Scope question...
Lipsch
I guess nobody out here read my first question about scopes...or maybe that
question mark shouldn't have been there.
Anyway, here it is again: Any advice on a good scope for my Gamo hunter 440?
I'm pretty sure some of you will have at least SOME advice.
thanks,
Geert
Adam Greatrix
news:bdsub9$6jp$1...@reader11.wxs.nl...
> Anyway, here it is again: Any advice on a good scope for my Gamo hunter
440?
You see your question depends on many things...
What do you want to do with it? Hunting? Plinking? Target shooting?
When do you want to use it? Day time? Night time? Dusk?
How much can you afford?
Are you bothered about weight?
What kind of reticle might you fancy? Standard cross hairs? Split? Mil-dot?
Do you want the reticle to be illuminated? If so what colour?
Do you want your scope to be able to range find?
Do you want to be able to adjust your scopes windage and elevation easily
(i.e. without removing dust caps etc)?
Any information would help.
Adam
Mitch Haley
>
> Anyway, here it is again: Any advice on a good scope for my Gamo hunter 440?
> I'm pretty sure some of you will have at least SOME advice.
Is this the full power (1000 fps in .177) version?
Get a durable scope. That gun recoils and vibrates
quite a bit. I'd guess that none of the Chinese
scopes will hold up forever on that gun. Simmons
Pro Air are about the cheapest I'd use on it,
assuming they are still made in Phillipines.
Bushnell/Bausch&Lomb Trophy and Elite series scopes
are pretty tough, and in the USA have very good
warranty service. Swift may be your best bet for
performance at a reasonable price. (all this is
based on USA prices, if your prices are like UK
prices I'd just buy a peep sight)
Mitch.
Lipsch
Well, I haven't done much "research" into scopes so some things are pretty
hard to evaluate for me (for instance, what kind of a price tag is connected
to which features and which are really "handy" and which are not).
Anyway, I have the gun just for some target shooting / plinking (I assume
"plinking" means something like shooting beer cans and stuff...I'm Dutch, so
I'm not familiar with a lot of slang that's being used, just trying to
interpret). Check below for Q&A!
> You see your question depends on many things...
>
> What do you want to do with it? Hunting? Plinking? Target shooting?
See above: target shooting / plinking.
> When do you want to use it? Day time? Night time? Dusk?
Probably day time, but a good sight at poor light conditions might be good.
> How much can you afford?
Well, something in the 40-100 Euro range. (maybe more if it's really worth
it).
> Are you bothered about weight?
Not really, as long as it's not kilo's we're talking about.
> What kind of reticle might you fancy? Standard cross hairs? Split?
Mil-dot?
"good old cross hairs" seems fine, unless you would advice me something
else... What's Mil-dot? Just a colored dot in the middle without any
"hairs"?
> Do you want the reticle to be illuminated? If so what colour?
Nah, to fancy for me, simple good cross hairs should be fine I guess.
> Do you want your scope to be able to range find?
That would be cool, but somehow I guess that it'll cost me plenty. A bit
more info on that would be great (cost, how-to-use).
> Do you want to be able to adjust your scopes windage and elevation easily
Well, pretty easily I guess, but I'm new to shooting so I don't need "the
best stuff around" I guess, just something that will do fine.
> (i.e. without removing dust caps etc)?
Do most scope come with dust caps? Do I need them?
>
> Any information would help.
Likewise!
Also, I can vaguely remember that you mentioned a scope that you said was
very good and costs much less than other good scopes and proved to be even
better. (something like a 100-150 Pounds / $ / Euro's scope vs 300-400
pounds / $ / Euro's scopes). I thought it was something with "nite" in it,
was from a question I asked a couple of weeks ago.
Cheers,
Geert
Mitch Haley
> What's Mil-dot? Just a colored dot in the middle without any
> "hairs"?
No, Mil-dot is a series of dots used for range estimation
and determining holdover at longer distances.
There is a good explanation of reticle types at the link below.
Leupold products are premium priced in USA, and very expensive in UK.
http://www.leupold.com/products/reticles.htm
Joseph Oberlander
Great reviews and advice. (prices are merely average - heh)
One thing - pick up a tin of sampler pellets while you are at it :)
Joe
$50USD, is tough as hell., built for big spring recoil. I have had four of
them, terrific bagain. Joe
"Mitch Haley" <m...@voyager.net> wrote in message
news:3F021234...@voyager.net...
Adam Greatrix
> > When do you want to use it? Day time? Night time? Dusk?
> Probably day time, but a good sight at poor light conditions might be
good.
The bigger the objective lens is (that's the lense at the front of the
scope, not the one you look through) the brighter the image. Scopes
generally come sizes ranging from 30mm to about 56mm. The bigger the
objective lens the bigger the mounts will need to be to raise it away from
the barrel of your gun. The higher the mounts the greater the parallax error
will be so you will have to aim more up or more down at different distances
than you would have to with a smaller scope. So, bigger scope is heavier and
you need to make more adjustment to your aim, but gets more light. Unless
you're really into dusk hunting you probably won't ever need the bigger
sizes and there isn't THAT much difference anyway.
> > How much can you afford?
> Well, something in the 40-100 Euro range. (maybe more if it's really worth
> it).
That puts you at the very cheap end of the scale, but that's not a bad
thing. There are people who pay over 1000 euro for a scope that has an image
quality that isn't noticibly better than my cheap 80 euro scope. They do
have other features of course...
> > What kind of reticle might you fancy? Standard cross hairs? Split?
> Mil-dot?
> "good old cross hairs" seems fine, unless you would advice me something
> else... What's Mil-dot? Just a colored dot in the middle without any
> "hairs"?
Most scopes come with standard cross hairs - which are usually thinner in
the centre 1/3 of the cross hairs. These are called 30/30 reticles. A
Mil-dot scope is a scope that is essentially a standard cross hair, but has
some small dots (usually 5) above, below, and to either side of the cross
hairs. These are positioned exactly 1 milli-radian apart (hence the "mil" in
"mil-dot"). They provide useful aiming points if you know how much to aim up
or down by for a given range, or how much to aim left or right by for a
given wind. If you know the size of your target you can also use these dots
for range finding as if you know the height of the target and how many dots
high it looks in your scope you can work out the distance and hence how many
dots up or down to aim.
> > Do you want your scope to be able to range find?
> That would be cool, but somehow I guess that it'll cost me plenty. A bit
> more info on that would be great (cost, how-to-use).
You can range find with any scope that has an "adjustable objective", often
abbreviated to AO. This means you can adjust the focus of the scope - which
is useful in itself. But for any given distance your target will only be in
perfect focus at one position, so you can note down at which positions on
your focus ring targets are in perfect focus at different ranges. Or you can
use a mil-dot reticle. Focusing has less guess work.
> Do most scope come with dust caps? Do I need them?
The dust caps are small screw on caps that go over the elevation and windage
adjustment knobs so that you don't knock them. Some scopes require a
screwdriver to adjust the elevation and windage, some require a coin, some
have knobs you can turn. It doesn't really matter as once you've set your
scope you rarely need to adjust it (in theory).
Lens caps are more important - these protect your lenses from scratches.
Some are transparent so you can keep them on while shooting.
> Also, I can vaguely remember that you mentioned a scope that you said was
> very good and costs much less than other good scopes and proved to be even
> better. (something like a 100-150 Pounds / $ / Euros scope vs 300-400
> pounds / $ / Euro's scopes). I thought it was something with "nite" in it,
> was from a question I asked a couple of weeks ago.
Hawke (their Sport HD, Reflex, Air Max, Nite Eye and Eclipse range), Simmons
(their standard, deerfield, prohunter and 8-point range), and BSA (their
Contender and Catseye range) all have scopes in your price range, which I
hear are very good. I personally use the Hawke Nite-Eye 6.5-20x50 AO IR with
mil-dot reticle (http://www.hawkeoptics.com/niteeye.htm) but have also used
other scopes in their Sport-HD range - all of which are very good. The name
of my scope means it's a Hawke Nite-Eye scope (that's just its name), has a
variable zoom from 6.5x to 20x, has a 50mm objective lens to let in lots of
light, has an Adjustable Objective lens so I can focus it and so that I can
range find with it, and has an Illuminated Reticle so I can see it at night.
I chose the one with the mil-dot reticle so that I can do quick estimates of
ranges with it when out hunting and to have useful reference points for
shooting at different distances.
It's worth shopping around for different prices. I've found the scope I use
for sale ranging from £120 to £200.
Also, make sure that any scope you buy is "spring rated". If not the
vibrations from your spring gun will ruin your scope. As far as I know (but
check before you buy) all Hawke scopes are spring rated.
You will also need to buy mounts for your scope. As you're using a spring
gun you should use mounts with double screws to help hold it in place. Make
sure you get mounts of the right height for the size of your objective lens
too (such as high mounts for 50mm lenses, low mounts for 30mm lenses, medium
for 40mm lenses) - again, check before you buy.
Hope this is of some help.
Adam
Joseph Oberlander
> Hawke (their Sport HD, Reflex, Air Max, Nite Eye and Eclipse range), Simmons
> (their standard, deerfield, prohunter and 8-point range), and BSA (their
> Contender and Catseye range) all have scopes in your price range, which I
> hear are very good. I personally use the Hawke Nite-Eye 6.5-20x50 AO IR with
> mil-dot reticle (http://www.hawkeoptics.com/niteeye.htm) but have also used
> other scopes in their Sport-HD range - all of which are very good. The name
> of my scope means it's a Hawke Nite-Eye scope (that's just its name), has a
> variable zoom from 6.5x to 20x, has a 50mm objective lens to let in lots of
> light, has an Adjustable Objective lens so I can focus it and so that I can
> range find with it, and has an Illuminated Reticle so I can see it at night.
> I chose the one with the mil-dot reticle so that I can do quick estimates of
> ranges with it when out hunting and to have useful reference points for
> shooting at different distances.
Mil-dot is sweet. It's a pain to learn at first, but once you get
used to it, it is sweet. So much so that you'll never go back.
The military uses these almost exclusively as they really do work - you
can tell that that 6ft tall person appears 2 inches tall and know the
exact distance - so aim about 6-8 inches high and...
It also allows them to do recon work easily - "Target moving towards you
from 8 o'clock - 300 yds out". No laser-finder or spotting scope.
Lastly, as Adam said, it allows you to lead a moving target for the
same reasons. I have mine mounted up-front on my rifle, scout-style,
so that the 12-14 inch relief and mil-dot together make for a perfect
combination - I can hit a running or moving target most every time.
(one eye aims, the other tracks - 1.5-2x magnification)
I even made a mil-dot(adjusted for the game) scope for my FPS games.
It serves another purpose - each dot at 100ft is roughly 25 ms lag,
so I just lead them about 2 dots and I'm golden. :)
Lipsch
ordered a Hawke brochure. Only problem is that I can't find any online-shops
here in Holland that offers them, however, I do have an adress of one hawke
dealer here but that's my only shot, I will have to go with their prices.
When I looked through some sites I found that there are quite a lot of
hawke's series scopes but much less comparable BSA or Simmons stuff, anyway,
I think I will go for Hawke anyway. What I don't really get though, is why
they have so many different types of scopes, I hardly see any difference
between them. For instance, why do they make "air max" scopes? They just say
that they are specifically made for air guns, yet practically all (if not
all) types of hawke scopes are spring rated. What's the extra you get from
those air-max types? Also, what kind of magnification should I get? Is it a
problem if I use a 8-32*42 scope or is that overkill? What kind of
magnifications are generally used for, say 10, 30 and 50 meters? (oh by the
way, isn't it possible to hit paper targets from, say 100m or even 200meters
or am I being silly now? I'm pretty new to air-guns). I will definately go
for the mil-dot system, that's for sure.
Thanks again,
Geert
"Joseph Oberlander" <josephob...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:3F03AC60...@earthlink.net...
Adam Greatrix
> First of all, thanks for all the great answers, especially Adam, I
allready
No problem...
> between them. For instance, why do they make "air max" scopes? They just
say
> that they are specifically made for air guns, yet practically all (if not
> all) types of hawke scopes are spring rated. What's the extra you get from
> those air-max types?
Not entirely sure - you could check their websites but I don't know. It's
possible scopes specifically made for air guns are pre-focused to the
shorter ranges you would typically use with an air gun and have less zoom
powers as you're usually shooting things at under 40 yards.
> Also, what kind of magnification should I get? Is it a
> problem if I use a 8-32*42 scope or is that overkill?
This is a difficult question to answer. I have 3-9 and 6.5-20 zoom scopes
and a fixed scope at 4x. I doubt you'd ever need more than 20 for air gun
work. The more you zoom in the more wobble you appear to have. Of course
this is an illusion as you wobble the same amount but it's more noticable on
higher zooms. This can make you over compensate which can throw you off
target. A lot of people actually hit a lot better using lower zooms. Again,
it depends what you want to shoot. I personally find 10x about right for me
for ranges up to about 30 yards. I might use 20x at 40 but might not be
bothered. Also remember that the more you zoom in the darker the image
becomes.
I doubt you'd ever need more than 20x for air gun work, but that's just me,
and as I said I use 10x the most.
> What kind of
> magnifications are generally used for, say 10, 30 and 50 meters? (oh by
the
> way, isn't it possible to hit paper targets from, say 100m or even
200meters
> or am I being silly now? I'm pretty new to air-guns).
I use 6.5 for 10 metres - but that's just because my scope doesn't go any
lower. I'd use 3x on my other scope. at 20 to 30 I'd use 10x, and maybe go
up to 15 or 20x for 40 metres. 50m would use 20x.
You can hit paper targets at 100m with a 12ft-lbf rifle (that's the max
legal limit in the UK for most air rifles), I've never tried to hit anything
further away as that's just silly with an air gun.
To be honest the effective range of most air rifles would be, in my
experience, 50 yards max. Above this the holes the pellets cut in paper
targets seem to be more like long tears in the paper and when you get to 100
yards you're aiming off the bottom of your scope due to the distance the
pellets drop.
Adam
Joseph Oberlander
> "Lipsch" <geert_...@lycos.nl> wrote in message
> news:be0vgi$bo2$1...@reader11.wxs.nl...
>
>>First of all, thanks for all the great answers, especially Adam, I
>
> allready
>
> No problem...
>
>
>>between them. For instance, why do they make "air max" scopes? They just
>
> say
>
>>that they are specifically made for air guns, yet practically all (if not
Parallax adjustment. Most scopes are set to be parallax free at 100 yds.
The smart shopper gets every scope(even for rifles) with an adjustable
parallax as once you know the range(Mil-dot is a good guestimate device)
- you can dial in the paralalax and have to optical displacement - from
like 10 yds to infinity.
Lipsch
or 8-32*42) which are on sale. Does anybody know something about these
particular scopes? Any pro's / con's compared to the air-max range for
example? I'm using the full-power (1000 fps @ .177 ") version of a Gamo
Hunter 440 (the varmints are spring rated according to Hawke's website). So
there's no problem with the combination? Also, the longest varmint is 413
mm long...would this fit OK on my Gamo? I ask this because I don't know how
much distance there should be from the eye of the observer to the scope, if
this distance can be very small than it must fit my Gamo. Also, does anybody
know WHY these scopes are on sale? Or shouldn't I be so suspicious?
Well, I just hope someone can still help me out here!
Geert
"Joseph Oberlander" <josephob...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:3F047308...@earthlink.net...
Adam Greatrix
> OK, I'm now seriously thinking about getting a Hawke varmint scope
(6-24*42
> or 8-32*42) which are on sale. Does anybody know something about these
> particular scopes? Any pro's / con's compared to the air-max range for
> example? I'm using the full-power (1000 fps @ .177 ") version of a Gamo
> Hunter 440 (the varmints are spring rated according to Hawke's website).
So
> there's no problem with the combination? Also, the longest varmint is
413
> mm long...would this fit OK on my Gamo? I ask this because I don't know
how
> much distance there should be from the eye of the observer to the scope,
if
> this distance can be very small than it must fit my Gamo. Also, does
anybody
> know WHY these scopes are on sale? Or shouldn't I be so suspicious?
They're both very similar scopes. The Air Max has slightly smaller
adjustment turrets, if I remember correctly, so are less likely to be
knocked. But there's really not much in it.
The distance the eye should be from the scope is called the "eye relief" and
if mentioned on hawke's website in their specifications. It's typically 2.5"
to 3". Usually this doesn't matter too much as you have loads positions you
can fit your scope to the gun. If you put the mounts right at the back of
the gun and right at the front of the scope it will stick out almost though
the butt of your gun, conversely if you put the mounts right at the front of
your scope rail and right at the back of the scope it will be very far
forward - I wouldn't worry about the eye-relief.
I don't see a reason to be suspicious.
Adam
Lipsch
> adjustment turrets, if I remember correctly, so are less likely to be
> knocked. But there's really not much in it.
OK.
What do you think is the best magnification for me 6-24*42 or 8-32*42 or
something less? (I want a good picture at 10 meters and as far as possible
to hit paper targets)
>
> The distance the eye should be from the scope is called the "eye relief"
and
> if mentioned on hawke's website in their specifications. It's typically
2.5"
> to 3". Usually this doesn't matter too much as you have loads positions
you
> can fit your scope to the gun. If you put the mounts right at the back of
> the gun and right at the front of the scope it will stick out almost
though
> the butt of your gun, conversely if you put the mounts right at the front
of
> your scope rail and right at the back of the scope it will be very far
> forward - I wouldn't worry about the eye-relief.
Well, the problem is off course, that I have a break barrel, so that might
cause a problem I guess, as there is a limit to how far I can mount the
scope.
>
> I don't see a reason to be suspicious.
Well, I just checked hawkes' website again, and saw that there's now a new
varmint 2 series...they used to have a "locking" eyebell type, now they have
fast focus ones'. Why would that be? And what's "locking" eyebell type?
Geert
Trevor Jones
>What do you think is the best magnification for me 6-24*42 or 8-32*42 or
>something less? (I want a good picture at 10 meters and as far as possible
>to hit paper targets)
For just shooting, get as low a magnification as you can get. The high
mag. scopes are popular with the FT guys because they can be used to
rangefind. This is not a big deal for them, but for general shooting
it's going to become not fun, quickly. They rangefind by utilising the
very narrow focus range of the scope and adjusting as required. They can
then read the range off the adjuster.
Personally, I would want a 2.5-10 power or thereabouts. At the lower
end the field of view is usefully large. Enough so that you can shoot
with both eyes open and find the target very easily. On high mag, you
will be able to see things within range very well indeed.
I have used a 6-24x42 on a centerfire varmint rifle. Finding the target
with the mag turned up high can be a PITA.
Cheers
Trevor Jones
Joseph Oberlander
> OK, I'm now seriously thinking about getting a Hawke varmint scope (6-24*42
> or 8-32*42) which are on sale. Does anybody know something about these
> particular scopes? Any pro's / con's compared to the air-max range for
> example? I'm using the full-power (1000 fps @ .177 ") version of a Gamo
> Hunter 440 (the varmints are spring rated according to Hawke's website). So
> there's no problem with the combination? Also, the longest varmint is 413
> mm long...would this fit OK on my Gamo? I ask this because I don't know how
> much distance there should be from the eye of the observer to the scope, if
> this distance can be very small than it must fit my Gamo. Also, does anybody
> know WHY these scopes are on sale? Or shouldn't I be so suspicious?
> Well, I just hope someone can still help me out here!
It should work, but it will not have parallax adjustment, so under 100yd
shots will be hard to get on target as the crosshair will appear to move
greatly depending upon where you look and how you hold the rifle.
Me? I'd never buy *any* scope without this feature, as 50yds and 150yds
are very different than 100yds.
Lipsch
> It should work, but it will not have parallax adjustment, so under 100yd
> shots will be hard to get on target as the crosshair will appear to move
> greatly depending upon where you look and how you hold the rifle.
>
> Me? I'd never buy *any* scope without this feature, as 50yds and 150yds
> are very different than 100yds.
Well, these scopes ARE parallax adjustable, says so clearly on their
website, I just forgot to put "AO" there in my post.
I don't completely get this parallax thing however, isn't it just for
focussing? So getting a sharp sight of the target? Why would the crosshairs
seem to move more without this feature?
Geert
Adam Greatrix
> What do you think is the best magnification for me 6-24*42 or 8-32*42 or
> something less? (I want a good picture at 10 meters and as far as possible
> to hit paper targets)
I would personally choose 6-24 out of those choices. I personally find that
the image starts to get darker on 20x and above on every scope I've tried -
and that's with 60mm objective lenses. Remember that the higher the
magnification the more wobble you perceive (of course you wobble the same
amount in reality). This can cause people to over compensate. You'll
probably find, like most people, the range you can hit things accurately at
is around 50 yards. Shooting at 100 yards will only make your groups twice
as large (assuming that wind and gravity, etc. doesn't play any factor in
it). So why not just shoot at 50 yards and understand that your groups are
half the size?
At 100 yards I find paper targets seem to tear producing big long 3cm long
holes that make it very hard to grade accurately. At 50 yards you can still
get neat holes with the right pellets.
At 10 metres I would be using a zoom of around 5x at most, 3 or 4 would be
fine.
Finally, remember that at 100 yards/metres your pellets are starting to drop
by huge amounts because of gravity. I find that at 20x zoom shooting at 100
yards the pellets have more than dropped off the bottom of the scope's field
of vision. I have to use 15x to be able to see where I'm going to hit and
10x to get it onto the bottom of my mil-dots.
This is all just my experience though...
Adam
Adam Greatrix
> Well, these scopes ARE parallax adjustable, says so clearly on their
> website, I just forgot to put "AO" there in my post.
> I don't completely get this parallax thing however, isn't it just for
> focussing? So getting a sharp sight of the target? Why would the
crosshairs
> seem to move more without this feature?
It's hard to explain without actually showing you, but say a scope parallax
adjusted for 100 yards and you try and aim at something at some other
distance, say 30 yards. If you look through the scope you'll find there is a
circle about an inch across where you can position your eye in and still see
the image clearly through the scope. If you move your head to position your
eye anywhere in that circle where you can see a clear image you'll notice
that the cross hairs move in a circle too. If you move your head from side
to side you'll notice the cross hairs appear to move from side to side
relative to the target as well. It's a strange optical effect.
As far as I know parallax adjustment could be the same as focussing? Can
somebody who knows answer this? However, I must admit, when I adjust the
parallax adjustment on my scope there is NO movement of the crosshairs when
I move my head when the scope is adjusted for the ranges printed on the
parallax adjustment ring at the front of the scope, however the image is NOT
in focus perfectly at this position. It's generally in focus when the
parallax is adjusted for around 5 yards less than what is printed on the
ring. Does this mean parallax adjustment is not the same as simple
focussing? Or does this just mean the numbers written on the parallax ring
are off for me?
Adam
Joseph Oberlander
> As far as I know parallax adjustment could be the same as focussing? Can
> somebody who knows answer this? However, I must admit, when I adjust the
> parallax adjustment on my scope there is NO movement of the crosshairs when
> I move my head when the scope is adjusted for the ranges printed on the
> parallax adjustment ring at the front of the scope, however the image is NOT
> in focus perfectly at this position. It's generally in focus when the
> parallax is adjusted for around 5 yards less than what is printed on the
> ring. Does this mean parallax adjustment is not the same as simple
> focussing? Or does this just mean the numbers written on the parallax ring
> are off for me?
The latter. Most analog controls are a bit off. My oven is ~20 degrees
off on my stove.
Adam Greatrix
news:3F071608...@earthlink.net...
> Adam Greatrix wrote:
> > focussing? Or does this just mean the numbers written on the parallax
ring
> > are off for me?
>
> The latter. Most analog controls are a bit off. My oven is ~20 degrees
> off on my stove.
So, in a nutshell, parallax adjustment is exactly the same as focus
adjustment?
Adam
Joseph Oberlander
Pretty much. :) But, it is a bit more complex than focus. You see,
in multi-optic insturments, the rays are bent and re-focused several
times. This leads to a sort of cone or tunnel where everything is
in focus, but the area of proper focus is smaller than the objective
lens if it is not properly focused. Move too far past the edge of
this "tunnel" and the light bends too much and everything shifts and
distorts This isn't a problem. Our eyes ignore this and re-focus
naturally to compensate.
Since the crosshair is artificially superimposed as another layer
on top of this set of lenses, it moves differently than the light
when it is bent too much. This is the problem. One moves one way
when your eyes and head adjust and one does not move the same way.
I suppose you could etch the crosshair on one of the lenses to get
rid of this problem, but then you'd have to move the lens itself,
leading to improper focus(catch-22)
Lipsch
didn't go with one off the varmint series (sale) because they did appear to
be too big for my gun (I e-mailed the shop).
Well, thanks for all the advice, it was very helpfull!
Geert
"Joseph Oberlander" <josephob...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:3F07A2A3...@earthlink.net...
Adam Greatrix
> I ordered a 6-18*44 AO airmax yesterday. I hope this will a be nice one, I
> didn't go with one off the varmint series (sale) because they did appear
to
> be too big for my gun (I e-mailed the shop).
> Well, thanks for all the advice, it was very helpfull!
No problem - how about letting us know in a couple of weeks what you think
of it in practice...
Adam
Lipsch
I
> > didn't go with one off the varmint series (sale) because they did appear
> to
> > be too big for my gun (I e-mailed the shop).
> > Well, thanks for all the advice, it was very helpfull!
>
> No problem - how about letting us know in a couple of weeks what you think
> of it in practice...
Sure. I just hope I'll remember to do that. On the other hand, I'm just
learning to shoot...my accuracy might be so poor that it's hard to interpret
any (dissapointing) results, since it's just probably me shooting very bad!
Also, I don't have any place to practice shooting >20 m except in some
forest, which is probably illegal.
Cheers,
Geert
Duane E. Moder
You should see a major improvement in accuracy after the scope is installed
just because of an improved sight picture. Personally, I coudn't group at
10 yds with open sights and thought there was a problem with the gun. After
I mounted a scope it was no problem to shoot with 5 shots touching. Past 20
yards is another story.
Enjoy the scope.
D.E. Moder
ph
> Hawke (their Sport HD, Reflex, Air Max, Nite Eye and Eclipse range), Simmons
> (their standard, deerfield, prohunter and 8-point range), and BSA (their
> Contender and Catseye range) all have scopes in your price range, which I
> hear are very good. I personally use the Hawke Nite-Eye 6.5-20x50 AO IR with
> mil-dot reticle (http://www.hawkeoptics.com/niteeye.htm) but have also used
> other scopes in their Sport-HD range - all of which are very good. The name
> of my scope means it's a Hawke Nite-Eye scope (that's just its name), has a
> variable zoom from 6.5x to 20x, has a 50mm objective lens to let in lots of
> light, has an Adjustable Objective lens so I can focus it and so that I can
> range find with it, and has an Illuminated Reticle so I can see it at night.
> I chose the one with the mil-dot reticle so that I can do quick estimates of
> ranges with it when out hunting and to have useful reference points for
> shooting at different distances.
Adam,
Would you be so kind to measure the outside diameter of the objective
side? (I have a Dampa mount (~32mm gun-line of sight) and wonder wether
it would take this particular 50mm scope.)
Another question, does the scope display a reticle when unlit?
A last question, what's the inside dimension between both scope rings.
since mine are fixed at 60mm (outside 90mm) and these scopes are rather
LARGE. :)
thx in advance.
Paul.
Neon John
<exto...@nospam.hotmail.com> wrote:
>"Lipsch" <geert_...@lycos.nl> wrote in message
>news:bdt3ss$57b$1...@reader10.wxs.nl...
>> > When do you want to use it? Day time? Night time? Dusk?
>> Probably day time, but a good sight at poor light conditions might be
>good.
>
>The bigger the objective lens is (that's the lense at the front of the
>scope, not the one you look through) the brighter the image. Scopes
>generally come sizes ranging from 30mm to about 56mm.
Adam is correct in everything he said BUT! If you're shooting a .177
cal springer, a scope will be overkill. I was a competitive shooter
(metallic silhouette) but I'm retired now. Still, old habits die
hard. When I get a new gun, I spend a lot of time characterizing it.
My springer is the universal chicom "1200 fps" .177 rifle sold under
several brands. I bought mine at Walmart I think, with a Remington
brand name.
I have an Oehler chrono, the one with 3 screens and a printer. I also
have a professional laser rangefinder intended for surveyors with a
resolution of 1".
My targets are lightweight wooden stand-along frames that will hold 4
ft lengths of 24" paper taken from my engineering plotter. I place a
fluorescent red dot about 4" from the top. If necessary, I'll cover
each new hole with a similar dot.
I fire 2 shots at each range. One to show how far the pellet has
dropped and a second shot after I've moved the chrono in place.
Given the performance I observed during break-in, I started with the
target as close to the muzzle as possible while not having the barrel
enter the chrono screen. This is as close as I could come to a muzzle
velocity. A 5 shot group averaged 975 fps. Not "1200 fps".
I decided, based on the performance seen so far, to move the target
and chrono to 10 feet and use 10 feet intervals. At 50 ft, the
velocity had dropped to under 500 fps and the impact point was more
than a foot below the red dot. (I'm doing this from memory, as my
shooting log is in the basement.) The 5 shots grouped well but they
were pretty useless for hunting.
I use this gun to kill squirrel pests. I have a 97 ft tall hickory in
my front yard. The gun will hit but not kill squirrels at that range.
I could hear the impact but it had little effect on the target. The
squirrels learned to run to the top of the tree when I opened the
door. My 12 ga trap gun took care of them.
My rifle came with a scope but it turned out to be a nuisance. I
removed the scope and used the provided iron sights for almost all of
this shooting.
My advice is before you spend a lot of money for a scope, shoot the
thing with the iron sights and see how you do.
John
>
>
>
John DeArmond
http://www.neon-john.com
http://www.tnduction.com
Tellico Plains, Occupied TN
See website for email address