Ballistic Turret vs Hold Over Lines

[bigngreen]

Not addressing the stadias here but dim light. What is posted is totally opposite of my many tests when comparing optics. As darkness sets in one has to turn up the magnification to continually see the target.

There is a guy on 24hour who was in Africa at the end of the day. He was using a 1-6X scope and trying to see an animal but it was too dark. The guide told him, "Turn up the scope and shoot it!" So he did.

There is an optics writer who has a low light test. I think his name is John Barrness or something like that. He has confirmed this, also.​

I've never had that experience, I have had many times I pull up to shoot and then turn my power DOWN to be able to see both the target and the cross hair, in many optics tests I've done you can keep turning the optic down and gain shooting light till they tap out, turning one up has never been a low light solution in the field!!

 

[Mram10us]

I've never had that experience, I have had many times I pull up to shoot and then turn my power DOWN to be able to see both the target and the cross hair, in many optics tests I've done you can keep turning the optic down and gain shooting light till they tap out, turning one up has never been a low light solution in the field!!

Happened this year to me. My buddy was videoing the shot and he saw everything perfectly, I couldn't see the buck thru 24 power, so I turned it down to 12. Same experience as you BG

 

[Rich Coyle]

.

 

[Rich Coyle]

AZShooter,

They weren't articles, they were posts on 24hour. I have no idea how many times I have done low light test and lost the antlers to darkness. All I had to do was turn up the magnifications and viola, I could see the antlers again. The antlers are 131 yards away in the woods.

Also I have a military's optics chart at 127 yards to compare things in good light. I used to think my Bushnell 6500 was as good as my Nightforce 12-42X56 when I used twigs and leaves 150 yards away for checking. Then I got this chart and discovered the Bushnell was not as good. Also I discovered Swarovski scopes of the same model, like z5, are not close to the same quality as each other. I was amazed. I had four of them. None were as good as the 6500. They are gone. A friend brought his z6 5-30X50 to do some comparisons. He was discusted with it and sold it. He told me, "I always that that one wasn't very good." He had more than one Swarovskis along with several other high dollar brands.

 

[Rich Coyle]

.

 

[Rich Coyle]

.

 

[AZShooter]

I also had a similar experience with a VX-L 3.5-10 x 56. It washed out on 10X compared to 3.5 when looking at elk in deep woods close to dark. Guess we will have to agree to disagree.

 

[Never ffp]

Dial up no question with zero stop turrets

 

[bedrok]

IMO Dial is NEVER more accurate, period, I don't care the brand ,,,,,,
I have used the BEST out there, Swarovski, Nightforce, Schmidt & Bender ,,, they can ALL have problems repeating the dial drop, especially on big rifles ,,,,
THE BEST I have found to use in the field for accuracy and repeatability, even under big recoil is a Schmidt and Bender 4-16X50 Klassic scope with the P3 mil dot reticle in the FRONT Focal plane, so that all hold over lines and dots are accurate at all magnifications ,,,,

Im glad someone else brought this up. Until I started spending serious bucks on scopes I never saw one that would track reliably. I'm not talking just 1/2 Moa or so. More like 3 to 5. My "good scopes" years ago were all Leupold VX-3s that I still love, but dialing to compensate was out of the question. When it takes two shots for poi to settle in when sighting in its hardly a good idea to dial for holdover. Then I'd read some review of a bargain basement scope in a mag where the author claimed it tracked perfect for elev AND windage. I thought I must be the unluckiest scope buyer out there or just plain crazy.

All that being said though, since I've been using Nightforce, I always dial past 400yds

 

[Rich Coyle]

So far I had two scopes that always tracked: A Nighforce and a Tasco. My Swarovski failed in that area twice.
I didn't try dialing thr several other brands. They were sight in and leave it.

 

[Ingwe]

So far I had two scopes that always tracked: A Nighforce and a Tasco. My Swarovski failed in that area twice.
I didn't try dialing thr several other brands. They were sight in and leave it.

did you send the Swarovski back for repair? That shouldn't happen

 

[Rich Coyle]

did you send the Swarovski back for repair? That shouldn't happen

Twice. Both times the note that came back in the package said they replaced the errector.

When I offered it for sale I put that info in the ad so the buyer could not come back on me.

By the way, the glass was very nice.

 

[COBrad]

For years I have dialed, but only with a few scopes that actually had accurate and reliable turrets; a SB, a couple Nightforce's, one old Zeiss Conquest, a now ancient IOR, and a few others that weren't true moa but they were repeatable. Problem is I've failed to execute too many shots because I was dialing the scope while the animal walked off. I'm going to reticles with one moa hash marks now. My G7 br2 range finder gives corrections in moa and I can split one moa on the reticle accurately enough.

 

[Rich Coyle]

What scope has one MOA hash marks?