Recent content by Snake CharmerXX

I'm most certainly not and so I'd agree with your advise to the OP. Without reservation! A thought though: Might the inverse be true? I'm inclined to think a good shooter could be held back by lesser glass, reticle, turrets, etc.. I suppose "Say No to US Optics" might be in order for a...

So some closure for anybody that happens to Google or Search in the future. Before that though, props to WaveNature: On one of his first posts here he suggested what turned out to be one of my top 3 and I not only didn't realize it, I didn't extend so much as "Thank you" to him. Feeling a...

Thanks SOG. I'm sorta "never own mismatching turret/reticle" so I would have missed that. I'll assume you're correct and stand corrected. OP: If not clear, and I wasn't, when I speak of the weaver I refer to the tactical FFP w/Illuminated reticle. I sorta assumed that given the PST as a...

I started at that kind of price on glass. It got expensive in a hurry. Decide as you want, but at this price point every extra dollar you spend buys a real gain in clarity. If you can find a used Weaver Tactical you MIGHT get away w/$400. I'd suggest not going any lower in glass clarity.

I'm using a 50MM objective on a 30MM tube. With Butler Creeks I'm 1.31" radius. After WAY to much study, my final three choices were: ADM Recon: 1.45" height, and enough forward mount that you can be leaned into the rifle and still have 4" of eye relief and keep the mount on the receiver...

And has never been available moa/moa ( your other question)

The Weaver is what made me realize how much good glass helps, and how much I like FFP. I'm moving mine from a .308 to an AR as I need more zoom for my older eyes on the .308 and the Weaver is just too good to sell. In the replacement decision I decided against Vortex as Sightron consistently...

Hard to add more than Bob has said. I'm making a similar decision and wanted 20 moa down for the same reason. Many suggested not, and as I looked at it I decided I had enough elevation to do just as Bob has done; go to a heavier bullet w/ a better BC. What I also wanted, have been...

Great list. Thanks! * NF = too much $$$ * ADM. You bet. Still a little expensive, but the "sw" can be had for about $160 and has 20 moa. Height might be a real good compromise, and reviews on their customer service seem good. * Stoner= no moa, but what a value! * Warne didn't have moa...

Ring height: Recall I mentioned i was looking for 1.38" rail to center of scope? The scope is 1.31" radius w/caps on it, so thats seems pretty tight. Rings seem to be rated in one of two ways; top of rail to bottom of ring (By that measurement I'm looking for .8"), and by top of rail to...

Thanks for the thought. The rifle's handguard has an extended rail on top. :)

Thanks. Oddly, I'd just bagged insisting on 1 piece. No MOA though.

Rfutch: So I see. Wow$$. Suddenly SOG sounds prophetic..

SOG: Yep. Good thought about transonic transition. I'd not thought it to be that bad. Voice of experience says it is. Drat. For those I'd confused: If a picture means a thousand words, what does a link mean? :) Here may be what I'm talking about. Except it might be too high...

Thanks! D