Go Back   Alberta Outdoorsmen Forum > Main Category > Guns & Ammo Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #61  
Old 12-23-2019, 05:01 PM
Bushleague Bushleague is offline
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 3,556
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 58thecat View Post
like the magnification levels from stalking up close to reaching out a bit,,,,very nice and the light gathering front end....good choice.
x2, and good luck with the sick kid. My whole family got sick this weekend, kids are pretty much over it but the wife and me are still struggling.
__________________
If the good lord didnt want me to ride a four wheeler with no shirt on, then how come my nipples grow back after every wipeout?
Reply With Quote
  #62  
Old 12-23-2019, 05:52 PM
Nyksta Nyksta is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Calgary
Posts: 1,543
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fishnguy View Post
Thanks, Cat. This is the plan:

The Leica website lists only 50mm and 56mm as options for the L-Ballistic reticle. If you can get it in the 1.5-10x42 that would be an outstanding scope!
Reply With Quote
  #63  
Old 12-23-2019, 09:25 PM
fishnguy fishnguy is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 3,659
Default

^ Yes, the scope is in hands, I received it a few days ago, and that is the photo I took of the actual box. Not sure why they wouldn’t list it on the website. Maybe the newer Magnus i (illuminated ones) don’t come with this reticle in the 42 mm? Mine is not illuminated.
Reply With Quote
  #64  
Old 12-24-2019, 12:02 AM
fishnguy fishnguy is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 3,659
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bushleague View Post
x2, and good luck with the sick kid. My whole family got sick this weekend, kids are pretty much over it but the wife and me are still struggling.
Missed this before. Thanks, man. Thankfully, it isn’t contagious. But, yes, a rough night and a run to the emergency. She is much better now, almost like new, lol.

You guys get better!
Reply With Quote
  #65  
Old 12-24-2019, 12:16 AM
fishnguy fishnguy is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 3,659
Default

Couldn’t wait for the evening to come to put things together. The ring alignment is near damn perfect as is:





That got me even more excited, lol. Then I put the scope in and... either I am dumb, or there is a “Huston, we have a problem” type of thing going on:





I haven’t actually thought about this kind of thing before. It appears, I am going to need to buy a rail. Any suggestions? Pointing out that I am dumb and there is another solution would also work.

Thanks.
Reply With Quote
  #66  
Old 12-24-2019, 07:40 AM
Redneck 7 Redneck 7 is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: The best place on earth.
Posts: 1,654
Default

A rail could work or get a cantilever ring, and keep your current 2 piece rail
__________________
Life’s a garden, Dig it! - Joe Dirt
Reply With Quote
  #67  
Old 12-24-2019, 07:41 AM
58thecat's Avatar
58thecat 58thecat is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: At the end of the Thirsty Beaver Trail, Pinsky lake, Alberta.
Posts: 24,502
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fishnguy View Post
Couldn’t wait for the evening to come to put things together. The ring alignment is near damn perfect as is:





That got me even more excited, lol. Then I put the scope in and... either I am dumb, or there is a “Huston, we have a problem” type of thing going on:





I haven’t actually thought about this kind of thing before. It appears, I am going to need to buy a rail. Any suggestions? Pointing out that I am dumb and there is another solution would also work.

Thanks.

Just tap it into place with a hammer.....send it to me and I will repair it for ya...dial it in too.....dam that sucks.
__________________

Be careful when you follow the masses, sometimes the "M" is silent...
Reply With Quote
  #68  
Old 12-24-2019, 08:05 AM
Nyksta Nyksta is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Calgary
Posts: 1,543
Default

If you are pretty close, skinnier rings might fit it in...
Reply With Quote
  #69  
Old 12-24-2019, 11:38 AM
qwert qwert is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 2,443
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fishnguy View Post
snip
The ring alignment is near damn perfect as is:

snip for bandwidth

IMHO,
Pointed rods may be intuitive for checking alignment, but are actually not nearly as accurate as plain square cut ends, where the alignment can be accurately felt and easily measured.
Pointed bars can indicate correct alignment when the rings are not aligned with the bore, or when there is misalignment in multiple planes.
I suspect your 'alignment bars' can be reversed to provide square cut ends, which will provide MUCH more accurate indications of direction and magnitude of any misalignment, by actually measuring the sides with a depth gauge or the end gap with a feeler gauge.

I also suggest you use an accurate straight-edge to check the alignment of the sides and tops of the bases.
It appears that the base mounts are flat and depend on the screws for alignment. (IMHO, NOT good design.)

Quote:
Originally Posted by fishnguy View Post
snip
“Huston, we have a problem” type of thing going on:
snip
I suggest you use a proper micrometer to check the scope tube front OD and compare with the rear OD and your alignment bars which do fit into the rings.
I would also try the rings to see if the rear ring will fit the front tube, (and the front ring fit the rear tube).

I would also turn the rings so that the smooth side is next to the port on the bolt side, and the clamping nut is on the off-port side. (This will provide better access to the port for loading or clearing.)

Quote:
Originally Posted by fishnguy View Post
I haven’t actually thought about this kind of thing before. It appears, I am going to need to buy a rail. Any suggestions? Pointing out that I am dumb and there is another solution would also work.
You are NOT dumb, but may be inexperienced.
My opinion on two piece mounts is previously posted.
IMHO, scope specifications, mounting system selection and P-rail availability should be carefully evaluated before any purchase, (avoid 6 o'clock ejectors).
I suspect you may have difficulty finding a suitable P-rail.

Leica does not provide turret vertical travel range specification, (which often indicates it is small,) and this scope may not have enough to permit the use of a sloped P-rail or bases.

I VERY much like (and own) Leica binos and range finders, but not their scope turrets.
Sako rifles are much loved by others, but IMHO some of their ejectors and proprietary scope mounting systems are best avoided.

Good Luck, YMMV.
Reply With Quote
  #70  
Old 12-25-2019, 12:22 AM
fishnguy fishnguy is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 3,659
Default

^ I greatly appreciate your input, qwert! Just like I appreciated your help with my BLR (which is still unfinished, by the way, I need to get some rings).

It does make sense what you are saying about the pointed ends. Though I would think the probability of misalignment would be pretty low if the ends lined up? Regardless, for the heck of it, I turned the rods around and they showed the same thing more or less.

The tube diameter is the same, front and back (I measured for fun and my Canadian Tire micrometer shows all values between 29.97 and 30.03). The issue is the tube is about an 8th of an inch too short. And I can’t believe I haven’t even thought of that. I read all kind of things about this scope and somehow completely missed out on this part. Now that I think about it, one of the reviewers even mentioned that some shooters may have trouble mounting it due to how short the tube is. Alas... In reality, it’s not an 8th of an inch short; I have to move the scope one slot back on the rail (maybe even a little more) for the eye relief. Here is a better pic, perhaps:



Lesson learned, I guess. I think I am going to purchase a 0 MOA rail and see how that goes.

Redneck 7, I am not sure a cantilever type mount will do the trick. Plus, I already have good set of rings, so I think the rail would be probably a better (and cheaper) way to go.

Nyksta, if I didn’t have to move it one slot back, a skinnier set of rings would probably work.

Cat, being only about an 8th of an inch, I tried tapping it in. I even bought a new mallet on sale I needed anyway, but it would not cooperate. May try a club hammer tomorrow (I also bought one when I went looking for a mallet).

You can see how short the tube is in comparison to a Leupold VX3i even:



I can say at this point, I am not nearly as excited as I was before, lol. Hopefully, it will work out. Wish more knowledgeable people chimed in, but they are probably having more fun (which is fair) arguing about long range or running shots on game, whichever is the flavour this holiday season

Merry Christmas to all and thank you.
Reply With Quote
  #71  
Old 12-25-2019, 12:35 AM
fishnguy fishnguy is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 3,659
Default

Also, forgot that I was going to post, a few people asked me where I bought this rifle at this price and where I saw Tikka for $950 (or whatever it was) delivered.

When I bought this rifle, it was the last one in stock, but it appears they have one more in stock now. Those interested can find it here: https://store.theshootingcentre.com/...4-4-barrel-tan (this is the rifle pictured above).

The $950 all in Tikkas were here (not sure if they have general free shipping or it was a promotion), but it seems the price was bumped since then: https://alflahertys.com/tikka-t3x-li...ious-calibers/

Hope this helps, though I think I replied to all or most who pm’ed.
Reply With Quote
  #72  
Old 12-25-2019, 08:04 AM
K.J K.J is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 216
Default

Sako rifle looks great. Can anyone on here offer their review of a Remington Sendero? Ive been checking them out a bit and like the look of them. From what ive seen on You Tube they look like a pretty decent rifle. Might be a bit on the heavy side though. Still thinking one in 300 win mag might be my next big purchase.
Reply With Quote
  #73  
Old 12-25-2019, 11:08 AM
NCC NCC is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Leslieville
Posts: 2,483
Default

I’ve shot a few Senderos. They’re accurate, long, heavy, and good value if you’re looking for a stand or bench rifle. You’ll like the extra weight and barrel length if shooting a magnum.

I have a Greybull stock for sale if you buy a Sendero and want an aftermarket stock.
__________________
We talk so much about leaving a better planet to our kids, that we forget to leave better kids to our planet.

Gerry Burnie
Reply With Quote
  #74  
Old 12-25-2019, 12:35 PM
liketoshoot liketoshoot is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 151
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 338Bluff View Post
7mm Rem Mag in whatever brand floats your boat. I'd buy the Sako Grey if I wasn't so cheap.
I have a Sako Grey Wolf in a 30-06, beautiful rifle
Reply With Quote
  #75  
Old 12-25-2019, 01:59 PM
ctd ctd is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 2,378
Default

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sour...vw_2pWd_wbQKLU

I think the based need to be flush like in the video.
Reply With Quote
  #76  
Old 12-25-2019, 02:39 PM
Dean2's Avatar
Dean2 Dean2 is online now
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Near Edmonton
Posts: 14,972
Default

Leica and Zeiss have short body spans compared to most NA scopes. This can make them a challenge to mount on LA guns. You are using Weaver bases with cross slots so you have no options with respect to ring positioning. Most Sakos are not designed for a rail, and a full length rail is likely to give you ejection issues, however the A7 is different and will work fine with a rail. You have the choice to use a one piece rail, I would get a Picatinny rather than a Weaver, to accommodate the short body scope or you can go to the Sako Optilock rings with the extended bases. Unless I was getting an MOA rail, I strongly prefer the Sako base and rings.

https://www.berettausa.com/en-us/bas...ock/s1a067761/
Reply With Quote
  #77  
Old 12-25-2019, 02:55 PM
Percher Percher is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 205
Default

Remington .270 was my rifle for 50 years. Jack O'Connor got it right!
Reply With Quote
  #78  
Old 12-25-2019, 02:59 PM
32-40win 32-40win is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Near Drumheller
Posts: 6,733
Default

Just setting up a TAC A1 in 6.5cm, Delta Stryker HD 4.5-30x56 w/DLR1 reticle, put it on Burris Signature XTR rings @ 30MOA seeing as the TAC has a zero rail.
Still room for the scope covers, just enough.

__________________
You should also be a member;
CCFR
CSSA
Reply With Quote
  #79  
Old 12-25-2019, 04:07 PM
270person 270person is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 6,496
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Percher View Post
Remington .270 was my rifle for 50 years. Jack O'Connor got it right!


I think Jack may have been a Win Model 70 guy. I remember him not being pleased when Winchester cheapened them up in 64 and went away from crf.

I went 270 because of him when I bought my first new rifle in the 70's. It remains a studly man's 30-06. No Fudd hat or suspenders required.
__________________
You matter. Unless you multiply yourself by the speed of light squared... ...then you energy.
Reply With Quote
  #80  
Old 12-25-2019, 04:13 PM
270person 270person is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 6,496
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fishnguy View Post
Also, forgot that I was going to post, a few people asked me where I bought this rifle at this price and where I saw Tikka for $950 (or whatever it was) delivered.

When I bought this rifle, it was the last one in stock, but it appears they have one more in stock now. Those interested can find it here: https://store.theshootingcentre.com/...4-4-barrel-tan (this is the rifle pictured above).

The $950 all in Tikkas were here (not sure if they have general free shipping or it was a promotion), but it seems the price was bumped since then: https://alflahertys.com/tikka-t3x-li...ious-calibers/

Hope this helps, though I think I replied to all or most who pm’ed.

Tikka T3x blued, synthetics are $849 day in and out where I've bought mine. 979 in SS.
__________________
You matter. Unless you multiply yourself by the speed of light squared... ...then you energy.
Reply With Quote
  #81  
Old 12-26-2019, 10:59 AM
qwert qwert is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 2,443
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fishnguy View Post
^ I greatly appreciate your input, qwert! Just like I appreciated your help with my BLR (which is still unfinished, by the way, I need to get some rings).

It does make sense what you are saying about the pointed ends. Though I would think the probability of misalignment would be pretty low if the ends lined up? Regardless, for the heck of it, I turned the rods around and they showed the same thing more or less.
The real difference is that square ends can be accurately measured, and quantified data logged, and are cheap and easy to build, points are subjective at best, more expensive and harder to build..

Quote:
Originally Posted by fishnguy View Post
^
The tube diameter is the same, front and back (I measured for fun and my Canadian Tire micrometer shows all values between 29.97 and 30.03). The issue is the tube is about an 8th of an inch too short. And I can’t believe I haven’t even thought of that. I read all kind of things about this scope and somehow completely missed out on this part. Now that I think about it, one of the reviewers even mentioned that some shooters may have trouble mounting it due to how short the tube is. Alas... In reality, it’s not an 8th of an inch short; I have to move the scope one slot back on the rail (maybe even a little more) for the eye relief. Here is a better pic, perhaps:



Lesson learned, I guess. I think I am going to purchase a 0 MOA rail and see how that goes.
Short tube scopes can be problematic; good you resisted temptation to just ‘tap’ or screw it into place.

Please confirm your rifle does NOT have a 6 o’clock ejector?

Please check your owner’s manual to see if Leica has provided total range of elevation turret adjustment. (& for other scopes listed in your manual).
Curious minds need to know.

I suspect your scope, on a 0 moa rail will be spectacular for short&mid range hunting using PBR. Leica clarity and contrast works well for my old eyes.
Once the scope is ringed to Pic std, it will be easy to switch it to your BLR with 0 moa P-rail when desired, or you can borrow a target scope to use for load development.

I suspect you have gotten lucky, EGW lists 0 (&20) moa slope P-rails
https://www.egwguns.com/scope-mounts...a-ambidextrous

The EGW std 6061 center groove P-rails are ~ .5” receiver top to P-rail top.
I prefer the 7075, P-rails (unless I want a center groove for iron sight use.)
The EGW P-rail url above seems to be an improved HD 7075 model
The EGW HD 7075 P-rails are ~ .375” receiver top to P-rail top.

The extra mounting height of the P-rail may change the best ring height.
There may be scope bell to P-rail interference with your short scope, (but it is easily fixed with a Dremel as reqd on the rail)

Properly installing and bedding the P-rail is your next task to research and consider.

Quote:
Originally Posted by fishnguy View Post
Snip
I can say at this point, I am not nearly as excited as I was before, lol. Hopefully, it will work out. Wish more knowledgeable people chimed in, but they are probably having more fun (which is fair) arguing about long range or running shots on game, whichever is the flavour this holiday season

Merry Christmas to all and thank you.
Lots of incompatibilities and unobtainium parts when assembling a rifle, which is why I suggest a functioning assembly is worth more than the sum of its parts.

Don’t be too hard on yourself for inexperience, (hopefully) we all learn from mistakes.

’Good judgement and wisdom come from experience,
however, experience often comes from bad judgement.’
or
’Wisdom is the product of bad judgement survived.’

Good Luck, YMMV.
Reply With Quote
  #82  
Old 12-28-2019, 06:57 PM
tikkahunter73's Avatar
tikkahunter73 tikkahunter73 is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 36
Default

I have a T3 270wsm, amazing accurate, I’ve had it for 8yrs now and it’s never failed me on a hunt, Elk, moose and deer. If you like the .270 you will love it in wsm! Buy the expensive shells! 140gr nosler trophy grade


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
  #83  
Old 12-29-2019, 02:00 AM
eschafer eschafer is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 47
Default

I just went thru same issue remounting a vintage Schmidt & Bender 1.5-6x42 (30mm tube) on my Browning A-Bolt 7mm-08..... Initially I had used Weaver 2 piece bases but I could not get scope far enough back (from front ring) for comfortable eye relief when on 6x power... I hated handling the rifle.... Then, bought an EGW Pic rail for A-Bolt and now scope is 1" further back and a delight to handle... EGW worked well with rings placement...

Last edited by eschafer; 12-29-2019 at 02:08 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #84  
Old 12-29-2019, 06:55 AM
ram crazy ram crazy is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 3,843
Default

I went with Talley rings and haven’t had any problems with mounting scopes. I mount Leupold ultralight 2x7 scopes on all my Kimbers. I have long and short actions. These scopes are short as well.
Reply With Quote
  #85  
Old 12-30-2019, 11:50 PM
fishnguy fishnguy is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 3,659
Default

^ If I didn’t have to pull the scope a bit backward to set an appropriate eye relief, Talleys would work because they are narrower than the rings I chose.

Thanks Dean, eschafer and everyone else for your replies. They are greatly appreciated.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 270person View Post
Tikka T3x blued, synthetics are $849 day in and out where I've bought mine. 979 in SS.
The stainless T3’s were $945 taxes and shipping in at the time I made the original post.

Quote:
Originally Posted by qwert View Post
Please confirm your rifle does NOT have a 6 o’clock ejector?
Tried with a few (maybe dozen?) cartridges and all ejected nicely “to the side”, not straight up, if that’s what you are implying. It appears that it will be just fine with a rail, but we will see.

Quote:
Originally Posted by qwert View Post
Please check your owner’s manual to see if Leica has provided total range of elevation turret adjustment. (& for other scopes listed in your manual).
Curious minds need to know.
According to the manual, there is 150 cm of vertical adjustment and 140 cm of windage. According to one of the reviews I read prior to purchasing, the guy came to about 185 cm in actual elevation adjustment and had no problems shooting to 850 meters (if I recall correctly), which is way beyond what I am looking for. Edit: thinking about it now, it may have been a review for a 1.8-12x50, which has the same adjustment specs according to the manual.

Quote:
Originally Posted by qwert View Post
I suspect your scope, on a 0 moa rail will be spectacular for short&mid range hunting using PBR. Leica clarity and contrast works well for my old eyes.
Once the scope is ringed to Pic std, it will be easy to switch it to your BLR with 0 moa P-rail when desired, or you can borrow a target scope to use for load development.

I suspect you have gotten lucky, EGW lists 0 (&20) moa slope P-rails
https://www.egwguns.com/scope-mounts...a-ambidextrous

The EGW std 6061 center groove P-rails are ~ .5” receiver top to P-rail top.
I prefer the 7075, P-rails (unless I want a center groove for iron sight use.)
The EGW P-rail url above seems to be an improved HD 7075 model
The EGW HD 7075 P-rails are ~ .375” receiver top to P-rail top.

The extra mounting height of the P-rail may change the best ring height.
There may be scope bell to P-rail interference with your short scope, (but it is easily fixed with a Dremel as reqd on the rail)

Properly installing and bedding the P-rail is your next task to research and consider.
I ordered a Talley 0 moa rail. Couldn’t find anything else for a reasonable price in Canada. I wanted to go with a steel Contessa rail, but either they weren’t able to ship to Canada or wanted an unreasonable amount of money for it.

Thanks again, qwert.

Last edited by fishnguy; 12-31-2019 at 12:19 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #86  
Old 01-05-2020, 10:15 AM
qwert qwert is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 2,443
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by qwert View Post
The real difference is that square ends can be accurately measured, and quantified data logged, and are cheap and easy to build, points are subjective at best, more expensive and harder to build.
http://forum.accurateshooter.com/thr...nment.3992657/
http://www.kokopelliproducts.com/scopeb.html
https://www.accurateshooter.com/gear...lignment-tool/

Accurately built, hardened and ground tooling is best, but the ends of a good piece of (cut-off scrap) cold rolled shafting can be easily squared on a lathe.
I suspect square end bars made with a properly adjusted abrasive cut-off saw would be a LOT better than very accurate hardened and ground points.

A more sophisticated alignment bar system, and discussion,
http://forum.accurateshooter.com/thr...3967775/page-2

Lots of good scope information & discussion
http://forum.accurateshooter.com/for...borescopes.15/

Good Luck, YMMV
Reply With Quote
  #87  
Old 01-05-2020, 10:34 AM
qwert qwert is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 2,443
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fishnguy View Post
snip
Tried with a few (maybe dozen?) cartridges and all ejected nicely “to the side”, not straight up, if that’s what you are implying. It appears that it will be just fine with a rail, but we will see.
A 6 o’clock ejector location on bolt face can be problematic with P-rails, large tube scopes and windage turrets.

Quote:
Originally Posted by fishnguy View Post
According to the manual, there is 150 cm of vertical adjustment and 140 cm of windage. According to one of the reviews I read prior to purchasing, the guy came to about 185 cm in actual elevation adjustment and had no problems shooting to 850 meters (if I recall correctly), which is way beyond what I am looking for. Edit: thinking about it now, it may have been a review for a 1.8-12x50, which has the same adjustment specs according to the manual.
AFAIK, 150cm of ‘impact point correction’ is measured @ 100meters
=15 mils x3.438 = 51.57 moa

~18 mils = ~62 moa, YMMV

I suggest a 0 moa rail will be best.
51.5 moa range of adjustment = ~25up & 25 down (assuming good alignment of optical center with bore).
A 20 moa P-rail may provide ~45up, but only 6 down and could limit windage range of adjustment.
I suspect a 10moa slope would be more practical than 20moa.
A 0moa rail could be milled (or bedded), if slope is required.

I indulged my curiosity with a search
https://www.all4shooters.com/en/hunt...0i-riflescope/
https://us.leica-camera.com/Sport-Op...Magnus-i/Range

https://www.rifleshootermag.com/edit...a-magnus/83634
reports a vertical range of 285 cm =28.5 mils seems incorrect

Good Luck, YMMV.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:31 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.