Eddybos Oryx rifle pretty much ready to ship....

[eddybo]

Actually I think the worst offenders were outfitters. They should know better those logos on the sides of thier trucks would make excellent targets. I met a good number of NM hunters and have known a bunch of NM hunters for a lot of years. My problems were not actually with NM natives as far as I know, and it was not intended to be a slam against them and I sincerely appolagize if it appeared that way. I love hunting NM and intend to do so for a lot of years to come. While I did have situations where other hunters cost me shots at trophy class animals my worst enemy was me.
When I found out that I had that very important matter come up in TX I should have given up on my trip. It wasnt like I could even relax and enjoy the trip. I endangered a bunch of people on the roads driving without sufficient sleep. Everything bad thing that happened leading up to the trip told me to cancel, but I had made a commitment to a friend to show up and hunt. It was stupid on my part to drive 15 hours to hunt for a day and a few hours just to turn around and drive 15 hours back to work. I do a lot of stupid stuff, but I try to learn from my experiances.
I had concluded a week before the trip that the trip was cursed. I should have listened to that little voice. Heck I got stopped by police 3 times within the first 30 minutes of leaving mcallen TX heading for NM. If that doesnt tell you that its going to be a bad trip nothing does.

Welcome to NM!! Did the ugly hunters have white tags front and back or were they yellow. I've had people drive across country as I crawled while muzzle load hunting antelope. Needless to say that was my last muzzle load hunt after 3 days of crawling to have a **** truck jump up from no where and come hauling *** to my intended buck. We need a more serious effort of enforcement in NM. And it shames me that you were treated that way. NM is screwed up but most of the pig hunters are not NM natives!!

 

[Fiftydriver]

Glad to hear you got to use one of your AMs. Other hunters can always cause some problems but its to bad that on a hunt like this it was so obtrusive to your hunt.

You explain an instance that is exactly why I endorse using ballistic reticles for hold over. No chance to get your zero lost in the field and no chance of forgetting to bring your scope to zero from a previous set up.

I am not saying its better, I am saying for big game hunting where shots and set up times can be fast and furrious, its a better system from me. Its possible to engage targets from 0 to 1000 yards as fast as you can get an accurate range and shoot and in the end, the scope adjustments are never touched.

It may not be "AS" precise as dialing up for each shot but its more then enough to put a bullet through the vitals of a big game animal out to 1000 yards.

Last fall I tried to do the dial up method for pronghorn hunting, wanted to get a kill over 1000 yards. For half the season I tried to get set up on dozens of opportunities but on every one, the pronghorns would move while trying to set up for the shot and at these ranges, 1100-1600 yards, the set up had to be recalculated each time they moved. It was truely frustrating. After giving it a two weeks, I took the rifle out, zeroed it at 800 yards and then developed the hold over for the NP-R1 reticle. That next morning, killed a goat at 1300 yards.

To each their own but using a properly set up ballistic reticle for hold over is faster and eliminates the possiblility of getting your zero lost in the field or forgetting to come back to zero.

 

[eddybo]

I have heard this before, but always thought that dialing was the way to go. You can bet that I will be doing a bit of practice without dialing. There were numerous ties I was wishing that I had was more familiar with them on my hunt.
The guys who were hunting with me were amazed with the 338AM. It got a good work out and got stretched out beyond a mile several times. Thanks again for getting the gun to me before my hunt. Hopefully it will get more use come November.

Glad to hear you got to use one of your AMs. Other hunters can always cause some problems but its to bad that on a hunt like this it was so obtrusive to your hunt.

You explain an instance that is exactly why I endorse using ballistic reticles for hold over. No chance to get your zero lost in the field and no chance of forgetting to bring your scope to zero from a previous set up.

I am not saying its better, I am saying for big game hunting where shots and set up times can be fast and furrious, its a better system from me. Its possible to engage targets from 0 to 1000 yards as fast as you can get an accurate range and shoot and in the end, the scope adjustments are never touched.

It may not be "AS" precise as dialing up for each shot but its more then enough to put a bullet through the vitals of a big game animal out to 1000 yards.

Last fall I tried to do the dial up method for pronghorn hunting, wanted to get a kill over 1000 yards. For half the season I tried to get set up on dozens of opportunities but on every one, the pronghorns would move while trying to set up for the shot and at these ranges, 1100-1600 yards, the set up had to be recalculated each time they moved. It was truely frustrating. After giving it a two weeks, I took the rifle out, zeroed it at 800 yards and then developed the hold over for the NP-R1 reticle. That next morning, killed a goat at 1300 yards.

To each their own but using a properly set up ballistic reticle for hold over is faster and eliminates the possiblility of getting your zero lost in the field or forgetting to come back to zero.

 

[Marine sniper]

No doubt ballistic reticle is a great way to go, we were messing with it in the early 90's in the Marine Corps for our 50 cal. sniper rifles. The cam turrnet deal on the Unertl scopes worked well also.

The ballistic reticle can be used for windage also.

 

[Fiftydriver]

I am certainly not saying its the end all for sure. Each application has a better way to shoot long range. For targets that move often and regularly, using a ballistic reticle has huge advantages.

This is good for pronghorn or any other game that moves alot. If you have a two man team, one ranges while the other is in the scope. If you have you know your drops, which is pretty easy to memorize, you never have to take your eye off the scope.

If your hunting elk in steap canyon country, dialing up could work and does work just as well as a ballistic reticle. Elk, when undisturbed do not generally move alot and on the steep side hills, generally, even if they do move, the distance changed from your shooting position is very little with a high performance rifle. Obviously all distances changes need to be considered before the shot but what I am saying is that an elk can walk up a steep hill for 30 yards and be less then 10 yards farther away from you. Not the case on the flat land.

Simply put, both ways have advantages and disadvantages, the disadvantages for dialing up were realized in this instance.

I am currently working with Leupold to get them to make me a scope with a reticle I designed several years ago. I have been waiting for the right scope platform. Now that they offer the new FFP in their 3.5-10, 6.5-20 and 8.5-25 Mk4 LR/T scopes, I feel this is the best available option for my new reticle which I personally believe is the best design for long range hunting using a ballistic reticle for hold over. Not only does it offer help holding for windage but it also greatly reduces the chance of loosing track of those long rows of reference lines.

Since I want to use the Front Focal Plane, any power setting of the scope will work for ballistic hold over with the reticle.

Just in the beginning talking stages now but hopefully it will happen soon. If it does, LRH will get the first report.

 

[slymule]

If you're considering a ballistic type reticle as any kind of reticle that has either dots or stadia lines denoting holdover points, then I too have been a fan of the ballistic type reticle for the last 6 years or so. I find its a much quicker, simplier solution than twisting turrets. I started out twisting turrets and for the reasons mentioned I decided to go with having dots put on my scopes by Premier Reticle at 100 yd. increments. I sighted in at 300yds, didn't need a dot at 400, then put dots at the 500, 600, 700, 800, 900, and 1000yd positions. Last year I shot my biggest bull at 879yds. Premier Reticle will no longer put dots in Leupold scopes but T.K. Lee will. After getting my loads worked out for my new 338Edge, I will have dots put on the Sightron SIII 6-24x50mm scope I chose to hang on this gun. Only difference will be I'll be running dots out to 1200yds with a stadia wire at 1000yds instead of a dot, just to keep things fast and simple. Not saying I won't use my target turrets for longer shots or if I decide to change the elevation I'm hunting at, I still have that option, if needed, and if I have the time. Sometimes when hunting you just don't have enough time to fiddle with twisting turrets.