Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 1/1/2006 3:49:47 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/1/2006 7:39:28 PM EDT by pepperbelly]
Are target turrets much more useful than the standard turrets, or are they just OK if you have them?
The scope will be used for target shooting for the most part with varmints when I can go.
I have a Simmons 6.5x20x40 scope coming from Cabela's that does not have target turrets. After ordering I got an email flyer from Natchez Shooters Supply with better Simmons scope including a 8x32x44 Prairie Master and a 6-24x50 Prairie Master. All have AO and Natchez's scopes are cheaper.
Is it worth the trouble to return the scope w/o TT and order another scope with them?
Jim
Link Posted: 1/1/2006 5:54:20 PM EDT
They will just make adjusting the point of aim easier. It depends on what that's worth to you...
Link Posted: 1/1/2006 6:12:35 PM EDT
Let me reply with some of my thoughts. I think of riflescope usage in one of two ways, after you have zeroed in. 1- You either use the reticle and other marks to adjust your aim for the wind and the distance or 2- you know exactly how much correction is needed on the scope for your distance and wind deflection, you dial it in and you hold the crosshairs on the target.

For hunting or fast competition shooting (not DCM,) you use Kentucky windage and guess at the distance and the drop. Extreme accuracy, 1/2 MOA or less is not your goal, a hit is. This type of scope is zeroed in at a distance that will give you point blank range for the distance needed, say 0-250 yards. After that, you're in Kentucky. You do not want to mess with the zero here and the turret caps are on solid preventing any inadvertent adjustment.

For target shooting, you actually know the exact distance and there are wind flags to indicate the direction and strength of the wind. You have the time to make the proper adjustments on the scope, because you KNOW the exact drop of the bullet for that distance and you KNOW how much the wind will deflect the bullet during flight and you thus preserve the same sight picture, shot after shot. This is best for extreme accuracy. One you have picked a zero distance, you set the zero on the scope to match that. You then calculate and test various other distances to confirm drop and clicks. If you take this rig hunting and you have both the time and a range finder, and you know how to read the wind, you can really split hairs at long distances with this setup.

As Hooligan22 so succintly said, "It depends on what that's worth yo you..."

I use target turrets because I'm a paper puncher, if I wanted to murder animals , I would probably use the low turrets, especially if I were to go after bad-tempered, clawed animals.


Link Posted: 1/1/2006 6:57:33 PM EDT
Is it better to have them and not use them, or to do without them?
I always just set the scope and used Kentucky correction.
I couldn't believe that a sale would come up just after ordering one with prices about half what I paid.
Jim
Link Posted: 1/1/2006 7:32:31 PM EDT
Very!!!!


If your particular about your loads and what it does out of your rifle, then you can chrono it and find out exactly what the drops are at a certain range, and use the knobs to compensate for the MOA you need.
Link Posted: 1/1/2006 7:41:01 PM EDT
OK, if I go ahead and return the scope I ordered which of the other Simmons scopes would work best, the 8x32x44 Prairie Masteror the 6-24x50 Prairie Master?
Jim
Link Posted: 1/4/2006 9:19:40 AM EDT

Originally Posted By pepperbelly:
Are target turrets much more useful than the standard turrets, or are they just OK if you have them?
The scope will be used for target shooting for the most part with varmints when I can go.
I have a Simmons 6.5x20x40 scope coming from Cabela's that does not have target turrets. After ordering I got an email flyer from Natchez Shooters Supply with better Simmons scope including a 8x32x44 Prairie Master and a 6-24x50 Prairie Master. All have AO and Natchez's scopes are cheaper.
Is it worth the trouble to return the scope w/o TT and order another scope with them?
Jim




Technically speaking, Target Turrets are designed to show their scales from the shooter's perspective of being behind the rifle (rifle mounted at the shoulder.)
Otherwise think of what's involved of looking at the scale if you want to record your shot: you would have to dismount the rifle, get out of your position, and then look on top of the scope for the elevation number, or turn the rifle or yourself to the side to read the windage number.

That's the benefit to target turrets. They operate the same as any other screw.

Hope this helps.
Link Posted: 1/4/2006 11:18:32 AM EDT
Do you think the under $100.00 Simmons scopes have a poi that is repeatable enough for TTs to work as they should?
If not I'll stick with what I received and adjust using Kentucky. If the scope isn't made well enough I would have to do the same even with TTs.
Jim
Link Posted: 1/4/2006 11:25:04 AM EDT

Originally Posted By pepperbelly:
OK, if I go ahead and return the scope I ordered which of the other Simmons scopes would work best, the 8x32x44 Prairie Masteror the 6-24x50 Prairie Master?
Jim



I would go with the 6-24x50. I like more magnification, but anything over 20 power and I have a hard time keeping the reticle on the target. The larger objective will also help out if you plan on shooting once the sun starts to go down.

Also, the target turrets will make the scope easier to use if you take the time to do a range card.
Link Posted: 1/4/2006 11:31:53 AM EDT
Depends on how you shoot.

Since both of those are likely a duplex reticle.... lets assume it is a .223 rifle, and you got a good solid zero that lets you shoot +-2" out to 250 yds.

If you never plan on shooting beyond 250 yds..... no target turret needed. If you do plan on shooting beyond 250.... then yes, you need one. Kentucky elevation sucks. Kentucky wind is fairly simple, however. Especially with a mildot scope.

As to whether thos cheap scopes will have repeatable adjustments.... I dont know. Only you will be able to determine that. You really get what you pay for in glass. Pretty much every scope I mount on a rifle is going to have an elevation knob.....
Link Posted: 1/4/2006 1:27:09 PM EDT
I have a Colt HBAR MTC6700 5.56 AR15. It's a flattop A3.
I will have a hard time finding a place to shoot over 250 yards. Most of the time the range will be less.
I will keep this 6.5x20x40 and shoot the crap out of it. When in the future I get an opportunity to shoot at longer range I will buy better glass with target turrets.
I am not expecting greatness out of a $100.00 scope, but I really need the magnification. At 47 years old it's getting tough shooting iron sights at 100 or 200 yards. I can still shoot OK groups but it's getting harder. I occaisionally manage a 2" 100 yard group with my Swede but it need a scope too.
Thanks,
Jim
Link Posted: 1/4/2006 1:59:50 PM EDT
i love the target turrets on my nightforce,super sniper, and simmons 44mag(which is on my 10/22)
Link Posted: 1/4/2006 3:10:40 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/4/2006 3:12:27 PM EDT by zoinks]

Originally Posted By pepperbelly:
Do you think the under $100.00 Simmons scopes have a poi that is repeatable enough for TTs to work as they should?
If not I'll stick with what I received and adjust using Kentucky. If the scope isn't made well enough I would have to do the same even with TTs.
Jim



It all depends on what you want to call repeatability. All scopes have an inherent error or inaccuracy. A typical hunting scope's inherent accuracy is about 2 to 1.5 MOA, so if you're using such a scope and the group you're shooting (this is not considering the inaccuracy of the rifle or ammunition or even the shooter) is from 2 down to 1.5 MOA consistently, then the scope is holding up its end of the deal.

Another thing to consider is that all scopes are actually assembled by hand. You can have a tech make a great "less than $100 scope" or another tech make a "lousy $400 scope." It's called production.


ETA to add quotation marks.
Link Posted: 1/4/2006 4:15:03 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/4/2006 4:16:49 PM EDT by pepperbelly]
I'm basically asking the Hive Mind their opinion on what I ought to do.
I ordered and received a Simmons 6.5x20x40 with AO and standard turrets, bu haven't mounted it yet.
Just after the order went through Natchez Shooter's Supply sent an email flyer with other Simmon's scopes, including a Simmons Prairie Master 6-24X50 AO TT, a Prairie Master 4-16X40 AO TT, both of which do have target turrets. Both are cheaper, enough that if I return the first scope to Cabela's I won't be out any extra money, and might save a little.
The scopes at Natchez are scopes that are "exclusives" from Simmons, whatever that means. Here is the link to the Natchez scopes.
Since I have never owned a scope with TTs before I need to know if it is worth the trouble to return the scope and order another.
All this for a Colt HBAR flattop that will spend most of it's time at the range. Varmint hunting will come not very often.
To top this off I have been sick since Christmas and not thinking too clearly so I am asking a lot from the ARFCOM crew.
Thanks,
Jim
Link Posted: 1/4/2006 5:48:49 PM EDT

Originally Posted By zoinks:
All scopes have an inherent error or inaccuracy. A typical hunting scope's inherent accuracy is about 2 to 1.5 MOA,



Please explain this.
Link Posted: 1/4/2006 5:51:01 PM EDT

Originally Posted By pepperbelly:
I'm basically asking the Hive Mind their opinion on what I ought to do.
I ordered and received a Simmons 6.5x20x40 with AO and standard turrets, bu haven't mounted it yet.
Just after the order went through Natchez Shooter's Supply sent an email flyer with other Simmon's scopes, including a Simmons Prairie Master 6-24X50 AO TT, a Prairie Master 4-16X40 AO TT, both of which do have target turrets. Both are cheaper, enough that if I return the first scope to Cabela's I won't be out any extra money, and might save a little.
The scopes at Natchez are scopes that are "exclusives" from Simmons, whatever that means. Here is the link to the Natchez scopes.
Since I have never owned a scope with TTs before I need to know if it is worth the trouble to return the scope and order another.
All this for a Colt HBAR flattop that will spend most of it's time at the range. Varmint hunting will come not very often.
To top this off I have been sick since Christmas and not thinking too clearly so I am asking a lot from the ARFCOM crew.
Thanks,
Jim



I thought you got your answer? It depends... on what you want to do with the scope. You need us to make your mind up?

Since you wont be shooting past 250, and most shooting will be on the range at 100 or 200, keep the scope you got.
Link Posted: 1/4/2006 6:05:18 PM EDT
I didn't mean to sound so lame. I have not ever used target turrets or kept a log and had no idea if it is a LOT better. It also seemed that everytime I thought I had my mind made up a post changed it.
I gotta keep off the net when I have either a fever or really good meds.
Jim
Link Posted: 1/4/2006 6:09:43 PM EDT

Originally Posted By pepperbelly:
I didn't mean to sound so lame. I have not ever used target turrets or kept a log and had no idea if it is a LOT better. It also seemed that everytime I thought I had my mind made up a post changed it.
I gotta keep off the net when I have either a fever or really good meds.
Jim



Sounds like a good plan Jim.

And save up for a Bushnell Elite, Super Sniper, or best yet, a Leupold if you want something with turrets that you can rely on.
Link Posted: 1/4/2006 6:17:09 PM EDT
Something with turrets I can rely on. That is what I have been trying to ask- whether those other scopes are a big step up or a giant step sideways.
I'll use what I have now and save up. If I gotta save it will be for a Leupold.
Thanks FALARAK,
Jim
Link Posted: 1/4/2006 11:37:32 PM EDT
Turrets are slower but more precise, a reticle with built in BDC is faster but less precise.

Both are useful and given different situations more useful in some and less in others.

I think for a less experienced guy a scope with a BDC reticle like a Shepherd, Springfield, or ACOG, is a better idea. They are simpler to impliment.
Link Posted: 1/4/2006 11:56:34 PM EDT

Originally Posted By FALARAK:

Originally Posted By zoinks:
All scopes have an inherent error or inaccuracy. A typical hunting scope's inherent accuracy is about 2 to 1.5 MOA,



Please explain this.



Gladly. All mechanical devices have tolerances. Tolerances are acceptable errors that still allows the device to operate within its designed parameters. Some tolerances are very small. Some tolerances are large. Sometimes designers will purposely choose large tolerances simply because of the cost of producing product with smaller tolerances where small tolerances are not needed or not useful would drive up the cost of a particular product.

As an example, typical North American game has a Kill zone of approx. 16 to 18 inches meaning that a projectile of sufficient size and velocity entering this area on the animal will cause the animal to bleed very quickly and then die.
Now let's say as I've stated before that a typical scope used for the hunting of medium sized game has an acceptable error of 2 to 1.5 MOA. What does that mean? That means that a shot aimed at 100 yards for example will impact anywhere in an area sized at 2 MOA (approx 2.08 inches.)

Getting back to the kill zone on an animal, if your shot is two inches off from your aimpoint that is a very acceptable error in an area sized at 16 inches. At two hundreds this would be 4 inches off, and that's still acceptable.
Now this is only appreciating the error induced by the scope. This is not counting the error(s) that the shooter makes, or the quality of the weapon or ammunition used. These too produce errors.

Now if you choose to, you can reduce error very easily by using money. You can go to the NorCal website for instance, or any other one of the fine custom rifle makers we have in the USA, and order one of their rigs. This $2500 dollar weapon systems can reduce error down to much less than 3/8 MOA.
At this level the only part of the system that will increase the error is the shooter.

We can agree that spending $2500 for a rifle, tuned handloads, and a super duper type scope is pretty much overkill for getting a deer at 100 yards.

You can say spend $600 or more on a varminter scope with an acceptable error of .5 MOA. Hell, you can go to the USO site and look at their used scopes for about $1300. But, do you really need to spend that kind of money for a scope to shoot a deer at 100 yards? You can get a real Target scope and pay a lot of money for it, but a Target scope is a rather delicate instrument. It doesn't take a whole lot of banging around to get the erector tube off kilter ( you're paying for precision, not ruggedness.)

Once you decide what type of shooting you're going to do, create your own system with the best pieces that you can afford.


Link Posted: 1/5/2006 4:51:46 AM EDT

Originally Posted By zoinks:

Originally Posted By FALARAK:

Originally Posted By zoinks:
All scopes have an inherent error or inaccuracy. A typical hunting scope's inherent accuracy is about 2 to 1.5 MOA,



Please explain this.



Gladly. All mechanical devices have tolerances. Tolerances are acceptable errors that still allows the device to operate within its designed parameters. Some tolerances are very small. Some tolerances are large. Sometimes designers will purposely choose large tolerances simply because of the cost of producing product with smaller tolerances where small tolerances are not needed or not useful would drive up the cost of a particular product.

As an example, typical North American game has a Kill zone of approx. 16 to 18 inches meaning that a projectile of sufficient size and velocity entering this area on the animal will cause the animal to bleed very quickly and then die.
Now let's say as I've stated before that a typical scope used for the hunting of medium sized game has an acceptable error of 2 to 1.5 MOA. What does that mean? That means that a shot aimed at 100 yards for example will impact anywhere in an area sized at 2 MOA (approx 2.08 inches.)

Getting back to the kill zone on an animal, if your shot is two inches off from your aimpoint that is a very acceptable error in an area sized at 16 inches. At two hundreds this would be 4 inches off, and that's still acceptable.
Now this is only appreciating the error induced by the scope. This is not counting the error(s) that the shooter makes, or the quality of the weapon or ammunition used. These too produce errors.

Now if you choose to, you can reduce error very easily by using money. You can go to the NorCal website for instance, or any other one of the fine custom rifle makers we have in the USA, and order one of their rigs. This $2500 dollar weapon systems can reduce error down to much less than 3/8 MOA.
At this level the only part of the system that will increase the error is the shooter.

We can agree that spending $2500 for a rifle, tuned handloads, and a super duper type scope is pretty much overkill for getting a deer at 100 yards.

You can say spend $600 or more on a varminter scope with an acceptable error of .5 MOA. Hell, you can go to the USO site and look at their used scopes for about $1300. But, do you really need to spend that kind of money for a scope to shoot a deer at 100 yards? You can get a real Target scope and pay a lot of money for it, but a Target scope is a rather delicate instrument. It doesn't take a whole lot of banging around to get the erector tube off kilter ( you're paying for precision, not ruggedness.)

Once you decide what type of shooting you're going to do, create your own system with the best pieces that you can afford.



Well, you said a lot, but really didnt answer anything. This is what I am talking about:


I've stated before that a typical scope used for the hunting of medium sized game has an acceptable error of 2 to 1.5 MOA.


Please back that up with some facts.
Link Posted: 1/5/2006 7:42:04 AM EDT

Originally Posted By pepperbelly:
Something with turrets I can rely on. That is what I have been trying to ask- whether those other scopes are a big step up or a giant step sideways.
I'll use what I have now and save up. If I gotta save it will be for a Leupold.
Thanks FALARAK,
Jim



This is an excellent plan. The next thing that you can start to ponder is which type of target turrets and which reticle? There are many different types of each and finding which is right for you may take time.
Link Posted: 1/5/2006 7:43:20 AM EDT
[
Well, you said a lot, but really didnt answer anything. This is what I am talking about:


I've stated before that a typical scope used for the hunting of medium sized game has an acceptable error of 2 to 1.5 MOA.


Please back that up with some facts.


Do you need engineering diagrams? Would you like some proprietary information?
I'll tell you what, I'm going to be at the SHOT Show this year 9FEB through 12FEB. Come by the Swift booth, ask for Bill, and I'll give you a lesson and then we'll go meet the engineer. How does that sound? Pretty good?
In fact, if any of you come to the SHOT Show just stop by the booth and say hi. I'll be happy to meet you.
Link Posted: 1/5/2006 8:00:15 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/5/2006 8:12:23 AM EDT by FALARAK]

Originally Posted By zoinks:
[
Well, you said a lot, but really didnt answer anything. This is what I am talking about:


I've stated before that a typical scope used for the hunting of medium sized game has an acceptable error of 2 to 1.5 MOA.


Please back that up with some facts.


Do you need engineering diagrams? Would you like some proprietary information?
I'll tell you what, I'm going to be at the SHOT Show this year 9FEB through 12FEB. Come by the Swift booth, ask for Bill, and I'll give you a lesson and then we'll go meet the engineer. How does that sound? Pretty good?
In fact, if any of you come to the SHOT Show just stop by the booth and say hi. I'll be happy to meet you.



No need for throwing out your qualifications.... or where you are going to be... or who you know. I dont need any diagrams or proprietary information. Just wanted you to clarify your own statements.

I just want to understand your statements with facts. Still havent seen you explain anything. I take issue with you saying the average hunting scope has a "margin of error of 2 to 1.5 MOA" You seem to be unwilling or unable to describe what you mean.....

Where is the "error"? What is the origin of the "error"? Parallax? Or are you assuming that movement occurred in the body of the scope?

With any average hunting scope.... shot to shot.... I have *never* seen one that could only keep the shots within 1.5 to 2 MOA. Even the cheapest scopes on a sub-MOA rifle, with a sub-MOA shooter, with sub-MOA ammo, will shoot sub-MOA farily consistently.... unless there is something broken (internal movement) or extreme parallax and the shooter is moving his eye position between shots. I have had tasco's, bushnells, and simmon's that do this all the time. As long as there is no major internal movement, a parallax problem, and the adjustment dials are not moved.... the reticle stays fix, and does not flop around 1.5 to 2 minutes. That is HUGE.

Now - if you meant a cheap hunting scope.... if dialed up up, say, 15 minutes of elevation..... then dialed back down.... or changed the zoom from 9x to 3x, then back again..... can only get within 1.5 to 2 minutes from the previous point of impact - I will buy that. But you didnt say that. Which is why I asked for an explanation.... which apparently offended you?

So.... I wont be at the Shot show. Could you do us all a favor, and explain what you meant right here?

I have read some of your other posts... you seem to be very knowledgeable on optics..... I guess I just wanted clarification on exactly what is causing 1.5 to 2 minutes of scope error, between shots.
Link Posted: 1/5/2006 12:48:06 PM EDT
Wow, this is becoming more and more complex quite frankly no longer fun.

Let's recap, so we don't lose track of the thread. The original thread was about the usefulness of target turrets.

My point was that a "target turret" on a hunting scope is only giving you the convience of looking at the scale from the side. Why because a typical general purpose hunting scope is not made the same as an all-out precision made target scope used for Benchrest competitions. The typical general purpose hunting scope does not need to be. Nobody would buy it at the cost that it would take to make one. Nobody would buy it because of the size it would need to be. Nobody would buy it because of it's weight.

Scopes have errors for all those reasons you listed and many more reasons that you didn't list. Simply leaving a scope out in the Sun light for it to heat up will change the point of impact because the tube body will expand quite a bit if it's aluminum and not so much if it's steel, but it will still change the point of impact.

Now I've offered you a general answer as to why because the specifics reasons are numerous, complex and time consuming to write. Physics, production techniques, metalurgy, machining and production techniques plus the human factor all come into play. But you were unsatified with this approach.
I've offered you specific information and a meeting with an engineer who is much more versed than myself in the mathematics of optical design, and then I can talk about design and production control. You are still unsatified.

I only wanted to let pepperbelly know that just cause a scope has a target turret on it, does not mean he should expect the scope to deliver a level of performance that it was never built to give. I thought it was fairly simple.

Now, it's your turn with your claim of "Even the cheapest scopes on a sub-MOA rifle, with a sub-MOA shooter, with sub-MOA ammo, will shoot sub-MOA farily consistently." Show me a target with a group of 5 rounds in the space of a nickel (which is sub-MOA) with even the cheapest scope, etc. That would be impressive as hell to every manufacturer that I can think of.

Again, there are a lot of reasons why there tolerances in manufacturing in the first place. And the biggest reason is cost compared to the benefit.

Now, if you have to hammer on me some more because you personally don't like my answers or style, then try and narrow down the topic. I've must've written almost 900 words just in this post. And please don't use those silly icon things. Just write it out in English.

My offer is still good to you or any one who goes to the SHOT Show. I'm still thinking it's fun to meet customers and listen to what they want.

Oh and by the way, it doesn't take a whole lot of misalignment to make a 1 MOA error. Depending on where the misalignment occurs, the difference of .001 inches is all it takes to cause a 1 MOA error. And also the scope usually experiences anwhere from 800 Gs to 1200 Gs every recoil cycle, and yes the erector does end up in a slightly differect set every recoil cycle. These are mechanical divices and they do experience wear.


Link Posted: 1/5/2006 1:13:31 PM EDT
Link Posted: 1/5/2006 1:58:45 PM EDT

Originally Posted By zoinks:
Now, it's your turn with your claim of "Even the cheapest scopes on a sub-MOA rifle, with a sub-MOA shooter, with sub-MOA ammo, will shoot sub-MOA farily consistently." Show me a target with a group of 5 rounds in the space of a nickel (which is sub-MOA) with even the cheapest scope, etc. That would be impressive as hell to every manufacturer that I can think of.



Ok, I dont see the point, I dont want to nitpick. I wish I had more pics of different groups I have shot..... I will oblige you tho.

I put a leapers 4x carry handle scope on my first AR15 I ever had... and shot multiple 1" groups that day, using 3D brand ammo in 55gr spoft points... but I dont have pics. I do have these pics:

chrysler.websitewelcome.com/~user1010/pics/guns/misc/rra/RRA001.jpg
chrysler.websitewelcome.com/~user1010/pics/guns/misc/rra/RRA002.jpg
chrysler.websitewelcome.com/~user1010/pics/guns/misc/rra/RRA003.jpg
chrysler.websitewelcome.com/~user1010/pics/guns/misc/rra/RRA004.jpg
chrysler.websitewelcome.com/~user1010/pics/guns/misc/rra/RRA005.jpg

Those were with a stock RRA varmint upper, on an AR15, shooting black hills 77gr SMKs. I averaged 5/8" five shot groups all day. So we had a submoa gun, submoa ammo, and a submoa shooter.

That rifle is topped off with a $60 Tasco scope. I do have a super cheap $29 Simmons, and I am tempted to throw it on, zero and group it.

I am not trying to say there arent drawbacks to cheap optics. I very much understand you get what you pay for. I just have never heard, that a cheap hunting scope, without making adjustments, can only do 1.5 to 2MOA shot to shot, all other things being sub-minute capable.


Now, if you have to hammer on me some more because you personally don't like my answers or style, then try and narrow down the topic. I've must've written almost 900 words just in this post. And please don't use those silly icon things. Just write it out in English.


Nope - I am done. I grew up in a CNC machine shop. I very much inderstand tolences, expansion, cleances, and backlash issues. I just wanted a simple understanding why a cheaper scope is only capable of 1.5 to 2MOA.... and I guess I am not going to get that. (resisting urge to place smiley here)


Oh and by the way, it doesn't take a whole lot of misalignment to make a 1 MOA error. Depending on where the misalignment occurs, the difference of .001 inches is all it takes to cause a 1 MOA error. And also the scope usually experiences anwhere from 800 Gs to 1200 Gs every recoil cycle, and yes the erector does end up in a slightly differect set every recoil cycle. These are mechanical divices and they do experience wear.


THATS what I have been looking for!!! Ok, so that is one of the exact explanations! You are saying that the internal parts are moving inside the scope, affected by the recoil between shots. That I can understand. And I can easily see that happening on some cheap scopes. The scope above was actually returned because the reticle canted inside the scope after about 25 rounds. It was sent back to Tasco and replaced with a new one of the same model. But it still shoots subMOA all day long. Guess I got lucky with that one. (resisting urge to place smiley here)

Wasnt trying to argue - just trying to understand what you meant, without the "go talk to an engineer" speech.
Link Posted: 1/5/2006 8:23:51 PM EDT
I use Kentucky windage. But then, I live in Kentucky.
Link Posted: 1/5/2006 8:35:56 PM EDT
Sodacan I will be using the standard scope turrets too, for now. It just doesn't seem to be worth the trouble to change until I can upgrade to a better scope. I regret not waiting a week and buying one with TTs but standard turrets aren't the kiss of death.
I did get an A.R.M.S. #5 mount abd Burris Zee rings, and others seem to like this scope so any errors will be mine.
Reckon a Texan can figure out the Kentucky shootin style?
Jim
Link Posted: 1/6/2006 10:22:52 AM EDT

Originally Posted By FALARAK:
Wasnt trying to argue - just trying to understand what you meant, without the "go talk to an engineer" speech.



Okay, if this means we can all go back to being one big happy dysfunctional family, then I'm all for it. By the way, that is some really excellent shooting. (Also, going to talk to the engineer was a sincere offer, not meant to be offensive.)
Link Posted: 1/6/2006 10:31:21 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/6/2006 10:31:44 AM EDT by FALARAK]
By the way - I just wanted to add - I remember when I got my first Leupold scope - a plain jane VX-II. I immediately bought some Stoney Point turrets to add on it - since it wasnt a target model.

I didn't do it for elevation adjustments in the field. I didnt even know how that all worked. I just thought it looks so much cooler and helped you zero the weapon faster.
Link Posted: 1/6/2006 10:52:21 AM EDT
I looked and found Stoney Point turrets on Midway's site- I get dealer prices there so it's always my first search.
The info there says their turrets will fit the older Simmons scopes but not the newer, but doesn't give details.
Do you know what to look for? Is it the design of the standard turrets?
Thanks,
Jim
Link Posted: 1/6/2006 10:56:17 AM EDT

Originally Posted By pepperbelly:
I looked and found Stoney Point turrets on Midway's site- I get dealer prices there so it's always my first search.
The info there says their turrets will fit the older Simmons scopes but not the newer, but doesn't give details.
Do you know what to look for? Is it the design of the standard turrets?
Thanks,
Jim



I have no idea.

But generally - if the scope doesn't come with turrets, and isnt a Leupold or really high quality scope - you probably will be dissapointed in the repeatability of the return to zero after adjusting. Guess it just depends on the scope you try it on. I just decided a while back, that all my purchases in the future were going to be on higher quality glass.
Link Posted: 1/6/2006 11:05:21 AM EDT
FALARAK, I have begun to come to the same conclusion about buying good quality.
I got this AR15 for Christmas and it was difficult convincing my wife I needed a scope. i generally have to look for bargains on everything.
Thanks for all your help, and everyone elses help,
Jim
Link Posted: 1/6/2006 11:09:54 AM EDT

Originally Posted By pepperbelly:
FALARAK, I have begun to come to the same conclusion about buying good quality.
I got this AR15 for Christmas and it was difficult convincing my wife I needed a scope. i generally have to look for bargains on everything.



Tell her you NEED a $1000 Acog. It will solve all your problems.

In all seriousness - nothing wrong with starting out slowly. Budget optics definitely have their place. My first scopes were all cheapies, and were great to learn on. For some, that is all they will ever desire. I kept chasing that tiny group, tho... and wanted to remove as many variables as possible. They have since been moved to the .22's opr sold. Except for the Tasco on my varmint rig. It just keeps producing....
Link Posted: 1/6/2006 11:45:37 AM EDT
I am 47 years old so I can remember when Bushnell and Tasco actually made pretty decent optics. Both have since been sold and the new companies couldn't make decent glass to save their life.
I have also been thinking about the budget optics, and wonder if a high end Simmons or Nikon is equilavent to a low end Leupold, etc. I have heard a lot of good about Bushnell's Elite series so they try hard on some of the scopes, but "back in the day" the low end Bushnells just didn't have the magnification or coatings the high end scopes did but were as clear.
I also remember when noone needed more than 4x magnification, which is why I still love the old steel tube Weavers in fixed power. I have a couple of K4s and the Redfield 4x that are as clear as any I have seen lately. Those are going on a couple of Mausers and a Swiss K31.
I wanted a higher power variable on this rifle for target shooting. I plan on buying another upper in the future in carbine length and using one of the good reddot scopes. I have also noticed that low end reddots are junk where a low end scope may be actually pretty decent..
A $1000.00 ACOG? OK, but you have to convince my wife, and she has had so many years of my BS that she is really tough.

Jim
Link Posted: 1/6/2006 12:35:44 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/6/2006 12:36:26 PM EDT by FALARAK]

Originally Posted By CSGunWorkscom:
I love target turrets on my scopes.




Isnt that scope mount on backward? I always put them the other way to get the scope more forward.
Top Top