One Rifle, Most Convenient Zero for Multiple Handloads?

[The Glockodile]

Well, lookit this here fancy graph.

Seems sumptin’ like validation for the 50 - yard “combat zero.”

1. Assume having one nice autoloading rifle in .223 Remington, which you shoot paper effectively out to say, 500 meters.
2. You have multiple bullet weights which you handload for - 53, 55, 62, 69, and 77 grains, which all seem to shoot accurately.
3. You shoot each handload equally.
4. You have been twiddling with your scope and resetting its zero far too often for each different handload.

I imagine the amount of elevation available and reticle type would come into play, but for the sake of simplicity let’s say these weren‘t an issue.

Ignoring the minimal deviation of impact from point of aim to impact between 0 and 200 yards, to what round would you zero your scope for and be more or less comfortable using holds beyond 200 yards?

Would you zero the rifle for:

1. … the lightest / fastest bullet and aim high for the heavier / slower bullets, or…
2. …the heaviest / slowest bullet and aim low for the lighter / faster bullets, or…
3. …find some middle ground, aiming high or low depending on the load?

This is a “jack of all trades zero” kind of question. Not a load development thread.

EDIT: A little more context - roughly 30,000 bullets of each weight has been hoarded over the years.

 

[jmr40]

I zero EVERYTHING at 100 yards. Every rifle that I own has a trajectory so that the bullet will be no more than 1" below, or 1" above my line of sight between the muzzle and 130-150 yards depending on the cartridge and the exact load when zeroed at 100. And only 2-3" low at 200 yards. That requires no hold over. Even at 300 yards virtually all of them will be around 8-10" low. On a deer or human size target that requires very little hold over. When deer hunting If I can see daylight between a deer's back and the bottom of the crosshair the bullet will hit vitals anywhere between 200-300 yards. Inside of 200 I just hold where I want to hit.

That takes care of 99% of the shots any of us will likely take in the real world. I'm not a fan of zeroing at 200-300 yards unless you know that will be the closest shots you'll ever take. With a 300 yard zero you're going to be 1-2" low at 100 yards and could be 6-8" high at 200 yards. It just isn't natural to hold low on something and IMO a 300 yard zero is going to cause more problems at closer ranges than it helps at long range.

If you plan to shoot beyond 300 yards it helps to know the bullets exact MV and it's BC. You can then plug those numbers into a ballistics program to see drops at longer ranges and print out a cheat sheet that you can keep handy. Lots of guys tape them to rifle stocks. This will get you pretty close, but I still advise actually shooting at those ranges to confirm the exact POI.

All of those 223 bullet weights will be within a fraction of an inch at only 100 yards and even the graphic shows only about 5" difference at 300 yards. Pick the one you are most likely to use and zero it. Then run the numbers and have cheat sheets for the all of the loads. It helps to have a scope with multiple aiming points or dials to twist. But you can make it work with a conventional scope.

 

[JTHunter]

The Remington 700 I use is .243 caliber and I reload with bullets ranging between 60 and 100 grains, all using the same powder, Accurate 2230. I also have the rifle set for a 200 yd. zero with the 100 grain bullets (Sierra spitzer BT). I then shot the 60 and 75 gr. hollowpoints at the same target to see the POI compared to the 100 gr. bullets. At 200 yds., the lighter bullets were about 1" higher and half an inch to the left. I don't adjust the scope and just remember that the lighter bullets hit at about the 10:30 clock position and shift the rifle towards the 4:30 position accordingly.
No muss, no fuss.

 

[Thomasss]

I would go with the heaviest in order to reduce windage. Then all others would be moved only in one direction.

 

[someguy2800]

I went through this phase and never will again. One load per rifle. Maybe one additional as a backup for some alternate purpose. Too much to keep track of and there is no reason for it.

There is a time in life where you will think its a great asset to have one rifle that could shoot multiple different loads. Eventually you will get to where you think its a great asset to have one load that shoots well in multiple rifles.

Keep the 77's and get rid of the rest.

 

[Savage30L]

Perhaps my comment is irrelevant here....but I have started zeroing my rifles at 50 yards, because where I hunt, I have little chance at a shot any further away. Makes things simple.

 

[sage5907]

If you haven't picked a favorite bullet weight for that rifle you need to re-think what you are doing because life is too complicated without making it worse. Common sense tells us to pick one favorite bullet for hunting and one favorite bullet for target practice. Hopefully they will be the same weight and use the same powder. I'm a hunter and I sight all of my rifles in at 200 meters (217 yards) and with a velocity of 2900 fps I can hit any animal out to 300 yards without thinking about trajectory. I think about shooting at an animal by dividing it's body into thirds. Shooting uphill or downhill I shoot at the lower third. Shooting at 400 yards I shoot at the upper third. By sighting that one favorite bullet in at 200 meters I know where it hits, and if I shoot another load at 200 meters the only thing that matters is the group size, and if that group is 3 inches low all I have to remember the next time I shoot that particular load is to hold at the top of the black to hit the center of the black. Nothing complicated about that.

 

[The Glockodile]

Ah.

The dreaded pronoun, “I.”

Yeah, done that entire “choose one bullet and load” ritual for my bolt guns.

Measured the persnickety thousandths of inches from the lands and did those fancy sine wave “harmonic node” maneuvers we spout of but don’t truly understand.

But I have roughly 30,000 bullets of each weight which I have barely skimmed, and I do intend to use all of them in small batches unless I find out one weight will absolutely not work in my rifles.

As the image in the first post indicates, there really isn’t much thinking to do out to 200 yards.

The question applies to hits beyond 200 yards.

And it’s not really “complicated” with each rifle’s properties stored in a ballistic program - as all one needs to do is indicate how much offset from the reference point is needed for clicks up or down.

 

[The Glockodile]

I would go with the heaviest in order to reduce windage. Then all others would be moved only in one direction.

Nice point.

Didn’t occur to me when I posed the question.

 

[JeffG]

If you haven't settled on one load/bullet weight...a detailed shooter's log book is essential. A way of attaching load/scope settings to the stock of your rifle for quick reference is useful.

 

[The Glockodile]

If you haven't settled on one load/bullet weight...a detailed shooter's log book is essential. A way of attaching load/scope settings to the stock of your rifle for quick reference is useful.

Won’t be “settling” on one weight in the usual sense.

Might exclude a weight if it shoots horribly.

But I intend to use them all.

Just to add some context, this is for a small batch of rinky - dink ARs…

…not a nicely polished, regularly fondled rifle that some gunsmith took four years to deliver.

 

[someguy2800]

And it’s not really “complicated” with each rifle’s properties stored in a ballistic program - as all one needs to do is indicate how much offset from the reference point is needed for clicks up or down.

If it’s that simple then I don’t really understand what the question is

 

[JeffG]

Won’t be “settling” on one weight in the usual sense.

Might exclude a weight if it shoots horribly.

But I intend to use them all.

Just to add some context, this is for a small batch of rinky - dink ARs…

…not a nicely polished, regularly fondled rifle that some gunsmith took four years to deliver.

Even so, some data might save you a "what the heck" moment.

 

[The Glockodile]

If it’s that simple then I don’t really understand what the question is

Many, many bullets.

Many external ballistics profiles, with the overall trend of light being fast, and heavy being slow.

For simplicity's sake - just one rifle.

Which bullet to set zero with, serving as a reference point for all the others.

 

[The Glockodile]

Even so, some data might save you a "what the heck" moment.

Quite true.

I would say "missed many a buck that way," but I'd come off as one lying fudd.

 

[someguy2800]

Many, many bullets.

Many external ballistics profiles, with the overall trend of light being fast, and heavy being slow.

For simplicity's sake - just one rifle.

Which bullet to set zero with, serving as a reference point for all the others.

The one you’ll use the most because the others may or may not shoot to the same point of aim. Even two different bullets of the same weight won’t always shoot to the same point of aim.

75 and 77 grain are the only bullet weights that interest me anymore in 223 because the ballistic coefficient is so much better than the light bullets there just isn’t really a task that I would ever pick something lighter for.

 

[someguy2800]

Personally I’d pick one bullet and sell the rest to buy more of that bullet, but I guess I’m laboring the point now. Ballistic coefficient beats velocity

 

[Show Me]

If it’s that simple then I don’t really understand what the question is

But my phone said so. Not

 

[mavracer]

Which bullet to set zero with, serving as a reference point for all the others.

I've never owned a rifle that shot every bullet weight to the same POI at 200 yards. My 308 doesn't even shoot 165 SST and 168 HPBT to the same POA.
I guess get a composite of where they all group at 200 yards and zero for the one closest to the middle .
This is one of those that reminds me of the Yogi Berra quote
"In theory, theory and practice are the same, in practice they ain't"

 

[conan32120]

I like to hit 100yd paper an inch above bullseye, not a clue where the zero is. Our range doesn't allow closer setups for fear of bullets skipping over the berm.

 

[35 Whelen]

View attachment 1185107

Well, lookit this here fancy graph.

Seems sumptin’ like validation for the 50 - yard “combat zero.”

1. Assume having one nice autoloading rifle in .223 Remington, which you shoot paper effectively out to say, 500 meters.
2. You have multiple bullet weights which you handload for - 53, 55, 62, 69, and 77 grains, which all seem to shoot accurately.
3. You shoot each handload equally.
4. You have been twiddling with your scope and resetting its zero far too often for each different handload.

I imagine the amount of elevation available and reticle type would come into play, but for the sake of simplicity let’s say these weren‘t an issue.

Ignoring the minimal deviation of impact from point of aim to impact between 0 and 200 yards, to what round would you zero your scope for and be more or less comfortable using holds beyond 200 yards?

Would you zero the rifle for:

1. … the lightest / fastest bullet and aim high for the heavier / slower bullets, or…
2. …the heaviest / slowest bullet and aim low for the lighter / faster bullets, or…
3. …find some middle ground, aiming high or low depending on the load?

This is a “jack of all trades zero” kind of question. Not a load development thread.

EDIT: A little more context - roughly 30,000 bullets of each weight has been hoarded over the years.

I'm going to assume this is a rhetorical question since the .223 is not good for much of anything past 300 yds. (and that is stretching it) except poking holes in paper. Pick one bullet and zero it 2.5" at 100 yds.

35W

 

[tdbmd]

Most of my hunting rifles are zeroed at 2 inches high at 100 yards, which for most of my hunting cartridges, gives me a on target zero of 200-225 yards. I have gotten to the point where I have a single load for each rifle. If I need more power/range, I change rifles, not loads.

 

[sage5907]

If you haven't settled on one load/bullet weight...a detailed shooter's log book is essential. A way of attaching load/scope settings to the stock of your rifle for quick reference is useful.

I have watched on youtube as people were shooting milk jugs filled with water at 1000 yards. If they have a quick reference based on previous shooting with that rifle and load it will give them a starting point. But, what they don't show is how many additional shots it took to make the hit on that jug. And if they try it again two hours later with a change in temperature the adjustment starts over again.

 

[ThomasT]

I would pick what bullet you like best and zero the load the way you like to hunt or shoot and test the other loads and make notes about where than land with the gun sighted in for your favorite load. But mostly I would just pick one bullet and load and use that all the time.

I just bought a new wood stocked Savage Axis in 243 and also bought 200 Speer Grand Slam bullets. I am going to zero the gun one inch high at 100 yards. I should be about one inch low at 200 yards and 8" low at 300 yards. That should cover any thing I want to do with this rifle. I'm not going to do my usual thing and have several different loads and bullet weights loaded up. I am going to pick one load and stick with it.

 

[Show Me]

I would pick what bullet you like best and zero the load the way you like to hunt or shoot and test the other loads and make notes about where than land with the gun sighted in for your favorite load. But mostly I would just pick one bullet and load and use that all the time.

I just bought a new wood stocked Savage Axis in 243 and also bought 200 Speer Grand Slam bullets. I am going to zero the gun one inch high at 100 yards. I should be about one inch low at 200 yards and 8" low at 300 yards. That should cover any thing I want to do with this rifle. I'm not going to do my usual thing and have several different loads and bullet weights loaded up. I am going to pick one load and stick with it.

Wood stock savage axis shouldn't shoot as good as they do. Good choice