Accuracy testing plans

Buckhorn open sights are fine for up-close snapshooting, but I am not very good with them. For precision shooting, I would prefer a scope and 1-4x is a nice short range option. At 1x, it can be used as a red dot, at 1.5-2x it’s convenient for off-hand aiming and at 4x allows for relatively precise shot placement from supported positions.

Something like this set-up would work, but the Brasslite carbines do not have receiver grooves. No trouble, I just have to decide between cantilever and receiver mounts. I have both, it’s a matter of deciding which to install. Receiver mount retains the rear iron sight but seems easier to install. Suggestions from other Henry users?

A “dangerous game” scope ought to stand up to the minimal recoil of a 44Mag carbine. At 25 and perhaps 50 yards, I should be able to see the bullet holes through the scope, but at 100-150 a spotting scope will help. Since I have been shooting mostly rifle this year, a 16-48 magnification model of good quality should be a huge help.

It is small and light enough to sit on a Bogen mini-tripod but still bright, sharp and clear. The eye caps extends to allow use with eye glasses on.

Last, but not least, Brownells delivered a chronograph. I am both curious about real vs. advertised velocities and about consistency of ammunition. This device should allow me to learn both.

This entry was posted in rifle and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

7 Responses to Accuracy testing plans

  1. Gunnutmegger says:

    Have canned air handy, for keeping the sensors clean.

    And bright sunlight shining on the white panels is key to getting accurate measurements. If one of the panels is in shade, or it is intermittently cloudy, the readings will not be accurate.

    I learned both lessons the hard way. LOL.

    • Oleg Volk says:

      Good to know. Often, I bring a portable white diffuser tent for myself and my models (as much for shade as for good imaging light) but the chronograph can stay out in the open. Trying to decide if it’s worth getting the laptop interface kit or I should just write down the numbers and integrate the info at home.

  2. Robb Harbaugh says:

    You’ll probably be a little disappointed with the chronograph. I bought a Pact chrono about a decade ago and immediately start testing all my loads in all my guns. I damn near could have written down the numbers from my reloading manuals on the cartridge box labels. They were almost identical. I rarely take the chrono to the range unless I’m working on a load that is pushing the limits.

    • Oleg Volk says:

      I do plan on pushing it: the load will be optimized for the longer barrel instead of being a compromise.

  3. xl_target says:

    If you use it a lot, get spare skyscreen rods. You WILL shoot them.

    I have a xl spreadsheet set up on a tablet PC and fill in my numbers as they come off the screen. You put in the bullet weight and velocity and it automatically calculates the SD, Muzzle energy, avg. velocity of the string, etc. Let me know if you want a copy.

  4. Keads says:

    The PC interface kit is worth it for the data reports on a string of fire. I have one of those.

Comments are closed.