Nikon Omega scope
12-01-2008, 08:24 PM
#1
Typical Buck
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: The forests and farmland of Ohio
Posts: 625
Nikon Omega scope
Just got my muzzleloader sighted in this past weekend and was disappointing. This summer i bought a TC omega and put on the Nikon omega with the bdc reticle. Got her sighted in at 100 yards then tried to move out to 200 using the BDC once i move out to 200 I was no longer on the paper. This scope and gun should perform much better than this sorta disappointed. I was just wondering if anyone else has used this combo and had any problems with this as well.
12-01-2008, 08:39 PM
#3
Typical Buck
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: The forests and farmland of Ohio
Posts: 625
RE: Nikon Omega scope
i was using a 150 grain charge of triple 7 and a 250 grain with TC 250 grain Schockwave sabots. I was shooting one inch groups at 100 yards. When sighting in i had problems with the gun shooting to the right about 5 inches at first but i believe this was due to the boar sighting job. once i move the scope over it was fine. I did not hit the paper at 200 yards and didn't have any more time to mess with the scope cause i needed to clean it cause i had to leave home to go back to school. I planned on using this gun for Ohio's deer gun season i guess my shots will be limited to 100 yards because i know it is good for that which still beats my slug gun
12-01-2008, 09:24 PM
#4
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: East Tennessee
Posts: 270
RE: Nikon Omega scope
Ihave that same combination except I do not use SW bullets. I use the 250 Barnes Ply tipped bullets. Some thing is wrong somewhere. Did you check the scope mounting screws? Mine will shoot about 4" at 200 yds. Thats as good as these old eyes will do. Do not give up it will do better
much better. I also shoot loose powder. 110 gr T7
much better. I also shoot loose powder. 110 gr T7
12-01-2008, 09:34 PM
#5
Boone & Crockett
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: River Ridge, LA (Suburb of New Orleans)
Posts: 10,917
RE: Nikon Omega scope
I just don't know what to tell you Lefty. First off, understand that I don't have a BDC scope and have not shot the load you are using -so I speaking from my experience with a regular 3x9 Leupold and other loads with T7 and 250 grain bullets.
With the load you are shootingyou have to be breaking 2000 fps, maybe even up to 2200 fps. If you have a tight group "dead on" at 100 yards I'm guessing it would probably be something like 9 or 10 inches low at 200 with the same POA. You didn't say what size target paper you were using. But assuming something like a 12 x 12" target paper, It just doesn't seem possible that you wouldn't hit the target at all using the BDC feature.
I'm sure one of the guys with a BDC scope can add more enlightened information, though not many guys are using a 150 grain load.
With the load you are shootingyou have to be breaking 2000 fps, maybe even up to 2200 fps. If you have a tight group "dead on" at 100 yards I'm guessing it would probably be something like 9 or 10 inches low at 200 with the same POA. You didn't say what size target paper you were using. But assuming something like a 12 x 12" target paper, It just doesn't seem possible that you wouldn't hit the target at all using the BDC feature.
I'm sure one of the guys with a BDC scope can add more enlightened information, though not many guys are using a 150 grain load.
12-01-2008, 09:58 PM
#6
Typical Buck
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: The forests and farmland of Ohio
Posts: 625
RE: Nikon Omega scope
I just started out with the 150 grains and 250 grains because that was what was recommended by the manufacturers in their statements to get the arc of the round to match up with the reticle
12-01-2008, 10:06 PM
#7
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Rivesville, WV
Posts: 3,192
RE: Nikon Omega scope
You are in way too big of a hurry. I have a Leupold VXIII with the B&C reticle on my Knight LRH. It took me an entire summer of shooting before I finally got it right. And the Nikon BDC reticle is not nearly as good as the B&C reticle.
With an MZ it is not nearly as "simple" as the mfrs. lead you to believe. You basically have to tailor your load to your rifle and your scope. And that takes a lot of range time, it simply will not work if you are in a hurry. It takes lots of range time.
If it helps any, my load ended up as 130 grains of loose 3F Triple 7, and the Barnes 250 grain TMZ. My rifle is dead nuts accurate out to 250 yards. but I easily put over 100 shots down range before I figured it out. And I have been doing this for close to 40 years. Tom.
With an MZ it is not nearly as "simple" as the mfrs. lead you to believe. You basically have to tailor your load to your rifle and your scope. And that takes a lot of range time, it simply will not work if you are in a hurry. It takes lots of range time.
If it helps any, my load ended up as 130 grains of loose 3F Triple 7, and the Barnes 250 grain TMZ. My rifle is dead nuts accurate out to 250 yards. but I easily put over 100 shots down range before I figured it out. And I have been doing this for close to 40 years. Tom.
12-01-2008, 10:41 PM
#8
Typical Buck
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: The forests and farmland of Ohio
Posts: 625
RE: Nikon Omega scope
Yeah I know it will take time to get things figured out. I usually sight in my guns behind my house in the field but this year the farmer had corn out so it just got taken off about 2 weeks ago and didn't have a chance to sight in until this weekend because I am attending college away from home so didn't get the chance to work with loads and such. Just seeing if anyone else had problems. Hopefully next summer i will get the chance to mess around with different combos more. Since i was shooting at a target on a board that was taller than wide and i didn't hit the board at all i believe i have to be shooting left or right which is odd to me because when sighting in other guns changing distance didn't effect left to right unless it was windy and then left to right movement was minimal. When i sighted in my muzzleloader the wind was minimal maybe 2-3 mph at most. I don't want to come across as a lazy hunter I just haven't found time this year to get the gun sighted in with college and not being at home.
12-02-2008, 08:39 AM
#9
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location:
Posts: 1,408
RE: Nikon Omega scope
(climbs onto soap box)
While I love both Nikon scopes and the T/C Omega, this marketing ploy has always stuck in my craw. Make a scope with built-in reticle for a load that is NOT accurate in MOST Omegas (or any other ML for that matter, though there are a few individual guns as exceptions) then go out and convince the public that they just need to buy this scope, cram a max powder charge down the barrel, and you're good to go to 300 yards. It's practically asking for a bunch of hunters trying to shoot way beyond their ability and wounding game (the scope does nothing to help you judge the wind, which is VERY important past 150 yards).
I shoot my ML out to 400 yards and have taken game out to 338 yards. However when I sighted in my new scope last summer I burned through 3 pounds of powder and enough bullets to get a lecture from my wife on the cost before I was satisfied that I knew my drops well enough to take a shot at deer at extended ranges. Under a variety of wind conditions. It's not easy at all, and not something to think a reticle is going to do for you -- especially when the aiming points are not points but little circles that are way too big! (I use a tactical scope so I dial in my drop exactly for what my rangefinder tells me)
Add to that that things like scope mounting height also affect the accuracy of the reticle.
(climbs off soapbox).
I'mNOT going off on you, LeftyBuckmaster. Just the marketing ploy.
The truth is, it is unrealistic to expect those circles to match up to your gun exactly even if you use the load they tell you to.
Let me ask you this -- correct me if I am wrong, but the manual told you to use 150gr of 777 pellets, NOT loose powder, correct? And were you shooting loose powder or pellets. If the instructions told you to use pellets and you used loose powder, you shot over the target. Guns are rated to 150gr Pyrodex/BP, but 777 is about 15% more powerfulthan the pellets. So a loose powder load of about 135 grains is equivalent to 150gr of pellets. If you ran 150gr of loose 777 powder you were actually exceeding the max recommended load for that rifle.
If this was not your problem, it could be a scope alignment issue left-right and your correction at 100 does not actually bore-sight you and it's off by 200. This is a less likely issue.
Or, if neither of the above is true, it could just be that your barrel generates a different pressure and shoots higher or lower than what the scope is calibrated for. The only way to tell for certain what is going on is to use a bigger target that you are sure to hit. With that load I would guess you are shooting about a foot low at 200 if aiming with your 100yd zero mark.
While I love both Nikon scopes and the T/C Omega, this marketing ploy has always stuck in my craw. Make a scope with built-in reticle for a load that is NOT accurate in MOST Omegas (or any other ML for that matter, though there are a few individual guns as exceptions) then go out and convince the public that they just need to buy this scope, cram a max powder charge down the barrel, and you're good to go to 300 yards. It's practically asking for a bunch of hunters trying to shoot way beyond their ability and wounding game (the scope does nothing to help you judge the wind, which is VERY important past 150 yards).
I shoot my ML out to 400 yards and have taken game out to 338 yards. However when I sighted in my new scope last summer I burned through 3 pounds of powder and enough bullets to get a lecture from my wife on the cost before I was satisfied that I knew my drops well enough to take a shot at deer at extended ranges. Under a variety of wind conditions. It's not easy at all, and not something to think a reticle is going to do for you -- especially when the aiming points are not points but little circles that are way too big! (I use a tactical scope so I dial in my drop exactly for what my rangefinder tells me)
Add to that that things like scope mounting height also affect the accuracy of the reticle.
(climbs off soapbox).
I'mNOT going off on you, LeftyBuckmaster. Just the marketing ploy.
The truth is, it is unrealistic to expect those circles to match up to your gun exactly even if you use the load they tell you to.
Let me ask you this -- correct me if I am wrong, but the manual told you to use 150gr of 777 pellets, NOT loose powder, correct? And were you shooting loose powder or pellets. If the instructions told you to use pellets and you used loose powder, you shot over the target. Guns are rated to 150gr Pyrodex/BP, but 777 is about 15% more powerfulthan the pellets. So a loose powder load of about 135 grains is equivalent to 150gr of pellets. If you ran 150gr of loose 777 powder you were actually exceeding the max recommended load for that rifle.
If this was not your problem, it could be a scope alignment issue left-right and your correction at 100 does not actually bore-sight you and it's off by 200. This is a less likely issue.
Or, if neither of the above is true, it could just be that your barrel generates a different pressure and shoots higher or lower than what the scope is calibrated for. The only way to tell for certain what is going on is to use a bigger target that you are sure to hit. With that load I would guess you are shooting about a foot low at 200 if aiming with your 100yd zero mark.
12-02-2008, 11:56 AM
#10
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Rivesville, WV
Posts: 3,192
RE: Nikon Omega scope
I agree with Spaniel about the Nikon BDC reticle. I tried one in a Monarch, and I found the circles to be totally annoying.
However I also own the Leupold B&C reticle, and the VH reticle. These are both bullet drop compensting reticles. I like the Leupold reticles. They work great. But as stated by Spaniel it takes an incredible amount of practice(burning powder) to fully understand the reticle.
Spaniel there is one additional "helper" with the Leupold reticle that really makes the difference when you are at the range determining your drop compensation. By adjusting the power of the scope you can adjust your drop compensation. You may not end up on the particular "arrow or point" that Leupld recommends, but you can work it out with practice. I have not shot mine past 250 yards. but I do have a crosshair, and a point left on the scope. So I am sure I can shoot longer(250 yards) distances. But that will take more range time. Tom.
However I also own the Leupold B&C reticle, and the VH reticle. These are both bullet drop compensting reticles. I like the Leupold reticles. They work great. But as stated by Spaniel it takes an incredible amount of practice(burning powder) to fully understand the reticle.
Spaniel there is one additional "helper" with the Leupold reticle that really makes the difference when you are at the range determining your drop compensation. By adjusting the power of the scope you can adjust your drop compensation. You may not end up on the particular "arrow or point" that Leupld recommends, but you can work it out with practice. I have not shot mine past 250 yards. but I do have a crosshair, and a point left on the scope. So I am sure I can shoot longer(250 yards) distances. But that will take more range time. Tom.