I really don't want to post on this site anymore, because of just this kinda crap - but I got an automatic e-mail on the 16th with a copy of Eric's comments in the above,post #33) bashing me for WHAT???
I never said anything about Berger bullets... and why is he dragging me into this - I just commented on a scope.
A mystery scope that, in three years, is still a total mystery to the shooting world. NOBODY has one, NOBODY that is independent has reviewed one, no independent users have ever commented on their use of the scope in any shooting thread - it is a scope that is a fantasy.
Eric says, "Who is Rich Allen? Who is CatShooter? What have they done to prove to any of you that they have the slightest idea what they are taking about. These forums are open to everyone. That includes those who do not have to answer to anyone and can not be held accountable."
So I sent him an e-mail introducing myself, and telling him "Who I was",I mean, he asked!!), with my creds,at the end of this posting, so you won't be bored with it now).
And I thought I should get an apology for his nastiness - since I didn't say anything bad or nasty about Berger bullets - they are Okie Dokie bullets - in a large field of many Okie Dokie bullet makers...
... and I got a rude e-mail back - it explains the whole thing about this thread from the beginning.
So Eric has thrown down the glove, so to speak.
-
Why is Eric so staunch in his defense of a TV show,and products) that most skilled shooters and "real" long range hunters consider a joke??
In his attack on Habu, Eric says:
"I find it hard to believe that a High Master would question the ability to hit the kill zone of an animal with a tuned rifle and a good scope at long distance. You do it regularly with open sights. They had to make the scoring rings smaller in F-Class because no one was dropping points at 1,000 yards,that's a 10 inch circle easily the size of a kill zone on an animal). Keep in mind they are using match grade components,not Barnes)."
What Eric seems to have completely missed in the comments is that at an "F" class match, you get a comfy shooting position with a nice shooting mat - you wind flags all over the range, a front benchrest support, and BUNCHES of sighting shots to get a feel for the wind and the mirage, you get to adjust the sights for the weather - temp and baro conditions and the general play of the range. By the time you are ready to shoot, all variables have been adjusted for.
But when you go out to shoot an elk at 1,000, you flop down, range it,and we all know how accurate and reliable pocket lasers are at 1,000yds), look at the leaves and grass for some hint of what the wind id doing,if you are not shooting across a canyon), and then say three "Hail Mary's" and let fly... you might even get a second shot if you are lucky.
Nothing is even close to an "F" class match.
So the comparison is an irrelevant and irrational attack on Habu, and a poor excuse to defend Eric's position.
-
Eric says...
"To suggest that The Best of the West is responsible for poor hunting practices is the same as blaming fast food restraunts [sic] for making fat people."
Well... Burger King does NOT have TV shows advertising that you can eat their fast food and loose weight.
BOTW does have a TV show that advertises "Buy our gun and scope, and you too can be a real long range hunter."
NOT at all the same thing.
In law, it is called misleading the customer - which BOTW does, with full knowledge.
-
Eric says...
" Additionally, comments made about their rifles and scopes should be made by only those who have used them personally."
There are two things wrong with this statement.
First - since no one seems to have one, then Eric is saying no one can talk about this scope - and as far as I can find, NO ONE HAS EVER talked about this magical mystery scope :, :,
Second - you don't have to use the Huskemaw BDC "personally" to know that their claims for it are bogus.
All BDCs,also called "cams") work in one environment of range, velocity, BC, barometric pressure, and temperature.
Used in the designed conditions, they can be outstandingly fast and accurate.
But at long range, when the temperature and barometric pressure change, they MUST be compensated for, and that's where the newbees with the Huskemaws crash and burn.
There are no "quick" fixes for these corrections, and the newbees are not prepared to make the proper corrections to get the new shooting solutions.
The accurate use of a BDC when the mets change is possible, but it takes a lot of planing and ballistic "smarts".
And these corrections must be made most of the time. There was only one scope that had a mechanical way of compensating - and that was the Unertl 10x USMC scope that had two co-axial elevation dials, one for range, and one for atmospheric corrections.
But the data still must come from another source.
So I don't have to have actually used a Huskemaw BDC to be fully aware of it's limitations, because it's limitations are the same limitations of ALL BCD/cammed scopes...
... I did consulting on the Leupold Mk4-M3 and the later M3-LR military scopes because their BDC cams were not ranging properly - I did two years of work, and my work was incorporated in all the cams made after January 2002 and supplied to the military - so I think I am fully qualified to comment on BDC/cams anytime, anywhere, with anyone... and it is all very well documented in the archives of SniperCountry.com from 2000 through 2002, if you doubt the truth of what I say.
As to the optical quality... in a thread on "Longrangehunting.com". in Dec 2006,nearly three years ago)...
http://longrangehunting.com/forums/f23/huskemaw-optics-20058/
... the question of quality came up. At one point, one of the principles, Arron Davidson entered the thread and said the scope was "his project", and at that time, none were in the hands of customers.
He claimed,and I quote), "Walt Berger has thoroughly tested and evaluated the scope. His evaluation was basically that the optical quality was much better than necessary"...
I don't know what Walt's optical background is, and how he evaluated this scope, but I have never seen an optical evaluation that said a product was "much better than necessary"
Now I don't know what "much better than necessary" means, but the connection between Berger and Huskemaw will become apparent later in this post... and it really sucks... big time!
In the same thread, people,including me) asked some straight questions - like what is the resolution - is it as sharp as a Nightforce or Leupold - I mean what does "better than necessary" mean - an elk is 4 moa at 1,000 yds, so even a $60 BSA scope would be "much better than necessary".
Hello, is there any intelligent life at BOTW??
The folks from Huskemaw did not answer any questions with details - it was all Madison Avenue fluff!
-
I commented in post #29 about why the BOTW system was not good.
And in post #33, Eric insults Rich Allen and me!
So that you guys will finely understand it - here's what is wrong with the super duper secret Huskemaw turret system - especially for beginners,the only people that would be attracted to it for $1,110 price tag - GAG me with a spoon!!).
Pay attention here, Eric!
All BDC/Cams work on a fixed set of parameters - you figure the Ballistic Coefficient, the velocity, and the "mets",meteorologicals, temperature, barometrical pressure AT the shooting position, known as "station pressure"), etc, and you cut a cam for the scope - they can be very accurate.
I created the ranging drop figures for a guy on this site for his load at 1,000yds, and it was 2" off at 1,000yds when actually fired it on a 1,000yd target.
So the calcs CAN be very accurate. But once cut into a cam, they are "cut into stone" so to speak.
BCDs are VERY fast to use, which is why the military uses them. If you are skilled,"skilled" being the operative word here), you can see a target at long range, range it, and fire in 10 to 15 seconds.
BUT - when you change the "mets", the long range drop figures change really fast - and you can easily miss a moose sized critter at 1,000 and not know why.
Now - a really well "trained" long range shooter will have a cheat book with all the +/- corrections for the changes in mets... but the Huskemaw scope does not, and their show does not tell you that after you buy their $1,100 scope, you still have to do a ton of ballistics work that they don't supply.
Now a lot has been made of their windage marks...
OK - we'll do it like in the 8th grade.
For all you guys that really shoot at long range,800yds or more)... not the wannabees.
Tell me how many times you have had a constant 3 or 9 o'clock wind at 5 mph,or multiples of 5 mph) blowing for long enough to set up a long range shot... raise your hands.
I can't see any hands.
The truth is that the wind is a bitch on a good day - especially out where the big game is - it doesn't come in from 3 or 9 o'clock - it varies in speed and direction constantly, often blowing in several directions at once,we're not talking about Camp Perry or Raton - but on saddle back ridges where you really shoot game).
So how do you use the windage marks that are for every 5mph at 3 or 9 o'clock???
You CAN'T!!! - they are as worthless as tits on a bull.
If you think otherwise,and you are welcome to), then tell me what windage hash mark to use with a switching wind running from 1 o'clock to 4 o'clock that is varying from 8 to 13 mph, over a saddle back ridge with a weather front on the north west side.
And dial it!
Now... which hash mark did you use???
HA! Gimme a break! The windage hash marks are worthless decorations.
So as I said in the beginning of this, I sent Eric an e-mail and said his insult of me was pretty poor, low class and uncalled for, ESPECIALLY since he did it in the company name of Berger Bullets.
I thought it pretty poor to insult Rich Allen too, but since I don't know Rich,and he probably doesn't like me either), I'll let him defend himself.
All through this thread, as I read it while it was growing, I could never understand why Eric kept on harping and ranting about BOTW - I mean, he gets on here and tells you guys about a new product, or when bulk bullets for sale, or when a die is being retired, and that's cool - and appropriate...
... and all of a sudden, Eric is the great mommy for BOTW??? How come?
I got back an e-mail from Eric today that put the whole thing in perspective...
Here is the salient part of it,I left out the rude insults).
Eric says - "Berger is The Best of the West’s presentation sponsor. That means when you say these things about The Best of the West you are speaking badly about Berger since we are directly connected to the show."
Holy brass bullets, Batman - so that's why Walt Berger said, "optical quality was much better than necessary" - I mean, it's the same as saying, "I looked through it and I think you could see a moose with it."
It's cuz Berger is in bed with BOTW.
Under those conditions, a BSA would meet the same description. I mean, you can see a moose at 1,000 yds with a $60 BSA. Does that make it a great,or even good) scope??? I don't think so!
Now, I'm not one that that walks on water... but it is the general custom EVERYWHERE, in the media, etc, that when you take a position on something and defend it or promote it...
... if you have any interest in it, financial or otherwise,your wife works there) then you DISCLOSE IT OUT FRONT - but Eric did not - he attacked me and Rich Allen, Habu, and others, when all along, he was protecting the company's financial relationship and investment - a very unethical thing to do anywhere in the USA.
BADD Eric!
So to answer your original question, "... Who is CatShooter? What have they done to prove to any of you that they have the slightest idea what they are taking about."
The following is "what I have done to prove to anyone, ANYWHERE that I have a damn good idea of what I am talking about."
Eric, your credibility is down the toilet.
-
My creds that I sent to Eric, for anyone that is interested...
"Who is CatShooter?
I am CatShooter!
My Name is Paul Coburn.
My Credentials are:
I was a Gunsmith for 7 years - I developed one unique wildcat,the 222 Longneck).
I went back to college and finished with a major in physics and a minor in engineering.
I was a research director at Columbia University for 4 years where I developed the Argon Laser for treating eye diseases,which is still in use).
I was a consultant to Columbia University's "High Energy Suite" where we studied the ballistics of small particles in air and Helium, and ran high speed photos and films, making shadow graphs of projectiles and their shock waves.
I was THE consultant to Leupold that solved the "long standing ranging problems" with the MK4-M3, and later, the M3-LR military scopes.
I was the person that got the patent office to reverse their rejection of the patent for a new military ranging reticle from Premier Reticles, allowing Dick Thomas to recoup triple financial damages from Leupold and Nikon for patient infringement.
And you make bullets for 18 years, and you want to tell the world that you know optics, and I don't???"
.
