a rant

Mungo

Well-Known Member
Why, oh why must the optics manufacturers have two different sizes of scope tube?!

A complete and unmitigated ball ache.

And why can't the rifle makers standardise the fittings for bases? There can be NO good reason why not.

Standardise, you fu*kers.
 
Why, oh why must the optics manufacturers have two different sizes of scope tube?!

A complete and unmitigated ball ache.

And why can't the rifle makers standardise the fittings for bases? There can be NO good reason why not.

Standardise, you fu*kers.

Probably boils down to the usual $$$ (I don't have a pound symbol on my laptop)
 
Agreed, every rifle should come with it's own rings, like CZ's do, and all scopes should be small, light, neat and have a 1 inch tube.
While they are about it they could also do away with anything over a 42mm objective, and keep the O/D of all oculars to 40mm or less :thumb:

Neil. :)

PS: As a rant, and marked on possible points out of 10, yours rates a 1 :p
 
Last edited:
There should also only be one calibre to simplify things. And that should be 7mm-08. Loaded with nothing but Nosler BTs. You don't need anything else.
 
PS: As a rant, and marked on possible points out of 10, yours rates a 1 :p

Now that is a statement garunteed to aggravate a man already unhappy with the world! Self-satisfied scrotum-sucker. Pretensious, patronising, pustulous pre-puce.

I feel better now.
 
Now that is a statement garunteed to aggravate a man already unhappy with the world! Self-satisfied scrotum-sucker. Pretensious, patronising, pustulous pre-puce.

I feel better now.

Confused! You feel better?

Did you get the prepuce thing sorted then? Sounds nasty.
 
S'munny, innit. The latest Z series of Swarovski 'scope boast ballistic turrets; the only thing ballistic is the price, the optics are the same, (tremendous quality, nevertheless).
 
Why, oh why must the optics manufacturers have two different sizes of scope tube?!

Only two! Haven't the 34mm and 35mm ones made it north of the border? And, come to that, what about the 1" vs. 26 mm issue?

While they are about it they could also keep the O/D of all oculars to 400mm or less

400m - that is a big eye bell! (But I approve of the sentiment, nonetheless)
 
Only two! Haven't the 34mm and 35mm ones made it north of the border? And, come to that, what about the 1" vs. 26 mm issue?

Until yesterday, I had no idea those existed as well.

I'm going to ignore them and hope they go away.

Fortunately the rifle in question has iron sights - maybe I'll just stick with those. I hardly ever shoot anything beyond 80m anyway.
 
If wishing to avoid disappointment consider carefully all qualities of a scope and with your intended use (magnification), stature, rifle to be mounted on and last but not least preferred aesthetic firmly in mind.

Buying a short tube scope, as but one example, then finding you must clamp it within what to all intent and purpose looks like a secondary action to achieve correct eye relief is not my idea of how to go about things on a sporting rifle of classic design and proportions.

Note I haven’t once mentioned my preferred make of projectionless rings and complementary mounts!

Cheers

K
 
Back
Top