Jump to content
Brian Enos's Forums... Maku mozo!

1-8x Scopes?


bigkyle72

Recommended Posts

Hey High Power Jack DID guess Burris! It is even on this very same page!

With that said, I could never shoot a scope that had 8X,s. I would pass out in terror at seeing a target so large and so close. How did THAT sneak up on me? would be my last thought as I fainted

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 131
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Do you guys know that Kurt (arguably one of, if not the best USA Iron sight shooters) wears prescription shooting glasses?

I do too, but I Kurt has been much more loyal to the Iron's only than I.

Not being able to see the the targets with the naked eye (or with Rx eye-wear) is THE problem! And one the too many MD's don't care to address.

This poor thread is off the rails...sorry, but Trapr and Kurt and others have recommended 4 MOA targets no matter the distance and those targets

should be set to show up in nearly any lighting conditions expected during the match.

If that recommendation were followed...the clamor for 6 and 8 power scopes would not be a clamor, but a "hmm I was thinking of upgrading for no particular reason."

When I could see, I shot Irons, then a dot, then a 1-4X now a 1-6X. I have corrective glasses, I can see the targets and I can see the sights, but not both with my Varilux glasses. SO for shooting I have a single prescription, it allows me to see the front sight clearly on my pistols, I am good enough to see any pistol or shotgun range target while wearing them. Unfortunately they don't work all that well for rifle as even if I can see the sights, I can't see the distance to the targets so I use a scope and adjust the the scope to cancel the correction and see the reticle and the target clearly. It sucks to get old, but it beats the alternatives!

I may go to an 8x next time as I would like to shoot at smaller targets at greater range just because and not necessarily in a match.

Regardless of Optic or Iron, I wholeheartedly support the 4MOA movement. Unless we are shooting a sniper match, finding the targets in the background clutter should not be part of the match. First shooter on the first squad on a stage where the targets are in the brush really sucks, as the match progresses the targets appear in cleared pathways. We should avoid this type of set-up. And we should arguably allow any Iron or Non-Magnified shooter to go first after targets are painted.

OK, Drift off, we now return you to your regularly scheduled thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey High Power Jack DID guess Burris! It is even on this very same page!

With that said, I could never shoot a scope that had 8X,s. I would pass out in terror at seeing a target so large and so close. How did THAT sneak up on me? would be my last thought as I fainted

I know what Jack posted..."plausible deniability" on what company or maybe I should lie?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I am confused, what does throwing two rounds down range to avoid a FTE have to do with 1-8X optics?

Limit to 6X? so we now need to have optics limited? I mean really? Anything over 1X is a waste anyway, but that is coming from a die hard Iron sight shooter.....No, real Iron sights! :lol:

Simple: when you can not see the target covered with lead out in the shade at 400+ yards, you shoot 2 rounds at it to avoid a failure to engage penalty.

When you see even good shooters doing this it makes me think "well, that was pointless."

Maybe limiting to 6x is a dumb idea, just throwing it out there. Not the 3gun hero over here or anything.

Edited by NoKimberDave
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Match directors that care about the shooters experience will move heaven and earth to make the targets visible to the naked eye. Not for the handful of limited lunatics, for the scope tac masses. When all the targets are visable the stage brief goes so much faster, and the challenge becomes hitting the targets quickly, not finding them. If a scope is required to find the target, be it 3.5 power or 8 power, how was the RO able to call the hits without glass? And if the RO is on glass to find the targets, who is watching the shooter? I look forward to awesome new 1-? Scopes, people should use the gear they enjoy, but it should not be a requirement to change gear just to find the targets when your turn comes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Match directors that care about the shooters experience will move heaven and earth to make the targets visible to the naked eye. Not for the handful of limited lunatics, for the scope tac masses. When all the targets are visable the stage brief goes so much faster, and the challenge becomes hitting the targets quickly, not finding them. If a scope is required to find the target, be it 3.5 power or 8 power, how was the RO able to call the hits without glass? And if the RO is on glass to find the targets, who is watching the shooter? I look forward to awesome new 1-? Scopes, people should use the gear they enjoy, but it should not be a requirement to change gear just to find the targets when your turn comes.

Precisely!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Match directors that care about the shooters experience will move heaven and earth to make the targets visible to the naked eye. Not for the handful of limited lunatics, for the scope tac masses. When all the targets are visable the stage brief goes so much faster, and the challenge becomes hitting the targets quickly, not finding them. If a scope is required to find the target, be it 3.5 power or 8 power, how was the RO able to call the hits without glass? And if the RO is on glass to find the targets, who is watching the shooter? I look forward to awesome new 1-? Scopes, people should use the gear they enjoy, but it should not be a requirement to change gear just to find the targets when your turn comes.

^^^Yeah, that.^^^

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I'm going with the FFP once it becomes available. On low power, you will be at close range and using the dots, so you will not need to see the reticle, as a matter of fact, the reticle will only get in the way when you are shooting fast. Then one you crank it up to 8x, you will use the reticle to aim/holdover, etc.

The FFP has a great reticle and is the way I am going. I cant wait for this thing to hit the market, its what i'll be running this year for sure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, without having held one and without having seen any info beyond what is here how does the new Burris 1-8 work out for Heavy Metal? Got a new BRO .308 last year and will be using it at at least a few matches this year. not ready to move 100% yet. With the advent of HM Optic and allowing a Semi SG I am going to at least get my feet wet.

I have a Vortex 1-6 on my JP, perhaps the answer is to move it over and get the 1-8 to replace it?

Thoughts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On a scope 5x or greater on the top I feel that the FFP offers so much more flexibility to the shooter.

That said...I love the 1x5 Burris XTRII because I have not found I needed any more power for the events I shoot.

But for the $1000 price tag the Burris 1x8 does everything the 1x5 does and lets you use the BDC feature at any power!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I will likely get one and try it out, not sure I will go to the 1-8 over the 1-5 for my 3Gun ARs until I try it out a bit. The 1-5 is just about perfect and I can slam the MGM switchview to 5x and be about perfect for the targets out at 350-600. At 8x, the FOV might be too narrow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for this Pat, I wasn't in the market for a new scope when I woke up Friday but this has my interest piqued. Your going to cost me money. I am curious why the RFP version is almost 13" long while the FFP is two inches shorter. I was leaning towards the FFP but that definitely kills off the RFP in my mind. Any idea on street prices? Looking at other Burris products MSRP vs. retail prices makes the $8-900 range seem possible. Then it'll almost seem too good to be true and I'll start wondering if glass quality was sacrificed to make that price possible. It really does look light years better than the 1.5-8x and less expensive as a bonus, as long as the glass is great.

Edited by TonytheTiger
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...