Among others, Melvin Forbes tells me that he warns people who want brakes when ordering one of his New Ultra Light Arms rifles in a harder-kicking cartridge.Īs far as POI shifts in variables go, they were common when second focal-plane variables became popular in the 1960's. Muzzle brakes on light centerfire rifles can have the same effect as the 2-way recoil on air rifles. It's not that the air rifle is so much worse - it's that the scope is actually getting exposed to repeated recoil forces and most aren't up to the job. The same guy that won't put a box of ammo through his deer rifle in a year will happily shoot thousands of rounds through his spriner air rifle. Springer / Gas Rams are hard on scopes mainly because they actually get shot a lot. That's nonsense started by Robert Beeman to sell his rebadged "Beeman" brand air rifle scopes. These Bushnell scopes lasted well, but they weren't "special air rifle scopes". The aforementioned Bushnells were popular because they would (generally) hold zero, turretts would repeat consistently and they were capable of a 10yd parallex focus. Some of the most popular scopes in use at that time were various Bushnells - Scope Chiefs, Legends, 3200's & 4200's, etc. Based on those experiences I disagree with this. I shot for fun and I shot competitive field target w/ both springers and PCP's for years. It's been 10+ years since I had a serious addiction to airguns. Air rifle scopes are constructed differently. I've seen air rifles chew up big game scopes too. Hell, in my case it actually dented the main tube! Since that episode, I've seen several instances of that happening. Thinking the recoil cycle on the rifle goes in two, not one, directions, which places a certain amount of stress on the scope that it was not designed for.
It gobbled up a pretty nice scope soon afterwards. I suspect this might be related.Īlong these lines.why will pellet rifles eat a scope for lunch sometime? Our 9 year old son won a $$$$ RWS Diana pellet rifle one time and I mounted a scope on it, against the recommendations of some folks whose opinion I should have heeded. I also have had scopes which needed a bit of a tap (or a shot or two) after adjusting, in order to make them move. I don't think any of them had had a particular battering, but all had had several years of use, including riding around in vehicles as well as shooting. A couple of others were a little less obvious, until I noticed that zero would shift enough to notice, sometimes between shots.
One was quite dramatic - it was pretty clear that something had come adrift inside, because changing the magnification caused it to drop right out of focus. More parts, especially moving parts, usually means more to go wrong.įWIW I've had a couple of scopes which worked well for a while, then became unreliable. I think that the fact that there has to be some clearance in order to allow the zoom mechanism to move, as well as perhaps wear over time, might make the variable more vulnerable to problems too. I've seen some test results in German magazines which show variation in POI as variables are zoomed, and in some cases it was certainly enough to be noticeable (well over 0.75 moa). My thought is that it could take relatively little recoil to cause problems if the excitation frequencies matched the natural frequencies.
Or in my case the ability of the ocular/jam-nut to remain tight. I wonder if certain scopes and scope mounting configurations (scope weight distribution, ring spacing, ring/mount stiffness, etc.) and natural frequencies of the "system", can affect the zero retention of a scope. Obviously this 7-08 had much lower "recoil" than the 375 or 300 chambered rifles.
#Schmidt bender ultra short reset zero cracked#
Not only that, but the Talleys eventually cracked at the bases (along with a set of Leupo DD which eventually was fixed with Warne rings and bases). Then that same scope went on a Kimber 7-08 with Talley mounts and the ocular loosening reappeared. Never an issue with either, in terms of zero retention or ocular loosening. That scope later went on two 300 Win Magnums, each with decent recoil. I envisioned the ends of the scope whipping. I figure that if the ocular/jam-nut were coming loose, then the rest of the scope was getting "stressed" too, even though I didn't have a problem with zero retention. Instead, we agreed that a tiny drop of blue Loc-tite should fix the problem, and it did. He said that they could machine the mating surfaces for better contact. I didn't think too much of it due to the relatively high recoil, but mentioned it to a contact at Leupo. And yes, I had cranked that ocular and jam-nut so tight that a strap wrench would slip. I had a 6x Leupo where the jam-nut for the ocular would come loose on a 375 Ruger. I'm wondering if there is more to it than just recoil.
0 kommentar(er)
