Long Range Hunting Online Magazine

Go Back   Long Range Hunting Online Magazine > Hunting > Long Range Hunting & Shooting

Long Range Hunting & Shooting Nightforce Optics



LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12-21-2009, 06:46 PM
Platinum Member
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Central ND
Posts: 1,021

BH Hunter & jcoop finally figured it out Sorry I took the post wrong. With three days off in the last month I am getting a little absent minded and testy.

p.s. I still can't spell didn't teach me that in the classes I took

"Amazing things can happen when preparation meet opportunity" Richard Schatz

"The will to win, compares little with the will to prepare to win" Donovan Moran

Last edited by blipelt; 12-21-2009 at 06:49 PM.
Reply With Quote
Old 12-22-2009, 01:29 AM
Platinum Member
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: on the rifle range in Utah
Posts: 2,720

Wow, been a long time since I started this thread and to tell you the truth, I haven't look back at it since. I see tonight that we've got the original BOTW man and the new BOTW man posting here. Great.

John, it's great to see you still look over this site though probably only as rarely as I do anymore. Glad there's still a few of the "old timers" still here from back when this site was a little bitty thing tucked way back in the corner of cyber space. I hope you are doing well and having successful hunts.

To the new host, Aaron is it?

You seem decent fellow, but you have to admit that you're claims seem mighty unsubstantiated at this point. After all, John is on RECORD as starting the show and the explanation of his system two years before you filed for any patent. So if you had any "improvements", then they were improvements on something that was already in use and in the same name as the company or show you now have so I hope you can see where the confusion comes from.

The second thing that rubbed me the wrong way is the way in which you present your "method" as being infallible and so optimal. I have been doing the "long" thing way, way before your system or Johns was so mainstream and there are things wrong with it and it is not optimal. It may be optimal to your pocketbook but that's where it ends.

Here's where your system falls short:

1. First, your rifles are sold with generic ammo. It might be the most carefully prepped ammo on the planet but if it's not tuned to EACH specific rifle, it just as well be rolled off Remchester's ammo line. Only tuned ammunition can deliver expected results required for long range shots and even at that, you have temperatures that can change that enough to screw things up unless the ammo is loaded in anticipation of forecasted temperatures. I shoot competitive benchrest and in that game, you load ammo 10 minutes before you fire it for a reason; because the tune is constantly being chased as the day progresses. And if it makes a difference in a cartridge holding only about 30 grains of powder and being fired at only 100 to 200 yards, you can bet it's going to make a difference in a case holding 80 grains and being fired across ten football fields.

2. Your special number on the elevation turret corresponding to the windage of a velocity of 10 mph at one vector is nothing more than cuteness. Again, if you had done any benchrest shooting, you would have seen a whole range full of wind flags turning and spinning at different velocities, different directions, and different values. You would see four or five flags between you and the 100 (yes thats 100) yard target frame all doing DIFFERENT THINGS! It takes tens of thousands of shots over these nifty little contraptions in all conditions to be able to dope them correctly. And this is just in close range. Multiply the possibilities tenfold for 1000 yard shooting and basically, that quaint little number you print on the turret means nothing. Only having "shoot on the fly" charts or programs and lots of range time are going to make the difference in a hit or miss.

3. Yardage turrets and drop reticles are easy but not optimal. Why? Several reasons. Elevation changes, temp changes, angle changes, ballistic coefficient changes, barrel conditions, scope power restrictions, expense, and cluttered views of the target to name just a few. Yes, angle changes are not as huge as some make out like you said, but everything is comprehensive when it comes to making errors. And why spend money to have a Huskemaw on ONE rifle and carry a bunch of elevation change turrets in your pocket to boot when you can learn MOA and dial your scope in that and use that knowledge on every other scope in your arsenal? It makes no sense to me. I don't condone all the things the military does, but if your system was really better than dialing correction in MOA and/or using miliradians, wouldn't the military have your scope design on all it's sniper rifles?

To all those that think yardage turrets are so much easier than MOA or IPHY turrets:

You are splitting hairs. If it is faster it's only by two seconds at most. For example, you range your deer at 700 yards and turn your knob to 7. I range my deer at 700, punch it into my PDA, and dial to 9. We are both dialing to a number, it's just that the number represents something different. That's all. And it took me an extra 2 seconds to input the distance into the PDA. Big deal. At least I know that all my other parameters are more accurate because they have been entered in "as I went" and therefore have real time accuracy. You simply can't get that with a pre-engraved turret set for one bc, one elevation, one velocity, one wind, and one angle. It just ain't going to be as accurate and I don't care how much money you spend (or make) trying to convince novices otherwise. Those that really study this stuff, and really, really live and breath it learn why.

To those who like reticle with drop and/or windage compensation:

All reticles are not created equally from one scope to the next. I'm not talking about one brand or model to the next. I'm talking one scope to the next. Even the scopes which have laser engraved reticles are not exact and they are few and far between. With most metallic based reticles, there can be huge differences in thicknesses and dot diameters. Couple this with the fact that most of them are built around a generic "ballistic" category and also require the scope to be on a certain power and you are getting nothing but a "ballpark" and a BIG one at that. If I'm taking a shot on a big game animal, I want to use the highest magnification I can get away with for the conditions. I don't want to have to back a 20x scope down to 10x just so I can use a bloody reticle. That's ridiculous!

The bottom line is you have to take what you bought, determine it's performance, and since there are slight flaws in every bit of your equipment, you have to be able to tweak this or that to get desired results over the course of the life of the rifle. You simply CANNOT do that with a system that affords you no latitude.
Find it
Range it
Click it
Pull it
Dump it

If it's not far, it's boring.

Last edited by goodgrouper; 12-22-2009 at 01:39 AM.
Reply With Quote
Old 12-22-2009, 02:40 AM
Silver Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: British Columbia
Posts: 109

Well said goodgrouper, i agree totally.
Reply With Quote
Old 12-22-2009, 08:47 AM
Silver Member
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Star, ID
Posts: 292

The Original Best of the West was what got me into trying to extend my reach. I for one was very dissappointed in the shows changes, though I still watch the new show. For me the biggest differences are:

Old show taught you how to hunt, how to think about making long range shots, and how a system could be set up for someone who isn't necessarily a competition shooter. The old show was fairly cautious about taking long shots if you had NOT practiced and become tuned into the rifle you where shooting. John Burns, many times cautioned people about knowing your gun. Again, I like to shoot, but primarily because I like to hunt "wild" game on "public" land and some time here in central Idaho, getting closer may not be reasonably possible so having a show that talks about how to shoot farther with confidence is great, but also how to glass and stalk game in the high country and use horses has a lot of value to me. Plus, I like John and the other hosts a bunch.

The new show is a very well produced infomercial for their products. Granted they mostly hunt my type of game: Mule Deer, Elk, Sheep, Moose in Western enviornments, but the focus of the show is on shooting, not HUNTING and all too often on private ranch's and not public ground. I must say that I truely enjoy John Porter, though he seems to be the only constant from the original show. There are many things I like about the systems, but I don't like that they seem to be bending their ideals for the market. A good example of this is their marketing of the HSM ammo. Most people understand that to make a Berger VLD bullet shoot to it's potential, you have to find the correct seating, but with factory ammo the seating is clearly not customized to your rifle so is that anywhere near ideal? Could you expect to duplicate the shows results with just 1.0 moa accuracy, instead of .50, which I would expect the ave MOA is with these Berger loads? Maybe I'm wrong but you get the point. I like the improvements for the more average guy as I don't prefer to take computers in the field so keep the new rangefinder coming. But DO NOT promote shooting over 500 yards for someone who doesn't understand the effects of variables like wind, tem, etc. and especially not for someone who hasn't put a hundred rounds down long range.
Reply With Quote
Old 12-22-2009, 09:32 AM
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 6,005


Good morning! Glad to see you on the site. Your comments on topics are always welcomed by me and many others. You tend to have very strong opinions about things in general so I won't try to change your mind about this topic. So the following reply is NOT MEANT TO BE A DEBATE TOPIC FOR YOU AND ME. Rather, it is for others without your level of skill or without your interest in doing it only your way...for those looking for a different way.

So...for the others. I have used a drop compensating turret cap with both a Nightforce (Kenton Industries cap) and a Huskemaw scope and I love it. There are so many ways to cause a miss on a big game animal and somehow calculating the drops wrong on your scope is only one way and I am not sure it is even the most common way to miss. I may want to start a poll on the different ways to miss and their relative frequency. I think it would be very enlightening.

So I welcome the compensating caps for me for their simplicity and quickness. I am convinced that for many of us, they reduce misses in the conditions that we hunt big game by reducing the complexity of the whole process.

Here is Ernie Bishop's take on the adjusting process...taken from his review of the Huskemaw scope. And keep in mind that his method of adjusting the turret is not the only way to adjust, either.

A legitimate concern for customized turret caps is what do you do when you get a turret cap for one set of conditions and then hunt under different ones. As an example, the original Huskemaw RFBC is customized for a 200 yard zero, 1,000 feet elevation and 75 degrees, 50% humidity. It will take 16.25 MOA for "Joe Hunter" to connect at 800 yards. Joe has been practicing at home and has become very proficient. He is preparing to travel to the Big Horns in Wyoming for an elk hunt in the fall. He will be hunting in an area where a local who used to be his neighbor has told him some big bulls hang out. Don't you wish you had friends like this? He has determined the conditions where the elk hang out are 9,000 feet above sea level, 27 degrees, and 20% humidity. He knows bullet flight is going to change, but how much?

Joe has several options. He can order another RFBC turret for the conditions he will hunt in. Joe could also order a 1/3 MOA turret cap from Best of the West that is a typical MOA turret cap, listed in MOA from 0-20 MOA. On a side note, if you are constantly switching loads or you continually move your Huskemaw scope from gun to gun, the traditional turret listed in MOA is something you will want for sure. A third option is for Joe to use his existing Huskemaw RFBC if he so chooses. In the new conditions at 800 yards, it only takes 15 MOA. Joe's maximum range under ideal conditions is 800 yards. The difference in vertical drop is 1.25 MOA or approximately 10 inches. Joe can determine the amount of adjustment that is needed at, say, 3/4 of his max expected range, which we will say is 600 yards. The difference at 600 yards between the two different conditions is .62 MOA. Joe can re-zero at 600 yards; this is simple to do even in the field. Just use a coin or cartridge case to turn and remove the flat silver screw on the top of the turret cap. Then move the turret cap 2 clicks (2/3 MOA or .66 MOA) and replace the cap. Total time spent…15 seconds. Joe's scope/gun/load combo now will be in the kill zone of his elk out to his maximum distance in good conditions. Of course, Joe will confirm his zeros once he gets to his neighbor's house in the Big Horns.

The rest will be determined by Joe's skill as a long range hunter, luck of the day, and his mental and physical conditioning. What would I do? For one thing, having one RFBC does not hamstring "Joe Hunter" as some would suppose. For the amount of money spent for an out of state elk hunt, I would order a new Huskemaw RFBC turret or use my 1/3 MOA turret. You get one custom RFBC turret free from Huskemaw with the purchase of the scope, and a spare one costs $99.99. I would go with the Huskemaw RFBC set-up for the conditions, so I would have one less thing to think about when the moment of truth comes. That is just the way I am wired. Maybe this scope is not as limited as some would have us think.
And they are far easier to adjust for different conditions than is thought by those who have not tried them or simply don't like the method because "their method is best for them". With gg's way you must adjust sometimes and with the drop compensating turret you have to adjust sometimes, no big deal. It is very easy to do in the ranges that 93% of our members limit themselves to.

I did it in 3 different western states this fall. If the air density corrections are very great, use a different compensating cap or use gg's method with a normal MOA cap for the same scope. Again, no big deal. For superstars like gg who can kill game at 1200 yards (I can't)...don't use the drop compensating turret caps.

And for the 7% of our members who kill big game over 1000, don't use a drop compensating turret.

Or wait until spring to buy a Huskemaw range finder that will calculate the air density adjusted yardage.

Long Range Rifles, LLC - Ready To Ship

Components and assembly by LRH Sponsors

Last edited by Len Backus; 12-22-2009 at 09:37 AM.
Reply With Quote
Old 12-22-2009, 10:38 AM
Platinum Member
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,082

I have no dog in this fight since I have only shot deer to 340 yards here in the East.

I have enjoyed both shows and wish the current show spent more time on the shot setup and after the shot, and less watching them walk around...but that is me

Since where I hunt will never really be true long range, I don't need to use mildots or direct reading knobs.

If I were to go out West for long range I would absolutely feel more confident with the Huskemaw style turrets!

IMO, I envision I would use a PDA as GG does and convert the yardage! To me I would like to dial a yardage vs an elevation because I think that it would be harder for me to screw up

As in GG's 700 yard example if my rangefinder said 700 yards and my PDA told me 675 or 750 it would seem hard to screw that up......

BUT if it told me 9 MOA my mind could easily misread or interpret that! Could I read 9 but think 6 MOA??
I don't think that I am going to read 700 on my rangefinder and dial 400 yards into my turret because the 700 really means something.

I am sure that if I have the years of shooting using MOA that it would be second nature, but for most folks that I know that shoot only hundreds of shots per year it just is not second nature.


Reply With Quote
Old 12-22-2009, 12:49 PM
Platinum Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: SW Montana
Posts: 4,622

I was kinda curious about the ammo they are shooting so I bought a box of 270 WSM which is loaded with 130 Bergers. I ran 9 shots over the crony this weekend and the ES was low the speed was way lower than I would have wanted but the accuracy was there. Punched it into my PPC and came up for 750yrds and shot a nice group. I need to set down and shoot a serious group but just dinking around they showed promise. They were running MOA and I was not shooting for group more for the velocity data.
I measured the COAL and it was longer than I normally run the 140 Bergers at but all were within .002 of each other and in new Win brass. I was kinda surprised, they were not that bad.
There system seems to work other wise it would have died fast, I do however prefer to punch everything in and get an exact come up.
Reply With Quote


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Similar Threads for: BEST of THE WEST?? REALLY THE BEST?
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Best of the West! edge Long Range Hunting & Shooting 16 02-22-2013 07:47 PM
The Best of the West bhalver Long Range Hunting & Shooting 2 12-12-2009 05:31 AM
Best of the West EDDIE POPE Long Range Hunting & Shooting 2 11-09-2009 12:07 PM
New guy in wet, I mean west WA roundss Member Introductions 2 02-13-2008 11:09 PM
Best of the West dnj21 General Discussion 1 08-02-2005 01:31 PM

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:19 AM.

Powered by vBulletin ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Management Powered by vBadvanced CMPS
All content ©2010-2014 Long Range Hunting, LLC