Originally Posted by Ringman

Your posts remind me of an engineer I used to work with. He could hardly ever make a decision because he was all caught up in the extreme minutia things. You are ignoring years of successful and precise use of SFP scopes.


Hi Ringman,
Please see my comments in response to jimmy's question below. (and thanks for the complement!! blush)


Originally Posted by jimmyp
so does a FFP scope move the reticle out of the erector mechanism, hence FFP scopes are better to dial with and hold zero better?


Hi Jimmy,

No, the design flaws (or maybe we should call them weaknesses) I mentioned in my post above are not related to the position of the reticle. In FFP scopes the reticle is mounted in the front end of the erector tube, in SFP scopes it is mounted in the rear end. Both types are susceptible to zero shift due to flaws I mentioned above. In SFP scopes, there is an additional cause for zero shift due to erector lenses moving during zoom (they could get de-centered during movement).

Of course premium scope manufacturers minimize the possibility of zero shift by utilizing better mechanical design and higher quality material. But they are still using this "tilting inner tube" concept to provide elevation and windage adjustment. It is the traditional method but it is not the best method. I myself have invented a totally different mechanism. In my design, all the lenses and the reticle are fixed and perfectly centered. The point of aim of the scope is adjusted by optical refraction not by mechanically moving the reticle.

In the picture below you can see a proof-of-concept prototype scope I have made to demonstrate my invention. In this model, the optical element covered by the round black ring inside the scope moves forward and backward and that gives you your elevation adjustment. There is no lateral movement of any element. I am also working on a new variation where there is no movement at all laugh

Have a nice Friday both,
-Omid

[Linked Image]



Last edited by Omid; 10/06/17.