Originally Posted by JGRaider


I always get a kick out of this "very few actually shoot" mentality, and that those "who don't shoot" are bottom feeding idiots.

I'm going to go out on a limb and say that "those that shoot" are a very minute part of the big game hunting population, therefore most diehard big game hunters are not "shooters". Would you buy that? I'd go so far as to say that 95% of big game hunters (myself included) are more of a set it and forget type turret/scope guy, and they get along quite well in the field by doing so. I've only had one scope lose zero in over 40 years of hunting.

If your world of "shooters" is strictly a tactical one, then fine. But to classify everyone who "doesn't shoot" as a bunch of bumbling fools is, well, foolish on your part. I'm beginning to think the only thing bigger than BS's mouth is your ego.



Let me see if I follow..... I have an ego because a guy asks why normal lightweight scopes aren't better at holding zero and tracking, I state the reason- that being that the vast majority "look" at glass, not actually shoot it to see if it works, you agree that a "minute" part part of hunters actually shoot, going so far as to put a number to it (95%)... And that means that I'm the one with an ego problem...?

Is that about right?



Forgive me if I could give two flying flips what dudes who shoot less rounds in a year than I, and those I work with shoot most mornings before breakfast, thinks they "know" about scopes.

There is nothing wrong with set and forget, or BDC reticles, etc. But there is a better way. Not because I say so, but because targets and a timer don't lie.


If those "die hard big game hunters" want to talk to me about finding those "exceptional" animals, I'm all ears. But those "95%" of hunters trying to "talk" actually using that gun, is akin to me trying to "tell" you all about those Texas scrub brush Muley's.







The afore mention SS's several thousand rounds later and no shortage of unkind handling...
[Linked Image]


[Linked Image]