Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles opinion of 7mm-08 rem. vs 308

What you guys are saying is utterly ridiculous.

I have a rifle with a 2.5x8 mounted as I prefer (as close as the Talley's will let it be to me) right next to me. The following are direct observations- which I've made before, which is why I mount my scopes as I do.

In the first place, it is not possible to mount a 2.5x8 Leupold to get a full sight picture at full magnification on, say, a LA M700 or Kimber Montana. Unless your head is way, WAY forward forward on the stock, to an extent I'd have to see to believe. My neck isn't that different that anyone else's. So I simply do not believe that you guys are getting "no black" at full power with a 2.5x8 Leupold, mounted further FORWARD, away from you, than mine are mounted. I call BS.

Second, if my head IS scooted that far forward so as to get a full view at full magnification, and I keep my head in the same place and crank it back down to 2.5x guess what happens? I LOSE the full field of view at the lowest setting- which takes some doing, on a 2.5x8!! The eyebox is now all shot to [bleep]! Now there IS black around the image at low power- something I hardly even would have thought possible with a 2.5x8, but apparantly you guys have found a way.

In addition to that, with my head that far forward on the stock, it's not hard to imagine getting hit by that scope. Duh.

So apparantly you guys are compromising your low-magnification eyebox(which matters a LOT) of your Leupolds in order to get a full field of view at full power (where it doesn't matter anyway). AND, making it more likely you'll get hit by your scope, due to having your neck craned so far forward.

So let's recap.

-I get a huge, generous eyebox and full field of view at lower power settings- where they matter most. NO BLACK around the image at low power; I don't think I could get it if I tried! If I need to make a quick shot, I get a HUGE field of view, the eyebox is maximized to help with whatever crazy body position I might be in (low magnification usually means a quick shot), etc.

-I don't get hit by my scopes, ever. Even shooting something like a .325 WSM Montana from field positions. Contrast that with you guys living in fear of that.

-I don't move my head around on the stock. I choose my spot and stick to it. I don't "chase" the image as it gets smaller as the magnification is turned to max on a Leupold. So there's some black around the image. So? I'm at full power, I'm shooting long, I have time, and I'm in a solid shooting position- OR ELSE I WOULDN'T BE AT MAX MAGNIFICATION!

YOU guys, apparantly:

-have your heads WAY forward on the stock, if you are getting a full field of view, no black, at full power on a Leupold 2.5x8;

-live in fear of getting hit by your scopes (hmmm... see a pattern here?);

-compromise the low-magnification eyebox of your scope enormously by having your eye so close to the scope, OR, compromise the consistancy of your shooting form by moving your head a couple inches back on the stock at lower magnifications. Ask any competitive shotgun shooter how important a consistant cheek weld is. The low-magnification eyebox of a Leupold is spectacular, and is one of the main reasons to even own one. And you are throwing it away. Smart.

As to that Zeiss mounted on my M7, does it look goofy? Sure does. Long scope on a short rifle.

Is it mounted in absolutely the PERFECT place on that rifle? Yep, it is. Any further forward moves it out of the sweet spot. As you'd KNOW if any of you had actually ever used one, which you have not.

Below is a pic of a 2.5x8 mounted on my Montana. Please note, it's about 1/4", maybe 3/8" at the most, further back than say STA's, or 340boy's if I'm remember his rifle right. Are they then 1/4" away from being idiots who deserves to be publically flogged for being so stupid?

You guys are full of it.