Just FYI:
I do not know what amazon sells but weaver actually makes two different "tactical" rings. One for weaver rails and one that is a true picitiny.
Admittedly Big Dave my only interest is hunting or shooting at rocks. For that purpose any good scope will work.
For ranging, a rangfinder is the best and most accurate option for me and most others.
As for videos it would be rare that id watch any of them. My feeling of them is sooner or later they get it right
and thats the version we see.
"For ranging, a rangfinder is the best and most accurate option for me and most others."
Count me among them.
.
By definition a "professional" will use the fastest safest most accurate means available (rangefinder when possible) AND have a less effective, slower, less definite backup plan like a reticle if need be.
A sfp with a reticle used properly at a specific magnification can fill that backup plan just as well.
Any "professional" would know that.
I love my Weaver Picatinny Six Hole LOW rings part # #99692 (note...the word "Tactical never appears for rings that fit MIL STD Picatinny rails. Here in lies a ton of confusion. it gets complicated.Originally Posted by D.ID
Weaver does not use the word "Tactical" to describe the rings it makes for modern US Government MIL STD Picatinny rails. Go figure. Weaver simply calls them "Picatinny Rings"
They LOOK outwardly the same as their TACTICAL STYLE RINGS which are made for and will fit the old fashioned (year 1930) , discontinued Weaver Rail System.
Weaver Scope company exact name of my rings is "Weaver Six Hole Picatinny Rings 30mm Low" #99692
Weaver calls the rings for the old fashioned (year 1930) Weaver Rail System..."Tactical-Style".
Confused yet? So are 99.9% of the buyers of Weaver rings.
If you do not visit the Weaver Scope company's website you will never know the difference. Amazon does NOT tell its buyers that the Weaver "Tactical" rings are not tactical at all! In fact, they are designed to fit an out of date no longer used Weaver Rail System!! Stupid? Yes! Heinous IMO.
Caveat Emptor.
I almost got caught up in this. I was able to cancel my order in time after I went on Weaver's website and found out I had ordered ill fiting rings. I finally found the correct Picatinny rings made by Weaver only after I used the correct part number as part of my search (99692)
The Amazon title for the correct LOW Picatinny rings is a mistake. You can not find these rings on Amazon with out using the Weaver part number.
Amazon calls them "Weaver 6-Hole 30mm 'Short' Picatinny Rings" They do not show up in any search unless you know the Weaver part #.
99.9% of the buys purchase the WRONG rings for their Picatinny rail systems.
They buy the rings below..
The Weaver exact name is: Weaver 30mm Six Hole Tactical-STYLE Low Rings (Matte Black) part #48355
The Amazon exact name is: Weaver 30mm Six Hole Tactical Low Rings (Matte Black) part#48355
Any Weaver ring (six hole or four hole) with the word "Tactical" or Tactical Style" in the description is NOT for tactical rails. They are for old fashioned Weaver Rail System developed in 1930. They have a .188" cross bolt width. The MIL-STD-1913 rail (Picatinny Rail) scope rings have a cross bolt diameter of .206.
You can fit Weaver rail system rings on a Picatinny rail, but it will be a poor, loose fit. You must push forward hard on the rings and SQUARE them on the lugs of your Picatinny rail when tightening them.
You can NOT fit MIL STD Picatinny rings on a Weaver Rail System. They simply will not fit.
Please make sure you have the correct rings for your scope base. When in doubt, go to the manufacturer website. MANY vendors neglect to tell you Weaver rail system vs Picatinny rail system.
It is up to you as the buyer to find out.
Mostly this problem is with the Weaver Scope company. Maybe they have a huge inventory of Weaver rail system rings that need to pawn off to unsuspecting buyers.
99% of the buyers on Amazon had no idea they were buying ill fitting rings (the wrong rings) for their Mil STD Picatinny rail system. They ALL bought the "Tactical" rings for their Picatinny rails. I did too..but I found out my mistake and was able to cancel.
Like I said, the proper Picatinny six hole 30mm low rings are buried on Amazon due to being mis titled. I did find them. Notice the correct( this assumes you do have a Picatiny rail and not a Weaver Rail SYSTEM) MIL STD picatinny rings have a mere 3 reviews vs 100reviews for the wrong but easy to find "Tactical-Style rings.
Owners who DO have an old fashioned Weaver Rail System tend to be much, much better informed since it it critical that they NOT buy rings made for Picatinny rails. They will not fit at all!
BTW, I have TONS of room under my 50mm lens (64.2mm O.D. with scope covers) objective bell using Weaver LOW rings. In fact my scope clears the barrel of my Savage 10 FCP-SR with NO RINGS...just sitting on the rail! These LOW (they are lower than most LOW rings) will fit a 56mm bell NO PROBLEM. IDK why guys get anything else for rails like 10 series that are so elevated to begin with. it is possible that a 20moa rail might make a 56mm objective pretty close to my barrel. Bull barrels and 56mm scopes likely need medium rings.
Last edited by BigDave; 03-23-2015 at 08:52 PM.
I hear you, but..
1) Not everyone can afford a range finder that will work well on a sunny day out to and past 1000 yards. They are very pricey.
2) Even the military operators say in interviews that they can not rely on the MIL SPEC range finders they are issued.
They break, batteries run out, haze/dust defeats them etc. As a result they go back to fundamentals...ranging with their mil reticle. This is something I think everyone should know and practice before plunking $$$$ down for that 1600 yard laser range finder.
I love my toys as well as the next guy. But mil ranging is one of the very, very BASIC fundamentals of tactical and field work. The speed at which this is done is much faster than you realize. I see in courses where both things are taught. Take a laze and back it up with a ranging from your mil dot reticle.
I am ALL for using every modern electronic device, but I want to know, and know WELL, what to do when they fail or simply are not working properly given the circumstances.
Most modern Military snipers admit to using electronic ballistic calculators for the really hard shots. But you can be assured, they can work out a firing solution long hand with a protractor (for angle) and set of tables if need be. A well prepared person has all the manual back ups in his kit...like a real thermometer, compass, barometer...it gets crazy, I admit. But it keeps you honest.
I like the challenge of knowing how to do things the old fashioned way, but not get mired in it. I just cant afford the laser rangefinder I have on my wish list right now. But I CAN afford $26 for a Mil Dot master card and did spend the extra $$ for a FFP scope.
Its not an argument or who is right or wrong. It is how hard you want to "work" at a hobby that is supposed to be relaxing. I find the challenge enriching, personally. That's me. If I did this for a living, I would HAVE to know all this extra stuff. I just choose to know. Dig?
You would be amazed how may HUNTERS use this. They have a "range card" pre made of the prey they are hunting. They take the height in inches, yards or feet or meters, of mm or cm from the biscuit to the top of the head (or what ever). They KNOW that when a TYPICAL Elk (for instance) reads X mils on his FFP scope at any magnification that that animal is X meters or yards away.
You can do this in bright sunlight, snow etc...all the things that can defeat even the best laser rangefinders. Freezing Cold outside? Oops, there go your batteries. You see what I am saying.
I am sure this will not change your mind. It is not meant to. 99.99999% of forum readers have their own way of doing things and i respect that. I just want to point out that their are options and reasons why so many courses teach FFP ranging and TEACH using the MilDot Master slide rule card.
I work on huge 1000'+ foot ships in the US Merchant Marine. We are surrounded by hundreds of pounds of electronics. We have 3 GPS. Some of the crew has GPS on their Casio or Garmin watches. But every day we take an old fashioned Sextant SUN SIGHT and work out long hand (VERY tedious!) our line of position. At night we do moon or star or planet sights and do similar calculations. This is done on every US Merchant Marine ship in the world. Hope you can appreciate the analogy.
Back on topic please.
Originally Posted by keeki
Guess it doesn't really matter. If ya cant afford $15, you won't be buying much anyways
Theres already a discussion taking place on rangfinders in the hunting lodge section, i'll post a reply there.
IMHO whatever you gain in light transmission from a huge objective lens is offset by the beating your shooting form takes because of how high you have to mount the scope. Even with built-up cheek rests etcetera, I could never make it work for me personally, so all the optics I'm running are 40 - 44mm. As others have said, the only way to beat eye fatigue is with better glass and coatings.
And apparantly a 34mm+ tube. I heard this a lot. I cant afford one just now. I ended up with a Bushnell Tacical Elite 30mm tube 6-24x50mm G2 DMR scope. I returned the Falcon 50mm because of tracking errors. My next scope will be a 50mm objective too, but with a 34mm or 35mm tube.
http://precisionrifleblog.com/2014/0...sults-summary/
Here's some info for you on the most common high end scopes being used by the pros. From the extreme to the mediocre. Good review, tests, and some knowledge on them all.
Well what is causing your eye strain?
I would get the BIGGEST obj so you have the biggest exit pupil width and highest light, which is also tied to the clarity at max mag.
newbie from gr, mi.
I have had that test bookmarked for a while.
Notice a lot of the scopes in that test are 56mm+ objectives. Notice also how well the Bushnell DMR 3-21 did. It out ranked many more expensive scopes. It is a 50mm objective BUT also a 34mm tube. That is the scope I really wanted.
My Bushy 6-24x50mm is a few steps below the DMR in quallity...30mm instead of a 34mm tube too. Oh, well. I could barely swing the $950 price tag. No way I can spend a penny more right now.
I will report on how my eyes hold up in a "measly" 30mm tube. I will be shooing with it this weekend with any luck. Eye relief is a healthy 4". That might help. I am hoping I will not have buyers remorse and kick myself for not getting the 34mm DMR. I am so far over budget I had to put on the brakes somewhere!
*#@! my eyes. They seem to be getting worse every day....
I have a vortex razor HD the Gen I version and still am looking to upgrade. You'll always wish you would have just went big up front. Never make up the money by reselling and buying twice!
You will most likely be sorry....the WORST place to cut cost in a long range riffle build is glass...i bought my NXS because i didnt want to wait another month to save for an ATACR....i REALLY like the NXS but wish ida held out for the ATACR. The only reason i dont sell the NXS and buy another ATACR is because like LW said you never get near what you paid.
I hope your experience with your bushy is as good as mine have bean.
As I mentioned earlier my eyes strain easily but never behind my 6-24x50 30mm elites.
Ah, you mean this quote? Memory is the other thing that goes..LOL. I did not know you had a 6-24 Elite. Would you please post in my thread I started about that scope here in Optics?
I will have it tomorrow. Seekins rings the day after.
Nope. I JUST got a text from Amazon. They didnt ship it until today. So much for Prime! I will get it Wed, the day after tomorrow.
Members who have read this thread in the last 1 days: 0
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks