Upvote 0
Latest activity
PCP Rifle WTB Wanted -.177 FX Maverick 600mm barrel kit (liner, etc.) with .177 pellet probe
- By Patrick1
- Member Classifieds
- 2 Replies
Upvote 0
Upvote 0
Upvote 0
Upvote 0
Upvote 0
Marginal gains and barrel/projectile choice
- By Franklink
- Field Target
- 27 Replies
It would be interesting to see how the 13.4’s compare in your two .177 barrels. Several of the long time members in our FT club (you know them all Cole) swear by the 13.4’s and tell me the higher bc’s are superior enough to warrant their use over the 10.3’s. My BRK Sniper has always shot the 10.3’s accurately and I always felt the higher FPS would be more forgiving of my ranging errors, so I have never bothered giving the 13.4’s a real try. More recently in swapping a .177 LW barrel (factory LW barrel from Crosman) into a Marauder that I built for the grandkids to shoot in FT, I found that the 13.4’s shoot with so much greater accuracy over the 10.3’s that it was not even close. Maybe I should revisit using the 13.4s with my Sniper
Might be worth giving them a try. Won't know unless you do.
This last week's project has been a doozy. Lots and lots of fiddling and tinkering and testing and comparing, etc. This wind drift experiment was a bit of a side project to the real one. While my particular slow twist poly is, as I say, "magic" with 10.34s, both in precision and resistance to wind drift, that sure doesn't mean all of them are. Two of the slow twist polygonal barrels I was messing with in the last few days were absolutely inferior to a good ole fashioned standard twist rate, 12 land and groove.
As for how my magic slow poly does AGAINST the 13.4s...well I've won plenty of matches with the 10.34s when other guys in the same class were shooting the 13.4s. Ultimately I feel like it comes down to what your particular gun/barrel shoots best. Flyers will ruin you, regardless of pellet weight or rifling profiles. If you've got multiple really good guns/barrels that don't throw flyers, then comes the experiment of which one of what you have available to you is THE BEST. For me, it's the 1:36 poly with 10.34s. For sub20 fpe, its my most accurate and precise, AND most importantly, the most resistant to wind drift.
Upvote 0
Upvote 0
Post an airgun related pic
- By Melo
- General Discussion
- 74 Replies
These are the on
es I am most fond of, and in that order.
Upvote 0
Upvote 0
Are glass optics becoming obsolete?
“I’m a die-hard dialer—gimme some turrets!”➊ One of the current drawbacks of digital scopes is the lack of rapid adjustment of elevation and windage.
Sure, it's not problema if you have one with a range finder, or if you want to use holdover. But I'm a die-hard dialer, so... — gimme some turrets!
➠ This would be a very easy fix.
➋ Another current drawback for me is the long time it takes to power up the unit. For rapid shots when stalking this is just too slow.
➠ But no doubt, this will improve drastically soon.
➌ I expect that these 2 hurdles to digital replacing glass will be overcome soon.
However, hurdle number 3 is the image quality for long range shots and for seeing small kill zones.
And that's a much bigger technological challenge, and one that might take a whoooole lot longer to overcome.
➠ I will continue to trust in glass, all the while using digital when needed.
Glass at least has no malfunctioning or discontinued apps.
Matthias
As far as distance with a digital scope, if you're shooting a pcp you will never run out of scope or as you say:
Totally get it. Dialing’s tactile, precise, and muscle-memory fast for experienced shooters. But in dynamic setups:
- Most digital platforms allow precise holdover with real-time ballistic overlays.
- Paired with a laser rangefinder, you’re already on target before any turret twist.
- As for lacking tactile feedback? Easy fix—some units now emulate turret adjustments digitally, and physical hybrid controls are coming.
Glass might win for mechanical satisfaction, but digital wins when speed and adaptation matter.➋ Slow Power-Up Time
🗣 “For rapid shots when stalking, it’s just too slow.”Fair. Earlier units were sluggish to boot. But newer optics—especially those geared for hunting—have:
- Fast-boot modes
- Sleep timers with instant wake
- Remote activation via e-caller or wrist toggles
This isn’t a hardware limit—it’s a firmware tweak. And yeah, it’s already improving with every release.➌ Image Quality at Long Range
🗣 “Glass still beats digital for spotting small kill zones.”Right now? That’s true. Edge clarity, color fidelity, and definition in digital scopes can’t yet match a $2k+ Schmidt & Bender or Nightforce lens stack.
But:
- Many IR-capable digitals aren’t built for long-range glass-level clarity—they’re designed for low-light engagement, tracking, and threat ID.
- Glass scopes struggle in total darkness, fog, or thermal contrast zones—where digital thrives.
- And digital zoom + high-res sensors are improving fast.
This is the real race: image fidelity vs. adaptive visibility. Both have their zone.
Field Takeaway
Glass offers fail-proof simplicity, pristine optics, and tactile control—no argument there. But digital gives:- Faster multi-target acquisition
- Ballistic auto-compensation
- Seamless transitions across light and distance
In a blind, with IR, thermals, and multitasking under pressure, digital wins me time. Glass wins me stillness.Why not use both? Just don’t tell me turret dialing beats real-time ballistic overlays for pure speed. Let’s keep it honest—and field-tested.
Upvote 0
Upvote 0