24hourcampfire.com
24hourcampfire.com
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Hop To
Page 2 of 4 1 2 3 4
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 59,910
M
Campfire Kahuna
Offline
Campfire Kahuna
M
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 59,910
Not really. I have several, and use whichever one seems right for the job. The one I probably use more than any is an old Bushnell with 3 expandable arbors that fit inside the muzzle, but it won't work on barrels under .22 caliber or over .45, or on most rifles with muzzle brakes or other attachments, because the "spuds" aren't long enough to reach the actual bore. Bushnell (and other companies) still sells a similar unit, or another one with fixed arbors for various calibers.

The most versatile are collimators that attach to the muzzle with a magnet, and I have two of those, an older Leupold with a grid reticle, and one from MidwayUSA, under the Wheeler Engineering brand, that also attaches magnetically to the muzzle but projects a laser. There are also laser collimators that fit specific cartridge chambers, but like bore-sighting through the barrel itself, they require more room to use.

Of course, you can also put the rifle in a vise where the muzzle can be pointed through a window at an object at least 20 yards away, and check on bore/barrel alignment that way, at least with rifles where you can look through the bore. In one house, my work-room had a window where I could put a rifle in my wise, then aim the bore at the peak of the roof on a house across the street, which worked VERY well.

The biggie with any collimator is to check its alignment, by putting it on several rifles that are already sighted-in. You'll discover that bore-scope alignment will vary somewhat, but will be in the same general area. The Bushnell, like some other more sophisticated collimators, has a grid reticle that can be adjusted to line up with the bore on sighted-in rifles. I did that years ago, and it works well, but as noted not for all barrels. Probably the most versatile in my collection is the Wheeler Engineering laser model. I've even used it on 12-gauge slugs guns.


“Montana seems to me to be what a small boy would think Texas is like from hearing Texans.”
John Steinbeck
BP-B2

Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 499
O
Campfire Member
Offline
Campfire Member
O
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 499
Your test for resolution at 6x is pretty neat, no expensive equipment needed. That and some comments here on the forums got me to thinking more about low light performance, resolution, color accuracy, usability, etc. I hadn't really thought through about how concentration of the focused image increases with the square of the magnification. (9x is about twice as concentrated as 6x given the same objective lens size). Given an average or above average variable scope at a 40 mm or so objective, about how far do you have to crank the magnification to go from a high six, low seven on your scale to a solid eight? Or does it not work like that?

Have you noticed a difference in scopes in their ability between day use and low light use that wasn't directly related to apparent optical quality. I ask because I was looking at information regarding human sight differences between day and night. Night vision is quite a bit more sensitive to blue light whereas day vision is more green/yellow sensitive. Also night vision takes awhile to develop. Are some scopes better comparatively for night use because they are optimized for use in lower light? Does building a scope with coatings optimized for color accuracy in day use contribute to, take away from, makes no difference in low light use?

Something else that got me to thinking on a cold weekend were comments about the perceived differences in brightness between 33mm, 36mm and 42mm Leupold fixed 6x's. I wouldn't think there would be too much difference until I got crazy with excel. What I hadn't though through was that while the concentration factor is the same at 6x, the amount of light refracted goes up at the square of the objective size. Even after controlling for the area difference in the exit pupils, the 42 mm is going to be about 60% brighter than the 33mm. I'm not sure a 60% increase is huge since our eyes are adapted to an incredible range of differences in brightness, but I'd guess it's easily perceptible.

Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 59,910
M
Campfire Kahuna
Offline
Campfire Kahuna
M
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 59,910
oklahunter,

It doesn't take much more magnification to push a scope's rating up in my nighttime chart test--which is one reason magnification is one of the factors in the approximate dim-light formula for "twilight factor," which originated in Europe. I've tested a few scopes above 6x, including a Schmidt & Bender 8x56, which easily rated an 8+, higher than any scope tested on 6x.

My test is strictly designed to rate sharpness (resolution) and brightness (light transmission), not color. That's partly because human eyesight can vary considerably in how it perceives color, with color blindness being the most extreme example. But many of us have slight differences in how we perceive various colors, particularly in the blue part of the spectrum. In fact, studies have shown women see blues somewhat better, on average, than men do, though there's some overlap.

As a result, when scope manufacturers tweak the color transmission of their optics to emphasize certain colors, this doesn't always work for all people. An emphasis on the blue spectrum to enhance dim-light viewing, for instance, won't help people who don't see blue as well. Also, a number of years ago, one scope company marketed their scopes as optically enhancing visibility of big game animals, which often are more reddish. But that didn't help dim-light aiming.

We also often make a big deal about exit pupil size being at least the size of our eyes' pupils, but as you point out refracted light increases as objective size decreases. But they also diffuse more light, because smaller lenses have more "edge" compared to overall area, and the edge of any lens scatters more light, partly because it's what's actually held by the lens mounts. So yes, scopes with smaller objectives tend to be perceived as less bright in dim light, even if their exit pupils are larger than our pupils, since the image isn't quite as sharp. (This is also why many "cheap" 10x40 binoculars have a noticeably sharper view than 10x20 binoculars, even on a sunny day when our eyes' pupils are quite small.)

Another factor in all this is the inside of a scope. A lot of light can be reflected by the interior walls, diffusing the view, the reason some scope companies paint or baffle the insides of their scopes.


“Montana seems to me to be what a small boy would think Texas is like from hearing Texans.”
John Steinbeck
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,425
M
Campfire Regular
Offline
Campfire Regular
M
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,425
John;

I've got a few questions.

The first is regarding adjustments and the amount / direction of backlash in the turret threads. Its commonly believed that adjustments up and right are less positive than down or left because the erector tube is relying on the springs to push it along with the adjustment. For some it borders on religion that you should go past the desired elevation point or right adjustment and back down to take the slack out of the system and let the threads do the job that they don't trust the spring to do. Whether it works, or whether we owe our scopes any favors is another thing. At first glance that does seem to make a certain amount of sense; until I realized that adjusting the elevation up is in fact moving the crosshairs down. Since that's the case relative to our eyes, isn't adjusting for more elevation actually compressing the springs and doing a back and forth herky-jerky at the end the exact opposite of what they should be doing? It has occurred to me that the term erector assembly does hint that adjusting up is in fact dragging an upside down image up but then my head starts hurting. I guess this is my long way of asking if dialing elevation up is really compressing the springs instead of loosening them? I may take that information and use it to start a new religion.

The next is concerning European scopes with backwards adjustments. Are the turrets set up with a backwards thread or is the erector tube being moved at the opposite end? It may not make any difference, but at least I'd know whether to call them left-hand thread scopes or backward tube scopes when I'm bad-mouthing them for having backwards knobs.

The last is rather general. I know that at least some cheap scopes have their erector assembly mounted in a rubber tube. How prevalent is that design?

I can't be the only one who wonders this stuff. wink


Life begins at 40. Recoil begins at "Over 40" Coincidence? I don't think so.
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 59,910
M
Campfire Kahuna
Offline
Campfire Kahuna
M
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 59,910
Model70Guy,

You got it right when you started thinking about the erector assembly: The turret turning up is actually "dragging" an upside-down image of the reticle down.

Yes, some Euro-scopes have turret screws with left-hand threads. But quite a few don't these days.

Also, quite a few scopes these days have strong enough erector springs that twisting the turret past the desired spot to take out the slack isn't necessary. In fact I haven't collimator-tested a scope in quite a while where the reticle didn't move noticeably (and apparently consistently) with each click the turret (though that doesn't mean each click moves it exactly as much as the manufacturer claims). Personally, anymore I won't put up with a "dialing" scope that doesn't consistently move POI with each click.

Hadn't heard about rubber-tube erector systems.


“Montana seems to me to be what a small boy would think Texas is like from hearing Texans.”
John Steinbeck
IC B2

Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,425
M
Campfire Regular
Offline
Campfire Regular
M
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,425
Thanks, wondering about the direction of the movement was honestly bugging me.

The thing about the rubber erector assemblies stemmed partly from some Youtube videos showing scope tear-downs. One was showing how the erector tube was a rubber tube. Admittedly it was cheap scope, but the way nobody seems to make their own scopes anymore I was wondering how far up the food chain the heater hose mechanism had made it.


Life begins at 40. Recoil begins at "Over 40" Coincidence? I don't think so.
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 12,664
D
Campfire Outfitter
Offline
Campfire Outfitter
D
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 12,664
I think of scope adjustments like adjusting a front sight. You physically move them the opposite direction for the desired results.


The Karma bus always has an empty seat when it comes around.- High Brass

There's battle lines being drawn
Nobody's right if everybody's wrong
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 4,976
E
Campfire Tracker
Offline
Campfire Tracker
E
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 4,976
Dang you..you might cost me some $
I got online to get one of these things and couldnt figure out how to to get one at their internet pricing..everywhere i looked up was $50 ish higher (i am cheap) referring to the below statement in your article...

(The exception was a recent Tract Toric BDC 3-15x42, priced at $674, made possible by Tract's direct Internet sales, which bypass the profit taken by the layers of typical retailing.)

Being cheap, I thought that maybe we could get several members to make a group buy and save even more ...?
Dont know how to go about this, but you likely do ! (Your endorsement is already out there so I bet there would be several other members here that would be willing to chance such an endeavour.. ?)
Have seen "group buy's" for here on rifles, but not optics..whatcha think ?..!
"elk"

Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 59,910
M
Campfire Kahuna
Offline
Campfire Kahuna
M
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 59,910
I honestly don't know if Tract would go for a group buy, but you might contact Trevor, the Tract guy here, or Jon LaCorte, one of the owners.


“Montana seems to me to be what a small boy would think Texas is like from hearing Texans.”
John Steinbeck
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 74
D
Campfire Greenhorn
Offline
Campfire Greenhorn
D
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 74
John I live down the road from you and have enjoyed reading your articles over the years.
My question is,does any scope stand out as a great scope below 1000.00?

IC B3

Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 59,910
M
Campfire Kahuna
Offline
Campfire Kahuna
M
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 59,910
How far "down the road"? :-)

In my terms, yes, quite a few scopes under $1000 are great. But what's your definition of great?


“Montana seems to me to be what a small boy would think Texas is like from hearing Texans.”
John Steinbeck
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 74
D
Campfire Greenhorn
Offline
Campfire Greenhorn
D
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 74
Helena.
My needs are clear optics and super at keeping on target every year.
I have been a Leupold man since the 1970's and have had great success with them but my latest seems to drift a bit every year.I will give Leupold a call and send it in way before hunting season begins.
I'm open to all brands.
Is there that ONE scope that stands out as a SUPER scope?

Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 59,910
M
Campfire Kahuna
Offline
Campfire Kahuna
M
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 59,910
Again, it depends on what YOU mean by SUPER.

As far as set-and-forget scopes I've had excellent luck with Burris as "set-and-forget" scopes for a long time (though they also make some good "dialing" scopes as well). In fact, one of the best bargains I've found is Burris's Fullfield II line. I've had them on rifles chambered for cartridges up through the .300 Weatherby Magnum and while any scope can malfunction, I haven't had any problem with FFII's yet. In my night-time optics-chart test they rate above average, and their adjustments are good enough to make sighting-in easy. Just last week I sighted-in a brand-new 3-9x40 on a .308. After bore-sighting and a check shot at 25 yards to make sure it would be on paper at 100, I shot a 3-shot group that turned out to be 2" high but also 2" to the left. After eight clicks to the right on the windage turret, the next group landed two inches high, dead-center.

The sub-$1000 scope I've been most impressed with lately is a Tract Toric 3-15x. I've had it on three rifles now, the first a super-accurate .300 Winchester Magnum that I shot extensively with a handload getting close to 3000 fps with 210-grain Berger VLD's. The adjustments were dead-nuts, and on the night-time optics chart the scope tested an 8, the highest ANY scopes have tested, including some costing well over $1000, but the price of the Toric is around $700. However, it weighs around 20 ounces, which is the other price often paid for reliable dialing scopes. A 3-9x40 Fullfield II is $200.

The other scope I've been very impressed with lately is the Nightforce SHV 3-10x42, a much more compact scope than many NF models, designed more for hunting. I have two now, and both have been dead-reliable in every way so far. The optics rated a 7-1/2 on my optics chart. The price varies, but so far Internet searches have always found them for under $1000, and sometimes in the $750-850 range. However, they weigh about the same as the Toric.


“Montana seems to me to be what a small boy would think Texas is like from hearing Texans.”
John Steinbeck
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 10,312
Campfire Outfitter
Offline
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 10,312
Back when Herters closed their doors, my family went to Mitchell and bought out their inventory of Weaver scopes. My favorite was a 6x, which I had on my 6mm for many years. The only issue I had with Weavers was having to ‘knock’ on the scope to settle it after adjusting the setting.
Since then I switched to Leupold due to their great service.
Lately I’ve bought a few Bushnell Elite scopes which are mounted on a couple 223’s, a 6mm varmint barreled 700 and one will be on a 280AI. That 280AI has a varmint contour 26” Douglas XX barrel. I don’t suppose that in any imagination these could be called heavy kickers. I sort of like the DOA600 reticle.

I wonder have you tried the Elite scopes? How do they compare to the Fullfield II? Thanks.


I prefer classic.
Semper Fi
I used to run with the hare. Now I'm envious of the tortoise and I do my own stunts but rarely intentionally
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 74
D
Campfire Greenhorn
Offline
Campfire Greenhorn
D
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 74
Many thanks sir.
I have only sent 1 Leupold scope in for repairs since the 1970's and I have 9 at the present and have had 11 in the past with only 1 problem which Leupold fixed fast and no charge.
I was advised to do one thing before contacting Leupold and I'll get that done soon.
I also will check out the Burris scopes too as weight matters to me as I have had many back surgeries.
Happy hunting

Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 59,910
M
Campfire Kahuna
Offline
Campfire Kahuna
M
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 59,910
Bugger,

Saying "Bushnell Elite" scope is sort of like saying "Leupold" scope: There are so many different Elites that making meaningful comments is difficult. They range in price fromabout the same $$$ as a Burris Fullfield II) to the over-$1000 Elite Long Range Hunter series. I've owned several Elites, at the moment from the fixed 10x40 Elite Tactical MilDot (under $250) to a 4.5-30x50 Elite 6500 (close to $900). They all work well for their price.


“Montana seems to me to be what a small boy would think Texas is like from hearing Texans.”
John Steinbeck
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 10,312
Campfire Outfitter
Offline
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 10,312
Ok, thanks. I’m not knowledgeable on Bushnell scopes.

I just ordered a 3x9 Elite with a 1” tube 50mm objective and a DOA600 reticle for ~ $215 from Outdoor liquidators.
This is the second or third (???) just like that - I have them on varmint rifles. I also have a 10x with multiple dots. I had sent the original 10x in and Bushnell replaced it for free.

I sort of like that kind of service.

Are the 3x9x50’s I have as good as the Fullfield II’s? If they are good with heavier recoil, I may put one on a 300 Win Mag - 180 to 200 grain bullet loads.

BTW: your write up on bullet stability in the Gack book saved me some heart burn. I’ve taken physics classes to doctorate level and I “thought” I knew all I need to on stability. I was wrong. Thanks for sharing your expertise.


I prefer classic.
Semper Fi
I used to run with the hare. Now I'm envious of the tortoise and I do my own stunts but rarely intentionally
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 3,044
T
Campfire Tracker
Offline
Campfire Tracker
T
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 3,044
Originally Posted by Mule Deer
Again, it depends on what YOU mean by SUPER.

As far as set-and-forget scopes I've had excellent luck with Burris as "set-and-forget" scopes for a long time (though they also make some good "dialing" scopes as well). In fact, one of the best bargains I've found is Burris's Fullfield II line. I've had them on rifles chambered for cartridges up through the .300 Weatherby Magnum and while any scope can malfunction, I haven't had any problem with FFII's yet. In my night-time optics-chart test they rate above average, and their adjustments are good enough to make sighting-in easy. Just last week I sighted-in a brand-new 3-9x40 on a .308. After bore-sighting and a check shot at 25 yards to make sure it would be on paper at 100, I shot a 3-shot group that turned out to be 2" high but also 2" to the left. After eight clicks to the right on the windage turret, the next group landed two inches high, dead-center.

The sub-$1000 scope I've been most impressed with lately is a Tract Toric 3-15x. I've had it on three rifles now, the first a super-accurate .300 Winchester Magnum that I shot extensively with a handload getting close to 3000 fps with 210-grain Berger VLD's. The adjustments were dead-nuts, and on the night-time optics chart the scope tested an 8, the highest ANY scopes have tested, including some costing well over $1000, but the price of the Toric is around $700. However, it weighs around 20 ounces, which is the other price often paid for reliable dialing scopes. A 3-9x40 Fullfield II is $200.

The other scope I've been very impressed with lately is the Nightforce SHV 3-10x42, a much more compact scope than many NF models, designed more for hunting. I have two now, and both have been dead-reliable in every way so far. The optics rated a 7-1/2 on my optics chart. The price varies, but so far Internet searches have always found them for under $1000, and sometimes in the $750-850 range. However, they weigh about the same as the Toric.


+1 on the Burris. I had a 3-9x40 Burris FFII that took quite a bit of abuse and never wavered. I like their hashmarks on the vertical crosshair better than Leupold's dots too.


"The trouble ain't that there is too many fools, but that lightening ain't distributed right." - Mark Twain
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 59,910
M
Campfire Kahuna
Offline
Campfire Kahuna
M
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 59,910
Bugger,

Glad you like Gack! Am working on Gack II, but got slowed down in April due to a more-than-average number of magazine assignments. It still should be out by late summer or early fall. As for bullet stability, I'm lucky enough to live where it can be tested at elevations from 2500 to 8000+ feet, in temperatures from below zero to 90+. Have found today's best twist-rate formulas are very accurate for modern spitzers--though not always for blunter bullets.

Dunno if the 3-9x50 Bushnells are as reliable as the Fullfield II 3-9x's. They haven't been around as long, so don't have as much experience with their reliability. Have been using FFII's since they were made in the USA, which was at least a decade ago. The present Philippine-made model caused so much worry among rifle loonies that I requested a test sample ASAP, and found it slightly better than the American model. The optical quality was the same, because the lenses were the same, but the machining was smoother. Unlike other optics companies that contract to have scopes made in Asia, Burris provided the same tooling to make the scopes, and taught the Philippine company to use it. Which is why I'm always kind of amused when somebody on the Campfire Classifieds asks if a Fullfield II for sale is made in America.


“Montana seems to me to be what a small boy would think Texas is like from hearing Texans.”
John Steinbeck
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 169
Campfire Member
Offline
Campfire Member
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 169
Really great article Mule Deer. Another factor I use in selecting a scope is eye relief. Three to 3.5 inches of eye relief is not enough for me on a super light "mountain rifle" or a magnum cartridge rifle; some rifles are both. So I look mostly at Nikon, Leupold, and Sightron for this in moderate price range optics. I understand some of the Vortex and Hawke offerings have longer (approximately 4 inches) eye relief as well. I'm wondering if others have suggestions for reliably longer eye relief scopes?

Page 2 of 4 1 2 3 4

Moderated by  RickBin 

Link Copied to Clipboard
YB23

Who's Online Now
195 members (257 roberts, 12344mag, 257robertsimp, 160user, 257 mag, 10Glocks, 19 invisible), 1,844 guests, and 873 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Forum Statistics
Forums81
Topics1,187,728
Posts18,400,787
Members73,822
Most Online11,491
Jul 7th, 2023


 







Fish & Game Departments | Solunar Tables | Mission Statement | Privacy Policy | Contact Us | DMCA
Hunting | Fishing | Camping | Backpacking | Reloading | Campfire Forums | Gear Shop
Copyright © 2000-2024 24hourcampfire.com, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5
(Release build 20201027)
Responsive Width:

PHP: 7.3.33 Page Time: 0.123s Queries: 16 (0.004s) Memory: 0.9132 MB (Peak: 1.0983 MB) Data Comp: Zlib Server Time: 2024-03-29 10:22:04 UTC
Valid HTML 5 and Valid CSS