COBrad
Well-Known Member
It looks like it could be a good system to me. Are the scopes themselves any good?
Any one have any experience with Horus Vision scopes?
- Thread starter COBrad
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
The Condor scopes, I beleive this is what they are calling them, are ok for hunting type of shooting. We at U.S.Optics are making the military versions of these, and are the toughest scopes we have ever built.
You should see more of these in the months to come, we are filling his orders for the military at the moment and when completed will be building ones for his stock.
John III
You should see more of these in the months to come, we are filling his orders for the military at the moment and when completed will be building ones for his stock.
John III
Jeff In TX
Well-Known Member
I found the reticle very busy and really unnecessary.
As for the ballistic program, it is the worst written program on the market in my opinion. They use a C1 drag model for all types of bullets. None of my ballistic books mentions a C1 drag model. I played with their program and what I found is they are using a G1 drag model for their calculations. This means they treat all bullet types as though they have the same aerodynamic flight characteristics. The calculations will calculate a flat nose bullet to fly the same as a boattail bullet.
Pure junk, don’t bother with that ballistic program.
As for the ballistic program, it is the worst written program on the market in my opinion. They use a C1 drag model for all types of bullets. None of my ballistic books mentions a C1 drag model. I played with their program and what I found is they are using a G1 drag model for their calculations. This means they treat all bullet types as though they have the same aerodynamic flight characteristics. The calculations will calculate a flat nose bullet to fly the same as a boattail bullet.
Pure junk, don’t bother with that ballistic program.
sakofan
Well-Known Member
Jeff in Texas, would you rate the optical quality of the Horus Scope line?? Is it a rugged, well built scope??
Thanks, sakofan..
Thanks, sakofan..
Jeff In TX
Well-Known Member
The Horus scope I tried was a S&B scope with their reticle inside. So, that scope had incredible optics.
Bottom line after I tried it out,this is my conclusion. The reticle is much too busy for me. Their ballistic program worked with their reticle out to about 400 yards. Once we started moving out further, their program was extremely unreliable and inaccurate. Really, it was just plain awful. The system itself is really neat and has some promise. But, the ballistic program is poorly written and the calculations for all bullet types are based on the G1 drag model. Meaning, the G1 drag model is over a 100 years old and the calculations are based on a 1 inch 1 pound round nosed projectile. There is no way to distinguish between a flat nosed bullet, flat-based spire point bullet, boat tail bullet or VLD bullets. You simple use the publish G1 drag model for that given bullet and programs uses the same calculations regardless of bullet type.
I’ve tried to contact them a few times to discuss the calculations in their program. The will not return my calls or emails.
Most everyone trying it did better using there range data a mil-dot reticle. It’s what we’ve trained on and were comfortable with. No one, and I mean no one was able to make a first shot hit on a target using their range data and reticle system beyond 700 yards and we were shooting at ¾ sized body targets. But all of us could make first shot hits with our own range data and our mil-dot scopes.
Someone once said, “A great rifle with a crappy scope is will only be as strong as it’s weakest link”. The Horus system may be a great scope and reticle system, but without a major overhaul of the ballistic program, it’s just plain JUNK and a waist of hard earned money!
Siskle says, "Two Thumbs Down"
[ 01-16-2004: Message edited by: Jeff In TX ]
Bottom line after I tried it out,this is my conclusion. The reticle is much too busy for me. Their ballistic program worked with their reticle out to about 400 yards. Once we started moving out further, their program was extremely unreliable and inaccurate. Really, it was just plain awful. The system itself is really neat and has some promise. But, the ballistic program is poorly written and the calculations for all bullet types are based on the G1 drag model. Meaning, the G1 drag model is over a 100 years old and the calculations are based on a 1 inch 1 pound round nosed projectile. There is no way to distinguish between a flat nosed bullet, flat-based spire point bullet, boat tail bullet or VLD bullets. You simple use the publish G1 drag model for that given bullet and programs uses the same calculations regardless of bullet type.
I’ve tried to contact them a few times to discuss the calculations in their program. The will not return my calls or emails.
Most everyone trying it did better using there range data a mil-dot reticle. It’s what we’ve trained on and were comfortable with. No one, and I mean no one was able to make a first shot hit on a target using their range data and reticle system beyond 700 yards and we were shooting at ¾ sized body targets. But all of us could make first shot hits with our own range data and our mil-dot scopes.
Someone once said, “A great rifle with a crappy scope is will only be as strong as it’s weakest link”. The Horus system may be a great scope and reticle system, but without a major overhaul of the ballistic program, it’s just plain JUNK and a waist of hard earned money!
Siskle says, "Two Thumbs Down"
[ 01-16-2004: Message edited by: Jeff In TX ]
