New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - low mag suggestions sought for match use
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Check GunBroker.com for SWFA's No Reserve and No Minimum bid firearm auctions.

low mag suggestions sought for match use

 Post Reply Post Reply   Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: October/18/2006 at 13:15
ac4wordplay View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper


Joined: October/15/2006
Status: Offline
Points: 20
I'm a new member, so if this (or something remotely similar) has been covered recently please forgive me and point me in the right direction. I've used the "search" feature and have found http://www.opticstalk.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=4578&KW=lo w+power to be helpful, but haven't found (or have over-looked) anything else pertinent. I'm looking for low magnification scope recomendations. Unfortunately I can't afford to be an optics connoiseur, and as much as I would like a (IOR, S&B, USO, NXS, etc.) they are out of the question. I expect to stay under ~ $200, and to date am considering:

Burris FFII 1.75-5 (yes, recently discontinued, but can be found)
Weaver V3
(your recommendation here)

The optic will be used on my competition AR at multi-gun and practical rifle matches (year -'round, all weather). I currently use a Bushnell Elite 3200 1.5-4.5 and find the optical clarity (and $$ value) acceptable. Why replace it? Because I purchased it sight unseen, prior to the heavy "Firefly" marketing and expected a standard duplex; I've made due with the heavy post "Firefly" for a while now (it's not bad - I'll use it for an upcoming night match) but would generally prefer a standard duplex (Bushnell doesn't seem to offer this model). I'd prefer not to consider scopes of lesser (relative to the Elite 3200) optical quality.

Thanks for your help,

ac
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: October/18/2006 at 15:55
koshkin View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar
Dark Lord of Optics

Joined: June/15/2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 10961
I've played with V3 quite a bit.  It is an excellent little scope with a true 1x on the bottom end.

Optically, it is on par with Elite 3200.

FFII is a little better and is, IMO, a bit more versatile due to a 5x top end.

ILya
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: October/18/2006 at 17:33
Trinidad View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master
Avatar

Joined: May/04/2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1555

A tactical scope will be nice for competition, how about a burris tactical.

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: October/18/2006 at 19:08
ac4wordplay View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper


Joined: October/15/2006
Status: Offline
Points: 20
Thank you both for your thoughts. Not having much experience with different optics, and NO experience with either Weaver or Burris, I appreciate your recommendations. I too was leaning toward the FFII as it's not at a disadvantage to a "true 1x" at most of the matches that I participate in, and the 4-5 magnification helps (my eyes) on the farther, smaller targets.

ac
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: October/19/2006 at 12:44
Trinidad View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master
Avatar

Joined: May/04/2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1555

[QUOTE=ac4wordplay]Thank you both for your thoughts. Not having much experience with different optics, and NO experience with either Weaver or Burris, I appreciate your recommendations. I too was leaning toward the FFII as it's not at a disadvantage to a "true 1x" at most of the matches that I participate in, and the 4-5 magnification helps (my eyes) on the farther, smaller targets.

 

Very good, post a pic of the FFII TAC when you get it all set up.

 

Trinidad

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: October/20/2006 at 00:32
ac4wordplay View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper


Joined: October/15/2006
Status: Offline
Points: 20
Any idea if the FFII 1.75-5 is a "true" 1.75? Is the 2-7 a "true" 2? I couldn't find the info at Burris.com, but maybe I overlooked it. TIA.

Yes, I will post pics when I get it mounted (ETA: end of next week?).

ac
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: October/20/2006 at 11:38
Urimaginaryfrnd View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar
Resident Redneck

Joined: June/20/2005
Location: Iowa
Status: Offline
Points: 13868
Item 6545 Trijicon TriPower    $379.95   on Samplelist.

I know its over the price range but I thought this would make a nice optic for your AR, (I wouldnt mind having one).

 

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: October/20/2006 at 11:48
Trinidad View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master
Avatar

Joined: May/04/2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1555

I am not shure about the actual magnification of the FFII but I am looking foreward to your pics.

I would call Burris,they have helped me out in the past with good service.

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: October/20/2006 at 18:32
ac4wordplay View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper


Joined: October/15/2006
Status: Offline
Points: 20
Originally posted by Urimaginaryfrnd Urimaginaryfrnd wrote:

Item 6545 Trijicon TriPower    $379.95   on Samplelist.

I know its over the price range but I thought this would make a nice optic for your AR, (I wouldnt mind having one).

 



I would like to play with one, but...

a) it's not in my budget;

b) although it isn't a scope (telescopic lens), it is an optic, and as such bumps one OUT of "iron sights" classification, and I'm usually not good enough to beat (good) shooters who have scopes (when I'm stuck without one - unless I'm using an Eotech );

c) if I WERE to get a non-magnifying optic I would choose an Eotech 512 as I've used them (and seen them used VERY effectively) in competition and know they are FAST! Because the dot is 1 moa they are quite competitive unless the targets are small and/or distant.

The TriPower has the advantage (over the Eotech) of not being useless when the battery dies, but I know that an Eotech can (and should!) be set up to co-witness with BUIS in case of malfunction/battery failure (I'm not sure that one can do this with the TriPower).

Anyway... Thanks for the thought; I'd love one, but it'd have to be under $250 (maybe closer to $175 - and I don't expect THAT to happen!) for me to move on one with my current budget - there are too many decent optics available at very competitive prices.

ac
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: October/27/2006 at 14:12
ac4wordplay View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper


Joined: October/15/2006
Status: Offline
Points: 20
Originally posted by SVD666 SVD666 wrote:

I am not shure about the actual magnification of the FFII but I am looking foreward to your pics.

I would call Burris,they have helped me out in the past with good service.



SVD:

I just got off the phone with Burris customer service; unfortunately the gentleman I spoke with wasn't of assistance and merely said that true magnification was "very close" to advertised magnification. I asked about both the 1.75-5 and the 2-7. He wouldn't even commit to it being a difference of less than .5x, yet he repeatedly stated that it was "very close". I asked if someone else might have the information and he replied "no, we don't test for that". Seems odd. I find myself a bit disappointed.

More soon.

ac
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: October/27/2006 at 14:21
Trinidad View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master
Avatar

Joined: May/04/2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1555

Here you go I found it for you. Check out the post in the riflescope section Zeiss MC 3-12x56 where I talk about customer service.

 

Specs:

http://www.dowdlesports.com/catalog/guns/burspec.htm#full

 

Customer Service:

http://www.opticstalk.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=4728&PN=1& amp;TPN=2

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: October/27/2006 at 14:42
ac4wordplay View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper


Joined: October/15/2006
Status: Offline
Points: 20
Originally posted by SVD666 SVD666 wrote:

Here you go I found it for you. Check out the post in the riflescope section Zeiss MC 3-12x56 where I talk about customer service.

 

Specs:

http://www.dowdlesports.com/catalog/guns/burspec.htm#full

 

Customer Service:

http://www.opticstalk.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=4728&PN=1& amp; amp;TPN=2



SVD:

Perfect. Thank you very much. This is one of my (admittedly petty) pet peeves:

"It's a 2-7 scope. Any difference would be 'very minor'. No, I can't define 'very minor' - but you wouldn't be able to tell the difference."

NO! It's a 2.5-6.8 scope. I tend to believe that a .5x difference is not insignificant (at the low end) for my intended use, and that one can tell the difference.

Again, thanks for your help - and sorry for the rant.

ac
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: October/27/2006 at 16:04
koshkin View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar
Dark Lord of Optics

Joined: June/15/2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 10961
Gentlemen, the 2-7x scope on the link SVD666 provided is an older Fullfield 2-7x32 scope, not the newer Fullfield II 2-7x35.  These are two completely different scopes with different optical systems (and different objective lens sizes).  You can not infer the actual magnification of Fullfield II out of that link.

ILya
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: October/27/2006 at 16:42
ac4wordplay View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper


Joined: October/15/2006
Status: Offline
Points: 20
Koshkin:

Thank you for pointing that out. I had noticed that the information was for the Fullfield (vs. Fullfield II that I am interested in), but (not knowing anything about optical engineering) I thought that one could make a reasonable inference. Thanks for correcting my misunderstanding.

Now I'm back to wondering...

ac
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: October/27/2006 at 16:45
Trinidad View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master
Avatar

Joined: May/04/2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1555

There are no specs available that I could find that actually say fullfield II with the actual magnification.

This is the best info I could find on the new Fullfield II Tactical scopes.

 

http://www.snipercentral.com/burris39bplex.htm

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: October/27/2006 at 16:51
koshkin View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar
Dark Lord of Optics

Joined: June/15/2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 10961
Since there are manufacturing tolerances involved, most makers will not publish how close they are to the stated magnnificaiton.  Even if they publish a number there will still be some spread in actual magnifications of different scopes within the produciton line.  I would not be surprised if it is within +/- 0.25 of the stated value.

ILya
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: October/27/2006 at 16:57
Trinidad View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master
Avatar

Joined: May/04/2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1555

This is what I believed to be the case, thanks Koshkin for the  info.

Koshkin since the Fullfield II Tacticals are made in the USA and the

Fullfield II are made in the phillipines could this have any effect on the

tolerances?

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: October/27/2006 at 17:06
koshkin View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar
Dark Lord of Optics

Joined: June/15/2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 10961
Originally posted by SVD666 SVD666 wrote:

This is what I believed to be the case, thanks Koshkin for the  info.

Koshkin since the Fullfield II Tacticals are made in the USA and the

Fullfield II are made in the phillipines could this have any effect on the

tolerances?



This is a tough one, to be honest.  Could it have an effect? yes.  Is it necessarly worse? nope.  I hate saying this, but American factories are not typically known as paragon of consistent manufacturing.  It all depends on who is running the shop.  The location of the factory is really secondary to the way the factory is run.  If Burris pays as much attention in their Phillipines factory as they do in their American factory, I would expect the manufacturing tolerances to be similar.

ILya
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: October/27/2006 at 18:38
Trinidad View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master
Avatar

Joined: May/04/2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1555

A Tactical scope has to be very reliable and when I found out that Burris decided to make the Fullfield Tacical II

in the USA I thought maybee they did not have the confidence in thier Philipine facility, after your last post I am starting to wonder if it was just marketing to use the USA made tag on the Tactical series. What are your opinions Koshkin on this move by Burris?

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: October/27/2006 at 18:48
koshkin View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar
Dark Lord of Optics

Joined: June/15/2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 10961
To the best of my knowledge the only difference between Tactical FFIIs and normal FFIIs are the knobs and color of anodizing available on the Tacticals.  While I do not have any information to support this, I would be very surprised if the Tacticals are fully made here.  Chances are all Fullfield IIs ar emade in the same factory and Tactical ones have the knob put in her in the US.  It would make no sense for Burris to have to factories assembling FFIIs, especially since they jus twent through the effort of moving the factory making FFIIs to Phillipines.

Remember, that to legally put that made in USA or made in Japan tag, you do not have to make the whole thing here.

ILya
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: October/27/2006 at 19:04
Trinidad View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master
Avatar

Joined: May/04/2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1555

Originally posted by koshkin koshkin wrote:

To the best of my knowledge the only difference between Tactical FFIIs and normal FFIIs are the knobs and color of anodizing available on the Tacticals.  While I do not have any information to support this, I would be very surprised if the Tacticals are fully made here.  Chances are all Fullfield IIs ar emade in the same factory and Tactical ones have the knob put in her in the US.  It would make no sense for Burris to have to factories assembling FFIIs, especially since they jus twent through the effort of moving the factory making FFIIs to Phillipines.

Remember, that to legally put that made in USA or made in Japan tag, you do not have to make the whole thing here.

ILya

 

Good points Koshkin. I am very curious now,if I dig up any more info I am going to post it here.

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: October/27/2006 at 19:45
ac4wordplay View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper


Joined: October/15/2006
Status: Offline
Points: 20
Re-cap w/pics:

My 2006 season match rifle is fairly accurate with ammo that it likes, but the current scope's (Firefly) reticle is too thick for my taste - it obscures a 10" steel plate at ~300 yards. I would like a low magnification scope to replace my current Bushnell Elite 3200 1.5-4.5x32 Firefly. A Burris 1.75-5x20 may do nicely (especially if I decide to add a JP close-range iron sight to the handguard for USPSA matches), but I'm also considering a Weaver V3. I don't have any experience with either scope (haven't experienced the reticle, etc.) but OT feedback has been positive for both.

The rifle:



The current scope on 1.5x, garage at ~40 yards (darn that thick reticle! It seems even thicker when looking through the scope).



A recent (rushed, pre-match) zero confirmation target (shot on 4.5x, from a bench w/sandbags, 200 yards). 5 shots into 2" (1moa) and 3 of those into .54" (<.5moa). PMC 55gr FMJ-BT (PMC! - who would've guessed?!) The thick reticle made it difficult and may have adversely affected group size. Still, capable of decent accuracy.



Reference reticle from Baush & Lomb Elite 3000 3-9x40 at 3x (a much better reticle for me - it doesn't seem quite as thin as the picture makes it look).




 Post Reply Post Reply
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Similar Threads: "low mag suggestions sought for match use"
Subject Author Forum Replies Last Post
Low-mag fixed or variable for .338 Win Mag hadama Rifle Scopes 30
HSM 7mm rem mag match venisonsniper Reloading & Ballistics 1
Real world effect of parallax to lower lower scope Canuck Bob Rifle Scopes 7
7 Rem Mag vs 7 weatherby mag? Rant Firearms 4
Low or Super Low Rings for M1a snewsom2997 Rifle Scopes 2
low dollar low end scopes atwisted1 Rifle Scopes 12 10/30/2007 10:52:24 AM
Seeking Scope Recommendation digitalnomadil Rifle Scopes 1 8/20/2007 11:49:47 AM
Still seeking the perfect scope for Tikka tarboroheel1 Rifle Scopes 9 3/22/2007 2:18:57 PM
Seeking Advice Elite 3200 4x12x40 digitalnomadil Rifle Scopes 7 6/6/2007 5:32:55 AM
High-end 300 win mag or 7 mag texashunter Firearms 19


This page was generated in 0.625 seconds.