|
|
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 10,972
Campfire Outfitter
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 10,972 |
I didn't think the SWFA 3-9X42 HD with MQ reticle was too fine for hunting. My 49 year old eyes had no problems finding it in legal light even on the 4X which is as low as I use the scope due to the tunneling on 3X. Tunneling is gone at 4X.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 2,621
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 2,621 |
A couple of points, one you've probably considered, the other maybe not: Yes, two good points that crossed my mind and people should consider. I guess it largely depends on how you plan on using the scope.
John 8:12 "I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will never walk in darkness, but will have the light of life."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 14,492
Campfire Outfitter
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 14,492 |
A couple of points, one you've probably considered, the other maybe not: Yes, two good points that crossed my mind and people should consider. I guess it largely depends on how you plan on using the scope. True, I’m not even one to use holdover much at all, but I do like my windage subtensions to be correct at all times for wind and mover holds, and I don’t always use my scope on 9x. Just depends on your use. My biggest thing is that I like to eliminate possible sources of error.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 14,492
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 14,492 |
I didn't think the SWFA 3-9X42 HD with MQ reticle was too fine for hunting. My 49 year old eyes had no problems finding it in legal light even on the 4X which is as low as I use the scope due to the tunneling on 3X. Tunneling is gone at 4X. That’s why I was wondering what scope models jeffbird was referring to, as they’re certainly not all of equal subtension. The 10x and up are finer reticles than the 6x and 3-9x, for example.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 10,972
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 10,972 |
A couple of points, one you've probably considered, the other maybe not: Yes, two good points that crossed my mind and people should consider. I guess it largely depends on how you plan on using the scope. True, I’m not even one to use holdover much at all, but I do like my windage subtensions to be correct at all times for wind and mover holds, and I don’t always use my scope on 9x. Just depends on your use. My biggest thing is that I like to eliminate possible sources of error.Jordan That's why I'm considering the IHR reticle if I choose the 2.5-10 NXS. It would eliminate making that error and I should have time to dial if I had a longer shot than a 200 yard zero would accommodate. Another factor that makes me consider the IHR as a top choice is that much of our hunting opportunity on good bucks is at last light. The fact that the IHR illuminates less of the reticle, makes it slightly better for low light hunting. The choices that illuminate the whole reticle lessen the ability to see the target as well. It's not really a great choice either way as you are limiting the capability of what the scope could do,no matter what you choose because of the SFP and the choice of reticles.
Last edited by R_H_Clark; 01/30/18.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 2,716
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 2,716 |
I'm leaning slightly towards the Nightforce 2.5-10x42 with IHR or MOAR reticle because it seems to check the most boxes. What's this about the reticle being too thin?
Do the VX-5HD and VX-6HD Leupolds have the same tracking issues as the VX3i? What about the Swaro Z5 3.5-18?
As a backup I may consider the SWFA series but they look really big, I should mention I've only owned one 30mm scope (an original VX-6 2-12 that I sent down the road).
Planning to order the rifle tomorrow morning... I have both of those reticles and they are far easier to see than the SWFA SS MilQuad or MOAQuad reticles, which I also have. (Sold the MilQuad as it was my least favorite of all of those.) The IHR is a nice reticle if you like a plain duplex, but the MOAR provides more useful information. The IHR reticle only has the center crosshair illuminate, which is nice in very low light. The one nice feature of a SFP reticle is that turning it down to 2.5 makes it bold, which I use occasionally on pigs in heavy cover areas, and thinner on the higher magnification for more open longer shots. Which version of the MQ and MOAQ? They're not all equivalent. Scope models? Was a SWFA SS 6x fixed purchased about three or so years ago.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 69
Campfire Greenhorn
|
|
OP
Campfire Greenhorn
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 69 |
I just became aware of the Tract brand of scopes - anyone have experience twisting dials on the Toric model? The 2-10x42 looks like the right size and a zero stop turret is included...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 13,760
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 13,760 |
|
|
|
|
|
603 members (10gaugemag, 12344mag, 1234, 10ring1, 007FJ, 10gaugeman, 54 invisible),
2,613
guests, and
1,252
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums81
Topics1,191,800
Posts18,477,464
Members73,944
| |
Most Online11,491
Jul 7th, 2023
|
|
|
|
