This is topic What do you think of the killflash device... in forum Optics forum at The New Huntmastersbbs!.


To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://www.huntmastersbbs.com/cgi-bin/cgi-ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=4;t=000075

---

Posted by 4949shooter (Member # 3530) on March 04, 2011, 02:09 PM:
 


...on the Nikon Coyote scope. It it worth it? Or is it just a gimmick?
 

---

Posted by Kokopelli (Member # 633) on March 04, 2011, 03:28 PM:
 
Ok............How many coyotes did you spook last year with 'scope flash'?? If you set out to spook a coyote on purpose with nothing but scope flash, how hard would it be to do??

I tend to think that it's a gimmic, BUT, if it doesn't cause any problems with dust or raindrops or such stuff, it shouldn't hurt anything.

Every season, I start out with a handful of new gadgets, gizmos & geegaws...........and every season I re-learn that if simple is good, very simple is very good.

YMMV
 

---

Posted by 4949shooter (Member # 3530) on March 04, 2011, 03:39 PM:
 
Yeah that makes sense Koko. It sure seems like a gimmick.

The instructions say to remove it for low light hunting, so I guess it darkens things up a bit.

[ March 04, 2011, 03:40 PM: Message edited by: 4949shooter ]
 

---

Posted by Leonard (Member # 2) on March 04, 2011, 04:05 PM:
 
Don't overthink this stuff. Those anti-flash devices are for war games and such, just like ghilli suits and face paint, etc. As the flyfisherman would say, "match the hatch". Conduct your stand with a focus on animals, such as a bobcat, fox or a coyote.

A coyote sees flashes every day. Well , maybe not every day, but theoretically he could see the flash of car windows, moving or parked and they do not spook into the next county because of it.

Now, a sentry may make a real big deal out of a momentary flash indicating enemy troop movements in his sector, but a coyote ignores it. That doesn't quite address the situation in which the flash is coming from the same location as the distress sound of a bunny rabbit, but then again, it is entirely possible that the bunny's dog tag might reflect some sunlight.

Now, we need to consider the exact location of the sun in the sky and triangulate the coyote with your scope's objective lens. Make a game of it some time and try to flash your neighbor's wife while she is shoveling the driveway. Might be easier said, than done, Amigo.

Yes, it will cause a reduction in apparent brightness so that should really come in handy. Right?

Conclusion: this gadget is perfect for posers. I bet they sell a ton.

Good hunting. LB
 

---

Posted by 4949shooter (Member # 3530) on March 04, 2011, 05:47 PM:
 
Interesting points Leonard. I kinda figured it was a selling point more than anything else.
 

---

Posted by TOM64 (Member # 561) on March 04, 2011, 05:58 PM:
 
If the sun is sending a flash off your lense, then you made a poor stand choice anyway.
 

---

Posted by Az-Hunter (Member # 17) on March 04, 2011, 06:48 PM:
 
Like so many of the "gimmicks" introduced into hunting, it's yet another; perfect solution, to a nonexistent problem.
 

---

Posted by 4949shooter (Member # 3530) on March 04, 2011, 07:07 PM:
 
Understood.

And getting back to Leonard's analogy to the military, when I brought the scope and gun to the range at work 6 months ago the military guys liked the killflash.
 

---

Posted by TA17Rem (Member # 794) on March 04, 2011, 08:14 PM:
 
I had a Nikon scope that came with the ARD. The scope did'nt cost anymore with it or without. It does reduce the amount of light about the same as a scope with a 4" sun-shade. Would I go out and buy one cause I think I need it? No!
If I bought a scope that came with one then I would leave it on the scope, can't hurt....
 

---

Posted by Cdog911 (Member # 7) on March 05, 2011, 05:08 AM:
 
I picked one up as we were looking at a possible article on sun shades. It was like looking through a window screen and it not only reduced the amount of light to the scope itself, it gave the image seen a definite haziness like the objective was smeared or something. A regular sunshade does the same thing as would a number of other things.

LOL, Tim. You just don't know how NOT to slam your little dink in a drawer, do you? Whereas any commentary I offer about you is aimed at your so-called hunting prowess - on a hunting forum - you are the first to go truly personal by dragging my son into this. Again. If you don't see the problem with that, and I pretty much guess you don't, then it pretty much clarifies and defines the problem for the rest of us. Character, son. Or the lack of. You don't have any idea of where the line might be. Just keep on keeping on. You say more about YOU than any of us could ever put into words everytime you get on a forum. LOL Looking at your recent posts, I'm beginning to think that we're getting to you a bit. Feeling insecure yet? Starting to see your place in the big scheme? Useful idiot.
 

---

Posted by TRnCO (Member # 690) on March 05, 2011, 06:52 AM:
 
IMO, the whole scope is a gadget, from the circles to the killflash.

Scopes with cross hairs have worked for how many decades, without some screen blocking out sun. Hell, the "brightness" of a scope has been a selling point for how long? Then someone thinks it would be better to keep some of the light out, and then put circles for reticles because "our eye will center the target automatically". Really?
Ever notice when you see a commercial on TV showing circle reticles that they are shooting round targets that fit right inside the circles? Great if I hunted circles, but I don't.

give me a good bright scope with a crisp sight picture with good 'ol cross hair and leave it at that.
 

---

Posted by sak81 (Member # 3706) on March 05, 2011, 07:11 AM:
 
Yep, ya can sell a coyote hunter anything.
 

---

Posted by TA17Rem (Member # 794) on March 05, 2011, 08:28 AM:
 

quote:

---

Scopes with cross hairs have worked for how many decades, without some screen blocking out sun. Hell, the "brightness" of a scope has been a selling point for how long? Then someone thinks it would be better to keep some of the light out, and then put circles for reticles because "our eye will center the target automatically". Really?

---

If you would have been around any weapons used by the military you would of noticed most of them use a Peep site which have been in use for decades.. The circle plex works very simular to the peep site..
As for the ARD it dose'nt block out that much lite and you hardly know its there when looking through it when outside.. Like I mentioned before its about equal to useing a sun-shade.. BR shooters use sun-shades and I also use them when hunting on sunny days over snow and when you don't need it all you have to do is unscrew it and put it in youre pocket, no big deal..
The ballistic plex is'nt any better than a standard cross-hair but it works just as well...
When useing the ballistic plex you can use it two ways. You can look through the circle and bracket it around the animal which makes for a steadier shot or you can use it just like a scope that uses a dot in the center of the cross-hair and just put the dot on center to where you want the bullet to strike.. Its not that difficult to use.. The outter edge of the circles can also be used for windage adjustments or for leading a running target...
Its just another tool, some will like it some will not...
 

---

Posted by Leonard (Member # 2) on March 05, 2011, 09:56 AM:
 
A few of the comments and observations concerning brightness are valid on bluebird days. For night hunting, anti reflective devices and sun shades are really counter productive, it is a bit surprising how much they affect a scope's brightness, under low light conditions.

The one scope that I have with the killflash, I don't think it's removable, and guess what? It also has a lighted reticle.

Good hunting. LB

edit: I wondered what Tim said that offended Lance. The last thing I noticed was his sig line/duh! However, I don't get it?

Tim, that's particularly rude. What possesses you sometimes, I don't know. I think you should edit. Don't make me do it.

[ March 05, 2011, 10:00 AM: Message edited by: Leonard ]
 

---

Posted by Cdog911 (Member # 7) on March 05, 2011, 10:00 AM:
 
"As for the ARD it dose'nt block out that much lite and you hardly know its there when looking through it when outside.. "

Wrong again. t-t-t-t-timmy. The ARD does, in fact, look totally different when using it compared to a sunshade. There is a milky, almost hazy appearance, like looking through a screen. The sun shade, in comparison, puts nothing between the user and the target - just glass. The sun shade accomplishes the same function as the ARD without the haziness. The ARD I have is mil-spec and you can't use it in low light, whereas the sun shade on my scope works day or night. Thus, in hunting applications, the ARD really isn't necessary whereas the sun shade is useful. I've been told that you can accomplish the same purpose as either method by simply taking a Butler scope cap and drilling a quarter-inch hole dead center on the solid objective lens cover cap. It keeps the sun from shining on the objective lens but, from where you are sitting, you notice no difference in the view. Haven't tried it myself, but was given this idea by someone whose more well known for good information that t-t-t-timmy.

Question: How many scout sniper teams in today's military are using peep sights? Yes, we used peep sights back in "the day", but then we invented optics and found them much easier to use when pinpointing exactly where we want to shoot. Just because an idea worked once upon a time, doesn't (note the proper spelling) mean we have to use it moving forward. If that were the case, we'd be arguing over the best sized stone to put in our catapults for " 'pultin' yotes".

[ March 05, 2011, 10:05 AM: Message edited by: Cdog911 ]
 

---

Posted by 4949shooter (Member # 3530) on March 05, 2011, 10:41 AM:
 
Well guys in my opinion the reticle isn't all that bad. Some of the guys at work were able to shoot tighter groups with it than me, but it isn't a target reticle. I shot this target off hand at 50 yards.



I forget how many rounds I fired, but they were all in the upper portion of the FBI "Q" target. The reticle seemed to make recovery after a shot quick and easy.
 

---

Posted by TRnCO (Member # 690) on March 05, 2011, 10:49 AM:
 

quote:

---

You can look through the circle and bracket it around the animal which makes for a steadier shot

---

quote:

---

Question: How many scout sniper teams in today's military are using peep sights? Yes, we used peep sights back in "the day", but then we invented optics and found them much easier to use when pinpointing exactly where we want to shoot. Just because an idea worked once upon a time, doesn't (note the proper spelling) mean we have to use it moving forward. If that were the case, we'd be arguing over the best sized stone to put in our catapults for " 'pultin' yotes".

---

quote:

---

There is a milky, almost hazy appearance, like looking through a screen

---

Either you need new glasses or you don't have the focus ring adjusted properly..

quote:

---

I've been told that you can accomplish the same purpose as either method by simply taking a Butler scope cap and drilling a quarter-inch hole dead center on the solid objective lens cover cap. It keeps the sun from shining on the objective lens but, from where you are sitting, you notice no difference in the view.

---

By doing so also affects the amount of light getting in to the scope and also reduces youre field of view..
 

---

Posted by Cdog911 (Member # 7) on March 05, 2011, 03:07 PM:
 
For chrissakes, you illiterate dink, the word is "YOUR". Youre is an incorrectly punctuated variant of the contraction "You're" which is short for "you are" as in, "You're an illiterate dink!"

"AR's with Peep sites is still standard issue.. Ask youre buddy thats in the Airforce what he use for sites when he qualified on the AR."

Yes, they are, if you buy them with that set up. Not all come with peep sights. Many come as flat tops with rails ready to mount modern optics like those used in the type of application I presumed we were talking about here - civilians hunting, not qualifying on the small arms range at Lackland.

And yes, my buddy did qualify with an AR15 - actually an M4 - using peep sights. And yes, he is in the Air Force (two words, vet) which means he stands very little chance of using an M4 or an AR15 in his job. The gentleman I referred to above is a retired scout sniper from the Army (one word, so you can tell the difference), and he just retired so he isn't some washed up old fossil troll has been like you. The platforms he used in his work in Iraq were state of the art and well beyond anything you've ever shot. I trust that when Kyle tells me he made an X-hundred yard shot, he was telling the truth as opposed to your stories. LOL

"
Either you need new glasses or you don't have the focus ring adjusted properly.. "

Apparently, you've only used the ARD that came with that Nikon scope because the one I have is the same one used by US Forces and LEO's today and I've had several ppl look through the scope I had it affixed to and their comments were the same as mine - not worth the distortion they caused to the imagery seen. Had nothing to do with the focus ring. I've looked through a Nikon Coyote with the ARD affixed and theirs is the only one with that large of grid to it. Only one other on the market that I'm aware of - the one I have - and it's notably smaller in cell size. The one Coyote I looked through had similar issues, but not as pronounced. As for the round circles, I just don't see how you can improve on crosshairs when seeking to hit a specific spot at long range. I'm shooting for a specific spot on a coyote, not shooting at the entire coyote. Lot of wisdom to "aim small, shoot small".

" also affects the amount of light getting in to the scope and also reduces youre field of view..

For once, you are correct. As I clearly stated, this isn't something I tried myself, but was given this as an option for someone looking to deal with glare from their objective lens. Under normal daylight conditions, I presume it would work sufficiently to be able to see the target. But, then again, why not just attach a sun shade or set up without the sun in your face and be done with it?

I really need to stop cutting and pasting your comments, t-t-t-timmy. Every time I run my spellcheck, my computer locks up trying to figure out what you're (<--- see how that looks?) saying.
 

---

Posted by TA17Rem (Member # 794) on March 05, 2011, 05:52 PM:
 

quote:

---

Apparently, you've only used the ARD that came with that Nikon scope because the one I have is the same one used by US Forces and LEO's today and I've had several ppl look through the scope I had it affixed to and their comments were the same as mine - not worth the distortion they caused to the imagery seen.

---

quote:

---

...on the Nikon Coyote scope. It it worth it?

---

 

---

Posted by JD (Member # 768) on March 05, 2011, 07:37 PM:
 
Good luck Lance. He`s clearly far more intelligent than any of us. Peep sights!!....what a hoot!!
 

---

Posted by Leonard (Member # 2) on March 05, 2011, 08:35 PM:
 
Dan's still the spellin polece around these parts, and before he get's all upset, you better fix stuff so people know what you are trying to say.

Good hunting. LB
 

---

Posted by Nikonut (Member # 188) on March 06, 2011, 02:02 AM:
 
WOW! I guess I've missed this one!

I'm not sure where to start... I sure like Lance's analogy of Tim's spelling and word usage!

quote:

---

For chrissakes, you illiterate dink, the word is "YOUR". Youre is an incorrectly punctuated variant of the contraction "You're" which is short for "you are" as in, "You're an illiterate dink!"

---

That one's a classic, Lance!

The new Nikon circle reticle might have merit for spray and pray shooting and as a sales gimmick, but it is in no way a precision reticle. If you want to quickly hit an animal and not necessarily kill it, by all means buy one!

The ARD device will reduce reflections but only at the cost of reduced light transmission to the user. The ARD works similar to looking through a screen wire or maybe a chainlink fence with a telescopic lens... the focal plane is sufficiently beyond the plane of the mesh to only cause loss of light and not be in focus to the viewer. As many have said it just isn't needed for normal hunting conditions.

Here is a good example...


I took this photo of a a close relative of TA from about 30yds using a 200mm F2.8 lens set at F2.8(wide open aperture)through a chainlink fence by holding the lens against the wire mesh. You can barely see the resulting checkerboard effect in the upper left hand corner of the picture.

A sunshade will not in any way reduce the light gathered on a telescopic sight unless the optics are extreme wide angle... the opposite is actually true, a proper length sunshade allows the scope to gather more direct light from the targeted area by reducing light refraction on the primary lens.
The same applies for night hunting, a proper length shade will reduce any refracted light from the spotlight(whereas a properly shaded spotlight won't be a problem anyway).

Nick said,

quote:

---

Well guys in my opinion the reticle isn't all that bad. Some of the guys at work were able to shoot tighter groups with it than me, but it isn't a target reticule. I shot this target off hand at 50 yards.

---

Nick, I'd wager you could have shot that same group offhand at 100yds with a good low power scope and a crosshair reticle!

Nikonut
 

---

Posted by 4949shooter (Member # 3530) on March 06, 2011, 03:39 AM:
 

quote:

---

However, I think your group is very good, offhand, etc. You might consider a Jewel trigger if you need to be more precise. Dan, (the man) wherever he is lately? would have good advice, I'm sure.

---

quote:

---

Nick, I'd wager you could have shot that same group offhand at 100yds with a good low power scope and a crosshair reticle!

---

You might be right Tom (well maybe I wouldn't be quite that good!). As I stated above, some of the guys at work shot the reticle better than I did, which was off a rest at the time. I shoot more than most of these guys, and I can only surmise that my eyes are used to a standard cross hair as opposed to the circle. Though one of the guys, my buddy Tom, who is an Iraq veteran and and avid shooter, didn't seem to be affected by the circles. But yes, I did have some trouble with it. I guess you can't teach an old dog new tricks...

I had originally toyed around with the idea of an Eotech or Aimpoint on this gun. But I decided to give the new Nikon a try, mostly for cost reasons. I am not sure if it was the best thing to go with. I would really like to try this scope on game to see what all the hullabaloo is about. Unfortunately, my plans for heading out west may have fallen through for the time being, and I can't use a rifle in NJ or a semi-auto in PA. So...I considered putting this scope on my model 700, but for now I think it will stay on the AR. I hunt mostly with a shotgun anyway...

During the development stage of this scope I had heard about the reticle design, and I took it upon myself to email Tom LaCorte from Nikon. I suggested putting an aiming dot in the center of the larger circle. Tom emailed me back and said they thought about this, but it would have required etched glass, and would have driven up the price of the scope more than they wanted. So...this is the end result. I don't think it is a bad scope for the money, but that is having been said without any experience killing anything with it.
 

---

Posted by Leonard (Member # 2) on March 06, 2011, 08:18 AM:
 
Niko, I don't agree with your comments about sunshades, but that's okay. Maybe you can show me some data?

Good hunting. LB
 

---

Posted by DAA (Member # 11) on March 06, 2011, 08:45 AM:
 
Sunshades are the devil.

- DAA
 

---

Posted by TOM64 (Member # 561) on March 06, 2011, 09:32 AM:
 
First off, I have never shot the nikon circles but I don't think I would like them. Reason, I am quicker with a solid dot or a single crosshair and more accurate when trying to shoot fast. (has nothing to do with hunting) This is compared to the eo-thingy's reticle and the Boone & Crockett reticle Leupold has come out with. Too clutered and too distracting under pressure.

I ran an ARD on a CompML3 Aimpoint and it helped by allowing the dot to be brighter. The thing you need to understand is the Bindon Aiming Concept (google it) allows you to shoot without looking through the tube or screen. When I shot my irons through the Aimpoint, the ARD sucked, making it difficult to define the edges. This was shooting peep sights, I have never seen a peep site, is that like a peep show?

Anyway I don't want an ARD on my scope for my uses. In fact my Aimpoint Micro that I have now isn't even threaded for one.

As for machine gun triggers, Jewell is not even close to the top triggers if you take in reliability. I've had 4 of them and they do not stay adjusted if you shoot them enough, have a light hammer strike and are not as clean as I'd like for a $200 trigger.

If you want the best look at Giesselle, KAC and possibly the AR Gold trigger. If you want a solid trigger for not alot of coin look at Rock River 2 stage, remove the disconnector brad and replace it with a slave pin, and use CS springs. Shooting it will smooth it out or you can lightly polish it but usually they are acceptable out of the bag.

Just the opinion of a machinegunner that has run lot's of options...
 

---

Posted by Leonard (Member # 2) on March 06, 2011, 09:43 AM:
 
Absolutely don't take my word for anything pertaining to machineguns. I'm not up to speed. Which is why I thought Dan would have something to say, but I guess he is busy counting money, or something? I hear he is well off?

Good hunting. LB
 

---

Posted by 4949shooter (Member # 3530) on March 06, 2011, 09:44 AM:
 
Tom I think I had the same problem with my Bushmaster DCM trigger. After 1600 or so rounds, and thousands of dry fires, the trigger went out of whack and needed an adjustment. I don't care for this at all, even on a "non field" competition gun.

Thanks for the Rock River tip.
 

---

Posted by Leonard (Member # 2) on March 06, 2011, 09:48 AM:
 
Keep in mind that Tom is the guy that told me that my drill bit shanks in the legs of my new shooting sticks....would wear out! I'm still trying to figure that one out?

Good hunting. LB
 

---

Posted by TA17Rem (Member # 794) on March 06, 2011, 09:58 AM:
 
I had a sun shade on my Leupold 4-14x when I hunted at nite with no lites. I tried it with and with out and the scope gathers more lite without it on so I left it off... For low lite conditions you can't beat a scope with multi-coated lenses and large objective lense on the end (50mm)...

As for the circle reticle it works the same as a scope that uses a dot on the cross-hair with the eception that the circle dose'nt get blacked out like a dot does on certain targets or low lite conditions... Accuracy wise the gun I had mine on would group under 3/4" which is good enough for coyotes...
 

---

Posted by R.Shaw (Member # 73) on March 06, 2011, 10:49 AM:
 
Tom...was your experience with Jewell triggers limited to AR's only? I have been running those triggers for over a year and would like to know what problems I might have in the future.

Thanks
 

---

Posted by Nikonut (Member # 188) on March 06, 2011, 11:24 AM:
 
Nick... I may have sounded heavy handed on buying that scope, wasn't my intent. Nikon is relatively new to developing specialized predator hunting reticles so I'm sure they will progress to better designs. I'm a big fan of Nikon optics! That should be a no brainer!!! I don't want anything more than a very thin crosshair or dot blocking my aiming point. I personally like target reticles but they can be difficult to see in many hunting situations.

I also emailed Nikon and made suggestions but was told they had pretty much finalized the design. That was a heated discussion at PM. Roberson and South both got pounded and then praised for that one.
The circle concept has long been used by shotgunners, after all they have a much wider "bullet" or pattern they are sending to target.

By Nikonut:

quote:

---

A sunshade will not in any way reduce the light gathered on a telescopic sight unless the optics are extreme wide angle... the opposite is actually true, a proper length sunshade allows the scope to gather more direct light from the targeted area by reducing light refraction on the primary lens.
The same applies for night hunting, a proper length shade will reduce any refracted light from the spotlight(whereas a properly shaded spotlight won't be a problem anyway).

---

Leonard, a sunshade at night can darken the scope somewhat overall but not the actual image light and not nearly as much as flare from a light or even the moon will. A key here is,"direct light from the targeted area". Flare would be my only reason for using one at night.

A big front lens will gather more overall light but the most important light for clear crisp image is only the center portion of the front lens. That's why a simple hole in a cover will work... try it sometime.

I guess the easiest way to explain this would be pictures... maybe a video, TA likes videos...

Let's say your scope has a field of view of 10ft at 100yds. If you can imagine two lines drawn starting at both sides of that 10ft and converging through the approximate center 1/3 of your scope's front lens, then image a point where a sunshade would intercept and block any of that light cone, you would lose useful light through the scope and out the ocular in a 5-7mm circle at that plane. The human eye can only open to approximately that range so any more light is wasted any way. Light from beyond that 10ft viewing area doesn't enter the image you see in the scope. That is why multi coatings are important. They help control stray light coming in from off the targeted area and into the lens system. You have to understand that light is linear.

Try looking through a scope with the sun flaring to one side and then hold your hand up and out in front of the scope to block the sun... that will convince you as to how this all works. The clarity of a scope is controlled by that narrow beam of light from the target area to your eye. Any other light entering the scope will cause distortion and loss of contrast.

This principal is also why a mesh screen can be placed in front of a telephoto lens and still get a relatively clean image. Try that with a wide angle lens and the image will be unusable.

Now, back to a sunshade at night. An unshaded multi coated lens will certainly gather more indirect light and give the impression of a brighter image but at the cost of a not so clear image and loss of contrast. We are talking hand grenades and oranges here... night hunting certainly has it's limitations and the need for experimentation and specialization. I digress to Leonard's theory of, "If it's not broken don't try to fix it!"

Not all optics are created equal... GO Nikon!!!

Nikonut

Edited to add quote...

[ March 06, 2011, 11:43 AM: Message edited by: Nikonut ]
 

---

Posted by 4949shooter (Member # 3530) on March 06, 2011, 01:10 PM:
 

quote:

---

Nick... I may have sounded heavy handed on buying that scope, wasn't my intent.

---

quote:

---

Sometime at the bench with an accurate rifle and a sunshade, shoot a couple groups. Then grasp the rifle by putting one hand around the end of the sunshade and the stock and just gently squeeze the sunshade towards the barrel. Shoot another group. See where it lands compared to the first two.

---

quote:

---

Would'nt you get the same results if you squeezed the barrel and forearm of the stock with a rifle that has the barrel free floated?????

---

UBB.classic^TM 6.3.0