Randomprojectile78
-
Posts
10 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Forums
Profiles
Events
Store
Posts posted by Randomprojectile78
-
-
15 hours ago, Southpaw said:
You know with a FFP reticle subtensions are accurate at all magnifications, right? Either way, out to around 300 yards you don't need any BDC anyway.
I wouldn't want a fixed 10x scope. Would be too slow, too small a field of view.
ETA, I'm too slow, see Tony beat me on both points
SP,
Good call. I should have said it's SFC where BDC reticles can be problematic. I'm aware, but since I have both SFP and FFP I've always had the habit of using both only on min and max magnification because I didn't want to forget which I was using at the time. Good points about a 10X when it's too close. I tried to lay it out a bit better to my reply to Tony, (comparing a 1-4 to a 4 fixed with the RDS for close in shots or a 1-10 with a 10 fixed with the RDS for close in shots-like an elcan)
-
15 hours ago, TonytheTiger said:
That's exactly the opposite of how this works.
Have you looked through many 10x scopes? The FOV and eyebox typically suck. They would be worthless for say a 60yd plate rack.
At a major this year they had little black clays, about 2" at maybe ten yards. Because of the lighting and background they were almost invisible at 1x. 2x was just right. 10x or a red dot would've been useless. That's just one of many times where I absolutely needed a little magnification but not very much.
Another stage at that same match had steel at 200, 300, 400 and 500 and 6x was almost too much because it was hard to transition from one target to the next because of a combination of terrain, target placement and the limited FOV at 6x. 4x would've been ideal. 10x would've been a handicap.
One thing I've learned from some really good shooters is to use as little magnification as you can get away with. If you have lots of steel at intermediate ranges, 50-150 yards, you'll almost always be faster on the clock with 1-3x rather than 6x or more. All of my testing and practice tells me I'd rather have a really good 1-4x than only a dot and a mediocre 10x.
Tony, I agree. But, I'm comparing variable FOV and eye box to fixed FOV and eyebox at the same magnification. Even if the variable is a 1-3, my assumption is (and I get that this may be wrong) that most people switch back an forth between min and max, like an ELCAN. So the question in is instead of switching between min and max on one optic, what about a scope with the max magnification (and FOV, eyebox, eye relief, ETC) and a RDS for the equivalent 1X shots? I've seen shooters with variables and RDS. I was wondering about eliminating the weight, cost, complexity, ETC of the variable in those situations.
-
500 max range.
I have a PA 1-6 now and like it (currently no RDS). It's FFP and ACSS so I use it either at 1 or 6 to ensure the reticle is accurate. The question arises out of all the talk about 1-10 LPVOs (like the razor hd). I don't see the need for more magnification, but acknowledge farther shots are easier with higher magnification assuming you can get stable. When thinking about more magnification, especially higher quality stuff, the optics get expensive and heavy. Got me thinking about essentially an ACOG that is 10X, but instead I'd just make one myself by using a 10X scope with a piggyback RDS or offset.
-
Title: Anyone ever tried a higher mag fixed scope with a tube mounted or offset RDS?
Considering:
cost / total weight / glass quality / speed.
Since most close-in shots either are or can be easily taken with a RDS (say offset for the discussion), and variable scopes often stay on max magnification, is there a possible advantage to a good fixed scope with offset RDS? Thinking about this since a lot of cost in variables is the adjustability and most of the cost on fixed scopes is glass. For the sake of the discussion, imagine the SWFA 10x42 (good glass, well built, 18 oz, at $270) with a RMR at 45* offset. Could this be a viable alternative to a 1-10 LPVO, either alone, or even compared to those that run offsets with them as well? Thoughts?
Note: I posted this here because I saw the LPVO sticky up top. If there is a better place to post please let me know.
-
On 8/10/2020 at 9:00 AM, belus said:
I have the 20" Faxon gunner profile barrel which is slightly heavier towards the chamber than the pencil, iirc.
Came here to say this
-
On 10/16/2021 at 1:12 AM, K-Tex said:
Good data. Thanks!
-
Hopefully they fix it.
I had a X-ring barrel on a ruger receiver. Issues until I changed out the extractor to a VQ exact edge extractor. Cheers!
-
I shot a neighbors after he switched from a RMR to a PA red dot (don't recall which, T1 form factor). Bottom line, he went back to the RMR as it was a sleeker vibe overall. It was purely subjective, but the RMR "seemed" sleeker, faster, and less chunky. I doubt it actually was, but we both commented on the phycological sensation.
-
I'm in Huntsville. There are two indoor ranges that aren't bad (Larrys and Bullet & Barrel) and an outdoor range (Hobbs Island) I've been to once (new to the town).
-
New to the site. Just saying hey.
-
Duly noted. Thanks
Anyone ever tried a higher mag fixed scope with a tube mounted or offset RDS?
in Rifle - Technical
Posted
Southpaw, Good comments. Thanks!