Mr.unlister said:

i bot a mount from u and got no feedback?... wut the hek

Click to expand...

theLBC said:

Login to view embedded media

Click to expand...

MWAlex2 said:

Login to view embedded media

Click to expand...

DeathBeforeDismount said:

What did ZCO say after you called and let them know of the issue? Or the retailer you bought it from? Or did you just come here to whine and bitch about a product? You did a tall target test before you took the scope to a match right?

Click to expand...

koshkin said:

For the moment, built in LRD introduces optical compromises. Eliminator 6 is better optically than the earlier ones, but still not as good as XTR PS. There is also an issue with doing a projected aiming point with FFP reticle. There is a way to do it, but it is expensive. That's why they are doing it in SFP.

Ideally, I would like to see them introduce a WMLRF that talks to the XTR PS wirelessly. I do not mind dialing for my shots if the information is all in front of me.

ILya

Click to expand...

taseal said:

This is the true benefit for these things. The only thing I would prefer is never having to look outside the scope. I really hope they eventually come out with a built in LRF version too. Don't even need the holdover dot like the E6. Just tell me the range and I can either hold, or dial it. How awesome would that be?

Now that they got the E6 and the XTR-PS, I do believe they will marry them up and we will end up with a new XTR-PSR version at SHOT 2026. I am def going to make the suggestion when I go next year if I don't see it.

Click to expand...

koshkin said:

I have both version of the XTR PS and that HUD is really growing on me. The ballistic data was very close to AB. The app does give you the option to true it. After truing, I have complete agreement between Burris Connect, AB Quantum and Geoballistics.

Optically, with the two I have, 5.5-30x is a little better than the 3.3-18x, but that is likely sample variation. It is pretty much XTR3i optical system, so it is a step behind Pro, but still very good.

The big advantage for me is to not need to look at the turret when dialing. Also, when I dial in yards, it is easier for me to estimate wind. If I dial in mrad, I need to remember exactly which distance that corresponds to in order to translate from my gun's MPH number to the wind hold.

Same goes for the level and the time. The less I have to look at stuff outside the scope the better.

ILya

Click to expand...

ToddM said:

XTR III glass is pretty good and more than useable. We were never going to get Pro or better glass in an optic that has a street price basically the same as the Pro.

That's an order of magnitude better than the glass Sig puts in their BDX Sierra6/Easy6 ballistic scopes, granted the PS is twice the price. However I'd consider XTR 3 glass more than useable and the Sierra 6/Easy 6 glass is abysmal. It basically compares with a above average $300 optic. The Sig's both fall well short of PST Gen 2 glass, which it still easily useable but hardly great glass even at a sub $1000 price point limit.

That said I love to see more companies pushing the envelope on these types of optics. I'd imagine for a lot of the market the big limiter that keeps companies from making them is the high number of states that ban such things for hunting purposes. This also might by why Sig avoided a built in rangefinder as some states make a distinction between a scope that gets say holdover information like the Sig and a scope that can range and do ballistics in the same package. For example in CO it used to be illegal to have a scope that had any ballistics calculator contained within it. In such a case it was deemed a "Smart rifle" no idea if it's still that way. So in that case something like the Sig BDX would be okay because it gets info from an external source for ballistics/holdovers. However in the case of the eliminator it has everything internal. Utah used to basically restrict any electronic feature in a scope outside of an illuminate reticle as being against regulations. It's kind of silly, but I'd imagine the manufacturers are looking at hunting regs to evaluate a product's viability. If a lot of states have regulations that restrict these sorts of optics for hunting use that's a huge loss of potential customer base. It was probably originally intended to restrict NV use, but it's hard to argue that having a rangefinder and ballistics calc inside the scope itself useable on demand would not increase the percentage of ethical kills.

Click to expand...

Bacarrat said:

Maybe in the UK it might be different. But in the states, all the quick change barrel long action/magnum rifles are M30. Mostly known as post 2014 (but there are some pre 2014 AXMCs) The AX338 still uses the old AW actions but in a AX chassis so it still uses the M27 tenon. Or basically if it's a long action, and takes double stack mags, it's a M30. This is not including some of the newer stuff made for special departments(German G22)

Click to expand...

Kopfjager1 said:

I was able to use both my Mini AB and Sig Kilo 10k at the same time.

Click to expand...