So you have a safe ( no closet) full of counter snipers I presume?
Drive a yugo, wear Walmart cloths and eat food from the dollar store as well? Surprised you have the internet when you can just read a newspaper.
View attachment 6983639
Ahh, the helpful, friendly keyboarded snickers commence. Did my questions arouse your silly sense of superiority? When I said I was a nub, it was an attempt to avoid doing so, but alas the goblins have smelt blood. Run whilst I can, should I?
Give me a break, your kind of banter will be long gone and guys like me will still wonder what makes TT (Or the next equivalent) worth so much more, regardless if the obvious protectionism and haughty glares and stares of disdain...
I noticed Primus, that you're still the same old child, waiting to troll the next person you think you're better than. Sigh, impressive.
No, no closet, no giant safe. Just a few pieces I've acquired and enjoy, and curiosity. I do actually wear clothes I get at Walmart. I buy food from there too. Got me! Good one, that.
I clicked this thread thinking that I'd actually learn something. All I see so far is a bunch of guys geeking out over Iphone pics of a reticle that looks suspiciously like an Athlon release from earlier last year. Funny how when I ask about it, you resort to calling me names rather than answering my questions or providing information.
I don't need you, and you can't offend me, so get lost Sergeant.
If you’re shooting enough to be considering a TT (or you have expendable income), when something starts going haywire with shots and such during a match, or just in general, you’re going to be wondering if your Ares is the problem.
When you’re trying to get parallax free or have that target set wayyy back in the shadows at 700 yds, you’ll appreciate the TT.
This is also true for just about any optic in the sub 2/2500 range.
If you were asking about the big deal between a TT and kahles/Schmidt/atacr, etc, I would be more inclined to say sure, spend a little less.
Talking about any Athlon and a TT is not even on the same planet.
I guess the statement "it's good enough for what I do" applies. I shoot enough to know when an image is clearer between optics. Enough to know that tracking is more important. Enough to know that the instances where the best possible glass clarity and light transmission are helpful. What I want to know, and since I'm an admitted nub here, life I'm sure will be a good teacher, is what makes the TT cause so much drooling fandom to come out of the woodwork?
Seriously, I really want to know. It's not a hypothetical. What makes the TT scopes worth the money over the other market-competitive options? Do they have clearer glass than the $2500 USOs? Than the $2900 Khales? Than the VIPER GII? How about the Swaros or the Zeiss'? I've spent hours behind Swaro and Zeiss Binos and if that's the case, then color me impressed. Are the mechanisms better? Materials? Craftsmanship? What?
One of the reasons I ask, is because the TT website is more of an exclusive gentlemen's club than an informative portal into why their product is better. Interestingly, the "
PROFESSIONAL RIFLE TELESCOPES FOR PRECISION MARKSMEN" line makes me chuckle... As if to say, "If you have to ask, you don't belong". Okay, maybe I'm reading into it more than I should, but it does strike me as more of a club than it should. There's no marketing, no explanations, no prices. VERY much like the Lamborghini/Bugatti dealerships. I guess when you attain a certain class, you don't have to explain yourself anymore, you just do; and those that are fortunate enough to be in the know, follow. One does not buy a Lambo if you have to ask how much it costs, right?
Sorry, maybe it's just me. Maybe I'm cynical. But can you blame me? A few posts up a blurry red post that would win the "worst scope reticle picture of the month" award is called beautiful. That says so much, and I am seriously asking what that is. To those in the know; Why?
