New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - What is your preference and why?
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

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

What is your preference and why?

 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: July/05/2010 at 21:55
REP View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice
Avatar

Joined: July/01/2010
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 238
< ="-" ="text/; =utf-8">< name="ProgId" ="Word.">< name="Generator" ="Microsoft Word 12">< name="Originator" ="Microsoft Word 12">
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/05/2010 at 22:04
338LAPUASLAP View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master
Avatar
Scope Swapper

Joined: October/17/2009
Location: STATESIDE
Status: Offline
Points: 2455
Swarovski old TDS or the new name (whatever it is) woked ok for me...Not the turrets preferred but decent)...
BRX or TDS type...
Ballistic Turret available.
 
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/05/2010 at 22:23
koshkin View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar
Dark Lord of Optics

Joined: June/15/2004
Location: United States
Status: Online
Points: 10961
Personally, for long range compensation I prefer scopes with mil-based reticles (Mil-Dot, MP-8, etc) in the front focal plane combined with easily adjustable knobs that have mil based clicks (0.1mrad for example).

The reason is very simple: within 500yards, it is nice to have the ability to use reticle for holdover.  For further ranges, I have to use the knobs.  Also, being able to range with the reticle is quite useful.  

Lastly, even at longer distances where I use the knobs to dial in rane compensation, I prefer to use the reticle for doping wind.

ILya
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/05/2010 at 22:35
REP View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice
Avatar

Joined: July/01/2010
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 238
Originally posted by koshkin koshkin wrote:

Personally, for long range compensation I prefer scopes with mil-based reticles (Mil-Dot, MP-8, etc) in the front focal plane combined with easily adjustable knobs that have mil based clicks (0.1mrad for example).

The reason is very simple: within 500yards, it is nice to have the ability to use reticle for holdover.  For further ranges, I have to use the knobs.  Also, being able to range with the reticle is quite useful.  

Lastly, even at longer distances where I use the knobs to dial in rane compensation, I prefer to use the reticle for doping wind.

ILya


Good info thanks for your input!
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/12/2010 at 13:40
stork23raz View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman
Avatar

Joined: September/10/2009
Location: Tennessee
Status: Offline
Points: 658

Mildot reticle is the only way to go. Add big repeatbale knobs.

SWFA SS
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/12/2010 at 13:56
Kickboxer View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar
Moderator

Joined: February/13/2008
Status: Offline
Points: 18334
I agree 100% with the Dark Lord of Optics...
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/12/2010 at 19:15
biggreen747 View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman
Avatar

Joined: October/16/2009
Location: Colorado
Status: Offline
Points: 470
I think the answer depends largely on what you are using it for. For Big Game hunting the holdover reticles work very well provided your cartridge/load matches up closely with them. Most are viable out to 500-600 yds which is further than most of us hunt at. For small game and paper punching knobs work best. Tactical shooting  is a different story but then you didn't post this under tactical scopes. I am obviously primarily a hunter but I do spend alot of time shooting for fun and to hone my skills. Someone who is a competition shooter will probably have a different opinion than mine.

Edited by biggreen747 - July/12/2010 at 19:18
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/12/2010 at 19:56
helo18 View Drop Down
Optics Jedi Knight
Optics Jedi Knight
Avatar

Joined: December/02/2006
Location: Montana
Status: Offline
Points: 5429
I would agree with koshkin on this one.  Although on target shooting where the wind is steady, I like to dial in windage as wellm not just use the reticle.  For hunting it is nice having hold over and being able to use the reticle for wind.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/13/2010 at 16:37
3_tens View Drop Down
Optics Jedi Knight
Optics Jedi Knight
Avatar

Joined: January/08/2007
Location: Oklahoma
Status: Offline
Points: 7180
Each has its own place. I shoot more in the hunting mode over the target mode. So REP What are yor thoughts? We need more input from you also. What are your needs?
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/13/2010 at 16:58
REP View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice
Avatar

Joined: July/01/2010
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 238
Originally posted by 3_tens 3_tens wrote:

Each has its own place. I shoot more in the hunting mode over the target mode. So REP What are yor thoughts? We need more input from you also. What are your needs?


Thanks for the depth of your consideration; Me; as to capability while in reality I will probably be using this rig mostly for field hunting. With normal shots ranging from 50 to 300yrds. But I am approaching this like I do most things that I buy for sporting use. I want it to as many things well as possible. I would say that I am around 95% in the hunting mode over target time etc.

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/13/2010 at 23:00
338LAPUASLAP View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master
Avatar
Scope Swapper

Joined: October/17/2009
Location: STATESIDE
Status: Offline
Points: 2455

glad to aim in the wrong direction for better insight on this one...

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/14/2010 at 09:32
biggreen747 View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman
Avatar

Joined: October/16/2009
Location: Colorado
Status: Offline
Points: 470
What Rifle/Caliber will you be putting this on?
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/14/2010 at 09:33
REP View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice
Avatar

Joined: July/01/2010
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 238
Originally posted by 338LAPUASLAP 338LAPUASLAP wrote:

glad to aim in the wrong direction for better insight on this one...



I confess I like the thought of the in sight ranging system as well. The problem for me is I don't like the idea of the hash marks or cam being generic. I talked to the nice people at Zeiss the other day and about their offerings; as I am a adding their 4.5-14x50 Conquest to one of my rifles. I really wanted to use the Z configurations but they tell me that in the 4-14 that the cam was designed more for magnum offerings and that it might not be the best chose for the 308 win.

So for me they said that I would have to drop down to a lower magnification where the Z 600 is offered for an offering that is closer to the ballistics of my rifle; but still it is a generic offering and not tuned to my loads performance. 

This is where I get hung up. Where as a scope with good mechanics in the turrets and a custom set of caps you are at least minimizing the variables.

I think that with the trend on people enjoying the full potential of their rifles these days  that we will see more and more scope manufactures offering custom in sight offers offering in the near future. 
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/14/2010 at 09:40
REP View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice
Avatar

Joined: July/01/2010
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 238
Originally posted by biggreen747 biggreen747 wrote:

What Rifle/Caliber will you be putting this on?


The rifle that I am working on now is in 308 Win. But please read the intro the poled question is intended to get an over all feel for individuals preferences as to sight configuration and why. In this context I would be interested it hearing your opinions.   
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/14/2010 at 09:42
supertool73 View Drop Down
Optics Jedi Master
Optics Jedi Master
Avatar
Superstool

Joined: January/03/2008
Location: Utah
Status: Offline
Points: 9515
Might want to consider this one REP.  It is a heavy beast, but it has a great mag range and has a BDC for the 168grain SMK bullet.  http://swfa.com/IOR-2-12x36-Spartan-Tactical-35mm-Rifle-Scope-P13106.aspx
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/14/2010 at 13:18
REP View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice
Avatar

Joined: July/01/2010
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 238
Originally posted by supertool73 supertool73 wrote:

Might want to consider this one REP.  It is a heavy beast, but it has a great mag range and has a BDC for the 168grain SMK bullet.  http://swfa.com/IOR-2-12x36-Spartan-Tactical-35mm-Rifle-Scope-P13106.aspx


Thanks that is a beast, You know IOR has been around for a long time. If memory serves Carl Zeiss was involved with its beginning when they made optics for para-scopes in submarines.
 
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/14/2010 at 16:40
JeffO View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper
Avatar

Joined: April/03/2010
Status: Offline
Points: 36
I've used the Rapid-Z 600 and the Boone and Crocket reticles, and run turrets, on Leupold and Zeiss and Swarovski scopes.
 
Here's my take.
 
Turrets are for the nerds among us.  I mean that in a good way.  If you like geekin' around with stuff; if you WANT to get to know the internals of your scope and how well it tracks and RTZ's and so on; if drop charts warm your blood; and if you want the maximum possible precision.... AND you are willing to put in the range time verifying that your scope tracks and returns to zero and tracks and returns to zero and tracks some more, and jigger around your drop charts based on the real-world characteristics of YOUR scope and load.... then viola, turrets are for you my friend!
 
If, on the other hand, you want to just zero your damn rifle, verify that it's hitting where it's supposed to out to XXX yards, and call it good then reticles are the bomb.  You don't move the moving parts of your scope; it's in "lockdown" mode and so requires MUCH less verification and continued monitoring.
 
I had a 3.5-10 Zeiss on my .338 with the RZ600 reticle and that thing was just sitting in my safe ready to kill something for a couple years- as in, I never touched a thing on it once I got it zeroed; I would just shoot it and hit stuff.  Not ever changing anything is very comforting.
 
On the other hand, I recently switched my Kimber .325 elk rifle from a B&C equipped 2.5-8 to a Swaro AV 3-10x42mm, on which I am spinning turrets.  The difference in approach was fairly dramatic.  With the B&C that sucka was locked down and ready to hit a 10" plate out to 450 yards.   Since switching to turrets I had to put ~200 rounds through it just to get back to feeling comfortable because now, you are changing things, big time.  You are moving that erector mechanism around with wanton abandon and it'd damn well better behave, or else you've created a disaster!  BUT the upside is, I now have it dialed and verified (numerous times) out to 600 yds; I extended the range of the rifle.  And the reticle is a simple crosshair which is kind of nice.
 
Anyway that's my take, having run both reticles and turrets pretty extensively in the last couple years.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/15/2010 at 19:24
REP View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice
Avatar

Joined: July/01/2010
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 238
Originally posted by JeffO JeffO wrote:

I've used the Rapid-Z 600 and the Boone and Crocket reticles, and run turrets, on Leupold and Zeiss and Swarovski scopes.

I understand where you are coming from; I am a nerd in most everything I do.
 
Here's my take.
 
Turrets are for the nerds among us.  I mean that in a good way.  If you like geekin' around with stuff; if you WANT to get to know the internals of your scope and how well it tracks and RTZ's and so on; if drop charts warm your blood; and if you want the maximum possible precision.... AND you are willing to put in the range time verifying that your scope tracks and returns to zero and tracks and returns to zero and tracks some more, and jigger around your drop charts based on the real-world characteristics of YOUR scope and load.... then viola, turrets are for you my friend!
 
If, on the other hand, you want to just zero your damn rifle, verify that it's hitting where it's supposed to out to XXX yards, and call it good then reticles are the bomb.  You don't move the moving parts of your scope; it's in "lockdown" mode and so requires MUCH less verification and continued monitoring.
 
I had a 3.5-10 Zeiss on my .338 with the RZ600 reticle and that thing was just sitting in my safe ready to kill something for a couple years- as in, I never touched a thing on it once I got it zeroed; I would just shoot it and hit stuff.  Not ever changing anything is very comforting.
 
On the other hand, I recently switched my Kimber .325 elk rifle from a B&C equipped 2.5-8 to a Swaro AV 3-10x42mm, on which I am spinning turrets.  The difference in approach was fairly dramatic.  With the B&C that sucka was locked down and ready to hit a 10" plate out to 450 yards.   Since switching to turrets I had to put ~200 rounds through it just to get back to feeling comfortable because now, you are changing things, big time.  You are moving that erector mechanism around with wanton abandon and it'd damn well better behave, or else you've created a disaster!  BUT the upside is, I now have it dialed and verified (numerous times) out to 600 yds; I extended the range of the rifle.  And the reticle is a simple crosshair which is kind of nice.
 
Anyway that's my take, having run both reticles and turrets pretty extensively in the last couple years.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/17/2010 at 16:10
Stevey View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper


Joined: June/24/2010
Status: Offline
Points: 38
SmileFixed 10X, mil dot , big easy to read knobs w hash marks with the ability to accurately repeat. Brand Leupold (I am considering 10X SS). I assume this is for careful planned shooting.
 
This combo would be an improvement over a 1 1/2 inch, 8X Unertl which has had an incredible record.
 Post Reply Post Reply
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Similar Threads: "What is your preference and why?"
Subject Author Forum Replies Last Post
$1000 plus binocular preference and power birdhunter Binoculars 19 1/30/2007 12:19:57 PM
preference between BDC and dial turrets dpdpete Rifle Scopes 4
After years, I figured out why bases get loose Clark Rings and bases 6
Why is swfa closing out sig k2000 ba_50 Laser Rangefinders 12
Which one would you choose and why? opticalillusion Rifle Scopes 5
why so many hunting scopes without AO? calixt0 Rifle Scopes 5
Auto Powder Disepnser Whos do you use and Why 338LAPUASLAP Reloading & Ballistics 18
why SFP and MRAD turrets? Flyby Target 22
Ranging Reticle on a cranking scope, Why? sakomato Rifle Scopes 8
Why no anti-fog coating on Swarovski? Blackhorn Rifle Scopes 8


This page was generated in 0.156 seconds.