Why don't all scope have internal anti cant bubbles?

[winmag]

4" off zero at 400 yards is nothing. A little more than the width of my palm. The boiler room on a deer is the size of a beach ball. I think if the shooter (note that I did not say hunter) is concerned about all those compounding extra instability factors (and he should be), he shouldn't be taking the shot in the first place. Range finder, spotting scopes, wind meter, smart phone loaded with apps, shooting sticks ... am I forgetting anything? Yeah, a team of sherpas to carry all that technocrap and an MIT grad student to figure out how to make it work. I go hunting to be a part of nature ... and get away from the plastic world of digital screens and software.

Then it sounds like this thread just doesn't apply to you. I agree that a level is not needed for most hunting situations inside 300 yards.

 

[mtmuley]

I just point my gun at stuff and kill it. mtmuley

 

[brockel]

I just point my gun at stuff and kill it. mtmuley

 

[mtmuley]

View attachment 203691

I think sometimes it's easy to get caught up in things that really have no effect on killing an animal at sane ranges. The internet is awesome for explaining why you need some things that you really don't. And one thing you don't need is a RUM. mtmuley

 

[Wind Gypsy]

And if you shoot right hand and are left eye dominate? Pretty much ruins that idea!

I'm quite left eye dominant but do everything right handed still. I don't have any problems looking at the scope level with my left eye without moving my head and losing scope alignment with my right eye. As long as it's offset nicely left of the scope. Those top scope cap levels.. i gotta wonder if anyone actually used those before selling them.

 

[Wind Gypsy]

4" off zero at 400 yards is nothing. A little more than the width of my palm. The boiler room on a deer is the size of a beach ball. I think if the shooter (note that I did not say hunter) is concerned about all those compounding extra instability factors (and he should be), he shouldn't be taking the shot in the first place. Range finder, spotting scopes, wind meter, smart phone loaded with apps, shooting sticks ... am I forgetting anything? Yeah, a team of sherpas to carry all that technocrap and an MIT grad student to figure out how to make it work. I go hunting to be a part of nature ... and get away from the plastic world of digital screens and software.

I understand how it all gets to be a bit much. Where should a guy zero his rifle at 100 to be dead on at 200 though?

 

[JLS]

I understand how it all gets to be a bit much. Where should a guy zero his rifle at 100 to be dead on at 200 though?

+1.16”

 

[noharleyyet]

I think sometimes it's easy to get caught up in things that really have no effect on killing an animal at sane ranges. The internet is awesome for explaining why you need some things that you really don't. And one thing you don't need is a RUM. mtmuley

Muley's been hacked...

 

[brockel]

Muley's been hacked...

If pictures of his “rum” start showing up we will know for sure

 

[mtmuley]

If pictures of his “rum” start showing up we will know for sure

Not a chance. mtmuley

 

[std7mag]

Ok, back to the OPs original question.

While some scope companies do offer some sort of anti cant indicator within the scope, most don't/won't for 2 reasons.

1) Cost
2)Complexity

The more complex you make the scope, the more it's going to cost.
Most people would rather spend the money on things that they value.

Good glass.
Repeatability. (Aka good repeatable adjustments)

Oh, and a 3rd reason.
Weight.

 

[brockel]

I’d bet over 75% of people when mounting a scope just eyeball the reticle to level instead of actually using levels and or a plumb bob

 

[OntarioHunter]

I’d bet over 75% of people when mounting a scope just eyeball the reticle to level instead of actually using levels and or a plumb bob

Guilty as charged. I changed front base at the last minute before going to Africa in August. Crosshairs are not quite plumb but I'm changing to detachable rings shortly so left it alone. Didn't seem to make a big difference. A couple weeks ago I shot my buck dead on the spot offhand at 200 yards. Only one bullet fired through it at an animal this hunting season. I hit him a little high ... but it was an offhand shot.

 

[brockel]

Guilty as charged. I changed front base at the last minute before going to Africa in August. Crosshairs are not quite plumb but I'm changing to detachable rings shortly so left it alone. Didn't seem to make a big difference. A couple weeks ago I shot my buck dead on the spot offhand at 200 yards. Only one bullet fired through it at an animal this hunting season. I hit him a little high ... but it was an offhand shot.

Really wouldn’t effect many people if things weren’t level

 

[winmag]

So 200 yards offhand is totally ethical and considered “hunting” but 400 yards prone is “shooting” and not “hunting”?

I should really take notes. These “ethics” are very confusing.

 

[Dan O]

I think sometimes it's easy to get caught up in things that really have no effect on killing an animal at sane ranges. The internet is awesome for explaining why you need some things that you really don't. And one thing you don't need is a RUM. mtmuley

mtmuley I think some folks would do well with a shot of Rum

 

[rwc101]

So 200 yards offhand is totally ethical and considered “hunting” but 400 yards prone is “shooting” and not “hunting”?

I should really take notes. These “ethics” are very confusing.

At least the animal wasn't running in this tale.

 

[Deleted member 16014]

Take it easy guys he’s a multimillionaire.

 

[ShootsManyBullets]

The real reason scopes don't have a level is that the manufacturers figure that as long as the truck is fairly level, the scope will be too.

cuz science

 

[OntarioHunter]

So 200 yards offhand is totally ethical and considered “hunting” but 400 yards prone is “shooting” and not “hunting”?

I should really take notes. These “ethics” are very confusing.

Recess bell must have rang.

I made a couple of long shots this past year: 370 and 440 yrds. Do I consider that hunting or shooting? Definitely the latter. I shot the buffalo on the run at 60 yrds after stalking them for three days in heavy cover and getting busted countless times. That was hunting. From prone position I shot this buck two years ago on the run at about 65 yrds after getting the drop on him and his buddy in a box canyon on a very windy afternoon. The bullet hit him forward in front quarter exactly where I was aiming though I expected him to run into it further. He fell in his tracks. Keep in mind I shoot a LOT of moving targets, usually three thousand rounds or more a year. My Springfield, though a little on the heavy side, is perfectly balanced right ahead of the magazine and fits me like a glove. For offhand shooting, fit and balance are probably more important than range time. This year a muley buck jumped out of a coulee with fourteen others and standing broadside on a hillside at 200 yards was not a particularly difficult target offhand. Not on a windless afternoon using a well balanced gun with EXCELLENT trigger and good scope set at nine power. No tree to lean against and no time to deploy bipod. I had already jumped them up once. If you can't hit a deer's beach ball size boiler room offhand at 200 yards (and I have no doubt you can't), then you need a better gun .. or more time in the field. Probably the latter.

Do I advocate running shots? No, not at all. Shooting at moving targets, unlike shooting at stationary ones (within mortal man distance), DOES require a lot of range time. Shooting at moving animals requires that and something more: a lot of experience hunting animals. Killing moving animals requires a hunter who can get close enough to cut the margin of error to maximum. A hunter who can maintain composure and concentration. That only comes with experience. You'll see ... maybe ... someday when you grow up.