Started By
Message

re: Rifle scope

Posted on 10/2/14 at 5:13 am to
Posted by 4LSU2
Member since Dec 2009
37374 posts
Posted on 10/2/14 at 5:13 am to
quote:

I got the Tikka T3 .270 left-handed. Southpaw for the win.


My setup purchased in May of 2014:
Tikka T3 Stainless Lite LH x 270 Win
MeoPro 4x12x50mm x #4 Reticle

I couldn't be happier with it. I looked at the Zeiss Conquest 3x12x56 but the weight of it skewed me from purchasing it for this particular gun.
Posted by DownSouthDave
Beau, Bro, Baw
Member since Jan 2013
7392 posts
Posted on 10/2/14 at 5:18 am to
Chuck Hawks

I'm just going to leave this here for all you large objective lens guys...

quote:

"Objective size. What is reasonable, usable, or just plain hoaky? I will offer my opinion; one I am sure will garnish some argument. I do not believe there is any use for anything larger than 40mm, or 42mm at the most. In a good quality scope, one in fact going to be used for sniping, competition, or collecting, a large objective bell is only a hindrance, no matter what the current hype." "Consider first the major disadvantage to a 50mm or larger bell. These large objectives force the shooter's head up so high that, on an unmodified stock, he can get no reasonable or repeatable cheek weld. Think of firing an AR15A2 with a scope. You just about have to use your chin on top of the stock to see through the scope. Until you mount a high-rise cheek piece, you will never be consistent. This is not acceptable on a sniper rifle or, for that matter, any firearm used for hunting." "Your best accuracy is going to be found by mounting the scope as low as possible to the axis of the bore. Why start off on the wrong foot by building in an inherent disability into your weapon system? For more clarity, you say? HA! This is where the industry really loses me. Many companies offer very large objectives claiming that they will transmit more light, be brighter, and cause less eyestrain. All of this may be true, but your eye can only accept so much light. About four to seven millimeters at the exit pupil. A good quality scope with a smaller objective is already capable of this, so why pay for something you cannot actually use? Also, consider that most of these 50mm (and larger) designs came about to assist European hunters who shoot at night. If you are not a poacher, why would you need whatever extra light gathering ability these behemoths might offer? If you are a police officer, chances are that the situation you are in is going to be well lighted by klieg lights, idiotic reporters, or ambient street light. You may even have night vision of one sort or another, depending upon your department's policy." "If you are a civilian, and a hunter, there are many scopes on the market that offer excellent low-light clarity with less than 40mm lenses. This is another advantage to low power. The lower the power, the more light is transmitted. A small 1.5-5x 32mm will transmit more light than a 10x 50mm. So the question begs: Why spend all your money on objective size, when quality of glass is far more important?"
Posted by kengel2
Team Gun
Member since Mar 2004
31046 posts
Posted on 10/2/14 at 6:29 am to
I disagree with about 90% of that piece by chcukhawks. If I get time I'll explain more.
Posted by Spasweezy
Unfortunately, Louisiana
Member since Jan 2014
6634 posts
Posted on 10/2/14 at 7:24 am to
Posted by Spasweezy
Unfortunately, Louisiana
Member since Jan 2014
6634 posts
Posted on 10/2/14 at 10:15 am to
What ammo have you used with it. I'm thinking of going with hornady sst 130 grain
first pageprev pagePage 2 of 2Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram