Anyone use one of these on an airgun?
I saw a post in another thread about putting this crossbow yardage gizmo on an airgun. The poster loves it. I watched the vendors video and it makes perfect sense if set up right. Ordered a couple to try out. I have a MTC scope with the turret markings but they change with parallax adjustment. This claims not to be affected by it. I dunno??? I'll try to do a review when I get it sorted out. Ebay has them for $158.
The original post I saw this being used....
I don't think velocity has much to do with it, in reality it is just moving the mount up and down so you don't touch the scopes elevation adjustment and for short range shooting it might work well, is it worth it, is a 300.00 bipod worth it
you would more then likely have to make your own yardage tape but it is interesting
now how about the crossbow shooter, shoots left handed but is right eye dominate, I don't think I have seen that before
Looks like a waste of money to me. It doesn't actually tell you the yardage, and it's working velocity is under 400 fps. You can buy a laser rangefinder for under $100 if you really want to nail the yardage, and that, combined with a good mildot scope would be MUCH better!
Other than a ATK scope with a range finder accessory what scope does tell you yardage? This works on the assumption you have determined the yardage with a range finder and have done the fundamental zeroing in. Some put the yardage markers on their turret. Easy to lose track of the turns. As marlow stated it simply changes the angle of the scope to compensate for yardage. I'm only going by what the Impact owner said in that for him it seems to work well. Plus it looks like it can cover a wide yardage range with minimal adjustment. I don't know, but I will soon. Ordered one for me and my son to try out. He just sold his ATK set up out of frustration over holding zero. Great concept with the rangefinder added and video feature. Just couldn't trust it to be consistent.
Thank you. I guess I was thinking more along the lines of standard optics. Those scopes that can compensate for wind, elevation and distance are pretty trick. My sons showed potential but just couldn't get over the quirks of programming upgrades and doing what it was advertised to do. I'm too low tech to figure out all the workings of the electronic scopes. He had the ability to do all the programming and upgrades, just couldn't get it to stay zeroed.
Plus $5K for the Swaro, ouch. I was just hoping for $160 the Optimizer could give a rapid accurate yardage adjustment once set up. No reason you couldn't continue to the standard scope turrets too. Sounds like I'm trying to defend it and I've never even tried one. Don't mean to. I keep thinking if it was so fantastic why don't you see top shooters using them?
Pluric..I noticed a laser range-finder/scope (unknown brand) several years ago on a Youtube video from Eastern Europe! I could find no information regarding such a scope, so I wandered off onto different topics, thinking it was probably a military feature not available to the public market. Several years pass...now we see market presence!
The crossbow unit is just a manually set cross-hair correcting feature. This is a nice feature for bow hunters, but incorporating a laser range finder into a scope is better for us lead slingers. The fact is this technology is readily available, and the prices should drop down to affordable levels in a couple of years. I'd watch the Chinese "Discovery" models a bit more closely. For the price, the Chinese have "upped their game" in quality control and are beginning to associate sales with quality over quantity.
If a feature as cheap as a laser range finder can be incorporated into a scope, which is no major technological feat, then I believe the market will begin to see more of these features affordable in the near future. There is already a high end scope that "dopes" all the variables, once the target is centered, and corrects for the point of aim.
In a few years "accuracy" will no longer be a skill...it will come in the box for anyone with the ability to hold the dang thing steady!
Kindly 'Ol Uncle
This evolved into a range finding scope thread. I realize the Optimizer is nothing more than a mechanical option to cant the scope to adjust for yardage. It doesn't determine yardage. I normally just use mil-dots. I seldom will adjust turrets once I have a range zeroed I would commonly shoot at. I do have a MTC scope that was designed to have pellet speed and weight information inputted to a program to print turret stickers. Changing the parallax defeated the purpose.
You are right on the changing environment on these electric scopes. My son's ATK advertised to do exactly what you stated. Properly set up and knowing a wind speed it would in theory compensate for all factors and have the cross hair always on the correct zero. He did have to ad the accessory range finder. I teased him on who would he get to pull the trigger for him? In a hunting situation I can see where that would be beneficial in taking some guestimation out of the equation and hopefully benefit with a clean kill.
For competition shooting it would seem to be an unfair advantage. Who needs wind flags and indicators when the scope is doing it all for you? It's all in the name of progress. I think we will always have the option of choosing what works for the individual.
Well the Optimizer came in and I mounted it on a .25 Cricket. Zeroed at 20 yards. Shot high at 30 yards with no adjustment to lower it other than by the turret. So I re-zeroed it a 30. Took it out to 50 yards and the same problem. I don't have any further yardage option to be able to test it on my block. I'm already shooting, with permission, across my neighbors front yard to get 50. I guess if you do long distance shooting it might be a viable option. I seldom have a need for over a 100 yards. I do have a FX Verminator with the arrow barrel and thought it might work well on that. All the sight mounts are 11 mm on the gun. By the time I got adapters to weaver it didn't seem worth the hassle for a gun I seldom shoot arrows with do to the noise level. It's LOUD!
The item seems well built. So unless you have a gun that the poi drops rapidly with distance or shoot high distance I don't know that I can recommend this as the cure for quick elevation adjustments on an airgun.
As many have said, for us airgunners, a well-built reticle is more important than gimmicks like the HHA Optimizer.
Even a good Xbow scope is more capable, but to each his own.
There ARE adjustable mounts in the market, and I MEAN CLICK ADJUSTABLE. Something that has not been seen in the optics world since the old golden days of the American Benchrest game, names like Unertl, B&L, Fecker, Lyman, even Mitchell Optics are, or should be, well recognized as pioneers in the optics and mechanics field (few know that Unertl is still doing defense-grade optics in things that are hard to disclose completely) by al shooters. But the idea of a solid scope that has no moving (or very few moving) parts and then the mount does the job is not new.
Surprisingly, it is not an idea that is taking the shooting world by storm, and it is a pity.
For about $60 you can have a proper Picatinny to Picatinny mount that adjusts for windage and elevation.
Now, how much adjustment do airgunners need? For starters more than CF shooters (unless they are shooting beyond 800 meters), but less than xXBow shooters. In a proper mil-rad reticle, all the trajectory from 8 to 75 meters (about 9 to 83 yards) is held between the CrossHair and 5 mrads down. And that is at a meager 12 ft-lbs in 0.177" . Go to 875 fps with a 0.25" cal and you need even less subtension.
The reality is that we, airgunners, need reticles with ¼ mrad divisions, so that we can estimate 1/8 mrad. THAT is coming, perhaps not soon, but there are good people working in that.
As for laser rangefinding scopes suitable for airgunners, apart from the custom made British offering, there will soon be one available for under $500 that will be completely suitable for airgunners. The Swarovski, Steiner, Zeiss and Burris, as well as the ZOS, or the old Bushnell, and Nikon are all considerably more expensive than what is sensible.
The tricky part is going to be that the guys that are working on the fine reticle are not the guys that are working on the LRF scope. LOL!
But we're doing every possible effort to get them to work together.
Keep well and shoot straight!