TT and Vortex Gen3 in PRS
- Thread starter anginaprinzmetal
- Start date
I can't imagine the components would get hot enough in a scope to manifest into those types of issues.
But I've been wrong before.
Tracking strong/weak would imply that you’re getting more or less (strong or weak) movement in the erector per click than expected.
Adjustment per click swings. Ex. when hot each click could be .11 mils instead of .10 mils, and would return when cooled off. (numbers made up to demonstrate example).
I don't have an opinion one way or another. Not 100% sure how these are constructed and materials used. I could see materials like brass expanding a few thousandths over a decent temp swing, but the design may negate all expansion.
Correct.
“It was with that third shot that I realized I was one one hundredth of a mil off. Surely the scope was to blame.”
-Things I Will Never Say
-Things I Will Never Say
10% error means 11 mils vs 10 mils. Makes a lot of difference at 1000 yards
One of the bigger loads of internet BS I have heard in a while and not surprised it's being parroted here over and over.
Not a chance. That is several orders of magnitude larger than the expansion rate of aluminum or brass or stainless steel or any other metal you might find in there.
ILya
So many other elements involved in the outcome. Load development, something lose, could be mechanical inside the scope that happens sometimes but not all the time, weather ? I doubt the metal or internal parts are moving in heat or cold.
This is a busted SWFA that I never bothered to send back for repairs because it was an interesting thing to have lying around anyways.
I don't know anything about how much metals expand/contract per degree Fahrenheit, so this could be a dumb question. Forgive my ignorance. If the piece at the bottom of the turret that pushes against the erector tube is made from a metal that can expand/contract enough in a 50°-60°, could this affect how much distance the erector tube is depressed?
I went ahead and plugged a hypothetical 10x6mm cylinder into Chat GPT (not conclusive, but I figured it'd answer my question enough) and what it gave me back was:
So, the brass cylinder will expand approximately 0.0058 mm in height and 0.0035 mm in diameter when the temperature changes from 50°F to 105°F.If that where thousandths of an inch, I could maybe see it. But I think @koshkin's probably right when he says "That is several orders of magnitude larger than the expansion rate of aluminum or brass or stainless steel or any other metal you might find in there."
The Gen III is not the first scope to use any of this internal material but all of a sudden it's the only one that is showing an issue after decades? Screams BS.
It is. I did some testing and modeled it for a range of designs based on several different objective lens focal lengths.
Unless there is a gross manufacturing defect somewhere (in how parts are machined and stress relieved), the claim is absolute and unmitigated pile of manure.
Let me use a modern political metaphor to try to convey how unlikely this is.
It is much less probable than AOC shooting in the PRS finals while buck naked with the 2nd amendment tattooed on her ass.
It is much less probable than Rashida Talib enrolling in the IDF, rifle in hand to defeat Hamas.
It is much less probable than assertion that Kamala Harris has never given a blowjob.
If this is too political for this forum, I'll edit it.
ILya
Be careful what you wish for. When dealing with politicians, everything has a price.
ILya
I answered this earlier. Cant believe anyone still thinks it’s the scope
Similar threads
