45x Leupold too much power for F-Class
- Thread starter tiny68
- Start date
Tim, I've never shot F-Class or anything else beyond 300 yards. I have a Leupold 45X on my BR rifle and it is super. I have a Sightron 10-50x60 on my 6 PPC and is also super. I'm guessing I would go with the Sightron for F-Class just because of the option to turn down the power if conditions ever required it. As a note, I see lots of Sightrons on here for sale and I translate into thinking lots of guys don't like them, but I have two and no complaints in their function or quality.
I would get a variable.
I've seen cases where 36X was too much. (Evidently you haven't, so where you shoot it's obviously OK
)
IMO if you're going fixed then 24X is more appropriate than 45. But if you've been successful with the 36X then???? I guess you have to step out and try it!
al
I've seen cases where 36X was too much. (Evidently you haven't, so where you shoot it's obviously OK
)IMO if you're going fixed then 24X is more appropriate than 45. But if you've been successful with the 36X then???? I guess you have to step out and try it!
al
Well, I've shot a lot of 1K BR, but not F-class. I've used a 24, a 36, and a (Nightforce) variable. I think Al has it just right. If you can afford the weight and dollars, it is hard to beat a variable. If you're going fixed power, hard to beat a 24X.
The interesting scope if you're a bit budget-minded is the Sightron 10-50x60mm. There have been a few negative comments (at least, early on), and a number of raves, too. Always hard to know how well something holds point-of-impact, the thing that matters most. Of course at close the $1,000, it is a lot more than a good 24, either a Weaver, or older Leupold.
I've never worried over much about clarity -- we shoot in good light, after all, But the Sightron is quite clear.
The interesting scope if you're a bit budget-minded is the Sightron 10-50x60mm. There have been a few negative comments (at least, early on), and a number of raves, too. Always hard to know how well something holds point-of-impact, the thing that matters most. Of course at close the $1,000, it is a lot more than a good 24, either a Weaver, or older Leupold.
I've never worried over much about clarity -- we shoot in good light, after all, But the Sightron is quite clear.
John Kielly
Shari's fan club
Tim,
The Leupold Comp scopes haven't got all that much adjustment. If your rail isn't just right for your rifle, you could find yourself running out of elevation, or worse, losing accurate wind adjustment if you max out the elevation.
John
The Leupold Comp scopes haven't got all that much adjustment. If your rail isn't just right for your rifle, you could find yourself running out of elevation, or worse, losing accurate wind adjustment if you max out the elevation.
John
John - I found the Leupold only has 36 MOA of elevation versus the 70 MOA in my T36. I realize that offset will be required. I will use Burris Signature Zee rings with off-set inserts to dial my scope in for the yardage. I use the same rig for point-blank with a 30BR and LR shooting with a 6BR or 6-improved. Not the best but it what I have got. I have seen days when the mirage was very bad even with a 36X in the Oklahoma summers.
Thanks for the discussion. I realize the 45x is not idea, but I think I will roll the dice. I really want to try the Leupold Competition series and have a chance.
Happy shooting, Tim
LarryBartholome
Member
German/Tiny68,
To each his own...I shoot 12-42x NF's and the only time I turn the scope down is when I am initially set up the rifle on my firing point. I hold off and don't use the knobs.
To my way of thinking the mirage is there even if you can't see it when you turn the scope down. The aiming point may appear clearer but the image is still bouncing even if you can't see it. The mirage between the firing line and the target doesn't go away when you turn the power ring down.
I like a big image to aim at and I disregard the fuzzy image. Even if I can't see the rings I have a largeer image to guess-a-mate where I should be holding for the next shot in relation to the shot disk.
To each his own...I shoot 12-42x NF's and the only time I turn the scope down is when I am initially set up the rifle on my firing point. I hold off and don't use the knobs.
To my way of thinking the mirage is there even if you can't see it when you turn the scope down. The aiming point may appear clearer but the image is still bouncing even if you can't see it. The mirage between the firing line and the target doesn't go away when you turn the power ring down.
I like a big image to aim at and I disregard the fuzzy image. Even if I can't see the rings I have a largeer image to guess-a-mate where I should be holding for the next shot in relation to the shot disk.
In my situation, we have a local 300 yard f-class match, and the targets we use have black centers. I shoot 6ppc's for this event, and there is no way i can see those bullet holes with a 24X scope. I have tried. We do have orange backer boards that help if the sun is just right, but usually its a bust. Now if you shoot were fellas are working pits, and you have someone marking your shots, that would be a hole other situation. Seems like sometimes there really is no definite answer. Every situation is a bit different, and if your going on opinion alone, Larry B and German S would be the one to listen to here. There is a couple truck loads of wood on those boys walls, won from shooting rifles. Good luck and let us know how it goes! Lee
Larry,
Can you explain what you mean? As I understand it, the mirage distorts the image of the target (either causing it to bounce or disappear) resulting in problems determining proper point of aim. In my experience, when you turn the power down the mirage DOES go away. What am I missing?
Thanks,
Ryan
Last edited:
LarryBartholome
Member
Ryan,
I am not a scientist so I won't try to get technical. I agree that mirage distorts the target. Since that distortion comes from the air density/temperature differences between the firing line and the target I believe it does not go away when you turn the power ring down.
When you turn the power down you are not able to see as much mirage, but it is still there. How can an affect go away if it is caused by a physical phenomenon? It remains, but is not as noticeable.
If you see the target bull moving when looking through a high power scope will that apparent movement go away if you look through a lower power one? What you see may decrease in movement or disappear but it will still be there. It is just not as noticeable to you. Keep in mind I may be totally wrong regarding this. I am not an optics expert.
I would rather see all I can and make my aiming guess based on that info than decrease the info available to me. Will that work for everyone? Is it the best choice? I don't know. But it is how I have been doing it for more years than I want to think about and has served me pretty well.
There are a few undesirable side effects of using more power and the biggest is a reduction in the field of view. At 42X I can't see adjacent targets and therefore on occasion lose intelligence I might otherwise gain from other shooters targets. You make your choice, play the percentages and live with it.
I am not a scientist so I won't try to get technical. I agree that mirage distorts the target. Since that distortion comes from the air density/temperature differences between the firing line and the target I believe it does not go away when you turn the power ring down.
When you turn the power down you are not able to see as much mirage, but it is still there. How can an affect go away if it is caused by a physical phenomenon? It remains, but is not as noticeable.
If you see the target bull moving when looking through a high power scope will that apparent movement go away if you look through a lower power one? What you see may decrease in movement or disappear but it will still be there. It is just not as noticeable to you. Keep in mind I may be totally wrong regarding this. I am not an optics expert.
I would rather see all I can and make my aiming guess based on that info than decrease the info available to me. Will that work for everyone? Is it the best choice? I don't know. But it is how I have been doing it for more years than I want to think about and has served me pretty well.
There are a few undesirable side effects of using more power and the biggest is a reduction in the field of view. At 42X I can't see adjacent targets and therefore on occasion lose intelligence I might otherwise gain from other shooters targets. You make your choice, play the percentages and live with it.
seblambang
seb
Larry sir,
I'm with you about the mirage & scope magnification.
Ryan,
Please remember the difference between ACTUAL image and "APPARENT" image (distorted) caused by mirage when we look through the scope.
Mirage is a nature thing, while scope magnification is mechanical thing. When the mirage is there, it's there...even if you "can't see" it when using smaller/turning down the magnification. Mirage makes your target "apparently" bouncing or in worse "disappear" (either through a scope or by naked eyes) - while the target is in fact: still. That's the APPARENT image. The actual image (i.e. the target) is still.
Any scopes known to human nowadays can't/won't change nature thing for instance in this case, the mirage. Of course you're right, decreasing scope power (on adjustable power scopes) can make a "steadier" apparent image, which you then feel the mirage "does go away", and/or for what you say for easier aiming point. Thus that's just a preference thing...just like some people prefer small/smaller power scope for offhand shooting (thinking it would be "more steady" that way), while some others prefer to use large/larger power (thinking for more finer aim). What work for you may not work for the other, and vice versa.
What you do when turning down the power is actually only to minimize the apparent movements on the target caused by mirage, not to make the mirage between the firing line and the target goes away. We are still far away from that, if that's what you mean.
seb.
I'm with you about the mirage & scope magnification.
Ryan,
Please remember the difference between ACTUAL image and "APPARENT" image (distorted) caused by mirage when we look through the scope.
Mirage is a nature thing, while scope magnification is mechanical thing. When the mirage is there, it's there...even if you "can't see" it when using smaller/turning down the magnification. Mirage makes your target "apparently" bouncing or in worse "disappear" (either through a scope or by naked eyes) - while the target is in fact: still. That's the APPARENT image. The actual image (i.e. the target) is still.
Any scopes known to human nowadays can't/won't change nature thing for instance in this case, the mirage. Of course you're right, decreasing scope power (on adjustable power scopes) can make a "steadier" apparent image, which you then feel the mirage "does go away", and/or for what you say for easier aiming point. Thus that's just a preference thing...just like some people prefer small/smaller power scope for offhand shooting (thinking it would be "more steady" that way), while some others prefer to use large/larger power (thinking for more finer aim). What work for you may not work for the other, and vice versa.
What you do when turning down the power is actually only to minimize the apparent movements on the target caused by mirage, not to make the mirage between the firing line and the target goes away. We are still far away from that, if that's what you mean.
seb.
LarryBartholome
Member
Seb,
Well said!
Well said!
I don't know if I believe it's this simple.
Some military shooters train with a fixed 10X that is adjustable for parallax. They "range" the various mirage effects between themselves and the target. here's a comment on this effect from Gail McMillan, "There is a small trick that I have used that I will share with you. Your rifle scope is focused at the target and has a very shallow depth of field. That means that you are only seeing the mirage for a few feet at the target. The mirage can be running the opposite direction up range and you will never know it. If you stop down the objective lens by covering it and leaving a small hole in the center you will increase the depth of field and be able to see mirage over a larger area of the range. You can do this by using tape and leaving a hole in the center about the size of a dime.
Copyright © Gail McMillan. Used with permission of McMillan Fiberglass Stocks. "
From personal experience I've seen situations where the mothball is "showing air" (my mental phrase) or bouncing around so much it's coming clear off the crosshairs and by dialing down I can make the bounce lessen, it makes the image smaller but the bounce lessens more.
I've asked the question of a lot of shooters and the answers vary with many people believing "the mirage is displacing the target no matter what" and many others saying "give up some clarity if you have to but dial out the mirage. The stuff in the middle won't hurt you." I currently believe that the displacement is 'there' but that you can dial out bounce somewhat by choosing focus and power.
That said, me arguing with Larry B is like a bug arguing with God.
al
Some military shooters train with a fixed 10X that is adjustable for parallax. They "range" the various mirage effects between themselves and the target. here's a comment on this effect from Gail McMillan, "There is a small trick that I have used that I will share with you. Your rifle scope is focused at the target and has a very shallow depth of field. That means that you are only seeing the mirage for a few feet at the target. The mirage can be running the opposite direction up range and you will never know it. If you stop down the objective lens by covering it and leaving a small hole in the center you will increase the depth of field and be able to see mirage over a larger area of the range. You can do this by using tape and leaving a hole in the center about the size of a dime.
Copyright © Gail McMillan. Used with permission of McMillan Fiberglass Stocks. "
From personal experience I've seen situations where the mothball is "showing air" (my mental phrase) or bouncing around so much it's coming clear off the crosshairs and by dialing down I can make the bounce lessen, it makes the image smaller but the bounce lessens more.
I've asked the question of a lot of shooters and the answers vary with many people believing "the mirage is displacing the target no matter what" and many others saying "give up some clarity if you have to but dial out the mirage. The stuff in the middle won't hurt you." I currently believe that the displacement is 'there' but that you can dial out bounce somewhat by choosing focus and power.
That said, me arguing with Larry B is like a bug arguing with God.
al
C
ChipEckardt
Guest
For me, I use as high a power as I can stand. There have been days where I had to turn power down because all the mirage gave me a headache, but I prefer as high a power as I can get while still having a bright image. Depending upon which scope I use I am almost always at 42x or at about 60x. That said I live in Wisconsin and rarely shoot over bare ground. I suspect mirage is much stronger out west.
Chip
Chip
LarryBartholome
Member
Al,
You can argue with me at any time. I never said I had the answer, just that it seems to work for me. I think there is some truth to what Gail wrote. March I understand sends an f-stop lens cap ( has a hole in the center) with some of their scopes to do just what he wrote. I made one for my NF last year, but haven't got around to trying it.
Chip,
Most of my shooting is done out west. We have 'dry' mirage. In Lodi, WI I was trying to read the liquid mirage...sometimes called rain. Completely different technique is required.
You can argue with me at any time. I never said I had the answer, just that it seems to work for me. I think there is some truth to what Gail wrote. March I understand sends an f-stop lens cap ( has a hole in the center) with some of their scopes to do just what he wrote. I made one for my NF last year, but haven't got around to trying it.
Chip,
Most of my shooting is done out west. We have 'dry' mirage. In Lodi, WI I was trying to read the liquid mirage...sometimes called rain. Completely different technique is required.
T
twentytwoguy
Guest
I have shot all those mentioned and don't think you will shoot a higher score by dumping your trusty and time-tested T-36 for a glamour brand. I would give it a season and then decide after having some experience shooting in your local conditions. When viewed side-by-side you couldn't hardly guess which one your looking through and all hold many records at all distances. If you hit a lottery ticket a Nightforce is cool and all but not a big step up optically .... especially for the extra $1000.
The 45 Leupy is really a nice scope and weighs alot less than a NF if you need to make weight for F-class bipod rules and I really like mine even in the heat and heavy mirage. Making your mirage and aimpoint "smaller" by dialing back seems to me to be like tricking yourself but many shooters I know prefer low power in mirage and do well with it so it's a chocolate and vanilla thing.
The T-36 is a great scope... don't second guess it!!!
The 45 Leupy is really a nice scope and weighs alot less than a NF if you need to make weight for F-class bipod rules and I really like mine even in the heat and heavy mirage. Making your mirage and aimpoint "smaller" by dialing back seems to me to be like tricking yourself but many shooters I know prefer low power in mirage and do well with it so it's a chocolate and vanilla thing.
The T-36 is a great scope... don't second guess it!!!
G
glbreil
Guest
The Leupold is still manufactured in the good ole USA and that adds some value for me. I have not shot F class but have shot both 600 and 1000 yard benchrest and have never wanted less power yet. Gary
seblambang
seb
In my perspective, smart (long range) shooters would use the biggest scope power possible at the time because mirage helps to determine wind direction & speed! (although in fact you can't see the entire mirage down the range but a small portion only, no matter how you focus or "tricking" the depth of field). Especially with long range competitions which there are not many windflags used / provided in the range between the firing line and the targets (only saw long range matches from the net/youtube...i'm not a long range shooter, yet. however I understood about mirage, how it happens, how to read it and hold off). Even in point blank BR, watching mirage (instead/along with the windflags and windprobes) help me for hold off... So I've been wondering myself why some shooters prefer to crank down their scope, or use just 24 X or so power...?
Also why seem scope manufacturers are doing "contest racing" to make bigger mag scopes?.... I think that's not about "big-bigger-biggest" thing only. Imo, if big mag scopes don't work or don't help, scope makers wouldn't make it.
Your thoughts?
(newbie) seb.
Also why seem scope manufacturers are doing "contest racing" to make bigger mag scopes?.... I think that's not about "big-bigger-biggest" thing only. Imo, if big mag scopes don't work or don't help, scope makers wouldn't make it.
Your thoughts?
(newbie) seb.
Last edited: