Agreed Jeff, but remember, those aren’t “tacticool”.. a guy really needs @ 20 oz scope and I-beam mounts to support it. Those 500 yard shots are demanding.
Nah to add that stuff to get up to that 7-7.25 pound you have mentioned you prefer as well.
Of course I can get by with lesser scope and have for years. Problem is now that I have used scopes that don't require a couple adjustment click everytime I check "zero" its hard to go back to the ones that do. Epsecially when I always have those other rifles that are lighter if needed.
I do have like 4-5 pairs of Kimber Talley's of various sizes if anyone want to buy them. $30 each shipped....some 30mm some 1", some black, some silver, some lows, some mediums.
I actually prefer dots, as they're a "set and forget" proposition. However, I certainly "get" wanting a scope that tracks perfectly, like the NF. For what I do a light Leupold with a CDS is fine. Yes I do prefer a 7 - 7.25lb rifle, but I don't like the weight sitting on top. I prefer it out front in the barrel, not awkwardly perched on top in the middle of the rifle like Dolly Parton and her bolt-on's. And of course, a lighter scope really negates the need for heavy mounts. A 20 oz scope up high is subject to a lot more forces than a 12 oz one and for sure it's smart to use a more stout mount.
We all find our way to the same end differently for sure... use what you wish, go forth and slay beasts. This is all fun and games anyway, and if it isn't then psychoanalysis is in order.
Agreed 100% most of this is certainly psychoanalysis. The LRD set and forget way is by for the best way to roll with Leupolds I agree especially since they will never put a TMOA or similar in their smaller scopes.
I certainly am not nearly the rifle aficionado as yourself to have balance dialed to where you can say you prefer the weight out front, but not too much cause you cut the 84Ls back to 21-23", but you also like the weight out front so you don't put a big scope on there.....cause I can't tell the difference often just shouldering rifles of similar weight rifle setup of totally different. This is most likely a blessing in disguise that I am too ignorant to know the difference. I also openly admit I am also not near astute enough to tell the 1.5 ft/lb of recoil difference between a 165 grain bullet at 2750 fps and a 180 grainer at 2650 fps out of the same rifle when I shoot them back to back and claim the 180s are that much more. I tried it by having my wife load them for me without looking 2 of each in the mag and I tried my damnedest to guess which was which but honestly they all felt the same to me haha. To me they both recoil stiff in a lightweight and no discernible difference.
Like you said its all psychonanalysis as we look over every tiny detail when we can't be out hunting. Then when the time to go hunting most of use would be happy to just grab a $300 rfile and a $150 scope and go slay just as well as we would with the rifle setups we agonize over and spend far too much on. But what fun would that be right?
Thanks for the reply...always enjoy reading your thoughts.
