The video opens by breaking down the math behind mil-based scope adjustments and why shooters cannot blindly trust turret markings. The host explains that 0.1 mil should equal 0.3599 inches and 1.0 mil should equal 3.599 inches at 100 yards, but real scopes often fail to track those values perfectly. Clint from Classic Firearms introduces Kaia and Josh from US Arms Co., framing the lesson as a math-heavy but practical guide to vetting optics. Two rifles are used for the test: a Bergara B14 Carbon Wilderness bolt gun and a US Arms Co. Champion in 5.56, each wearing a different optic. Josh stresses that scopes are man-made mechanical devices, not perfect instruments, and that understanding their true adjustment value is critical for precision shooting and long-range consistency.
The discussion shifts to minutes of angle and the danger of oversimplifying the math. The instructor clarifies that a true minute of angle is 1.047 to about 1.0474 inches at 100 yards, not a clean 1.0 inch. While the difference seems small at short range, it compounds dramatically at long distances, such as 1,760 yards, where the error can translate into substantial vertical misses. The plan is to traverse 30 MOA, which should equal 31.41 inches at 100 yards, to test whether the scopes actually move the point of impact that far. The hosts highlight how casually rounding MOA to one inch and assuming perfect tracking can mislead shooters, especially when validating ballistic software or dope charts for extreme-range shots.
The video introduces a guest who is a competitive long-range shooter and former military sniper, underscoring the real-world importance of precise scope tracking. The instructor explains how tracking errors can corrupt ballistic data: if a scope only gives 12 minutes when 14 are dialed, shooters may incorrectly adjust muzzle velocity in their ballistic software to match observed impacts. This creates a false sense of confidence when no chronograph is available. To counter this, the team outlines a simple but rigorous vetting method. Shooters first fire a three-round group at a fixed aiming point, then dial a large elevation change—around 30 MOA or roughly half a degree, adjusted for the scope’s tube size—while continuing to aim at the same point. A second group is fired, and the vertical shift between group centers is measured using the precise 1.047-inch-per-MOA factor to determine the scope’s true travel.
The procedure for verifying each scope’s true click value is laid out in detail. Shooters are instructed to fire an initial three-round group and then ignore any obvious flyers, focusing instead on the mean point of impact for accurate measurement. Both rifles are equipped with 0.1 mil scopes, so the instructor converts the planned 30 MOA traverse into mils. At 100 yards, 30 MOA equals 31.41 inches, which corresponds to 8.7 mils. That means each shooter must dial 87 clicks of elevation on their 0.1 mil turrets while maintaining the same bottom-corner aiming point on the target. The US Arms Co. Champion rifle produces a notably tight group, while the Bergara shows a larger but still serviceable group. These groups will form the basis for calculating how closely each scope’s mechanical movement matches its advertised adjustment values.
With the test parameters set, the shooters execute the tracking evaluation. They begin by confirming their initial three-round groups at the chosen aiming point, establishing a reliable baseline. After that, each shooter dials 8.7 mils, or 87 clicks, of elevation on their 0.1 mil turrets, corresponding to the theoretical 30 MOA or 31.41 inches of vertical shift at 100 yards. Importantly, they do not change their point of aim; they continue to hold on the same bottom-corner reference, allowing the scope’s internal mechanics to move the point of impact. The Champion rifle’s second group remains impressively tight, demonstrating the rifle’s inherent accuracy, while the Bergara’s group is somewhat larger but still consistent enough for measurement. These paired groups, separated by a large turret adjustment, provide the data needed to determine each scope’s true per-click movement and overall tracking accuracy.
The team now measures how far the scopes actually moved the point of impact compared to the predicted 31.4 inches for an 8.7 mil traverse. Using tape measures and the centers of each three-round group, they calculate the true vertical distance between the baseline and adjusted groups. For the Riton scope, the measured travel shows it is about 0.001 inch over per click, yielding roughly 0.360 inch of movement for each 0.1 mil instead of the nominal 0.359. Kyle’s scope, however, comes up short by 1.156 inches over the same 87-click adjustment. This translates to each click being about 0.013 inch under, or an effective 0.346 inch per 0.1 mil. The instructors emphasize repeating the test and always tracking from a known zero. They explain that such seemingly small mechanical discrepancies can cause significant misses at long range and can mislead shooters who assume their scopes track perfectly when building ballistic solutions.
The final section focuses on practical takeaways from the tracking test. The speakers note that even high-end optics rarely track with perfect accuracy, though they have seen rare examples, such as specific Nightforce and Leupold Mark 5 scopes, that were essentially dead-on. Other units of the same models did not match that performance. They stress the value of determining the true click value for each individual scope, then using that number in ballistic calculators instead of relying on theoretical values. Some manufacturers even offer custom turrets cut to a shooter’s verified click data and specific ammunition. The hosts advocate a “trust but verify” mindset: every scope, regardless of price or brand, should be field-tested. They recommend running at least half of the scope’s total elevation traverse, at 100 yards or other convenient distances, to establish a solid baseline for turret behavior before serious long-range shooting or competition.
Loading...