Another bad rifle, Sabatti EVO US 308win

[Hannibal]

So based on the new information, including that the ammunition is, in fact, correct for the chambering, I offer a new suggestion. This will sound strange, but hear me out.
Take a loaded round and see if it will insert into the muzzle up to, or beyond the brass neck.
I say this because we are continents apart and it is entirely possible that the barrel bore does not match the chambering on a brand new rifle.

There aren't very many reasons why the point of impact and point of aim would be off by 3 meters at 50 meters.
If it is believed that the scope and mount are correct, that leaves the barrel. This would become obvious with numerous shots fired. But with minimal shots fired, we're left with minimal information to work with.
And now there exists the possibility that the POI was in the dirt?

[414gates]

Four people looked through the barrel and through the scope at a target at 100 meters.

Did any of the four notice if the barrel was bent ?

[M-Tecs]

There aren't very many reasons why the point of impact and point of aim would be off by 3 meters at 50 meters.

Per the OP it was thought to be one meter.

We were impressed that they were one meter above the target.

Also from the OP

I've been thinking a lot about the issue.
The ammo is correct. All the mechanical parts fit with my new torque wrench.
Four of us checked the adjustment between the scope and barrel. As mentioned above, I'm not an amateur. I'm a surgeon, so you can bet I'm very meticulous about things.
I think I may have made a mistake. Everyone present saw the dive above the target.
What happens if the bullet passes below and what we see above is thrown dirt?
I only focused on shooting low; I never tried to shoot higher.
On Saturday, I'll go with a larger target, some more bullets, and a new spotter.

[badwolf]

20 moa scope base on backwards possibly?

[jonp]

We were impressed that they were one meter above the target.

That being the case use a taller rear mount and leave the front the same. There is nothing that says you have to use the same height mounts front and rear. On a couple of rifles simply lining the rear ring was enough but I wasn't off 1 meter at 50 meters with it.

[nueces5]

So based on the new information, including that the ammunition is, in fact, correct for the chambering, I offer a new suggestion. This will sound strange, but hear me out.
Take a loaded round and see if it will insert into the muzzle up to, or beyond the brass neck.
I say this because we are continents apart and it is entirely possible that the barrel bore does not match the chambering on a brand new rifle.

There aren't very many reasons why the point of impact and point of aim would be off by 3 meters at 50 meters.
If it is believed that the scope and mount are correct, that leaves the barrel. This would become obvious with numerous shots fired. But with minimal shots fired, we're left with minimal information to work with.
And now there exists the possibility that the POI was in the dirt?

Having checked everything, I think it's either hitting the ground and the spotter didn't see it, or there's something wrong with the barrel.
We need to test the weapon again with a larger, closer target.

[nueces5]

Did any of the four notice if the barrel was bent ?

None of the four of us thought the barrel was bent.
When you look inside, it looks perfectly straight.

[nueces5]

20 moa scope base on backwards possibly?

The base is 20 MOA, the mount is 0 MOA
Don't check the base, because it already came mounted on the rifle.

[nueces5]

That being the case use a taller rear mount and leave the front the same. There is nothing that says you have to use the same height mounts front and rear. On a couple of rifles simply lining the rear ring was enough but I wasn't off 1 meter at 50 meters with it.

[Cap'n Morgan]

1 meter high at 50 meters would be roughly 70 MOA, if my calculation is correct. Check your base!

[725]

I get the frustration. If the gun is chambered in the correct round, scope rail & rings are tight, shooters abilities are half-way decent, correct rate of twist for the weight of the bullet, AND THE FIRST SHOTS ARE AT SOMETHING LIKE 10 YARDS, you should be able to find paper. At this point, anything else is a waste of ammo.

[Iron369]

The base is 20 MOA, the mount is 0 MOA
Don't check the base, because it already came mounted on the rifle.

Doesn't mean someone didn't mount the base backwards. I'd check that out

[white eagle]

Shoot it up close at first, 15 to 20 yards to get on paper. Then go to 50 yards.

yep that is the way I did it for years and years

[M-Tecs]

Doesn't mean someone didn't mount the base backwards. I'd check that out

Hole spacing isn't the same. https://www.sabatti.it/en/product/tactical-evo-us

[oldleadhead]

Too many variables. I would start by centering the reticle in the scope. Then just lay the scope in the rings with the rifle bore on the target. See if that looks even remotely close. Then mount the scope in the rings and see if anything has drastically changed. That should give you some idea of what needs work and what adjustments to make. I'd want the scope to be pretty well lined up at this point. If it's not I want to know why not.

[Shopdog]

A 2 or 3 foot piece of 1",TGP(turned,ground,polished) shaft is a mighty handy thing to have when dealing with these issues. Hard to beat in assessment situations.

On collimeter's... you need to check a rig that's already sighted in. There's a better than average chance the instruments "grid" isn't centered.... and never will be. Translated; once you know this particular collimeter's grid is say one block left,two blocks low(or whatever),record that as the actual,or working center. Good luck with your project.

[john.k]

I reckon I could boresight good enough to hit a 2ft x 2 ft target at 100 yards............I know someone who broke two scopes trying to sight in a new rifle .....seems some people arent mechanically inclined.

[M-Tecs]

I've been thinking a lot about the issue.
The ammo is correct. All the mechanical parts fit with my new torque wrench.
Four of us checked the adjustment between the scope and barrel. As mentioned above, I'm not an amateur. I'm a surgeon, so you can bet I'm very meticulous about things.
I think I may have made a mistake. Everyone present saw the dive above the target.
What happens if the bullet passes below and what we see above is thrown dirt?
I only focused on shooting low; I never tried to shoot higher.
On Saturday, I'll go with a larger target, some more bullets, and a new spotter.

We should get some more info soon.

[M-Tecs]

That being the case use a taller rear mount and leave the front the same. There is nothing that says you have to use the same height mounts front and rear. On a couple of rifles simply lining the rear ring was enough but I wasn't off 1 meter at 50 meters with it.

If it's hitting one meter above the target the rear mount would need to be lower not higher. Unless the mounts are something like the Signature Rings with ***-Align Inserts or the Sako Optilock version having misalignments of the rings can do some not so nice things to the scope tube and erector assembly.

https://www.burrisoptics.com/mountin...ignature-rings

[nueces5]

The seller took the gun to test it, luckily I think he either detects that we are fools, or he changes the gun with us.