00bullitt

Hey Chris.....Welcome I can write a book on low power riflescopes about as much as I can comps. I'll start by saying I run the Swarovski Z6i 1-6(circle dot) and it is an unbelievable advantage for me. It was worth every penny. But in the 1-4 range and to fit within your budget....I would look really hard at the Meopta or Trijicon TR24 and probably plan on dropping $200 on a good LaRue mount too. The Meopta does not have zeroing turrets but the Trijicon does and its a very nice feature that I prefer. My Z6 has zeroing knobs just not as big as I would like them. In the Trijicon I prefer the crosshairs with the amber dot. The green dot washes badly in bright sunlight. Several folks prefer the red triangle reticle. I'm a dot kinda guy. The triangle just does not seem natural to my eye. But YMMV....thats gonna be a decision for you to make. Both are daytime visible. But neither have holdover style stadia reticles. But they work well for 3 gun out to 400 with ease dependant on your zero distance. The Meopta is battery powered but has an etched reticle that is still visible if battery goes dead. The Trijicon is illuminated by fiber optic and tritium and has an adjustable sunshade to filter the amount of light the FO absorbs. I've had the S&B Short Dot and USO. My big complaint about both of those was that the reticle was in the front/first focal plane. I hate that feature in a low power scope and find it to be detrimental to my needs. The Short Dot was very bright in daylight and also worked very well for close targets due to the dot. The USO reticle was no where near visible in daylight and the front focal plane caused the reticle to be too small on 1x and too large on 4x. The power ring also had a weird almost 360 degree throw on it to go from 1x to 4x. But the glass was phenomenal. Every bit as good as my Z6. One of my favorite 3 gun scopes is the Leupold CQT. I started using that scope and still use it for matches and tactical use. I really like it. Downside is the illumination is not daytime visible. But at 1-3 it is a great scope with a large field of view for such a small objective. I have made shots out to 350 yards with ease using my 200 yd zero. One of the most important factors to look for is a true 1x. I tried the Leupold 1.5-5x and the difraction and offset on the 1.5 was just too distracting for close targets for me. But there are plenty of national champs who use it and use it well. I really did like the 5x on it. Also look at the latest generation Burris Tactical 1-4. I've heard alot of recent reports of big improvements with it. Hope this helps start to get some answers to your post. ETA: Chuck Anderson just picked up one of the new IOR Pitbull 1 x 4 scopes. Looks pretty cool. I am interested to see the reports come out on it.

I can't tell you how many times I watch that video. He is blazing. I was at the range the day he was filming that. Dave just flat amazes me at the stuff he is capable of.

Just got back from the doc with the wife.....dilation has started......shes at 2cm. 8 more to go. They think shes gonna be right on track with estimated delivery of the 14th.

I run bullets back in rifle mags on the belt. No real definitive answer to which is best as it seems to be personal preference. I grab and insert my rifle mags differently than my pistol mags. Bullets back works for me the best. In my plate carrier rig....I also run my mags up instead of down. It works much better for me. Everyone looks at my vest and says....hey...you know you've got your mags in those pouches wrong? Then I always have to explain and show my technique to them and I always see the light bulb brighten. It boils down to what technique works best for you and your given skillset.

I'm just a little curious as to the intent of the poll? Is it about which one is best or which one is most widely used. Because the two are far different from each other. It seems to me as the poll is about which one is most widely used. Which still does not tell me which one is the best. The closest thing I have seen to date is Pat Kelley's article in Front Sight. But still to me is not a die hard answer of the best. But very good intentions on collecting scientific data. Best can very much involve subjective opinion and most of the time does. I test comps on my competition rifles to get comparisons. That is my constant. It doesn't always mean the same comp will work the same way every time on someone elses rifle and load. There are variables that can easily change results. If it were about which one was best......every voter would have to have knowledge of all other comps available on the market. I don't think that is the case with this poll. I personally took interest in muzzle brake design when I started shooting 3 gun a few years ago and since have purchased or acquired just about every brake available. And also started making some of my own design. I have yet to shoot anything better than an SJC Titan as far as a comp that shoots flat no matter how fast or how many times you pull the trigger and it reduces recoil to nothing.(and yes I know the 223 has little to no recoil). But nothing is better than a little something in competition(in terms of recoil anyway). The biggest negative is the bark it has. It is the most excruciating bark I have heard from a comp in 223. But I'm willing to accept that since the other benefits seem to outweigh the volume. The Titan in 308 is even far more impressive. I will not hide the fact that the Titan is the best comp for me and I therefore tend to recommend it to anyone that asks. But I feel good knowing I have tested it against pretty much every other comp on the market to back up my recommendation.

I'm with Peter on this one. I'd run the midlength port. I've seen some 16" rifle length ports,but very few that work reliably. I am certain the midlength will still give a smooth enough impulse and be totally reliable in that configuration. I run a 17" rifle length and have had no issues with it. And then....there is also the intermediate port position that Noveske started. I don't know a whole lot about it but its longer than midlength and shorter than rifle. Could be a viable compromise and worth more investigation.

Thanks guys.....somewhere along the line(based on something someone else had told me) I had come to believe that SS could not be hard chromed. Which sucks because there were a many of times I wanted hard chrome over stainless. Good to know now.

AWESOME...Congrats!!!! My first baby girl is due here any day. I am excited and terrified all at the same time. I've got another shooter buddy(Rob Romero) who is due with their first on Christmans Eve too. It has definitely been a kidfest as of late on Enos.

I've lost a number of friends over there. It hurts every time I hear news of this sort. I really hate this war.

Huh, that's funny I have had quite a few M&P slides hard chromed, all turned out great and are working well. I do not do the hard chrome myself, but I have several shops I have worked with over the years and only one had a problem doing M&P slides but in his defense he was a farily new guy and it wasn't chrome he was trying to get to stick. But yes stainless is just that stain less not stain proof, I no longer offer the blasted look as I didn't feel good about a gun leaving my shop that required more care than when it got here. That and I didn't ant my name associated with some rusty a$$ guns I thought that was funny as well as I have always seen it on Dan's website for M&P's. Thanks for chiming in Dan. Well damn.....I wish I would have known this long ago......somehwere I had come to believe it would not work. Many times I would have preferred a hard chrome finish on stainless. Sorry for the misinformation. Thanks for setting me straight.

Rifles that recoil up and to the right tend to do so based on the stance of the shooter. What part of physics in a bullet exiting the barrel causes recoil to only impart itself up and to the right? Notice left hand shooters that shoot a bladed stance tend to see recoil up and to the left. I never see recoil up and to the right and I relate alot of that to my stance. Which is a squared up isosceles stance with a forward progressively aggressive posture and by placing the stock more inboard to rest near the clavicle to control recoil and rapid fire muzzle control. Recoil tends to follow the path of least resistance in a bladed stance when the rifle is placed into the pocket of the shoulder and the stance is bladed and off center. Basically like weaver but with a rifle. My stance is very universal across all platforms and I do not see the rise up and to the right. Its very neutral and to the rear. So I do not like brakes with off center holes on top. I'm not the brightest bulb in the house so its not always easy to understand things unless I go out and get actual real world hands on experience alot of the times. If someone can debunk my theory.....I would like to learn more about recoil. Recoil is a weird beast,it imparts a force that causes change and it tends to be different for everyone.

This came up in the M&P forum and Dan Burwell had mentioned that he had several stainless M&P slides hard chromed. I was not aware hard chrome would bond to stainless. Is it just as durable as applying to carbon steel?

I don't recall stainless ever being able to have hard chrome applied......new one to me.

CPWSA has them and I believe in stock as well.

You cannot hard chrome stainless. I blasted the slide of one of my earlier slides and it looked great......but it started showing dark stained areas. Not really rust but darker areas that really showed up. I though it might have been from something that got imbedded from my blast media but now that Mike is saying the same.....I'm thinking its something in the alloy or a by product of the melonite.

I edited the original post to show Saturday.

I had one and liked it.....its what gave me the idea to drill the hole in the Miculek brake. I tried the first hole in the Miculek brake at an angle and off to the right side to counter torgue and it actually worsened the Miculek so I tapped it and installed a set screw and drilled it in the center and it worked great. I think the larger design of the first port of the Miculek brake helps balance it a little differently than the MSTN/PRi brake. But the MSTN brake works quite well but I would still choose something else. I do like its efficiency in a short design.

Thanks for the warm and accepting welcome. It was an honor to be asked to join the team.

I prefer the .105 if anyone wants a .090

The "errornet" as Pat Rogers likes to call it. True in alot of ways. Nothing wrong at all being partial to NF.....its hard not to be considering the quality of product they make.

Awesome!!! I've been hoping a local club would start hosting some shotgun only matches. I hope to be able to attend.

Well Bobby......you seem very well in the know of what is misinformation and what is not......maybe you should correct it rather than set such a negative tone. The internet is for discussion. I believe discussion is taking place.

I like to use Football gear. Neo sleeves for the elbows and knees. Chack out yor local sporting goods store and go to the football section. Under Armor and Nike both have good stuff. I think I spent $30 for knee and elbow sleeves.

They must have dropped the older logos. Just show the new ones in stock now... http://www.uspsa.org/cgi-bin/cart/page.cgi?category=decals I always thought I license plate done up in DVC would be cool. Wish USPSA would consider it. I actually had a custom stainless steel tag frame made that says DVC on the top and Diligentia,Vis,Celeritas on the bottom portion. It was like $35 shipped or something. I also got a little crazy and tatooed it on my back.....see avatar.

Charles.....in reference to screw on cans and QD style cans......I can't really offer any definitive information as to the truth of sound reduction between the two types. I have a Johns Guns can that threads on. I have a couple AAC cans and a Surefire K model. The Johns Gun can is much louder than the others I have(and a buttload heavier). I prefer my AAC cans over anything I have used. They are the quietest and have been the most durable. The Surefire has an awesome mounting system and their mounts are top quality. I really like the option of having their muzzle brake as a mount for a suppressor. Something AAC has just released but not as effective as the Surfire IMO. I keep the Surefire Brake on my 18" SPR configured rifle. It works great on that configuration. The Surefire brake did a great job of taming the 10.5 when I mounted it. Extremely easy to control in select fire mode(full auto). But....it was a freaking fire breather once the unburned powder ignited out the end of the barrel. With the suppressor attached and on FA.....fire would pour out of the ejection port after about a 6 or 7 round burst as the back pressure blew it out. It was freaky. Another thing I really like about the Surefire brake as a mount is that it acts as a blast baffle for the gun and it will prolong the life of the inconel baffle. And yes.....different length barrels react differently with certain comps. I tested the Surefire against my SJC Titan that I currently run on my 18" rifle gas gun to see if I thought it would be a more viable option for my competition rifle but the performance of the SJC was far above the Surefire so I relegated the Surefire brake to my SPR rifle. I have not found a brake to date that is as effective as the SJC Titan. I continuosly waste time trying to make one that is better but have not been able. I have a drawer full of comps and designs I have made that look good in theory but just flat do not perform like the Titan. The Titan is still relatively new and not marketed very well. I expect if it were to ever be marketed better than just word of mouth that it would quickly be known as the number one comp on the market......and most definitely the loudest.