poor results with Airmax on R9

[Tom1340]

I am not satisfied with the Hawke Airmax 4-12x40 mounted on my Beeman R9.  The zero drifts quite a bit  (1/2" or more in any direction, at 29 yards).  The scope has been replaced under warranty before, but the drift returned.  I am wondering if going to a 30mm tube would give me a more reliable scope?    Or does the additional diameter (and cost) only get me an illuminated reticle and a side parallax adjustment, neither of which would be useful to me. 
I know that many of the marksmen on this forum use Hawke scopes on some of the strong recoil springers.  Are they using 30 mm tubes?  If not, do they frequently readjust their zeros.  Or is my experience an exception.  Thanks for any comments. 

[nced]

I am not satisfied with the Hawke Airmax 4-12x40 mounted on my Beeman R9.  The zero drifts quite a bit  (1/2" or more in any direction, at 29 yards).  The scope has been replaced under warranty before, but the drift returned.  I am wondering if going to a 30mm tube would give me a more reliable scope?    Or does the additional diameter (and cost) only get me an illuminated reticle and a side parallax adjustment, neither of which would be useful to me. 
I know that many of the marksmen on this forum use Hawke scopes on some of the strong recoil springers.  Are they using 30 mm tubes?  If not, do they frequently readjust their zeros.  Or is my experience an exception.  Thanks for any comments. 

I have a .177 Beeman R9 and a .177 HW95 with Hawke scopes and haven't had that issue. Perhaps there are some "mechanical issues" or even "improper/inconsistent supporting methods".

R9 with 4-16x44 Hawke Airmax 30 SF Compact, UTG Universal Adapter and 30mm Picatinny rings...........



HW95 with 4-16x44 Hawke Airmax 30SF compact, Utg Universal Adapter and 30mm Vector Optics Picatinny rings..........


"Are they using 30 mm tubes?  If not, do they frequently readjust their zeros"
I've used both 1" tube and 30mm tube Hawke scopes and indeed I rezero my scope before each shooting session. When shooting those hollow lead badmitton birdies called pellets even daily changes atmospheric conditions such as temperature, barometric pressure etc can affect the poi at 50+ yards. When I shot field target matches the routine before each match was to check the zero prior to the match.........

[853_okg]

I have a few of the 4-12x40 scopes. I've only had an issue once. I sent the scope in to be checked out. The service man told me my scope was near its limits of adjustment which can cause eradic performance. I chose to tweak my barrel to get its POI closer to optical zero, I haven't had any issues since. I don't know if that is something your comfortable with, many aren't, and not all barrels are easily bent.
If that is your issue, a 30mm tube does offer more adjustment. I've had really good performance from the 30mm airmax scopes I have. The only downside I have is they are bigger and take up more space.

[Bayman]

If it's not your shooting. There's something wrong with the rifle. It probably has, loose screws, droop or lock up issues. All which are very common with R9s. I have 4 Hw95 family guns and an R1 that all wear 3-9 Airmax scopes. I can't say I've never had one go bad but it's very rare and it's not usually a wandering zero. Another scope, 30mm or otherwise wont fix the rifle.

[nced]

I have a few of the 4-12x40 scopes. I've only had an issue once. I sent the scope in to be checked out. The service man told me my scope was near its limits of adjustment which can cause eradic performance. I chose to tweak my barrel to get its POI closer to optical zero, I haven't had any issues since. I don't know if that is something your comfortable with, many aren't, and not all barrels are easily bent.
If that is your issue, a 30mm tube does offer more adjustment. I've had really good performance from the 30mm airmax scopes I have. The only downside I have is they are bigger and take up more space.

Very good comment!
One of trhe things I always did with a new scope for my R9 or HW95 was to first "optically center" the scope, then "adjust" (actually bend) the barrel till the poi matched the point of aim. This gives even tension on the scope erector tube which minimizes "shifting" due to the the normal piston gun "forward/back/twist" recoil. If the "turret adjustments" are near the "extremely loose" adjustment then erector tube can "thrash around" to a different position after the shot and the scope MIGHT even be damaged internally. Here are a couple sketches showing "erector spring" arrangements............
 

To "optically center" (actually "mechanically center") some folks simply "count turret clicks" from "stop to stop", then reverse   the "clicks" to "half the count" on both the elevation and windage turrets. Years ago I questioned the "Hawke tech gurus" about this practice and was told that it wasn't recommended. The explaination was that the "turret mechanism" could be damaged if too much pressure was applied to the turrets at the "turret stop points". Also it was mentioned that the actual "adjustment mechanism" might not actually be centered mechanically in the scope. I don't know if I buy these reasons but I stopped using the "count clicks and devide by two" method.

Supposedly the "best" optical method is to turn the scope tube in "vees" until the reticle remains fixed on the "aiming point" while rotating. I tried this and while it did seem to work I found it too tedious for my liking. Here is a link explaining the various "optical centering" methods...............
https://www.agmglobalvision.eu/blog/the-easy-way-to-center-a-rifle-scope

I chose the "mirror method" for my setups and found it to be adequate for my purposes. As a "side note" I read that scopes are optically centered at the factory so I used the "mirror method" to check out optical centering on the new Hawke scopes I bought and indeed all scopes I bought were aligned "straigght from the box". Here is a pic of a misaligned retical reflection before adjusting............

I personally found that it was easier to do the alignment with a mirror by turning on the "retical lighting" and doing the adjustment in the dark..........


However your preferred "optical/mechanical" retical centering the next issue was to make the poi fall on the aim point at the chosen zero distance (I use 30 yards for zeroing my springers) by "tweaking the barrel". I found that a "barrel bend" great enough to move the poi a few inches at 18 yards isn't even visibal.  Anywhoo, one of the reasons scopes need to be "optically centered" is the fact that some brand new break barrel guns have "barrel droop built in" at the factory like these barrel...........

Some have claimed that this was a deliberate "feature" because many European shooters don't use optics preferring "iron sights" and the "droop" accommodates the low positon of the rear sights. I don't know if this is true or simply a case of "accumulated manufacturing tolerances" but this still creates issues with a scope mounted a couple inched above the receiver.

If there are indeed "mechanical issues" that require "barrel tweaking adjustments" this is my "barrel tweaker" made from a "construction 2x4", large eye bolt, hex nut with flat washer and a "Delrin shoe" to spread the bending over a wider area of the barrel so as not to put a "divot in the metal" with the steel eye bolt.............

I also take care to put bending stress only on the barrel, not the "barrel to barrel pivot block joint"...........


The adjustment is done a "little at a time" till the poi at 18 yards (my upstairs shooting distance) hits the aim point then the "deed is done" till I get to my back yard shooting to check alignment at my 30 yard zero distance. For fine adjustments if it takes more than a couple clicks from center to zero I use a favorite "tweaking tree"to fine tune LOL..........

   
 

[Deerstalker]

Hawke 4-16 x 44 mm compact with Hawke tactical medium rings on my HW95L .22.  This scope is a 30 mm tube and is accurate.

[Tom1340]

a couple of days ago, when my shooting started getting sloppy, I "reset" the zero on my scope, by turning the turrets through a 180 degree arc, then returning them to the same setting. The result was noticeable ...which i took as evidence the ejector tube or reticle had worked out of alignment.   See photo.   But I have been unable to repeat that experiment, and based on everyones comments, I am back to my opinion that the scope is not an issue.  I believe The gun is well tuned, with full power ARH spring/vortek seal, proper screw tension and scope reasonably close to optical center.    So I'm guessing the problem is in my ability to manage the recoil.  It seems to me there a chaos element to the recoil which defies my consistency?  Thanks to all who sent comments.

[Yogi]

a couple of days ago, when my shooting started getting sloppy, I "reset" the zero on my scope, by turning the turrets through a 180 degree arc, then returning them to the same setting. The result was noticeable ...which i took as evidence the ejector tube or reticle had worked out of alignment.   See photo.   But I have been unable to repeat that experiment, and based on everyones comments, I am back to my opinion that the scope is not an issue.  I believe The gun is well tuned, with full power ARH spring/vortek seal, proper screw tension and scope reasonably close to optical center.    So I'm guessing the problem is in my ability to manage the recoil.  It seems to me there a chaos element to the recoil which defies my consistency?  Thanks to all who sent comments.

Do you know and use the "artillery hold"?

-Y

[nced]

a couple of days ago, when my shooting started getting sloppy, I "reset" the zero on my scope, by turning the turrets through a 180 degree arc, then returning them to the same setting. The result was noticeable ...which i took as evidence the ejector tube or reticle had worked out of alignment.   See photo.   But I have been unable to repeat that experiment, and based on everyones comments, I am back to my opinion that the scope is not an issue.  I believe The gun is well tuned, with full power ARH spring/vortek seal, proper screw tension and scope reasonably close to optical center.    So I'm guessing the problem is in my ability to manage the recoil.  It seems to me there a chaos element to the recoil which defies my consistency?  Thanks to all who sent comments.

I don't know if there is a "fouled bore" or perhaps "pellet choice" issue but in the past I've had grouping "go south" after shooting about 1000 hard lead Crosman Premiers which were the most accurate pellet from my HW springers (now "unobtanium")............



.177 Beeman R9 group variation at 50 yards after testing die lot marked and dated Crosman Premiers from the 1250 count box and a few different Air Arm pellets. All shot sitting on a "bucket" resting the gun on cross sticks. (Notice the CPL group in the upper left corner...........