Is Tangent Theta worth the $ over NF?

orkan

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2010
Messages
377
Location
Huron, SD
I love seeing kywindage flag himself as massively inexperienced the way he does.

His last paragraph is solid gold. It outs him as just another inexperienced SFP shooter that hasn't a clue what FFP is about. Once upon a time, I'd be worried about some poor new guy listening to what he's posted. These days, literally everyone knows better. All it does is reveal to everyone that he just doesn't have enough experience. Yet in typical forum fashion, that won't stop him from making post after post about anything that passes through his mind. The guy probably hasn't even touched a tangent theta. lol 🤣 You'll notice I'm not engaging him directly anymore... and that's because the only way to deal with impossibly unreasonable people is to ignore them.

Don't be conned into thinking some other scope on the market is "just as good" for half the money. ;) The world simply doesn't work like that. Lots of good scopes out there that present a great value, but only one "best."

The GenIIXR reticle in the TT 5-25 covers less than a tenth of an inch of linear space at 100yds. Guess that blows the "big giant fat thick too thick to use reticle" argument out of the water.

Here's some proof for those of you that aren't at the peak of Mount Stupid on the Dunning-Kruger graph. It's a given that iphone pictures through a scope do not even come close to the actual viewing quality.

This antelope is bed down at 625yds. Here's a look through a TT315M w/Gen2XR at 15x


Here's that same antelope through a TT525P w/Gen2XR at 25x. I would have no problem quartering her eyeball with that reticle. I have no problem quartering prairie dogs at 1200yds with it either.


As for the "ball of twine" at low magnification while scanning argument... well here's a 315M at 6x magnification.


The moral of the story is, if you can't get the shot made on paper, or in the field, with a TT... you should probably find a new sport. Maybe give competitive basket weaving a try.
 

KY_Windage

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2018
Messages
274
Location
Frozen North
I love seeing kywindage flag himself as massively inexperienced the way he does.

His last paragraph is solid gold. It outs him as just another inexperienced SFP shooter that hasn't a clue what FFP is about.
You are such a fool, calling anyone who has different preferences from yours "inexperienced."

I have plenty of experience with FFP scopes. I just prefer SFP, for the reasons already stated and because they do not draw the large, outlier portions of the reticle into the center where they cover up a lot of my picture when I am trying to scan for an ear in the foliage, as your FFP do. I like my reticle to always look like this, regardless of what power I am on. And I am not alone -- a whole lot of people prefer SFP over FFP. Doesn't mean anyone is ignorant -- it is just a personal preference thing.

If I'm so "ignorant and inexperienced," you should have no trouble setting up a target at 600 yards and outshooting the 600-yard target I posted earlier. I just used a factory 700, but you go ahead and use any custom rifle you want. Eighteen shots. Let's see how great those TT scopes are. :)

 

KY_Windage

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2018
Messages
274
Location
Frozen North
Well that's kind of mean. A 17 year old girl spending time with her father and hunting is a gift, and if she didn't hit the squirrel she hit right under him. Way to go lancetkenyon, and congratulations on raising a great girl. Good luck this fall!
That part is great, but it is silly to conclude from that one shot that 20x is all anyone needs to shoot squirrels at 741 yards. As I have said many time, you can make do with Weaver K10, too, but that does not mean it isn't way better with 25x or more.

If weight is not a concern to the OP I'd get the 7-35 ATACR, his choice of FFP or SFP, mil or moa. If he wants more low-end, then the 5-25 ATACR, same choices.

If weight is a concern, then the 4-16 ATACR, again with his choice of reticle.
 

lancetkenyon

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2013
Messages
2,871
Location
Arizona
Hey KY, my 17 year old daughter has been shooting since she was 6.

She has taken exactly 7 shots on big game. And taken 7 animals that went a total of 40 yards cumulatively.
18 yards (javelina @ 11yo)
160 yards (bull elk @ 12yo)
532 yards (mule deer buck @ 13yo)
60 yards (cow elk @ 14yo)
637 yards (mule deer buck @ 14 yo)
391 yards (pronghorn buck @ 17yo)
454 yards (mule deer buck @ 17yo)

If you want to bag on adults, that is fine. But if you bag on a 17yo girl for making a cold bore shot on a squirrel @ 741 yards, you are a piece of work.

And looking at your 600 yard target, not impressed in the least.

Done here.
Tangent Theta blows NF away.
 

Kimber7man

Well-Known Member
LRH Team Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2008
Messages
914

TheBoctor

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 11, 2018
Messages
62
Location
NOCO
Hey @JARHEAD1371 check this dude out. https://www.youtube.com/c/ikoshkinDLO/featured He's very knowledgeable and has reviews for most scopes out there. No nonsense, just the facts. He also has a bunch of videos that do a good job of quantifying the differences between these high end scopes and explaining a lot of the optics.

To the angry guy, you have a valid point in that mechanically, a perfectly tracking scope is a perfectly tracking scope and in that regard, they cannot be X dollars better because both have perfect reticle tracking (as should everything in this price range). Beyond the erector housing and reticle tracking, everything else can still be improved upon. Glass quality, lens design/optical engineering, reticles, coatings, durability, etc are all on a sliding scale and are harder to quantify but can make drastic differences in user experience.

Having said all that, I'm confused. You've decided the ATACR's are what you want to cram down everyones throats, but the SHV's and NXS's have the same perfect reticle tracking and share a lot of the same features (maybe not FFP but you've already aggressively stated you don't opt for that). So the only real improvement you get out of paying up for the ATACR is the improved picture and optical performance. How can you claim people are idiots for paying more of a premium than you for a scope with even higher optical quality than you're getting? They're doing the same thing you did, just to the next step...

Before you go on another tirade just know, I've always been a NF guy. I own 2 ATACR's, 2 NXS's, and an SHV. I use them because I trust their tracking and they're a known quantity, and I'm local to Mile High and they've always had a ready supply of demo NF's. Would I buy another ATACR if i was in the market for a scope in that class? Nope. There's better options.
 

Braunschweiger

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2018
Messages
355
Location
Missouri
Braunschweiger, always interested in learning. How are you measuring clarity and resolution to differentiate the NF/TT difference? Numbers, please. I might change my direction.
I use Resolution test cards/targets which I sit at a fixed distance, to see which optic resolves better. Again, my eyes may not be as good as yours or anyone else. Its very subjective at that point but I feel the Kahles, Zeiss, and TT take the cake there based upon what I see. Obviously parallax comes into play and some optics just have a finer parallax adjustment. Depth of field is also an important factor especially when hunting.
 

Trending threads

Top