What's up with sightron

kombayotch said:
That is only due to exposure. We are about 15-20 years behind the US when it comes to field oriented practical shooting. More and more guys in the US are hunting with setups that look like PRS match rifles. Once they go to a match, they realise that PRS looks a lot more like hunting than gallery range shooting does and much of the stuff carries over directly to hunting (ranging, setting up improvised postions quickly, shooting from tripods, moving targets, randoms speeds and distances, etc...). Hunting scopes are starting to look more like tactical ones (Bushnell LRSH comes to mind). This trend will only continue and it will find its way up here as we catch up.

All Sightron needs to do is get a few top PRS guys onboad to give them direction. Bushell's offerings were garbage before they got George Gardner onboard. No one was too wild about about Kahles before they got Shannon Kay giving them input. Vortex was a cheapo brand before taking input from people like the Team Blaster guys and designing the Razor II based on that. Nightforce didn't listen till thier old NXS was getting dropped from Military contracts. They tried to do the BEAST on their own and it flopped, but then they got input from shooters for the ATACR and it is a big success. Now, they're even using those shooters and their venue to anounce the new versions. The list goes on...

Sightron could create a great tactical scope, but they need to LISTEN to the people who excel at that type of shooting instead of those that do not and don't understand how the equipement is actually used.
Click to expand...

I have given them my two cents.. hopefully, Sightron IS asking the questions and looking for input. I am happy to refer informed shooters to the guys at the top so they can share their experiences.

They do not let dealer know what they are working on...always happy for our input but not always part of the final plan.

There is no doubt the PRS sport and support gear is growing leaps and bounds. It would be hard NOT to see the growth and opportunity.

We shall see.....

What's up with the 12 unit turret on the ATACR? I understand that if you are only going 1 or a little over 1 rev, the units mix up will not matter but those markings are going to get real confusing otherwise.

Jerry
 
I use SIII for F-Class and it worked great.
I use Vortex AMG for PRS and it worked great.

Buy Sightron if you are in budget and use it few times a year.
Buy high end scope for precision, X-mas tree for hold over and withstand abuse.
 
I just spent the day shooting my .204 Ruger with the S-TAC 2.5-17.5x56 out to 500 yards in 30km winds and had a blast with it. My shooting partner was having a tough time making 200 yard hits with his BDC reticle in those winds and didn't stretch out further with his rifle. When we got back I pulled my 3-16x42 out for him to look at and now he's thinking of making the switch.
 
Sightron is nice glass, but it has always been a Plain Jane in the rifle scope world. It has lacked in the 'flair' that Vortex / Nightforce have brought to their ranges particularly with turrets and recticles. However, nice quality and great glass with a good price. Still hard to beat overall, just a bit unexciting.

Candocad.
 
Candocad said:
Sightron is nice glass, but it has always been a Plain Jane in the rifle scope world. It has lacked in the 'flair' that Vortex / Nightforce have brought to their ranges particularly with turrets and recticles. However, nice quality and great glass with a good price. Still hard to beat overall, just a bit unexciting.

Candocad.
Click to expand...

Depends on priorities. Flair is neat and all, but Reliability trumps flair every time :) It is the dead nuts reliability that keeps me purchasing Sightron. Sure, some other reticle choices in FFP would be pretty cool.

That being said, when I load a gun to shoot an animal, or piece of paper, I know where the bullet will go 100%. It's hard to put a pricetag on reliability.
 
I like my Sightron SIII FFP mil scope (got it from Jerry). It has been good so far on my TRG 42. It doesn't have a zero stop, but until I got my Tangent Theta I never had a scope with a zero stop. For the price I paid for my Sightron I am quite happy, especially after reading of the issues some others have had with their Vortex scopes.
 
Mystic Precision said:
What's up with the 12 unit turret on the ATACR? I understand that if you are only going 1 or a little over 1 rev, the units mix up will not matter but those markings are going to get real confusing otherwise.

Jerry
Click to expand...

12 mils gets a 308 shooting 175 SMK past 1000 yards and gets most of the 6mm and 6.5mm calibers out past 1200 yards. It's pretty rare that you will need more than 12 mils...
 
kombayotch said:
12 mils gets a 308 shooting 175 SMK past 1000 yards and gets most of the 6mm and 6.5mm calibers out past 1200 yards. It's pretty rare that you will need more than 12 mils...
Click to expand...

That is true but using a 10 unit turret would make multiple revolutions SOOO much easier to keep track off. The scope is rated at 35mils of elevation travel so why not use a base 10 turret and keep things simple?

I am sure ELR shooters would be interested in this scope given how much travel it offers, but I would be very shy to use any scope where the markings vary in value each revolution... gets confusing in a big hurry.

Jerry
 
Other than on my F-Class guns, I've been undertaking the expensive process of switching out from SFP MOA/MOA to FFP MIL/MIL and have been selling off my Siii's and similar to offset the new costs. For each Siii I've listed I have had several "I will take it" PM's within minutes of listing so I thing most people appreciate the value in Sightron. I have enjoyed the ones I have owned and still have a couple that I will continue to enjoy until I can accumulate the funds for replacements.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom