RH Clark,You are not the village idiot I was referring to. Cummins cowboy is. He is forever talking about the poor qualities of a ffp scope for hunting. He is a dim wit. Sorry for the mix up. As to one of your points about always being on max power for wind hold, I disagree. I have the 3x15 and most of my "long range" shooting is from 500 to 600yds. I rarely go over 10x, even on coyotes. I use my wind holds a lot though. Again, sorry for the mix up.
I knew who you were referring to my friend. It was also CC who was talking about holding for wind at max power. In my last post somehow my quote of him didn't appear in the quote box ,so it looked like I was talking. I don't know how all that happened. Sorry I got everyone so confused. No worries about it all on my part though.
What advantage does this 3-9 offer over the Fixed 6X...besides the higher power?
Bob,
As mentioned earlier, the image is better. The 6x is still fine for aiming, but the 3-9x has the edge. Whether or not it matters is up to the buyer/user. On 3x, however, there is tunneling so it's really a 4-9x to me.
The coatings, at least on the ocular, also seem better on the 3-9x than the 6x. I get fewer reflections from light sources to the side and rear. Not a huge deal, but I'm sure you've experienced situations where you may need to shade an optic due to oblique light sources.
I've had the 6x, 10x, 20x, 3-9x, and 3-15x. The 6x and 3-9x are my favorites for all-purpose use, while the 10x is great for a rifle dedicated to mid-to-long range or small targets. I sold the 3-15x to a friend and don't miss it one bit. He likes that scope though.
Parallax is minimal on the 6x, as one would expect, and there is the rear parallax adjustment. On my 3-9x, parallax is also minimal but there is no adjustment. On a few 10x, I noticed that the indicated distances didn't jive with actual distances but it was easy to re-label the scale to make it work correctly.
Turrets, about .15" shorter, depending on the adjustment of course. More reasonable. Knob diameter, .18" smaller. Again more reasonable. Length, about 1.15" Shorter. She said. Ocular tube diameter, about .17" smaller. Seemingly minor but all combined it takes up less real-estate.
Originally Posted by BobinNH
Huh....I didn't know that it was more compact. Interesting.
With a Creedmoor how far can you shoot on the reticle?
"I can't be canceled, because, I don't give a fuuck!" --- Kid Rock 2022
I've given up on them. Once I bought my first Conquest and took it to the range to zero it up, and the impacts moved like they were supposed to, it was the beginning of the end. Now I'm buying Nightforce scopes and there's no going backward <g>.
I'd like to try one of the 3-9's on my 7-08 Mountain Rifle, and depending on how I liked the eye relief, perhaps my .338. I'm pretty happy with the NF SHV on my Kimber, though ironically (in the context of the FFP/reticle discussion) the MOAR reticle is a little thin in low light.
I'll be spending in the realm of $3k-5k on scopes in '17 for the rifles I'm building, depending on how I go..... Holy crap. I gave myself a mini panic attack just typing that <g>!
please disregard the village idiot,especially the whole last paragraph that he wrote. If you hold for wind a ffp works on any power, unlike a sfp scope.
umm ok someone asked a question I gave them an answer now I am the village idiot? sorry your having a bad day. I would simply say if your using wind hold offs on a 3-15x scope your going to be at MAX power anyways. especially so with the 3x9. the videos below show the very real downsides of FFP. I said where they can work and I said where they don't and why. instead of calling someone a village idiot why not learn something. again my scopes sit on lowest power and only are increased when needed.
fast forward to the 5 minute mark. I would also add I looked at this scope at a trade show (because I really really wish I could like it!) I held the scope up to a brown curtain in the trade show and the reticle washed out on the curtain in a freaking trade show!!
ok here is a video of the 3x9 SS talked about in this thread, fast forward to around the 2 minute mark
look your choice in optic is yours!!! my opinions are mine based on my experience. I don't shoot at a range all that much as such its either hunting or wack that rock on the side of the hill. if I am needing to be precises enough to make a wind hold that is an important one ie shot on an animal. I am going to do it on max power. keeping in mind my scopes that are NOT for load development top out at 14-16x
I think JRraider said he is buying one of these scopes, JG if your reading give us a report, I at least know he isn't such an optics snob to say something sucks even though he may have spent alot of money on it.
that is the problem people spend alot of money on something and they think they have to defend it till the cows come home. I am very much not that way. I am not a fanboy unless it really works.
[/quote]
$450 is a lot of money for a scope?? You're delusional!
Completely agree with cumminscowboy about FFP scopes for hunting in heavy timber at low power without a lit reticle. Not sure why the FFP fanboys get bent out of shape about it. Just buy the one you want and we will buy what we want, but if they don't make it we can't buy it. So no 3-9 super chicken for me, but that's OK, plenty more SFPs out there.
Completely agree with cumminscowboy about FFP scopes for hunting in heavy timber at low power without a lit reticle. Not sure why the FFP fanboys get bent out of shape about it. Just buy the one you want and we will buy what we want, but if they don't make it we can't buy it. So no 3-9 super chicken for me, but that's OK, plenty more SFPs out there.
I've given up on them. Once I bought my first Conquest and took it to the range to zero it up, and the impacts moved like they were supposed to, it was the beginning of the end. Now I'm buying Nightforce scopes and there's no going backward <g>.
I'd like to try one of the 3-9's on my 7-08 Mountain Rifle, and depending on how I liked the eye relief, perhaps my .338. I'm pretty happy with the NF SHV on my Kimber, though ironically (in the context of the FFP/reticle discussion) the MOAR reticle is a little thin in low light.
I'll be spending in the realm of $3k-5k on scopes in '17 for the rifles I'm building, depending on how I go..... Holy crap. I gave myself a mini panic attack just typing that <g>!
Bet you know where I'd suggest you spend that $3-5K and to include the $$ on the rifles they are going on...
Not sure why the FFP fanboys get bent out of shape about it. Just buy the one you want and we will buy what we want,l.
You should notice this is a discussion about a scope that everyone likes except cummins and now you. No one is bent out of shape except him. We have tried and like the scope(the scope this thread is about).....hes the one upset about focal planes not anyone else.
Not sure why the FFP fanboys get bent out of shape about it. Just buy the one you want and we will buy what we want,l.
You should notice this is a discussion about a scope that everyone likes except cummins and now you. No one is bent out of shape except him. We have tried and like the scope(the scope this thread is about).....hes the one upset about focal planes not anyone else.
Agreed. WYcoyote's statement should read "I'm not sure why the SFP fanboys get bent out of shape and reply to FFP threads simply to antagonize the FFP fans". WYcoyote and cummins should heed their own advice: Just buy what you want. and we'll buy what we want.
