Really didn't see what age had to do with much here, to say a 50+ yr old has more knowledge than someone in their 20 or 30's doesn't make sense to me, myself, being in my upper 20's, and having hunted since I was 10, gives me almost 20 years of real world experience. My point is I don't presume someone younger than me has less knowledge of hunting or firearms.

I'm sure I've been on more big game hunts thanmany men older than mehave. I can shoot a rifle very well.

I've pointed out that I really don't find ammo costs to be so drastically different that it would make me decide which I chose.

Iguess from now on I'll just cite endless specific examples from past experience to support my claims.....

such as my vx-ii 4.5-14 with the B&C reticle......it was sighted dead on at 200yds, the antelope was out at about 330yds or so. I put the 300yd crosshair on him, the wind was blowing hard, more than the 10mph windage showed, using the 10mph I set it into the wind another foot or two, pulled the trigger and watched the antelope drop, from that point on, I'm a big fan of ballistic style reticles.

Any by using ballistic tables from manufacturers you can determine which loads follow yoru specific scope's reticles.....not closely, or loads that will "work" but loads that are dead on the money. IMO a ballstic scope probably takes away alot of the wasted time at the range trying to determine exactly where to aim /hold out to 500yds, in that case sure you may need boxes and boxes of ammo.