|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 16,512
Campfire Ranger
|
OP
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 16,512 |
Curious having seen and owned a few 36 and 42s in both...what would others think.
One thing to consider, if duplex specs are the same as a gloss 36, a 200 zero should be about right on w/lower post point - at 400 yds.
Would you upgrade the vertical or not?
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 5,828
Campfire Tracker
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 5,828 |
It dose just that with my 7mm RM shooting 150 gr Bullets out of a Blaser R-93 and a 6 x 42 mm leupold scope. Upgrade if it keeps up up at night. I been leaning to not worry about such things. My current favorite set up is a plain jane 760 Remington in 30-06 with an aimpoint sight. Big Greens 180 gr Core Lokts. The older I get the simpler I want both my guns sights and loads to be. I put more thought into cooking venison these days than what gun load or what have you to shoot it with.
"Any idiot can face a crisis,it's the day-to-day living that wears you out."
Anton Chekhov
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 13,860
Campfire Outfitter
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 13,860 |
LR duplex with a target turret on the elevation
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 16,512
Campfire Ranger
|
OP
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 16,512 |
gmsemel - I agree, good chance such a scope would be riding atop a 243 and see some varmint action which might give a greater variety of shot presentations, distances and size targets. If deer/hogs only I'd not change anything.
The LR duplex works well for many, not used to form an opinion. Target knobs work great, but given choice a M1 w/o worry w/a cap and waterproof would get the nod. An M2 or M3 profile would be great if 1/4MOA.
Just thinking, will likely test to see POI w/lower post downrange.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 3,395 Likes: 2
Campfire Tracker
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 3,395 Likes: 2 |
Yes. I won't have a scope without repeatable adjustments, solid turrets, and/or at the very least mildots.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 8,816 Likes: 6
Campfire Outfitter
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 8,816 Likes: 6 |
Na not if your shots are under 300 yards. Heck most of my shots are under 100 yards.
Will Munny: It's a hell of a thing, killing a man. Take away all he's got and all he's ever gonna have.
The Schofield Kid: Yeah, well, I guess they had it coming.
Will Munny: We all got it coming, kid.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 18,881
Campfire Ranger
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 18,881 |
I'd probably do some sort of CDS on a compact 6X33. I tend to prefer low profile adjustments like the current ones on the FX3, 6X42 to the taller M1 or target knobs. They are nice to have as an option. Over the years, I've found I can do fairly well either holding over or holding into the estimated wind. But I don't do nearly as well if I must do both at the same time. I would not do a Mil-Dot reticle or anything like one on a big game scope. Too easy to loose the retilce in bad light. E
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 16,512
Campfire Ranger
|
OP
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 16,512 |
Agree LBP on those shots, E - the CDS does seem the better option on a svelte little scope.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,255
Campfire Regular
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,255 |
I just can't warm to the CDS turret. I think some prefer the looks of the CDS, but I like the ease of spinning the M1. If your hope is aesthetics then go with your personal preference, but if spinning is your goal then M1 is the best choice.
Suck bullets simply suck.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 16,512
Campfire Ranger
|
OP
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 16,512 |
Appreciate the input 406.
|
|
|
|
683 members (01Foreman400, 160user, 16gage, 12344mag, 10ring1, 16penny, 65 invisible),
3,016
guests, and
1,367
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
Forums81
Topics1,192,617
Posts18,492,642
Members73,972
|
Most Online11,491 Jul 7th, 2023
|
|
|
|