Apparently NF is open to a hunting reticle, see the IHR (International Hunting Reticle). How could they possibly screw it up so bad? Who tested this reticle? I am at a loss.
Just seeing the usual problems. Incorrect tracking, failures to return to zero, and occasional loss of zero. They are still better than the variables.
It used to be that the only things you had to worry about was the rear ring breaking the reticle if over tightened, and the adjustment values being off. They held zero well, adjusted consistently, and returned to zero.
Just seeing the usual problems. Incorrect tracking, failures to return to zero, and occasional loss of zero. They are still better than the variables.
It used to be that the only things you had to worry about was the rear ring breaking the reticle if over tightened, and the adjustment values being off. They held zero well, adjusted consistently, and returned to zero.
I was fresh out of the Army at the time of that pic and that's what I had for a pack! Have since greatly improved my pack selection, but I still use the ALICE for some short distance pack outs - it stays in the back of the pickup for hunting season and if it blows out or gets stolen I figure they did me a favor.
Phil's a big fan of the 2.5x Leupold, having had one on his main .458 Winchester brown bear back-up rifle for decades. It's been used from at-your-feet ranges to several hundred yards.
“Montana seems to me to be what a small boy would think Texas is like from hearing Texans.” John Steinbeck
Appreciate that. No doubt that 3x is fine for hunting. My thoughts with regards to 1x was more about worst (or best depending on how you look at it... grin) case of following wounded animals. In that case, from my own experience I prefer in order- 1x red dots, 1x scopes with daylight usable reticles, irons.
Ct,
Very often military shooters, competitors, and hunters don't cross pollinate. That is they believe that they know best and therefor the others have little to offer them. The IHR appears to me what happens when target shooters try to design a hunting reticle. I will talk with them and see if a better design can't be offered. I know most "believe" that they want a plain duplex, however that would be wasted on a scope that is truly designed for dialing. Am thinking a very duplex looking reticle of proper thickness with low profile mil ticks for wind.
You are wrong on both scopes. Google can be your friend, but not in this case. The Trijicon 1-4x is an outgrowth of a military organizations, and competitive 3- gunners use of the 1.25-4x scope. They wanted the same scope but with 1x and finger adjustable and resettable turrets.
There have been at least three versions of the Shortdot, as well as FFP and SFP, and multiple reticles including "hunting" ones. It IS a hunting scope, just like most Leupold Varible Mark 4's are nothing but rebadged versions of their hunting scopes with different turrets and reticles, except that for the most part ShortDot's work....
Fost,
I am sure there are some here that have more experience with S&B's hunting scopes, as I only see a few used heavily a year, however they do seem to be good scopes and as good as they always have been. For their purpose I would not hesitate to use them and would test, and watch them just like every other scope.
No you are wrong on both scopes and I have no idea where you come up with half the $hit you say. I shoot with 2 guys from Trijicon. The Accupoint is their hunting line. Look at the reticles for gods sake.
The short dot is a CQB scope and comes with a CQB reticle.
How you could argue either point shows your ignorance......
I was fresh out of the Army at the time of that pic and that's what I had for a pack! Have since greatly improved my pack selection, but I still use the ALICE for some short distance pack outs - it stays in the back of the pickup for hunting season and if it blows out or gets stolen I figure they did me a favor.
If they steal it, the first time they use it they'll know karma is real....
No you are wrong on both scopes and I have no idea where you come up with half the $hit you say. I shoot with 2 guys from Trijicon. The Accupoint is their hunting line. Look at the reticles for gods sake.
The short dot is a CQB scope and comes with a CQB reticle.
How you could argue either point shows your ignorance......
Forgot to mention I did use a Trijicon AccuPoint 1.25-4x on the grizzly at about 65 yards--and the bright triangle would have worked fine with the scope on 1.25x if he'd charged.
Did shoot him again to make sure as he ran past me, angling somewhat closer, but that was a blind run as the first bullet had taken out both lungs. Didn't bother to turn the scope down off 4x, though.
“Montana seems to me to be what a small boy would think Texas is like from hearing Texans.” John Steinbeck
Forgot to mention I did use a Trijicon AccuPoint 1.25-4x on the grizzly at about 65 yards--and the bright triangle would have worked fine with the scope on 1.25x if he'd charged.
Imagine that.
Keep inserting your foot further into your mouth Formid. You are clearly fighting a losing battle.......
Very often military shooters, competitors, and hunters don't cross pollinate. That is they believe that they know best and therefor the others have little to offer them. The IHR appears to me what happens when target shooters try to design a hunting reticle. I will talk with them and see if a better design can't be offered. I know most "believe" that they want a plain duplex, however that would be wasted on a scope that is truly designed for dialing. Am thinking a very duplex looking reticle of proper thickness with low profile mil ticks for wind.
Count me in! Maybe your feedback combined with John's (because John will shoot straight with them, right John?) will get the wheels turning.
Very often military shooters, competitors, and hunters don't cross pollinate. That is they believe that they know best and therefor the others have little to offer them. The IHR appears to me what happens when target shooters try to design a hunting reticle. I will talk with them and see if a better design can't be offered. I know most "believe" that they want a plain duplex, however that would be wasted on a scope that is truly designed for dialing. Am thinking a very duplex looking reticle of proper thickness with low profile mil ticks for wind.
I hunt and target shoot. The NP-R1 is my favorite, followed by the MOAR-T.
However, would you ask them to please make 1 MOA hash marks on the windage axis of the NP-R1? They fixed the elevation from the NP-R2, but I never understood the reasoning for 2 MOA on windage on the -R1.
The short dot comes in 1 retcle and it is called CQB. You do the math.
2muchgun you are incorrect... The Gen 1 shortdot was offered with an FD7 reticle and the Gen II version which came from the Zenith Hunting line but badged the Zenith LE and listed as a PM II scope is available in FD2, FD7 and FD9 reticles and also has a 24mm objective...
Police Marksman II line:
9467 - 1.1-4x20 Short Dot (Gen I) w/ Flashdot#7 reticle (illum.) 946SDL - 1.1-4x20 Short Dot (Gen II) w/ Short Dot "CQB" reticle 946SD - 1.1-4x20 Short Dot (Gen I) w/ Short Dot "CQB" reticle
9762 - 1.1-4x24 Zenith Short Dot LE (Short Dot II) w/ Flashdot#2 reticle (illum.) 9767 - 1.1-4x24 Zenith Short Dot LE (Short Dot II) w/ Flashdot#7 reticle (illum.) 9769 - 1.1-4x24 Zenith Short Dot LE (Short Dot II) w/ Flashdot#9 reticle (illum.)
Which color triangle do you use... I seen somewhere in the thread that an amber was recommended but in my experience the amber would seem to wash out in light colored (IE: sand, yellow grass, sandstone etc.) backgrounds... I have only used the Green accupoint but had The Reflex sights in amber and they washed out terribly....
