duvida entre lunetas

[Brunobala]

vcs q tem mais experiencia q eu me tire uma duvida

 

qual a diferenca entre essas duas lunetas

Luneta Hawke Sport Optics 4-16x50aoir, Mil Dot, Paralax

 

 

 

Luneta Hawke Sport Optics HD AO MIL DOTE 4-16x50

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[BrunoM]

A diferença do nome (IR) indica que a luneta tem o retículo iluminado, acho que a diferença é essa.

 

Enviado de meu XT1069 usando Tapatalk

[Brunohf]

Posta foto das duas aí... me parece que se trata do mesmo modelo.... Só foi escrito de 2 maneiras.

[Brunobala]

Acho q nao,a diferença e 400 conto

[Anderson gallo]

Boa noite tenho uma duvida qual é a diferença de usar Mount baixo ou um Mount alto na carabina? minha duvida em relação a visada qual seria melhor mount. obrigado há todos que poder me ajudar . minha luneta é snauzer 3-9x32eg e veio com o mount baixo. obrigado pela resposta uso uma hatsan ht 95 60gas ram

Editado Julho 11, 2016 por Anderson gallo

[MATTHEW QUIGLEY]

Depende do tamanho da objetiva da hipócrita, do tamanho do pescoço, rs e da altura da " almofada " ou da coronha pp dita, e do tipo de posiçāo de tiro mais frequente ( conforto é fundamental )

Geralmente, no comum, se usam mounts médios.

Os altos , em geral, sāo para as zuiudas ( objetivas acima de 50mm )

E os pescoçudos, rs

 

Métil Hipócrita.

[ThiagoBF]

Boa noite tenho uma duvida qual é a diferença de usar Mount baixo ou um Mount alto na carabina? minha duvida em relação a visada qual seria melhor mount. obrigado há todos que poder me ajudar . ME DESCULPEM SE COLOQUEI ESTE TÓPICO EM LOCAL ERRADO

 

Mount de perfil baixo é para lunetas menores (com objetiva menor), mount de perfil alto é para lunetas maiores, as "zoiudas" como o nosso colega falou.

 

O ideal é utilizar um mount cuja a objetiva da luneta fique o mais próxima do cano, sem, no entanto, tocá-lo.

 

OBS: não utilize caixa alta (caps lock), isso é algo como alguém esteja "falando alto", por isso sugiro que edite-o.

Editado Julho 11, 2016 por ThiagoBF

[MATTHEW QUIGLEY]

 

O ideal é utilizar um mount cuja a objetiva da luneta fique o mais próxima do cano, sem, no entanto, tocá-lo.

 

 

Vai parecer heresia o que vou comentar,...o que me preocupa muito. rs

Curiosamente, a maioria pensa assim, mas tudo leva a crer que é mais um mito não comprovado.

Essa história de proximidade entre a hipócrita e a arma não se aplica em inúmeros casos e a suposição de de aumento da instabilidade por estar a hipócrita mais elevada em relação à arma não procede.

O que se leva em conta é a funcionalidade ótima desejada e consequente desempenho.

Abaixo,um exemplo exagerado, " high":

 

 

Col. Matthew Quigley

Editado Julho 11, 2016 por MATTHEW QUIGLEY

[ThiagoBF]

 

Vai parecer heresia o que vou comentar,...o que me preocupa muito. rs

Curiosamente, a maioria pensa assim, mas tudo leva a crer que é mais um mito não comprovado.

Essa história de proximidade entre a hipócrita e a arma não se aplica em inúmeros casos e a suposição de de aumento da instabilidade por estar a hipócrita mais elevada em relação à arma não procede.

O que se leva em conta é a funcionalidade ótima desejada e consequente desempenho.

Um exemplo exagerado, " high", rs, , não vou entrar em detalhes porque, para que, por motivo óbvio:

 

Col. Matthew Quigley

 

Humm.. não sabia disso, vi uma vez que o mais indicado era o que havia dito, enfim, ciência e seu gene dialético.

 

PS: esse mount é pra quem não tem medo de altura rsrsr

[MATTHEW QUIGLEY]

PS: esse mount é pra quem não tem medo de altura rsrsr

Isso Thiago, o Bastião Girafa, por exemplo.

Já o P.P.M...

 

Métil.

Editado Julho 11, 2016 por MATTHEW QUIGLEY

[Rafael Tomaz Grando]

Ola,

A altura da luneta em relação a arma não influência na estabilidade, isso está muito mais ligado a robustez do equipamento, ao recuo da arma, etc

O que interfere bastante e quando vc atira a distâncias variadas, quanto maior à altura da luneta maior a necessidade de compensação.

[Pedro Zanetti]

A altura da luneta influência sim o tiro. O ideal eh a maior proximidade do cano. Estando próximo ou no do cano você regula tudo igual a principal diferenca fica na dinâmica da trajetória do chumbo. Por exemplo as mesmas configuracoes na primeira o centro da luneta ate o centro do cano com 6cm de distância

 

Agora com 12 cm

 

Pode ser preciosismo para alguns mas para FT faz diferenca

 

Abraço

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[unzioto]

Tô inclinado a acreditar que influencia no tiro, apesar do gráfico aí em cima, mas na minha carabina os grupos com o mount mais alto me deixa mais confortável (diz aí coronél) e os grupos saem melhor, então a influencia tá no que melhor lhe der a visada e conforto.

[MARCOSYW1]

acho que so não vai influenciar se for atirar sempre a mesma distancia... mesmo alvo..., pois depois de regulada o ponto de impacto sempre sera o mesmo...como o Pedro citou para distancias variadas enquanto mais perto do cano melhor...

[MATTHEW QUIGLEY]

High Scope Mounts for Airguns?

 

The usual advice in mounting a scope or sights is to get as close to the barrel as possible. For a scope, that means selecting a mount that just allows the bell of the scope to clear the receiver, with maybe enough space to allow a scope cover to slide over. The reason is simple: the farther apart the axes of the scope and the barrel, the greater the error in aiming if the rifle isn’t held perfectly level.

There are, however, some cases in which there’s an advantage to a high mount. One is with air rifles, like the Air Arms Pro Sport seen above. Pellets travel a lot slower than bullets, and have a lot more drag. Consequently their trajectories are not as flat over their useful range as would be a .22 or a small caliber, high velocity rifle bullet. A 12-16 foot-pound gun like this Pro Sport, if zeroed at 22 yards, is going to see a drop of close to two inches between that distance and the maximum useful range of 50 yards. That’s a lot of correction to dial into a scope- 16 clicks in a quarter minute of angle adjustable scope.

But if the scope is mounted two inches above the barrel, it’s alignment is going to be a lot closer to the downward arc of the pellet than if it was mounted lower. A lot of field target shooters and some airgun hunters mount their scopes high for this reason. A second advantage is that on some stocks it’s easier to get a good sight picture with a high mount.

There are some disadvantages. The earlier mentioned problem of error increasing as the gun is tilted is one. Another is that some scopes don’t have enough adjustment range to deal with a high mount; in those case scope rings can be shimmed, or you can purchase an intermount from Barska and other suppliers that has a built-in angle correction. Such mounts are designed to correct for the “barrel droop” seen in some break barrel guns, but they work well in this application, too. High scope mounting isn’t appropriate for all applications, but it might solve a scope problem you have. Don’t be afraid to try it just because the experts say you should always mount a scope as low as possible.

 

http://airgunner.org/?p=753

 

Col. M.Q.

 

 

Tô inclinado a acreditar que influencia no tiro, apesar do gráfico aí em cima, mas na minha carabina os grupos com o mount mais alto me deixa mais confortável (diz aí coronél) e os grupos saem melhor, então a influencia tá no que melhor lhe der a visada e conforto.

A second advantage is that on some stocks it’s easier to get a good sight picture with a high mount.

[MATTHEW QUIGLEY]

Thanks for the article, John. Personally, my biggest objection to super tall rings and large objective bells is that it makes the rifle more cumbersome. Both make it harder for scoped rifles to fit in soft cases especially, but also in some hard cases like the scabbards I use on my ATV. I can barely fit a rifle in my scabbards if it has a scope with tall W/E knobs, in fact. I don't like having an objective bell wider than the rifle's forend. Plus, all else being equal, tall mounts can't be quite as rigid as shorter mounts, though it may not make any difference in real world use.

From an aesthetic standpoint, I think a low mounted, moderately sized objective scope looks better on most sporter weight rifles too.

------

I have always advocated scopes mounted as low as possible on rifles; and usually with very good results for the reasons mentioned by Rifledude.

But more important to my way of thinking these days, is a proper correlation of the stock to the shooter's individual build and shooting style.

When that is correct, mount height should be determined by the height of comb and the shooter's facial structure. If that is done right, the rifle becomes part of the shooter, and all kinds of problems go away. Adjustable combs make this process a little easier to fine tune.

Another great article, John. Many valid points to consider...

--------

My friend Charlie Sisk, the well-known custom rifle-maker from Texas, is much more concerned with overall rifle fit than are most custom riflesmiths I know. Charlie says that once he builds a stock to fit the shooter, most hunters are better off with medium rings than low or high. He bases this on the hunter in question not having to "dip or dive" to see the whole field of view--a pretty practical approach!

 

No, the real problem with a high-mounted scope isn’t finding the field of view or getting kicked in the cheekbone, but the inaccuracy caused by tilting the rifle. This is something most shooters simply don’t understand, though target shooters generally know all about it.

 

http://www.opticstalk.com/scope-mount-height_topic18514.html

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

http://www.kifaruforums.net/showthread.php?t=21653

 

http://www.rimfirecentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=526045

 

http://www.at3tactical.com/blogs/news/11491881-ar-scopes-what-is-the-best-scope-for-your-ar-1

 

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

 

Scopes – Part 3 How high should a scope be?

Posted on March 11, 2008by B.B. Pelletier ↓ 36 Comments

by B.B. Pelletier

Part 1
Part 2

The first two sections of this report were titled poorly for the way I blog, so I went back and changed their titles to Scopes, Parts 1 and 2. It’s too difficult to track anything else. You may have forgotten, but I’m using this section to write the outline of a book on airgun scope mounting.

Today, I want to look at scope height. How high do you want your scope to be? There are two considerations for scope height. The first is adjusting the height of the exit pupil (the light that comes out of the rear of the scope that lets you see the target and reticle) to the height of your eye and the second is the clearance of the scope above the parts of the gun. Let’s discuss both.

Fit to the eye
Ideally, your rifle should mount to your shoulder with the eye coming into perfect alignment with the exit pupil. I say ideally because it seldom happens. You want to get as close to the ideal as you can so that parallax from different eye placement is reduced as much as possible. With some rifles this will demand a medium-height mount and with others a high mount. With a few, such as the AirForce rifles, which have an absolutely straight stock line, they demand ultra-high mounts (which are already built in to the gun).

Usually, the height of the cheekpiece is a clue to how high the scope will have to be, but a stock with a straight line (i.e., not much drop from the pistol grip to the butt) will fool you into thinking you can get by with a lower mount than really needed. You may need to live with a rifle for a period before you know what it needs scope-wise.

Fit to the gun
Obviously, the scope mount has to be high enough that the scope caps can be tightened around the scope tube. Scopes that have large objective lenses will need higher mounts to clear the gun, and guns that have level actions (most spring-piston air rifles) will need higher mounts for the scope to clear the gun. PCPs often have receivers that extend above the level of the barrel, thus providing some of this clearance.

 

This Harrier’s receiver is higher than the barrel, but to use a scope with a 56mm objective, high mounts are still necessary.

However, scope length also comes into play here. If the scope is short enough, it won’t get in the way of loading, regardless of how close it is to the spring tube. As long as it clears the tube, you’re home free.

 

RWS Diana 460 magnum has a sliding compression chamber with tight pellet-loading clearance. If the scope doesn’t stick out that far (the silver rectangle behind the rear sight), it doesn’t matter.

Some guns have special clearance needs. PCP repeaters with circular clips need higher mounts to clear the clip. Sidelever and underlever rifles, such as the RWS Diana 460, with tight breech access often need scopes higher for pellet loading.

 

You need plenty of clearance to load the rotary breech found on a Gamo CFX.
A circular clip means the scope has to be mounted high in order to clear. Not this high. though. This was extra high because of long-range testing. I needed an adjustable scope mount and this B-Square was all I had on hand.

Disadvantages to mounting high
The higher you mount the scope the greater the effect of cant. Because the sight is so far from the bore, any angular difference will be magnified. Some shooters also believe that a lower scope helps flatten the trajectory. It does, but I don’t find the difference to be so great that it concerns me. I first get the scope to rise to my eye and to clear the gun before I worry about flattening the trajectory. That’s just personal; you have to decide what’s important for your kind of shooting.

 

http://www.pyramydair.com/blog/2008/03/scopes-part-3-how-high-should-a-scope-be/

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

 

para o unzioto ( é por aí mesmo );

 

Editado Julho 11, 2016 por MATTHEW QUIGLEY

[MATTHEW QUIGLEY]

Às almas caridosas que se propuzerem a traduzir para o distinto público,agradeço antecipadamente.

Linguagem compreensível aos mortais comuns e comentários práticos são desejáveis.

Só os 10 mandamentos foram gravados em pedra.

 

Os grifos e negritos ( epa! ) são meus.

 

Col. M.Q.

Editado Julho 11, 2016 por MATTHEW QUIGLEY

[BrunoM]

 

Vai parecer heresia o que vou comentar,...o que me preocupa muito. rs

Curiosamente, a maioria pensa assim, mas tudo leva a crer que é mais um mito não comprovado.

Essa história de proximidade entre a hipócrita e a arma não se aplica em inúmeros casos e a suposição de de aumento da instabilidade por estar a hipócrita mais elevada em relação à arma não procede.

O que se leva em conta é a funcionalidade ótima desejada e consequente desempenho.

Abaixo,um exemplo exagerado, " high":

 

 

Col. Matthew Quigley

Até onde sei as vantagens de ter a luneta mais baixa possível são: diminuir a influência do "cant" (disparar com a arma desnivelada) no POI e aumentar a distância de uso da luneta (em tiros de longa distância o POI fica "fora da luneta").

Mas posso estar errado também...

 

Enviado de meu XT1069 usando Tapatalk

[MATTHEW QUIGLEY]

Sobre o "cant " penso ser indiscutível, sobre aumentar distância de uso, em armas de ar, faz sentido também, mass: porque nāo tentar a altura mais compatível com a coronha, de acordo com cada um, como obter o melhor desempenho em circunstâncias específicas? ( nāo é, unzioto? ), rs

Aliás, comentários muito bons , Bruno.

Todos entenderāo.

Abraço

 

Métil

Editado Julho 12, 2016 por MATTHEW QUIGLEY

[MATTHEW QUIGLEY]

De hoje ( aquí, como lá...)

Scope mounts - isn't it best to keep them as low as the set up will allow?

http://www.network54.com/Forum/79537/thread/1468348950/last-1468361704/Expand+Thread

 

Métil Chato.

[MATTHEW QUIGLEY]

Sometimes you just don't have a choice. July 12 2016, 8:20 PM

 

Sometimes the stock limits your choices. Really isn't any good way to low mount a scope on some rifles. AirForce rifles come to mind, no matter what you do the scope is going to be mounted high in relation to the bore. Does make it more of a challenge to hit one of the dumb-ones that pop up at 5 yards to tease you.

Other stocks have really high cheek pieces, so unless you whittle down the stock, are going to be mounting your glass higher.

Almost all of my airgunning is short to medium range, so generally keep the scope mounted as low as I can get away with. IF I were always shooting at medium to long range, would likely mount the scope higher (which does make short range shooting more difficult, but helps a bit with longer ranges).

One thing I did learn. If you gotta mount the scope high, may as well use a scope with a large (50mm or more) objective. You already "paid the price" for high mounting, may as well fill that height with glass.

 

Pois é...

 

Metil Chato II

Editado Julho 13, 2016 por MATTHEW QUIGLEY