|
|
Joined: Jul 2014
Posts: 2,556
Campfire Regular
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jul 2014
Posts: 2,556 |
They also have an MOA quad reticle that I think looks an awful lot like a tape measure. ![[Linked Image]](https://swfa.com/media/catalog/product/cache/1/image/9df78eab33525d08d6e5fb8d27136e95/S/S/SS6X42MOA-R.jpg) with A RETICLE LIKE THIS and say 800yds is plenty far to be shooting, why twist a turret, why not just hold for your value you need ,, if your gonna twist turrets why have all this in the windshield, maybe 10 moa would be plenty and then the heavy crosshairs, even in a mil reticle same question, for a hunting scope, not a lets see how far away i can hit steel scope, I have to twist, as my shooting eye does not pick up the hash marks well. Otherwise, you are correct.
You did not "seen" anything, you "saw" it.
A "creek" has water in it, a "crick" is what you get in your neck.
Liberals with guns are nothing but hypocrites.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 31,429
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 31,429 |
I have dual dovetail bases on this Rem 700 now. Any idea what height 30mm dual dovetail rings the SS 6x would require? I'd like to stay as low as possible. I think Low but too far away from my gear to verify.
"I can't be canceled, because, I don't give a fuuck!"
--- Kid Rock 2022
Holocaust Deniers, the ultimate perverted dipchits: Bristoe, TheRealHawkeye, stophel, Ghostinthemachine, anyone else?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,393
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,393 |
They also have an MOA quad reticle that I think looks an awful lot like a tape measure. with A RETICLE LIKE THIS and say 800yds is plenty far to be shooting, why twist a turret, why not just hold for your value you need ,, if your gonna twist turrets why have all this in the windshield, maybe 10 moa would be plenty and then the heavy crosshairs, even in a mil reticle same question, for a hunting scope, not a lets see how far away i can hit steel scope, I have to twist, as my shooting eye does not pick up the hash marks well. Otherwise, you are correct. To see the hash marks I have to focus the reticle for my aging eyes. I've tried just using the hash marks but I spin the elevation turret and hold for wind. I haven't found a better way to start someone shooting distance than with this reticle, I find that it gives a lot of information but not so much that the shooter gets confused. Shooting my muzzleloader on a breezy day there can be 10-20 MOA of wind at 300 yards and the reticle helps you empirically understand what the wind is doing to your bullet, it also helps you appreciate a good bullet.
What would Porter Rockwell do?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 1,331
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 1,331 |
I must admit I am curious about these SS scopes but am not a target shooter and don't twist turrets. I do want reliability and repeatability. Which model would you recommend for a "from the house deck" coyote/varmint 223 out to about 250 yards?
My eyes are almost 73 years old. Some body parts seem to be older than that. Right now, I use a Leupold VX2 4-12 on that rifle. Shot a coyote this am at 60 yards but most shots are 200 or 225. Would you go 6x or 10x? 6x Mil-Quad. Why not the 10X in case the targets are smaller than a coyote? Is it just the power or some other factor? Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2014
Posts: 4,755
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Oct 2014
Posts: 4,755 |
The reticle pictures make it look like the MOA-quad reticle is much finer than the Mil-quad, is that the case when looking through these scopes or is it just SWFA's pictures? I like that center dot with open space around it on the MOA quad, wish the mil-quad was the same way. The MOA Quad is not as usable as the MQ. I haven't seen anyone that prefers it. Thanks for the feedback. Is that because the reticle is too fine, or just because it's in MOA? I prefer mil reticles myself anyway for a common system across all of my rifles so I don't intend to buy the MOA version, just curious about the differences in SS reticles.
The first part is to stop thinking in "inches". The reticle is marked in .5 mil increments, the turrets adjust in .1mil increments. When you fire a round (in this case point of impact is low) place the reticle on the target and read the correction needed like a tape measure. For your example you would see that you need to come up .6 mil. This works at all ranges- no conversion necessary.
+1000 here. It seems that a lot of guys miss that "yes it really is that easy". No need to complicate things by thinking in inches and using conversions, other than for ranging.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 3,395 Likes: 2
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 3,395 Likes: 2 |
Why not the 10X in case the targets are smaller than a coyote? Is it just the power or some other factor? Thanks.
The 6x just has a More forgiving eyebox/FOV and for 250 yards on coyotes I would prefer it. That said, the 10x would be fine as well. Yondering, No one wants MOA, but it's also not as visible.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2014
Posts: 4,755
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Oct 2014
Posts: 4,755 |
Thanks Form, that answers my question.
I'm thinking I'll watch the black friday deals and pick up a 6x and a 10x to try out. MQ in both of course.
Last edited by Yondering; 11/01/17.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 4,874
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 4,874 |
My buddy wants to deer hunt and range shoot. His terrain is more wooded hills though than open fields. He bought his 6.5 Creed, 8 lb Savage long range hunter already. It will be heavy for most of his hunting situations but maybe it will help him shoot well. I'll set him up with some shooting houses. He owns 50 acres that buts up to a remote area of the National Forest. I may get a trip or two for my help if I'm lucky.
In my first conversation with him about this gun he mentioned deer up to 600 yards. I told him ,"let's work on up to 300 first".
Clark, The 6x would cover that, as others have stated. For inspiration for your pal, my buddy took his 10x MQ off of his RAR Predator in 6.5 Creedmoor and put a 6x on it. With the 6x, he hit our 200 yard pie plate offhand. Then hit a 6" target at 400 yards from prone. Then the 6" target at 500 yards. Rifle and scopes are proven, as I've helped dial in each scope and fix the bedding on that noodle stock. Have seen hundreds of rounds thru that rifle and know it's not a fluke. The 6x is plenty for deer out to 600 yards. Jason
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,393
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,393 |
Why not the 10X in case the targets are smaller than a coyote? Is it just the power or some other factor? Thanks.
The 6x just has a More forgiving eyebox/FOV and for 250 yards on coyotes I would prefer it. That said, the 10x would be fine as well. Yondering, No one wants MOA, but it's also not as visible. Hey Form, Can you elaborate on why no one wants the MOA? I may be purchasing a few more in a few weeks and I'll make a change if there's something better.
What would Porter Rockwell do?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 814
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 814 |
Why not the 10X in case the targets are smaller than a coyote? Is it just the power or some other factor? Thanks.
The 6x just has a More forgiving eyebox/FOV and for 250 yards on coyotes I would prefer it. That said, the 10x would be fine as well. Yondering, No one wants MOA, but it's also not as visible. Hey Form, Can you elaborate on why no one wants the MOA? I may be purchasing a few more in a few weeks and I'll make a change if there's something better. I`m planning on picking a couple up and would be appreciative of the insight as well.
|
|
|
|
Forums81
Topics1,192,626
Posts18,492,910
Members73,977
| |
Most Online11,491
Jul 7th, 2023
|
|
|
|
