It's usually the US viewers that question our mix of units. I actually prefer 1/4 moa turrets as there is a finer adjustment when zeroing. You're right though, some of our practices don't make much sense.

@@hftshooter I would agree about the finer adjustment out at 400 yards + but at sub 12 ranges it makes little difference

It is what it is. The results are all there for anyone to make their own conclusions.

🙂👍

Got to keep the dog happy! 🙂

Thank you 🙂

The point of the video was to show how to find the sweet spot on an unregulated rifle, i.e. the fill pressure from which the most consistent string of shots can be taken. In this instance, the sweet spot was from a 170 bar fill so it was the string of 10 shots from that point that I used in the comparison. If it's the correct sweet spot then that string should always be the most consistent 10 shots, that's the point of the exercise; no funny business. As a competitive HFT shooter I'm only interested in the most consistent 30 shots. For benchrest it would be 25 shots and for hunting it's often less than 10! If I need some sighters for the zero range I will fill an extra 5 bars or so to cover those before the event. I'm really not that interested in how the rifle performs further down the shot string. If I'm plinking and I notice the poi begin to change I simply refill. It is common practice for a 10 shot string to be used to calculate velocity spread and standard deviation and for those results to be used to compare rifles. A regulated rifle by its very nature shouldn't have a sweet spot, so any 10 shot string above the regulator pressure should be representative of the rifle's performance if it's a well functioning regulator. Taking this into account I think it was a fair comparison and was included to show that not all unregulated rifles need to have a regulator added. I hope that clarifies my intent.

@@hftshooter Jeff, The point of your video was not lost in fact you very capably demonstrated how to determine the “sweet spot” but the comparison with the regulated rifle results were unbalanced. We agree that “A regulated rifle by its very nature shouldn't have a sweet spot, so any 10-shot string above the regulator pressure should be representative of the rifle's performance if it's a well functioning regulator.” In fact, 10/20/30/40 shots strings should be consistent. However, by your own admission as an HFT shooter you are only interested in the best 30 (thirty) shot string for a competition. Using your results there is not one 30 shot string that is equal to or better than the 12.1 fps spread you obtained from the regulated rifle. If I were to be pedantic the best 30 shot string in your results is shots 24-53 which returned 12.2 fps spread but you would have to be a special person to replicate that start point on a competition day. I am not trying to belittle your efforts, but you suggested that your unregulated rifle would not benefit from having a regulator fitted! Probably not if you are only ever going to fire 10 shots from the exact same start pressure every time, but yes it would, if you want better results from more than 10 shots and less worry about where the pressure indicator is before you start shooting. This is all very academic considering the small shift in POI for a few FPS considering all other variables that affect the shot, but we need to be thorough with the details.

Yes, this is very much 22 ft.lb construction. 😄

Sounds great! 😀👍

Yes that would work. 👍

Glad it was helpful! 😀

Thanks. I picked up the stock from eBay.

Thanks 👍

Yes I have. It's been mentioned to me before, but I prefer clips as they don't fall off and get lost in the mud. I usually use thick card targets that are a little more manageable in the wind. 🙂👍

Cheers, I'll take a BP badge! 😄

I'm all for keeping things as simple as possible. 👍

I was fortunate to pick it up from eBay. 🙂

Go for it! 🙂👍

Loving the baking tray tip! 😀👍

I have no idea mate. It's exactly the same with weight and volume.

Thanks for the tip!

Thanks 👍

Good idea, but I hate those polystyrene bean bag balls they stick everywhere with static! 😆

Great tip!

Thanks for the tip!

Yep, denim, every bit as good as kevlar! 😆

Sorry, I think I was mostly talking to myself, old people like me do that a lot, lol. I think I was referring to the 3 shot clover-leaf group on the centre target. 👍

Yes, very quick to make and I think I'm going to get a lot of use out of it. 🙂👍

Sounds great! I've seen similar setups before and they look the business. 🙂👍

Good afternoon to you too. Hope you enjoyed your plinking session. 🙂👍

Sounds like the perfect solution. I think those clear plastic strip blinds they hang in warehouse doorways would work well too! 🙂👍

@@hftshooter might be. But tires and conveyor belts are threaded, which add a lot to the stopping power.

I agree with you! I've never had much success with a springer off a bag or a bench. I always have to revert to shooting prone to get the best groups. 🙂👍

Thanks. I've only ever had a quick look through a Veyron at a show, never shot with one. I've read and heard good things though. 🙂👍

Thanks. You hit on something there. If pellet prep gives you more confidence in your shooting, then go ahead! 🙂👍

I agree, but I like to keep things fairly simple and straightforward where I can and I'm aiming to help beginners and improvers. 🙂👍

My rifle has the prs monopod and butt plate fitted, which adds the extra length. 🙂👍

The tin foil method is in no way iffy. Measuring at the muzzle is the most accurate figure. That's where the ballistics start. I learnt this from a respected source who's info I trust.

@@hftshooter Please don't be offended. I am just trying to debate the method. Just stating it is right without any background doesn't work for me. Calculating is as near absolute as you will get with known dimensions. You didn't measure at the muzzel. You measured at an unstated dimention from the muzzel to the cardboard, you also hand held the rifle which could also lead to deviations and you measured to an estimated centre of the pellet hole. We are talking about small dimentions so very little room for error. If you would prefer that I didn't comment on your content just say and that will be that.

@@fxpeter22 I'm not offended at all, please don't think that. I welcome all comments and questions. I'm not an expert and am just passing on this stuff as I learn it myself. I'm happy to be proved wrong at any time if I've picked up bad information. Unfortunately it's very easy to get misconstrued in a messaging app. If you check out my video number 45 from about 16:30 I cover the tin foil method in more detail. You should see that the muzzle is touching the paper target when I take the shot. I have read some compelling articles promoting this method and have also noted graphics in some ballistic apps that clearly show that sight height is measured at the muzzle for ballistic calculations. Still happy to be proved wrong if that's not the case and I would happily broadcast a correction from the channel. I encourage you to continue to challenge everything to get to the truth; a mantra to live by! Best wishes, Jeff.

@@jeffmccall8013 That is great. I will get back to you 🙂

Hi, thanks for pointing that out. My apologies, that was clearly an error in my part in terminology. I should have said 'focus' rather than 'diopter'. Clearly I missed that during editing.

@@hftshooter Blimey, I thought you had discovered something new, had my brain whirling. enjoy your content "Subscribed"

@@fxpeter22 I'm really not that clever, lol! There are only so many times you can watch things through during editing before it all becomes a blur and you miss obvious mistakes. That being said, I've read that it's advisable to check the dioptre adjustment once your focus is properly set to ensure they work in tandem so the reticle and target become one image rather than two if that makes sense. Thanks for the sub and all the best. 👍

@@jeffmccall8013 I agree, everything should be focused in the same plane for best results. I also agree that editing is the arduious part of video making, it can take 2 or 3 times as long to edit as it does to generate the video in the first place. I am very interested in the technicalities of shooting, ballistics, optics and setups and I am working through some of your videos which are very enlightning. Thanks ☺

Very philosophical, but just meant as a friendly greeting!

Glad you liked it! 🙂👍

I'm not familiar with that brand. I just checked it out; looks good and an interesting focus arrangement. Little bit pricey for me though. 🙂

Yes a little bit pricey , That said I own a couple of the optisan CP scopes , the fixed 10 and the variable , Brilliant little things , Your comment about the fixed 10 being a bit brighter and sharper is spot on ,, Both great scopes

Hi Steven, it took so long to film that segment. I hate to think how much longer it would've taken had I not been at home. 😄

That's interesting. I spoke with a shooter who had the opportunity to test a pre-production model. His opinion was that it was much better than the one that came to market. 🤔

My pleasure! 🙂👍

Personally, I don't find the mismatch an issue as I'm shooting at a fixed mag and fixed focus. I like a mil ret for bracketing and a moa turret for finer zero adjustment. 🙂👍

@@hftshooter fair enough but turret should always match ret imo an the finer adjustments are minimal tbh

I always use a torque driver set well below the recommended settings so I know they're not too tight. From what Hawke said there's obviously an issue with the scope.

@@hftshooter sensible

Certainly do! 🙂👍

Cheers! 🙂👍

Thanks for sharing, I'll check those out. 👍