enough scope for an Appleseed (even a Known Distance event).
Getting people to dial it down to 3 (which is all that is needed) seems to be very bitter medicine though.
That's really difficult for those not used to the idea. Not knowing anything, I presume using a 3X optic makes a 25M object appear the same as it would if it were 8.33M away viewed unaided. I can maybe see that although having worn glasses almost 60 years and no glasses for only 6 months now I'm still mentally in the "can't see anything and need LOTS of help stage" so 10X and seeing it as if 2.5M away seems more useful and appealing. And the thought of only 3X at 100yds or especially 200yds seems impossible. But I know it depends on the object being viewed, size, shape, contrast etc. etc. also.
This is very dependent on eyesight. When I first got into Appleseed, I knew I needed a scope, because my eyesight is BAD. The feedback I got was to not get too much scope, you don't need it, try with irons, or at most get something like the 2-7x32 Rimfire scope package from the Appleseed store. I knew I had not chance with irons, so I got the Appleseed scope package.
It's a great package for the price, and I felt like it was probably adequate, even though the stage 3 and 4 targets were extremely small. I went to 3 25m events, improving each time, finally topping out with a score in the high 180s. I felt like my skills were solid and I was doing everything right, but I couldn't get past that point. I went to two more Appleseeds and was still stuck there at 189. Before my 6th, an instructor told me he would loan me a scope. On the first day, I used my regular 2-7x32 and scored 189 again. On the second day I borrowed a 5-25x50 and immediately scored a 211 and a 222. So it's pretty obvious I needed the scope. It improved my score by 30 points.
I'd say if your vision is normal, you don't need it. If your vision is more like 20/60 or 20/80, and the stage 4 targets look like tiny gray specs, maybe you need more scope. I never used it at full 25x, but I adjusted it so I was able to actually see and hold on the V in each target. I bought the same model scope on Black Friday, and I'm looking forward to using it at future events, especially RKD and KD events now that I'm a Rifleman.
My eyes are about 20/30-20/40 now, after cataract-ectomy. I was probably 20/80-20/90 prior plus heavy astigmatism as a bonus. I have never thought about getting some kind of X-25 or X-30 power scope like I see mentioned at times various places. Nor a /50 or /56 scope. I figure an X-Y/40-44 scope is right for me.
And I'm as concerned about going too big on X as I am not going big enough on Y. So the idea of a 6-18/4x, if they even make one with less than a /50, seems too strong at the 6 end. I like the idea of an X-14/44 and still uncertain about 3 or 4 for X. If they even make a 3-14. It may be to get to 14 it starts with 4 only.
And parallax focus concerns me also as so many scopes are set at a fixed 100yd parallax. And I figure most of my use is going to be at 25yd/M with now and then some 50 and 100. So an AO, either adjusting the bell or with a side knob, appeals to me psychologically, whether really warranted or not.
And I would seriously like made in USA but that may be non-existent or budget breaking. Just not China if at all possible to avoid.
Magnification is over rated. Higher magnifications do have value, but the value is target detection, which is not an issue during a traditional Appleseed event.
The big win for an optic is for those with vision problems. The key is adjusting the eyepiece to make the crosshair crisply focused.
Your eye should be focused on the crosshair of the optic, not on the target, and that cross hair should be crisply focused.
Next pay close attention to your cheek weld. Your cheek weld should be repeatably consistent, and should center your eye in the optic.
Consistent cheek weld + eye centered in the optic = Consistent performance even with bargain bin optics.
Note: A 1X scope when adjusted to your prescription is likely to solve the vision issues. Because magnification is not what solves the actual problem.
Can you spend more? Certainly, and it's good for the economy. But price and consistency on target are not necessarily correlated.
What do you get with better glass?
-Thinner wallet
-Better light handling (bad glass can go darker as magnification increases)
-Better eye box (The distance forward/back that your eye must be inside of for a proper full view)
-Possibly better eye relief (the required distance between the eye and the eyepiece)
-Possibly distance specific focus knob
-Possibly an elevation stop/lock (valuable at a KD event)
-Better color accuracy
-Larger objective for increased light gathering ability
Quote from: eaglescouter on January 06, 2026, 03:28:04 PMMagnification is over rated. Higher magnifications do have value, but the value is target detection, which is not an issue during a traditional Appleseed event.
The big win for an optic is for those with vision problems. The key is adjusting the eyepiece to make the crosshair crisply focused.
Your eye should be focused on the crosshair of the optic, not on the target, and that cross hair should be crisply focused.
Next pay close attention to your cheek weld. Your cheek weld should be repeatably consistent, and should center your eye in the optic.
Consistent cheek weld + eye centered in the optic = Consistent performance even with bargain bin optics.
Note: A 1X scope when adjusted to your prescription is likely to solve the vision issues. Because magnification is not what solves the actual problem.
Can you spend more? Certainly, and it's good for the economy. But price and consistency on target are not necessarily correlated.
What do you get with better glass?
-Thinner wallet
-Better light handling (bad glass can go darker as magnification increases)
-Better eye box (The distance forward/back that your eye must be inside of for a proper full view)
-Possibly better eye relief (the required distance between the eye and the eyepiece)
-Possibly distance specific focus knob
-Possibly an elevation stop/lock (valuable at a KD event)
-Better color accuracy
-Larger objective for increased light gathering ability
I think a lot of what you say here is true, but it might not be considering special cases of unusual vision problems that can't be corrected with lenses, which is the case for me.
I'm not going to advise anyone to run out and get a scope capable of 25x for Appleseed. But for me higher magnification, along with a crisper and brighter image, definitely made an immediate difference. My scores topped out at the high 180s at my third event and held there for the next 2.5 events. I must have shot in the range of 15 AQTs over the course of 3 AQTs after topping out, never getting above 189, and then after switching to a better scope, immediately scored rifleman twice in a row. It made a 25-35 point difference as soon as I used it.
My advice for most new shooters would be, if you want to try a scope, try something like the rimfire package from the Appleseed store. If the shooter reaches a plateau, and they seem like they have mastered the fundamentals, and they have a known vision problems, then maybe better optics would help. Even then 25x is probably overkill for an AQT, but I plan to use the scope at some other kinds of shooting events where that appears to be pretty normal. When I used the fancy scope for my Rifleman scores the magnification for stage 4 was below 20, probably around 15. So that's probably adequate for anyone with even very poor vision.
I have poor vision. Not Mr. Magoo vision, but poor vision. I test with both eyes at 20/20-20/25 and single eye 20/35-20/40. Yeah, with both eyes a 20/25 is really good vision. My eyes apparently know it. But my brain is almost 69 years old and for all those years, save the last 0.5 year, I was more like 20/75 with major astigmatism thrown in.
That's all my brain knows. And hasn't believed anything else yet. In spite of being told so by one of the top 5 eye doctors in Texas, and me, of the new facts and new normal. So we coddle it along and figure it will catch up at some point, hopefully soon.
So I bought the best non-optic sight to put on my new rifle, Tech Sights TSR200. I'll probably buy another "new and improved" 10/22 to have an identical look/feel/operation rifle to put a scope on at some point, prior to attempting KD which I don't think is as friendly to the TSR200 as to scopes.
That's my too long and TOO boring vision story and why I'm exploring sighting options.
When I first started in firearms, I had 20/15 vision. I was handed a pretty shot out M4 with irons and was around a 180 for the Navy. It was difficult.
Going forward 15 years into the future, my eyesight isn't so great, I wear glasses now to see at distance. I tried irons on a Ruger PCC and it just wasn't fun trying to focus on the target.
No shame at all in looking at scopes.
I did a ton of research before I settled on purchasing a scope for my AR-22. The reviews on the Vortex Crossfires and Diamondbacks of a few years ago wasn't super great. I also knew I wanted something with parallax control rather than the cheapest scope available.
I went with the Vortex Venom 3-15x44 FFP. I have Strike Eagles on my centerfires, so having the same reticle is a plus.
I run it with the zoom turned down all the way to 3.
The downside is a scope (and mount) like this adds quite a bit of weight to your rifle overall.
Last recommendation, get a good optics torque wrench and torque to all your screws to the recommended specifications. After I got one, I went back and re-torqued all my screws and wow, was I way off from my hand tightening. After that, I was a lot more consistent.
IMO, the magnification range you choose for your rifle depends entirely on your intended use case for the rifle. There's not really a generally accepted range for too much or too little magnification necessarily, and take anything you read from 60+ years ago especially about optics with a grain of salt. The engineering and manufacturing of optics has some a long way since then and so has the process of selecting an optic for a specific use.
My general rule of thumb is 2X the magnification of the number of hundreds of yards I am shooting (with a limit, obviously, and as long as I am steady enough to keep my reticle on target within reason), so for example, for a KD, at 400 yards, I will likely shoot at 8X magnification or so. Can you get away with less, sure, but my other intended use cases for that rifle have me shooting beyond 400 yards, so I opted for a 3-18X magnification range. Plus, generally optics get weird (tight eyebox, lots of chromatic aberration, etc) when you get into the high end of the max magnification range so it's nice to sit closer to the middle of the range I have found, so buying a little more than your intended magnification might help with regards to that, and you can always dial it back if you need to. Knowing when you should dial it back is also an important skill, but you can never add extra magnification to your scope.
You get a lot more than improved quality glass with a higher end scope (although this is a huge benefit in less than nominal circumstances). A large part of the expense of optics is in the mechanical portions of the scope (Turrets and associated screws, erector tube assembly, etc.). Cheaper scopes tend to make compromises in this area and might not be as consistent in their tracking as their higher end counterparts, or those mechanisms may just be less robust, might have tighter eye boxes, etc. They might also be heavier, might not have illumination, might be second focal plane, might not have zero stops, etc. So again, the money you spend on your scope also depends entirely on your use case and your requirements.
So I'd say, when trying to determine what magnification to choose and then eventually a scope to actually buy, make sure you understand your use case, and the "must have" features that your chosen scope needs to have to make your shooting experience, Appleseed or otherwise, productive and enjoyable. Once you know the ranges you intend to use it at and the features it needs to have to make it useful to you, it will make it easier to narrow down the list of choices. You can cover a range of uses, but remember there is no perfect do-it-all scope or magnification range, there are always trade offs to be made
LOTS of really great and helpful input in all these responses. I don't imagine ever shooting beyond the 400yds of the KD and normally nowhere near that. I know, never say never. But since the ranges I have convenient access to all max out at 100yds that will be my usual maximum.
I've been thinking for the KD rifle a scope with a min or 2x-3x up to 12x or 14x is probably the most likely suspect. I have it in my mind it should have AO or internal adjustment so I can dial the parallax back to 100yds or out to 400yds and in between if that ever comes up. But so many are fixed at 100yds so maybe that's not a big thing to have after all.
I don't want a cheap scope but won't have a Swarovski budget either. I've heard spend more for the scope than you did for the rifle but not sure if Mr. Grumpy Checkbook will go for that or not. But unless/until I decide for certain if I'm doing 400yds I don't need to worry too much about it, just enough to enjoy the scope scouting and shopping until then.
Yeah I think if your main goal is to be 400 yards and in, a 2-12, 3-15 or 3-18 range magnification will be excellent. You could also go lpvo in the 1-6 or 1-8 range which I think would be fine for that purpose.
Personally, I really like adjustable parallax to get that perfectly crisp target/reticle overlay. I also like a zero stop capability, and exposed turrets (at least elevation).
The adage about spending more on glass than the rifle is also something I think comes from a bygone era. We live in the golden age of excellent, affordable optic performance. I agree with Kevin_K, I think the Venom 3-15x44 FFP is one to take a hard look at. Extremely affordable and performs well. Others to look at in that range I think would be the Vortex Strike Eagle 1-8x24 and the Athlon Helos BTR 2-12x42. AA Optics sells refurbished Vortex scopes at a significant discount that carry the same lifetime warranty. I have purchased several from them that looked totally brand new.
Not that it has anything to do with anything but I like the looks of the Strike Eagle style scope for an AR. It just seems more correct on an AR platform. As always, great responses that give me more good information and more to think about.
Quote from: LDB415 on January 20, 2026, 12:32:31 PMNot that it has anything to do with anything but I like the looks of the Strike Eagle style scope for an AR. It just seems more correct on an AR platform. As always, great responses that give me more good information and more to think about.
I'd bought the Vortex Strike Eagle 1-8x24 about three years back. The eyebox was tiny at more 5x or more. Just breathing hard and you'd lose the sight picture. I'd bought it for KD and wanted 8x.
Two other instructors I know both said the same. They both said it sucks too. I wound up giving it away. Maybe it's improved since then. Or maybe I'm just too picky?
That is interesting and unhappy news. My gambling budget is zero so I'll look at other options even if they don't visually look as much like an AR scope. I'm sorry you had to have an expensive learning experience.
I've qualified three times with my Strike eagle 1-8, and I'm old enough to have hot flashes. That said, the 1-6 has better glass and a more forgiving eye box.
Better glass and eyebox negates 2x lower max. Better glass and eyebox negates 2x lower max. Better glass and eyebox negates 2x lower max. If I tell myself enough maybe I can convince myself over 50 years of thinking higher magnification is better isn't accurate after all. :)
Quote from: LDB415 on January 20, 2026, 05:47:03 PMBetter glass and eyebox negates 2x lower max. Better glass and eyebox negates 2x lower max. Better glass and eyebox negates 2x lower max. If I tell myself enough maybe I can convince myself over 50 years of thinking higher magnification is better isn't accurate after all. :)
;D Honest to goodness, more magnification can hurt more than it helps. You'll see every little twitch. You'll see your dang heartbeat, and without realizing it you might find yourself trying to compensate for for those things and only making it worse. It's 400y with a 4MOA standard of accuracy. You don't need to shoot between your heartbeats, I promise.
Don't let perfect be the enemy of "good enough."
Quote from: Mrs. Smith on January 20, 2026, 07:14:46 PMQuote from: LDB415 on January 20, 2026, 05:47:03 PMBetter glass and eyebox negates 2x lower max. Better glass and eyebox negates 2x lower max. Better glass and eyebox negates 2x lower max. If I tell myself enough maybe I can convince myself over 50 years of thinking higher magnification is better isn't accurate after all. :)
;D Honest to goodness, more magnification can hurt more than it helps. You'll see every little twitch. You'll see your dang heartbeat, and without realizing it you might find yourself trying to compensate for for those things and only making it worse. It's 400y with a 4MOA standard of accuracy. You don't need to shoot between your heartbeats, I promise.
Don't let perfect be the enemy of "good enough."
Part of my brain gets it. And part of my brain has had at least 50 years of thinking magnification magnification magnification. So it's a slow transformation. But I'm working on it and why I said and intrinsically believe better glass and eyebox negates 2x lower max. But the other part still says a 2-12 or a 3-14 is definitely a better way to go than a 1-6. But I'm working on it. :)
And my current "suspect list" is Bushnell Trophy R5 1-6x 24mm, Bushnell AR Optics 1-8x 24mm, Sig Sauer Tango MSR 1-10x 28mm, and Vortex Optics Viper HD 3-15x 44mm.
The AR 1-8 and Viper 3-15 both have adjustable parallax, a major factor and big plus in my uneducated mind so those two are definitely in the lead. And the Tango I can save 14% if I get the ugly Coyote color instead of black. :)
Quote from: Mrs. Smith on January 20, 2026, 07:14:46 PMYou'll see every little twitch. You'll see your dang heartbeat, and without realizing it you might find yourself trying to compensate for for those things and only making it worse.
True statement.
I have a few scopes of 2x7 and 3x9 on a couple of my hunting rifles and I like them very much.
But, when it comes to shooting at longer ranges like a centerfire KD or Service Rifle competition I'm in the 4x power camp. I stay with 4x power for a couple of reasons.
1. When competing in Service rifle you can only have a 4.5x scope or lower. I have a Vortex Crossfire (1-4x) on my Service Rifle. In slow fire prone, the target is at 600 yards. In Service rifle the X ring is 6" in diameter (1 MOA) at 600 yards. The 10-ring is 12" in diameter (2 MOA). A 4x scope is plenty of magnification to consistently stay in and around the 10-ring. 2 MOA is the accuracy standard that you the rifle and ammo must be able to achieve in order to stay competitive at the top levels. My 4x scope enables me to do that because it has that wonderful balance of being enough, but not too much. 4x power doesn't noticeably magnify my wobble which promotes total confidence with sight alignment and sight picture. This allows me to concentrate on the other fundamentals and making good wind calls.
Good News is a Known Distance AQT is not Service Rifle competition against other shooters. It's you trying your level best to keep your shots in the black. When shooting a KD, you need to be able to achieve a 4 MOA standard in order to make a Rifleman's score.
Oh, reason 2. I use the same rifle for shooting KD, because of the economy of it. If my rifle works well at 600 yards, it'll work even better at 400 yards.
I get it that it's fun to shop and compare, and dream a bit :). Please understand that other considerations are just as important, if not more so, than scope power. Things like Solid Position, the Six Steps, Natural Point of Aim and, at a KD, compensating for Wind!!! At 400 yards, you can do everything else correctly, but, if you don't make a good wind call, your well aimed and released shot from your rifle (regardless of scope power) will drift out of the black and you will have missed.
Fun discussion!
In Liberty,
Gus
Yes, the wind is something I know zero about in regard to shooting. It just doesn't factor in when you're only a plinker at the 25 yard line. Even less at the usual indoor range shooting. That will likely ruin me at both KD clinics. I don't anticipate shooting service rifle as unless it's shot with 5.56 it will be too much recoil for me. I wish I could be an M1 shooter, they're such cool rifles. But .25-06 was more than I enjoyed so I know .30-06 or .308 will be. I'll be working on my brain to get used to the 4x idea. :)
Yes like others have said, this all assumes your fundamentals are good enough that magnification is helping, not hindering. Calling the wind comes with experience and shooting in the wind more.
Many scopes have the issue of eye boxes getting tight or things just getting generally wonky at max magnification. That's why I think it's better to look at your desired magnification range and buy something with a little more than that, so you don't end up in on that hairy edge. LPVOs especially with higher high end magnification seem to suffer from this.
And the great thing about a 2-12, or 3-15, or 3-18 or something of the like is, you can still shoot it at 3X or 4X, you just may find much more versatility in other types of shooting vs. max 4X, unless you shoot a type of match that requires that, like service rifle. Just room to grow in my opinion. You'd be surprised how fast you get addicted to all kinds of long range shooting once you go to a couple KDs ;D
Wind and sound are such fascinating concepts. Invisible, and yet so real and complex. I got to go to the drag races once, NHRA championship at Houston Raceway Park before they closed it down. My seat was maybe half way up, 150 feet or so from the lanes I guess. As the top fuels passed, maybe 6000-7000hp back then, I'd literally feel 3-4 thumps to my chest, serious thumps, from the sound waves, moving across my chest in the direction of travel of the cars. Such a cool thing and a great time. The wind is the same. You can't see a thing but is it ever real and working. And the idea of me figuring it out is currently quite foreign. Something to eventually learn and continually work on.
And both sides make a lot of sense in the scope discussion. Having more scope just seems so much more logical to me at this point. And I can shoose the highest power I adjust it to. And if I can ever afford another discipline and for it the rules set a limit I'll probably be setting up another rifle anyway and will set it up with whatever the rules approve. But then if I already had that now I'd be that much more proficient. So much "sensible" on both sides. Tough decisions to make.
Quote from: LDB415 on January 20, 2026, 09:06:35 PMI'll be working on my brain to get used to the 4x idea. :)
I like high magnification myself. But good scopes, in a compact package, cost buku.
So I use my 5x prism. Small and good for going through brush country. I mount what I'll use both on and off the range.
If I had 3k to spare I'd get a Vortex 1x10 Razor compact. But I don't so I wont.
Why?
I've got big huge 3x12 scope though. It's a cheapo with crappy glass. Good enough at 25m though. At 25m at 8x, or even 12x, the target looks like the side of a barn. How can you miss right? So the wobble was there but hey it's the side of a barn. The wobble doesn't bother me and I pay it no mind. And I can nail those small targets. As in 5 rounds in one hole. Consistently. And with a good solid position there's not much wobble anyhow.
I can't do that with 4x.
So I think it comes down to the way you look at things. If you worry about the wobble then it will affect you and best to stick with 4x.
I don't tell new shooters that though since they usually don't have a solid position. But if you can steady yourself - works for me.
My 3x fixed power was easier on my eyes than my 3-9x this past weekend.
It probably has way better optics given that it cost at least twice what the adjustable did. The image was just brighter, clearer, less hazy. They spent the money on glass, not gears. Sight alignment was way easier to acquire and maintain than at 9x. "Exit pupil diameter" was not a thing I considered when I bought the scopes a decade ago.
9x is great for spotting those 22lr holes and getting a clear picture of the 400m targets; lower magnification but a clear picture worked for everything else including the 300m targets and the shingle. If I keep telling myself that I might avoid scope shopping before the next RKD. :-\
Historically most militaries have arrived at that 3x-4x range for magnified combat optic and keep coming back to it over the past 100 years. I'm generally a simple man. I like my 3x PA micro prisms. I do have an ACOG on my 6920 and an overkill Leupold Mark 5 3.6-18x on my A4.
I'm at the point where a scope is necessary.
A slowly forming cataract in my dominant eye has turned the smallbore targets into ovals. After testing several front globe sight inserts and an adjustable rear sight diopter, my scores plateaued because I could never be 100% certain that I was on center.
I installed a 10x scope, and my scores jumped, especially in prone and seated (one of the leagues that I compete in shoots 4 position).
The other thing that I really like is the instantaneous shot feedback; not having to break position to use a spotting scope has its advantages.
I had cataract surgery just over a year ago. No glasses since, other than reading cheaters once in a while. Horrible experience but excellent results. Wore glasses for 60 or so years. Amazing how white white actually is and how fun it is to see without glasses or astigmatism. But considering moving to scopes because at 69 they can be helpful even with new eyes.
I know this thread is a little old, but I want to insert an alternative take on this subject.
I have shot my AR-15 and my 308 bolt gun out to 600 yards. I have a scope on the AR that maxes at 27X. I have tested myself shooting at different magnifications because I've heard so many times "that's way too much magnification". I found that, for ME, I was more accurate at 100 yards with 27X than with lower magnifications.
I shot my first Appleseed early this year, with a 10/22 with a 2-7 scope on it. I did not score Rifleman.
I shot the next 2 Appleseeds with a 10/22 with a 4-16x44. I found that I did my best running it around 10X. I finally made Rifleman on that 3rd 'seed.
My friend that introduced me to the Appleseed program is a cop and the lead sniper on his department's SWAT team. He shot my first 'seed alongside me. It was not his first Appleseed and he's shot a Rifleman score every time he's done a 'seed, I think. At my first one, I was shooting using less than the 7X my scope could offer. He eventually told me "crank that up. Shoot small, miss small."
My final thought is, if you don't use enough magnification to see your shakiness, how can you tell when you're improving on your shakiness?
Quote from: StuartV on July 08, 2026, 01:50:09 PMI know this thread is a little old, but I want to insert an alternative take on this subject.
I have shot my AR-15 and my 308 bolt gun out to 600 yards. I have a scope on the AR that maxes at 27X. I have tested myself shooting at different magnifications because I've heard so many times "that's way too much magnification". I found that, for ME, I was more accurate at 100 yards with 27X than with lower magnifications.
I shot my first Appleseed early this year, with a 10/22 with a 2-7 scope on it. I did not score Rifleman.
I shot the next 2 Appleseeds with a 10/22 with a 4-16x44. I found that I did my best running it around 10X. I finally made Rifleman on that 3rd 'seed.
My friend that introduced me to the Appleseed program is a cop and the lead sniper on his department's SWAT team. He shot my first 'seed alongside me. It was not his first Appleseed and he's shot a Rifleman score every time he's done a 'seed, I think. At my first one, I was shooting using less than the 7X my scope could offer. He eventually told me "crank that up. Shoot small, miss small."
My final thought is, if you don't use enough magnification to see your shakiness, how can you tell when you're improving on your shakiness?
I totally agree. I found the scope revealed tiny shakes and wobbles I didn't see before, and I could learn to calm and relax enough to reduce them. And I also found with enough magnification and sharp clarity, I could see and hold on the X in the target, instead of the general center of a small grayish target with no detail. It's a definite benefit in stage 4. In the rapid fire stages, too high magnification can make it take longer to even find your targe, and in stage 1, it's not necessary to have high magnification, but for me, on stage 4 it really helps to crank it up.
Quote from: Fulcrum on July 08, 2026, 02:02:34 PMI totally agree. I found the scope revealed tiny shakes and wobbles I didn't see before, and I could learn to calm and relax enough to reduce them. And I also found with enough magnification and sharp clarity, I could see and hold on the X in the target, instead of the general center of a small grayish target with no detail. It's a definite benefit in stage 4. In the rapid fire stages, too high magnification can make it take longer to even find your targe, and in stage 1, it's not necessary to have high magnification, but for me, on stage 4 it really helps to crank it up.
Exactly! Aim small, miss small.
Quote from: StuartV on July 08, 2026, 01:50:09 PMMy final thought is, if you don't use enough magnification to see your shakiness, how can you tell when you're improving on your shakiness?
StuartV,
That is one of the top ten best questions I've ever seen on these forums. I have been going through some of the older posts and I happened to see it.
I pondered this a little while. The answer I have for you, in my opinion, is you you'll know your shakiness is improving when your group sizes shrink from what you have been doing and the noticeable lack of flyers (whether the flyers are called or not). This assumes you are using the same rifle, sight/scope, sling, ammo and you're in the prone position. When in a solid sitting position you can develop your skills to be very nearly the equal of prone. Even in standing you can improve your groups and nearly eliminate flyers.
As a brief aside, I would encourage shooters to keep their targets and establish a file for them. Over time you can measure the groups to actually see how much you are improving from one clinic to the next. Write on the targets pertinent data like dates, places, ammo and rifle used.
When you see your groups shrinking down to 4 MOA or less in prone (even less when you really get with it) it means you are concentrating on each shot individually and consistently applying the fundamentals of the six steps, NPOA, and solid position. It also means you have good equipment and you're taking care of it!
Also, to reduce shakiness, you can wear a soft, padded, leather glove on your support hand. The glove reduces the amount 'wiggle' your pulse induces to the rifle from your support hand.
When using your sling in any of the positions, wear a shirt or jacket that is of a material your sling can 'bite' into. Don't wear something slick like a nylon or polyester windbreaker that lets your sling slip down towards your elbow. Once your sling slips, especially during stages two and three, shooters try to compensate by muscling the rifle because they don't have time to fix the sling. Muscling = Shakiness.
There is also the shooting jacket, but I'll only mention it here as a shooting jacket is typically its own skillset to learn after a shooter is solid in the fundamentals. That is, again, only my opinion.
Furthermore, to reduce shakiness, eat, sleep and hydrate well for a few days before attending an Appleseed clinic. At a clinic, snack lightly on some proteins and drink a lot of water. Remember, at 25 meter and KD clinics we usually shoot AQTs after lunch! A belly full of pasta causes your heart to pound away like a vintage locomotive right when you need it to to play nice.
My two cents. Hope this helps.
Gus