Does anyone know much about these? I've heard very little and understand that they are very few and far between. Logically though if one is willing to pay the price and if they can be made sturdy enough to consistently withstand recoil while giving always-repeatable adjustments at levels perhaps even better than 1/8 MOA, then they would seem to be far superior to windage and elevation adjustable scopes. Thoughts? -Rod-
Adjustable Scope Bases
- Thread starter USAPatriot
- Start date
This topic has been discussed in depth on benchrest central quite a bit recently. The two discussed the most are the Jewell/Foster adjustable rings and the Gene Bukys adjustable mount. The JF's use a regular dovetail base,davidson style) and the GB is an adjustable base with his rings. They are both pricy indeed. The scope itself is locked up with either screws to set the erector tube in place or they just epoxy it in place. Either way the goal is to have absolutely no movement inside the scope. Some have even glued a glass reticle in place to further the fix. I actually broke the reticle in one of my 36's so I figured I'd give it a shot and it was actaully quite easy to do. I do plan on locking the erector tube in place on this scope eventually and getting the GB mount. So many projects..............
A couple of examples...
The way things used to be done on my ancient Win 52 with the externally adjustable 20x Lyman:
And US Optics offers a premium super-scope with external adjustments as well, the SN-9, for a cool $3800...
http://www.usoptics.com/sub_pages/scope_model.php?recordID=7
Understand that there are some other adjustable scope mounts avail now as well - but I don't know much about 'em, belonging to the crew who likes to have their scopes fastened real snug to the rifle.
Regards, Guy
The way things used to be done on my ancient Win 52 with the externally adjustable 20x Lyman:
And US Optics offers a premium super-scope with external adjustments as well, the SN-9, for a cool $3800...
http://www.usoptics.com/sub_pages/scope_model.php?recordID=7
Understand that there are some other adjustable scope mounts avail now as well - but I don't know much about 'em, belonging to the crew who likes to have their scopes fastened real snug to the rifle.
Regards, Guy
My first scope on my first centerfire rifle,a sporterized 6.5x55 Swede back in ~1972) was set in one of the old adjustable ring sets. But that's not quite the same thing.
If one of the BR scope companies were willing to get their heads around the idea, they could make non-adjusting scopes specifically for use in adjustable base sets that they would also make. No need to spend a bunch of time and money locking down a scope while simultaneously voiding it's warranty too.
The fewer functions a scope has, the better it should be, assuming quality components and workmanship. Most of us have had at least one scope where the turrets quit working, didn't adjust correctly, didn't always repeat, etc. Turrets are inconveniently located, outside our line of sight and represent a weak spot in the scope overall.
Food for thought. -Rod-
If one of the BR scope companies were willing to get their heads around the idea, they could make non-adjusting scopes specifically for use in adjustable base sets that they would also make. No need to spend a bunch of time and money locking down a scope while simultaneously voiding it's warranty too.
The fewer functions a scope has, the better it should be, assuming quality components and workmanship. Most of us have had at least one scope where the turrets quit working, didn't adjust correctly, didn't always repeat, etc. Turrets are inconveniently located, outside our line of sight and represent a weak spot in the scope overall.
Food for thought. -Rod-
rstreich said:
I don't know. One doesn't necessarily need to admit a problem in order to improve on the way we do things. You don't infer that a Ford F150 is junk because Ford makes a bigger and better F350. You just infer they have different uses and people have different tastes. Or that an RCBS Partner press is no good because the Rockchucker is more popular.
People love new things, especially shooting and reloading things, if they think it will give them even a marginal improvement. Most people hope it's the magic bullet that will put them over the top. But mostly we just love new toys. It therefore makes sense for Leupold or Weaver to put out products like this. -Rod-
Here is the problem: Just how many of these non-ajustable scopes do you figure they would sell? My guess would be not even close to enough to justify making them. Only an extremely small number of shooters would be interested in them. A lot of "BR" scopes get sold today to non BR shooters but probably zero adjustable bases and rings go to those shooters.
You guys failed to mention one of the nices adjustable bases out there. The Variable Gantry Mount, made by Chris Self, at Miricle Machine Works, 285 Co. Rd. 418, Selma Alabama 36701, telephone 334-872-0121. It has ten variable settings. They are a little pricy but I have heard they are worth every penny.
There have been several post on the BRC website. I think Mickey Coleman has tried them.
Rustystud
There have been several post on the BRC website. I think Mickey Coleman has tried them.
Rustystud
Forum Boss
Administrator
This is a bit off-topic, but I think the future of target type scopes,for use at fixed, known distances), is a rigidly mounted light receptor with a chip out of a digital camera. This would be about the size of a penlight, with output to a viewing screen. User-selectable reticle and you could have up to 100x zoom,combined optical and digital). Likewise, with a button you could change from sighter box to target, or switch between 100 and 200 yard zero. Since the center of the cross-hair would be software-controlled it would be simple to have multiple zeros at multiple distances and you could even "dial in" wind correction.
All the hardware exists. The question remains--could BR shooters get used to looking at a screen rather than squinting through a tube?
Here is a 10X to 200x digital inspection scope with video output. All you need to do is add software to place and center a reticle.
All the hardware exists. The question remains--could BR shooters get used to looking at a screen rather than squinting through a tube?
Here is a 10X to 200x digital inspection scope with video output. All you need to do is add software to place and center a reticle.
Paul:
While attending the Long Range Firing class held at Butner, NC in October I heard two shooters talk about a situation where a shooter was equiped with a very high tech ballistics program, wind sensors and a laser aiming system and a very accurate rifle. Another experienced shooter was just equiped with an accuate rifle and good wind doping skills. The end result was the good shooter produced better groups and a higher scores than the techno wizard with a computer. I know technology changes but the basics don't change. There are just too many variables to put shooting on autopilot.
Rustystud
While attending the Long Range Firing class held at Butner, NC in October I heard two shooters talk about a situation where a shooter was equiped with a very high tech ballistics program, wind sensors and a laser aiming system and a very accurate rifle. Another experienced shooter was just equiped with an accuate rifle and good wind doping skills. The end result was the good shooter produced better groups and a higher scores than the techno wizard with a computer. I know technology changes but the basics don't change. There are just too many variables to put shooting on autopilot.
Rustystud
Forum Boss
Administrator
Well you still need a trigger puller and the shooter still has to make the wind call. My point is that we don't need a big heavy hunk of glass and metal that moves up down and sideways. Trust me, with an 8 Megapixel chip on board, the resolution would exceed the capacity of the human eye--as it comes out of the digital scope. The limit on resolution would be the number of pixels on the display screen. But, honestly, I don't think there would be any issue aiming precisely--you could just zoom in until the center of the target filled the screen. Remember you could get up to 100x interpolated magnification.
The big problem right now with magnification greater than about 45X is that the exit pupil is so small. All your "information" arrives via a tiny circle of light,about 1 mm in diam. on a 40x scope) that is very difficult to see unless your head is in exactly the right place.
With a remote screen and a digital zoom, that's no longer a problem. You could view the target at 70X just as easily as at 7X, since exit pupil size is no longer a limiting factor.
The big problem right now with magnification greater than about 45X is that the exit pupil is so small. All your "information" arrives via a tiny circle of light,about 1 mm in diam. on a 40x scope) that is very difficult to see unless your head is in exactly the right place.
With a remote screen and a digital zoom, that's no longer a problem. You could view the target at 70X just as easily as at 7X, since exit pupil size is no longer a limiting factor.
Something along those lines has been floating around the back of my mind since The Jackal came out some years ago. But off-axis aiming may in effect relegate us to shooting railguns. There's no point in cradling a rifle if you're not looking down the long axis. All is not lost though. Electronics are so small that it's probably possible to use one to gather and retransmit what little light is coming through the exit pupil as a larger one. Just thread that screen right into the ocular end of your favorite 45x scope and you have a bright full-screen view. Whether or not they could survive recoil is another problem. -Rod-
Paul:
Even if a digital sight was developed I think the "rule makers" would make it in eligible in competition. When the first optical sights came out for pistols there was all kinds of hoopla. That is when the USPSA, IPSC, and the IDPA all went their respective ways. I can see the NRA Match Rifle class allowing digital sights. I can't see the IBS or NBS organizations allowing digital sights either. Hand held, hand, pulled trigger, and eye balled through metalic or lensed sights with the aid of electronic enhancement.
I think you will see it in the military first.
Time will tell.
Rustystud
Even if a digital sight was developed I think the "rule makers" would make it in eligible in competition. When the first optical sights came out for pistols there was all kinds of hoopla. That is when the USPSA, IPSC, and the IDPA all went their respective ways. I can see the NRA Match Rifle class allowing digital sights. I can't see the IBS or NBS organizations allowing digital sights either. Hand held, hand, pulled trigger, and eye balled through metalic or lensed sights with the aid of electronic enhancement.
I think you will see it in the military first.
Time will tell.
Rustystud
Upgrades & Donations
This Forum's expenses are primarily paid by member contributions. You can upgrade your Forum membership in seconds. Gold and Silver members get unlimited FREE classifieds for one year. Gold members can upload custom avatars.
Click Upgrade Membership Button ABOVE to get Gold or Silver Status.
You can also donate any amount, large or small, with the button below. Include your Forum Name in the PayPal Notes field.
To DONATE by CHECK, or make a recurring donation, CLICK HERE to learn how.
Click Upgrade Membership Button ABOVE to get Gold or Silver Status.
You can also donate any amount, large or small, with the button below. Include your Forum Name in the PayPal Notes field.
To DONATE by CHECK, or make a recurring donation, CLICK HERE to learn how.