Firearms AO Carbon/Ti 6.5 SAUM
- By StaMic006
- Buy - Sell - Trade
- 11 Replies
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
That moves the whole image with the reticle. Where the reticle is IN the image (i.e. where the POA is) does not change.This weekend I found something interesting with the LHT when setting the diopter.
Once the lock ring was loose, the ocular had some wiggle to it. This moved the reticle about .7 mil or so in any direction. I would imagine that once the lock ring is tightened again it would self center. I could see how a relatively small bump on the ocular with a slightly tight lock ring could result in a shift.
The natural man in me agrees with him. This makes me think he might be the antichrost.
Nah, I think that's trumps role. Go ahead and flame me. Not a trump hater. Never been a never Trumper. Voted for him twice. Always been a little skeptical about him on some things. Watch the video and get back to me.He seems to like women a bit too much to fit that one, but he could be the false prophet to Theil's antichrist...
Closed minds are why agendas are always allowed to move forward.
I've been eye-ing that brass and think it might be a decent option for hunting loads.Keep in mind on the AR brass, is you have no idear on the primer they have used. I bought a bunch of the Sig .270 stuff. Good brass, necks are thicker than Peterson and need an E27 vs a T2 mandrel too keep my neck tension. Took a high anneal code as well. Primer looks like a CCI200, but it's not. I took 10 cases, popped the primers and seated a 200 in them. Same charge etc and I was 18 FPS slower with a lower SD v's theirs.
Not unhappy at all, just a note to keep in mind.
lol If you really want this testing to raise red flags, you need a statistically significant sample size. While a failure rate of 2 in a row sounds unlikely, it is just as likely be a fluke as it is to indicate an actual issue without more data. Anyone trying to draw a conclusion with confidence from such a small sample size would have their brain broken by a basic Stats class.People think about the goal of the testing in the wrong way. It's meant to raise red flags about an optic model, not definitively prove all scopes of a line are bombproof/garbage. If you think about it in that way you can find value in it. Let's say someone thinks a Leupold VX6 has a lemon rate of 1/1,000. Well two of them were just tested and both shit the bed. What's the likelihood the droptesters got two lemons in a row? That person might then have to re-evaluate what they think the lemon rate is.
It’s not that easy. No way that this guy would’ve passed the eye test like the pictures they released of the shooter (who was wearing fitted jeans/not baggy) in the stairwell. I didn’t believe the story they were pushing so I played around with it myself. It led me to believe that he may have had the barreled action removed from the stock.Well that solves that![]()