Scope Recommendations for New Airgun Shooter
- Thread starter elock49
- Start date
Greetings, 2L8.
I was going to ask a question about the Frontier line, but figured I should read threads on it first. You are the only one so far that mentioned the light weight of some Frontiers. My question was going to be on the matter of this light weight. How does Hawke achieve this? Do they sacrifice something? I ask because I am very much into light quality scopes, and I have so far found nothing that matches the Frontiers. Thank you. S7
Upvote 0
That's a great question to ask!
I'm going to be standing in line right behind you for receiving an answer....
Matthias
Upvote 0
Looking at the specs of the Hawke Frontiers... — many seem to have some of the following characteristics (the 34mm scopes do not...):
▪︎ Smaller tube diameter than typical
▪︎ Less max. elevation adjustment than typical (=result of smaller tube)
▪︎ Rather limited field of view at min. magni when compared to scopes with similar magni ranges
Matthias
▪︎ Smaller tube diameter than typical
▪︎ Less max. elevation adjustment than typical (=result of smaller tube)
▪︎ Rather limited field of view at min. magni when compared to scopes with similar magni ranges
Matthias
Upvote 0
I may contact Hawke, JS. I would really like to know this answer. Take care. S7That's a great question to ask!
I'm going to be standing in line right behind you for receiving an answer....
Matthias
Upvote 0
I appreciate that very much, S7.
Hawke offerings have always kept me a bit cold as there was very often something I didn't like:
▪ capped turrets!
▪ somewhat high prices
▪ FFP scopes lack the heavy outside posts that — at low magnifications — should guide the eye toward the center where the crosshairs intersect
▪ SFP scope reticles are usually not calibrated at the highest magnification
But I should give them another chance — as I am realizing that lighter scopes ARE important for certain shooting scenarios.
Hope the Spirit will make your screen name reality, 1Th 2:13.
Matthias
Hawke offerings have always kept me a bit cold as there was very often something I didn't like:
▪ capped turrets!
▪ somewhat high prices
▪ FFP scopes lack the heavy outside posts that — at low magnifications — should guide the eye toward the center where the crosshairs intersect
▪ SFP scope reticles are usually not calibrated at the highest magnification
But I should give them another chance — as I am realizing that lighter scopes ARE important for certain shooting scenarios.
Hope the Spirit will make your screen name reality, 1Th 2:13.
Matthias
Upvote 0
Hi, Matthias.I appreciate that very much, S7.
Hawke offerings have always kept me a bit cold as there was very often something I didn't like:
▪ capped turrets!
▪ somewhat high prices
▪ FFP scopes lack the heavy outside posts that — at low magnifications — should guide the eye toward the center where the crosshairs intersect
▪ SFP scope reticles are usually not calibrated at the highest magnification
But I should give them another chance — as I am realizing that lighter scopes ARE important for certain shooting scenarios.
Hope the Spirit will make your screen name reality, 1Th 2:13.
Matthias
It is a reality, Brother!
Yes, I am not a Hawke guy, per se, although two of my three airgun scopes are Hawkes: The Advantage 3-12x44 and the Sidewinder 6.5-20x44. I have a Helix 4-16x44 on my recently acquired Crown MK II. I am still not sure how much I like the Helix. I have not used it pesting yet, but only zeroed it in. I think I was expecting more from what Dubber and others said on YouTube. But it seems nice. I still cannot tell if the glass is better on the Helix than the Sidewinder, the latter which is not mounted on anything presently. I do like light, as you do, and I like my parallax down to 10 yards.
To be resumed.
S7
Last edited:
Upvote 0
In my experience, Hawke Sidewinder or Airmax, Athlon Argos, Helos, or Midas Tac, Arken, Sightron S-Tac, are excellent scopes that won't break the bank. All are between $400-700. Your application might direct you to certain ones, especially if you plan to compete in FT or BR shooting.
Upvote 0
@elock49 Give immersive optics at least a gander. Specifically for pesting at 50 and under the FoV makes a world of difference and the 5x is plenty. Specifically the 5x24 and 5x30 versions.
I really like the Mildot Rapid for hunting, but it is NOT a bench reticle.
If you've got any questions about these scopes, holler, I know them pretty well.
I really like the Mildot Rapid for hunting, but it is NOT a bench reticle.
If you've got any questions about these scopes, holler, I know them pretty well.
Upvote 0
Hi, JS.That's a great question to ask!
I'm going to be standing in line right behind you for receiving an answer....
Matthias
Respectively, here's my question to Hawke and their answer to me:
Question: "I and another guy on Air Gun Nation are curious about how the light weight of the Frontier line is achieved. Typically, as scopes have more lenses and go up in quality, they seem to get heavier. Yes?
Is it different materials? Is anything sacrificed?
By the way, I own a Vantage and a Sidewinder."
Hawke Answer: "Unfortunately this isn't a simple answer, and of course our overall designs are proprietary. Yes, the lenses are the heaviest component in a scope, but no - adding lenses does not necessarily improve optical quality. At a minimum in fact, you will always loose a degree of light transmission with every added lens - everything is a compromise. That said, the Frontier line of scopes utilize a high grade, low-dispersion Crown glass and carefully paired lens coatings, helping us achieve efficient optical systems which perform well beyond their price."
S7
Upvote 0
Not really, except I would probably pick one of the lighter ones like the Airmax or Sightron S-Tac. Arken just came out with a 30 mm line of lightweight scopes which look good. The 34 mm scopes are great for bench shooting, but too heavy for anything else.
Upvote 0
I like the Airmax too, and almost bought one. Maybe sometime in the future. I was considering the 3-12x32 (among others). I wondered how that small objective lens would be. S7
Upvote 0
Thanks, David, for getting us the answer from Hawke.
Smaller objective lenses, generally speaking, have 3 features:
● (1) They allow less light in — so they might be a bit darker. This might make a difference to you if you're shooting in the dark woods, or in a barn with marginal lighting, or if you are filming through your scope. In bright daylight — not so much.
● (2) They require less parallax adjustments, as in: Their SPR (Sharpness and Parallax Range) is longer — meaning that your quarry will be sharply focussed and the parallax error will be compensated for at a longer range (say, instead of 15-19y it will be sharp and parallax-free at 13-25y).
This is good if you want to make quick shots. And bad if you try to use the parallax turret to determine your range. Take your pick!!
● (3) They are somewhat lighter (smaller lenses).
Matthias
Smaller objective lenses, generally speaking, have 3 features: ● (1) They allow less light in — so they might be a bit darker. This might make a difference to you if you're shooting in the dark woods, or in a barn with marginal lighting, or if you are filming through your scope. In bright daylight — not so much.
● (2) They require less parallax adjustments, as in: Their SPR (Sharpness and Parallax Range) is longer — meaning that your quarry will be sharply focussed and the parallax error will be compensated for at a longer range (say, instead of 15-19y it will be sharp and parallax-free at 13-25y).
This is good if you want to make quick shots. And bad if you try to use the parallax turret to determine your range. Take your pick!!
● (3) They are somewhat lighter (smaller lenses).
Matthias
Upvote 0
Hi, Matthias.Thanks, David, for getting us the answer from Hawke.
● (1) They allow less light in — so they might be a bit darker. This might make a difference to you if you're shooting in the dark woods, or in a barn with marginal lighting, or if you are filming through your scope. In bright daylight — not so much.
● (2) They require less parallax adjustments, as in: Their SPR (Sharpness and Parallax Range) is longer — meaning that your quarry will be sharply focussed and the parallax error will be compensated for at a longer range (say, instead of 15-19y it will be sharp and parallax-free at 13-25y).
This is good if you want to make quick shots. And bad if you try to use the parallax turret to determine your range. Take your pick!!
● (3) They are somewhat lighter (smaller lenses).
Matthias
I am happy to contribute something to the folks on AGN. You’re welcome.
Thanks for the helpful information on small objectives.
David
Upvote 0
David, great question indeed. Many comments have been made since my post. Of the scopes I was testing at the time, the Frontier, offerd 4 parameters that are great. Excellent overall glass, eye box, reticle design (subjective I know) and lightweight design. Other features were not so desirable to me and diminished the overall value to a point that I sent it back. Mushy turrets are never acceptable to me, especially in the $800 price range, so, that's a deal breaker.
Patrick
Last edited:
Upvote 0
Patrick,
As I continue to evaluate Hawke scopes, I have also found that the turrets on my Sidewinder are not as crisp as those on my Helix. It’s too bad that you say turrets are also mushy on the Frontier, and yes, this is not good for the $800.00 range, and that’s a less expensive model in the Frontier line. If you care to read it, I emailed Hawke about the lower weight for some Frontiers. They gave me a bit of an answer. Both question and answer are on another thread, “Scope Recommendations for New Air Gun Shooter.” Do you mind telling what those other features you did not like were? Thanks.
David
Upvote 0