Printable View
I'm going to be mounting a Primary Arms 4-14x44 scope on an Axis heavy barrel to use as a bench gun. Looks like im going to use the EGW base. Question is which rings?
Low, or Medium. Probably going to use the Primary Arms rings.
Any other suggestions?
Thanks
I have a Primary Arms 4-14x44 on my Axis, I used Warne low rings. Fits perfectly (although I used a Warne base instead of EGW). I like my scope as low as possible, in my opinion nothing looks worse than a scope towering above the action.
I agree, the EGW Rail profile is a little high anyway compared to say a Weaver so low rings should work just fine.
I use an EGW base with my PA 4-14x44mm FFP scope and have it set in UTG low rings (10mm saddle height). I could see going as low as 7mm, but I'd start to worry about bolt handle interference.
I would say that the scope might not be ideal for a bench gun. I have one one of my Axises that I've just been shooting out to 1000 yards and have noticed the wires of the crosshairs are a bit thick at max magnification. If it's going to be a heavy bench gun for small targets, I might think of using a fixed power scope. I have an SWFA 12x42mm on my magnum Axis. Its reticule is noticeably finer at the same magnification as the PA.
I was looking at getting this scope for my savage. What redical did you guys go with? they have three to choose from. I'm going to be using my rifle for target shooting no hunting
Russ, I have the ACSS reticle, and I love it. At first glance it may seem a bit busy, but with 4 separate ways to instantly range your target AND have the ballistic drops right there to pick from, it's great! I also have a Pride Fowler Rapid Reticle which is right about $100 more expensive, and has a similar ranging BDC. I vastly prefer the Primary Arms scope, the reticle is intuitive and through shooting I've come to like the chevron aiming point. The reticle is also finer, which on the PFI RR I have found the thick reticle to obstruct small targets. My shooting buddy (my brother) also prefers the Primary Arms over the PFI. We hope to test the accuracy of the BDC at some longer distances, but with crops in we are struggling to find a place. Hope this helps!
When you say "target shooting" do you mean on a square range at known distances? If you're shooting at known distance targets, I don't see the need for any ranging capability and would go with the simplest, cheapest reticule. You could go with a duplex reticule if you were okay with dialing for wind. I've never really liked BDC reticules just because they never seem to match the loads I use, which is fine but I imagine if you're shooting targets you'll want a little more control of your elevation. One of the guys at the long range school I went to was using a Horus Vision reticule, which looks like the ACSS R-Grid, and it seemed to work well for him. Dialing for elevation (and holding for windage) seemed more natural to me, which was fortunate since that worked well with the mildot model I have.
Chevron aiming point? I thought it was more like the CMR from Hi lux.
RH, some of Primary Arms ACSS aiming points are like you describe (Hilux CMR), but the ACSS DMR 308 scope has a chevron aiming point. The tip off the chevron is the 100 yard aim point and the "underneath" of the chevron is the 200 yard aim point. I can post a pic if needed.
Please do because they don't show it on their website.
This is directly from Primary Arms' site. It shows the chevron better than trying to take a pic though the scope (which I would still be happy to do if needed!)
http://i1065.photobucket.com/albums/...psjzg730dp.jpg
Thanks. With my poor eyesight I thought that was a dot. I guess with high mag on a FFP you can see it better also.
I will be shooting on open land with targets at unknown ranges. I know I can just buy a laser range finder but I want to learn how to range through a scope.
Which of the three ACSS reticles do you like best. I am looking at the HUD DMR
I don't have any experience with the other reticles, but I really like my "HUD DMR/ACSS 223-308" reticle. Like I said, it's a bit busy at first glance, but within no time it becomes second nature. Some seem to discourage anything but a duplex or shun first focal planes. Whatever floats your boat I say! Known/unknown, targets or fur, who cares. I like it a lot, and I have some scopes in the safe that I've paid 3 times as much for as this PA scope. Blasphemy!
I hope to find a spot to test the accuracy of the BDC's, and lay that myth to rest next.
Waiting on your review.
http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_3_124/6...__223_HUD.html
Lots of good info on the reticle
I saw there is a BDC for 55 grain. That's what I will be more than likely shooting. It gives you the drop in MOA. Would you then convert that to mills?
1 mil = 3.438 MOA???
I need help with this one. Reticle in mils, drop charts in MOA and inches. What are the turrets?
Turrets are 1/10 of a MIL per click. I really can't explain why the literature sent with scope has drop in MOA's. The real question for me is why even debate it? I can assure you I don't plan on running the MILs through my handy little "MilDot Master" then run the result through the turret. Crazy! IMHO, that defeats the entire purpose of a load calculated BDC. Throw the scope up on a target, bracket it for the perceived size in the appropriate aim point and pull the trigger. This sounds great, and is reliant on the correct trajectory path.
Speaking of trajectory paths, @Russ77, the literature does have a listing for the 55 grain load from a .223, but I think they should have ommitted it as the drops are so different than the reticle (according to their data). Maybe they added it to show that it was TOO different? I'm sure you could assign your own yardages to each aim point but no way will the 55gr match up. I don't want you to be unaware, and in turn unhappy when the BDC doesn't mesh with your load. Heck, I might be unhappy when I try my 308!!!
500 Yards---------
308 (175@2600fps) = -52.60"
223 (55gr@2950fps) = -62.45"
1000 Yards---------
308 (175@2600fps) = -379.42"
223 (55gr@2950fps) = -635.11"
Thanks for the feedback Blue. PA is less than 15 miles from me and I was going to drop by today and look them over.
I just ordered one today. Can't wait to get my hands on it
One thing I can't figure out on the reticle is the jump from 100 to 200 yards is very small. Then when you go from 200 to 300 yards the jump is large?is the drop from 100 to 200 that small in comparison to the 200 to 300 mark? It does not seem to add up
Because the bullet drops maybe an inch from 100 to 200 and 2 inches from 200 to 300 and then maybe 5 inches from 300 to 400, then 10 inches from 400 to 500 yards. Those are not actual amounts, just trying to illustrate that, as the bullet slows down, it falls more and more before reaching the next 100 yards... take a look at a bullet trajectory chart and you will see the bullet path is not a straight line but a curved line. Final example, consider an arrow's flight. If you shoot an arrow at a target 20 yards away, and compare how much higher you must aim at 30 yards versus 40 or 60 yards. The hold-over is progressively and relatively higher and higher the further out you go.Quote:
Originally Posted by Russ77
Foxx nailed it. Gravity is a helluva thing. I once was told that a 308 wasn't worth shooting because "it jumps straight up out of the barrel"... I talked myself blue in the face trying convince this guy that ALL bullets begin dropping immediately after leaving the barrel. And the bevaviour he was referring to was the slight upward angle of the barrel in opposition to the scope (it aims "down"). The 308 didn't shoot as flat as this guys "7mag" (which by the way reportedly shot flat as a laser) and in turn the barrel was angled up higher to lob the bullet to the same point of impact. I was informed I was dead wrong. Physics don't lie, but they sure are fascinating.
another way to look at it...
due to gravity, all objects fall in a vacuum at a constant rate or speed of 32 feet per second squared...
Because they lack wings, all bullets start falling the moment they leave the barrel (assuming your rifle is level when fired). It takes a split second to reach 100 yards, but even then, gravity has pulled your bullet down a bit in that short time span...
Because of air resistance, the bullet starts to slow down as soon as it leaves the barrel. the farther it goes, the more it slows down. Eventually it would actually stop and drop if it didn't hit the ground first...
it takes longer for it to go from 100 to 200 then it did 0 to 100. In that slightly longer bit of time, gravity pulls it down a bit more than the first 100 yards. It keeps getting slower and slower, allowing more TIME for gravity to pull it down further while it's traveling the same DISTANCE to the next target. Eventually it just hits the ground.
More than that, gravity causes acceleration. Not only does the slowing bullet have more time to fall, it's falling faster with time!
If you really want a physics mind blow....
Forward momentum has zero bearing on gravity's effect on drop.
If you shot a 175gn bullet at 3000 fps from a barrel that is perfectly level, whilst simultaneously dropping a static 175gn bullet from the exact high of the center line of the barrel, they would impact the ground at exactly the same moment.
Skadoosh.
Since this has become a science lesson, (lol) another mind blowing factoid is the bullet never actually touches the barrel. In turn you have never truly "touched" anything. Quantum mechanics shows us there is space (really really really super tiny space) between objects. We live in an amazing universe, things like the "observer effect" where the mere act of observing something can change its value, or if we try to measure light we change it from what is was. OR "entanglement", where different particles exist and then don't and can relate to other particles in a seperate timeline (past or future)... Yikes!
So yes, I really like my Primary Arms scope (even though I've never actually "touched" it)
i have a very very similar scope to the pa 4-14x44, the sun optics 4-14x44 (ffp and sf), but costs over $100 more (street price). it's on the axis hb .308win. maybe it's the same as the pa, but i've read that the sun glass is better (?). if i knew about the pa i probably would have opted for it over the sun. after all, the axis is just a bottom feeder cheap rifle. :devilish:
http://sunopticsusa.com/products/fir...ope/CS-4141444
http://i.imgur.com/4tnv1xC.jpg
Wow that rifle looks great! Did you have the muzzle threaded or is the flash suppressor booted on?
Got home and my scope was waiting for me in the living room. Wow this thing is a lot bigger than I thought it would be. Everything looks great on it. When I turn the light up reticle on it looks like I'm seeing two of the center horse shoes that light up in red very close together. Am I just not lining up straight on the scope??
it's a muzzle brake by witt machine, bolted on (see the three bolts at its bottom?).Quote:
Originally Posted by Russ77