Well I was wanting to know what the problem is with zeroing your weapon at 25 meters with a reduced target? I was watching the show Tactical Impact, and one of the instructors(Kyle Defoor) said that on today’s battlefield the 100 meter zero is better.
I remember every year qualifying with my M16A1 with a 25 meter set zero, and qualifying expert most of the time. I also talked to a Marine Recon friend, and he said to use what works for me.
So before I reset the zero on a few platforms, I wanted to get some other opinions, and beta on the matter from some knowledgable shooters. Thanks in advance guys.
From my understanding of the reduced chart when you zero your rifle at 25 meters you will be on target at 300 yards right? So Kyle is saying to zero your rifle for CQB? That leaves a larger compensation at longer shots. I’m not sure if I would want to do that.
I know Defoor was speaking on zero distance, and I inferred target size as well. Leaving the zero distance as preference, the target size is questionable.
Mathematically, shooting 25 yards on a reduced target can be the same as 500 yards on a larger target, but I think he was getting at rather than shooting a smaller target up close, zero at the actual intended range.
For handguns, I can shoot pretty good on a reduced target up close, but the equivalent at the true distance results do not scale the same. If you get 1/2 MOA at 25 yards do you get 2 MOA at 100, or can you hold better/worse? I believe he was also speaking to knowing what your weapon does at that range. If you use a 50/225 zero, shoot it at 225, or at least thats what I gathered.
^Help me understand that chart because I don’t see how the bullet drop would be any different based on ones zeroing distance. Or am I misinterpreting the chart?
it compares the 3 zeros mentioned…
to the OP, Kyle is a member here, send him a message to understand the intent of his comments.
On the Tactical Impact episode he says “100 meter zero”, not 100 yard zero. He also says that when using the 25 meter target you’ll be off a little sometimes. What is Kyle’s user name here? I’ll ask him like you suggested.
The chart shows that each zero will cross the line of sight twice, once at the zero, and once again further down range. You will notice that the deviation from line of sight is less with the 50 yard zero from 50 to 250 yards than it is with a 25 or 100 yard zero. A 25 yard zero is almost 10" high at 200 yards, while the 50 yard zero is never off more than 2" high or low all the way out past 200. It crosses the line again right around 225. Some believe that the most accurate way to zero is at the longer distance where the bullet crosses the line of sight again. I just zero at 50. You can shoot effectively to 250 without any adjustment for elevation.
Using smaller targets has nothing to do with zeroing; in theory zeroing is on a single, bullet sized point at what ever distance you choose. You try to make one hole so target size is not relevant. Smaller targets are said to be used to simulate longer ranges, but I don’t think it’s the same.
I use meter/yard as the same in this instance, but the idea is the same. I believe his user name is “Kyle Defoor”. The idea of the smaller target is valid, for a quicker zero, use the reduced target and then confirm at the true distance.
One advantage of a 100 yard zero is that some optics have one or more dots below the center dot. They are used at longer ranges (like the EoTech XPS with 2 dots, second dot=500 yards), and I believe they are based on a 100 yard zero for the center.
load, barrel length, height above bore?
M855 from an M16A2.
Any idea on, say, same ammo from an M4 with M68? Much variation?
I’m more confused now than when I posted the thread. The platforms I’M asking about zeroing are a 6920, 16 inch LMT, and a 10.5 LMT SBR. Using XM193 and iron sights.
Not much on the short end.
Meters or yards, pick one, it doesn’t make a significant difference at short ranges with infantry guns (non-magnified, non-accurized). I grew up with yards.
A carbine can’t be zeroed for CQB. It’s not possible,-barrel/sight relationship. The sights/sight would have to be on top of the barrel ala a pistol.
300m zeros are the reason so many bitch about 5.56 not getting the job done. The other is ammo. Average engagement distance has and always will be around 100-150 (what most people can see without magnified aid, especially a small target, like a man in the prone).
Ammo and barrel length play a slight hand in it, but honestly (and trust me, I’ve been in the tests at Crane and elsewhere), none of us shoot better than either. So don’t get wrapped up with it, and don’t use it as an excuse. You just need to practice more. 10" uppers with EOTechs and Aimponts shooting 55 gr.ball, 70 gr. TPX, and 77 gr. BLK Hills have killed way good with 100 and 200 zeros out to 200m with no problem. In fact, we all HAD to shoot over 175 with irons on the Navy qual at 200, not 25, with 10" barrels and 55 gr.!
100m zero-
never off more than 2.5" (barrel/sight relationship) from contact distance to 100m(i.e.- you can see and take a head shot at this distance and hit). Low 4" at 200. To take a shot at 200 without magnified aid you’ll have to have a torso shot anyway (so that extra 4" will be there, and you have 200m to tell yourself to aim high a hair). 4" is acceptable considering the capabilities of the normal M4 (4 MOA), and the capabilities of the normal marksman.
200m zero-
Only a 2.5" difference either high (about at 100) or low (about at 250) out to 250m.
Here at TigerSwan, we are advocating a 200 because it fits for all our customers. Meaning that a military guy with be able to cover the entire seeable battlefield and get a kill shot, and a LE guy (who’s engagemnet distance will most likely be 50 and less) will hit in his entire spectrum as well.
Bottom line - Either the 100 or 200 is a good choice, just not the 300. The bottom line on either zero choice is to know your holds at different distances.
Hope that helps,
M193 from a 6920
I think the greatest benefit to setting your “true” zero at 200 yds is that you are at a facility where you’ll likely be able to have actual confirmation where all the rounds are hitting out to that point. Yes, I am stating the obvious, but I know more shooters that use other people’s ballistic data as crutches (sometimes with all the variables being different), and call it a day when they’re on paper at 50 because it is an improved zero, and all their woes will magically go away from it. My only point here is that you should take the time to either use a 200 yd zero, or conversely a shorter range “improved” zero with confirmations on paper all the way out to where you want to be able to make your hits. For a lot of us, that means make the effort to schedule a day when you’ll make the long drive to that 300 yard range that is just beyond your everyday driving distance. If you don’t know what your own rifle does at a specific distance because you haven’t actually tried it, you just don’t know… BTDT- lol.
One of the side benefits of Randy Cain’s carbine class is that, facility dictating, you will get a very well confirmed 200 yard zero. You get it on at 25, get it tight at 50, then go out to 200 and get it really tight, and then go back to 50 to reconfirm and then spend the next 2.5 days shooting at various distances figuring out relative holdovers/unders.
I agree that most people misunderstand the 50 yard zero and ideally should get out and field verify what that gives them at distance, but I also think that ultimately it doesn’t much matter for the vast majority of shooters.