Not until reading this. Hadn't heard of them, but thanks they're now on the radar.Quote:
Originally Posted by nor-west
Printable View
Not until reading this. Hadn't heard of them, but thanks they're now on the radar.Quote:
Originally Posted by nor-west
Hi Caliberwalker, marked improvement weight wise and balance. The bergs are a good option if not a tad heavier than the Tikkas. I installed an an aftermarket floor plate and now it's a flush 5 shot. The bergs def shoot.Quote:
Originally Posted by CalibreWalker
That works tooQuote:
Originally Posted by CalibreWalker
Yeah mate. Was replying to Andy's comment. Fat fingers hahahaQuote:
Originally Posted by CalibreWalker
I would suggest a 2-10 or 2-12 for General hunting with a 308. Thats like an open sights shot at 50 mtr on a deer size target. Your not shooting rabbits.
Unless you do a lot of hunting you need to keep it simple or you get caught out.
My last hunt was a goat hunt on cut over forestry, I started out prone then moved to seated back against a stump and using my knee for suport on the edge of a Hauler site shooting down hill. We started at 1-200 mtr then and a mob pop up at 10 mtr running across infront of me. Getting the 4-16x scope wound down and I forgot the parallex (focus) meant I could not see or find the goats clearly in the scope so just shot both eyes open.
To be fair I would have been better off with a diffferent rifle, my lever action with a 2-10 scope or 22wmr semi with 1-4 scope.
Point being we went expecting a longer range hunt and ended up shooting most of the 50 goats at less than 50 mtr.
Z
Appreciate this, good points there to consider. Thanks.Quote:
Originally Posted by ZQLewis
To update this, I haven't yet made my mind up on the scope but have just discovered Arken Optics. Had a look through one the other day and they're pretty neat for the money. They seem to be a pretty hot topic in the ELR game at the moment as well. Not the lightest option but side by side with the pricey options it's becoming difficult to justify $1800+ extra...
My suggestion is again go with something low power and good low light capability. I assume you are looking at something short action in 7m08 or 308 and focus on your regular hunting in the north island so sub 400 mtr. If you talk with most hunters very few will have taken game past 300 mtrs.
When the time comes for a south island hunt you sould be confident in your current rifle and setup and you will know its limitations.
Then you can take the next step of a custom tops rifle but again most would use the rifle they know.
if you are dropping down to 6 or 6.5mm short action then there is a case to be made for a 3-15 or better scope as they have the flat shooting and higher velocity high BC Bullets that make you want to reach out a bit further and on smaller game.
Z
This is what I'm mulling over. I'm assuming low power in this example you mean under 15x so something more like a 2-10, yeah?Quote:
Originally Posted by ZQLewis
The problem with that is for general hunting you do not want a FFP scope and as far as I know all Arken scopes are FFP.Quote:
Originally Posted by CalibreWalker
calibrewalker, I was refering to bottom end magnification,
for bush shooting a 1-2x bottom end is great but not always a practical bottom end as may people feel they still want a 14-16x top end.
My bush rifle started out with a 1-4x20 #4 reticale but I found myself taking a number of deer at 200-250 mtr ranges so I moved it up to a 1.5-6x42 illuminated #4 this was great but had an electrical issue and the nearest options I was offered were the Burris signature 3-15 or the Veracity 2-10 FFP which I went with.
Its a bit larger than i would like, a Lupie 2-8 or Kahles similer would look nicer
As far as top end, for most shooting a top end of 9-12x is enough, Again you are shooting a 308 family in 7mm or 308 I assume so with factory ammo 400 mtr is about your limit.
Thats a long way to shoot and for most people 300 mtr is more than far enough. Not many people shoot game past 300 mtr very often, even though it gets a lot of attention. In a field enviroment it's actually quite challenging.
Our NZDA branch 2 years back setup a hunter challenge shoot ahead of a group Sika hunt, standing at 50, kneeling at 100 and a prone gong 18" od at 300 mtr using hunting rifles. Not many hit it first shot.
Z
Zeropak, what is wrong with ffp for general hunting ? Can you give me some insight on this?Quote:
Originally Posted by zeropak
Cheers LMP
Here's my 2 cents..
Having had a few different scopes, VX3/5/6, Z5, Z8i, V4 and a few others.
Keep it simple! You don't need a huge big scope on your rifle to hunt deer/chamois/tahr etc and with a good reticle and knowing your rifle you don't even need adjustable turrets etc. I am a huge fan of the Z3 3-10 with BRX/BRH reticle. I've had a few of them now, gone back to a VX5, a Z5, then back to the Z3 again. I currently have a 3-10 Habicht AV 3-10x42 BRX (Austrian made version of the Z3) on my 270 and it's a brilliant bit of kit, they're light, the glass is great and they don't upset the balance of a hunting rifle. I've comfortably shot game out to as far as I ever have with a "big" scope with turrets etc. The VX3 3-10 is a good scope also with similar dimensions and weight but the swaro just walks all over them for glass quality and the eyebox on the swarovski is very forgiving compared to the fussy VX3 eyebox (the 4.5-14 VX3 is terrible)
For a budget friendly option I'd like to take a look at the Vixen range of scopes, I have their 2-8x32 with ballistic reticle on my short 308 and it's a great little scope, very good glass for the money, solidly built and the reticle is very functional, I haven't done a lot of actual hunting with it as yet but confident shooting a 6" gong at 400yds with it no problems.
with FFP the dimension of the reticle in relation to the target does not change. The advantage with this system is that the hash marks on the reticle are constant regardless of the magnification selected this is great if you use those hash marks for windage and/or elevation correction. However in a hunting situation with FFP this means the cross hair will look very fine at low magnification and coarse at high magnification, which in my opinion is exactly the opposite to want you want.Quote:
Originally Posted by littlemorepork
With SFP the opposite occurs and the cross hair appears finer at long range and coarser at short range in relation to the target, the hash marks can still be used for shot correction but they are only true to their stated MOA, or MIL at a certain scope power setting which is usually the highest magnification. In open country where shots are usually taken at longer ranges I guess FFP would be OK but for general hunting where short range shots can be expected then the FFP scope is at a disadvantage. One more thing, for me when shooting at longer ranges I always dial the elevation correction on the scope, I do no use hash marks for hold over, To me this is the most accurate way to set the elevation correction so the possible advantage that a FFP scope might have with the hash mark value remaining constant at various magnifications is a moot point.
I only use FFP scopes for hunting, there is no real disadvantage at all when you are accustomed to the FFP reticle and it allows you to hold wind accurately at any magnification, or correct for a missed shot (if you are able to spot the miss)
There is however no advantage to FFP if you are only bush hunting or shooting at close ranges (i.e. inside 200m)
I'm only using FFP scopes on my rifles, and with a properly designed reticle they give up nothing in close, and are significantly better at distance than SFP.
If the OP is open to Arken, then in a similar but possibly better vein I'd suggest a Athlon 2-12 x 44. I've got one on my SAUM (and my .22), and I've shot deer from 15-680m with it. For the money, I don't think they can be beaten. That said, my 280 has a March 3-24 FFP with the FML reticle and it is simply superb. I'm not a fan of NF FFP reticles for hunting, but have no arguments regarding their ability to drive tent pegs. I do own several hammers though, so don't need the crossover ability. (Take cover, incoming!)
As said above, ffp with properly designed reticles are fine. The best ffp reticle I can think off currently for the hunting market are :
The E1 on the Burris veracity. The branches of the reticle are thicker on the outside as you wind down the magnification. But thinner when you zoom in.
https://www.stoegercanada.ca/wp-cont...tic-E1-FFP.jpg
The reticle of the bushnell LRHS.
https://www.targettamers.com/wp-cont...-1024x1024.jpg
And this reticle from nightforce but only on their 1 to 8 scope:
https://armsvault.com/wp-content/upl...DM-Reticle.jpg
There might be others but this are my favourite ones.
@Ross Nolan I'm always open to listening to ideas which are counter to my own. I am genuinely interested in why you say that the FFP style scope is significantly better at long range. Assuming that you are using the correct ballistic data and using a decent quality scope which will dial accurately then surely the end result will be the same FFP vs SFP?
Holding wind and spotting/correcting for misses, on any magnification. There just isn't any reason to use SFP, it isn't better for anything
my Burris Veracity 2-10 has the E1 FFP, As Friwi says I'm found it a great retical. fat on the outer edges for fast shooting at low power and tappered very fine in the centre for precision at longer ranges.
On low power you are just shooting on the coarse tappered outer lines and don't use the fine inner cross.
Z
In the bush at close ranges on dark, is where a FFP scope shows it’s disadvantages. Certainly the case with my ffp higher power swaros.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Which Swarovski models are FFP??
A badly designed or unsuitable reticle is badly designed or unsuitable whether FFP or SFP
FFP reticles like the S&B P4/P4F, Leupold TMR or March FML1 are all good to go for general purpose hunting. It is a shame that there aren't more good FFP scopes available in sizes and weights suitable for hunting.
Gimp, all the 30 mm habicht models are ffp, Pre z6. With the std European heavy duplex.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Ah they've gone backwards
I think you hit the nail on the head there. SFP win for size and weight, and price for comparable quality.Quote:
Originally Posted by gimp
The advantages for me of a well designed reticle - that is, one with side bars big enough to be useful at minimum magnification (possible tapered), a easy to read mill scale on both vertical and horizontal axes, side bars no more than 10 mills apart and preferably an illuminated aiming point in the centre include:Quote:
Originally Posted by zeropak
Accurate wind holds without shifting from position to move the windage turret
Accurate on the fly adjustments if, for example, a deer is feeding across a face and not holding a consistent distance
Zeroing is easy at any distance, using the reticle to measure the offset from aiming point and make adjustments accordingly
If you are using the reticle then you aren't making elevation adjustments that can be forgotten about - I've seen a shot taken, and then on the way to the animal a quick close shot miss over the top because the elevation wasn't wound back to zero
I'd ask what advantage sfp has over ffp other than a seemingly finer aiming point at distance? I've hit magpies out to 440m using a ffp scope, so I'm not sure the small target argument holds all that much water.
There is a bit of learning and undoing of stuff you have picked up over the years from using sfp, but for me the advantages are such that other than a fixed 4x on a 10-22 used exclusively for spotlighting possums and a red dot on a single shot 308, all of my rifles use ffp scopes.
The great thing about this sport is that everybody is free to look at things and work out what is best for them, and it doesn't impact on anyone else's enjoyment. Go for it.
Edit. It is probably worth mentioning that a lot of the shooting I do is at ranges where elevation adjustments are essential. If I was just bush hunting or limiting my shots to 300m, then ffp/sfp wouldn't matter.
Extra edit. Specifically to @Zeropac regarding distance, if your wind hold is (for example) 500mm at 500m, how do you do that? Guess at that based on the animals body size? What if it is a 80kg hind, not the 55kg or so you mistakenly estimated it at? With FFP, you just hold .1 mill on the scale and let it go. The maths is easy - we come (mostly) pre configured to count in 10, and that is what mills are all about.
haha, what a clown. I tidied up the above post, and managed to put another mistake in. Never post on the phone about technical stuff where fullstops can become decimal places when fat fingering.
500mm@ 500m is 1 mil, not .1
I'll wear my glasses next time.
Hi Ross, Good answer, It did get me to thinking about FFP vs SFP. I also do most of my hunting at longer ranges so I have my set way on how I do this with SFP scopes. I always dial the elevation past about 250 metres (scopes are zeroed for 200m) If an animal is moving I will monitor this with the range finder, I am using a Leica 2800.com which gives me a ballistic solution. I have this set to give me either MOA or Mils depending on the scope I am using. I have never used Hash marks for holdover. The thing about windage is that it is never a precise calculation in my opinion, Across a gully you can have varying wind speeds at different distances, varying angles and gusting wind. All of this comes down to the wind hold being an educated guess, I prefer to simply hold for the wind and modify that hold "on the fly" if that wind hold starts to become around 40/50cm or more I would reconsider my decision to take the shot. I get what you say about using the hash marks for that windage hold but don't you then have to do the calculation as to what the hash mark represents at the distance the shot is being taken? Say your hash marks are 0.5 mil and your taking a shot at 545m and you have a 10 mph 90 degree cross wind which requires a 55cm compensation do not then need to calculate the value of those hash marks at that distance? I am curious as to how you would deal with this.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ross Nolan
Sorry if this discussion has gone sideways from the original post but it is a pretty interesting conversation,
.
I hold in mills, not a linear measurement. That is the whole point of having an angular scale on the reticle.
When I get to where I'll be shooting from I open strelok on my phone and input the atmospheric conditions - temp, barometric pressure and altitude. Then I look for deer - while keeping an eye on the wind. Measuring it where I am, and looking at what is happening between me and where I expect the deer to be.
When a deer pops up I'll range it, input that into strelok, check the wind, have a think about it and then input that. The elevation is dialed (usually) and I'll hold for wind, check the wind hasn't died off or increased and shoot.
Usually the deer falls in sight, so before I wander over I'll often shoot a couple of rocks at different distances and angles to sharpen the wind reading skills and then off to work.
Wind is the thing. It all started to come together for me when I began to think about it like waves moving across a rock pool. The main movement is in a direction, but where it contacts the rocks there are reflections, swirls and all sorts of things going on. The more you think about it, and shoot to test your assumptions the better you'll get.
Firing solution below- I'll just hold at .7 mil once I've dialed for elevation, but it would be an easy shot to take holding elevation on the reticle also.
Attachment 264789
Ok Interesting. I also use strelok, although I use it less now I have the Leica range finder. So I guess it would be fair to say that in order to use the hash marks on a FFP scope that strelok (or something similar) is essential tool in order to convert a wind reading into Mils.
For wind reading I try to keep it simple. I have the 10 knots @ 90 degrees wind values taped to my stock for various ranges in 50m Increments, I can then make quick mental adjustment to the wind hold based on these values. For example 10 knots at 45 degrees is 50% of a given value, 15 knots is 1.5 times the given value. This is quite effective and very fast to apply, maybe not as precise as your system but reading the wind is an imperfect science.
Also, I am curious as to what scope are you using? I found it difficult with a quick search to find anything online which fitted into what I would consider a FFP hunting scope. My criteria would be as follows.
Under 700 gram in weight
magnification range of 4/5 to 20/24. So something with a 5x zoom range
30mm main tube
50mm objective lens ( could maybe live with a 44mm)
decent quality glass ( Japanese or Euro)
@zeropak I've got a March 3-24 x 40 with the FM-L reticle, and an Athlon 2-12 x 42 with their mil reticle on my deer rifles. I used the Athlon for my longest shot, and on deer I almost never shoot on higher than 14-16 x, to keep a nice wide field of view. Glass quality is less important than repeatability of adjustments, which of course have to match the reticle graduations. I have a Bushnell that has 1/7 moa adjustments rather than the 1/8 the dial claim.... and I've never had a Leupold that was correct either. A 50m tape and a steel rule to check against are hard to argue with.
Zeropac, you are asking about hunting scopes, my Burris Veracity 2-10 is 22 oz or around 620 gram. Its is a 30mm tube FFP and non iluminated. I see a 10x as typically good to 400 mtr for typical large game hunting but obviously you can streach it well past that if you want.
What sort of ranges are you looking to hunt out to with the scope you are looking for?
Z
To date I haven't shot game past 500m. My thoughts are that with the 6.5CM I could stretch this out to around 600m but then only in calm conditions. I tend to always zoom the scope up to the max magnification setting. The lowest max mag I have on any of my scopes is 16x on a zeiss V4. I reckon scope choice is a personal thing, for me I would not go for something with only 10x max mag even though it will do the job in the right hands. I looked at the 4-20x50 veracity but at 770 grams its a no go.Quote:
Originally Posted by ZQLewis
I do already have plenty of scopes that fit my criteria but I'm a bit of a tinkerer so it tend to ignore the old mantra ( if it ain't broken don't fix it) part of the enjoyment I get out of my sport is playing with new gear, I'm the prefect consumer, always buying and trying new stuff. I like to think I have pretty open mind on choices, as opposed to some who would rather be seen running naked down Queen street than be seen with a SFP scope on their rifle. Already I'm considering giving a FFP scope a try. The Arken EPL 6-24x50 looks interesting, I am not sure how Arken manage to put these scopes on the market at these prices so I am I little suspicious but the reviews look good.
Alright well I've done it now! Settled on a Leupold VX5-HD 3-15x44 Firedot. Took it for it's first walk yesterday evening and it seems very nicely balanced on the rifle. Glad I didn't go any heavier, despite the fact it would have saved some money. I've also managed to do ok at the range. Was getting some nice groups when zeroing at 100 and am able to hit 600 without too much trouble, even with no reticle markers for wind hold.
Good on you. you've gone for the safe approach which I doubt you will ever regret.Quote:
Originally Posted by CalibreWalker
Good choice.
