Who walks around carrying their rifle by the scope? I see people (even guides) doing this on TV and scratch my head. Doesn't make sense to me.

I do.




Travis

What else would you put a scope on a rifle for?

Bill,

I know it makes some people cringe, but I've not owned or used an internal adjusting scope or mounts that were so schitty they would lose zero from supporting the weight of the gun they're mounted to.

I think compared to the recoil a scope endures, being used as a carrying handle is next to nothing.



Travis

That is what stocks and slings are for.

I don't know if there is any harm or not in using the scope for a handle , I don't do it simply because I never got in the habit.



Mike

I don't condone it, but the scope and mounts should be able to handle it. miles

Bill_N,

When I was in my mid thirties I had a rifle built that was quite light for the times. I had high rings installed on purpose and carried it by the scope. I discovered the #6 screws were not adequate to hold the constant pressure and they came loose.

There was a fun thing I learned from the experience, though. I prefer high rings. When I bring up the rifle with my eyes closed and shoulder it, then open my eyes I am looking right through the center of the scope.

Just like so many tell us scopes are nothing but a sight, they are wrong. Scopes are used for other things, also. I don't see anything wrong with the practice of using the scope as a handle as long as the mounting system can handle the job. But then I don't try to impress others, only myself.

Big difference in a scope supporting the weight of a rifle VS a rifle supporting the weight of a scope. I learned about 40+ years ago that it was a bad idea. I too had gotten in the habit of carrying my rifle by my scope. I had them high, see through mounts on a 300 Savage. While hunting outside of Yellowstone on the White river I spotted an Elk feeding below me. I pulled the rifle up and the scope jiggled. Luckily I got that Elk but I learned my lesson. Tom

What was it chambered in?




Travis

I don't make it a habit but I do it on occasion.
Tis one of the reasons I prefer two-piece bases.

+1

If the rings were perfectly aligned and lapped it's probably OK but I don't think most scopes are mounted that way.

If your setup is not durable enough to hold by the scope occasionally then how would it ever survive a fall or bump?

6-48 screws with an average bite of maybe three threads never seemed adequate to withstand the constant vertical pull of a 7 or so lb. rifle. Probably work in a lot of cases but why not just carry it conventionally?

John

+2


I also carry it upside down by the receiver/magazine area.....occasionally, and frequently the so-called "African"carry...

Ok.





Travis

How did you determine your method of transport was the source of the problem?




Travis

Can't say for sure it was but from that point on I eliminated that possibility. Tom

+1. For many years.

pick it up by the scope but I can't think of a comfortable carry position I would use it for more then transferring off the ground to carry position

never have. my hands fit around the rifle just fine.

Pisses me off to agree with our new overzealous moderator but +3.

Probably somebody's shop.

Never, as it does not make sense to me either.

I saw a new scope get hit directly by a rock on the elevation turret. The scope buckled from the impact at the W&E housing. The rifle was slung over my son's shoulder and he slipped on a wet rock. He didn't fall completely down but the elevation housing took the blow.

You have a relatively thin aluminum tube inserted into the housing that contains the W&E mechanism - in many, but not all scopes. Carrying a 7 lb. or more rifle with the weight concentrated on such a joint seems like trouble waiting to happen. Murphy is alive and well.

(I also carry it upside down with my fingers around the magazine, never by the scope.)

Grabbed, yes, carry, no.

+1

So a scope getting whacked on the elevation turret with a rock is the same as carrying a rifle by the scope?

One of the valid ways to use a collimator (which so many people refuse to do because they can "bore-sight" the old-fashioned way) is to put one on the muzzle of a rifle in a vise, and then how doing various various things to the scope affects how the reticle lines up. You can make the reticle do all sorts of things just by pressing the top of the adjustment turrets in some scopes, or pressing the objective and ocular bell in different directions. But damn few scopes change POI just because we pressed on them a little.

This is because even big, tough scopes have to be a little flexible to withstand recoil. If manufacturers actually made them super-stiff, all sorts of problems would appear.

I'm one of those ignorant nitwits who does carry a rifle by the scope occasionally, and have yet to experience a change in POI. So +17, or whatever.

Hell yes it's a handle... Anymore questions???

I like for my rifles to balance right under the turrets...

John, I did not say a rock whack and carrying by the scope were the same thing. There is a joint - at least in that scope - that partially separated. Any joint can be a potential weak part in any structure. Some scopes may be made differently, you know more about that than I do. But you often caution against tightening the ring screws too much because of the thinness of the scope tube. So why put unnecessary stress on the tube and joint?

To me it seems prudent not to take chances; since carrying a rifle by the stock is not difficult!

It does not matter to me how people carry their rifles as long as they are safe with it. I simply chose not to carry a rifle by the aiming device.

Bill_N: I do not partake of the scope as a handle policy.
I am NOT sure whether it is or could be detrimental to maintaining a Rifle/scopes desired point of impact/sight/in?
I use slings and hand carry of the stock.
Hold into the wind
VarmintGuy

been using my scopes as handles forever.

Never any problems (unless there so low I can't carry them that way!)...

CKW,



This must be a hard lesson to learn. A rifle scope is not just an aiming device. This very thread proves that.

I stick my finger in the muzzle and drag it behind me

I only use the Euros as handles, the budweiser beer can material on Leupolds just does not cut it .

I can't make myself carry the few scoped rifles I own by the scopes. I'll either sling it over my shoulder or hand carry it by the stock. Prolly nothin' wrong with it within reason...I just can't bring myself to do it.

Just as long as no one happens to hold it at eye level and use it to look at something.

I don't do it but with a GOOD scope and GOOD steel mounts I don't think it would be a problem. What I get a kick out of it when guys use it as a handle with cheap aluminum see through rings and a $50 scope. When I worked at a gun shop I did a test where I mounted a scope in see through mounts, bore sighted it and then walked around the store for about an hour carrying it by the scope. I then put the bore sighter back in - not even close! Then again if the scope didn't bore sight right with see throughs we would just push on the scope and give the rings a little "tweek"!

5sdad,



That sounds difficult.

I have but not regulary. Never thought that it would be a problem and hasn't been.

I do. They make a fair carry handle especially if you have your sling off.

My scope has fogged up externally from the heat generated from my hand on occasion. Especially if it is moist out or quite cold-say 15 degrees Farenheit, like it sometimes is here. As a result, I am careful not to carry it that way then.

Gary

JFC, are you guys buying scopes made out of paper towel tubes?

I have way too many scoped rifles. I also have a bad habit when I buy a new scope in that the purchase may result in several changes on rifles other than the one the purchase was made for. I also have a few extra scopes in a drawer that I get to thinking it needs to be on a particular rifle. I change scopes too often.

I do have two rifles that have worn the same glass for well over twenty years. I think the scope makes a good handle if the mounts are high enough. These two are carried by the scope and I cannot rember how long it has been since the reticles need to be adjusted. I did buy a good supply of ammo that they liked back when.

Jack

I would if it made a better handle. My fingers don't fit under the scope.

Steve.

Maybe that's why I don't - I always use the lowest rings I can get away with.

Agreed x2. Big hands and low scope mounts make using any of my scopes as a handle near to impossible. Not sure I'd go that route even if I was a skinny-fingered high-scope-shootin type of guy. If not slung my scoped rifles usually get carried one-handed from right under the balance point of the stock.

This is some funny stuff.

I carry by the scope often. I've used the rifle as a 'climbing' stick often. I've used the rifle to brace me crossing streams/rivers, often.


Aside from borrowing a sling from a pard last year, so I could climb into a deer stand, I can't tell you the last time I used a sling.

I wouldn't even consider hunting where/the way I hunt without a sling.

How do you hunt that requires a sling?

I keep one in my pack or cargo pocket for freeing up both hands when needed but then it wouldn't be considered hunting at that point.
As far as using my scope for a handle goes? Not for anything length of time or for very far.

How on Earth do people shoot without completely entangling themselves in a sling? Do they actually hit something?

You ever been sitting on your butt, or shooting offhand, without sticks, bipod, anything? Tightening the sling around your arm helps, a bunch.

Slings are necessary for me. When I get where I going to hunt out come the binoculars.

No, I only shoot from a bench. I'll give it a try, thanks!

And then what? No ground where you hunt?

It was a stupid question BTW.

Well duh,,, why don't you tell us something we don't know...

Thus the reason you are always in search of the 5 pound rifle. Packing the 50 pound bench out in the field is a pain the in the azz.....

Don't blame your fat fingers on something like that...

Yes I do often.

Was it Groucho Marx who said? "Sometimes a scope is just a scope."

I believe that he said that he loves his scope, but that he does take it out sometimes.

Aha.

No, just a stupid belief. Not sure how I've managed to kill shiet without a sling all these years, must be doing something wrong.

The point being you make it sound like it's an absolute, which it ain't, only a preference, which is fine.

An absolute with me. Slings not mandatory for your stand hunting, obviously.

I tend to look at my scope and mounts with a degree of suspicion, paranoia, and a little bit of awe and usually try to suck up to the whole works a bit by saying nice, reassuring things to them.

One time I slipped on a shale slide and banged my rifle and scope on the rocks as we slid down about eight feet. I then later missed an over 350" bull at 350 yards by about two feet due to my scope being whacked--it now was off a foot to the right at about a hundred yards as verified later.

The scope and the mounts took it out on me as I see it; it was pure retribution for being dropped. I kinda see them as royalty--not to be touched or treated commonly so I use a sling and try not to make direct eye contact until at the last moment.

I'll carry mine by the scope. If the scope, mount, and rings can't handle that I'm not sure I'd trust them to hold up to a long car ride, much less being used in the field.

1 inch carry handle, you betcha.

Now we know what those extra-high scope mounts are for- clearance for scope carry in the winter, with heavy gloves on........

Well, you use rifles (well, Savage at least) as a crow bar too!

No I do not carry my rifle by the scope.
I either carry the rifle by holding the pistol grip in my hand and resting the rifle on my shoulder or have the rifle cupped in my right hand or carry the rifle cupped in the crook of my left elbow and holding the rifle grip in my right hand.Or I carry in a ready position with the rifle pulled close to my body and all I have to do is raise the butt of the rifle and shoot.
About all I use a sling for is when I climb into a tree stand.

I dont see how a person could carry a rifle by the scope unless it was in very high mounts,only way I could carry any of my rifles by the scope is the scoped AR I have.
Mt other rifles are scoped bolt actions and there is room for only my fingertips(fingers will not slide between the rifle and scope) to go under the scope in a curling or pinching, fashion with the tip of my thumb from the other side.
Not very Much control of the rifle and I would have muscle spasms in my fingers in probably less then 20 steps !

And I have average to small hands and fingers.

I just tried an Old Mauser 98 with a Leupold 4x28 in higher mounts so bolt handle can clear scope and I can If i wanted to carry it by the scope.
Cant see me wanting to though as it would be much slower to bring into action and the weight of the rifle would bearing on a much smaller area of my hand than the other ways of carrying.

Of course. That way you can save the 2 ounces and leave the sling at home. When you get tired simply carry your rifle over the shoulder like a hobo's stick ...

Best way to always get those fat fingers under is switching to see-through mounts


Jokes aside, 90% of the miles and 70% of the time my rifle is carried in/on my pack; the remainder by the sling. When I hunted tree stands exclusively, and it always took less than a hour to get to stand, I used the sling 95% of the time.

I've Carried One, A lot Miles By The Scope. Never The First Problem.. Most Miles Have Been With Swarovski AV In A Set S&K Rings And Bases. Have Also Used Talley And Leupold D.D's With No Problems... I Hate Slings..

I prefer to carry my scoped rifles that way, Idont use my sling near as much as I use too.

I carry by the scope some, not much though just because I don't really like the way it feels for a long haul.. I prefer to(if the scope up enough)stick my thumb betwixt the scope and action..... But I grab by the scope all the time getting in and out of a truck, etc.

Mostly I carry my rifle on a sling.

I'm sure most of us are in the same boat as you. We just like fu cking with the op . Honestly, for me, carrying the rifle by the scope is a bad habit. I'll do it just as you do, but then remind myself that it isn't a carry handle. I also want to add that none of my scopes ever lost zero or suffered any harm by carrying them a short distance by the scope. Good scopes and good mounts/rings are key here...

This thread is starting to remind me those on whether the .223 is a deer rifle. The people who are sure it isn't have mostly never used one on deer, but "know" it won't work. Then there are the people who actually have killed deer, sometimes quite a few, with a .223, and know it will.

bsa1917hunter,



Obviously this is only an opinion.

Ringman, read it very carefully and very slowly. I said "for me".... It may be different for you my friend..

Many a deer have fallen to the mighty 22lr. I'm in the boat that the .223 rem is a "deer rifle" and a damn good varmint rifle as well..

Carrying by the scope occasionally sure helps when trying to weave a rifle through thick brush. I've never had one change zero because of it.

You got it. My Ruger with big bell scope and high rings is made to carry that way. My Tikka is low mounted so I can't. I used to tote my Marlin GG Africa style. None of this ever affected accuracy.

I always do. Never a problem, and see no reason not to do so. If the scope/mounts cannot handle that, then they won't handle a few Gs of recoil force either.

And I don't use steel mounts.

I did read it slowly. That's the only way I can read. In fact some times I even have to sound out a word before I can move on. Sometimes I have to read something a couple times to get it. But I did notice that. Others may not.

And here's a link to an oldy but goody, on the same topic from 2005:

Do you use your scope as a handle?

I don't carry only by the scope, my fingers won't fit with low mounts and the DNZ's have a bar below. Usually my fingers are under the action and thumb on the front scope mount on top of the scope. The fat azz DNZ's work well for the thumb on top.

I always carry a sling with me. There are a couple of spots I hunt where I have to climb and need both my hands...one on a climbing/walking stick and the other on any roots, or rocks I can grab. Have held the rifle by the barrel and used the butt as a second walking stick before. I picked up an Elberstock this year and I'm anxious to see how the rifle carrier in it works for some of these spots....kinda worried that the barrel end may catch the ground when coming down the slopes though.

I use mine as a buck for logs when cutting firewood.Works good cause its a Vortex.

I do it....sometimes.

After reading this thread, I've decided to install quick release rings/base on every rifle. I will then remove the scope and keep it in the factory box and in my back pack.

When the time comes that I need to take a shot, I will carefully remove said scope from said backpack and box and install on my rifle.

That should eliminate ANY concern, other than recoil, of something happening to my scope.

Hey, even recoil won't be a problem if you mount it only on .223's. But the .223 won't kill deer.

Remember the guy who came on and posted how he carried two or three scopes and types of ammo so he could swap on and load up according to what situation he encountered while he hunted?

Did he use a Scope Caddy??Say James, I will use the Leupold 4X14 X 40 30MM please and the 130 grain Noslers for this shot!!!

Damn.....JB you know I take your word as gospel, as Ive never seen you be wrong.


I'm gonna hafta re-think this whole thing now.........

You better check with W.E. Tibbe, he knows everything.

At the very least he can tell you what edition of Field & Stream he read it in...

Where can I find this font of knowledge?

Cause I'd really rather go with opinion than actual experience.....

In a detailed and meticulous way.

My scopes are optical instruments. Stocks and slings are for carrying. After missing a few opportunities as a youngster due to the time needed to remove rifle and sling from my shoulder, I don't do slings anymore.

I own a couple, but like my cell phone, they stay at home.

I remember the instructors in Basic and AIT screaming that the M-16 did not have a MF'ing carry handle, that it was a rear sight housing. Those that chose to use it that way were vigorously and physically corrected. There was a strong emphasis on muzzle awareness and not flagging each other. To this day I find it difficult to hold any rifle in a similar fashion.

While moving I frequently use trekking poles and use a Kifaru gunbearer or sling my rifle. When stalking the rifle is in my hands.


mike r

My scopes are handles. Utilize the appropriate ring height to make it happen. And, I use two piece bases as well for that reason.

I do not use rifle slings. I have never found one that would stay on my shoulder. I have tried many.

I don't know about that? Does QL interpolate scopes as handles?

I learned much the same way with regards to the “carrying handle” and judicious physical correction. I suspect I would still be doing push ups if I had tried packing an M24 via the scope.

I’ve retained the habit of not carrying a rifle by it’s optic.....with the number of scope failures out there, adding another potential point of failure to the list does not seem wise. Whether it really makes any difference or not? I don’t know, or care. It’s just as easy to grab by the action when such a carry method is employed.

Try the rubber ones from Slogan Outdoors and you'll never say that again, ever.

People keep making reference to using slings only for their secondary purpose of carrying a rifle. If they aren't using them to wind themselves up like Frodo after he met Shelob (their primary purpose), what are they doing to delay shooting long enough to let the game wander off?

They’re busy twisting knobs and dicking with their rangefinders. Ample opportunity to let game wander off, even if a sling is not being used as a shooting aid.

Aahh so many ways to transport a rifle....so many ways to screw up in the presence of game. So we miss an opportunity,blame the gear instead of ourselves and how we used it,and ignore the fact that we were not thinking 2 steps ahead and simply were not ready. I call it "buck fever".

So we blame the gear instead of ourselves.We learn this stuff by (guess how?)...screwing up.Or in practice or varmint hunting,or just making mistakes.

Friends and I used slings for years...for shooting piles of woodchucks,at the range,on big game. Detachable sling swivels are a wonderful invention. If still hunting,we removed them and stuck them in the pack,or looped them through our belts.They never cost us a shot because we used them all the time and knew when to use them,and when not to.

Other things we used as field rests included rolled up jackets, tree limbs, binoculars,rocks, logs,a handful of little saplings,hats,packs and pack frames.

The primary purpose of the sling was not to carry the rifle.Their purpose was/is as a shooting aid,and secondarily to transport if you need both hands to climb, drag a deer,get into a tree stand.Among others, I owe my biggest Maine whitetail to the use of a sling to help steady a long off hand shot.

If the rifle is over your shoulder in game country, you're a boob; and if you miss an opportunity because your rifle was slung over your shoulder, blame yourself, not the sling. Even with the sling on the rifle, you carry the rifle in your hands if there is any possibility of encountering game.

This stuff is not hard but it takes a little common sense and maybe some pracice.

What time is it?




Bob's answer:

The oldest means of determining time is by observing the location of the sun in the sky. When the sun is directly overhead, the time is roughly 12:00 noon. A slightly later development, and one less subject to an individual's judgment, is the use of a sundial. During the daylight hours, sunlight falls on a vertical pole placed at the center of a calibrated dial, thus casting a shadow on the dial and providing the reader with a relatively accurate time reading.

The invention of the mechanical clock in the fourteenth century was a major advancement—it provided a more concise and consistent method of measuring time. The mechanical clock includes a complicated series of wheels, gears, and levers powered by a falling weights and with a pendulum (or later a wound-up spring). These pieces together moved the hand or hands on a dial to show the time. The addition of chimes or gongs on the hour, half hour, and quarter hour followed soon afterward. By the eighteenth century, smaller clocks for the home were available, and, unlike their predecessors, were closed and sealed in a case.

The more exacting the workmanship of the moving parts, the more accurate the clock was. From invention through to the middle of the twentieth century, developments in clock-making focused on making the moving parts work as accurately as possible. Developments in metal technology and in miniaturization, the lubrication of small parts, and the use of first, natural sapphires (and then artificial sapphires) at the spots that received the most stress (the jeweled movement) all became integral components of horological science. Small pocket watches, perhaps two to three inches (five to seven centimeters) in diameter, were available by the end of the nineteenth century. Mechanical wristwatches were an everyday item in the United States by the 1960s. And yet, the central problem faced by watch and clockmakers remained the same: mechanical parts wear down, become inaccurate, and break.

In the years immediately following World War II, interest in atomic physics led to the development of the atomic clock. Radioactive materials emit particles (decayed) at a known, steady rate. The parts of a mechanical clock that ratcheted to keep the time could be replaced by a device that stimulated the watch movement each time a particle was emitted by the radioactive element. Atomic clocks, incidentally, are still made and sold, and they are found to be consistently accurate.

With the development of the microchip in the 1970s and 1980s, a new type of watch was invented. Wristwatches that mixed microchip technology with quartz crystals became the standard; there are few non-quartz wristwatches made today. The microchip is utilized to send signals to the dial of the watch on a continual basis. Because it is not a mechanical device with moving parts, it does not wear out.

The use of quartz in watches makes use of a long-known type of electricity known as piezoelectricity. Piezoelectricity is the current which flows from or through a piece of quartz when the quartz is put under electrical and/or mechanical pressure (piezo is from the Greek verb meaning "to press"). A quartz watch uses the electricity from a piece of quartz subjected to the electricity from a battery to send
The heart of a quartz watch is a tiny sliver of quartz. In a natural form, quartz is first loaded into a giant kettle or autoclave. Hanging from the top of the autoclave are seeds or tiny particles of quartz with the desired crystalline structure. An alkaline material is pumped into the bottom of the autoclave, and the autoclave is heated to a high temperature, dissolving the quartz in the hot alkaline liquid, evaporating it, and depositing it on the seeds. After about 75 days, the chamber can be opened, and the newly grown quartz crystals can be removed and cut into the correct proportions.
The heart of a quartz watch is a tiny sliver of quartz. In a natural form, quartz is first loaded into a giant kettle or autoclave. Hanging from the top of the autoclave are seeds or tiny particles of quartz with the desired crystalline structure. An alkaline material is pumped into the bottom of the autoclave, and the autoclave is heated to a high temperature, dissolving the quartz in the hot alkaline liquid, evaporating it, and depositing it on the seeds. After about 75 days, the chamber can be opened, and the newly grown quartz crystals can be removed and cut into the correct proportions.
a regular, countable series of signals (oscillations) to one or more microchips. (Electrical wall clocks, in contrast, use the regularity of wall current to keep track of time.)

The most accurate quartz watches are those in which the time appears in an electronically controlled digital display, produced via a light-emitting diode (LED) or a liquid crystal display (LCD). It is possible, of course, to have the microprocessor send its signals to mechanical devices that make hands move on the watch face, creating an analog display. But because the hands are mechanically operated through a portion of the watch known as a gear train, analogue watches usually are not as accurate as digitals and are subject to wear. Both types of watches achieve tremendous accuracy, with digital watches commonly being accurate to within three seconds per month.
Raw Materials

Electronic watches make use of many of the most modern materials available, including plastics and alloy metals. Cases can be made of either plastic or metal; watches with metal cases often include a stainless steel backing. Microchips are typically made of silicon, while LEDs are usually made of gallium arsenide, gallium phosphide, or gallium arsenide phosphide. LCDs consist of liquid crystals sandwiched between glass pieces. Electrical contacts between parts are usually made of a small amount of gold (or are goldplated); gold is an almost ideal electrical conductor and can be used successfully in very small amounts.
The Manufacturing
Process

This section will focus on quartz digital watches with LED displays. Although the assembly of such watches must be performed carefully and methodically, the most essential aspects of the manufacturing process are in the manufacture of the components.
Quartz

1 The heart of a quartz watch is a tiny sliver of quartz. The synthetically produced quartz is cut by the manufacturer with a diamond saw and shipped to the watchmaker to use. The production of "grown" quartz is a critical step in the process.

Quartz, in a natural form, is first loaded into a giant kettle or autoclave (the same device used by doctors and dentists to sterilize instruments). Hanging from the top of the autoclave are seeds or tiny particles of quartz
In watch assembly, the entire set of crystal and microchips is set onto a circuit board. A battery is also installed that generates electricity for the quartz crystal and supplies the power for the LED display.
In watch assembly, the entire set of crystal and microchips is set onto a circuit board. A battery is also installed that generates electricity for the quartz crystal and supplies the power for the LED display.
with the desired crystalline structure. An alkaline material is pumped into the bottom of the autoclave, and the autoclave is heated to a temperature of roughly 750 degrees Fahrenheit (400 degrees Celsius). The natural quartz dissolves in the hot alkaline liquid, evaporates, and deposits itself on the seeds. As it deposits itself, it follows the pattern of the crystalline structure of the seeds. After about 75 days, the chamber can be opened, and the newly grown quartz crystals can be removed and cut into the correct proportions. Different angles and thicknesses in the cutting lead to predictable rates of oscillation. The desired rate of oscillation for quartz used in wristwatches is 100,000 megaHertz or 100,000 oscillations per second.

2 To work most effectively, the piece of quartz needs to be sealed in a vacuum chamber of one sort or another. Most commonly, the quartz is placed into a sort of capsule, with wires attached to both ends so that the capsule can be soldered or otherwise connected to a circuit board.

The microchip

3 The electronic leads generated by a battery through the quartz (producing oscillations) will go to a microchip that serves as a "frequency dividing circuit." Microchip manufacture, like the quartz, is also carried out by the supplier to the watch manufacturer. An extensive and complex process, making microchips involves chemical and/or x-ray etching of a microscopic electronic circuit onto a tiny piece of silicon dioxide.
4 The oscillation rate of perhaps 100,000 vibrations/second is reduced to 1 or 60 or some other more manageable number of oscillations. The new pattern of oscillation is then sent to another microchip that functions as a "counter-decoder-driver." This chip will actually count the oscillations that it receives. If there are sixty oscillations per second, the chip will change the reading on an LED every second. After 3,600 oscillations (60 x 60), the counter will instruct the LED to change the reading for minutes. And, after 60 x 60 x 60 oscillations (216,000), the counter will change the hour reading.

Assembly

5 The entire set of crystal and microchips is set onto a circuit board. The board incorporates a space to hold the battery that supplies electricity to the quartz crystal and supplies the power for the LED display. Generally, the space for the battery is on the outside of the surface facing the back of the case. The battery can be replaced by removing the back of the watch, shaking out the old one, and dropping in the new battery.
6 The mechanism used for setting the watch is then connected. This mechanism involves two pins that extend beyond the case of the watch. One pin lets the counter circuit know which reading to reset—seconds, minutes, or hours. The second pin is pushed a number of times to bring the display to the desired reading.
7 The entire circuit board, along with a battery, is then closed into a case, and a wrist strap is attached.

Additional Watch Features

Because the microchips in a quartz watch are capable of holding large quantities of information, it is possible, from an engineering standpoint, to add other functions to a watch without much difficulty. An additional push button on the case connected to the counter circuit can provide alarms, tide information, and more. The microchip can just as easily be programmed to set the watch forward or back a defined amount at the push of a button, so that an owner can determine the time in another time zone, or perhaps have two, three, or more time zone times displayed successively.
Quality Control

All components of electronic watches are manufactured under a strict system of quality control. Quartz crystals, for example, have their frequencies tested before being used in a watch. Microchips must be made in a "clean room" environment with specially filtered air, since even the tiniest dust particles can render a chip useless. Microchips are examined carefully and are also bench tested for accuracy before use.

After a watch is manufactured, it is again tested before being shipped to market. In addition to its time-keeping accuracy, it is also subjected to a drop-test in which it must continue to operate properly after being dropped and otherwise abused; a temperature test; and a water test. While a watchmaker may, with proper testing and proof, claim that a watch is "water resistant" at certain, known specifications, it is inaccurate to say a watch is "waterproof because without particular specification that designation is meaningless.

Large watch companies make all of their own components, ensuring that product quality standards are in place at the earliest point in the manufacturing process.
The Future

Because today's electronic watches are by design so accurate, accuracy is not the only goal for which a watch manufacturer aims. Future changes in product will take advantage of other technologies from other fields such as the addition of a calculator function to a watch, or even the addition of a radio-transmitter that can send out a traceable signal if the wearer is lost or in trouble.

Read more: http://www.madehow.com/Volume-1/Watch.html#ixzz3iYEjNiST

I don't usually carry by the scope, but occasionally do use it as a handle to hold the rifle by when repositioning.

Now those tall turrets… They are great! I think it was Big Stick that pointed out how handy they are for lapping in scope rings. Works great!

John

Laffin!

You have an ignore button. Please use it. I'd be grateful.


I understand your intellect only allows microbites of thought,and your ability to string two sentences together is suspect. None of this is my fault.You haven't said anything really useful since I've been on here.Just another "drive-by".

Get some rest. You'll be better soon.

Beats carrying it by the bolt knob by multitudes of better.

If you carry hot-even if it doesn't mess with the screws-I wouldn't think it that great of an idea, what with the safety and trigger being down there and the possibility of them bumping and rubbing who knows what.

Addition: There is an old time warning of being extra watchful around those in the field who carry a shotgun around in one hand dangling at their side.

How else they gonna carry it? Ain't no scope or sling on a shotgun....

In both hands like they were ready to use it.

And out of the weeds, sticks and other catchy things shotgunners often travel thru. At least in my part of the country, shotguns and rifles are carried thru much the same type of cover.

That was pretty funny.

I was going to say much the same thing. We even had a rifle (the L1A1) fitted with what was undeniably a carrying handle, but woe betide you if you were ever seen to carry it that way. Even decades later the idea of carrying a rifle like that (or on a sling, unless doing something which requires both hands) goes right against the grain.

The DS sure have a way of making lessons stick!

98% of the time whilst moving the rifle is cradled in my off hand/arm.

Like thus

UBER laughing...




Travis

Hell no. The scope may take it, but why risk it...

Bob is one of the few guys who can respond to a query in something other than an acerbic word clipping. He actually knows how to write, carry a line of thought based on experience to a practical resolution or suggestion.

Those with short attention plans can of course always move on to stuff with more pictures.

OK OK let's shift gears a little.....Have any of you carried a woman like a bowling ball?

I've rolled a few out the front door that way.

I knew I could count on the usual suspects to find Steelhead amusing...they must originally be from New Jersey....or something like that.


They do real well on the 223AI thread though. That's their natural habitat.

That concise enough for third graders?

NO!

I have, but the best example I can think of is a cousin of mine who has done it for many years. The 30-06 Sako that he carries this way have probably taken around 5000 animals. I have never seen this rifle with a sling The rifle wears a Lynx LX2 which is probably about the same quality as a Leupold VX2 I guess.

I think there is no problem carrying it this way as long as you have a decent quality scope and rings.

Pieter

It's ok if you're not funny Bob, you can still pull off the suspender look!

Unlike you, I'm not on here to try to be "funny".

That you on the left?

At least someone got you off the front porch. You left the driveway yet this month?

It's never not funny watching you get pissed off. I'm sure when I become an old man like you that my sense of humor will slip.

I'll also impress people with 40 paragraph answers, when a sentence will do. You baffle all the time.

Unlike you, everything I've done, everything, I've done on my own.

I often miss your wonderful stories about Barnes bullets and turrets, having never used either.

You're a Field & Stream article with an attorney's salary that has allowed you some good PAID time afield.

I know, it will be considered envy by you, but it's any thing but, its sympathy.

Just because you've screwed 100 high class HOOKERS, don't make a you 'player'


Carry on.

Exactly.....

They are very predictable, aren't they?

I couldn't say. I didn't make it that far.




Clark

Bob,

I sincerely doubt gun slings were originally developed as a shooting aid, because too many early guns (including early rifles) weren't accurate enough to benefit from a shooting sling. Instead, slings became dual-purpose as rifles became more accurate.

Another little piece of evidence is the sling swivel studs on many European shotguns, which I find very handy, especially when turkey hunting, where a shotgun is carried far more than shot. Which is exactly why many turkey shotguns have sling swivel studs.

As somebody named O'Connor once pointed out, rifles are relatively clumsy burdens when carried, because their comformation is primarily for being aimed and shot. A sling is a simple and natural way to make them less clumsy burdens between shots.

O'Connor's wife didn't like slings, instead carrying her rifles like Steelhead carries his, one reason detachable slings are so popular: If you don't like slings, for whatever reason, then you can take 'em off. Or if you have ambivalent feelings about slings, you can put 'em on or take 'em off.

My thoughts exactly, whatever works for you and you are comfortable with. I don't carry by the scope, I have carried by the barrel before, I do use a sling for carrying and shooting in hasty form from time to time depending on what rest is available or just cradled in my arms. My favorite sling is the Trader Keith's canvas web and leather sling.

But never unoriginal. At best you're boring.

I am certainly glad people like you and your sheeple don't approve. If you did I'd wonder about myself. Thanks for the compliment.

Wow, some people are wound a little tight.

John thanks. I am pretty darned sure I made reference to taking them off,when you don't need or want them, in my post.

What I don't understand is what throws people on here into an absolute tis when someone mentions using them as a shooting aid. I can only conclude they don't really know how.

I promise you that you've never seen me mad. Rather I'm incredulous. Let's see what you don't like about me:

-I don't zero rifles the way you do and you seem upset that I've killed game up close and further than you have, without turrets. You find this annoying.Yet it has worked well for me countless times.

-I use slings to shoot and carry rifles. You borrow them from people to climb into tree stands.

-You think(assume,speculate,guess) that the only hunting I have done has been "guided", paid for, and my hand held. So I resemble a F&S character to you. Truth is I have hunted around a bit and easily more than half my hunts west of the Mississippi have been unguided,where I have found,shot, and processed my own game.I could prove this rather easily if I thought you were worth convincing.

ALL of my hunts back east are unguided...I stay at lodges and friends cabins. I get invited to lots of places,here and out west, because I try to be a good guy and people seem to like me.

So....most ALL the animals I have killed have been largely on my own. I use a guide in Canada because I have to by law; but even there, I set the agenda and go off by myself because I know what I want to do.

In any event I have been lucky to do a lot and the majority has been largely on my own. In any event it's a lot more than you will ever do.

- You don't like the way I communicate, the way I talk, the way I write. Too bad. That's an outgrowth of how I make my living,advising people on important stuff involving things that are important to them,and for which I get paid.

More importantly, I don't see anywhere here,where you've been appointed as the censor for this site, and how you are entitled to ridicule, demean,belittle, and criticize,me nor anyone else for what they,say or do,nor how they say it. That's censorship and you have neither the authority nor the acumen to impose your will on me nor anyone else.

I'm not the one running around the internet finding quotes to belittle me,pictures of old guys who look nothing like me,and making condescending reference to my age.It's the kind of behavior I expect from kids; you revel in the chicanery.

Oh...BTW I've been pegged as a decade or so younger than I am. I'm not going to apologize for my age even when the criticism comes from an internet bully.

So, it will be a cold day in hell before I let you dictate to me what I say on here and how I say it.

As to Barnes bullets, who cares? They aren't hard to figure out. I've been using something fully as good for 25-30 years. But you seem to get a kick out of them.

Carry on yourself. Unfortunately you seem to be a permanent part of the landscape around here. A lot of former posters who actually had something to offer, didn't like the landscape so much.

You don't need to explain yourself Bob, but you did so quite well, as usual. I'm quite sure I've culled more big game that that loser has ever shot at. He's not worth the time and effort discussing it.

You know you're a zero when you've averaged 15 posts a day on this forum, for almost 13 years.......a pathetic picture it paints.

You couldn't pay me enough to guide for you, Bob. Nevertheless, I'd be happy to hunt with you on my turf simply because I know you'd ask whatever questions you needed answered….and you don't need your hand held, if only obviously. Yeah, I can read sign. (Conversely, there are some that wouldn't, and do.) As some have been known to say, "This ain't rocket surgery."

JG: No doubt....on all counts.

Compelling.

Bob's word count in ONE post is equal to 200 of my posts, though there's no more info in his.


You still offering to kick my ass again? Please, I recall you offering to do it a few years ago. I'm guessing it's getting boring for you to keep slapping the wife around.

Holy F*ck, who asked Bob his favorite color?

Bob can't take a joke. If we don't treat something as wordy and serious he breaks down. Said to see a boy get so twisted over a joke. I'm sure Bob would be a hoot in a camp, so long as everyone was Mennonite


I KNEW the What time is it/how a clock is made would spin him off. I was hoping it wouldn't, but maybe one day he'll figure out how to take a joke.


Bob's breakdown over a joke

And now, if you can settle down Bob, I like you, if I didn't I wouldn't have made the joke. Obviously you didn't like it and had to step it up with personal attacks, and I'll always follow.

I'm an eye for an eye kind of guy, not a turn the other cheek.

That said, I'll forget about this thread in another 30 seconds and still be willing to help you if it's in my power to do so.

[s][/s]

psssssst

JG - have you had the time to crunch the numbers on Bob's post count averages?

What kind of picture does that paint?

David

No. Bob's posts are informative and interesting. You're not going to start stalking me again are you?

I'd love too. I'm 54 now, and still wouldn't break a sweat on your punk ass.

Feel free to leave my wife out of it if you don't mind. FWIW been married to the same fine woman for over 30 years. But then again, this is not a surprise to me, given the fact you made fun of a kid with a disability, one good hand, and one that's basically missing, just 'cause you don't like his dad. Remember that?

He's like a buddy of mine who makes being a smart-ass a varsity sport, as well as being a gadfly. He's hunted enough to earn his stripes, but his mouth has probably been filled with a fist more than a time or two over the years. Not worth the skin on your knuckles. Grab a cold one and save your blood pressure.

Always enjoy seeing evidence of your over inflated ego JG. Could you explain to the group again just how expensive your mule deer hunts are. There may be a few new guys that haven't seen it yet.

David

Since I know JG, I think you must mistake him for someone else. Overinflated ego? Hardly, I've found him him to down to earth with a self deprecating sense of humor. Not the stuff of an egomaniac. I will venture to say he has little tolerance for the disingenuous. I will also add that he can pack more whoop-ass than you can likely handle in a month. Could be wrong since I don't know you, but my money's on Johnny.

Sorry, I guess that was Scott on the call out. Statement true either way.

Now back to the original topic - African carry or use a sling. Don't stress your optics or mounts. This scope carry thing must be left over from Eugene Stoner putting a handle on the AR15/M16.

So you're saying JG is a fire breathing 54 year old bad ass that'll whoop on anybody that get's cross ways with him?

Relative of Biq Squeeze by any chance?

Thanks for the belly laugh!

David

No use in explaining it pard. We won't have extra tags for at least the next 5 years.

For future reference:

Base cost, all inclusive of tags, food etc. $4500
Idiot, loudmouth, smartass, etc surcharge $5500

Total for hunters like yourself $10,000 for 4 day hunt

That really hurts JG! I thought for sure you were gonna offer me a 'campfire deal.

David

Saw this on another forum. Had to share after reading the last couple of pages - "Never wrestle with a pig, you'll just get dirty and the pig will like it"

That is a special deal for you.


I often times give my tag to kids who deserve it......


[img:left][/img]

[img:left][/img]

no chit...

Dude,

He could pretty much whoop anyone not named John Shsrp. JG ain't that badass. Check the Africa Forum if you need to know John Sharp.

Dude,

Do you know how stupid you sound talking about a 54 year old in the context of "he could pretty much whoop anyone...."?

Crank up the Bon Jovi and drink a cold one bruh!

David

Nice deer, happy hunters, well done

You don't know him and I do, therefore I'm better qualified to pass judgement on the subject than John Bon Jovi.

I know a 60 year old I ain't crossing - John Sharp.





Look, chances are you two will never cross paths. I'm trying to help you out.

You'd be surprised how many people didnt know that.

Thanks for getting us back on topic.

Hmmm...sounds like the musings of a wet-behind-the-ears 30-something poster.

I suspect you're being generous. Who says "bruh" anyway (other than teen-somethings- and what does it actually mean?

Glad the sarcasm wasn't lost on you.

David

Bob and I are doing some hunting together this fall.
I'm rather looking forward to it.

And maybe coming home with his Mashburn. *grins*

Klik: Thanks!

You,too Scott. Just don't forget this a high dollar hunt and I may need my hand held,because....you know.....I am a high paid lawyer and usually pay a LOT of money for ALL my hunts.

People I never met know this...laffin'.

You know what they say Bob. Nobody likes lawyers till they need one. Same with my profession.

You forgot "afraid to get your hands dirty".

Scott: Yeah.That was an expensive hunt. Plane fare to Wyoming....food, etc.Cost a bundle.


He was 340 yards. I lazed it AFTER the shot. No turrets. How'd I even hit him?

No guide....shucks had to shoot and dress him myself.

I was 59 or 60 years old in that picture.Do I look like John Buhmiller to you? No suspenders.

Idiots....LOL!

Bob, I just don't know how you did it, "western camo" and all.

Was Robert Mitchum an older brother?

George I have been asked that...more than once....

Nice buck Bob, very nice.

What wasn't lost on me is the notion you seem to have that if your 54 years old you can't fight. While it's true, 50-something muscles can't keep up with a 20-something or even a 30-something set of muscles, neither the 20 year old nor the 30 year old has seen near as much of life as the 54 year old has. I speak from experience. I'm 55. I harbor no illusions about being about being a bad-ass, because I'm not. I have, however, been weight training since I was 13, and training in martial arts since I was 18. I don't like to fight and do all I can to avoid it. The training served me well during my 16 year career as a Deputy Sheriff in Brazos County, Texas. My training enables me to stop a fight before one really gets going. That generally means the other guy either can't and doesn't want to continue being an irritant after the initial contact. If I were forced to fight a highly trained 20 year old I'd be in for a world of hurt. But, something I've found about the true bad asses of the non-criminal world; they don't want to fight and will do just about anything to avoid a street fight.

JG thanks. He was an old buck.

Thanks! You make an excellent straight man.

It's the idea that a 54 yr old man is still resorting to threats of physical violence and intimidation to resolve conflicts. That someone is not so subtly insunating that this 54 yr old man might kick my ass if I continue to disagree with him - phugging hilarious!

I see why you are so insulted now - you're that age and you still believe this is viable behaviour. I'm crying I'm laughing so hard....

David

Copying Stick? Don't you have to ask his permission before you start throwing his verbiage around?

Clown.

Gonna kick my ass now?

David

Probably not the most comfortable way of toting a rifle, but ya I've carried my rifle many times grasping the scope as a handle.

Lol.....if a person grabs his gun by the scope or not turns into middle aged men talking about fighting and how much they work out....wow too funny.

For the record, I did not bring the subject in to this discussion

sad but true.

I carry my rifles by the scope and I'd kick all yall's asses.

are Bob and JGRaider the same person?

Nope. I don't have the slightest desire to hit you or even exchange harsh words with you. When you get old and decrepit like me it takes too damned long to heal when I get injured regardless the cause of the injury. But, I would bet every gun in my safe that a conversation between us face to face would not even resemble the posts we exchange.

I'm 5'-8" 160# and I'll whip all of ya'.

Laffin', only on the fire.

Negative......Bob's a yankee, I'm TX oilfield trash.....

Shrapnels dad can kick your dads azz!

If carrying a rifle by the scope started this big of a pizzing match, I don't suppose I should mention Ive done the "African Carry" with no sling, and a hot chamber!


and no blue tape......

Yes, but have you ever viewed anything through a scope that is mounted on a rifle?

No.



I might have to give that a try....

Yes i have used mine to carry my rifle.Never a problem. I also find it hard to shoot something without viewing it in my scope. ED K

Once again the Campfire fails, due to its lack of an Irony Icon.

Nothing like packing a couple of heavy hunting rifles around by the scopes to get you in shape for a good fight. In fact people will probably stop you and ASK to fight....

SLM,



I'm just below you at 5'7" and 152. But last year I posted I am 6'2", weigh 240 pounds, twenty-five years old and have been a Navy SEAL for ten years. The very next day Seafire, who knows me, posted, "Didn't you have a birthday yesterday? Aren't you seventy now?" So much for 'net anonymity.

LOL @ this lame thread.

you tube little guys fight

Carried Mine About 4 Miles Last Weekend.. Model 7 With S&K .The S&K Didn't Have Quite Enough Room. So I Switched To The Talleys... Life Is Good, I've Got Plenty Of Room Under The tube Now...

Mull, was this with one of your Swaro's?? I know they are tough, but damn...

Imagine that you are a guide, and some doofus shows up in camp, with his $3xxx rifle and $2xxx scope, carrying both using the scope as a handle.

Ka-Ching!!!!!!! Go find this guy a spike buck, and head for the bank.

With a few common-sense mods.....you can get both hands in there for an all-day marathon carry.

Yes On The Swarovski..Found No Need For Both Hands{Cept To Piss...} Rifle Weighs 6.3 Pounds.. Talley's Are Lows.. If It Where a Leupold. I Just Tie Rope On And Drag It....

I grab the scope all the time on my rifles. I wouldn't want a scope and mount setup that couldn't handle being a handle.

Have your cake, and eat it, too.

My rifles and scopes must be put together better then you are used to.

Handle....walking stick.....boat paddle.....snake club

Fell down a many of mountains out west with a rifle....never worry about point shift

Yes the scope is above capable of being used as a handle

If yours isn't.....your mounts are grade A junk

My choice.....Leupold dual dove tails.....line lapped every time

OMG I'm still laffin'!!

I hate scopes for the most part, that's why mine stays in the pack sack for the most part unless I need it for something over 200!
Cat

Cave man style

Two Larrys with very different methods of rifle break in.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WjbnYm_HmXg
This one comes to mind while we are talking about grabbing and carrying rifles by the scope!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TRRahHX9Zkg
Is big Stick still around??
Cat

No, but I have no objection to others handling their equipment in such a manner.