~24 oz, 30mm, 42mm objective. Could have been really good if they made if FFP with a basic mildot/mildot Gen II reticle....or some measured version of a hunting reticle. SFP and a non-measured reticle for windage hurts so bad.....
Boy I hope they expand on this line! Give us a few more options on reticle and SFP vs FFP. The physicals on this baby are very attractive! What’s the price tag?
In reality,Schit & Blunder don't get very much right. Including erector travel,parallax and reticles. Not that Jim Cumrag could save for her "life",to arrange a down payment upon same. Hint.
In reality,Schit & Blunder don't get very much right. Including erector travel,parallax and reticles. Not that Jim Cumrag could save for her "life",to arrange a down payment upon same. Hint.
I'm unaware of how you gals "celebrate" in the ghetto,but we tend to hug it out(daily),with a GrandBaby stealing The Show...you "lucky" kchunt. Hint. Congratulations?!?
~24 oz, 30mm, 42mm objective. Could have been really good if they made if FFP with a basic mildot/mildot Gen II reticle....or some measured version of a hunting reticle. SFP and a non-measured reticle for windage hurts so bad.....
It falls outside of the family grouping they use for everything else (Klassik, Exos, Summit, Polar, PMII, etc.), so maybe the plan is to make a new line and they'll expand the offerings?
~24 oz, 30mm, 42mm objective. Could have been really good if they made if FFP with a basic mildot/mildot Gen II reticle....or some measured version of a hunting reticle. SFP and a non-measured reticle for windage hurts so bad.....
+1 on your assessment.
The 3-12 Klassik has a great FFP reticle for big game hunting. Little limited on erector travel, but, depending on your distance needs and the specifics of the bullet you're sending, it can be enough.
I was recently admonished on another thread on this forum for suggesting to a retailer that a hunter centric, lower X scope should be offered in an FFP variant. Was a reminder that for many, FFP's are best suited to a realm that doesn't include big game hunting.
~24 oz, 30mm, 42mm objective. Could have been really good if they made if FFP with a basic mildot/mildot Gen II reticle....or some measured version of a hunting reticle. SFP and a non-measured reticle for windage hurts so bad.....
+1 on your assessment.
The 3-12 Klassik has a great FFP reticle for big game hunting. Little limited on erector travel, but, depending on your distance needs and the specifics of the bullet you're sending, it can be enough.
I was recently admonished on another thread on this forum for implying that a hunter centric, lower X scope should be offered in an FFP variant. Was a reminder that, for many, FFP's are best suited to a realm that doesn't include big game hunting
Yeah, I use a BDC on a 6x Klassic and it's workable. 6x PMII is a big improvement.
I've been using a 3-12 Klassik P3 a fair bit the last several months. Need to send it in for the BDC. 3.2 mils is not much...but running the numbers, even if using a fairly low BC bullet at medium speed with a 100 yard zero it will get to 500. 200 yard zero and better BC improves that. I'd certainly like more travel, but for hunting I can live with it.
I own ONE S&B. Bought it because everyone said it was the cat's meow. Yes they are quite good, peerless glass, but what exactly do you get for the price over a more reasonably priced scope? MAYBE five minutes of light? I won't buy another.
I own ONE S&B. Bought it because everyone said it was the cat's meow. Yes they are quite good, peerless glass, but what exactly do you get for the price over a more reasonably priced scope? MAYBE five minutes of light? I won't buy another.
Mostly a joke, but here people are super allergic to FFP reticles, most hunting here just doesn't require rangefinding and dialling. The best selling scopes here also routinely have higher magnification ranges than those that sell best over there. I don't exactly know why, but game size and low light hunting probably play into it. Not to mention that the German hunter likes having the latest and greatest gear but will nearly always still keep shots inside 200yds no matter the gear. Hell, if enough people write them they'll offer a BDC in no time I bet.
Personally, I would have quite liked it if the turrets were a little sleeker.
Mostly a joke, but here people are super allergic to FFP reticles, most hunting here just doesn't require rangefinding and dialling. The best selling scopes here also routinely have higher magnification ranges than those that sell best over there. I don't exactly know why, but game size and low light hunting probably play into it. Not to mention that the German hunter likes having the latest and greatest gear but will nearly always still keep shots inside 200yds no matter the gear. Hell, if enough people write them they'll offer a BDC in no time I bet.
Personally, I would have quite liked it if the turrets were a little sleeker.
I own ONE S&B. Bought it because everyone said it was the cat's meow. Yes they are quite good, peerless glass, but what exactly do you get for the price over a more reasonably priced scope? MAYBE five minutes of light? I won't buy another.
Like every manufacturer's products, there are some that fit a user's preferences and some that don't. If you find a product that meets your preferences better than another, and it's in a price range you're ok with, what you really get for the price is "what you want".
I've not had a S&B fail to adjust properly or lose zero (yet)....so reliability is one of the biggest reasons for me. I've been very pleased with the glass....but lots of scopes have good enough glass. They have several models with well designed hunting reticles. Some of those double as good "shooting" reticles if you like to play long. The ONE biggie for me is their 6x42 PMII, fixed power, reliable, simple, good glass, zero stopped, good hunting reticle that doubles as a good shooting reticle....again, user preference on what a person likes.
Buy what you prefer that fits your budget if it's "what you want".
I've had a few other brands that have never lost zero or fail to track for a lot less money, a lot less. For example a Swaro PH 1.5x6X42 (same as the S&B) do exactly the same for less, then so have my (no longer manufactured ) Leupold (the horror) 1.75X6X 32 for a LOT less. Granted the S&B's glass is much better, but not at four times the price which is my point. Hell, I have some forty plus year old Weavers that I've never touched the adjustments. My only point is Swaros and many other Euroglass are just not worth the money. Most of their price has to do with labor coasts of course.
I've had a few other brands that have never lost zero or fail to track for a lot less money, a lot less. For example a Swaro PH 1.5x6X42 (same as the S&B) do exactly the same for less, then so have my (no longer manufactured ) Leupold (the horror) 1.75X6X 32 for a LOT less. Granted the S&B's glass is much better, but not at four times the price which is my point. Hell, I have some forty plus year old Weavers that I've never touched the adjustments. My only point is Swaros and many other Euroglass are just not worth the money. Most of their price has to do with labor coasts of course.
They are if you do much hunting in very dim light... or darkness. We can legally hunt an hour after dark here. Most any scope is good in bright light.
I'm sure someone will chime in with a S&B that they've seen fail, but I've never seen one break. That for me is the main reason to choose one, much like a Nightforce. I have one of the 1.75-6x32 Leupolds on a .375 H&H and it's never given me any problems, but Leupold's reputation for reliability certainly isn't in the S&B category. If I were going to take that rifle on a once in a lifetime hunt I'd much rather have the S&B riding it than the Leupold, no matter what the price.
S&B's work like they're supposed to work and that's something you can't say about a whole lot of products nowadays. They're just a quality scope.
I've had a few other brands that have never lost zero or fail to track for a lot less money, a lot less. For example a Swaro PH 1.5x6X42 (same as the S&B) do exactly the same for less, then so have my (no longer manufactured ) Leupold (the horror) 1.75X6X 32 for a LOT less. Granted the S&B's glass is much better, but not at four times the price which is my point. Hell, I have some forty plus year old Weavers that I've never touched the adjustments. My only point is Swaros and many other Euroglass are just not worth the money. Most of their price has to do with labor coasts of course.
Sorry, I understand your point is focused on cost.
The point of the original post was S&B's missing a measured FFP hunting reticle in a scope that should have it. I should have stayed on point.
I've had a few other brands that have never lost zero or fail to track for a lot less money, a lot less. For example a Swaro PH 1.5x6X42 (same as the S&B) do exactly the same for less, then so have my (no longer manufactured ) Leupold (the horror) 1.75X6X 32 for a LOT less. Granted the S&B's glass is much better, but not at four times the price which is my point. Hell, I have some forty plus year old Weavers that I've never touched the adjustments. My only point is Swaros and many other Euroglass are just not worth the money. Most of their price has to do with labor coasts of course.
They are worth the $$ to many of us. I'm the first to admit that there is a diminishing return cost/benefit on optics. This is true for riflescopes, binoculars, spotting scopes and rangefinders. But if you have to have the very best, and you are spending serious $$$ on hunting, it's worth it. S&B scopes have served me very well over the years.
The money I have spent on hunts (fees, travel, hotels, meals, taxidermy etc.) have far exceeded my equipment costs. My equipment is twenty years old and been on a lot of hunts. I only paid for it once.
I've had a few other brands that have never lost zero or fail to track for a lot less money, a lot less. For example a Swaro PH 1.5x6X42 (same as the S&B) do exactly the same for less, then so have my (no longer manufactured ) Leupold (the horror) 1.75X6X 32 for a LOT less. Granted the S&B's glass is much better, but not at four times the price which is my point. Hell, I have some forty plus year old Weavers that I've never touched the adjustments. My only point is Swaros and many other Euroglass are just not worth the money. Most of their price has to do with labor coasts of course.
They are if you do much hunting in very dim light... or darkness. We can legally hunt an hour after dark here. Most any scope is good in bright light.
Most any $350 scope nowadays has glass that will get you to/past legal shooting light, including the Chicom stuff. A good reticle is just as important.
If you Crying Kchunts amassed "all" the rounds you "shoot" in a year,it wouldn't begin to fill a sandwich ziploc...you "lucky" kchunts. Hint. Congratulations?!?
20yrs of Pussification,ain't very "hard" on wares,nor is talking about The Outdoors.You Drooling Fhuqktards couldn't "critique" a rifle scope,with all your Dumbfhuqktitude bolted together. Hint.
Bless your Day Dreaming hearts and "hard charging" ways.
You have a lot to offer the readers here, but sniping at people you dislike just wastes what could have been an enjoyable thread.
There's the joke of the day. About as much to offer as the demented moron in the white house. Offers mumbling bullschitt, 20 year old pictures, and the attitude of a lunatic woman with PMS. All the other forums booted his ass out forever. He kisses the moderators ass here, so gets the pass to pollute an otherwise decent page.
Best thing he says is:
***you are ignoring this user***. Really pisses the NPD troll off. Fuqquing laffin
You have a lot to offer the readers here, but sniping at people you dislike just wastes what could have been an enjoyable thread.
There's the joke of the day. About as much to offer as the demented moron in the white house. Offers mumbling bullschitt, 20 year old pictures, and the attitude of a lunatic woman with PMS. All the other forums booted his ass out forever. He kisses the moderators ass here, so gets the pass to pollute an otherwise decent page.
Best thing he says is:
***you are ignoring this user***. Really pisses the NPD troll off. Fuqquing laffin
Ken,
Agree his language, and his "insults", may be "abrasive" to some, but his knowledge of schitt is open for everyone on here to absorb - language be darned. About the only member who has helped, directly or otherwise, with my questions - get over the Fhuqking language, man!
Hint: Don't know you, or Stick. And, don't have the slightest interest in doing so.
The point of the original post was S&B's missing a measured FFP hunting reticle in a scope that should have it. I should have stayed on point.
I've been using them for a very long time. I was pretty shocked when they upped there eye relief from 3.15 to 3.6. that was 20 years ago. They just don't respond to the market. I've talked to the guys in Virginia. The home office has been told what would fly off the shelf here. You don't see it . And you probably won't. It's just the way they roll. The fixed 10x PMII is excellent if you can live with ,10 power.. I've taken a shine to the fixed 8x56. But then I'm not clicken and dicken.
If they do a 2-12 in this 6X magnification with a good, FFP reticle in it would seem to be a direct competitor the Helos BTR 2-12 (note the short mounting area forward of the turret) plus a throwback homage to the Weaver Multistop turret and 1/3rd of the elevation travel….but Euro glass!
You have a lot to offer the readers here, but sniping at people you dislike just wastes what could have been an enjoyable thread.
There's the joke of the day. About as much to offer as the demented moron in the white house. Offers mumbling bullschitt, 20 year old pictures, and the attitude of a lunatic woman with PMS. All the other forums booted his ass out forever. He kisses the moderators ass here, so gets the pass to pollute an otherwise decent page.
Best thing he says is:
***you are ignoring this user***. Really pisses the NPD troll off. Fuqquing laffin
Agree his language, and his "insults", may be "abrasive" to some, but his knowledge of schitt is open for everyone on here to absorb - language be darned. About the only member who has helped, directly or otherwise, with my questions - get over the Fhuqking language, man!
Hint: Don't know you, or Stick. And, don't have the slightest interest in doing so.
Like picking corn from a turd. I’ve never been that hungry…
You have a lot to offer the readers here, but sniping at people you dislike just wastes what could have been an enjoyable thread.
There's the joke of the day. About as much to offer as the demented moron in the white house. Offers mumbling bullschitt, 20 year old pictures, and the attitude of a lunatic woman with PMS. All the other forums booted his ass out forever. He kisses the moderators ass here, so gets the pass to pollute an otherwise decent page.
Best thing he says is:
***you are ignoring this user***. Really pisses the NPD troll off. Fuqquing laffin
Ken,
Agree his language, and his "insults", may be "abrasive" to some, but his knowledge of schitt is open for everyone on here to absorb - language be darned. About the only member who has helped, directly or otherwise, with my questions - get over the Fhuqking language, man!
Hint: Don't know you, or Stick. And, don't have the slightest interest in doing so.
There are more than a few that have as much or more knowledge than he does. I've never needed any advice from him and have done just fine. YMMV
I've had a few other brands that have never lost zero or fail to track for a lot less money, a lot less. For example a Swaro PH 1.5x6X42 (same as the S&B) do exactly the same for less, then so have my (no longer manufactured ) Leupold (the horror) 1.75X6X 32 for a LOT less. Granted the S&B's glass is much better, but not at four times the price which is my point. Hell, I have some forty plus year old Weavers that I've never touched the adjustments. My only point is Swaros and many other Euroglass are just not worth the money. Most of their price has to do with labor coasts of course.
They are if you do much hunting in very dim light... or darkness. We can legally hunt an hour after dark here. Most any scope is good in bright light.
Most any $350 scope nowadays has glass that will get you to/past legal shooting light, including the Chicom stuff. A good reticle is just as important.
This is true if legal is 30 minutes past and you’re in an open field. In the woods or where you can hunt later, there’s value in the S&B glass. At least that’s true for my eyes. Agreed that the reticle is just as important.
The point of the original post was S&B's missing a measured FFP hunting reticle in a scope that should have it. I should have stayed on point.
I've been using them for a very long time. I was pretty shocked when they upped there eye relief from 3.15 to 3.6. that was 20 years ago. They just don't respond to the market. I've talked to the guys in Virginia. The home office has been told what would fly off the shelf here. You don't see it . And you probably won't. It's just the way they roll. The fixed 10x PMII is excellent if you can live with ,10 power.. I've taken a shine to the fixed 8x56. But then I'm not clicken and dicken.
Dave
They do pay attention to the market, but S&B is not a very large company and they take their time. I did ask them whether they plan to offer this model in FFP, but there are currently no plans to do so. That having been said, I still plan to test this one and I should be able to do so toward the end of the year. I think they are supposed to hit the market around SHOT Show of thereabouts, but I have a mule deer and elk hunts in November, so I am scheming to get one here in time for that.
I would also prefer it in FFP, to be honest, but as is, it caught my interest because it is notably lighter that typical from S&B. I really want to see how well they pull it off.
As far as whether they will ever make something like this in FFP, I would not discard it right out of hand. I think they can be persuaded if the market is there. Once I have it in my hands, and if I like the scope, I will look into it a little bit and see if I can make a good argument for them. Personally, I think the crossover market is there. A good example of that is the success of Vortex Razor HD-LHT 4.5-22x50.
The point of the original post was S&B's missing a measured FFP hunting reticle in a scope that should have it. I should have stayed on point.
I've been using them for a very long time. I was pretty shocked when they upped there eye relief from 3.15 to 3.6. that was 20 years ago. They just don't respond to the market. I've talked to the guys in Virginia. The home office has been told what would fly off the shelf here. You don't see it . And you probably won't. It's just the way they roll. The fixed 10x PMII is excellent if you can live with ,10 power.. I've taken a shine to the fixed 8x56. But then I'm not clicken and dicken.
Dave
They do pay attention to the market, but S&B is not a very large company and they take their time. I did ask them whether they plan to offer this model in FFP, but there are currently no plans to do so. That having been said, I still plan to test this one and I should be able to do so toward the end of the year. I think they are supposed to hit the market around SHOT Show of thereabouts, but I have a mule deer and elk hunts in November, so I am scheming to get one here in time for that.
I would also prefer it in FFP, to be honest, but as is, it caught my interest because it is notably lighter that typical from S&B. I really want to see how well they pull it off.
As far as whether they will ever make something like this in FFP, I would not discard it right out of hand. I think they can be persuaded if the market is there. Once I have it in my hands, and if I like the scope, I will look into it a little bit and see if I can make a good argument for them. Personally, I think the crossover market is there. A good example of that is the success of Vortex Razor HD-LHT 4.5-22x50.
ILya
Yes, the weight was one of the reasons it caught my eye. Lack of FFP and measured reticle made me look away.
The "crossover market" of hunters who like to shoot, often and at distance, that you mentioned is an area that a lot of scope companies are missing. Different preferences for different people but the following should be a rough outline for the crossover market scope:
1. Reliable - perfect adjustments, return to zero, and zero retention. The ability to take a beating should be a given. 2. FFP 3. Measured reticle in mil's with adjustments in the same. Should be designed to be visible in low light with bold outer bars limited in width from center - no more than 5 mils from center. Inner sections fine enough for holds at distance. If illuminated, limited illuminated area with extremely low illumination for use in low light. Overall, illumination shouldn't be a requirement for the reticle to be seen, only to pinpoint point of impact in low light. 4. As light as possible while still maintaining reliability.
I think Tangent Theta's Long Range Hunter is a really, really good design, though I'd prefer a 42 mm objective for a little less weight and trimmer scope, perhaps finer inner section and limit the illumination to only the inner mil, but it's a really good design overall.....reliability and toughness being the biggest "if".
Bushnell's LRHS is a really good design as well.
S&B's Klassic 3-12 FFP P3 with a BDC is close but could use more elevation adjustment. A 30mm PMII 3-12x42 would be very nice.
NF's 2.5-10x42 NXS would be great if it was FFP and had better reticle options.
Again, different preferences for different people, just my $.02
I've had a few other brands that have never lost zero or fail to track for a lot less money, a lot less. For example a Swaro PH 1.5x6X42 (same as the S&B) do exactly the same for less, then so have my (no longer manufactured ) Leupold (the horror) 1.75X6X 32 for a LOT less. Granted the S&B's glass is much better, but not at four times the price which is my point. Hell, I have some forty plus year old Weavers that I've never touched the adjustments. My only point is Swaros and many other Euroglass are just not worth the money. Most of their price has to do with labor coasts of course.
They are if you do much hunting in very dim light... or darkness. We can legally hunt an hour after dark here. Most any scope is good in bright light.
Most any $350 scope nowadays has glass that will get you to/past legal shooting light, including the Chicom stuff. A good reticle is just as important.
Absolutely, and one of the issues with Swaros (and they admit it) their reticles are way too thin. Years ago I went to a heavy duplex for low light situations and it was a revelation. Can't hit the target if you can't find the X hairs.
Jorge TCS This Crosshair Syndrome. Leupold suffers from the vary same affliction.
dave
Acutally, no. The duplex on a Leupold is FAR more visible than Swaros', the glass, etc is another story, but I can tell you if you get the HD option on a Leupold (or used to anyway), although the Swaro was most definitively a clearer, sharper view, it was offset by those thin cross hairs
Twenty-nine years ago Zeiss threw a factory tour for a bunch of American writers, including both hunting and bird-watching. That was back when they had three factories in Germany, and it was a week-long deal. By halfway through the trip it was obvious the hunting writers were there to be enlightened about why Zeiss scopes were the best in the world, yet American hunters were quite stupidly not buying more of them.
One of the other American hunting writers was Jim Carmichel, and he started explaining the faults of Zeiss scopes for American hunting--including the fact that like just about every other major scope manufacturer did NOT seal/purge their scopes against moisture. (One exception was Kahles, which started doing so in the 1960s.) I joined Jim in discussing that, and various other factors. The Zeiss guys were rather startled, but it evidently sunk in that the U.S. is the largest hunting-scope market in the world. It "only" took another six years for Zeiss to introduce the original Conquest line....
ILya I'm thinking you could make a pretty good argument for FFP. dave
If you're going to recommend it how about the following:
FFP with a new P3 Hunter reticle...essentially their P3 reticle with only 3 or 3.5 mils to each quad with .5 mil hashes. Only the inner most mil illuminated (P3L)...or a FD P3...if they were going to use illumination.
Really, their P3, P3L, and FD P3 are good...if the original scope discussed was FFP with any of those I'd be in line.
Twenty-nine years ago Zeiss threw a factory tour for a bunch of American writers, including both hunting and bird-watching. That was back when they had three factories in Germany, and it was a week-long deal. By halfway through the trip it was obvious the hunting writers were there to be enlightened about why Zeiss scopes were the best in the world, yet American hunters were quite stupidly not buying more of them.
One of the other American hunting writers was Jim Carmichel, and he started explaining the faults of Zeiss scopes for American hunting--including the fact that like just about every other major scope manufacturer did NOT seal/purge their scopes against moisture. (One exception was Kahles, which started doing so in the 1960s.) I joined Jim in discussing that, and various other factors. The Zeiss guys were rather startled, but it evidently sunk in that the U.S. is the largest hunting-scope market in the world. It "only" took another six years for Zeiss to introduce the original Conquest line....
Where are doing your mule deer/elk hunt?
John
Did they outright tell you that nitrogen purge and sealing wasn't a good idea, or just look down, tilt their heads slightly, do the Germanic negative head shake, and slowly explain to you why you were wrong?
~24 oz, 30mm, 42mm objective. Could have been really good if they made if FFP with a basic mildot/mildot Gen II reticle....or some measured version of a hunting reticle. SFP and a non-measured reticle for windage hurts so bad.....
That reticle is extremely easy for hunting measured set up......just like any standard duplex. Darrel
It’s not a tacticle scope it’s a hunting scope. Surprising to some here not everyone wants first focal for everything. First focal has its use so if you demand it. Buy something else.
~24 oz, 30mm, 42mm objective. Could have been really good if they made if FFP with a basic mildot/mildot Gen II reticle....or some measured version of a hunting reticle. SFP and a non-measured reticle for windage hurts so bad.....
That reticle is extremely easy for hunting measured set up......just like any standard duplex. Darrel
Sure...it gives you a mark for a 75.6" windage hold at 3x, a 25.2" windage hold at 9x, and a 12.6" windage hold at 18x.
It’s not a tacticle scope it’s a hunting scope. Surprising to some here not everyone wants first focal for everything. First focal has its use so if you demand it. Buy something else.
Correct. Those who prefer it, won't purchase that scope.
S&B makes some awesome scopes. The 5-25x56 PM II was ahead of its time and keeps up with the current scopes on the market. It has excellent low-light performance, resolution, and accurate color rendition with CA. The turrets are excellent, it tracks perfectly, and has an excellent parallax adjustment. I've put tens of thousands of rounds out of precision rifles wearing this optic. Unfortunately, some of their other designs end up with poorly planned reticle/knob combinations along with optics that simply weigh more than it should.
They haven't gotten near the perfect scope yet, and neither is this. But neither has anybody else.
The point of the original post was S&B's missing a measured FFP hunting reticle in a scope that should have it. I should have stayed on point.
I've been using them for a very long time. I was pretty shocked when they upped there eye relief from 3.15 to 3.6. that was 20 years ago. They just don't respond to the market. I've talked to the guys in Virginia. The home office has been told what would fly off the shelf here. You don't see it . And you probably won't. It's just the way they roll. The fixed 10x PMII is excellent if you can live with ,10 power.. I've taken a shine to the fixed 8x56. But then I'm not clicken and dicken.
Dave
They do pay attention to the market, but S&B is not a very large company and they take their time. I did ask them whether they plan to offer this model in FFP, but there are currently no plans to do so. That having been said, I still plan to test this one and I should be able to do so toward the end of the year. I think they are supposed to hit the market around SHOT Show of thereabouts, but I have a mule deer and elk hunts in November, so I am scheming to get one here in time for that.
I would also prefer it in FFP, to be honest, but as is, it caught my interest because it is notably lighter that typical from S&B. I really want to see how well they pull it off.
As far as whether they will ever make something like this in FFP, I would not discard it right out of hand. I think they can be persuaded if the market is there. Once I have it in my hands, and if I like the scope, I will look into it a little bit and see if I can make a good argument for them. Personally, I think the crossover market is there. A good example of that is the success of Vortex Razor HD-LHT 4.5-22x50.
ILya
Yes, the weight was one of the reasons it caught my eye. Lack of FFP and measured reticle made me look away.
The "crossover market" of hunters who like to shoot, often and at distance, that you mentioned is an area that a lot of scope companies are missing. Different preferences for different people but the following should be a rough outline for the crossover market scope:
1. Reliable - perfect adjustments, return to zero, and zero retention. The ability to take a beating should be a given. 2. FFP 3. Measured reticle in mil's with adjustments in the same. Should be designed to be visible in low light with bold outer bars limited in width from center - no more than 5 mils from center. Inner sections fine enough for holds at distance. If illuminated, limited illuminated area with extremely low illumination for use in low light. Overall, illumination shouldn't be a requirement for the reticle to be seen, only to pinpoint point of impact in low light. 4. As light as possible while still maintaining reliability.
I think Tangent Theta's Long Range Hunter is a really, really good design, though I'd prefer a 42 mm objective for a little less weight and trimmer scope, perhaps finer inner section and limit the illumination to only the inner mil, but it's a really good design overall.....reliability and toughness being the biggest "if".
Bushnell's LRHS is a really good design as well.
S&B's Klassic 3-12 FFP P3 with a BDC is close but could use more elevation adjustment. A 30mm PMII 3-12x42 would be very nice.
NF's 2.5-10x42 NXS would be great if it was FFP and had better reticle options.
Again, different preferences for different people, just my $.02
All good suggestions, although with the reticle I would prefer a VERY abbreviated tree-type design. Sometimes I dial elevation and sometimes I hold. It sorta depends on the situation. When I need to hold a couple of mrad, it is nice to have a couple of wind references. With an FFP design it is pretty easy to make this type of a reticle so that the tree does not get in the way when you do not need it.
I did a couple of designs like that in the past. I do not always know whether the companies I did them for will utilize them, but I've spent a lot of time simulating this stuff. It is very doable.
Twenty-nine years ago Zeiss threw a factory tour for a bunch of American writers, including both hunting and bird-watching. That was back when they had three factories in Germany, and it was a week-long deal. By halfway through the trip it was obvious the hunting writers were there to be enlightened about why Zeiss scopes were the best in the world, yet American hunters were quite stupidly not buying more of them.
One of the other American hunting writers was Jim Carmichel, and he started explaining the faults of Zeiss scopes for American hunting--including the fact that like just about every other major scope manufacturer did NOT seal/purge their scopes against moisture. (One exception was Kahles, which started doing so in the 1960s.) I joined Jim in discussing that, and various other factors. The Zeiss guys were rather startled, but it evidently sunk in that the U.S. is the largest hunting-scope market in the world. It "only" took another six years for Zeiss to introduce the original Conquest line....
Where are doing your mule deer/elk hunt?
John
All of the German manufacturers have changed their way since then to varying degrees. Sometimes they admit and sometimes they don't, but they all pay attention. They have other markets to consider and they make their own decisions, but they are very aware of the feedback from the US market.
I'll be hunting in New Mexico. Mule deer on the outskirts of Gila national forest. Elk will be in the northern part of the state.
The point of the original post was S&B's missing a measured FFP hunting reticle in a scope that should have it. I should have stayed on point.
I've been using them for a very long time. I was pretty shocked when they upped there eye relief from 3.15 to 3.6. that was 20 years ago. They just don't respond to the market. I've talked to the guys in Virginia. The home office has been told what would fly off the shelf here. You don't see it . And you probably won't. It's just the way they roll. The fixed 10x PMII is excellent if you can live with ,10 power.. I've taken a shine to the fixed 8x56. But then I'm not clicken and dicken.
Dave
They do pay attention to the market, but S&B is not a very large company and they take their time. I did ask them whether they plan to offer this model in FFP, but there are currently no plans to do so. That having been said, I still plan to test this one and I should be able to do so toward the end of the year. I think they are supposed to hit the market around SHOT Show of thereabouts, but I have a mule deer and elk hunts in November, so I am scheming to get one here in time for that.
I would also prefer it in FFP, to be honest, but as is, it caught my interest because it is notably lighter that typical from S&B. I really want to see how well they pull it off.
As far as whether they will ever make something like this in FFP, I would not discard it right out of hand. I think they can be persuaded if the market is there. Once I have it in my hands, and if I like the scope, I will look into it a little bit and see if I can make a good argument for them. Personally, I think the crossover market is there. A good example of that is the success of Vortex Razor HD-LHT 4.5-22x50.
ILya
Yes, the weight was one of the reasons it caught my eye. Lack of FFP and measured reticle made me look away.
The "crossover market" of hunters who like to shoot, often and at distance, that you mentioned is an area that a lot of scope companies are missing. Different preferences for different people but the following should be a rough outline for the crossover market scope:
1. Reliable - perfect adjustments, return to zero, and zero retention. The ability to take a beating should be a given. 2. FFP 3. Measured reticle in mil's with adjustments in the same. Should be designed to be visible in low light with bold outer bars limited in width from center - no more than 5 mils from center. Inner sections fine enough for holds at distance. If illuminated, limited illuminated area with extremely low illumination for use in low light. Overall, illumination shouldn't be a requirement for the reticle to be seen, only to pinpoint point of impact in low light. 4. As light as possible while still maintaining reliability.
I think Tangent Theta's Long Range Hunter is a really, really good design, though I'd prefer a 42 mm objective for a little less weight and trimmer scope, perhaps finer inner section and limit the illumination to only the inner mil, but it's a really good design overall.....reliability and toughness being the biggest "if".
Bushnell's LRHS is a really good design as well.
S&B's Klassic 3-12 FFP P3 with a BDC is close but could use more elevation adjustment. A 30mm PMII 3-12x42 would be very nice.
NF's 2.5-10x42 NXS would be great if it was FFP and had better reticle options.
Again, different preferences for different people, just my $.02
All good suggestions, although with the reticle I would prefer a VERY abbreviated tree-type design. Sometimes I dial elevation and sometimes I hold. It sorta depends on the situation. When I need to hold a couple of mrad, it is nice to have a couple of wind references. With an FFP design it is pretty easy to make this type of a reticle so that the tree does not get in the way when you do not need it.
I did a couple of designs like that in the past. I do not always know whether the companies I did them for will utilize them, but I've spent a lot of time simulating this stuff. It is very doable.
ILya
I use the LRHS G2H reticle fairly often and the tree isn't bad. I've never used the tree while hunting but I use it often while shooting. I'm not opposed to it.... I prefer that the outer bars all be the same distance from the center. It's never caused me problems when one has the bigger spacing on the lower bar than the top/sides but visually I prefer them equal on all spacing.
The point of the original post was S&B's missing a measured FFP hunting reticle in a scope that should have it. I should have stayed on point.
I've been using them for a very long time. I was pretty shocked when they upped there eye relief from 3.15 to 3.6. that was 20 years ago. They just don't respond to the market. I've talked to the guys in Virginia. The home office has been told what would fly off the shelf here. You don't see it . And you probably won't. It's just the way they roll. The fixed 10x PMII is excellent if you can live with ,10 power.. I've taken a shine to the fixed 8x56. But then I'm not clicken and dicken.
Dave
They do pay attention to the market, but S&B is not a very large company and they take their time. I did ask them whether they plan to offer this model in FFP, but there are currently no plans to do so. That having been said, I still plan to test this one and I should be able to do so toward the end of the year. I think they are supposed to hit the market around SHOT Show of thereabouts, but I have a mule deer and elk hunts in November, so I am scheming to get one here in time for that.
I would also prefer it in FFP, to be honest, but as is, it caught my interest because it is notably lighter that typical from S&B. I really want to see how well they pull it off.
As far as whether they will ever make something like this in FFP, I would not discard it right out of hand. I think they can be persuaded if the market is there. Once I have it in my hands, and if I like the scope, I will look into it a little bit and see if I can make a good argument for them. Personally, I think the crossover market is there. A good example of that is the success of Vortex Razor HD-LHT 4.5-22x50.
ILya
Yes, the weight was one of the reasons it caught my eye. Lack of FFP and measured reticle made me look away.
The "crossover market" of hunters who like to shoot, often and at distance, that you mentioned is an area that a lot of scope companies are missing. Different preferences for different people but the following should be a rough outline for the crossover market scope:
1. Reliable - perfect adjustments, return to zero, and zero retention. The ability to take a beating should be a given. 2. FFP 3. Measured reticle in mil's with adjustments in the same. Should be designed to be visible in low light with bold outer bars limited in width from center - no more than 5 mils from center. Inner sections fine enough for holds at distance. If illuminated, limited illuminated area with extremely low illumination for use in low light. Overall, illumination shouldn't be a requirement for the reticle to be seen, only to pinpoint point of impact in low light. 4. As light as possible while still maintaining reliability.
I think Tangent Theta's Long Range Hunter is a really, really good design, though I'd prefer a 42 mm objective for a little less weight and trimmer scope, perhaps finer inner section and limit the illumination to only the inner mil, but it's a really good design overall.....reliability and toughness being the biggest "if".
Bushnell's LRHS is a really good design as well.
S&B's Klassic 3-12 FFP P3 with a BDC is close but could use more elevation adjustment. A 30mm PMII 3-12x42 would be very nice.
NF's 2.5-10x42 NXS would be great if it was FFP and had better reticle options.
Again, different preferences for different people, just my $.02
All good suggestions, although with the reticle I would prefer a VERY abbreviated tree-type design. Sometimes I dial elevation and sometimes I hold. It sorta depends on the situation. When I need to hold a couple of mrad, it is nice to have a couple of wind references. With an FFP design it is pretty easy to make this type of a reticle so that the tree does not get in the way when you do not need it.
I did a couple of designs like that in the past. I do not always know whether the companies I did them for will utilize them, but I've spent a lot of time simulating this stuff. It is very doable.
ILya
Agree 100% on the reticle design. I think the Tangent Theta MRAD with another 1.5 MILs below the center with finer Christmas tree references would be almost perfect in a hunting scope.
The Bushnell LRHS tree only starts windage references below 2 MILs outside the donut of death which IMO is too far down.
The March FML is pretty good for a hunting FFP reticle.
On low power it just looks like a tapered duplex, and the graduations start being useable at around 6-7 power. I can't imagine a situation where I'd want to hold on the reticle with the scope set at lower power, so it works well for me.
The March FML is pretty good for a hunting FFP reticle.
On low power it just looks like a tapered duplex, and the graduations start being useable at around 6-7 power. I can't imagine a situation where I'd want to hold on the reticle with the scope set at lower power, so it works well for me.
I've thought about the March D24V42FIML several times. I'd like to spend some time with one. No idea how robust they are....the question of if they can take a beating is my main concern. At any rate, the FIML reticle looks really good to me for a FFP hunting reticle:
The March FML is pretty good for a hunting FFP reticle.
On low power it just looks like a tapered duplex, and the graduations start being useable at around 6-7 power. I can't imagine a situation where I'd want to hold on the reticle with the scope set at lower power, so it works well for me.
I've thought about the March D24V42FIML several times. I'd like to spend some time with one. No idea how robust they are....the question of if they can take a beating is my main concern. At any rate, the FIML reticle looks really good to me for a FFP hunting reticle:
The March FML is pretty good for a hunting FFP reticle.
On low power it just looks like a tapered duplex, and the graduations start being useable at around 6-7 power. I can't imagine a situation where I'd want to hold on the reticle with the scope set at lower power, so it works well for me.
I've thought about the March D24V42FIML several times. I'd like to spend some time with one. No idea how robust they are....the question of if they can take a beating is my main concern. At any rate, the FIML reticle looks really good to me for a FFP hunting reticle:
Yeah, I wouldn't worry about the March scopes taking a beating; they are built for the long haul. The 3-24X42 is a superb little scope weighing in under 22 ounces and it's solid.
I like to tell my story with my first March scope that I bought almost 10 years ago. I mounted it on my F-TR rifle and it went to over 100 monthly matches, over 20 regional and state multi-day matches, 7 nationals and a couple of World competition. It saw countless hotel rooms, one major drop and other incidents. It still looks pristine and is now on my backup F-TR rifle. I sent it back to Japan to change the reticle because my eyesight decreased over time, and they sent it back within 3 weeks with the new reticle. The March scopes are hand built for the long haul.
ILya I'm thinking you could make a pretty good argument for FFP. dave
If you're going to recommend it how about the following:
FFP with a new P3 Hunter reticle...essentially their P3 reticle with only 3 or 3.5 mils to each quad with .5 mil hashes. Only the inner most mil illuminated (P3L)...or a FD P3...if they were going to use illumination.
Really, their P3, P3L, and FD P3 are good...if the original scope discussed was FFP with any of those I'd be in line.
Can't speak to all of their hunting scopes but having used two Klassik 6x42's (purchased from Doug) for the last 8 or 9 years with no issues, they meet my needs.
I have looked through a Polar 2-10x50 that was very nice and wouldn't hesitate if the price was right.
I do keep my eyes open for a great deal on a Klassik 3-12x42.
![[Linked Image from imagizer.imageshack.com]](https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/1280x1024q90/924/1zrNDB.jpg)
![[Linked Image from imagizer.imageshack.com]](https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/1280x1024q90/924/YFN1Ng.jpg)
![[Linked Image from i.postimg.cc]](https://i.postimg.cc/Kj70N1xv/77-DA0-D62-C5-B6-43-A1-ACD9-393-BAF6-AA1-B0.jpg)
![[Linked Image from imagizer.imageshack.com]](https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/1280x1024q90/923/oZREXl.png)
![[Linked Image from imagizer.imageshack.com]](https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/1280x1024q90/923/yOAAMx.png)
![[Linked Image from i.postimg.cc]](https://i.postimg.cc/nzZBSXWL/KIMG1379.jpg)
![[Linked Image from marchscopes.com]](https://marchscopes.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/A05_FML-1.jpg)