Is this me or the scope?

[8391JE]

I had a little bit of an issue the other day when trying to sight in my Simmons Protarget Rimfire 2-7x32 scope on my ruger 10/22. I?m not sure if the issues are me or the scope so I don?t want this taken as a bad review of the scope.

The rifle and scope kept on having what seemed to me to be random changes in the point-of-impact relative to the point-of-aim of the scope. I shot the same ammunition at 25 yards with and without the scope to try to figure out if it was me, the ammo, or the scope.

Both ranges where I shot with the scope and with iron sights were completely enclosed so wind was not a variable. When I was shooting with a scope, I had a more stable position than shooting with iron sights, but I got more random results with the scope. I was not adjusting the scope for any of the shots shown on the target papers in the pictures, so the variation is not due to scope adjustments.

I had tightened the weaver mount to my 10/22 with 15 in-lbs of torque, the base of the rings to the weaver mount with 30 in-lbs of torque, and the scope rings with APPROXIMATELY 15 in-lbs of torque (my bit on my torque driver kept on slipping on the screw heads, so I didn?t have a measurement of the torques there, but the scope rings were tightly screwed down with an allen key).

The ammunition used was CCI Copper-22 Hollow Points (21 Grain), Winchester Varmint LF Tin Hollow Points (26 grain), and CCI Minimag Copper-plated Hollow Points (36 Grain). All ammunition came from the same boxes. Everything was shot at 25 yards.

All the pictures of my groups with and without the scope are here on this post.

I am not sure if this is me or the scope. Considering that my groups were more consistent when shooting without a scope from a less stable position than with a scope from a more stable position, I think I may have an issue with the scope.

What do you all think? Is this me or do I need to send an email to Simmons? customer service?

[stormvet]

When I looked at your targets, before reading your post. My first thought was the rings/mounting was not secure. But in your post you made it clear that it was, but it sure looked like there was optic movement.

I would take the optic off the rifle remove the rings and remount it all over again and see what happens.

['ol shooter]

Simmons scopes are low quality and the rings that come with them are pure junk. Worst scope I ever bought.

[ar15barrels]

I had a little bit of an issue the other day when trying to sight in my Simmons Protarget Rimfire 2-7x32 scope on my ruger 10/22. I?m not sure if the issues are me or the scope so I don?t want this taken as a bad review of the scope.

The rifle and scope kept on having what seemed to me to be random changes in the point-of-impact relative to the point-of-aim of the scope. I shot the same ammunition at 25 yards with and without the scope to try to figure out if it was me, the ammo, or the scope.

Both ranges where I shot with the scope and with iron sights were completely enclosed so wind was not a variable. When I was shooting with a scope, I had a more stable position than shooting with iron sights, but I got more random results with the scope. I was not adjusting the scope for any of the shots shown on the target papers in the pictures, so the variation is not due to scope adjustments.

I had tightened the weaver mount to my 10/22 with 15 in-lbs of torque, the base of the rings to the weaver mount with 30 in-lbs of torque, and the scope rings with APPROXIMATELY 15 in-lbs of torque (my bit on my torque driver kept on slipping on the screw heads, so I didn?t have a measurement of the torques there, but the scope rings were tightly screwed down with an allen key).

The ammunition used was CCI Copper-22 Hollow Points (21 Grain), Winchester Varmint LF Tin Hollow Points (26 grain), and CCI Minimag Copper-plated Hollow Points (36 Grain). All ammunition came from the same boxes. Everything was shot at 25 yards.

All the pictures of my groups with and without the scope are here on this post.

I am not sure if this is me or the scope. Considering that my groups were more consistent when shooting without a scope from a less stable position than with a scope from a more stable position, I think I may have an issue with the scope.

What do you all think? Is this me or do I need to send an email to Simmons? customer service?

Do you know what parallax is and how to adjust it?

http://www.caprc.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=36

[Zenderfall]

One thing I noticed:
Bullet holes that form really straight lines when using the scope. The iron sights are outputting a lot more evenly spread groups.

Straight lines like that can be an indication of the turret adjustments moving inside the scope after every shot. Yes, .22LR can knock cheap scopes adjustments out of whack due to the budget construction and choice of materials. This is very typical of Chinese sub $100.00 scopes like the (Gene) Simmons scope you’re using. Can be assured this scope doesn’t rock n roll all night and party every day like it should.

Have you tried a different optic on this rifle? I know you used irons and got different results.

[kenl]

Ditto what Zenderfall said.

If it was my setup, I wouldn't use that scope again. For irons, try some different ammo. Non-lead .22lr never shoots well for me, but CCI copper plated is usually good. That said, something else may work better.

Also check the stock and barrel wedge torque. Probably not the problem, but it's worth checking. I use values that found on Rimfire Central, 20 in-lbs for the barrel retainer, 30 in-lbs for the stock takedown screw (the suggested range is 25 - 45 in-lbs).

Hope this helps.

[8391JE]

Ok that makes sense to me. Sometimes I was able to put successive shots on top of each other and other times the shots went along on lines.

I think it's time to email the customer service. Thanks for the advice.

[8391JE]

The problem that I have is that I want to use this for hunting eventually so I would need to use non-leaded ammo.

I had torqued the stock takedown screw to about 30 in lbs but hadn't thoughts of the barrel band. Thanks for the advice.

[kenl]

Not the barrel band, but the wedge that holds the barrel to the receiver. I think the band doesn't do anything to accuracy because it isn't in contact with the barrel, only the stock.

I had such bad luck with non-lead .22lr that I bought a .22 mag rifle. The mag nl ammo is a lot more accurate than the LR stuff.

But look at .17hmr if you want a laser accurate nl round.

Hope you can figure it out.

[alpha_romeo_XV]

There are some YouTube videos about over tightening the bolt that holds a standard 10/22 stock to the barrel. Trying backing it way off to get more of a free float action. Then get some 40 grain subsonic ammo to verify if scope and mounting is kosher.

[kcheung2]

Simmons scopes are low quality and the rings that come with them are pure junk. Worst scope I ever bought.

Ok that makes sense to me. Sometimes I was able to put successive shots on top of each other and other times the shots went along on lines.

I think it's time to email the customer service. Thanks for the advice.

Writing to Simmons would be a waste of bytes. What exactly would the complaint be? That it's a cheap scope? Their "warranty" service entail you sending in the scope +$50, you pay postage, and then after 6 months they'll send the same scope back with a letter saying they didn't find anything wrong. Just move on. Even if they were extremely generous and gave you a coupon for their absolute, top of the line scope, it wouldn't be worth it.

Either get a better scope or stick with iron sights and get more practice. Even a $80 red dot from Primary Arms or Bushnell would be a better choice.

[Zenderfall]

I’ve actually sent Simmons, Tascos, and Leapers UTG scopes back. Didn’t take them long to respond and all I had to do was send them in, or in the case of Leapers, drive it over to the distribution warehouse.

The worst part of it was they sent me…..another Simmons, Tasco, or Leapers UTG.

They will take in scopes and hand you new ones all day long. And each one of them will be just the same quality as the one sent in. Keep in mind that if you paid $75.00 for a scope, it only cost them about $9.99 to make.

I’ll agree with the above too. I have two Bushnell TRS-25 (lovingly called Trash Twenty Fives) and they actually work pretty well considering how much they cost. One of them is an early Japanese made model, although the more recent Chinese made ones aren’t bad either. Same with Primary Arms. Their stuff’s not bad.

[eviioiive]

I’m going with it’s you and the scope. Irons at 25 should be tight. Take whatever you’re doing wrong, add a scope issue and here’s the result.

[RNE228]

I would agree. My old 10/22 is plain-jane from mid 1970's. I do have a set of Tech-Sights(works great for Appleseed)

With cheap ammo it shoots nice little groups on those little Appleseed targets from prone, standing, kneeling etc. From a bench it shoots even better.

OP, were you shooting from a bench? From sandbags? Sandbags under the stock, not the barrel? The target is on carboard, on a stand, not just free hanging from a couple clips. Using Natural Point of Aim?

I?m going with it?s you and the scope. Irons at 25 should be tight. Take whatever you?re doing wrong, add a scope issue and here?s the result.

[Jimi Jah]

I paid only $113 for the Vortex 2x7 32mm. It is nearly as good as the $300 Leupold.

Measure twice, cut once.