Leupolds SABR muzz. scope
- Thread starter 10point
- Start date
Help Support Modern Muzzleloading Forum:
10point,
I have one but have no experience with shooting it yet. This is a post I made on another forum for a guy that was getting one for his Sidekick, I had everything to check it out for him so I put it on my Sidekick with medium Warne QD rings I had on hand. I will be getting low rings before I tighten the screws to it. I bought it for my .45 cal Knight Disc Elite, but may just keep it on the Sidekick.
Remember this was for another question, but will save me some typing and you can see from the pics what rings you may want. The H&R/NEF rifles have a high hammer spur to contend with, but you can mount the Leupolds lower than anything else.
I was able to check that out for you, but I think you will actually want low rings. That is the beauty of Leupolds smaller diameter eyepiece/lock ring/power ring. The medium Warnes are .360" from the base to tube, the low Warnes are .250" from base to tube. I have right at .200" of room between the hammer spur/hammer spur extension and the eyepiece lock ring. Lows would sit .110" lower and still leave about .080" to .090" of space between the hammer and scope. You would have to move your rear sight down the ramp some, or just remove it. You could sight the rear sight in and mark it on the ramp, then if ever a problem with the scope in the field you just move the rear sight blade back up into position after removing the scope. In the pictures you will notice the room, these are medium Warne rings, but Warne makes the Leupold rings for them and I believe they are the same heights. I really like the Warne rings, but the Leupolds are just as solid. You make that decision, you can't go wrong either way. I will order low rings soon, and that Utimate slam might just go back on the Sidekick.
Here are some pics, sorry about the fuzz and shadows, but I think you will be able to see what I am talking about. Remember these are mediums, and lows will work for sure if your scope eye relief is comparable to mine and you don't mind sliding your rear sight down the ramp. My rear sight is set just a hair above the center line in that pic, there would be plenty of room to just mark it (once sighted in) then just slide it down until it is needed.
http://www.precisionscopes.com/leupold_ ... slam_scope
http://www2.leupold.com/resources/Mount ... efault.asp
Warne QD Rings.
http://www.warnescopemounts.com/quick_detach.html
Leupold QRW Rings.
http://www.leupold.com/hunting-and-shoo ... rw-mounts/
I have one but have no experience with shooting it yet. This is a post I made on another forum for a guy that was getting one for his Sidekick, I had everything to check it out for him so I put it on my Sidekick with medium Warne QD rings I had on hand. I will be getting low rings before I tighten the screws to it. I bought it for my .45 cal Knight Disc Elite, but may just keep it on the Sidekick.
Remember this was for another question, but will save me some typing and you can see from the pics what rings you may want. The H&R/NEF rifles have a high hammer spur to contend with, but you can mount the Leupolds lower than anything else.
I was able to check that out for you, but I think you will actually want low rings. That is the beauty of Leupolds smaller diameter eyepiece/lock ring/power ring. The medium Warnes are .360" from the base to tube, the low Warnes are .250" from base to tube. I have right at .200" of room between the hammer spur/hammer spur extension and the eyepiece lock ring. Lows would sit .110" lower and still leave about .080" to .090" of space between the hammer and scope. You would have to move your rear sight down the ramp some, or just remove it. You could sight the rear sight in and mark it on the ramp, then if ever a problem with the scope in the field you just move the rear sight blade back up into position after removing the scope. In the pictures you will notice the room, these are medium Warne rings, but Warne makes the Leupold rings for them and I believe they are the same heights. I really like the Warne rings, but the Leupolds are just as solid. You make that decision, you can't go wrong either way. I will order low rings soon, and that Utimate slam might just go back on the Sidekick.
Here are some pics, sorry about the fuzz and shadows, but I think you will be able to see what I am talking about. Remember these are mediums, and lows will work for sure if your scope eye relief is comparable to mine and you don't mind sliding your rear sight down the ramp. My rear sight is set just a hair above the center line in that pic, there would be plenty of room to just mark it (once sighted in) then just slide it down until it is needed.
http://www.precisionscopes.com/leupold_ ... slam_scope
http://www2.leupold.com/resources/Mount ... efault.asp
Warne QD Rings.
http://www.warnescopemounts.com/quick_detach.html
Leupold QRW Rings.
http://www.leupold.com/hunting-and-shoo ... rw-mounts/
- Joined
- May 18, 2005
- Messages
- 4,261
- Reaction score
- 223
.80"-.90"
yer dyslaxic taday
:wink:
yer dyslaxic taday
:wink:That is the 3-9x40, they also make a 2-7x33. Here is a couple more links.
Click on all the tabs and pics in the top link.
http://www.leupold.com/hunting-and-shoo ... imateslam/
http://www.leupold.com/_pdfs/ultimatesl ... csheet.pdf
http://www.leupold.com/_pdfs/ultimatesl ... csheet.pdf
http://www.leupold.com/_pdfs/ultimateslam_sabr_vs.pdf
Click on all the tabs and pics in the top link.
http://www.leupold.com/hunting-and-shoo ... imateslam/
http://www.leupold.com/_pdfs/ultimatesl ... csheet.pdf
http://www.leupold.com/_pdfs/ultimatesl ... csheet.pdf
http://www.leupold.com/_pdfs/ultimateslam_sabr_vs.pdf
Doohan said:
JJ,
No I don't, but I know a few guys that are making the switch. They were leupold fans, but had bought the Nikon Omega because they were offered first. I really like the Nikon scopes, but I dont like the large circles.
The beauty of this scope is you can tune it to your load, You dont have to tune your load to the scope.
Example: Put it on 9 power,,,zero crosshairs at 100,,,set up target at 300,,,make sure your target is high and lots of cardboard under it for drop,,,shoot at 300 yd bullseye with the 100 yard crosshairs,,,mark where your group actually hits below bull,,,with rifle benched center crosshairs on bull at 300,,,turn ring until the 300 setting is lined up with your group while maintaining crosshairs on bull,,,wherever that is, that is your setting for 300,,,then check your 150,200, and 250 for accuracy,,,they should be real close according to Leupold. WE SHALL SEE! :wink: I don't know about 300, but the same thing can be done at 200 or 250.
I sure am not expecting a miracle, but I think I can find a setting that will be satisfactory for out to 200, maybe 250. 300 would be great for varmints, but that is a long way to poke a deer IMO, unless conditions were perfect and you have several days of practicing. the wind drift at that range must be unreal.
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2007
- Messages
- 229
- Reaction score
- 0
HJBUYS has one on his Triumph and loves it. I'm sure he will pipe up in a bit or send him a PM
I have just started shooting with a 3x9 Ultimate Slam on my Omega and so far I really like it, but I am a big Leupold fan to begin with. I much prefer the Leupold reticle to the Nikon's--I never felt that the Nikon circles allowed for much precision.
One thing I don't really like about the Leupold is the circle around the center crosshair--makes things too "busy." Supposedly the top of the circle is on at 50 and the bottom of the circle is on at 150, but I don't need those references. I am not going to use a separate crosshair for 50 yd shots. I am so used to sighting in 3" high at 100 that I know to put it right on the deer's chest at 50 and it's a dead deer, and I know I am dead on at about 140 (with the 300 XTP I usually hunt with).
I got the scope hoping that the reticle would give me a good, precise aiming "dot" for 200 yards and I think it will do that. My Omega shoots 250 grn SST's and Harvester SB sabots with 100 grains of Blackhorn209 really well, so I started with that load. Dead on at 100 yds, I set the scope power ring to the "2 pellet" mark and was a little low at 200. Turned the power ring down just a hair--less magnification means more space between scope's crosshair and first dot--and I was on with the 200 yard dot. I did not try the 250 or 300 yard marks.
What was interesting was that if I turned the power all the way up to 9, what was supposed to be the 250 yard dot, was now on at 200, and I liked that a lot. Confused yet? It is hard to explain, but it seems that a relatively slow load is on at 200 with a dot that would be on at 250 with a faster load--I think that makes sense...
When I am laid out prone over a terrace in an Iowa corn field I like the idea of cranking the scope up to 9 power and holding the dot right on at 200. I think the scope is going to let me do that and I like it, even if I don't "go by the book" and use all the marks and dots etc.
Tomorrow I am going to shoot some 200 grn Shockwaves and 195 grn Barnes with 120 grns of BH209. They are accurate in that rifle and should shoot flat enough to test out the "3 pellet" marks on the Ultimate Slam.
BTW--I paid $259 for it at OpticsPlanet with no tax and free shipping
One thing I don't really like about the Leupold is the circle around the center crosshair--makes things too "busy." Supposedly the top of the circle is on at 50 and the bottom of the circle is on at 150, but I don't need those references. I am not going to use a separate crosshair for 50 yd shots. I am so used to sighting in 3" high at 100 that I know to put it right on the deer's chest at 50 and it's a dead deer, and I know I am dead on at about 140 (with the 300 XTP I usually hunt with).
I got the scope hoping that the reticle would give me a good, precise aiming "dot" for 200 yards and I think it will do that. My Omega shoots 250 grn SST's and Harvester SB sabots with 100 grains of Blackhorn209 really well, so I started with that load. Dead on at 100 yds, I set the scope power ring to the "2 pellet" mark and was a little low at 200. Turned the power ring down just a hair--less magnification means more space between scope's crosshair and first dot--and I was on with the 200 yard dot. I did not try the 250 or 300 yard marks.
What was interesting was that if I turned the power all the way up to 9, what was supposed to be the 250 yard dot, was now on at 200, and I liked that a lot. Confused yet? It is hard to explain, but it seems that a relatively slow load is on at 200 with a dot that would be on at 250 with a faster load--I think that makes sense...
When I am laid out prone over a terrace in an Iowa corn field I like the idea of cranking the scope up to 9 power and holding the dot right on at 200. I think the scope is going to let me do that and I like it, even if I don't "go by the book" and use all the marks and dots etc.
Tomorrow I am going to shoot some 200 grn Shockwaves and 195 grn Barnes with 120 grns of BH209. They are accurate in that rifle and should shoot flat enough to test out the "3 pellet" marks on the Ultimate Slam.
BTW--I paid $259 for it at OpticsPlanet with no tax and free shipping
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2007
- Messages
- 229
- Reaction score
- 0
Good report. I cant wait till I get mine. Let us know how the 3 pellet setting goes
I put one on my Triumph. I really liked the reticle much better than the Omega. More space between the circles, easy to pick out exactly which dot you want. My 200 yard dot was spot on with 120 grain of BH209 at the 3 pellet setting. I mounted mine with a Maxima base and low Warne QW rings and it is perfect. The scope is short enough that it allows me to keep my rear site on with plenty of eye relief, which is what I wanted to do. I have pictures of it on this post http://www.modernmuzzleloader.com/phpBB ... highlight= just scroll down to see it. I really couldn't be happier with mine. Let me know how you like yours.
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2008
- Messages
- 147
- Reaction score
- 0
I'd like to try out the Nikon Omega Myself, there's something to be said about the 5 inches of eye relief it offers! I currently use a Burris Fullfield2 with the ballistiplex reticle. It is a good scope that has crosshairs for all yardages, instead of circle or dots. It can also be tuned to a load like the lupy! I just like the idea of as much eye relief as possible, so my next investment might be a Nikon Omega!
I've heard the discussion about eye relief before. I have not had an omega on a gun before, but I find that the Leupold offers plenty of eye relief, even with it sitting back on my gun a bit to make room for my rear open site. The field of view is perfect right when I shoulder it and no recoil to the face (as opposed to my rifle scope that gave me two hits to the forehead last time at the range). When I looked at the omega, I just felt that the circles were crowded and difficult for me to pick out while the leupold has more space between the dots and is easier to pick out the range you want quickly. Also, even with the scope set back in the rings and using low rings, I have plenty of space to get to my hammer very easily, even when I had my hunting gloves on.
As for my range report, the first time I tried it out I was using 110gr BH209 under a harvester sabot and 250gr SST/ML. I had put through ~40 shots already without swabbing. The wind was blowing quite a bit left-right and I didn't get great groupings. I went back another day when the wind was calm and adjusted my load to 120gr BH209. Spot on at 100 yards, less than 3" group at 200 and spot on in elevation. I went again and switched my bullet to the 300gr SST/ML in preparation for my elk hunt, made some adjustments at 100 yards to be spot on and to my surprise, was right on at 200 yards with a less than 2" group. This was at the 3 pellet setting. I did not have to experiment with decreasing to scope power as the 200 dot was right on with both bullets. I have not had the chance to try it out to 250 or 300 yards yet.
I'll be interested to hear others experience with this scope.
As for my range report, the first time I tried it out I was using 110gr BH209 under a harvester sabot and 250gr SST/ML. I had put through ~40 shots already without swabbing. The wind was blowing quite a bit left-right and I didn't get great groupings. I went back another day when the wind was calm and adjusted my load to 120gr BH209. Spot on at 100 yards, less than 3" group at 200 and spot on in elevation. I went again and switched my bullet to the 300gr SST/ML in preparation for my elk hunt, made some adjustments at 100 yards to be spot on and to my surprise, was right on at 200 yards with a less than 2" group. This was at the 3 pellet setting. I did not have to experiment with decreasing to scope power as the 200 dot was right on with both bullets. I have not had the chance to try it out to 250 or 300 yards yet.
I'll be interested to hear others experience with this scope.
- Joined
- Nov 9, 2008
- Messages
- 37
- Reaction score
- 0
Re: Scope
I purchased 2 of them on gunbroker.com for 243.95/scope. I first looked at the Omega scope and I didn't care for the 5" eye relief. I put the scopes on a Omega and a buddies Encore, so far the scopes are all that Leupold says they are and perform nicely. I would definitely recommend it.Bucker said:
