Huskemaw?

[Kurt]

re: Huskemaw?

The last I heard there were 2 scopes that met the rigid tests of the army sniper school, Leupold and Nightforce. They will test any scope if it is sent to them. So if you think a certain scope will stand up to the test send them one and they will see. I don't know if a Huskemaw has ever been tested.

PH has a contract with military as does USO. I will say just because they use some thing does not make it the best. The military gets what is issued not what is the best per say. Just look at the failure rate of the leupys at RO seems they are 2-1 compared to other scope makers. Hopefully after the little vist that a few had at the leupy factory they will start listening to the customers.

 

[mustang58]

re: Huskemaw?

Tikkamike, I read thast article in Precision Shooting. I don't know the issue. It was maybe two years ago. Land ran the school at that time and he was the one being interviewed. I can't remember all the tests but one was water submersion to a certain depth and the other was tracking. There were others but don't remember the particulars. I might add I saw a tracking test shot with a Burris Black Diamond and a 6BR the other day and you can measure the square with calipers and it is perfect as well as the begining and ending shots were in the middle. It says something about the rifle, shooter and the scope.

 

[Lapua guy]

re: Huskemaw?

The last I heard there were 2 scopes that met the rigid tests of the army sniper school, Leupold and Nightforce. They will test any scope if it is sent to them. So if you think a certain scope will stand up to the test send them one and they will see. I don't know if a Huskemaw has ever been tested.

You forgot US Optics and Schmidt and Bender.

 

[Sako7STW]

re: Huskemaw?

Sako7STW ole TikkaMike is puttin' you on the ole hide stretcher. If you want to understand what he is talking about try reading optics writers like Bill McRae and Jacob Gottfredson (start with articles in American Rifleman; p63> May 2003 / p55> Nov 2003 / p76> Sept 2005 for McRae then in Tactical Shooter Jacob Gottfredson's treatise articles: Optics:Understanding The Basics & Optics: Tech Info; A Bit Beyond The Basics) The quality of the lens coating and lens matching can more than make up for large objective lens and bigger diameter tubes and the lower power setting on variables do produce a better exit pupil i.e. 5mm or > in dawn , dusk conditions. Hint the human pupil diameter varies slightly from individual to individual. The cheek weld comment is so valid it would be good to set preconceived ideas aside and study what he is talking about. Europeans only use 56mm because they sit in highseats and kill Roe deer and boar in full night. Same with the 30mm now 34mm and larger scope tubes ...this is not so much for light transmission as for internal vertical elevation adjustment range limitations. There are many common knowledge "facts" that do not withstand myth busters like TikkaMike. I have not read all his posts but these seem right in line with McRae & Gottfredson and they know their sh_t shells. I say this not to attack you but to point you towards good references...hell , you and I aren't stupid we were just ignorant until we studied from good sources. It took me some time to reference these articles for you so I trust you will see I mean it when I say I am NOT trying to belittle your ideas, you just got them from the wrong sources.***Schmidt&Bender also mfgs for our military snipers but so did Redfield back when I was in VN. Hell, I flew airplanes mfg'd by the lowest bidder...so go figure.

On my phone so please excuse any typo's. If you look at my join date, I have been reading this forum and shooting for years. I know what the main purpose of tube size is for and the abilities of objective sizes. I will certainly check out the articles you mentioned if I can find them.

While every piece of equipment has a purpose, some things work better than others in certain situations. NOONE can tell me a 44mm obj. can perform with a 50mm in low light all other things equal (glass, coatings, ect). Anyone who knows anything about optics knows that the higher the power the dimmer the sight picture is as well. Your wrong Tikkamike on what I do, and what I know. My scope is 4-16 and I hunt with it set on 10x. If,i need to go up or down I can and have. I like to hunt the movements of big game. I will be setup well before the sun even begins to show itself in hopes to catch them in movements to their beds. This requires a light gathering objective size and lower power, thus thats what I do. My whole family has all switched to larger objectives for the advantages it provides in "our" style of hunting. I do alot of studying optics and have even done a few reviews and am about to be posting a comparison review on some binoculars. I do know what I am talking Bout and I do know Leupold is not the cats meow that they once were. In optics it is still possible to "build a better mouse trap" and just because one might not have a big name or price does not mean it isnt better. If your so willing to bet on leupy vs. anything else in their price range, all I can say is, stay out of Vegas because your leaving a poor man.

BTW I do not typically shoot prone in hunting as I find I usualy have to be above sagebrush height. Thus my cheeck weld is more uprite and a taller scope has never been an issue for me.

 

[Tikkamike]

re: Huskemaw?

Sako7stw your kinda missing the point. Nobody is saying a 50 mm does not gather more light because they do but there comes a point when more light is no advantage. But you seem very content and it works for you. The point was that you were spouting off incorrect theories as fact. I'm not going to sit here and talk in circies with you. If you hate leupold or Zeiss or whatever. I don't care. But I will go so far as to say you are more than welcome to prove me wrong about my opinions on leupold. Also if your sitting upright in tall sage brush cheek weld is still important. But its not a great shooting position so usually you can get away with holding your head up with your cheek bone off the comb because your not going to shoot that far I know that because you said you need as much light as possible to catch any movement so if that's the case you need to be pretty close to identify what you are shooting in these extreme low light situations. But were not going to get into the logistics of that either because I don't have time and you have no interest in listening.

 

[Terrytf]

re: Huskemaw?

so Lapua & TIKKAMIKE why a no vote on the husky 3-12 ? I was going to put one on my .243 I dont need much more than 12 for it so I was thinking it would be a good scope for this gun.

 

[Lapua guy]

re: Huskemaw?

On my phone so please excuse any typo's. If you look at my join date, I have been reading this forum and shooting for years. I know what the main purpose of tube size is for and the abilities of objective sizes. I will certainly check out the articles you mentioned if I can find them.

While every piece of equipment has a purpose, some things work better than others in certain situations. NOONE can tell me a 44mm obj. can perform with a 50mm in low light all other things equal (glass, coatings, ect). Anyone who knows anything about optics knows that the higher the power the dimmer the sight picture is as well. Your wrong Tikkamike on what I do, and what I know. My scope is 4-16 and I hunt with it set on 10x. If,i need to go up or down I can and have. I like to hunt the movements of big game. I will be setup well before the sun even begins to show itself in hopes to catch them in movements to their beds. This requires a light gathering objective size and lower power, thus thats what I do. My whole family has all switched to larger objectives for the advantages it provides in "our" style of hunting. I do alot of studying optics and have even done a few reviews and am about to be posting a comparison review on some binoculars. I do know what I am talking Bout and I do know Leupold is not the cats meow that they once were. In optics it is still possible to "build a better mouse trap" and just because one might not have a big name or price does not mean it isnt better. If your so willing to bet on leupy vs. anything else in their price range, all I can say is, stay out of Vegas because your leaving a poor man.

BTW I do not typically shoot prone in hunting as I find I usualy have to be above sagebrush height. Thus my cheeck weld is more uprite and a taller scope has never been an issue for me.

I seriously don't get all the people claiming that somehow Leupold has gone down in quality. It is utterly ridiculous. If anything, their lens coatings, reticles, and glass quality has gotten better, and they are worth every penny. I own several brands of scopes, many more expensive that Leupold. Sure they are better glass, but you pay for that in price and weight.

If you bet against Leupold, you should stay out of Vegas. I own 13 of their scopes and one of their new Redfields, and all work like a champ. Never had a single problem except for a 50 year old fixed 4 that I sent back last year and Leupold replaced with a FX-3 for NOTHING.

As far as the objective size, you clearly missed the point. I do see the advantage of 50mm, but it isn't as significant as you make it. In fact I would prefer if GBP made their scope in a 30mm tube and 40mm objective.

 

[Lapua guy]

re: Huskemaw?

so Lapua & TIKKAMIKE why a no vote on the husky 3-12 ? I was going to put one on my .243 I dont need much more than 12 for it so I was thinking it would be a good scope for this gun.

Because you can get a GreyBull Precision that has better glass, better warranty, better reticle and 4.5-14x50mm power.

IMO, Huskys only leg up on GBP was their 5-20 setup. If they don't have that, there is zero reason to buy. Plus GBP puts their scopes on their rifles that come in only 3 calibers: 243, 264 Win Mag, 7 Rem Mag. So you know they have used the 243 extensively when developing and testing their glass.

 

[Tikkamike]

re: Huskemaw?

TF, I completely agree with Lapua Guy. However I don't personally have a problem with 12 power. I just think ( as does lapuaguy) that there is no advantage. But if you want it I'm sure it'll work great for you. What I was trying to say was a huskemaw. 5-20 x44mm would probably appeal to more people than the 4-12

 

[Tikkamike]

re: Huskemaw?

TF, I completely agree with Lapua Guy. However I don't personally have a problem with 12 power. I just think ( as does lapuaguy) that there is no advantage. But if you want it I'm sure it'll work great for you. What I was trying to say was a huskemaw. 5-20 x44mm would probably appeal to more people than the 4-12

 

[mustang58]

re: Huskemaw?

Have we finally arrived at the Ford-Chevy debate? I think it is obvious all the scopes being talked about will work. It has been proven. It is a matter of personal preference. Yes some have attributes that are better than others and vice versa. I do think cost will be a factor. How much quality is needed. One thing I know for sure is that we are going to extend the range we shoot until we have some wounded game. Guess we had that when we were shooting at 150 yds. I do know for a fact that all conditions are not predictable at extended ranges.

 

[CRaTxn]

re: Huskemaw?

Auh, the dark side. Competition: Race cars bring us turbo torque in our personal vehicles and the space race brings us a myriad of gadgets. So long as we don't destroy the resource and whats left of hunting's public image (like our brothers in the Bass Tournament Ego Trip) we will be good. When the first annual longest elk kill trophy shows up, we will have hit the hammer to said nail head...and ours. A lot of rocks must die before you "send it" on a game animal and Shawn et al. seem to constantly drive that home here on Len's forum and on their DVDs. Your remarks are very poignant amidst all the techno talk...thanx

 

[Terrytf]

re: Huskemaw?

I have look at the GreyBull Precision and the only thing I dislike is the Reticle with Ranging Bars. I realy like the MOA Windage Hash Marks . Its the Turret in yards I want and thats why I spent the money on the nikon but now nikon is not going to do the turret's for the Monarch X series . a friend of mine has one with the Kenton Industries turret and I dont like it . The fit is not so good so that is out . anther buddy has the leupold with the cds in the vx-3 not impressed with it at all . I know the info he sent them was right on but the turret is off alot so now he went bake to the moa turret . I'm in no means a scope guru it is one of the reasons I became a member here so I could bug pepole that know what they are talking about. with that said I like the husky because I read that at low power or high power the turret is the same unlike others. so to me thats great no extra thought involved. 200 yards at 5 power is the same as if it was up at 20 power. and thats what sold me...

 

[Lapua guy]

re: Huskemaw?

I have look at the GreyBull Precision and the only thing I dislike is the Reticle with Ranging Bars. I realy like the MOA Windage Hash Marks . Its the Turret in yards I want and thats why I spent the money on the nikon but now nikon is not going to do the turret's for the Monarch X series . a friend of mine has one with the Kenton Industries turret and I dont like it . The fit is not so good so that is out . anther buddy has the leupold with the cds in the vx-3 not impressed with it at all . I know the info he sent them was right on but the turret is off alot so now he went bake to the moa turret . I'm in no means a scope guru it is one of the reasons I became a member here so I could bug pepole that know what they are talking about. with that said I like the husky because I read that at low power or high power the turret is the same unlike others. so to me thats great no extra thought involved. 200 yards at 5 power is the same as if it was up at 20 power. and thats what sold me...

Then the BOTW sold you on something that isn't anything special. GBP will work that way too, take a look at the videos on GBPs page. They explain it better than I can.

On both scopes, windage MOA marks change with magnification. GBP is in yards too, so not sure what you are getting at. I happen to like the range finding bars. It is a quick way to swag your range if you need to.