thanks guys, all lower case here because i have my niece in one arm,,,,,,,well my reading has me thinking i may stick with what i know, still the 3 scopes i'm looking at are the monarch 4-16, the leupold 4-14 lr, and the falcon,, but right now leaning more towards the leupold or monarch,,,,,but will keep looking for a deal on a zeiss as well,,,thanks again,,anymore thoughts are appreciated!
I believe the best you'll get with a FFP, is just what we have always had in SFP.
All the proclaimed 'benefits' are nothing new.
If you care to range with a reticle instead of a LRF, you can do it at a set power in SFP. Same with hold over if you don't care to dial in elevation..
Sombodys reticle may suit you better, but ultimately there is none better than a standard med-fine crosshair.
So where is there any real improvement in FFP over SFP?
So where is there any real improvement in FFP over SFP?
I guess I could re-type all the examples I gave in my first response, but it would be easier for you to go back and read them.
In short, I do like to use my reticle and for my hunting style a fixed 14X or 18X scope is not appropriate. If that doesn't apply to you, then no, there probably will be no improvement for you.
It's a strange herd here.
On one hand, we want most accurate..
On the other, we resist any resultant paths to accuracy..
Laser Rangefinder
Krestel 4K
Exbal(or any other) on Palm/PPC
ACI, ScopeLevel
External elevation turret on any quality scope with appropriate power and reticle
A gun with reasonable weight, cold barrel accuracy, and bullet cartridge combo producing least wind drift
Dose anyone here deny this is the most ACCURATE approach for long range HUNTING?
It's right there
On the other, we resist any resultant paths to accuracy..
I don't like your implication I'm resistant to any of the above. I'm all for them and will use them when the conditions call for it.
But I don't need all that stuff for a 400, 500 or 600 yd shot. If you do you will simply miss out on some opportunities doing the hunting I do because the deer will have stepped into the brush or walked over the hill while you were screwing with your gear. For those who only get set up at a static location, glass for game at extreme range without ever moving, this is not much of a problem. Like I said, the advantages may be of little use to you. But that doesn't mean they aren't there for me.
I also find it quite annoying you specifically ask what the "improvements" are but when told, instead of arguing those specific points (if you disagree) you trump up some strawman argument instead claiming I'm against using the tools you list for obtaining accuracy. I never said nor implied any such thing.
The added ability to make a quicker mid-range shot without having to screw around with your gear is not mutually exclusive with making accurate long shots which require screwing with all of it.
Linear Mode
