Fitted new scope on low Tikka Optilock rings, 50mm bell with about 1mm clearance gap. Not so keen to get other rings as I like the straight on the dovetail setup.
I'm happy to try but what's the senses on being to low?
Attachment 229418
Printable View
Fitted new scope on low Tikka Optilock rings, 50mm bell with about 1mm clearance gap. Not so keen to get other rings as I like the straight on the dovetail setup.
I'm happy to try but what's the senses on being to low?
Attachment 229418
looks ideal to me :cool:
absolutely perfectomondo dont change a thing.
Perfect mine is about the same
Sent from my CPH2145 using Tapatalk
Looks perfect!
Nope, thats about perfect.
Couldn't ask for much better. got clearance and probably good cheek weld to stock.If you can shoulder rifle with eyes closed and scope is alighned with eye when you open then it's perfect for offhand shooting.
Exactly. As long as the objective bell isn't touching the barrel it doesn't matter. What matters is your eyes alignment with the ocular lens.
Spot on, that's what i aim for...pun intended!
Even if it was just touching just give a barrel a quick Wizz with angle grinder!
I seen a freind do it.
Sent from my SM-A226B using Tapatalk
Is this the same as asking for a friend?Quote:
Originally Posted by andyanimal31
I've always mounted as close to the barrel as possible. Had to grind the bottom out of scope covers to get them to fit on several rifles.
Bloody hell, you can see right through me!Quote:
Originally Posted by zimmer
Sent from my SM-A226B using Tapatalk
Yep did the closed eye thing at full mag in and out and it's a perfect weld. Pretty happy with it. Will sight it soon and enjoy the 6HD for what it is. I do find the reticle quit unique being a "Firedot 4 Fine " and having so much space in the view.
you are only allowed to do that to a plastic fantastic Tikka in 6.5 crudmore and nothing else -- bloody heathen - do that to a classic early sako Tikka Shultz and LarsenQuote:
Originally Posted by andyanimal31
Mauser and you may never ever use a bog normally again and it will be guilt and nothing else any one has done - a curse of the blued and walnut will be opon you
I guess I'm doomed then :-)
I brought a early sako from a shop probably 15-20 years ago and they had milled a bit out of the barrelQuote:
Originally Posted by Barry the hunter
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
funny the scope with a bite out of it thing didnt really catch on......bloody good concept and you just dont see them anymore..well I dont..maybe Im going blind???
What power settings do you start to see the suppressor?
Just out of curiosity.
@bigbear maybe the 50mm will fit your tikka my long action is obviously longer than tikka
Pays to check the clearance regularly especially if bush hunting as fern or similar can get wedged in the small gap under the objective lens.
below 3x with any of mine..and I m one of those weird types that actually LIKE seeing suppressor in scope,it sort of works like shotgun barrel for quick alignmentQuote:
Originally Posted by Blackmac
Other thing to consider is your prefered scope covers -butler creek style will fit but you may struggle with a neoprene style. Or shell out a few pingas for the Leupold magnetic ones.
1mm clearance sounds perfect to me.
I don't wanna hear "angle grinder" and "barrel" in the same sentence :P
I always use a neoprene cover on the scopes. I tried a Leupold one on this and unfortunately it doesn't fit.. Vortex has a new style neoprene cover that fits good and has loops, goes on tight and wraps around the scope.Quote:
Originally Posted by FRST
mate had one -redfield I think it was - no end of fogging and he eventually sold it- maybe odd shape hard to seal properly - concept was good thoughQuote:
Originally Posted by Micky Duck
Rubber band style scope covers don't care how low it is
Was Leupold that brought them out. Had one when first released, was a good scope. Had no problems with it but was just too bulky for my style of shooting. Only Leupold that’s escaped from me.Quote:
Originally Posted by Barry the hunter
This is why i went to a 44mm i always run the leupold neoprene covers also i thought it was going to be a tight fit and didn't want to buy then have to change rings:)Quote:
Originally Posted by DBD
Yea know what you mean, tried the Leupold ones and they don't cover the windage and parallax turrets properly. I not fussed weather its 44 or 50, the 50 gives me more chance to see the target for a follow up. It's the reticle that sold it to me, this so far the best one yet for me.Quote:
Originally Posted by bigbear
Attachment 229530
Bigger objective lense doesn't neccessarily give bigger field of view, usually less. Have a look at scope and binocular specs to see what I mean.Generally to get bigger field of view in a bigger lense something else suffers unless you go for high end scopes then you tend to treat the unit like a pussy with flash scope covers etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by DBD
50mm is definitely brighter and better picture for my eyes, not sure if it's a bigger fov or not. The flash scope covers only protect the lenses so no use to me when a neoprene cover covers the hole scope for a fraction of the price. Them fancy overpriced flip up caps are ok for the show-pony range shooters but no good out hunting & going through scrubby shit.
that pair of neoprene waders your mate left at your place 5 years ago will give you 12-20 nice big fat rubber bands to protect your scopes better than anything you can buy..... cut leg into strips about 3" wide....they work really well and last forever..we actually have one from fat thigh of the leg on our tellus vacume cleaner as the clips let go...used it like that for 10 years now LOL.
Quick reticle at low power, very satisfied with the finer cross.
Attachment 229556
