Digex C50, PPU 25-05 100gr SP - 200yd Zeroing questions

Spear Chucker

Well-Known Member
Advice please. I am using a new (less than a year out of the box) Weatherby Vanguard 24"barrel in 25-06 Rem. The barrel was thoroughly cleaned 8 shots prior to the zeroing session.
I am using PPU 100gr SP rounds - some will be laughing already- zeroing with the Pulsar Digex C50 at 100 yards, 14 X magnification and getting 1/2" groups with no problem.
I backed out to 200yds and things got a bit more interesting. Firing groups of three, I was within 1" (low) of the bull in target 1 in the picture for the first shot. Then two fliers for shots 2&3 as marked. Thought it was just me being a dope, so let the rifle cool down and started again on target 2. Shot 1 pretty much exact repeat of Target 1, 1" from the bull (low) - happy happy. Shots 2 and three were well off as marked in the picture.
I took one shot at target 3 on the 100yd profile I was happy with, using a 3" hold-over and got an acceptable result that told me I need 4" hold-over at 200yds. I threw the towel in before getting frustrated or chasing fliers around the target.

There are a number of potential reasons in addition to operator error and I wondered whether there were any more experienced shots with a view. The questions I had were:
1) Is it me or a combination of me and the kit? I assume that the problem -or a good part of it- lies behind the rifle - the kit is rarely to blame in these situations. When using my Tikka T3 and federal ammo in .308 I am consistently on the mark with no aberrations beyond the norm (fluffed shot etc).
2) Is the first shot "on" because the barrel is "cold" and the following shots are from a hot barrel? If so, what do you zero for?
2) Many people think PPU ammo is fine (me included when it was going through my Steyr Mannlicher), others say that it can give variable results -"cheap for a reason". At 100yds it seems good, giving consistent groups. Conditions were favourable with a light breeze from the South while firing North. If it is the ammunition, what do people feel is a good round to try?
3) Is it the sight? At 14 x mag across 200yds, the definition of the bull -even enlarged as it was- was a bit ropey and ill defined. It was easily enough for a fox in daylight, but for clear view of the bull of an 8" target it was less than perfect.
4) Have I missed something else?

The rifle is not to blame, it is definitely built to a price point rather than a quality point, but at 100yds, the results are exactly as it says on the tin. It has its quirks. The trap door mag was a delight and unless closed with pin point precision, would dump the entire contents on the floor as soon as I worked the bolt. I bought a proprietary detachable magazine and mag housing and this is just as irritating. It is plastic. It doesn't feel like a quality item at all. The release catch at the front of the mag housing has to be engaged exactly correctly and tested before I can have any confidence it isn't going to drop out or come loose when I work the bolt.

If anyone has any answers as to how one deals effectively with this I would be grateful for guidance. I hope the guidance isn't "chuck it in the ditch and buy a proper rifle and use better ammo!

1744549195108.webp
 
Can I give you the benefit of my experience with a C50.
Initially it was mounted on a rail, and was fine. I found that after about z5/6 shots of 6.5x55 the zero moved. Investigations revealed the weight of the C50 meant it actually broke the rail free between action and rail by the screws holding rail to action had just enough ‘free play’ fore and aft to allow to allow zero to be set up, but then it slowly weakened the bolts until I was chasing rds all over the target.
I say this only to make sure you check the physical bits first - rings, rail, mounts, screws of any description.
Once mine was off the rail and on rings straight to action, this ended.
 
Last edited:
Yes check mounts for sure but do go try different ammo just as a process of elimination.
Nothing wrong with ppu ammo but your barrel may not like them.
That said, seeing you get 100yd groups I'd be very tempted to NOT get the barrel hot to eliminate a barrel issue.
Many a barrel has not had sufficient stress relief processing and elimination of that in your case can only be proven by shooting from a cold barrel. If it behaves cold but doesn't when shot repeatedly until hot that will be the issue. Hopefully we can eliminate that though via testing thus.
 
Thank you all. I'll check the mounting. Mine is on a rail and single piece innomount quick release rings. There didn't seem to be any play, but it doesn't take much and possibly less than you'd feel with a shake. The lens cap was touching the barrel at one point, so I got a bull straight away then when the cap touched, the next two rounds key-holed 3" out at 7 o'clock. I'll have a chat with the gun shop to see what alternatives they have to PPU. I have just got used to them and they worked for me. Interesting point MealieJimmy, I had an idea I was asking too much of it. It is a great sight but at 200yds the clarity of image just wasn't there.
 
Thank you all. I'll check the mounting. Mine is on a rail and single piece innomount quick release rings. There didn't seem to be any play, but it doesn't take much and possibly less than you'd feel with a shake. The lens cap was touching the barrel at one point, so I got a bull straight away then when the cap touched, the next two rounds key-holed 3" out at 7 o'clock. I'll have a chat with the gun shop to see what alternatives they have to PPU. I have just got used to them and they worked for me. Interesting point MealieJimmy, I had an idea I was asking too much of it. It is a great sight but at 200yds the clarity of image just wasn't there.
Currently, there are no digital scopes with the level of image detail needed to see a typical zeroing target clearly at 200 yards - certainly nothing like the level of image detail that could be seen with even a pretty mediocre glass scope

Cheers

Bruce
 
Currently, there are no digital scopes with the level of image detail needed to see a typical zeroing target clearly at 200 yards - certainly nothing like the level of image detail that could be seen with even a pretty mediocre glass scope

Cheers

Bruce
Agree - frustrating isn’t it.
 
Currently, there are no digital scopes with the level of image detail needed to see a typical zeroing target clearly at 200 yards - certainly nothing like the level of image detail that could be seen with even a pretty mediocre glass scope

Cheers

Bruce
TBF, not much of my shooting is at the extended ranges. 100yds is normally fine and the hold-over for a longer shot is not too demanding. If I am on the deer at those ranges, I would be on a day scope and that has no problem at 200 yards. I had the morning to play, so thought I'd do a 200 yard range so I had the option if it was ever needed. Nothing wrong with the sight, but it just has certain limitations. Having established what they are, coping with them isn't too difficult.
The mountings are all rock solid, the performance of the ammunition and rifle at 100 yards is excellent, so I have what I need. I just need to remember to hold myself in check if the barrel is warm and the shot is "reachy".
Thank you very much for your help. Luckily, for once, the solution costs nothing...self control and knowledge/understanding of the limitations of the kit. Best solution I could have hoped for.
 
Yes check mounts for sure but do go try different ammo just as a process of elimination.
Nothing wrong with ppu ammo but your barrel may not like them.
That said, seeing you get 100yd groups I'd be very tempted to NOT get the barrel hot to eliminate a barrel issue.
Many a barrel has not had sufficient stress relief processing and elimination of that in your case can only be proven by shooting from a cold barrel. If it behaves cold but doesn't when shot repeatedly until hot that will be the issue. Hopefully we can eliminate that though via testing thus.
Just thinking about your remark and my conviction that mine is a rifle built to a price point, I suspect that you will be exactly right. I will have another do to test the theory. It should be good for three rounds before going on a wonk.
 
My vanguard of many years ago would shoot three then wander, it had a pencil thin barrel and I loved the rifle. But it was good for three shots but only a little off from there on. Certainly nothing to worry about.
 
Could you get your rifle zerod with glass at 100m and find your drop at 200 using glass again.
Zero C50 at 100 and you know the drops will be same as with glass at 200 so aim accordingly if the quarry is at that distance.
 
As Smelly suggests try a few different brands of bullet.
PPU are very much the Marmite round - most guns love them and they are value for money but some just don’t shoot well with them. As an obvious example I have had them scatter gun and turning sideways at only 10m through my Mosin Magant M44 but a quick swap for S&B sorted the problem and I kept the rifle….
🦊🦊
IMG_7044 2.webp
 
Agree - frustrating isn’t it.
It may be frustrating for some, but the fact is that it's just the physics of digital imaging
If you wanted a digital scope to have the same or similar image detail to a decent glass scope, you'd need a huge objective lens and sensor with a similar number of pixels to the human eye (about 576megapixels) - and that just ain't happening anytime soon
What we do have currently are digital scopes that can produce good enough images of reasonable size targets (foxes, deer etc) at sensible shooting ranges that allow us to take safe and humane shots at those targets.
The quality of those images are still not good enough for some shooters and it's absolutely their right not to take a shot they are not comfortable with.
But for many of us the quality of the image is good enough so we can and do take successful and humane shots with digital scopes

Cheers

Bruce
 
It may be frustrating for some, but the fact is that it's just the physics of digital imaging
If you wanted a digital scope to have the same or similar image detail to a decent glass scope, you'd need a huge objective lens and sensor with a similar number of pixels to the human eye (about 576megapixels) - and that just ain't happening anytime soon
What we do have currently are digital scopes that can produce good enough images of reasonable size targets (foxes, deer etc) at sensible shooting ranges that allow us to take safe and humane shots at those targets.
The quality of those images are still not good enough for some shooters and it's absolutely their right not to take a shot they are not comfortable with.
But for many of us the quality of the image is good enough so we can and do take successful and humane shots with digital scopes

Cheers

Bruce
I would whole heartedly agree. Having chewed it over and realised that "tweakments" rather than full-on re-do will serve me very well, the concern I had over image quality at 200 yards is easily dealt with: Find a good round I am happy with -probably the ones I am already familiar with- zero it at 100yards and practise plenty at the 200yd shot to really get a feel for it. The image quality at 200yds is absolutely fine for taking a shot at live game/vermin. Trying to zero onto a 1" red circle at 200yds is asking too much of the 'scope. Therefore, my assumption 1) in my original post was correct - the problem lay behind the rifle...I had unrealistic expectations.
As Smelly suggests try a few different brands of bullet.
PPU are very much the Marmite round - most guns love them and they are value for money but some just don’t shoot well with them. As an obvious example I have had them scatter gun and turning sideways at only 10m through my Mosin Magant M44 but a quick swap for S&B sorted the problem and I kept the rifle….
🦊🦊
View attachment 415515
Apologies, inexact terminology on my part, the rounds were touching (as in well placed close shots) not "key-holed" as in unstable projectiles.
 
I am really grateful to you all as contributors. I have learned a lot from this, and you have probably saved me a ton of money and time. There are some really bright and experienced people on here and I thank you for your help and patience.
 
Back
Top