Small scope with chevron reticle?
What do you think, would this scope be a good match for a compact bullpup?
http://www.vectoroptics.com/Vector-Optics-Mustang-SCOC-02-Scope-Product.html
How about that chevron reticle, it kind of looks like it could be useful with the loopy trajectories we have at longer ranges?
All Replies
Kind regards,
Uncle H 😯 😯 t
You really know our digestive system and timing, nature calls – got to go.
You are, each and every one, full of shit!
Kind regards,
Uncle H 😯 😯 t
The optics on my Bugbuster are fine and actually the FOV at 3x is larger than the 3x view in my Leapers SWAT. It’s the thickish reticle that bothers me. Maybe I shoud just swap it on and use a shorter shroud on the gun and get used to it. Of course I need to swap in a shorter barrel to do that so it’s not just a few minutes operation. Perhaps next weekend if the new valve for my Blizzard won’t arrive by then, otherwise I’ll have to check how close to the 250 joules barrier I can get with my .357 Evanix 😈
I guess those bugbusters with coke bottle optics must be a bad batch? I’m more used to looking through the bottom of a pint glass so I can’t really compare.
The problem with FFP scopes is, IMO, the thickness of the reticule when you turn up the magnification. Even at 14x the reticule looks as thick as crossed fingers. Me no like – at all. For FT/FFT,hunting (bigger game-not small birds) or Military use i see the beauty of the FFP but for serious target shooting i do not. I want my cosshairs thin as can possibly be (the opposite of Hoot: ´s preference regarding women) thus i like my Delta and IOR. With the IOR i can aim at a Fly at 75m and place the middle dot on one´s head and still see the rest of its head around the dot. That´s how i like it !
if you or anyone adjusted the scope Magnification on 8X or 10X,,, then … i prefer, if anyone ever wants to buy a FFP scope, he should go for a magnification above the 16X ,,, otherwise what is the different between the 10X to 14X on a small target/aim / small GS or whatever at + 100mtr.. you will not benefit from a tight space of magnification on a target above 100mtr …
my personal opinion ,,, maybe i am wrong … the 14X mag is not bad for a big deer or so …but for a small starling and small game at + 100 mtr will not work,,,
They track well, Clear glass and they are made my Falcon. Same scope, but different turrets.
Great deal on sale for $250 at MidwayUSA http://www.midwayusa.com/product/456482/bsa-tactical-mil-mil-rifle-scope-30mm-tube-4-14x-44mm-side-focus-1-10-mil-adjustments-first-focal-mrad-reticle-matte
I agree to that 110%. The best you know is the best you´ve seen.
I bought a new BR scope recently, an IOR BR Comp 36x with their MARVELLOUS MP8M-reticle. The reticle makes it useful for iex ultra long range hunting too. That one costs money but it also makes up for it in just about everything. In comparison to Leupold Comp 35x (that was one of the candidates while i was shopping) there is NO comparison. IOR line of scopes are made in close co-operation with Zeiss and that shows.
That said my absolute favorite is still my Delta Titanium 4.5-30 . I can use that scope for BR shooting due its power and clarity or i can use it for short,medium and long range hunting if needed. It can also be used for FT/FTT/FTH or whatever duties you´d like.
The optics are superb – for the price there´s nothing better – and although not really on par with the IOR in the optics quality , it´s far more useable.
I think it´s a shame you don´t have the Delta – line of scopes for sale in US. Or is there an importer by now ??
I don´t agree your point regarding the Buggy though. Sure it is a toy of a scope but it does fill a purpose. The quality of the optics is … well – there´s no quality to – but it is useful for AG hunting and many other AG duties. A BR/FT scope it is not and i don´t think anyone is confused enough to think it is either.
Ride, You would absolutly see the difference. It’s unereal the difference quality optics bring to the table. They will blow you away! 😉
Butttt–Just bexause a scope is expensive, it doesn’t mean the Optics are Ultra good. there are a LOT of high dollar scopes out there with high price tags, that the optics are, whild very good, are Not Superior optics. Lupy’s top of the line and Night force are good examples. Good tough Scopes, But only good optics. Not Great Optics.
And Hoot, what is the deal with the Bug Buster. I have one here on a good friends gun. What a piece of SHIT! I went to the dealer where he boutht it an looked at several more, hopeing it was just a bad one. They Suck Hoot! I mean know your blind in one eye, so is the other over compensating to th epoint that a bug buster actually looks good. Like looking thru a coke bottle good? Geeesh! :rofl:
Knife
The Mustang scope pictured it the link is made for FAST acquisition of a “MAN” sized target in combat. Not a precision optic. Nor is there any provision for wind age in the Ret. Pretty much useless for typical PCP Airgun work.
Knife
Regards
LarryW 🙄
They don’t have airgun trajectories for those automatic laser scopes.
The smallest – and dare i say it – fine working scope i´ve had on my EdGun was the Leapers Bug Buster./quote]
Ditto on the Bug Buster series of compact scopes. I’ve owned 4X, 6X, and 3-9X. Every one of them was bright, crisp, accurate, and priced so anyone could afford them. If they had a 3 x 12 or a 4 X 14, or a 4 X 16, I’d own one now. I had them on short range guns, and I never owned one that I didn’t like!
Right now, my .25 caliber calls for some extra power because my range is much extended. My Sight Mark 4 X 16 is doing the job. Weighs a lot, but is crisp and bright, so I won’t complain. Besides, I use a bipod so who cares. Being on fixed income, I can’t afford a Ted in Madison quality scope, but there are plenty of others out there that get the job done for me.
Hoot:
I actually do have a 3-9x Bug Buster and I’m going to try it next when this bloody coldness eases up a bit. I’m just afraid that the reticle is going to be too thick for 40-50 yard shooting, especially when compared to leapers swat 3-12 that I have there now – so I’m trying to figure out alternatives.
Ride, I know scopes are very subjective to the individual but if I could spend 2k, I would want the newest laser tech scope available. Buyers remorse, we all battle that demon. Well maybe not Sir Ville, with his new camera he will be rolling in the residuals. 😕
Regards
LarryW 🙄
Regards
larryW 😎
Larry, I need to update that, I was about to buy it when I added that to my sig. but I chickened out from liking the 6-24-56 mm so well and decided to buy another of the same, (3) now, mostly for familiarity. My decision I am asking about here is really about going ahead and buying the 8-32 you mentioned for $500 or spending $2000 and maybe hating myself later if it does not seem to be worth the extra $$
Ride, sounds like you already have some great scopes, how do you like the 8×32 Hawke?
Regards
larryW 😎
I want to try a real high end scope for bench rest but if I get one home and on my gun and ….If don’t feel the need to say …WOW.. NOW I UNDERSTAND .. then I would be suicidal over spending the money -vs- my $479 Hawkes.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Kind regards,
Uncle H 😯 😯 t
Nope. Just took a dump recently.