HuntingNet.com Forums

HuntingNet.com Forums (https://www.huntingnet.com/forum/)
-   Guns (https://www.huntingnet.com/forum/guns-10/)
-   -   scope help (https://www.huntingnet.com/forum/guns/314301-scope-help.html)

scooterbob 01-06-2010 12:30 AM

scope help
 
lookin for new scope for my marlin 512 any ideas thinkin about nikon slugmaster anythin will beat this tasco it came with.

and to uncle norby the brenekee ko shot awsome along with win. bri was close to same patt. touchin @ 50 if not hair line close but think scope was movin
and the federal tru ball expensive yet not all that graet i see what u ment by finding a slower velocity shot thanks

statjunk 01-06-2010 04:24 AM

I'm not a fan of Nikon scopes but there are folks that swear by them. To me they have to little parallax tolerance which makes getting a sight picture more difficult.

Tom

vabyrd 01-06-2010 04:40 AM

Never had any trouble with my Monarchs. Brighter than my VX II's.

bigcountry 01-06-2010 05:06 AM


Originally Posted by statjunk (Post 3548649)
I'm not a fan of Nikon scopes but there are folks that swear by them. To me they have to little parallax tolerance which makes getting a sight picture more difficult.

Tom


Good optics but I totally agree. I have two monarchs. Clear as a bell but easy to lose sight picture.

statjunk 01-06-2010 06:29 AM


Originally Posted by bigcountry (Post 3548666)
Good optics but I totally agree. I have two monarchs. Clear as a bell but easy to lose sight picture.

Wow. I thought I was the only one. All I ever here are people talking highly of Nikon optics. I even feel the same way about the range finder that I own. Same issue.

Tom

bigcountry 01-06-2010 06:30 AM


Originally Posted by statjunk (Post 3548735)
Wow. I thought I was the only one. All I ever here are people talking highly of Nikon optics. I even feel the same way about the range finder that I own. Same issue.

Tom

Nope, its thier design to keep parallax down. Can be viewed as a good thing, but in a hunting situation, can be a pain.

thndrchiken 01-06-2010 06:55 AM

That's why I prefer Leupold's or Zeiss' for my hunting rigs. For my Varmint rigs it's not that much of an issue due to the low recoil.

vabyrd 01-06-2010 09:05 AM

I believe it boils down to consistent cheek weld, proper rifle fit, and scope alignment.

Maybe someone could explain parallax...

bigcountry 01-06-2010 09:35 AM


Originally Posted by vabyrd (Post 3548848)
I believe it boils down to consistent cheek weld, proper rifle fit, and scope alignment.

Maybe someone could explain parallax...

Something tells me I shouldn't but here it goes. Guess I feel nice today.

Its the targets relative movement with eye position. Unless you can hold your eye position the exact same to 2mm, your going to have it with any scope. Most rifle scopes are set to 150 yards. Slug scopes for 75 yards. At these ranges you could move your head side to side (if you got sight picture) and should see the crosshair stay dead on the target. But when you move out to 500 or 900 yards, you will see crosshairs come off your target as you move side to side. Hense the need for adjustable parallax.

Even then with AO, its not accurate. Its difficult to design in AO for any optics devise. nanometers of movement makes incredible change.

This is the reason some long range shooters try to adjust out thier parallax using ocular changes (focus). It kinda works.

vabyrd 01-06-2010 09:54 AM

Wow, you didn't even call me names...

Does it have anything to do with "blackout" when you're not aligned correctly? Or is that something different?

So essentially, since the cross hairs are about 8" from your eye, and the target 300 yards, you're looking around them, so to speak?


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:31 AM.


Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.