New Falcon Menace 5.5-25x56 FFP

Metric all the way. MOA is very out dated imo. All my scopes are metric except one CQB low power that isn't available in metric. Its a point and shoot thing anyway.

AF
 
After reading this thread I wish I had got a menace in MRAD instead of MOA....
Allen Gun Works said:
MOA/MOA will be incorporated into one of the lines, not sure which one yet, but it won't happen until the Fall probably.

I received another update on the 5.5-25 today:

- definitely a one piece tube
- It will be offered in a 56mm and 50mm objective
- They will likely be available in May instead of April (they are incorporating some suggestions from dealers into the production run, so it might take an extra month)
- Pricing is still going to be around $500, likely a bit on the plus side.

We are very impressed with the progress so far on this. Falcon has sent test scopes out and has received a lot of feedback, which they are incorporating into the production model. We are still waiting for our test scope to arrive, but I am sure from reading some of the feedback that we won't have much to add. I will post some pics as soon as it gets here. Hopefully it will be nice enough out to take it out for a shoot and see how it performs.

Right now it looks like the first batch will be all MRAD turrets.
Click to expand...
Great product, Great prices, AND they are listening to their customers? I f'ing love this company!
 
A possible issue for heavy recoiling rifles with these scopes could be the eye relief. At high magnification the scope can get pretty close (Very evident with the 4.5-18x ). At least close compared to what I'm used to with the far more expensive scopes. Just something to consider.

They do the job and are a decent scope. Tracking with the Falcon scopes I have (4-14x and 4.5-18x) has been very good. But I haven't run them through box tests etc. Other reviews have shown they track well.
 
Last edited:
Epoxy7 said:
A possible issue for heavy recoiling rifles with these scopes could be the eye relief. At high magnification the scope can get pretty close (Very evident with the 4.5-18x ). At least close compared to what I'm used to with the far more expensive scopes. Just something to consider.
Click to expand...

Falcon's website lists the eye relief for the 4.5-18x as 106-72mm. That's roughly 4" @ 4.5x & 3" @ 18x. I still don't know what the specs will be for the new 5.5-25x.

But 3 inches is more than enough eye relief if your scope is mounted properly and you're shooting position is stable, unless you're shooting .400s & bigger on rails (in which case your head is never near the scope when pulling the trigger). Granted, some of the higher end scopes have 3.5", even 4.5" @ high magnification, but I'd rather save the $1000 for 1/2" of extra eye relief.
 
HyeProfile said:
Falcon's website lists the eye relief for the 4.5-18x as 106-72mm. That's roughly 4" @ 4.5x & 3" @ 18x. I still don't know what the specs will be for the new 5.5-25x.

But 3 inches is more than enough eye relief if your scope is mounted properly and you're shooting position is stable, unless you're shooting .400s & bigger on rails (in which case your head is never near the scope when pulling the trigger). Granted, some of the higher end scopes have 3.5", even 4.5" @ high magnification, but I'd rather save the $1000 for 1/2" of extra eye relief.
Click to expand...

When I run it through a converter I get 2.83" to 4.17" for the eye relief range. So an inch of difference between the minimum and maximum range.

If you're target shooting you're most likely going to be at the max magnification. So 2.83" of eye relief. I wouldn't want to shoot anything bigger than a .308 with that. Even then I'd want a heavy barrel and probably a longer barrel just to be safe. This would be the very least amount of eye relief I would find comfortable for my 5R milspec in .308. I've never had scope bite, but I have seen the results on other people. I maybe overly cautious here. I just don't want to even worry about it. I've seen a number of the Falcon scopes used on .308 rifles and I haven't heard of any problems. So it may not be a factor. But it is something to think about and look into. If you're using a muzzle brake it's a different story. I'm not.

They are very good scopes for the money. I own a number of them ;). But like everything there are some compromises. Overall the feature set and quality of these scopes is fantastic for the price.
 
Last edited:
Epoxy7 said:
This would be the very least amount of eye relief I would find comfortable for my 5R milspec in .308.
Click to expand...

Well my friend, I shoot my stock Stevens 200 in .308 with a 6-24x42mm AO mildot Tasco with a mere 2" of eye relief :cool: Let's just say that I wear safety glasses, and the Falcon will be an upgrade in terms of eye relief ;-)

The Tasco will go back on top of my .1MOA@50yrds ToZ 22LR, where it belongs :sniper:
 
HyeProfile said:
Well my friend, I shoot my stock Stevens 200 in .308 with a 6-24x42mm AO mildot Tasco with a mere 2" of eye relief :cool: Let's just say that I wear safety glasses, and the Falcon will be an upgrade in terms of eye relief ;-)

The Tasco will go back on top of my .1MOA@50yrds ToZ 22LR, where it belongs :sniper:
Click to expand...

I learned on a Winchester Model 70 .308 with a fixed 4x Weaver. Not much eye relief on those either. Seemed at least one guy out of 30 would get scope bite.

Fun times :D. Yes I would have preferred a Falcon 4-14x on that rifle :D
 
BTW, I received the scope a couple of weeks ago. WOW. Looks really mean and feels like quality... Optics look very clear... It's been mounted for a couple of weeks now, I can't wait to shoot it but I just didn't get the chance yet... Pictures to follow...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom