Those really big muleys sure look good going straight away like that. Saw a similar view of one near Jackson Lake some time ago. All I got was a crappy picture. Thanks for sharing JG and interrupting a pitiful thread in a positive way.
No, I don't know more than anybody else. No human does. But I do have more experience than most hunters, so can appreciate (and learn) from other hunters' experience.
You, on the other hand, think YOUR experience is the ONLY experience that counts. This isn't unusual among humans, but most aren't as insistent about it. In fact, you're one of the perfect examples of what a good friend of mine calls "aggressive ignorance."
I'm trying to get an answer to whether there are or shoud be limits to what constitutes fair chase. We used to call certain things "unsporting" if they left little chance for survival to the game. Things like shotgunning birds on the ground or jacklighting deer were considerd not to be fair chase or sporting. Seems like anything goes now so long as something gets killed. If rangefinders and dialing scopes for 1000 yard shots is ok, why not just use spotlights and hunt at night ?
How fair is fair? How good a chance does the game need to have to get away?
You tell me big shot. I've asked that question about a dozen different ways here and get nothing.
ok ok, you guys have to finally admit I am not the most argumentative person on the board anymore!!!! that award now goes to blackheart. I am ready to be cut some slack now, LOL. holy crap JG what the frick??when are taking me hunting?? That video makes me feel like a dipshit
Stay on topic and stop trying to start a new argument...grin...
No, I don't know more than anybody else. No human does. But I do have more experience than most hunters, so can appreciate (and learn) from other hunters' experience.
You, on the other hand, think YOUR experience is the ONLY experience that counts. This isn't unusual among humans, but most aren't as insistent about it. In fact, you're one of the perfect examples of what a good friend of mine calls "aggressive ignorance."
I'm trying to get an answer to whether there are or shoud be limits to what constitutes fair chase. We used to call certain things "unsporting" if they left little chance for survival to the game. Things like shotgunning birds on the ground or jacklighting deer were considerd not to be fair chase or sporting. Seems like anything goes now so long as something gets killed. If rangefinders and dialing scopes for 1000 yard shots is ok, why not just use spotlights and hunt at night ?
How fair is fair? How good a chance does the game need to have to get away?
You tell me big shot. I've asked that question about a dozen different ways here and get nothing.
You started the whole “fair chase” argument.....
You passed judgement on a bunch of guys here.....
You should answer the fuggin question, or go away.
You better pray to the God of Skinny Punks that this wind doesn't pick up......
In the 60’s & 70’s Leupolds was a good option, the problem is everyone else has improved their scopes but Leupold has not.
IIRC, Leupold upgraded their scopes multiple times since the 1960's and 1970's.
Vari-X II became the Vari-X IIc in 1984.
Vari-X IIc became the VX-I and VX-II n 2001.
VX-I and VX-II were upgraded in 2004.
VX-1 and VX-II became the VX-1 and VX-2 in 2012.
The Freedom series superceded the VX-1 and VX-2 in 2018.
I have room for 100 rifles in the ready rack, around 95 of them have scopes mounted and of the 95, 70 probably have Leupolds mounted. My two current disappointments with Leupold are the usurious price that they are charging for a simple reticle change and the fact that the heavy duplex doesn't appear to be available in a 2-7x33 Freedom.
That didn’t keep up with the competition
In what way?
Tacticool?
New scopes come out of the box with canted reticles for starters. Not adjusting properly, loseing zero and ability to hold zero after several hundred rounds. If you’ve never experienced the leupold shuffle consider yourself very lucky.
I got banned on another web site for a debate that happened on this site. That's a first
ok ok, you guys have to finally admit I am not the most argumentative person on the board anymore!!!! that award now goes to blackheart. I am ready to be cut some slack now, LOL. holy crap JG what the frick??when are taking me hunting?? That video makes me feel like a dipshit
Your arguments are on topic. This is left field crap.
In the 60’s & 70’s Leupolds was a good option, the problem is everyone else has improved their scopes but Leupold has not.
IIRC, Leupold upgraded their scopes multiple times since the 1960's and 1970's.
Vari-X II became the Vari-X IIc in 1984.
Vari-X IIc became the VX-I and VX-II n 2001.
VX-I and VX-II were upgraded in 2004.
VX-1 and VX-II became the VX-1 and VX-2 in 2012.
The Freedom series superceded the VX-1 and VX-2 in 2018.
I have room for 100 rifles in the ready rack, around 95 of them have scopes mounted and of the 95, 70 probably have Leupolds mounted. My two current disappointments with Leupold are the usurious price that they are charging for a simple reticle change and the fact that the heavy duplex doesn't appear to be available in a 2-7x33 Freedom.
That didn’t keep up with the competition
In what way?
Tacticool?
New scopes come out of the box with canted reticles for starters. Not adjusting properly, loseing zero and ability to hold zero after several hundred rounds. If you’ve never experienced the leupold shuffle consider yourself very lucky.
I've sent a few old scopes that came to me on rifles back to Leupold to be refurbished, but none for failure. I've never had any of the problems that you've cited, but because I have a large number of rifles, few of them get shot very much. Other than dedicated varmint rifles and rimfires, I doubt that many of them have seen more than 300 rounds fired, some less than 100.
No, I don't know more than anybody else. No human does. But I do have more experience than most hunters, so can appreciate (and learn) from other hunters' experience.
You, on the other hand, think YOUR experience is the ONLY experience that counts. This isn't unusual among humans, but most aren't as insistent about it. In fact, you're one of the perfect examples of what a good friend of mine calls "aggressive ignorance."
I'm trying to get an answer to whether there are or shoud be limits to what constitutes fair chase. We used to call certain things "unsporting" if they left little chance for survival to the game. Things like shotgunning birds on the ground or jacklighting deer were considerd not to be fair chase or sporting. Seems like anything goes now so long as something gets killed. If rangefinders and dialing scopes for 1000 yard shots is ok, why not just use spotlights and hunt at night ?
How fair is fair? How good a chance does the game need to have to get away?
You tell me big shot. I've asked that question about a dozen different ways here and get nothing.
There is no definitive answer, that's my point. Then again, I'm not the one pointing fingers and saying others don't hunt by fair chase methods, you are. If you can't answer the question stop with the accusations.
I've taken lots of game with an open-sighted muzzleloader, effective range (for me) at 100 yards or a little more. I've also taken some with archery gear. My opinion is, it's orders of magnitude easier to get within muzzleloader range than archery range, and get a good shot opportunity. So if pressed on what distance technology becomes more important than skill my answer is closer to 100 yards than 400. And the difference in skill required to get within 100 yards vs 400 is nowhere near the difference between 100 and 30 or 40.
So IMO anyone who thinks 100 yards is "fair chase" but 400 isn't is a hypocrite.
No, I don't know more than anybody else. No human does. But I do have more experience than most hunters, so can appreciate (and learn) from other hunters' experience.
You, on the other hand, think YOUR experience is the ONLY experience that counts. This isn't unusual among humans, but most aren't as insistent about it. In fact, you're one of the perfect examples of what a good friend of mine calls "aggressive ignorance."
I'm trying to get an answer to whether there are or shoud be limits to what constitutes fair chase. We used to call certain things "unsporting" if they left little chance for survival to the game. Things like shotgunning birds on the ground or jacklighting deer were considerd not to be fair chase or sporting. Seems like anything goes now so long as something gets killed. If rangefinders and dialing scopes for 1000 yard shots is ok, why not just use spotlights and hunt at night ?
How fair is fair? How good a chance does the game need to have to get away?
You tell me big shot. I've asked that question about a dozen different ways here and get nothing.
You started the whole “fair chase” argument.....
You passed judgement on a bunch of guys here.....
You should answer the fuggin question, or go away.
BH, You’re ideas and experience are overwhelming subjective.
The world of hunts and different killing fields are mighty vast.
Comparing everything from your kitchen table only proves you need to invest in a bigger table, or buy a tag in an area outside of your backyard...😎
Curiosity Killed the Cat & The Prairie Dog “Molon Labe”
The way and the places I hunt don't change to much. I can only think of a couple of times in the last 35 years dialing would have been real useful. Set and forget works for me but I'll owe up to owning a couple of Mk4 Leopolds, a SWFA and a Vortex just to learn new things. I've had some scope fails Weaver, Redfield ,Tasco and a Bushnell. Of the 20 odd Leupolds I have they are and have been dead reliable ,I think they were all made before 2000 except for 1 VX-1 50 mm and I bought most of them used for a savings advantage. Knowing that Leopold would fix them for free or damned reasonable. I am kinda glad a lot of people bad mouth them and buy new wonder scopes as I have bought 4 Vari-X IIc's in the 18 months for a total of 230 bucks, the last one a gloss finish for $30 + tax. You all keep badmouthing them so there are more used ones for me to buy. MB
" Cheapest velocity in the world comes from a long barrel and I sure do like them. MB "
I didn't have a tag left or I would've shot this big sucker from the back of my truck a couple of years ago. I can assure you I wouldn't have worried what some yankee from NY (or anyone else for that matter) thought about it.
I used to hunt on a ranch out between Junction and Menard on the edge of the Texas Hill Country. We hunted on 4,600 acres on the Nogues Ranch. He (I'll call him Paul) owned about 1000 acres of it and Mrs. Nogues owned the balance of the land. She was a widow, here husband having died in a plane crash in a WWII relic aircraft. His policy was every guest got to shoot one buck, one doe, and one turkey. However, and he was adamant about this, his one exception was, "If you see a trophy buck even if it's in the headlights, Shoot Him!" He was from Michigan or Wisconsin originally, but had been in Texas so many years he would fight you for calling him a Yankee.
Last edited by Filaman; 05/22/19.
What goes up must come down, what goes around comes around, there's no free lunch. Trump's comin' back, get over it!
Leupold still seems to be the best scope for the $, at least in the under the $1,000 price point. Please educate me if I'm wrong, I'm not opposed to learning something here.
I have two left in my collection, a VXII 2-7 on a 22 lr, and a vx6 1-6 on a 223. They don't get dialed or moved, I think its an OK scope if you don't abuse it, like dropping it. dialing it, putting it on a heavy kicker, for the 223 and the 22 they work great. I especially enjoy the vx6, I go back to the range time after time with the same fed fusion 62 grain load and it puts the bullet holes in the same center it did 3 years ago...just don't move them around, dial them or drop them by accident.
"Provincial" is the word I've been looking for! There's a lot of provincial characters around here. Start a thread that mentions bear baiting, crossbows, chili, beer, inline MLs, kaywoodie's hats, most anything, and they come out of the woodwork like bedbugs. Lighten up, people!
Provincial adjective 1 : of, relating to, or coming from a province 2 a : limited in outlook : narrow b : lacking the polish of urban society : unsophisticated
Plus, I realized a couple years ago that MOST hunters develop their preferences (whether in cartridges, rifles, scopes, etc) between age 30 and 40. After that they never change much, mostly because those "worked" for them--and generally their fathers, and perhaps grandfathers.
Yet centerfire cartridge rifles and sights have been evolving for around 150 years. Which means that all those hunters who believe "their" generation of perfect hunting rifles is absolute perfection are essentially saying one 20-30 year period is not only everything anybody "needs" but anybody who might prefer anything else (even say, a 94 Winchester .30-30 rather than a .45-70 trapdoor Springfield) is FOS.
Personally, having owned and hunted with a wide variety of rifles I appreciate all of them.
“Montana seems to me to be what a small boy would think Texas is like from hearing Texans.” John Steinbeck
The funny thing is, I'll bet $1,000,000 that when the youngest hunters (and I'll jump on the assumption that they almost universally prefer the newest stuff) get to be my age, they'll be in the very same boat. Odd bunch, we are.
BTW, I do not expect to be alive when the youngest hunters get to be my age. You can take my bet but you'll have to dig me up for the payoff. There will be a note in my pocket that says "you didn't REALLY expect to find a million dollars in my pocket, did ya?"
Don't be the darkness.
America will perish while those who should be standing guard are satisfying their lusts.
Plus, I realized a couple years ago that MOST hunters develop their preferences (whether in cartridges, rifles, scopes, etc) between age 30 and 40. After that they never change much, mostly because those "worked" for them--and generally their fathers, and perhaps grandfathers.
Yet centerfire cartridge rifles and sights have been evolving for around 150 years. Which means that all those hunters who believe "their" generation of perfect hunting rifles is absolute perfection are essentially saying one 20-30 year period is not only everything anybody "needs" but anybody who might prefer anything else (even say, a 94 Winchester .30-30 rather than a .45-70 trapdoor Springfield) is FOS.
Personally, having owned and hunted with a wide variety of rifles I appreciate all of them.
I've killed deer with multiple levers, pumps, bolts and semi's in .222, .223, .22-250, .243, 6.5 Creed, 7x57 mm mauser, .30-30, .308, .30-06. .357 mag,, .35 Rem. and .44 mag... I just prefer the "carryability", handling/balance of a traditional exposed hammer lever and never found anything to be more effective for where and how I hunt. I started with a .30-30 lever and went back to them for the bulk of my hunting after trying many others.. I guess if that makes me "provincial" then so be it. I can live with that. I have and will continue to experiment with new/different rifles and cartridges and if I ever find something I like better for my use then my old lever guns will be playing second fiddle but I'm not holding my breath.
![[Linked Image from i.postimg.cc]](https://i.postimg.cc/qMjL6f8C/27-FD3-F35-D9-CF-4-FC0-AE24-D01508-F7-AF1-C.gif)
