wildcatgoal from United States, GA Public Profile

On the example I got, the ballhead friction adjustment does absolutely nothing with binoculars let alone a 27 lbs competition rifle. This adjustment should have the fidelity to keep the ball from moving when the mounted object is unsupported but still allow you adjust the mounted object. The friction adjustment is difficult and not smooth to twist and as far as I can tell - especially compared to another tripod ballhead I've used - does absolutely nothing. I hope Athlon replaces it!

Lots of play at the trigger blade side to side. Safety actuation is gritty. Loose-fitting in well known custom action. Mine was so bad I sent it in to Timney and they told it's all in spec. Next to my TriggerTech Special (which has very little play at the trigger, the safety actuation is extremely smooth and positive, and it fits snug in the action) this Timney feels cheap. What's worse, you can't buy this without the old school bolt stop. Common... nobody uses this trigger with anything but a custom action and all custom actions these days use a side bolt release negating the need for the old school Remington lower bolt release that nobody likes or wants.

Results in Leupold's own 35mm scope being nearly .5" off of a heavy palma barrel. Makes absolutely ZERO sense. Waste of money. The scope should far lower, closer to the barrel. I shouldn't need to completely max out my cheek adjustment just to use it when doing so would be totally unnecessary if they just made this lower knowing it was designed FOR A BOLT GUN, not an AR.

Gunsmith tells me the rear sight was a "decent" fit but the front was basically too loose to allow and had to do all kinds of work to get it to fit better only to result in there being light under the front of the sight. He said the finish marred far more easily than anything he's worked with before and he couldn't use a darkening agent to fix it like the others, meaning the metal is cheap junk. So in short, these don't actually fit TIGHT into the dovetails, the metal is cheap, and the finish is weak.

Here's what's intolerable about this sight.

1) The brightness adjustment requires you to place your finger in front of the sight window, blocking the dot so you have to do this press, move finger, press, move finger dance that takes forever to get to the right brightness.
2) The battery compartment is held down by a slide wedge that itself is locked in with a cheap-feeling detent. Twice during firing this detent backed out and in one instance the battery came flying out. Unacceptable.
3) Compared to other options, the battery life of this is terrible. 300 hours or so compared to 40,000 hours on some other units. Had I known this from your website (which didn't list this information), I wouldn't have bought it.

This is a traditional soft point bullet in a brass case. They shoot .75 MOA at least out of my Tikka Ultralite, which is more than enough for hunting deer. I was able to take a large-ish doe recently using one of these. She was about 150 yards away across a hollow. Because the Tikka is so light, it's tough to stay on target through the scope but the bullet landed more-or-less where I aimed (and I sight the rifle in 2" high at 100 yards) for more of a high shoulder shot. She jumped and ran with mostly her front legs working maybe 20 yards and toppled over and did the usual passing kicks. The autopsy indicates the bullet was highly effective in the boiler room without any meat damage I cared about and it looks like there was hydro-static shock to the spine, which may explain why her back side effectively buckled after being hit. My Tikka isn't particularly sensitive to any ammo I've put through it but only notably more expensive Nosler ammo seems to be reliably more accurate out of it.

Sometimes I'm baffled by the decisions scope manufacturers make. This zoom range and objective size are most suitable for a hunting rifle or potentially a MSR that is used for hunting (like hogs or coyotes). Consequently, it would seem all of the models would be equipped with scope caps. The ones that are - like the one I have - still has "target/tactical" style turrets (as opposed to super flat, small turrets found on your typical basic 3-9x hunting scope. Given the fact that even the capped turrets are relatively tall and large, really all models in this 3.5-10x44mm range should have capped turrets. Mine has a mil-dot reticle with MOA adjustments, which never made sense but I opted to buy it anyway because I like the general quality of SIII scopes. I will say that I can sort of see "inside" of the scope when it's light out. More specifically, there's a divot or recess inside of the scope assembly at the objective side (perhaps part of what holds the glass in?) that I can see while looking through the scope. Not a big deal and not particularly uncommon, but given the original MSRP of these things I didn't expect that. The glass, though, is clear and, most importantly to me, the eyebox is not a pain in the royal tookus to stay in. I find the turrets to have nice tactiles and the markings line up like they should (they're better turrets in that sense than my Leupold VX-5s). I actually prefer that Sightron sell scopes with the gold vs. white lettering and am disappoi

The silver color doesn't match the stainless receiver color of a Howa receiver, which is a darker shade of gray. Not a huge deal, but the difference is stark enough that you might as well just get the black rings since your scope is likely going to be black. Additionally, the silver really seems to be a sort of spray paint as opposed to something perhaps more durable. I don't know if that's actually the case but the black rings - which I have a few of - look higher quality even if it's the same metal.

Seems hard to find quality but affordable accessories for Steyr Pro Hunter rifles. I normally don't use a rail on a hunting rifle, instead using 1-piece rings (but those don't seem to be easy to find unless they're ridiculously expensive). The the rail, I've found a medium-height Warne ring will work for a 50 mm objective, possibly 56 mm. You might be able to get away with a low Warne ring if you have a 40/44 mm objective scope, but you need to be careful about Steyr's illogical bolt handle design that can contact a low-mounted scope.

I have a Montana 1999 action rifle which has always reliably used Winchester 70 scope rings. I also have a Winchester 70. The rings I received, when screwed to either receiver, were not even. If you place a level on the front ring and compare to a level on the rear ring, they aren't even. Never had this issue before. I had to level the receiver and found the front ring was very close and the rear ring was way off. Why? because the screws provided to not force center the rings. I had to place a 30mm lapping bar on the rings in order to keep them straight then a modified hex key to screw them down enough to where they'd stay. Then I removed the lapping bar, torqued them. Still the rear was not the same level as the front -- although close enough. The screws provided and the drilled holes for them should be designed such that they force center 2-piece rings. I got the scope level and mounted properly but not without extra, unnecessary work that I shouldn't have had to do.