Accurate Targets?

[BeeTee]

Seems to me that the target has a lot to do with accuracy. For example, the "sight-in" targets used at & sold by ranges are fine for sighting in, but seeing a precise aiming point isn't a sight-in target's strong point. Most times good enough, but...

Quite some years ago I began experimenting with an old Leupold target that was printed on light beige card stock, having four 2" black squares on the grid. With my 223, I found that by glueing on a beige 1" square in the exact center of the 2" black square, I could better align my 12x fine duplex. The non-reflective beige paper works better than stark white. Your eyes are quite good at using the crosshairs to split the difference when it's a square. Circles aren't that great.

I can't locate any more of those Leupold targets, so I began making my own... I use the 8-1/2" x 11" non-glossy card stock bought from Staples. If you can get beige, use that, or white if you have a color printer to reproduce the beige. Size the print to produce exactly 2" squares with the 1" grid. If you have a target rifle with a high power scope, cut the size by half.

If your rifle prints just above the black square, you essentially have 8 targets. Just rotate it. I do that a lot. BT

 

[JD338]

BeeTee

Thanks buddy.

JD338

 

[BK]

I can't locate any more of those Leupold targets, so I began making my own... I use the 8-1/2" x 11" non-glossy card stock bought from Staples. If you can get beige, use that, or white if you have a color printer to reproduce the beige.

Ugh, the price of ink would make it worth your while to find some colored paper.

Great info! I think Barsness (or maybe the yahoo who edits Rifle (Dave SomethingOrOther) wrote about matching targets to sighting system. Various sized diamonds seem to work best for me with scopes.

 

[BK]

I can't locate any more of those Leupold targets, so I began making my own... I use the 8-1/2" x 11" non-glossy card stock bought from Staples. If you can get beige, use that, or white if you have a color printer to reproduce the beige.

Ugh, the price of ink would make it worth your while to find some colored paper.

Great info! I think Barsness (or maybe the yahoo who edits Rifle {Dave SomethingOrOther})wrote about matching targets to sighting system. Various sized diamonds seem to work best for me with scopes.

 

[Oldtrader3]

I think that the accuracy potential of targets also has some bearing on the reticle type and size that your scope has, as well as the magnification range of the scope and the range being shot at. I seem to shoot better at long range with smaller target images.

 

[AzDak42]

As someone with visio and way too many boring conference calls, I can attest that target shape does make a difference.

- I've had my best luck with 1" diamonds
- I tend to put a 1" circle 1.5" above the center of the diamond - this gives me a reference to see if I'm 1.5" high at 100, my typical hunting rifle setup
- I also find that putting a large black bar up away from the diamond at 0,90,180 and 270, gives me a reference point to make sure my reticle is perfectly level.

I have a whole series I've made up. If anyone wants the PDF, hit me with an IM and your e-mail address and I'll send them to you.

 

[Guy Miner]

In long-range prone competition, it was interesting to me that the black bullseye was rather huge, so it could be seen by a shooter using sights at 600 - 1000 yards. The actual X-Ring & 10 Ring weren't too big, but the big black circle was necessary for shooters to see the bull.

Then the bullets would land mostly in the 10 and X rings... Love it!

That was surely a case of the target being well matched to the sighting systems in use.

No reason why scopes can't make use of good targets either. One fellow taught me that he aligns the crosshairs with the lower left corner of an aiming square. Keeps those crosshairs plastered right on the vertical & horizontal edges of the square and bangs away. With the scope adjusted so that the rounds are actually impacting in the center of the square. His aiming point never gets messed up by bullet holes. Always keeps a sharp, crisp aiming point... Interesting. I tried it, and it works well.

Mostly though, I'm interested in where the bullet is going to strike when I put the crosshairs on a shoulder, or just behind the shoulder. :grin:

FWIW, Guy

 

[SJB358]

I tend to use a 6 o'clock hold on most all targets now. Seems alot easier to aim the same way everytime.

 

[Kodiak]

Interesting information and some real tips on sighting in the above comments.

Thru the years, I have learned to have the best scope on my rifles as I can afford. That does away, to a certain extent, with the guess-work of, "is my load any good or is my scope lying to me?"

 

[BeeTee]

I bought a stack of commercial benchrest targets recently. These have a 1" black square with a blank 1/2" square inside it. Below the square are a series of rings. The 1" and 1/2" squares are just usable with a 12x scope, but better with higher magnification. They also work well with an accurate 22LR at 50 yards and 4 up to 12x scope.

I also have the above target image in white/black, for use when printing on beige card stock. I use my laser printer when doing these targets, so cost isn't too great. If I could buy commerical targets like these, I would, but I can't locate a source. I do know that my best shooting is done with targets that allow me to hold the crosshairs in the exact center, and the 2" square with a 1" blank inside it work best for scopes up to 12x. BT

 

[remingtonman_25_06]

Ive been making the same target basically for years now, simple black square, heavy on the edges...

Different size squares for different scope powers and yardages work best for me.

I hate orange circles and diamonds...

I've made a couple good targets over the years and saved the original so it only takes going to the copyer and I have a few targets to last a while.