New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Why 35mm, and do I need it?
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

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

Why 35mm, and do I need it?

 Post Reply Post Reply   Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options Page  1 2>
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: September/16/2006 at 12:51
Exoman View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper


Joined: September/16/2006
Status: Offline
Points: 37
I   really  need  a  good scope  for my  ar10.
Ever since I sold my  pentax lightseeker 3-9 x 40  I have been bouncing   around the woods  with  a  nikon prostaff  fixed  4x  that I robbed off my ruger 10/22 squirrel gun.....needless to say this is not cutting it.

I have been   eyeing the IOR 35mm line for some time and  have always  been under the impression that the  35mm tube leads to  better light transmission, larger fov,  and increased   adjustability.... then I started reading this forum.

I have been  reading thru  some of these 30mm versus  1" threads clearing  up some misconceptions  I had  about larger tube diameter. It is stated  over and over that   30mm tubes  do not draw in any more light than  1"  and  its  the  purpose of the objective diameter  and  exit pupil to do so.  This would  suggest  35mm   is not going to draw in any more light than 1" as well correct?

Is this  to  say that   the IOR 6x42 30mm  is going to be superior in low light  conditions to the  IOR  6x30 35mm?  Is  this to say that the 2.5-10x56 30mm   going to  draw more light and be better  for hunting at dusk than the 2-12x32 35mm?

I have  to ask  what  advantages is one getting out of the  35mm tube diameter  outside  of  increased adjustability if it  offers  no improvement on light  transmission? 

Does the larger  tube diameter  lend to a larger field of view?

Are the  larger tube  diameters  quicker  to line up?

It  would  seem that   trying to  line  up two 35mm  circles   would go much quicker than 2  1"circles. then  again I havent  ever  been able to look thru  a 35mm so I can  only  speculate over here.

What  I  am wanting  is  a versatile scope  with  a  ranged reticle (really digging the mp8) thats  going  to have  good low light characteristics. I hunt  deer, hog, and coyote ,  all of  which  seem  to be most  active  at  dusk. I need  something that  can  tune  down to low power for  brush busting  but  will still have  the ability to make a shot at 500 yards( i wouldnt take  questionable shots  at deer but coyotes are  another story) 

I  have  had  my heart  set on the  3-18X42 but  i  dont know if its the  best  choice  for my application.
I  have  hung out for  almost  a year  and  watched the ior 35mm prices  hoping theyd settle down but  it  seems  the prices  are only  going up

Over on snipers hide it would  appear IOR  is cooking up a ffp 3-18x 42 with no illumination however it  seems  the cost of the ffp is going to make  up for  the cost savings of no illumination. and put the  price the same  if not  higher than  the current 3-18x42. 

Part of me  wanted to settle on a  fixed 6x  but after much deliberation I feel a  6x  may  give  me  a little  bit of both but not enough of either(too slow for brush busting and  not enough ass to make a long shot).

Ultimately  tho I just dont know If  I am barking up the right tree here as far as what  I need in a scope versus  what  I want hanging on top of my  rifle.

anybody got a couple cents?





Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: September/16/2006 at 14:02
koshkin View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar
Dark Lord of Optics

Joined: June/15/2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 10961
See my comments below.

Originally posted by Exoman Exoman wrote:

I   really  need  a  good scope  for my  ar10.
Ever since I sold my  pentax lightseeker 3-9 x 40  I have been bouncing   around the woods  with  a  nikon prostaff  fixed  4x  that I robbed off my ruger 10/22 squirrel gun.....needless to say this is not cutting it.

I have been   eyeing the IOR 35mm line for some time and  have always  been under the impression that the  35mm tube leads to  better light transmission, larger fov,  and increased   adjustability.... then I started reading this forum.

I have been  reading thru  some of these 30mm versus  1" threads clearing  up some misconceptions  I had  about larger tube diameter. It is stated  over and over that   30mm tubes  do not draw in any more light than  1"  and  its  the  purpose of the objective diameter  and  exit pupil to do so.  This would  suggest  35mm   is not going to draw in any more light than 1" as well correct?

First of all, scopes do not draw light or gather it.  That is a huge misnomer that marketing companies introduced.  Whatever amount of light gets to the front objective lens is what comes out of the eyepiece sans some transmission losse alon gthe way and in the absence of vignetting (anything blocking the edges of the light path).  Scopes do not try to reach out there and grab light peacefully passing by.

Tube diameter alone does absolutely nothing to improve light transmission IF the glass quality is identical.  So, if IOR puts the same optical system into 1", 30mm and 35mm tube scope, you will have the same light transmission.  Now, I think that IOR optics in 35mm scopes are a little better than those in 30mm scopes.  However, both are very good and I think you would be happy with either.  The biggest advantage of 35mm tubes is in the magnification range.  More real estate inside that tube really allowed IOR to rework the mechanicals and the optical system.  For example, a 35mm 3-18x42 scope is shorter and lighter than 30mm 4-14x50 scope and is the same length as 30mm 2.5-10x42 while offering wider field of view at all magnifications.

Is this  to  say that   the IOR 6x42 30mm  is going to be superior in low light  conditions to the  IOR  6x30 35mm?  Is  this to say that the 2.5-10x56 30mm   going to  draw more light and be better  for hunting at dusk than the 2-12x32 35mm?

At magnifications where the smaller objective lens plays a role the 30mm scopes above will be better in low light.  This basically all about an exit pupil.  6x30 has a 5mm exit pupil, while 6x42 has a 7mm exit pupil  If your eye can dilate enough to take advantage of the extra exit pupil, you'll feel the difference (probably if you are under 50 years old or so).  Between the variables, above 5x magnification you'll feel the difference.  Below 5x they'll be pretty similar.

I have  to ask  what  advantages is one getting out of the  35mm tube diameter  outside  of  increased adjustability if it  offers  no improvement on light  transmission? 

See above.

Does the larger  tube diameter  lend to a larger field of view?

Not necessarily, but it does with IOR design.

Are the  larger tube  diameters  quicker  to line up?

No difference.

It  would  seem that   trying to  line  up two 35mm  circles   would go much quicker than 2  1"circles. then  again I havent  ever  been able to look thru  a 35mm so I can  only  speculate over here.

Scopes do not work that way.  You are not trying to line up two crcles here.  You are looking at a single sight plane image.

What  I  am wanting  is  a versatile scope  with  a  ranged reticle (really digging the mp8) thats  going  to have  good low light characteristics. I hunt  deer, hog, and coyote ,  all of  which  seem  to be most  active  at  dusk. I need  something that  can  tune  down to low power for  brush busting  but  will still have  the ability to make a shot at 500 yards( i wouldnt take  questionable shots  at deer but coyotes are  another story) 

There are a lot of scopes that would work well here. 2-12x32 or 3-18x42 would work very nicely.  I think that a 2-12x32 is the best deal in IOR's 35mm line-up.  This all depends on how much money you are willing to spend.  If you want to save a few bucks, 30mm 2.5-10x42 is an excellent choice for a fair bit less money.

I  have  had  my heart  set on the  3-18X42 but  i  dont know if its the  best  choice  for my application.
I  have  hung out for  almost  a year  and  watched the ior 35mm prices  hoping theyd settle down but  it  seems  the prices  are only  going up

Over on snipers hide it would  appear IOR  is cooking up a ffp 3-18x 42 with no illumination however it  seems  the cost of the ffp is going to make  up for  the cost savings of no illumination. and put the  price the same  if not  higher than  the current 3-18x42. 

Part of me  wanted to settle on a  fixed 6x  but after much deliberation I feel a  6x  may  give  me  a little  bit of both but not enough of either(too slow for brush busting and  not enough ass to make a long shot).

Ultimately  tho I just dont know If  I am barking up the right tree here as far as what  I need in a scope versus  what  I want hanging on top of my  rifle.

anybody got a couple cents?





Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: September/16/2006 at 16:49
cheaptrick View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar

Joined: September/27/2004
Location: South Carolina
Status: Offline
Points: 20469

Welcome Exoman to The OT!!

 

As an aside, who's making rings for the 35mm tubes these days besides IOR??

I thought I had heard of someone else, but not sure.

 

Good response, koshkin.

I colored font, no less....  

(Exoman, he must really like you to do that!!)

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: September/16/2006 at 17:10
ceylonc View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman


Joined: September/13/2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 514

I was told by Steve @ IOR that the 35mm tube is also stronger than previous models.  I believe they did so to make the scope attractive to shooters of .50 caliber rifles, etc.

 

With regard to 35mm rings, seems like I read somewhere that TPS and Badger makes them along with IOR.  Not 100% positive about this.  Anybody else know for sure???

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: September/16/2006 at 22:40
Trinidad View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master
Avatar

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

With IOR 35's my choice would be the 2-12x32 with the free IOR rings included.

The prices kind of suck right now for the IOR 35's in my opinion. Cheap USO

makes some nice 35mm rings with horizontal travel for alighment corrections.

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: September/16/2006 at 22:56
koshkin View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar
Dark Lord of Optics

Joined: June/15/2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 10961
I have TPS 35 mm rings and I am happy with them.

ILya
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: September/17/2006 at 02:16
Trinidad View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master
Avatar

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

Hello Koshkin

 

Your IOR did not come with the free tactical rings? Or did you not like The IOR rings?

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: September/17/2006 at 20:59
Exoman View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper


Joined: September/16/2006
Status: Offline
Points: 37
Originally posted by cheaptrick cheaptrick wrote:

Welcome Exoman to The OT!!

 

As an aside, who's making rings for the 35mm tubes these days besides IOR??

I thought I had heard of someone else, but not sure.

 

Good response, koshkin.

I colored font, no less....  

(Exoman, he must really like you to do that!!)



thanks for the  warm  welcome, and thanks for the  reply  Koshkin.  blue is my  favorite color
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: September/17/2006 at 21:59
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:

Hello Koshkin

 

Your IOR did not come with the free tactical rings? Or did you not like The IOR rings?



Actuoally, my IOR came with TPS rings.  Not entirely sure why, but they work well so I did not ask.

ILya
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: September/17/2006 at 22:05
Urimaginaryfrnd View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar
Resident Redneck

Joined: June/20/2005
Location: Iowa
Status: Offline
Points: 13868
That IOR fixed 6x42 would probably work fine but spend more if you have it to spend.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: September/18/2006 at 03:06
xtreme_jeremy View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper
Avatar

Joined: September/03/2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 22

do you guys know if IOR is going to make the 3-18X42 35mm tube scope in FFP?

It just seems like it would be so much easyer shooting with a ffp rather then checking your power before you used your retical for holds, ranging or sighting it in.

 

I just found out for sure that I need a new scope for my rifle. for months now I have been trying to get my rifle to group good and the best I can do is 3/4 an inch

 

I thought it might be the ammo I was shooting but I thought it might be my scope so today I put my super sniper 16x scope back on and sighted it in well my first group with the super sniper back on the rifle and all three bullet holes made one big hole that was less then 3/8ths an inch. this is just shooting the Fedral cheap hunting ammo $12.99 a box!

 

So now I know its time for me to get a new scope and man do I feel better there for awhile I was starting to think that I was not going to be a good shooter but now I feel much better about my skills.

I know the super sniper is not going to do so well for deer and elk hunting and 16x does not give you much field of view at 50 yards so I am thinking about the IOR but really want a FFP retical.

 

let me know what scopes you would reccomend that are similar to this one. 

 

Jeremy

 

       

 

 

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: September/18/2006 at 07:50
Exoman View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper


Joined: September/16/2006
Status: Offline
Points: 37
so is this the only  variable  FFP that  IOR offers?

http://www.swfa.com/pc-7137-292-ior-25-10x42-tactical-30mm-r ifle-scope.aspx

 I know  they  are talking about making  a 3-18X42 ffp on snipershide  but it sounds like that  will be  december.

not  to jack my own thread  but I havent  decided  whether  I need ffp or not.  it does seem like  anything thats  far enough  away to require ranging,  youd   certainly  want to put it  at max magnification.  I also  dont know    how  smudgey an Mp8 is gong to get on ffp  at the  lowest  magnification.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: September/18/2006 at 12:27
koshkin View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar
Dark Lord of Optics

Joined: June/15/2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 10961
If you plan to do a lot of ranging with the reticle, ffp is nice to have, but not necessary.  With SFP scopes, though it is a good idea to confirm the reticle size at a particular power.  If it says it is 10x, it does not necessarily mean it is.  Placing a yardstick or a mildot target at a known distance can help calibrate reticle size at different powers.  If I plan to use the reticle for ranging and/or holdover I usually put a mildot target at 100 yards and calibrate the scope at two or three different magnifications depending on the scope.

My experience with FFP reticles has been mixed.  Some are excellent, but some are either barely noticeable at low power or obscure too much of the target at high power.  If it does not obscure too much at high power, then you can't easily use for ranging at lower powers because it is too fine.

However, a lot of people who know more about this then I do like them, so take my comments with a grain of salt.

ILya
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: September/18/2006 at 13:31
Exoman View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper


Joined: September/16/2006
Status: Offline
Points: 37
Originally posted by koshkin koshkin wrote:

If you plan to do a lot of ranging with the reticle, ffp is nice to have, but not necessary.  With SFP scopes, though it is a good idea to confirm the reticle size at a particular power.  If it says it is 10x, it does not necessarily mean it is.  Placing a yardstick or a mildot target at a known distance can help calibrate reticle size at different powers.  If I plan to use the reticle for ranging and/or holdover I usually put a mildot target at 100 yards and calibrate the scope at two or three different magnifications depending on the scope.

My experience with FFP reticles has been mixed.  Some are excellent, but some are either barely noticeable at low power or obscure too much of the target at high power.  If it does not obscure too much at high power, then you can't easily use for ranging at lower powers because it is too fine.

However, a lot of people who know more about this then I do like them, so take my comments with a grain of salt.

ILya

Im going to be  hunting. and  the  nature  of the land  I am  on  is  such taht  I can see something  from hill to hill  300-400 yards  away or  I could  have  a hog  bust out 10 yards  in front of me.
is the difference in  size of the sfp reticle  consistantly   different?

For instance if I get the 3-18 x42 sfp.  any problem with using  a rangefinder to  note  what  yardage  each  hash mark on the mp 8  delivers  bullseye  at  3x and  at 18x power  and  just remembering the difference  dependant  on  whether  I am at minumum or maximum power?
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: September/18/2006 at 13:34
TPS_Phil View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman
Avatar

Joined: September/14/2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 339

IOR is using TPS 35mm Rings, but those are the only TPS Rings at this time.

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: September/18/2006 at 13:51
xtreme_jeremy View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper
Avatar

Joined: September/03/2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 22

well I just gave IOR a call and they said that they are not going to be making this scope in FFP Becasue the retical would not work well becasue the huge power difference from 3x to 18x they said that if you were shooting game at 600 yards the dot would cover the whole head of the animal and on 3x you would not be able to see the dot.

 

thats about all I know for now.

 

I like the idea of being able to range on any power but at the same time if my cross hair is so big at long range its not worth it.

 

I am sure there is some way to get the best of both worlds. I think I have figgered out how but want to talk to a few scope companys before I give my idea away.

 

anyone that works for a scope manufacturer and is interested in solving this problum pleas contact me!       

 

Jeremy

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: September/18/2006 at 14:02
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 Exoman Exoman wrote:

Originally posted by koshkin koshkin wrote:

If you plan to do a lot of ranging with the reticle, ffp is nice to have, but not necessary.  With SFP scopes, though it is a good idea to confirm the reticle size at a particular power.  If it says it is 10x, it does not necessarily mean it is.  Placing a yardstick or a mildot target at a known distance can help calibrate reticle size at different powers.  If I plan to use the reticle for ranging and/or holdover I usually put a mildot target at 100 yards and calibrate the scope at two or three different magnifications depending on the scope.

My experience with FFP reticles has been mixed.  Some are excellent, but some are either barely noticeable at low power or obscure too much of the target at high power.  If it does not obscure too much at high power, then you can't easily use for ranging at lower powers because it is too fine.

However, a lot of people who know more about this then I do like them, so take my comments with a grain of salt.

ILya

Im going to be  hunting. and  the  nature  of the land  I am  on  is  such taht  I can see something  from hill to hill  300-400 yards  away or  I could  have  a hog  bust out 10 yards  in front of me.
is the difference in  size of the sfp reticle  consistantly   different?

For instance if I get the 3-18 x42 sfp.  any problem with using  a rangefinder to  note  what  yardage  each  hash mark on the mp 8  delivers  bullseye  at  3x and  at 18x power  and  just remembering the difference  dependant  on  whether  I am at minumum or maximum power?


That would work just fine.  You just have to be always aware of what magnification you are on.

ILya
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: September/18/2006 at 15:11
cheaptrick View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar

Joined: September/27/2004
Location: South Carolina
Status: Offline
Points: 20469

I typically like a FFP reticle for most of my shooting.

Being able to "mill" a target at any and all power ranges is just plain good.

 

THAT SAID....For any and every hunting scenario that "I have been in", a RFP reticle will be more practical, IMO.

 

I like what koshkin said about "lossing the reticle" of a FFP reticle in lowlight situations and at higher magnifacations.

That's the way I see it too. (No pun intended.)   

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: September/18/2006 at 16:45
Exoman View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper


Joined: September/16/2006
Status: Offline
Points: 37
Originally posted by cheaptrick cheaptrick wrote:

I typically like a FFP reticle for most of my shooting.

Being able to "mill" a target at any and all power ranges is just plain good.

 

THAT SAID....For any and every hunting scenario that "I have been in", a RFP reticle will be more practical, IMO.

 

I like what koshkin said about "lossing the reticle" of a FFP reticle in lowlight situations and at higher magnifacations.

That's the way I see it too. (No pun intended.)   



so  are you  loosing the  reticle itself at high magnification or  loosing the target  because he  reticle has   become too large and is  covering  it up?
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: September/18/2006 at 16:51
cheaptrick View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar

Joined: September/27/2004
Location: South Carolina
Status: Offline
Points: 20469

As you crank up the power at low light, the reticle becomes"smaller"

I realize that the reticle doesn't actually get smaller, but said that to convey my point.

 

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: September/18/2006 at 18:16
Exoman View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper


Joined: September/16/2006
Status: Offline
Points: 37
Originally posted by cheaptrick cheaptrick wrote:

As you crank up the power at low light, the reticle becomes"smaller"

I realize that the reticle doesn't actually get smaller, but said that to convey my point.

 



so illumination is probably  a plus on an ffp  correct?

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: September/18/2006 at 18:23
cheaptrick View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar

Joined: September/27/2004
Location: South Carolina
Status: Offline
Points: 20469

Originally posted by Exoman Exoman wrote:


so illumination is probably  a plus on an ffp  correct?

 

Yes, I would say so.

A lit reticle on a FFP, like I had on a S&B w/ a L7 reticle, would be optimal.

 

Again, the FFP lit reticle scope would be more of a "Tactical" scope, in my opinion.

A RFP scope, with a duplex reticle would be enough scope during normal US hunting hours.

 

The above is just one guys opinion.... 

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: September/21/2006 at 22:35
Exoman View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper


Joined: September/16/2006
Status: Offline
Points: 37
Originally posted by xtreme_jeremy xtreme_jeremy wrote:

well I just gave IOR a call and they said that they are not going to be making this scope in FFP Becasue the retical would not work well becasue the huge power difference from 3x to 18x they said that if you were shooting game at 600 yards the dot would cover the whole head of the animal and on 3x you would not be able to see the dot.

 

thats about all I know for now.

 

I like the idea of being able to range on any power but at the same time if my cross hair is so big at long range its not worth it.

 

I am sure there is some way to get the best of both worlds. I think I have figgered out how but want to talk to a few scope companys before I give my idea away.

 

anyone that works for a scope manufacturer and is interested in solving this problum pleas contact me!       

 

Jeremy



I wonder when they  are going to  tell  the liberty optics guy 

  http://www.snipershide.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic; f=19;t=004544;p=7

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: September/22/2006 at 00:14
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 Exoman Exoman wrote:

Originally posted by xtreme_jeremy xtreme_jeremy wrote:

well I just gave IOR a call and they said that they are not going to be making this scope in FFP Becasue the retical would not work well becasue the huge power difference from 3x to 18x they said that if you were shooting game at 600 yards the dot would cover the whole head of the animal and on 3x you would not be able to see the dot.

 

thats about all I know for now.

 

I like the idea of being able to range on any power but at the same time if my cross hair is so big at long range its not worth it.

 

I am sure there is some way to get the best of both worlds. I think I have figgered out how but want to talk to a few scope companys before I give my idea away.

 

anyone that works for a scope manufacturer and is interested in solving this problum pleas contact me!       

 

Jeremy



I wonder when they  are going to  tell  the liberty optics guy 

  http://www.snipershide.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic; f=19;t=004544;p=7



If memory serves me right they have to redesign the reticle for Scott's group buy.

ILya
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: September/30/2006 at 20:51
Exoman View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper


Joined: September/16/2006
Status: Offline
Points: 37
Originally posted by koshkin koshkin wrote:

Originally posted by Exoman Exoman wrote:

Originally posted by xtreme_jeremy xtreme_jeremy wrote:

well I just gave IOR a call and they said that they are not going to be making this scope in FFP Becasue the retical would not work well becasue the huge power difference from 3x to 18x they said that if you were shooting game at 600 yards the dot would cover the whole head of the animal and on 3x you would not be able to see the dot.

 

thats about all I know for now.

 

I like the idea of being able to range on any power but at the same time if my cross hair is so big at long range its not worth it.

 

I am sure there is some way to get the best of both worlds. I think I have figgered out how but want to talk to a few scope companys before I give my idea away.

 

anyone that works for a scope manufacturer and is interested in solving this problum pleas contact me!       

 

Jeremy



I wonder when they  are going to  tell  the liberty optics guy 

  http://www.snipershide.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic; f=19;t=004544;p=7



If memory serves me right they have to redesign the reticle for Scott's group buy.

ILya



so there  will be  a  snipers  hide ffp 3-18 x 42 35mm scope  it just wont  be an mp8 reticle?
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  1 2>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Similar Threads: "Why 35mm, and do I need it?"
Subject Author Forum Replies Last Post
Spotting scope: why you need it? RDM17353 Spotting Scopes 16
Kokopelli 35mm accurizing kit supertool73 Hunting and Shooting Gear For Sale 0
Need help. Why is this happening? JimFromTN Reloading & Ballistics 24
need a new scope, need input jjrgr21 Rifle Scopes 23
? on size of 35mm rings savage2506 Rings and bases 5
35mm Scope mount for 11mm dovetail - help tabeast Rings and bases 0
Leupold 3.5-25x56 35mm (Mark 7 ?) Chris Farris Tactical Scopes 11
Extra High rings for 35mm tubes okc4956 Tactical Scopes 7
35mm scope tube: windage adjustable rings? TexasTransplant Rifle Scopes 2
IOR 1.5-8x26 Tactical 35mm Rifle nightowl Tactical Scopes 2


This page was generated in 0.391 seconds.