Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
10/20/2017 1:01:18 AM
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Posted: 8/19/2005 3:08:45 PM EDT
OK so I decided on the 10X super sniper for my rem 700p but should I get rear focus or side focus?? what is the diff??

Also what type of base and rings do I get for this thing?? I want simple and sturdy. point me in the right direction??
Link Posted: 8/19/2005 3:35:51 PM EDT
Rear focus is cheaper and works just as well.....
Link Posted: 8/19/2005 3:39:57 PM EDT
any other opinions??
Link Posted: 8/19/2005 4:18:59 PM EDT
side focus!

i always look for side focus when looking for scopes. makes it much easier and imo well worth it.

and since youre already at swfa pick up some badgers
Link Posted: 8/19/2005 4:24:27 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/19/2005 4:32:38 PM EDT by sprist]

Originally Posted By eklikwhoa:
side focus!

i always look for side focus when looking for scopes. makes it much easier and imo well worth it.

and since youre already at swfa pick up some badgers



badgers? those must be the rings?? what base should I get?? want something nice and tight to the rifle... what does the MOA mean for scope mounts?? and what MOA do I want? and which rings do I want??? I am looking at rifle scopes dot com but I dont know the dif between any of those mounting options!!
Link Posted: 8/19/2005 5:23:16 PM EDT
tag..

Im looking at thise for my AR-10T..

C.g.
Link Posted: 8/19/2005 5:40:03 PM EDT
Save a hundred $$$ and get the rear focus. I got IOR QD rings for mine.
FWIW I'm very happy with the scope and rings, I also got a Ken Farell(sp) 0 moa base the scope has 120 moa so there is really no need for a sloped base.
JMHO
Link Posted: 8/19/2005 6:03:50 PM EDT
with bases and rings i like to go all out and get the absolute best cause they are what holds up my optics


i went badger ordinance rings and badger ordinance 20moa base


the moa/cant is for shooting out to 1000yds. it helps with scopes that dont have much elevation (which btw the supersniper has no problem with) and this kinda gives it 20moa to from the get go so in the end you have an extra 20moa of adjustments.

Link Posted: 8/20/2005 6:20:06 AM EDT
Sprist, the reason for going to a 30mm tube it to get more elevation built in, so to speak. The SS has a boatload of adjustment, so you should have no problem getting out to 700 yards without any cant. Here's a portion of the review over at Sniper Country of the SS:

"The box test was standard. 20 moa in all directions, for a 40 moa by 40 moa square. Both scopes worked perfectly so I ran the test six times with the same perfect results. Then I cranked each knob for about an hour each, constantly going all the way in one direction and then in the other. That is thousands of clicks. Then I ran the box tests twice more. All results where the same, perfect. I cranked in 20 moa and the change made was 20 moa. The clicks are truly .25 moa each . Both scopes had over 100 moa of actual travel, so they wont run out of elevation adjustment on you. Under most any condition or range. Heck lets face it you have enough travel to send a 338 Lapua over 1500 yards. One thing often overlooked when we talk click value is how many MOA's per turn of the elevation knob. Some manufactures of .25 moa per click scopes, have 8 moa, some 10 moa, some 12 moa and lastly 15 moa per turn. Leupold and the Super Sniper share, what I think is the best, that's 15 moa per turn. It is harder to multiply, under stress in eights and twelve's. Ten's are easiest but take 1.5 times the amount of turns a 15 moa per turn scope does. I like the 15 moa per turn knob because on my flatter shooting calibers I can get to 1000 yards with less than two full turns, and just slightly over two turns with a 308. The less the number of turns the less likely you will forget under stress and be off one or more turns."

As you can see, 1000 yard shooting is something this scope can handle with ease.
Link Posted: 8/20/2005 7:00:22 AM EDT
agree the ss should have enough elevation but its better to have it and not need it than you know
Link Posted: 8/20/2005 7:17:35 AM EDT
Side focus

That way you're not twisting your flip up scope caps when your focusing the rifle. Now if you're not going to ever use flip up scope caps...

My Super Sniper is a side focus model.
Link Posted: 8/20/2005 7:43:13 AM EDT
Link Posted: 8/20/2005 8:16:15 AM EDT
How is the warrantee on the SS? How serious is a "dust" appearance on the inside of an older 20x?
Link Posted: 8/20/2005 11:01:23 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Fenian:
Sprist, the reason for going to a 30mm tube it to get more elevation built in, so to speak. The SS has a boatload of adjustment, so you should have no problem getting out to 700 yards without any cant. Here's a portion of the review over at Sniper Country of the SS:

"The box test was standard. 20 moa in all directions, for a 40 moa by 40 moa square. Both scopes worked perfectly so I ran the test six times with the same perfect results. Then I cranked each knob for about an hour each, constantly going all the way in one direction and then in the other. That is thousands of clicks. Then I ran the box tests twice more. All results where the same, perfect. I cranked in 20 moa and the change made was 20 moa. The clicks are truly .25 moa each . Both scopes had over 100 moa of actual travel, so they wont run out of elevation adjustment on you. Under most any condition or range. Heck lets face it you have enough travel to send a 338 Lapua over 1500 yards. One thing often overlooked when we talk click value is how many MOA's per turn of the elevation knob. Some manufactures of .25 moa per click scopes, have 8 moa, some 10 moa, some 12 moa and lastly 15 moa per turn. Leupold and the Super Sniper share, what I think is the best, that's 15 moa per turn. It is harder to multiply, under stress in eights and twelve's. Ten's are easiest but take 1.5 times the amount of turns a 15 moa per turn scope does. I like the 15 moa per turn knob because on my flatter shooting calibers I can get to 1000 yards with less than two full turns, and just slightly over two turns with a 308. The less the number of turns the less likely you will forget under stress and be off one or more turns."

As you can see, 1000 yard shooting is something this scope can handle with ease.



sounds like flat will do just fine... thanks for the info. I am going to go flat then. What height rings should I get? I believe it is best to be as flat as possible to the rifle, is this correct?
Link Posted: 8/20/2005 5:09:22 PM EDT
i think highs should be suffecient



not too high from center of axis and not too low for comfortable cheek weld.

Link Posted: 8/20/2005 8:40:22 PM EDT
Im nervous about going with the high rings, I want the scope as close as possible to the bore. How small of rings can I get without hitting the bore?
Link Posted: 8/21/2005 1:40:50 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/21/2005 1:42:54 AM EDT by eklikwhoa]
you could go pretty low since the obj is only 42mm but the main problem you will have with mounting in rings is the cheek weld.

this is with ex-high rings on top of a 1/2" arms riser/ext.



just to give you an idea of how low you can go.


Link Posted: 8/21/2005 7:02:00 AM EDT
Here's a very crappy pic of a Burris scope on my Savage 12FV...that's a Leupold 1 piece base, and what I would guess are medium or high rings. The objective is 42, and it clears the barrel by about 1/4". The height is perfect, for me...it's very easy to see through the scope, w/o having to crane my neck or mash my face down on the stock.



This is pretty much what you're gonna end up with, since you'll need enough space for the objective to clear the barrel. You do not want ANY part of the scope in contact with the barrel. And, because the barrel flexes like a piece of rope every time you shoot the gun, a little extra daylight is not a bad thing.

Link Posted: 8/21/2005 9:51:56 AM EDT
this is really hard, I just cant decide. I dont think that I need much height for my cheak weld. Everyone is a bit different i suppose. I would sure hate to spend 180$ on rings that I ended up not liking!
Link Posted: 8/21/2005 10:58:06 AM EDT
damn

i just noticed you are mounting onto a 700 and not an ar


confused me a little there.

im sure you will have no problems with some low-medium rings


heres my savage with a 50obj in medium rings and a 20moa base


Link Posted: 8/21/2005 8:34:32 PM EDT
Link Posted: 8/21/2005 8:41:52 PM EDT

Originally Posted By eklikwhoa:
damn

i just noticed you are mounting onto a 700 and not an ar


confused me a little there.

im sure you will have no problems with some low-medium rings


heres my savage with a 50obj in medium rings and a 20moa base

img.photobucket.com/albums/v629/eklikewhoa/le2b/IMG_0051.jpg
img.photobucket.com/albums/v629/eklikewhoa/le2b/IMG_0052.jpg



ok so standard to 1/2 inch should be ok?
Link Posted: 8/21/2005 9:54:10 PM EDT

Originally Posted By sprist:

Originally Posted By eklikwhoa:
damn

i just noticed you are mounting onto a 700 and not an ar


confused me a little there.

im sure you will have no problems with some low-medium rings

heres my savage with a 50obj in medium rings and a 20moa base

img.photobucket.com/albums/v629/eklikewhoa/le2b/IMG_0051.jpg
img.photobucket.com/albums/v629/eklikewhoa/le2b/IMG_0052.jpg



ok so standard to 1/2 inch should be ok?



.5? there is such an animal?


.855 is the lowest i have seen but then again i only look what badger or nightforce has to offer
Top Top