Have one. Used it on 4 critters this year. I like it, no issues finding the MOAR reticle in fading light. Turrets tracked. Stayed zeroed after a healthy bounce while packing out a mule deer.
Ran it sans elevation turret cap in mud, dirt, rain, and snow and it didn't skip a beat FWIW.
i've got a shv 4-14 on my 7mm mashburn very pleased with it.
Ed
THAT, would be a most cool all around set up right there. I had not seen the 4-14 advertised, had been unaware of its being in the lineup. Worth some consideration.
LOVE God, LOVE your family, LOVE your country, LIKE guns and sports.
About 2016 team "R" candidates "We definitely need a crew with a sack of balls the size of hot water bottles, bloviated estrogen leaking feel-gooders need not apply." Gunner 500
i've got a shv 4-14 on my 7mm mashburn very pleased with it.
Ed
THAT, would be a most cool all around set up right there. I had not seen the 4-14 advertised, had been unaware of its being in the lineup. Worth some consideration.
It's a good thing that this is a virtual campfire. If it was real, anyone with an milligram of character would ostracize you for your history of bad acts and total lack of contrition.
Have you ever read the fable of the scorpion and the frog?
I wish they made the 3-10 with illumination, and I wish the made the 4-14 with a 50mm objective. That 56mm bell would force me to jump up in ring size, and my cheek weld is already borderline.
FWIW, I just bought a new Sako 85 Bavarian Carbine in 6.5X55. I then ordered the Nightforce 3-10,SHV with the IHR reticle along with the Optilock mounting system.
ran into a problem with the front section of the scope tube being too short to use any of the Optilock bases and get satisfactory eye relief. I was going to have to het a Pic rail and tactical rings to make it work. Kinda defeated the "European" style of the rig.
I ended up going with the Swarovski 3-10X40, Z-3 with their German #4 ret. 1" rings but its not a "long range" set up.
To make this long story longer, I LOVED the NF, great glass the IHR reticle is really nice for hunting. I was disappointed I couldn't use it but another Swarovski for me.
FWIW, I just bought a new Sako 85 Bavarian Carbine in 6.5X55. I then ordered the Nightforce 3-10,SHV with the IHR reticle along with the Optilock mounting system.
ran into a problem with the front section of the scope tube being too short to use any of the Optilock bases and get satisfactory eye relief. I was going to have to het a Pic rail and tactical rings to make it work. Kinda defeated the "European" style of the rig.
I ended up going with the Swarovski 3-10X40, Z-3 with their German #4 ret. 1" rings but its not a "long range" set up.
To make this long story longer, I LOVED the NF, great glass the IHR reticle is really nice for hunting. I was disappointed I couldn't use it but another Swarovski for me.
Did you try or consider Leupold rings? I think they are more forgiving on placement. I am really considering a NSX on a Sako "S" action. Right now I have a 1-6 VX6 mounted and I have plenty of play. No bell on the front, but the turret and rear objective ring have play.
I wish they made the 3-10 with illumination, and I wish the made the 4-14 with a 50mm objective. That 56mm bell would force me to jump up in ring size, and my cheek weld is already borderline.
I wish they made the 3-10 with illumination, and I wish the made the 4-14 with a 50mm objective. That 56mm bell would force me to jump up in ring size, and my cheek weld is already borderline.
Fully aware that extra weight will be part of the costs that brings reliability but 28 oz's seems to be a little heavy for my use, would likely use the NSX 2.5x10x42!
Fully aware that extra weight will be part of the costs that brings reliability but 28 oz's seems to be a little heavy for my use, would likely use the NSX 2.5x10x42!
Have one that's been on 3 rifles and now resides on a Montana 308. Tracking and RTZ has been spot on out to far as I've run it on steel and hair. The Tucky is still TITS at a [bleep] over 6 1/2lbs all up....
I can live with 20 oz's but a 4x16x42 or 44 with a capped windage that was under 24 0z's would be the sweet spot for a lot of shooters......just dreaming out loud!
It's an experience thing. Most when they start shooting at longer and longer ranges start going up in power. The problem is that as you start shooting at range on moving mammals, as opposed to a steel and targets, the importance of gathering all available information during and after the shot becomes extremely important. Unless you always use a spotter, high power scopes and light rifles don't mix real well.
Higher power helps with one aspect- finer aiming. It hurts in most/all others- field of view, catching impact/splash, tracking the animal, and reacquiring for follow up shots.
Lower power (below 10 or so) hurts in one aspect- courser aiming, yet helps in all others. Aiming is overcome by the fact that you're shooting at relatively large targets.
The reason for the question of your experience killing big game at longer ranges, is because it is the most common trend among those who haven't done a bunch of killing past normal ranges.
I don't need a 16x scope but I like to play around on steel with a little higher magnification scope, have taken big game to 607 yds with 10x and realize the trade offs with higher magnification........ 14x on a 12" plate
Anybody have one of the Nightforce SHV 3-10x42's? I'm considering one for use on a 30-06 Model 70 I'm putting together.
I bought one and sold it before mounting it on a rifle. The SHV did not work well for me.
donsm70
Life Member...Safari Club International Life Member...Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation Life Member...Keystone Country Elk Alliance Life Member...National Rifle Association
It's an experience thing. Most when they start shooting at longer and longer ranges start going up in power. The problem is that as you start shooting at range on moving mammals, as opposed to a steel and targets, the importance of gathering all available information during and after the shot becomes extremely important. Unless you always use a spotter, high power scopes and light rifles don't mix real well.
Higher power helps with one aspect- finer aiming. It hurts in most/all others- field of view, catching impact/splash, tracking the animal, and reacquiring for follow up shots.
Lower power (below 10 or so) hurts in one aspect- courser aiming, yet helps in all others. Aiming is overcome by the fact that you're shooting at relatively large targets.
The reason for the question of your experience killing big game at longer ranges, is because it is the most common trend among those who haven't done a bunch of killing past normal ranges.
Less, very often, is more.
We might have to agree to disagree.
In my experience 10X is lacking when applying real precision in field shots.
It is not a "courser aiming" issue.
It is about reading mirage.
It is about picking the 360" bull out of a gaggle of 320" bulls.
It is about picking the anterless deer from a spike at distance.
If you don't have a spotter then 10X or less is even more of a handicap.
If your rifle/16X or so optic combo does not allow you to see bullet impact then you need to learn proper shooting technique. That is cut and dried.
In other words if your stance and grip allow the rifle to recoil enough (off line)to prevent you from seeing impact then spend a bit more time at the range learning how to control the recoil.
If you can not acquire animals fast and efficiently at 16X or so then you need to practice a bit more.
I would be willing to compare my real world game killing experience at distance to anyone advocating a 10X or less solution.
As you say "It's an experience thing."
John Burns
I have all the sources. They can't stop the signal.
You do much "spotting impacts" with sporter weight BG rifles and 16x scopes from field positions other than prone and bipod, John?
You read a whole lot of mirage through a 14x scope...? Don't you normally have a spotting scope, and you usually have a spotter/partner along as well, correct?
I have one of the 3-10x42s and have tested it pretty extensively. It tracks correctly and is generally "user-friendly". It is about as good a scope as I've seen at that price point.
You do much "spotting impacts" with sporter weight BG rifles and 16x scopes from field positions other than prone and bipod, John?
You read a whole lot of mirage through a 14x scope...? Don't you normally have a spotting scope, and you usually have a spotter/partner along as well, correct?
Question #1. Of course.
Question #2. Of course.
Makes me smile that reading mirage at 14X stymies some. Look more.
It is actually kinda funny to think of who exactly would make me change a wind call when I have 14.7X and they have a spotting scope.
Pro Tip: The list is very short.
Pro Tip #2: You are not on that list but given a bit of training you might make the cut. Practice more???
Pro Tip # 2 was a bit of jab. Just havin fun.
Here is a bit of a hint. 3 good hits for 3 shot with 2 moving at 550yds.
. You might not want to play this game.
John Burns
I have all the sources. They can't stop the signal.
I actually went to pick up a NSX 2.5-10, and they were out of stock. (The web page said they had inventory) Anyway they had the SHV 3-10 and I was afraid to cut corners. I figure cry once is a good motto, even though I can't believe I was going to drop 2K on a scope - with tax. So where do they cut corners on the SHV? No illumination, no zero stop, what else? I am getting a 3-9 SWFA for Christmas, so I think the SHV would not get me much more?
You do much "spotting impacts" with sporter weight BG rifles and 16x scopes from field positions other than prone and bipod, John?
You read a whole lot of mirage through a 14x scope...? Don't you normally have a spotting scope, and you usually have a spotter/partner along as well, correct?
Question #1. Of course.
Question #2. Of course.
Makes me smile that reading mirage at 14X stymies some. Look more.
It is actually kinda funny to think of who exactly would make me change a wind call when I have 14.7X and they have a spotting scope.
Pro Tip: The list is very short.
Pro Tip #2: You are not on that list but given a bit of training you might make the cut. Practice more???
Pro Tip # 2 was a bit of jab. Just havin fun.
Here is a bit of a hint. 3 good hits for 3 shot with 2 moving at 550yds.
. You might not want to play this game.
Mr. Seinfeld, did that 2nd round really hit that bull in the dome?
I think the system that SunTan Dan uses along with a half dozen other system builders (Red Rock, Western Precision, Best of the West, MOA, Sub MOA etc) makes a lot more sense and is faster than counting clicks, although that does limit someone who likes to experiment with different bullets/loads and one who travels to different elevations. Of course buying an extra turret or two is cheap enough too.
Cabelas had a NF 4x14x56 SHV MOAR illuminated in the bargain cave at my local store today. $995 out the door. We'll see how it does on my Sendero 7mm STW.
You do much "spotting impacts" with sporter weight BG rifles and 16x scopes from field positions other than prone and bipod, John?
You read a whole lot of mirage through a 14x scope...? Don't you normally have a spotting scope, and you usually have a spotter/partner along as well, correct?
Question #1. Of course.
Question #2. Of course.
Makes me smile that reading mirage at 14X stymies some. Look more.
It is actually kinda funny to think of who exactly would make me change a wind call when I have 14.7X and they have a spotting scope.
Pro Tip: The list is very short.
Pro Tip #2: You are not on that list but given a bit of training you might make the cut. Practice more???
Pro Tip # 2 was a bit of jab. Just havin fun.
Here is a bit of a hint. 3 good hits for 3 shot with 2 moving at 550yds.
. You might not want to play this game.
John go easy on him you keep scarin in him off..........
I see 1 good hit out of 3 there. In what appears to be very limited wind. With the first shot being at an uninjured, moving bull elk at 550 yards. Great example.
Mr. Seinfeld, did that 2nd round really hit that bull in the dome?
Tanner
The trace is pretty clear in the vid and every hit is visable.
Spotting through the camera screen is less than optimal.
Originally Posted by starsky
I see 1 good hit out of 3 there. In what appears to be very limited wind. With the first shot being at an uninjured, moving bull elk at 550 yards. Great example.
I had a few funny (to me) snarky remarks but some of you guys get defensive when you step on your wanker. I am toning it down a bit.
Just watch the video again, cripes it is in HD. The trace is all there.
On a positive note you are 100% correct that there was "very limited wind". I guess that's a good observation.
14X let me see the lack of mirage which is just as important as seeing a bunch of mirage.
The first round hit on the ribs can be seen here in this picture if you are struggling with the video.
A good Monday morning quarter back might say I needed another minute of lead but a solid double lung hit on a moving bull at 550yds is not horrible.
Originally Posted by Formidilosus
I don't know what y'all are talking about, I see great shooting with a "sporter rifle" and high power scope at long range with "no spotter".
Clearly exactly how ackleyfan hunts.
Read trace much.
I didn't think so. It's only HD video.
Thus endith the lesson.
Last edited by JohnBurns; 12/04/15.
John Burns
I have all the sources. They can't stop the signal.
Just watched the video, scrubbing back and forth over the shots a few times. From the looks of things, it's really difficult to see the trace or impact on the first shot, due to the bull making it to the edge of the camera's FOV when the shot was released (pard took hands off the camera for a minute to work the cow call, I assume). In your photo, however, you can see what must be the first shot, and based on the angle of the photo it looks to be a high, slightly rear lung shot, just under the spine. As you say, a bit more lead wouldn't have hurt, but not a terrible shot. In the vid, the second shot was at a quartering toward and left presentation, and the trace showed the bullet hitting somewhere on the outside left of the neck area, which appears to be a flesh wound in the neck muscle. The third shot showed an impact that I assume was a bit further forward than intended, perhaps a bit too much lead on the walking bull in compensation for the first shot which hit a little further back than you wanted, and hit the front edge of the shoulder, a bit above the center line of the body. The shot must have come very close to the spine or hit it, since the bull's legs folded up immediately as it went down.
Sound about right? Any pics of the 2nd or 3rd shots on the bull?
I did the same thing, running the video several times, and it looked to me like the second hit, when the bull was more-or-less facing, was just inside the elk's left shoulder. Will also be interested to hear.
“Montana seems to me to be what a small boy would think Texas is like from hearing Texans.” John Steinbeck
That's what it looked like to me as well. Easy to see the "trace" as I expanded the video to full size on my PC's screen. First hit was front of left shoulder about mid way up. Good shot as far as I'm concerned. Second hit (third shot) looked to be slightly in front of the right shoulder when he dropped like a stone. You can still see some trace from that shot as well.
Okay, loaded the vid on Youtube, turned the vid up to maximum 720p resolution on my 24" Samsung monitor, and slowed playback speed to 0.25x. The trace and impact on that second shot is still a left side of neck shot to me.
Just watched the video, scrubbing back and forth over the shots a few times. From the looks of things, it's really difficult to see the trace or impact on the first shot, due to the bull making it to the edge of the camera's FOV when the shot was released (pard took hands off the camera for a minute to work the cow call, I assume). In your photo, however, you can see what must be the first shot, and based on the angle of the photo it looks to be a high, slightly rear lung shot, just under the spine. As you say, a bit more lead wouldn't have hurt, but not a terrible shot. In the vid, the second shot was at a quartering toward and left presentation, and the trace showed the bullet hitting somewhere on the outside left of the neck area, which appears to be a flesh wound in the neck muscle. The third shot showed an impact that I assume was a bit further forward than intended, perhaps a bit too much lead on the walking bull in compensation for the first shot which hit a little further back than you wanted, and hit the front edge of the shoulder, a bit above the center line of the body. The shot must have come very close to the spine or hit it, since the bull's legs folded up immediately as it went down.
Sound about right? Any pics of the 2nd or 3rd shots on the bull?
Originally Posted by Mule Deer
Jordan,
I did the same thing, running the video several times, and it looked to me like the second hit, when the bull was more-or-less facing, was just inside the elk's left shoulder. Will also be interested to hear.
Jordan, JB.
The first hit, first shot was 3 ribs in front of the diaphragm and centered for elevation. This shot exited and was not survivable. I shot with 3 MOA of lead (center shoulder) but really 5 MOA would have been better.
The second hit, second shot landed a few inches inside of the mane. The bull was really quartering and the bullet went in to the chest and I found it under the hide behind the off side shoulder.
On the third hit, third shot the bull was stopping and I had to much lead. Bullet hit right below the spine and in front of the shoulders. Basically a neck shot.
Scott called the 2nd shot a horn shot because of branches falling off the bulls fronts. I was feeling a bit like a dummy in the video.
JB,
That bull was a bit tough but tasted fine even with the ruttng behavior. He was in great body condition and was still packing a decent amount of fat.
John Burns
I have all the sources. They can't stop the signal.
No smack talk, however we/I were discussing seeing our own splash/impacts while shooting sporter weight rifles, high power scopes, live targets and from odd or field positions. You claimed you have no issue with all of that, and then post a video where you are shooting a dedicated long range rifle, from tripod sticks, with a spotter and yet you couldn't/didn't read your own impacts or splash.
A 10lb gun or heavier with a 12-14x scope and muzzle break- yes someone who knows what they are doing can catch most impacts through the scope under those conditions.. A sub 8 pound rifle with 14x scope and no muzzle break in most BG rounds... No. Saying so is trying to BS people. Your own video shows that, or you would have known where you hit.
Just watched the video, scrubbing back and forth over the shots a few times. From the looks of things, it's really difficult to see the trace or impact on the first shot, due to the bull making it to the edge of the camera's FOV when the shot was released (pard took hands off the camera for a minute to work the cow call, I assume). In your photo, however, you can see what must be the first shot, and based on the angle of the photo it looks to be a high, slightly rear lung shot, just under the spine. As you say, a bit more lead wouldn't have hurt, but not a terrible shot. In the vid, the second shot was at a quartering toward and left presentation, and the trace showed the bullet hitting somewhere on the outside left of the neck area, which appears to be a flesh wound in the neck muscle. The third shot showed an impact that I assume was a bit further forward than intended, perhaps a bit too much lead on the walking bull in compensation for the first shot which hit a little further back than you wanted, and hit the front edge of the shoulder, a bit above the center line of the body. The shot must have come very close to the spine or hit it, since the bull's legs folded up immediately as it went down.
Sound about right? Any pics of the 2nd or 3rd shots on the bull?
Originally Posted by Mule Deer
Jordan,
I did the same thing, running the video several times, and it looked to me like the second hit, when the bull was more-or-less facing, was just inside the elk's left shoulder. Will also be interested to hear.
Jordan, JB.
The first hit, first shot was 3 ribs in front of the diaphragm and centered for elevation. This shot exited and was not survivable. I shot with 3 MOA of lead (center shoulder) but really 5 MOA would have been better.
The second hit, second shot landed a few inches inside of the mane. The bull was really quartering and the bullet went in to the chest and I found it under the hide behind the off side shoulder.
On the third hit, third shot the bull was stopping and I had to much lead. Bullet hit right below the spine and in front of the shoulders. Basically a neck shot.
Scott called the 2nd shot a horn shot because of branches falling off the bulls fronts. I was feeling a bit like a dummy in the video.
JB,
That bull was a bit tough but tasted fine even with the ruttng behavior. He was in great body condition and was still packing a decent amount of fat.
Thanks. That's about what I thought I saw- the trace led straight into the mane, but I suppose the quartering angle was a bit more than it appeared, and even the mane shot angled into the chest.
![[Linked Image]](http://s1234.photobucket.com/user/ackleyfan/media/securedownload3_zpse579d136.jpg.html)
![[Linked Image]](http://s352.photobucket.com/user/dogdownproductions/media/BBEF7661-B551-4349-8062-D9E7EF73B68E_zpsiiuyjzh1.jpg.html)
![[Linked Image]](http://s1205.photobucket.com/user/GreybullPrecision/media/2014%20Elk/DSC01214_zpse1929bae.jpg.html)
![[Linked Image]](http://www.atncorp.com/night_vision_images/products/908/middle.jpg)