|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 32,312
Campfire 'Bwana
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 32,312 |
Here's another one for you, Art. This is compared to my Montana, butt pads lined up, and I swear upon my children taken from an accurate perspective. ![[Linked Image]](http://i142.photobucket.com/albums/r111/handwired/photo-22.jpg) It's a long scope, Art. And a strange stock. You screwed up. Now do the right thing.
The CENTER will hold.
Reality, Patriotism,Trump: you can only pick two
FÜCK PUTIN!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 32,312
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 32,312 |
Just waiting for JO to start talking about wanting some other guy's load again.................
Though, his refusal to actually post up the data showing what we already know is rather telling.................. It doesn't matter, though I'll try those bullets at some point. Doesn't matter, because EVEN IF we grant "he who is afraid to post his load particulars" his 2700 fps, using RL15, from a 22" factory barrel, a claim completely out of line with any loading manual I've seen... Shane's (MontanaMarine) AMAX load hits within .3" windage at 600 yards, while carrying considerably more energy with a heavier, wider bullet to boot. A function match, thus proving my point. Shane posts his load. TryMe chickened out. Hmmm...
Last edited by Jeff_O; 05/29/09.
The CENTER will hold.
Reality, Patriotism,Trump: you can only pick two
FÜCK PUTIN!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 18,462 Likes: 2
Campfire Ranger
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 18,462 Likes: 2 |
Shall I bring in a Campfire member who has shouldered that rifle to tell you how much "contorting" they had to do?
Gads no, please don't drag Maser into this thread!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 24,851
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 24,851 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 21,958
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 21,958 |
The children, the scope mounting and wanting loads they won't try themselves are all a choice for some. Others live in more finite terms.....and believe there are certain ways of doing things.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 5,233
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 5,233 |
I wasn't going to get into this, but holy chit how deep a hole can Jeff O dig on scope mounting now? I have a model 7 in .223 that is taken apart right now for new tube), it used to wear a Leupy Mk 4 3.5-10, now has a 4.5-14 VXIII. The stock on my model 7 is a dead ringer for the profile of the stock on my mom's Rem 788 7mm-08 (which wears the Zeiss Conquest 4.5-14). MyMk4's and 4.5-14 VXIII's are damn near the same length as the Zeiss Conquest on my moms gun and none look anything like that. I am 6'4", both my mom and GF are 5'1" and all of us can use either gun/scope combo without issue with the scope sitting quite a bit further forward as designed to be. Hell i bet good money i can throw my VXIII 6.5-20 on my Model 7 and it won't be anywhere near that far back and anyone who picks it up will think the scope is set just right front to back. Makes me wonder why you think there will always be a thick black ring around the image when looking through the scope. I dont think there is enough adjustment in the ocular lens to make such mounting ever come clear. It goes without saying that your story dont wash from YEARS ( approx 15) of use of the model 7 with long scopes such as above. Fact is some of the guys here have a metric chit ton of experience setting up guns and as your buddy TRYME is so fond of saying "You can bullchit the fans but not the players" P.S. My Kimber Montana as shown below wears the 4.5-14 VXIII ( again just as long as the Conquest), its damn near the same LOP as my factory model 7 stock (the model 7 is about 1/4" shorter), it shoulders beautifuly and as soon as you open your eye the image is clear as a bell for heights from 5'1"- 6'4". Please notice it dont look nothing like what your showing there pardner.... ![[Linked Image]](http://i192.photobucket.com/albums/z254/MallardAddict/kimberWSMsmall.jpg) In case your not familiar, here is a Leupold Mk4 on my .308 (admittedly not a Rem 7 though), pretty long even when it isnt wearing the 4" sunshade as in that picture, again no where near that far set back. (got about 15- 20 more rifles here with so called "long" scopes if more pictures are needed, but the results are the same......) ![[Linked Image]](http://i192.photobucket.com/albums/z254/MallardAddict/FNXP1.jpg)
Last edited by MallardAddict; 05/29/09. Reason: added pictures and descriptions
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 50,635
Campfire Kahuna
|
|
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 50,635 |
Jeff
Maybe I was mistaken... You need to slide that scope another 1/4" aft and shoot some crows in treetops straight above you.
As I said, so clueless you do not even know what is so funny.
Please bring the other moron forward to stand up for you. It would be damn funny to know where you go for support...
I notice you removed my reference to your boy bambam and his dyke... No comment on how great a choice that is, either.
art
Mark Begich, Joaquin Jackson, and Heller resistance... Three huge reasons to worry about the NRA.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 50,635
Campfire Kahuna
|
|
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 50,635 |
Oh, and the term is "nose".
Mark Begich, Joaquin Jackson, and Heller resistance... Three huge reasons to worry about the NRA.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 32,312
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 32,312 |
That's all well and good guys... except...
If the scope on my M7 was mounted any further forward, I'd lose my full sight picture (unless I crawled the stock forward from my natural position). Period. This is a fixed-eye-relief scope; it's not hard to see this. How this concept escapes you guys is beyond me, other than the before-mentioned "experts syndrome".
The 2.5x8 Loopy on my .325 WSM Montana is as far back as the Talley's will let it go. If I could, I'd probably bring it even further back, another 1/8" or so. If ever there's a rifle that bucks, that'd be it... never touches me. Ever. I practice with it all the time from field positions, prone, whatever. I shot my cow elk at a very steep up-angle with it this last fall, about as steep as you will get short of perhaps sheep hunting. No problem.
My sporter .338 sports a 3.5x10 Conquest, also nominally fixed eye relief. It's also mounted as close to me as possible. If I could, I'd move that one back a little more, too. Again, I shoot it all the time from field positions. No problems, never been touched by that scope.
So what ever shall I do? Shall I mount my scopes according to how people say on the internet, even though it's worse for me and my body? Or shall I mount them such that they work best for me? Gosh, I'm in a tizzy... wringing hands... so confused...
Seriously guys... think about it. Mounted where it is, I close my eyes, throw up the rifle, open my eyes, and everything is perfect, right where I want it, full sight picture, no moving my head around, nuthin'. Perfect. And, the scope NEVER HITS ME.
In what possible way, could a scope be mounted better FOR ME than what I just described? They are my fuggin' rifles.
So what, exactly, is the problem? And why, exactly, should I change?
The CENTER will hold.
Reality, Patriotism,Trump: you can only pick two
FÜCK PUTIN!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 32,312
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 32,312 |
... and Art, I'd be happy to shoot that M7 at any up-angle you desire, in the presence of a long-standing 'fire member, next time I shoot with him. It ain't gonna touch me. And should I ever decide to set up my M7 .358 for crow hunting, why I'll consult you on the proper way to set up a rifle for that. You seem to be quite knowledgeable in the field of setting up big game rifles for crow hunting.  Just so you don't run with something I've never said- I am not claiming to be an expert, nor that my way is best for everyone. I'm defending myself against a RUDE [bleep]' attack from YOU, Art, which is completely baseless, childish, and insulting. You know, YOU. You are the guy who's never even touched this model of Zeiss scope, never mounted one on a M7 LSS, doesn't live in my body, doesn't share my neck/shoulder/whatever geometry, but feels compelled to publically slam me over setting my rifles up to work properly for ME. You know, ME. Me being the guy who shoots his rifles all the time, can certainly understand what works or doesn't for himself, and who sets his rifles up properly for the person it matters for- ME. It'd be laughable, but you are rude enough about it that it turns into something else entirely. Shame on you, Art.
The CENTER will hold.
Reality, Patriotism,Trump: you can only pick two
FÜCK PUTIN!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 32,312
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 32,312 |
MallardAddict, I would not presume to tell you that your rifles aren't set up properly for you. Just for the record, the Zeiss scope I mounted on that M7, PROPERLY mounted for me and my body I might add <g>, is 13.5" long. The Leupold 4.5x14 you mention is 12.1" or 12.3" long, depending on the model you have. Just sayin'. You may not know as much as you think. This Zeiss is an odd scope. If you'd like to explain to me how a scope is not properly mounted, for ME, when I get the fullest field of view possible from the natural position my head hits the stock... and I NEVER get touched by my scopes... then please, explain how I could do better than that. I'm all ears!  Good day to you. Won't be long, you'll be whackin' mallards again! I wasn't going to get into this, but holy chit how deep a hole can Jeff O dig on scope mounting now? I have a model 7 in .223 that is taken apart right now for new tube), it used to wear a Leupy Mk 4 3.5-10, now has a 4.5-14 VXIII. The stock on my model 7 is a dead ringer for the profile of the stock on my mom's Rem 788 7mm-08 (which wears the Zeiss Conquest 4.5-14). MyMk4's and 4.5-14 VXIII's are damn near the same length as the Zeiss Conquest on my moms gun and none look anything like that. I am 6'4", both my mom and GF are 5'1" and all of us can use either gun/scope combo without issue with the scope sitting quite a bit further forward as designed to be. Hell i bet good money i can throw my VXIII 6.5-20 on my Model 7 and it won't be anywhere near that far back and anyone who picks it up will think the scope is set just right front to back. Makes me wonder why you think there will always be a thick black ring around the image when looking through the scope. I dont think there is enough adjustment in the ocular lens to make such mounting ever come clear. It goes without saying that your story dont wash from YEARS ( approx 15) of use of the model 7 with long scopes such as above. Fact is some of the guys here have a metric chit ton of experience setting up guns and as your buddy TRYME is so fond of saying "You can bullchit the fans but not the players" P.S. My Kimber Montana as shown below wears the 4.5-14 VXIII ( again just as long as the Conquest), its damn near the same LOP as my factory model 7 stock (the model 7 is about 1/4" shorter), it shoulders beautifuly and as soon as you open your eye the image is clear as a bell for heights from 5'1"- 6'4". Please notice it dont look nothing like what your showing there pardner.... In case your not familiar, here is a Leupold Mk4 on my .308 (admittedly not a Rem 7 though), pretty long even when it isnt wearing the 4" sunshade as in that picture, again no where near that far set back. (got about 15- 20 more rifles here with so called "long" scopes if more pictures are needed, but the results are the same......)
The CENTER will hold.
Reality, Patriotism,Trump: you can only pick two
FÜCK PUTIN!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 50,635
Campfire Kahuna
|
|
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 50,635 |
"...doesn't live in my body, doesn't share my neck/shoulder/whatever geometry...
And I cannot begin to express how happy that makes me...
When you posted the perpetual "Black Ring" it became clear to everyone, then you post the picture. It would be impossible to make it funnier. But do not let that stop you from trying.
As to the Paul comment, I have proof you got it. But coming back with it after all of the crying you did??? And I am rude?
Unbelievable!
art
Mark Begich, Joaquin Jackson, and Heller resistance... Three huge reasons to worry about the NRA.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 5,233
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 5,233 |
Jeff
I do not really even have a dog in this fight, was just posting honest facts, but the truth is Jeff that you do not seem to know as much as you think. The reason i say this is you have mentioned more then once that a scope tube never delivers a clear image without the thick black ring around it for you, this is likely because it needs to go forward a good inch or so.
Ya see Jeff, that 4.5-14 on my Montana is actually 12.7" as just measured with its BC caps, which i have never taken off since put on (and that length thusly is same same as tube length then). The Mk4 above that used to reside on my .223 Model 7 and is now on my FN 308 above is 14.2" minus its sunshade. The 6.5-20 on my Kimber 22-250 that was on a model 7' 7mm-08 is 14" on the nuts. I have a 4.5-14 LR that was on a previous Kimber Montana .308 before i put it on my .257 ROY, it is 13.4". Also have a VXII 6.5-18 handy that goes 13.5" that's currently on my 7 Rum but was on a model 7 .308 at one time. And lastly my Leica 2.5-10 30MM tube on my Semi Custom .338 RUM is 13.3" on the nuts. None of my scopes have the power ring more then 3/4-1" away from the rear ring and all have always been clear without any "thick black ring"
These are just a few of the ones at the safe door and handy, but all pretty long tubes in the world of scopes and NONE are that far back.
I have seen your pictures, and your build isnt that differnt then mine. If i thought your response would be honest i would wager $100 that you or anyone else except a Giant or Midget could shoulder any of my rifles eyes closed and the scopes will be just fine for you without adjusting your head on the comb upon openeing your eyes. Yuo see pretty much all of my rifles have been shot by the gamut of sizes from 8 year olds that barely go 4' 6" tall to my buddy who is 7'1" (admitdly he has to adjust a bit but hes huge.
Again you can bullchit the fans but not the players.
Last edited by MallardAddict; 05/30/09.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 32,312
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 32,312 |
Guys,
I've seen this "black ring" comment come up numerous times lately. I'd like to nip this one in the bud. It seemed, at the time that I typed it, that it was misunderstood- by Art and others.
What I said was, with a variable eye relief scope like my 2.5x8 Leupolds, it's impossible to mount them such that you DON'T get black around the image AT FULL MAGNIFICATION. Even mounted all the way back, like I typically mount them.
This is... true. Right?
Now, a guy could certainly skootch his head forward. I choose not to do that. I prefer to maintain my cheek weld where it works best for me. Some black around the image doesn't matter and in fact can help reduce parallax by helping me keep my head centered- kind of like a ghost ring. On the other hand, moving my head forwards a couple inches on the stock DOES matter. It changes everything. And there's no point in doing so. If I'm at full power, it's a longer shot, and I have time to set it up, and some black around the image is irrelevant.
Now if I'm missing something... if there is some magic way that you guys are getting a full field of view with a Leupold 2.5x8 set to full power, from the same head position that gives you a full field of view set to 2.5x, I'm all ears. Since mounting it all the way back towards me (to the point that you guys think it's acceptable to publically call me names over it) doesn't do it, for ME, I'll be very curious to hear how it is that you think this is possible.
Perhaps it was a misunderstanding, and that clears it up.
The CENTER will hold.
Reality, Patriotism,Trump: you can only pick two
FÜCK PUTIN!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 32,312
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 32,312 |
Mallard, I quoted "naked" scope measurements. If you want to know how long the Zeiss is with Butler Creeks, I can get you that. It will be longer still, than the number I quoted, and proportionally longer still than the 4.5x14, by roughly an inch and a half. FWIW. I don't appreciate the dig that my response wouldn't be "honest". We don't need to act like that. Your rifles would almost certainly work just fine for me. I'm adaptable. But, would they be set up the best they possibly could be, for me? Doubt it. And, why would I want to set up my rifles in any way other than what is the best they can possibly be, for me? They are MY RIFLES. What consistantly works best for me, on rifles from BLR's to M7's and M700's and Savages and Sendero's and Marlin lever guns and so on... is to mount the scope all the way back towards me. Why is that so... wrong? I'm not saying it would be best for YOU. That would be just as stupid as you thinking that your way is what is best for ME, sir. I'm not telling anyone what to do, nor casting aspersions on how they do it. That's what you and Art are doing, however. One more time. Take my M7 for example. Where that Zeiss is mounted is PERFECT for me. I am right in the middle of the sweet spot, I get a full field of view at all power settings from my natural cheek weld, and I don't get hit by the scope. Ever.
How could it POSSIBLY be mounted any better than that, for ME?Please answer that question before bothering to insult me any further with honesty comments or implying that I'm trying to fool anyone. Jeff
I do not really even have a dog in this fight, was just posting honest facts, but the truth is Jeff that you do not seem to know as much as you think. The reason i say this is you have mentioned more then once that a scope tube never delivers a clear image without the thick black ring around it for you, this is likely because it needs to go forward a good inch or so.
Ya see Jeff, that 4.5-14 on my Montana is actually 12.7" as just measured with its BC caps, which i have never taken off since put on (and that length thusly is same same as tube length then). The Mk4 above that used to reside on my .223 Model 7 and is now on my FN 308 above is 14.2" minus its sunshade. The 6.5-20 on my Kimber 22-250 that was on a model 7' 7mm-08 is 14" on the nuts. I have a 4.5-14 LR that was on a previous Kimber Montana .308 before i put it on my .257 ROY, it is 13.4". Also have a VXII 6.5-18 handy that goes 13.5" that's currently on my 7 Rum but was on a model 7 .308 at one time. And lastly my Leica 2.5-10 30MM tube on my Semi Custom .338 RUM is 13.3" on the nuts. None of my scopes have the power ring more then 3/4-1" away from the rear ring and all have always been clear without any "thick black ring"
These are just a few of the ones at the safe door and handy, but all pretty long tubes in the world of scopes and NONE are that far back.
I have seen your pictures, and your build isnt that differnt then mine. If i thought your response would be honest i would wager $100 that you or anyone else except a Giant or Midget could shoulder any of my rifles eyes closed and the scopes will be just fine for you without adjusting your head on the comb upon openeing your eyes. Yuo see pretty much all of my rifles have been shot by the gamut of sizes from 8 year olds that barely go 4' 6" tall to my buddy who is 7'1" (admitdly he has to adjust a bit but hes huge.
Again you can bullchit the fans but not the players.
Last edited by Jeff_O; 05/30/09.
The CENTER will hold.
Reality, Patriotism,Trump: you can only pick two
FÜCK PUTIN!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 32,312
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 32,312 |
"...doesn't live in my body, doesn't share my neck/shoulder/whatever geometry...
And I cannot begin to express how happy that makes me...
When you posted the perpetual "Black Ring" it became clear to everyone, then you post the picture. It would be impossible to make it funnier. But do not let that stop you from trying.
As to the Paul comment, I have proof you got it. But coming back with it after all of the crying you did??? And I am rude?
Unbelievable!
art Art, it's becoming clear that, as is often the case with guys like you who think it'd be cute to take a shot at me... you have nothing of substance. At this point all you can do is play the "you are so stupid!" card. Not going to fly. And for the record- GOD I hate this BS! I wish you and your sort would just stop acting this way! You completely misunderstood my "black around the image" comment, some months ago. You did so because it was in your best interest to pretend you didn't understand. You have run with your "misunderstanding" and are attempting to mock me with something I didn't say. I just wrote a clarification which, by the way, is completely consistant with what I said at the time; if you want to go dig that up, be my guest. How you, who has never even touched this model scope much less mounted one on a M7, can tell me, who has one in my possession so mounted, that I've done it SO VERY WRONG that it rates a public mocking, is beyond me. It's one more example of your utter arrogance, Art. As to that punk Paul Walukewitz and the vile thing he said about my mother, he never apologized that I saw. I have the link to the thread stored- no apology. I have kept the PM thread that I started in an attempt to find a solution with the man- no apology. The closest he came was some BS about how it was a shot at me, not my mother. So if you are in possession of an apology from him, do share. I'd like to see that. As I said, if it came on this thread when he showed up, I didn't see it. I left the thread for a few days and never read back through that section, so as not to get sucked back into that garbage with that punk, Paul Walukewitz.
The CENTER will hold.
Reality, Patriotism,Trump: you can only pick two
FÜCK PUTIN!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 50,635
Campfire Kahuna
|
|
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 50,635 |
1000 words; ![[Linked Image]](http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a34/peckpartyof3/guns/MsandMKX25-06portsides.jpg)
Mark Begich, Joaquin Jackson, and Heller resistance... Three huge reasons to worry about the NRA.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 2,873
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 2,873 |
Beautiful stocks. What type of wood is that?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 7,893
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 7,893 |
Listen, your a worthless piece of [bleep] that should do a LOT more reading and a LOT LESS posting. you might actually learn something. you rant like a little girl... MAN the [bleep] up already! Your BS ballistic gack is just that! you're a fool. you are the first person i've ever considered putting on ignore!
I can't spell... Deal with it...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 6,116
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 6,116 |
As to that punk Paul Walukewitz ...just wanna be there when you meet Paul face to face...
|
|
|
|
|
538 members (01Foreman400, 1beaver_shooter, 21, 10gaugeman, 12344mag, 10Glocks, 67 invisible),
2,430
guests, and
1,234
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums81
Topics1,192,447
Posts18,489,641
Members73,970
| |
Most Online11,491
Jul 7th, 2023
|
|
|
|
