shot saver

simon1979

Well-Known Member
hi there, just woundering if any one used a shot saver/collimator. They sound very useful and you can buy an hawke or simmons for around £40.
Are they just another peice of kit you buy which is an complete waste of money.
i look forward to reading your throughts

atb
simon
 
Used correctly collimeter will get your first shot onto paper. However getting it zeroed using one is unlikely. The problem I have found with them is that due to bore dimensional differences there is nearly always some play in the "spud" that fits into the bore. The play of course effects the result of setting up the scope. So I was intending to make up rifle specific spuds but never got around to it. With a proper fitting spud the accuracy of adjusting the scope to the collimeter would be improved no end.

Personally I have had and used one for many years and it's certainly easy than bore sighting.
 
I have started using one - when I changed scope on 243 noted coordinates of where the reticle was on the grid 5x5y New scope went on, adjusted it to 5x5y and first bullet down range was within an inch of where I wanted it. They are also quite useful in checking that the rifle is still on zero after travelling etc. i have found that mine is repeatable enough, that provided the reticle is at 5x5y the rifle is pretty well zeroed. I have checked the zero a few times both with the shot saver and then on the range. They are a useful tool, but don't replace proper zeroing on a target.
 
hi there, just woundering if any one used a shot saver/collimator. They sound very useful and you can buy an hawke or simmons for around £40.
Are they just another peice of kit you buy which is an complete waste of money.
i look forward to reading your throughts

atb
simon

Save your money.

Mount your chosen setup (well inside) a chosen bedroom. Remove the rifle bolt. Find a circular object at about 100yds range - satellite dishes & stop signs are ideal. Open the window immediately in line with rifle & object. Align your rifle on a parallel plane with the aforesaid. Squint down the bore, and centre object. CHECK EVERYTHING IS TIGHT, THEN DON'T JIGGLE ANYTHING.

Adjust reticle to bisect chosen object (the crosshairs move the opposite way to what the turret arrows advise, but use your eyes & brain rather than the instruction manual). Check bore image, and 'scope image again - and again.

Take it down the range with a large clean board and a red central aiming point. Establish a good rested position. Fire. If you've done the foregoing right, then your 1st shot must be on the paper - within 6" of the aiming point. A few adjustments, then you're there. Five shots should do it easily.

Boresighting is quicker than any other method. Collimators have their uses, and are a great service for gunsmiths stuck in the shop. I've yet to find any customer who had their sights set with these that got anywhere near a boresighted rifle properly done at their first range session with a new rifle.
 
great, well i think i will be getting one, i know i still have to fine tune my zore but im sure it will save me time and bullets in the long run
thanks for the useful replys
atb
simon
 
Would this work?

The system works well IF you can hold the rifle steady right through the process - especially whilst twiddling the scope turrets. Best done by two people.
Problem is that some ranges don't like people shooting unzeroed rifles and you need to be on the paper to use this system.

I use a collimator to initially rough zero rifles & I usually find the first shot to be within 2" of point of aim. It's great value is that I can pre-zero a rifle at home without shooting a shot. It is also useful to check the zero after knocking the scope etc.
The weak link in the colimator is the spud design - I totally agree with Brit** on that one. Mine has a spring in the end of the each to tighten it in the bore & this gets caught in the rifling & can twist the collimator making it difficult to get it to stay square. A better quality spud would improve the system. I remember seeing one years ago that used an expanding mandrel design of spud. I'm sure that would have been better (more expensive though).

Ian
 
Back
Top