Cerakote it and go hunting, oily pull through each night and it will be mint[emoji106]Quote:
Originally Posted by NZVarminter
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Printable View
Cerakote it and go hunting, oily pull through each night and it will be mint[emoji106]Quote:
Originally Posted by NZVarminter
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
:) What are your preferences, @6x47 ?Quote:
Originally Posted by 6x47
A lot of the features I listed above are just my own opinions for almost any rifle, although some like weight, scope size and cartridge were meant to span the most common big game hunting scenarios for NZ.
Perhaps I was a bit harsh on the Swarovski. It's the wobbly ballistic turret on the Z5 I don't like, and the need to have a series of round number (200m, 300m, 400m) zero ranges to use the coloured ring system. The scope has superb optics and is nice and light and would perhaps be great with capped turrets. It was on my shortlist of scope for the allrounder a few years ago. Swaro is the recreational hunter (sport & jagd) line and Kahles is the professional heavy duty line from the same company. Either would be desirable on an all rounder hunting rifle.
For parallax, the need for geometrical correction is minimal in an all rounder hunting situation, more critical for long range >500m I understand. I was referring to the limited depth of focus in large objective, high power scopes (over 40mm and 10x). This is just annoying in a short / medium range situation. Young people can focus down without thinking about it and see close targets sharply (although the reticle goes a bit out of focus) but from age 50 onwards, the lens in your eye hardens up and it gets more and more difficult to focus up close. If you are starting to need reading glasses then you will benefit from being able to focus the target, using the parallax knob.
one on trademe at moment is up OVER $5000 and still bidding hotly.....Quote:
Originally Posted by caberslash
I hear there's someone imports these second hand, so they're not as rare as that, specially if you put in an "order" and are prepared to wait for a while.
$5000 is still a bit less than you'd pay to make this setup on a new Finnlite in an all round calibre. The 85 action is better in several ways than the Vixen. That vixen is an example of a special gun for the collector and for light duties shooting hares or perhaps sika / fallow if you're a good shot. Very nice rifle, I expect.
Agree on the Ballistic Turret- both of mine immediately went and were replaced with an MOA labelled cap. I feel these are more future-proof than true custom (distance labelled) caps, eg a simple change of projectile forced by unavailabliity.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bagheera
As for parallax and "focus" issues, I think you need to do a bit of reading. These are not same. Young eyes with maximum "accommodation" ( the tech term for ability to adjust focus with varying distance) cannot overcome parallax issues. Parallax causes aiming errors which become important obviously at longer ranges where there is far less leeway for error, esp in wind. You need everything going your way. I'm also a F-Open shooter so am acutely aware of these things.
BTW, the amount of parallax error at any given magnification does not vary with the objective diameter. If your 18X scope has a 40 or 56mm objective, there is no difference in that variable.
The Sauer 101 was invented by Satan himselfQuote:
Originally Posted by NZVarminter
101 or 100?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryan_Songhurst
Also no way in hell are vx3s top tier. Swaro z3, Burris signature HD and zeiss conquest all superior to a vx3 regardless of opinion that is just fact.
Sako carbonlight 260, 7 08, 308, 7 rem mag. Dpt or Hardy suppressor on the medium action cartridges. Swarovski z5 2.4-12 x 50 with Moa turret (bush to 400-500). Maybe a Swarovski z5 3.5-18x 44 on the 7 rem mag. Off you go and shoot some deer!
Thanks 6x47. I guess parallax isn't central to the "all rounder" topic but I'm curious, if you've looked into it a lot.Quote:
Originally Posted by 6x47
Is there a formula for the amount of aiming error due to parallax ?
I'd sort of intuitively thought it would be something like:
Aim error in mRad is proportional to (Target distance / Parallax set zero distance) x (distance of sighting axis from optical axis of scope)
I'm not sure where magnification would fit in, if at all.
So, I had assumed that if the exit pupil is larger, there is more potential for your eye to be further away from the optical axis of the scope.
Certainly good technique, centering your eye on the scope, is a traditional basic for long range shooting.
Important to note as well that if your head is always in the same position (optimally, eye looking dead centre into the ocular lens) then you will never have a parallax POI shift.Quote:
Originally Posted by 6x47
However, I do like the image and reticle being focused into the same plane.
Good article here: https://www.rifleshootermagazine.co....ined-1-6617150
However, no need for a fancy adjustable stock (easily adjustable also means can easily go out of adjustment...).
Just use pipe insulation and duct tape, add a low profile stock pack for extra security and a little storage.
Perfect.
I'm not aware of any practically-useful formulae but the critical consideration is that the potential aiming error increases the higher the magnification. My 6BR varmint gun is often run on its max 25X magnification and if you're trying to hit a rabbit at say 400yds, you want to eliminate as many aiming errors as possible.
Consciously keeping your eye in the centre of the visual field helps but it's a distraction. When you're making wind calls especially in LR target shooting, you don't need extra distractions. When I set up for a long range shot, I almost subconsciously reach for the parallax knob. That variable is then gone.
Thanks Caberslash. I didn't know Rifle Shooter was available online. That guy is quite a prolific writer isn't he ? The article focuses on adjustable stocks rather than principles of parallax. 6x47, I'll start a new post on parallax when I've got a it more time. We've got away from the all rounder theme a bit now.
Seen this one? I've used equation 6 (example 3) before when choosing a scope, to see how much parallax error there'd be for a given error in eye alignment/cheekweld. More useful than just calculating the maximum parallax figure before you can't see through the scope anymore.Quote:
Originally Posted by 6x47
Worth Reading
Light. You carry more than you shoot.
Short. Better in the bush.
Easy care (Stainless etc)
Enough accuracy and knockdown power to tip things over at 4-500m. >100 grain bullet. 308, 708 are all fine
Great trigger (I just cant stand bad triggers)
Half cock
Great optics. Low bottom end, proper glass. You know what I mean.
See through scope covers.
With either dial-up or a Xmas tree (fine out to 4-500m)
A light easy on/off bipod.
A light can, and still short.
Low noise, low recoil.
Easy in the hand - no annoying stick out mags. Blind mag is fine.
I use a chopped & canned Kimber 708 with a Swaro 1.7-10, a can and a halfcock. And a Snipepod.
Top of my wish list on a rifle are:
Stainless steel
Vertical grip
Pic rail with integrated sling stud up front
Unfortunately 2 of these things are always aftermarket
Oh and also the ability to accomodate projectiles seated out long
Was randomly thinking about this thread on a hunt the other day. Choice of scope is just as important as what's underneath it. Setting up one rifle for short range bush work and longer distance shooting is a tall order, but some of the top end scopes have a large magnification range. That would be my starting point. After that, I would want a rifle that is as short as possible and many of the obvious other features already mentioned (e.g. reliability; weather resistance etc).
its my one complaint about the kimber montanasQuote:
Originally Posted by GDMP
a nice floorplate would make it even better for me
I agree, cycling rounds out the top is a pain in the butt. Some good pros as mentioned thoughQuote:
Originally Posted by Bill999
I'm a big kimber Montana fan and the bottom metal exists for the classic timber stock version so I imagine it's possible but not recommended for the carbon stock as it weakens it too much apparently, unless you epoxy the bottom metal to strengthen it I imagine
I got a rem700 223 short action floorplate with the intention of fitting it to my 300blk to make it "perfect" for my use but the geometry is wrong so it was a no go. The upside was the Remington 223 metal follower and spring was far superior and solved a lot of fail to feed problems with flat faced subsonic projectiles
The action works far better as 308 based cases but I fully recommend the Remington follower/spring upgrade for the 223 length action as it's a straight fit and solid upgrade to the shit plastic one they come with