Is More Magnification Always Better in Highpower Competition?

More scope magnification means you can see more detail on the target. But is this always a good thing in highpower rifle competition? Are there tradeoffs with a higher magnification? Let's look at the standing position and the differences when we increase the scope power.

[@briangood5610]

Konrad, Now that’s an Impressive hold! That takes a lot of work to hold that steady!

[@michaeldoe4805]

I am into the pistol bullseye game where magnification is not allowed but the same plus and minus chart can be applied to irons vs reddot in pistol. Reddot magnifies the apparent movement, makes the shooter pinpoint the exact moment to break the shot and makes calling your shots much more accurate. But the eventual final score? Same for me... I personally find shooting iron sights much more relaxing, especially outdoors. Only time my reddot scores are higher are the times with poor lighting both indoors and outdoors. With high winds, rain, and snow blowing towards your face, irons outscore the dots. I believe magnification makes calling your shots easier, but at least for me, for some reason overall final score is not dependent on the sighting system.

[@dinoc.5537]

If we liken the black to the chicken in highpower silhouette, we can directly compare the two games. Where XTC limits us to 4.5X, you will see much higher magnifications used in silhouette games. The habit was to take a scope and even boost it before ready options became off-the-shelf. Like XTC, both games require training to connect the brain, to the eyes, to image, to the gun, to hit the target. I have a theory that if a shooter like Konrad was to practice with the higher magnification, he would adjust his "gain" to match the feedback and do just as well if not better with high mag. I also believe we can't judge either mag without spending a significant number of real shots standing in the wind. Also, keep in mind that the silhouette game usually takes just 5 shots at a time and then typically has a short break to reset plates. Also, they do not get to wear a hardback coat. When I pick up a 22 Anschutz with a boosted scope, I might turn down the mag to start but soon after I crank it up. Rimfire or airgun silhouette is a great barometer for what condition you are in and makes great alternative practice for the 200 yard offhand in XTC. Many thanks for the videos and your efforts to help the XTC folks. Best Wishes for your 2024 Season! Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!!!

[@konrad1853]

The short time limit allowed in silhouette would also be good training for highpower. It would encourage shooting the first good shot you see.

[@randym6439]

I know you know this, but I saw the same thing when I was a Appleseed instructor. The guys with the archangel stocks and the 6-18X scopes would almost always shoot worse than the kids shooting the irons or a low power scope and paying attention to what we were teaching.

[@konrad1853]

It all comes down to the basics.

[@JaredAF]

i was thinking about this recently and also was wondering how the switch to optics has affected the overall scores. i think the top scores have gone up but i believe the "cut" for eic points has remained similar even after optics were allowed. also that scope camera is awesome, great vid as always

[@Daniel-lf2no]

Sir, I ran the numbers on this already. I looked up the past scores from the years just before scopes were allowed, and the years after they were allowed. I averaged the scores of over 50 matches for each category. The average cutoff for leg points in EIC matches increased by 7 after scopes were allowed.

[@JaredAF]

@@Daniel-lf2no interesting. I think it would also be interesting to see the cutoff scores for the Perry EIC match but over a longer period of time. Like from 1990 to present

[@konrad1853]

Without a doubt shooters are shooting higher scores with optics. In general, more shooters are shooting higher scores and the top shooters are pushing the top scores upward. I explored something like this for WOA. Go to www.whiteoakarmament.com/blog/highpower-today-vs-yesterday.html and scroll down to "Data and Statistics".

[@JaredAF]

@@konrad1853 Just checked it out, thanks a lot 👍

[@danieljenkins779]

my current rifle setup has an ACOG on it. its a fixed 4x and really not a precision scope but it has been great for learning highpower

[@lawtonsegler1923]

Thanks for taking the time to make these videos. This is a visual sport, and no one does a very good job of showing newer shooters what successful shots look like. That scope camera is awesome. I can’t hold on the black in off hand for more than a second. lol. Also, my pulse is pretty bad. It would be great to see more through your scope. You mentioned in another reply that you prefer the dot over any other reticle. I’ve been struggling with my vision for about two years now. Like most service rifle scopes these days, mine has a circle/dot. It’s a good scope, but for some unknown reason, when the target black is inside the circle the edge of the target starts to disappear from about 6 to 10 or 11:00. When this happens, and I go ahead and break the shot, it will almost always be off. I’m talking slow prone. Backing off the magnification helps a little, as does moving the scope forward. The biggest help is keeping my face up and towards the target. Even with all this, it’s still a struggle. The funny thing is, if I aim so the target black is outside the circle it’s totally clear…. Do you shoot service rifle with a dot only reticle? I haven’t been able to find one with competition turrets at a reasonable price. And, I have seen a an eye doctor that deals with shooters and had me bring in my rifle. He spent an hour with me, but wasn’t able to help. One thing he told me was that it’s definitely not a stigmatism. Lastly, I’ve been shooting long enough now that I want to learn more on reading the wind. I think you’d be able to do a good job presenting this. Wind isn’t much of an issue at our local 300yd range located in a forest, so much of what I know comes from people trying to describe mirage…. It’s really not helpful without something to look at. It would be great to actually see what you’re seeing, what you do or don’t do to compensate, and then see the results. I know that’s asking a lot, but you seem to enjoy the challenge…. Thanks for all your excellent content.

[@JamesApplebyLRN2shoot]

I find when I shoot my match rifle standing, I like 16x. But my score doesn't change, however I only shoot that rifle 2-3 times a year. I shoot smallbore at 20x on one rifle and 16x on the other, one is a fixed 20x. It takes a few matches after service rifle season to adapt to the higher magnification. I find I get a better feed back or learning curve from the higher magnification.

[@Daniel-lf2no]

I don't like electronic targets either. I like the old fashioned pits better. I don't mind that they take more time to use, because it gives me a chance to talk to people. I don't want to drive two hours to a match just to experience the match director hustling us through as fast as possible and not being able to hang out and talk. I also experienced a type of malfunction of the laptops we were given, because I had never used them before and didn't push the right button during slow prone. It only recorded 10 out of 20 shots. I think the electronic targets are just another thing to fail or break. My philosophy is just because something can be made electronic doesn't mean it should. I might disagree with you about some of the shots that are barely touching a white line. I would score those in the outer ring, not the inner ring. I think some scorers are too zealous to give the shooter the higher score, or perhaps they are afraid of a confrontation when the shooter complains about not being given the higher value. But I believe they should have just shot better. If the hole is on the line or halfway on the line, I give them the higher value. If it's just next door to the line or just barely next to it, I score it as the lower value. That is what makes sense to me.

[@codyway7424]

I went from 24x to 55x for F-class. Mostly had to dial back to somewhere between 24x and 40x to deal with mirage. Scores didn't really improve with the high magnification like I had hoped. But better quality glass did improve my ability to see mirage, and etc.

[@konrad1853]

That's the problem when you get up to the 50X area. It's fine in overcast conditions but as soon as the sun comes out the target image is distorted due to mirage. But maybe having that higher magnification in your back pocket makes it worth it for those cloudy days.

[@morgendietrich5062]

Give me 20x for standing, I would take 25x for prone rapid and slowfire prone if my optic has that option but 20x works well there too. I want to see the target lines to assist with standing break, harder at 4.5x

[@konrad1853]

Agreed. I like the higher magnification for standing (even 25X). More apparent wobble but the ability to see your aiming point really speeds up the shot decision making.

[@patrioticspartan]

I recently did a practice standing stage at the local club where i compete.100 yrd reduced NRA cert 200yrd equivalent targets. I had a nm upper irons and my fun upper, with and eotech confirmed zero, then did a 10 shot standing with each. Oddly did better with the irons. Something about the classics. I love my red dots even for highpower though. Idk if ill be moving to 4.5x scopes yet.

[@michaelaustin7505]

It would be interesting to test with a SCAT trainer to develop data. I can see when I snatch at the trigger when trying to get a shot moving toward center, or worse away from center. Learning a scope after shooting an apature match rifle and post/iron service rifle, the crosshair reticle was tough. The new Sightron (and Nightforce/Leupold) apature reticle seems much more telling with shots closer to call and fever anticipation jerks on the trigger, but time will tell. (Non distinguished/ low master, so your mileage may vary....)

[@konrad1853]

I think we can adapt to just about any reticle type. That being said, I really like a dot over any other kind.

[@DonaldHawkins-e9f]

I kind of prefer shooting XTC with iron sights. I'm more relaxed and I feel more confident when I can't "see" the wobble in greater detail. I also shoot XTC with a 4X scope. I can shoot slightly better when using the scope, but it's much more "stressful" when I can see how much wobble is really there.

[@konrad1853]

I think if you spend time dry-firing with the scope you will get more used to the size of your hold. This will make you more comfortable when lining up the shot and reduce some of that stress.

[@DonaldHawkins-e9f]

@@konrad1853 Agree!

[@ericgerhardt1127]

I don't believe any level of magnification will make us wobble less, but also you want enough magnification to give a solid view of where your shot has broken.

[@konrad1853]

The wobble is always the same but the higher magnification makes it look bigger. This can throw off some shooters because they are not used to the greater apparent motion.

[@Daniel-lf2no]

I was trying to comment on your "electronic target experience" video but somehow I ended up commenting here.

[@Orangeipadcase]

Hey Konrad. Whereabouts in Illinois are you? Have any pointers for someone new starting out in historic rifle matches? I’m between the Joliet-Pontiac area (don’t want to get too specific here in the comments). Thanks.

[@Wmbhill]

Thanks for the video

[@detepenny7948]

The real point of the video is to dissuade neighbors from peeking in the window

[@TheJasonmurphy2005]

Where did you come up with that training setup? I mean the reduced target and how did you get it to focus correctly at such a short distance? I have used an electrical box across the street with a target dot on it. Would be interested in improving my kit

[@konrad1853]

I create the reduced target in a CAD program. The scope is a Leupold VX-2 Rimfire so it can focus at a closer distance.

[@bigb4894]

Obviously the higher power view works better....until one actually has to hold the rifle in offhand. The lower power I think helps the body to not overcompensate for the wobble.

[@konrad1853]

As I mention in the video, there are pros and cons for each of lower and higher magnification. But I have found that seeing more wobble in standing is compensated by better decision making with the higher magnification.

[@snake57]

I find my offhand scores are a bit higher with less magnification.

[@pine0981]

Good video........ dang you wobble more than I do. You got great timing tho.

[@konrad1853]

Rifle movement can always be reduced. I'm working on it.

[@garyhammond2213]

Think I'd stick with iron sights. That's just me. An old timer.

[@silvers74]

Konrad, I accidentally shot President's 100 this year at 2.5x for standing 200yd and prone rapid with a 96-0x and 99-6x respectively. I haven't intentionally practiced with lower (let's say 2x) vs 4.5x for service rifle but from my experience in more wobbly standing and sitting stages is that the higher the magnification, the more my tendency to try to force 10s and Xs and actually fire a 9. For example, I cleaned sitting with irons years ago and finally did again in the NTI this year. Something about seeing better not translating into better results on target. More magnification is definitely helpful for prone stages that are pretty solid. I need more practice in standing and sitting for sure. Also, is there a place I can download that target you use for dry fire? I just have a plain black dot about 7 yds away in my garage. It would be nice to have correctly sized value rings for dry fire. thanks. Tim in Alaska

[@pine0981]

Oh yea you did....... Mr. clean

[@konrad1853]

I create my targets in a CAD program. E-mail me your dry-fire distance and what target you are trying to replicate and I can make a printable sheet of targets for you.