|
|
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 17,927
Campfire Ranger
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 17,927 |
Pretty might over the whole "light" thing. Except my ass...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,422
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,422 |
I am surprised a scope manufacturer has not offered a scope made from a carbon tube similar to the high quality and expensive baitcasting reels being offered today. I think Bushnell made a carbon-tubed scope back 20+ years ago. Can’t remember the name, but I seem to remember print ads with a medieval Knight in chain male associated with the scope.
"Behavior accepted is behavior repeated."
"Strive to be underestimated."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 14,483
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 14,483 |
I've been playing with a borrowed 2.5-10X32 Nightforce NXS on my Kimber Montana lately. I shot some outstanding groups yesterday after finally settling on a load and learning a correct way to hold the rifle. I had several 5 shot groups at 100 in the .5's to .8's with the load it liked.
I was saving to get the 2.5-10X42 NXS but just bought a used Bushnell LHRS 3-12. Man,it seems like a heavy son of a gun,but I haven't found the 32mm NF bad at all.
I don't know if I'm going overboard or what with such a heavy scope on such a light rifle but I suppose the whole rig should still be fairly light and I'm very tired of inconsistent results,wondering if it's the scope and mounts. Yea,I added a rail and Seekins rings too.
Just wondering how many of you guys have given up on light weight scopes and sort of wondering if anyone is using heavier scopes on Montana's. Seems like about 20oz is about as light as you can go and count on reliability. That weight covers the Nightforce NXS compact and the SWFA SS fixed powers and 3-9. I have a SS on the wife’s Montana and it seems fine to me. I have the 4.5-18 LRTSi on my heavier rig and of course it is fine there. Nothing lightweight about that rig anyway. I have run the 3-12 LRHS on a medium weight rig (< 9 lbs) and it was right at home there as well. I don’t go for lightweight rigs much anymore as I have never been able to get the level of precision that I want from them but if I were to do another, I’d put a NXS compact on it, and if I couldn’t stomach the cost, an SWFA. John If they made their compacts in FFP, and offered a reticle I really liked, I’d totally agree with you, but as it stands I’ll take the SS 3-9X over any of the NXS compacts I’ve played with.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,357
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,357 |
I am surprised a scope manufacturer has not offered a scope made from a carbon tube similar to the high quality and expensive baitcasting reels being offered today. I believe Bushnell did that a few years back Kruger builds them now Kruger Carbon fiber scopeInteresting idea.....not very lightweight though, according to the specs.
Don't speculate when you don't know, and don't second guess when you do.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 13,759
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 13,759 |
I've been playing with a borrowed 2.5-10X32 Nightforce NXS on my Kimber Montana lately. I shot some outstanding groups yesterday after finally settling on a load and learning a correct way to hold the rifle. I had several 5 shot groups at 100 in the .5's to .8's with the load it liked.
I was saving to get the 2.5-10X42 NXS but just bought a used Bushnell LHRS 3-12. Man,it seems like a heavy son of a gun,but I haven't found the 32mm NF bad at all.
I don't know if I'm going overboard or what with such a heavy scope on such a light rifle but I suppose the whole rig should still be fairly light and I'm very tired of inconsistent results,wondering if it's the scope and mounts. Yea,I added a rail and Seekins rings too.
Just wondering how many of you guys have given up on light weight scopes and sort of wondering if anyone is using heavier scopes on Montana's. Seems like about 20oz is about as light as you can go and count on reliability. That weight covers the Nightforce NXS compact and the SWFA SS fixed powers and 3-9. I have a SS on the wife’s Montana and it seems fine to me. I have the 4.5-18 LRTSi on my heavier rig and of course it is fine there. Nothing lightweight about that rig anyway. I have run the 3-12 LRHS on a medium weight rig (< 9 lbs) and it was right at home there as well. I don’t go for lightweight rigs much anymore as I have never been able to get the level of precision that I want from them but if I were to do another, I’d put a NXS compact on it, and if I couldn’t stomach the cost, an SWFA. John If they made their compacts in FFP, and offered a reticle I really liked, I’d totally agree with you, but as it stands I’ll take the SS 3-9X over any of the NXS compacts I’ve played with. I can live with first or second focal plane, the reticle is my dislike with the NXS. If the IHR had solid bars rather than hollow it would meet my needs better in thick cover and take nothing away from the precision at longer ranges. The NX8 1-8x24 might be interesting for a lightweight at 17oz, but I'm guessing the view is pretty "tight" at upper powers with the small obj. The illumination has been changed to make it daylight visible....if I knew it would go as low as the NXS illumination at last light (which is excellent) I'd probably grab one but don't want to spend the $ and end up with a washed out image in low light. I need to pick up a SS 3-9 as several have mentioned they have a bolder reticle than the 6x. All I've used are 6x and 10x.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 10,972
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
OP
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 10,972 |
I've been playing with a borrowed 2.5-10X32 Nightforce NXS on my Kimber Montana lately. I shot some outstanding groups yesterday after finally settling on a load and learning a correct way to hold the rifle. I had several 5 shot groups at 100 in the .5's to .8's with the load it liked.
I was saving to get the 2.5-10X42 NXS but just bought a used Bushnell LHRS 3-12. Man,it seems like a heavy son of a gun,but I haven't found the 32mm NF bad at all.
I don't know if I'm going overboard or what with such a heavy scope on such a light rifle but I suppose the whole rig should still be fairly light and I'm very tired of inconsistent results,wondering if it's the scope and mounts. Yea,I added a rail and Seekins rings too.
Just wondering how many of you guys have given up on light weight scopes and sort of wondering if anyone is using heavier scopes on Montana's. Seems like about 20oz is about as light as you can go and count on reliability. That weight covers the Nightforce NXS compact and the SWFA SS fixed powers and 3-9. I have a SS on the wife’s Montana and it seems fine to me. I have the 4.5-18 LRTSi on my heavier rig and of course it is fine there. Nothing lightweight about that rig anyway. I have run the 3-12 LRHS on a medium weight rig (< 9 lbs) and it was right at home there as well. I don’t go for lightweight rigs much anymore as I have never been able to get the level of precision that I want from them but if I were to do another, I’d put a NXS compact on it, and if I couldn’t stomach the cost, an SWFA. John If they made their compacts in FFP, and offered a reticle I really liked, I’d totally agree with you, but as it stands I’ll take the SS 3-9X over any of the NXS compacts I’ve played with. I can live with first or second focal plane, the reticle is my dislike with the NXS. If the IHR had solid bars rather than hollow it would meet my needs better in thick cover and take nothing away from the precision at longer ranges. The NX8 1-8x24 might be interesting for a lightweight at 17oz, but I'm guessing the view is pretty "tight" at upper powers with the small obj. The illumination has been changed to make it daylight visible....if I knew it would go as low as the NXS illumination at last light (which is excellent) I'd probably grab one but don't want to spend the $ and end up with a washed out image in low light. I need to pick up a SS 3-9 as several have mentioned they have a bolder reticle than the 6x. All I've used are 6x and 10x. To me the SS 3-9 reticle is the same at 6X. The advantage is that if you need a bolder reticle you can increase magnification. I really wish Nightforce would have given the NX8 a 32mm objective and low light illumination. It would have been a near perfect hunting scope.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 13,759
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 13,759 |
I've been playing with a borrowed 2.5-10X32 Nightforce NXS on my Kimber Montana lately. I shot some outstanding groups yesterday after finally settling on a load and learning a correct way to hold the rifle. I had several 5 shot groups at 100 in the .5's to .8's with the load it liked.
I was saving to get the 2.5-10X42 NXS but just bought a used Bushnell LHRS 3-12. Man,it seems like a heavy son of a gun,but I haven't found the 32mm NF bad at all.
I don't know if I'm going overboard or what with such a heavy scope on such a light rifle but I suppose the whole rig should still be fairly light and I'm very tired of inconsistent results,wondering if it's the scope and mounts. Yea,I added a rail and Seekins rings too.
Just wondering how many of you guys have given up on light weight scopes and sort of wondering if anyone is using heavier scopes on Montana's. Seems like about 20oz is about as light as you can go and count on reliability. That weight covers the Nightforce NXS compact and the SWFA SS fixed powers and 3-9. I have a SS on the wife’s Montana and it seems fine to me. I have the 4.5-18 LRTSi on my heavier rig and of course it is fine there. Nothing lightweight about that rig anyway. I have run the 3-12 LRHS on a medium weight rig (< 9 lbs) and it was right at home there as well. I don’t go for lightweight rigs much anymore as I have never been able to get the level of precision that I want from them but if I were to do another, I’d put a NXS compact on it, and if I couldn’t stomach the cost, an SWFA. John If they made their compacts in FFP, and offered a reticle I really liked, I’d totally agree with you, but as it stands I’ll take the SS 3-9X over any of the NXS compacts I’ve played with. I can live with first or second focal plane, the reticle is my dislike with the NXS. If the IHR had solid bars rather than hollow it would meet my needs better in thick cover and take nothing away from the precision at longer ranges. The NX8 1-8x24 might be interesting for a lightweight at 17oz, but I'm guessing the view is pretty "tight" at upper powers with the small obj. The illumination has been changed to make it daylight visible....if I knew it would go as low as the NXS illumination at last light (which is excellent) I'd probably grab one but don't want to spend the $ and end up with a washed out image in low light. I need to pick up a SS 3-9 as several have mentioned they have a bolder reticle than the 6x. All I've used are 6x and 10x. To me the SS 3-9 reticle is the same at 6X. The advantage is that if you need a bolder reticle you can increase magnification. I really wish Nightforce would have given the NX8 a 32mm objective and low light illumination. It would have been a near perfect hunting scope. I agree on the 32mm obj. Everything is a trade off...it would have gained a little weight. I'm guessing the NX8 was just their first model in that line. The next may have a bigger obj. Regardless of what they release, I'd prefer they make a true hunting reticle in it, like their Forceplex with center illumination (like in the Nightforce SHV 4-14x56) or a reticle heavy enough not to need illumination, in a 2.5-10 NXS or 3-10 SHV.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 4,062
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 4,062 |
No - no scopes over 12 ozs and if I’m going more reliable I’m using open sights.
“There is no limit to the amount of good you can do if you don’t care who gets credit.” R. Reagan
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2013
Posts: 28,755
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Nov 2013
Posts: 28,755 |
One lightweight that seems to be reliable is the one-inch Trijicon. No complaints about those yet, that I've seen anyway. That said, the 30mm 2.5-12.5 is the one that's got me itching, and that's pretty beefy.
Some seem to satisfied with the Burris FFs too, for set and forget, anyway.
What fresh Hell is this?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 1,686
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 1,686 |
many are turning in their 10# hunting rifles for 5#'s
I did, bought Barrett 6.5 Creedmoor Field craft just replaced the Z3 with a Z6 5-30X50 LOVE IT
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 14,483
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 14,483 |
I've been playing with a borrowed 2.5-10X32 Nightforce NXS on my Kimber Montana lately. I shot some outstanding groups yesterday after finally settling on a load and learning a correct way to hold the rifle. I had several 5 shot groups at 100 in the .5's to .8's with the load it liked.
I was saving to get the 2.5-10X42 NXS but just bought a used Bushnell LHRS 3-12. Man,it seems like a heavy son of a gun,but I haven't found the 32mm NF bad at all.
I don't know if I'm going overboard or what with such a heavy scope on such a light rifle but I suppose the whole rig should still be fairly light and I'm very tired of inconsistent results,wondering if it's the scope and mounts. Yea,I added a rail and Seekins rings too.
Just wondering how many of you guys have given up on light weight scopes and sort of wondering if anyone is using heavier scopes on Montana's. Seems like about 20oz is about as light as you can go and count on reliability. That weight covers the Nightforce NXS compact and the SWFA SS fixed powers and 3-9. I have a SS on the wife’s Montana and it seems fine to me. I have the 4.5-18 LRTSi on my heavier rig and of course it is fine there. Nothing lightweight about that rig anyway. I have run the 3-12 LRHS on a medium weight rig (< 9 lbs) and it was right at home there as well. I don’t go for lightweight rigs much anymore as I have never been able to get the level of precision that I want from them but if I were to do another, I’d put a NXS compact on it, and if I couldn’t stomach the cost, an SWFA. John If they made their compacts in FFP, and offered a reticle I really liked, I’d totally agree with you, but as it stands I’ll take the SS 3-9X over any of the NXS compacts I’ve played with. I can live with first or second focal plane, the reticle is my dislike with the NXS. If the IHR had solid bars rather than hollow it would meet my needs better in thick cover and take nothing away from the precision at longer ranges. The NX8 1-8x24 might be interesting for a lightweight at 17oz, but I'm guessing the view is pretty "tight" at upper powers with the small obj. The illumination has been changed to make it daylight visible....if I knew it would go as low as the NXS illumination at last light (which is excellent) I'd probably grab one but don't want to spend the $ and end up with a washed out image in low light. I need to pick up a SS 3-9 as several have mentioned they have a bolder reticle than the 6x. All I've used are 6x and 10x. To me the SS 3-9 reticle is the same at 6X. The advantage is that if you need a bolder reticle you can increase magnification. I really wish Nightforce would have given the NX8 a 32mm objective and low light illumination. It would have been a near perfect hunting scope. The 3-9 subtension is greater than the 10x and equal to the 6x, but by increasing the mag beynd 6x you can make it appear larger, as you pointed out.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 16,130
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 16,130 |
I set these up for optics piece of mind.......![[Linked Image]](https://i.imgur.com/sO8tsAv.jpg)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 22,911
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 22,911 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 16,130
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 16,130 |
The hole finger or the one next to it?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 22,911
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 22,911 |
the hole finger, of course......grin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2013
Posts: 14,799
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Dec 2013
Posts: 14,799 |
I’m a set and forget person so I really don’t mind imprecise adjustments too much.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 9,374
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 9,374 |
I’m a set and forget person so I really don’t mind imprecise adjustments too much. Same here. The old friction adjustment Leupold M8 4X scopes are a pain in the rear to get zeroed in, but seem to stay there indefinitely once you get there.
Always remember that you are unique, just like everyone else.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2013
Posts: 28,755
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Nov 2013
Posts: 28,755 |
Unless you go with an SS, you can end up dropping $1200- $2k for a lightweight rifle so the total weight with the $1000-$3k reliable scope isn't over the top. Looks like, once again, money is the answer.
In the opposite direction, yesterday, I mounted a Hawke 8x56 on my Ruger 1V; a 22oz scope on a 8.5lb rifle. Don't think I'm climbing any mountains with that rig. Seems like it weighs a lot more than 10lbs to me!
What fresh Hell is this?
|
|
|
|
|
565 members (10gaugemag, 007FJ, 17CalFan, 1Longbow, 1lessdog, 1badf350, 63 invisible),
2,601
guests, and
1,333
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums81
Topics1,191,469
Posts18,471,386
Members73,934
| |
Most Online11,491
Jul 7th, 2023
|
|
|
|
