One of our .com friends asked this question, but it seemed to get over looked. Maybe having its own thread will help.

Maybe it was not overlooked - rather people figured, whats to tell?

No difference using the AO feature hunting deer than punching paper.

You either are around your scopes current parralax setting distancewise, then you fire away.

Or you correct, using the AO feature to the desired distance and engage target (or) deer.

The fact, that, outside of the internet, in the game fields, the majority of deer are engaged well inside 200 yards, may further explain the quiet.

I would think having parallax adjusted properly in field positions where your eye might not be perfectly centered might matter, but inside 200 yds only a matter of which side of the aorta you hit.

I have always wondered why AO scopes did. See some for sale at times.

Why would using an AO on "deer-sized game" be any different than using an AO on other-sized game?

The better question might be.
Why on Earth would you want to monkey [bleep] around with an adjustable AO scope, while hunting any big game.?


dave

Agreed.

i dont have any desire for AO

I've never owned one either, so I can't say.

I re-phrased Fotis' question on the other post. He asked if it would hinder hunting.

Some guys said they gotta have it for hunting (assumption) and I was wondering why--tempted to conclude something smartass like this is another case of herd buying following savvy marketing. The deer sized parameter was included to exclude varmints.

More specifically, if I am understanding this now, you adjust the AO prior to hunting a known specific distance?

I hunt with AO scopes a bunch. I hunt very open country. I set them to 200yds and forget about it unless I'm going to make a long shot. At that point I have the time to take a good rest, manipulate both the power ring as well as the AO.

This is the way informed user of A.O use their scopes.

Seems like a good thread to hijack and correct my confusion. I have 2 AO scopes. The last marking before infinity on 1 is 150 yards, on the other it's 100 yards. Yes they are budget minded scopes. Also, the higher the range the closer the markings are to the previous one leading me to believe that once you're out beyond a couple hundred yards AO adjustment is pointless? Yes? No? Kinda?

My other thought is the focus issues I have with AO scopes. With my AO's I have to have them properly set for my eyes to work but on all my non-AO scopes, whether they were factory set at 50, 75 or 100 yards, focus is never an issue. Example: if I have an AO scope set at 100 yards it's completely unusable at 25 or 200. If I have a non-AO that is factory set at 100 my eyes do just fine at 25 and 200. I don't know why there would be a difference between adjustable at 100 or factory set but there seems to be. Am I alone in this?

Save me from my own thoughts!
CB

I think "E" suggests you put the scope on infinity. I hope I am not messing up his idea. Now you point the scope at the sky and look though it. If the cross hair is not immediately sharp turn the ocular one way or the othe till it is clear. Look away often and look at someething else. Then recheck the crosshair. This may take a couple minutes or more.

Once you have the crosshair clear turn the ocular till it barely becomes fuzzy. Now turn the ocular the other dirction counting the turns until it becomes clear again and then fuzzy again. Now turn the ocular half way back to where it was fuzzy and you should be in the center of the clearest the crosshair is going to be. I hope I got it correctly from "E".

Now set the A.O. for 100 and check the results. Let us know how it works.




"E",

If I messed up give us a hand.

Like horse 1, I have a bunch.of AO scopes. I bought one for the airgun (most valuable there), one for the scoped .22 (Needed unless a specific .22 set parallax) and the rest came to me at no extra cost in a rather uninteresting way. Use them like horse does. Will never pay extra for the feature on a 10X or less, except for airguns and .22s. jack

Chris, one of the reasons why the non AO scopes are desirable is because non AO scopes have a longer depth of focus, as you have discovered.
While Ringman did describe how I usually start to focus my scopes, that procedure won't change the depth of focus of the scope. E

Eremicus,

I have been using your system because it sounds logical and can't hurt.

Leupold sets its parallax on non AO scopes to 150 Yards. S & B sets it to 100 meters (110 Yards). I don't know about other scopes.

The POTENTIAL loss of accuracy out to normal hunting distances of say 500 yards is minimal, less than 2MOA. If one looks directly through the scope, there is no parallax problem. It's only a problem where one cannot get a good view and even then one would have to be way off center.

Many guns don't even shoot that accurately - (oh yeah I know ALL yours do!). So on a deer sized target you're going to hit it, and probably in a vital part. 2MOA is the 10" pie plate that will put the animal down @ 500 Yards. And once again, if you look directly into the scope, there is no error.

I get AO for varmint shooting, those are small targets engaged at fairly long distance. Ever notice that all the big manufacturers put AO only on the 12X and above scopes??? Anything else is a gimmick IMHO.

And of course someone has already pointed out that in the "heat of battle" who has time to fool with AO anyway??

mrmarklin,

Your arguement assumes the bullet hits exactly where the crosshair is indicating. If a guy is shooing a 2MOA rifle and is 2MOA out he can be pleanty far off to miss or wound.

One can also buy fixed-focus cameras, binoculars, telescopes, etc.; very convenient - no need to focus.

E:

Does an AO scope ever have the same depth of focus as its counterpart in a non-AO scope at any particular setting?

Do (same quality) scopes with a reticle adjustment for parallax have more or potentially more depth of focus than scopes with an adjustable objective?

Another trick to eliminate parallax with a non AO/SF scope is what we call ghost ringing.

You pull your head slightly back until you see the black ring appear around the perimeter of your lens. Center this ring in your site picture and line up the cross hairs on target.

This will help eliminate most parallax on decent quality scopes. It really takes no longer than using a SF, if you practice...

JM

Works great on a bench, but what about when you're lying prone, rifle resting on a pack, with your body contorted between a rock and a cactus and your neck bent at an awkward angle and you don't have the luxury of picking just the right eye relief......

Back in the 1970's Robert Klienguenther suggested this procedure. He guarenteed 1/2" three shot groups at 100 yards with proper loads. I don't remember scopes back then with A.O. so I used his system to achieved his guarentee.

I'm a fan of AOs, but don't have them on any of my deer rifles.
They're for hitting tiny targets close in, or small targets at distance. They're of marginal usefulness on large targets.

I understand they have the same differences in depth of focus as long as they are set on the same magnification.
Side focus/parallax adjustable scopes have even less depth of focus than do the AO scopes.
The other thing is that the lower the magnification, the greater the depth of focus. Regardless as to any AO, side focus/parallax or none built into the scope. E

I don't agree with the statement that the potential loss of accuracy out to 500 yds. is less than 2 MOA with a scope with it's parallax set at 110-150 yds.
It depends on the scope, what magnification it's set on, and, probably the shooter's eyes.
BTW, I've never seen any shooting techniques that would eliminate the effects of parallax.
That's the bad news. The good news is that some companies, at least, will set a given scope to parallax free at whatever range(s) you'd like. And some scopes come set for longer ranges. S&B's 10X42 PM scope is set for 300 meters not 100 meters, for instance.
You can also try using the ocular to reduce parallax. I've had great results doing that with some of my Leupolds. I went from 4-5 inch groups at 300 yds. down to 2 inch groups with one of my 6X Leupolds by simply using the ocular to reduce the parallax in the scope. E

Even if it's only a loss of 1 MOA, if you start with a rifle that shoots 1 MOA at 100, the loss of accuracy due to parallax alone (never mind the wind) will take your groups (assuming they hold at 1 MOA out to 500, a big assumption) from 5 inches to 10 inches.

Either you can live with that, or you can't.

Thanks E.

Nothing is easy...

Works great in any position if you practice as you shoot in the field.

Is it easy? Nope, but contrary to what E. says, it does work because I've done it and know it works, otherwise I would say don't do it, it's a waste of time.

And the scope I've used the most on this was a VX-II 3-9x40

I know it works too, but I've been in situations where the right eye relief was not a position I could hold for long and I had to take what I could get, as far as eye relief. In other words, sometimes in the field, the only position you can squirm into is not one you've practiced. It's funny, some people poo-poo the idea of an AO by saying they don't want to mess around with another adjustment that removes a source of error, but they'll put up with a different compromise that takes just as long and restricts eye relief to a narrow band in order to reduce that same error. To each his own.

Never said I was against them and have said they have their place in certain applications.

I simpy gave an alternative method of reducing parallax if you don't have one.

IMO, if your position is so bad you can't get behind the gun properly, you should:

A. Change it if possible.

B. Pass on the shot.

JM

Personally, I'd never advise someone else what shots they should/shouldn't take over the internet.

Wasn't aimed at you Smoke, just a general statement pard.

If someone can't get behind their gun and execute a killing shot...for whatever reason, common sense should tell them to pass.

Just stated the ethical solution to the problem. I'm sure some will choose to bang away.

One of the things that would prevent someone from getting behind a rifle for a killing shot would be the requirement to get eye relief just so. In that respect the ethical solution is to eliminate parallax with an AO.

Only yuppie hunters need AO scopes for deer hunting.

Depends on how far they're shooting, not what they're shooting at. Or their status as rednecks vs yuppies.

Skill set of a hunter obliviates the need for an AO for big game.

You are trying to defend a "want" rather than a "need".

No necessity to do that. You may want whatever you wish.

Opposition springs from trying to convince others that your "want" for an AO is a need for "deer hunting".

Be my guest - go shooting, practice lots, argue MOA, clicks, dials and dots, windmeters, laser rangefinders and AO.

Tools of the trade for a shooter. Master that trade, perhaps you already have, and that commands respect.

Skill set does not change by supping a paper target for a deer.

Change the thread title to "deer shooting scope" and go forth and fill arcs.

To me - IMHO - to much talk of shooting these days and to little of hunting.

Rant over.

cmg hit the nail on the head.

Fact is an AO is a non issue in the vast majority of hunting situations.

LR guys are the exception of course, but tons of venison is loaded into the back of trucks every year by hunters who don't use an AO scope.

Guess I'd Rather be a redneck than a clueless boob.

JM

Now that's more like it, boys. We should have resorted to name calling earlier. I feel more at home in the optics forum, now.

Anything to add to the argument?

Thought not.

Smoke is good people and I've learned from him on here.

Same with cmg.

They ain't the clueless boobs....

LOL, I don't believe I ever said you "need" an AO to kill deer. In fact, of the 15 or so scopes I own, two have an AO. And they're both on "long range" rigs.


BTW, the word is "obviate."

Thank you for the correction. Lets try you do this in my native language...

Glad to see, we are in agreement. Both in between us and you with your siglines...

De nada, mi amigo.

If you read the thread you would know I have participated without denigrating any of our .com friends.

@ Ringman,

have I?

@smokepole,

Kein Problem, mein Herr. Lassen Sie h�ren.

That is pretty much what I thought the proper use was.

Smokepole,

I know what a Redneck is cuz I are one, but, what's a Yuppie Hunter?

They be worse than the Redneck Hunter.......honestly......



Casey

One way to spot a Yuppie Hunter is he be loaded down with dials, buttons, LED lighted shooting equipment, lots of spare batteries, $3000 worth of optics that weigh a ton........



Casey

My sig. line? Depends on your point of view. When I�m hunting in the backcountry, I�m wearing either camo or orange hat/vest and carrying a rifle, depending on the season. And toting my backpacking gear, which has labels from a variety of good equipment purveyors that don�t distribute through Cabela�s. When I come across others back there, what they see depends on their own point of view.

Backpackers see a redneck with a gun, an orange hat and vest, who just happens to be carrying a backpack. A redneck backpacker. They don�t like rednecks and cringe at the sight of a gun. Some hunters (not the smart ones) spot gear with a label other than Cabela�s, maybe even (gasp!!) REI, and see a yuppie who just happens to be toting a gun.

I just like to hunt out of a backpack and use the best gear available, so I don�t really give a sh**.

I think I saw one of those guys in the field last season.


Lets see:

Dials � check
Buttons � check
LED lighted shooting equipment � check
Lots of spare batteries � check
$3000 worth of optics � check +

What a goomer!!

Shot a little video of this idiot. It is a wonder he can even function with all that crap.



Yuppies, who needs em.

True to form - the exception to the rule pipes up...

You know, because you partly market to them, that for everyone scenarshooter, senderoman, JohnBurns, joecool there is 10+ sniper wannabees out there.

You know the type - those not willing and/or able to put in the time that think you can buy skill.

Those honking their gear.

Generalisations are a biatch - and alpinecrick made one - but lets not forget, there is mostly cause for them...

Takes 30 seconds to find out if the guy talking the talk (carrying the gear) can walk the walk.

You can, all know, and none will forget - ever. I know, you will not allow it.

:-)

Where do you draw the line between "Yuppie hunter" and dude who knows how to use what he's carrying?

I carry Geovids and almost always have my 1200LRF and a 2nd set of binocs (Meopta or Zeiss Victory) in the truck as backup. I'm often guilty of carrying 2 spotters in the truck and depending on terrain and expectations, I occasionally carry 1 into the field. Pretty much every rifle I own has an Leupold with an M-1 elevation dial and a table either taped to the stock or just written on with a sharpie. I shoot in a "sort-of" F-Class league (we only have 300 and 600yd birms)

I've loaded my own ammo, mounted my own scopes, bedded the stocks myself, work my own triggers, etc.

Last yr I probably only shot 300ish rifle rounds all year. Some summers I go over 2K. I've never hunted with a guide/outfitter in my life nor killed a single critter over a corn-flinger. Closest was paying for an outfitter in AK to fly me out to a gravel bar on the Canning River and provide the camping gear/provisions for a 7-day Caribou hunt. I'm not JB, so now do I have to be a yuppie?

gettin' kinda rough on here....

Nah, your just a dandy.

Nah, "dandy" is the word you use to describe the bucks he kills.

You're welcome.

I was shown that trick years ago, and I did teach myself to do it that way on longish shots.

I find myself automatically doing it at the range too, even at 100 yds.....


Casey

Let me fan the flames a bit more.......





Casey

quote=alpinecrick]One way to spot a Yuppie Hunter is he be loaded down with dials, buttons, LED lighted shooting equipment, lots of spare batteries, $3000 worth of optics that weigh a ton........
Casey [/quote]




Were you sweating a lot?--that's usually a sign of a overloaded yuppie.....

Used to be, we carried everything in our coat pocket, along with a knife and a cartridge box on our belt. Today, we carry "daypacks" big enough for a couple overnights.







I'm not dissing your skill nor your product, but most guys who are into the "long range" thing go looking for that long range shot.

There are some places in elk country where longish ranges are likely, but most of elk country is not. For every elk standing out in the open and posing long enough to heft the 10x50 bino's, set up the 80mm spotter, untangle the bipod, warm up the rangefinder, range, consult the trignometry book taped to the stock, twirl, lick our finger and test the wind, there are 10--maybe a 100--more elk hanging out in the timber.

I've hunted and killed elk in most of the Rocky Mountain states, BC, and Mongolia, but one of these days I'm gonna have to go hunt elk east of the Montana Front Range, those elk must be slow on the uptake........



Casey

But if I do get a hankering for a long range rig ( I mean, besides my 270W Beanfield Rifle), a 264WM would at the top of the list. If or when I do, I'll come talk to you.




Casey

And for every nimrod who goes through your procedure above, there are probably two or three guys who could throw their pack down, get behind it, range and twist the knob and be ready to shoot in just about the time it took to type this..........

edited to add: And for every guy who can successfully stalk elk in black timber, there are 10 who bumble along, make too much noise, get winded, and blow the elk out of their bedding areas and into the next basin......

alpinecrick,



Upon what do you base this assumption?

There is something you are missig here. Most folks are NOT going to see game that is much over 100 yards away. Most of the hunters I have been with think fifty yards is 100 yards and 250 yards is 600 yards.

Most guys don't use binoculars and woud not see the pronghorns displayed in the fun video a few posts above. They don't even know that world exists. Those who do use bins thrown them up look around the area in about ten seconds and declare, "Ain't nothin' here," and move on.

Maybe you are one of them so you lash out. Maybe you are someone who can "heft the 10x50 bino's, set up the 80mm spotter, untangle the bipod, warm up the rangefinder, range, consult the trignometry book taped to the stock, twirl, lick our finger and test the wind" and get a shot off at some distant target and hit it.

The probelm with "there are 10--maybe a 100--more elk hanging out in the timber" is most of them are not spotted by the majority of hunters. I have pointed out game standing almost in the open and in the open and the "hunter" never saw a thing but woods or brush.

One guy I remember in particular told me, "That's a horse," when I pointed out a cow elk. Another guy I took deer hunting threw up his rifle and started to shoot at a herd of elk which we jumped in the timber. Fortunately I was close enough to stop him.

You post that you are not "dissing" and then go on to make fun of someone. Why bad mouth fellow outdoorsmen for what they enjoy?

Smokepole, I am an old fart who had secretaries to type/word process for the last 25-30 years of my career. I can get my rifle set up and do the Kentucky windage/elevation much faster than I type. Now then, the dials and knobs might slow that process to where the game would be long gone, Hunting is getting close. Shooting is the long range sniping. All in what one wants to do. My longest game kill was a bit beyond 500 yards on a day with absolutely no wind.(no dials or dots/bars on the reticle) I am not comfortable with the certainty of a properly placed bullet at that distance under usual wind conditions, so I choose not to do it again. Have fun, jack

Well, if the game is gone by the time you get set up, it's very easy to not take the shot......

Personally, I'd rather take the few seconds it takes to get the range with an LRF and adjust my crosshair so I can hold right on.

I don't consider dialing elevation/windage and ranging being uneccassarily time consuming on long shots.

IMO, they are crucial parts of the shot.

If the animal moves before you can range, dial and fire, then thats just the way it goes sometimes.

Better to lose an opportunity than rush a difficult shot.

If the animal moves before you can get a shot of at short range that's just the way it goes sometimes.

I hunt mostly deep woods, sometimes open fields for the Mule Deer. On a centerfire I have never seen the need for an AO. Maybe extreme long range, but I seldom take that shot. The normal deer has an 14" to 18" kill zone, can't see that an AO would help that much. My shots ae usually very fast and quick, no time to fiddle around. On my 22LR match rifles, AO is needed. at 50 yards no AO means no good score. Talking 1/4" or less here. Deer hunting I have a lot more latitude for a kill shot.

18"?? Where are you hunting, those are some big damn deer. So an AO is necessary for punching paper at 50, but not animals at 600?

Once again, I'll say that it's not necessary for most deer hunting. But some of the logic here is baffling.

When one with an A.O. hunts the woods he sets it and forgets it. No need to fiddle around with it for a very fast and quick shot.

OK, what does one set the AO at? Most scopes are set at 100 yards for parallex. In the woods where I hunt most shots are between 25 and 75 yards most often at a moving deer. With the large kill zone can't see the differance.

Where I hunt the range varies from 10 yards to 200 yards. I set the A.O. for about 150 and forget it. There is a place I can make a shot about 450 yards. Even there I don't change it unless I acutually see game and get into position.

Also I don't change the magnification setting from its lowest setting unless the game is very far away.

OK from what I see with my 22LR match rifles setting the AO at 150 yards would mean about 1/2" at 25 yards. Still well withing the kill zone. Unless at extreme long range I still don't see how an AO will help with a deer rifle at normal ranges IE up to 100 yards. My largest scope is a 3X9, set at 3 unless I go to the corn fields. Then I have plently of time to adjust. Still most shots are within 100 yards and to me no need for AO.

Some here, including me, have places where 100 yards is like right next door. Some of the action is in the next block or two streets over.

A longer shot usually takes a little more time to set up for poindexter....

And you can make 'em without an AO. I know, because I've done It.

So quit suggesting you need to have an AO to make longish shots on big game.

It's a well established fact that you don't.

Are poindexters good to eat? What's the kill zone on a poindexter??

They are quite easily hunted, due to the fact they haven't a clue.

Can be easily located due to their incessant babbling about adjustable objectives.

The ultimate thrill is to stack them up like cord wood at distance with a non-AO scope.

No good to eat, as they fall into the varmint category.

I live, hunt, and guide in elk country, you dummy. I see it every year, and it can be entertaining to watch, and to listen to them.

Besides it makes it easy and fun to, you know, make fun of them.........

But go ahead and carry on and keep packing that heavy gear--leaves more elk for me.


Casey

Well, it's good to see that you're finally treating this subject with the gravity it deserves. For a minute there, I was worried that you were gonna post some smart-ass comment like "the kill zone is exceedingly small, as every shot seems to be an ass shot."

Are you under the impression that your experience is consitant with all other hunters and guides?

Thank you?

Good on him - albeit expected to find bucks like that in the "vicinity of dandihood".

Welcome.

Lol. I left that out!

Parallax is an annoyance at the range...I tend to shoot an appropriate sized orange dot against a black background target because it helps me "hold small".But it is easy to see that dot float around as you move your head around the stock;and with some scopes, I can see the difference in group size from one scope to the other.Not a "huge" difference, but its' there.

The definition of "long range" varies with capability and equipment,but at say 300-500 yards,if I have "doubts" the simple solution for me is to get rid of the dots,cut out a full sized elk (or deer)target,with a slightly shaded vital area.This requires additional focus on that "imaginary"spot on the animal against a larger, monolithic background.

Shoot it for groups at distance the way you would in the field,if it makes you happy, but I prefer to watch POI from first shot,cold barrel.Not having that central aiming point(dot)will make parallax more difficult to detect.You should get central kill zone hits at 300-500 yards,even with a scope that does not adjust for parallax.

This is a bit different from trying to kill tiny varmints at distance, or shoot groups...but BG animals are not killed with groups.Generally they are(or should be) killed with a single shot from a cold barrel at whatever distance is afforded.I have killed deer and elk sized animals(coyotes too)to 400-500 yards with mostly fixed power scopes of modest power,and no adjustments for parallax.

Teaser:

Dandy.

All dinks.

Bet u could have killed everyone with a non AO scope.

Top row, 2nd in from left was killed W/1x Sightron on a muzzle loader. All the rest were 4-12 or 4.5-14x40 Leupolds with fine-duplex and AO.

Bottom right died in his bed, the rest of the bottom row died on the run from 75-300yds as did top right and next one in.

GASP!!!!!!!!!!!!! I've taken running shots and used an AO. Probably going to hell twice.

Nutter runner/AO kill:



Would you believe a fast walk and an AO?

I just got back from a weekend guiding aoudad hunters (2 this time). As usual I got to inspect their equipment, and test out my VX6 and my buddy's VX3 4.5-14 non AO (7 STW). To make a long story short, at lunchtime we ranged and shot 2 ft sized rocks. I could consistently hit @ 600 (4 for 4), 740 (3 for 4), and 908 (2 for 3) with my VX6, 7mag, shooting HSM trophy gold 168gr VLD hunting bullets. Not 'cause I'm a great shot, but because the MOA dial on the VX6 tracks perfectly, up and down and back to the 100 yd zero it started with. We had about the same consistency with my buddy's 7STW, and another hunters Nightforce 5-22x50. It obviously has the SF adjustment. The glass in my VX6 was noticeably better to my 51 yr old eyes than the NF. My conclusion was that I personally have no need for AO or SF. I could hit those targets on 6x-12x rather easily. No wind of course.

JG,

Only dink shooting dandy's need an AO.

Like ol horse head. Lol.

Nice animals pard and that is some good shooting JG.

JGRaider,



I am deeelighted to read that. I better be looking into this new line.

It may be just me, so don't take it to the bank without looking through one yourself. I will say this, I was more impressed this go 'round with the NF than I was previously 3-4 years ago. They're just a little bit too beefy for my tastes.

Only if you shot 'em with a .223. Then you're making the trip three times.

Ah CRAP! Killed a doe that way this fall on the run with a 223.