231 replies to this topic

[RippSpeed]

I had a conversation with an 11 time world 3gun champion at his house. And he mention it to me. When I speaking to him about the eye box issue with bushnell and he brought up the current 1-4x trijicon, I told him I didnt like it because there was no bullet drop. He said Trijicon will be bring a 1-6 or 1-8 scope next year specifically with 3gun in mind and it will have a bullet drop reticle.

But I wont mention any names

Without naming names, were there any details discussed about the bulled drop reticle? I suppose it's too much to hope for an ACOG style reticle w/ a 1-6x magnification range. Still, if you have any other rumored details (e.g. bullet drop design, estimated release date, guesstimated MSRP, etc.), we're all ears. Even if it is all speculation & rumors at this point.

-Cheers

Pretty much what he would let me know and said he will most likely be testing it...

Did it sound like something they were maybe planning for SHOT or commercial sales in 2013, or can you say?

-Cheers

I dont know ... he ended it there I think his will let me see it when he get it, in his hands...

[Middle Man]

I know barely anything about optics, but if the front objective is the same size on that as on the 1-6.5, then the exit pupil is going to be even smaller on 8.5x.

Eye relief (the distance from your eye's pupil to the eye piece of the scope) is different than exit pupil. The exit pupil is an internal measurement within the scope, while eye relief is an external measurement. The previous comments regarding the "eye box" are part and parcel to the eye relief distance (which is variable for each individual in reality). Eye position within the geometry of the AR platform is a bit different than what optics manufacturers were dealing with in more traditional, bolt gun applications. This has lead to some less than optimal eye relief considerations with new riflescope designs of late. Finding the correct geometry for AR's got a big boost when Larue brought the SPR and SPR-E mounts to market (a decade ago?).

The field of view is determined by the diameter of the main tube of the scope, as is the overall light gathering capacity of the scope (think funnels). One inch tubes will always have a smaller FOV than a given 30mm tube (34mm tube scopes will yield a wider FOV than either 30mm or 1 inch). As the magnification increases in any optic, FOV shrinks.

By and large, the objective size of any scope is more about marketing and consumer preferences, than it is about performance. Bigger is always better...right? Take a close look at scopes for the European market versus those for the US market. In general, you won't find objectives over 40mm and you'll find more 34mm main tube models.

[wgj3]

As we persist with the issue of "eye box" with this scope, does anyone else think that some of the issue may be related to a longer eye relief? It seems to me that when I back my eye away from the scope an extra inch or so, the eye box gets a bit better. I'm currently thinking that going to a mount with greater forward offset may greatly alleviate the issue.

Anybody need a adm recon or lt104? Both are like new, tried mounting but cant get them far enough forward since Im using a slick handguard. I would be interested in swapping for an ADM recon-x or scout-x or the lt139...

[RippSpeed]

As we persist with the issue of "eye box" with this scope, does anyone else think that some of the issue may be related to a longer eye relief? It seems to me that when I back my eye away from the scope an extra inch or so, the eye box gets a bit better. I'm currently thinking that going to a mount with greater forward offset may greatly alleviate the issue.

Anybody need a adm recon or lt104? Both are like new, tried mounting but cant get them far enough forward since Im using a slick handguard. I would be interested in swapping for an ADM recon-x or scout-x or the lt139...

I've had mine on a recon X and the regular recon... I guess I just cant get a good enough cheek weld. I am a novice when it comes to rifles. And that might be an issue because alot of the other seasoned shooters are fine with this scope...

[wgj3]

As we persist with the issue of "eye box" with this scope, does anyone else think that some of the issue may be related to a longer eye relief? It seems to me that when I back my eye away from the scope an extra inch or so, the eye box gets a bit better. I'm currently thinking that going to a mount with greater forward offset may greatly alleviate the issue.

Anybody need a adm recon or lt104? Both are like new, tried mounting but cant get them far enough forward since Im using a slick handguard. I would be interested in swapping for an ADM recon-x or scout-x or the lt139...

I've had mine on a recon X and the regular recon... I guess I just cant get a good enough cheek weld. I am a novice when it comes to rifles. And that might be an issue because alot of the other seasoned shooters are fine with this scope...

Any chance you would like to get rid of the recon-x?

[waktasz]

Has anyone put Butler Creek flip up covers on this scope? I measured the eyepiece and got 43.5mm. They make a 43.2 and a 43.9mm cover. Would one of those fit?

[wgj3]

I would think that 0.2mm would be ok. Prob better a little more snug rather than less.