This is topic Scope opinions 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=000080
Posted by Aaron Rhoades (Member # 4234) on August 23, 2014, 07:14 PM:
I'm in the market for a new scope for my new gun and since I like nice glass, I have a top 5 that I was wondering if any of you have experience with. The 5 are in no particular order: Nightforce, Schmidt & Bender, Premier, Us Optics and Kahles. Also as a side note, I have a friend that got a Burris Eliminator 3 that he hasn't used yet that I could probably try it out just to see what its all about.
Posted by Prune Picker (Member # 4107) on August 23, 2014, 09:43 PM:
Aaron, I assume the scope will be for your new rifle? Regardless how much will your rife weigh without a scope? LB has a US Optics scope and Fred (Knockemdown) pretty much knows scopes inside and out. Pretty sure there are several others here with some good info. Don't overlook the VX6 Leupolds (TWR has one) it's definitely a bad ass 1st class scope. Do you plan on twisting knobs?
Posted by Aaron Rhoades (Member # 4234) on August 24, 2014, 07:04 AM:
Yes, for the new rifle Mike. I do not plan on dialing with this gun. I do not know the weight yet either.
[ August 24, 2014, 07:04 AM: Message edited by: Aaron Rhoades ]
Posted by Leonard (Member # 2) on August 24, 2014, 07:18 AM:
I'm a big fan of Kahles. On the Premier and U.S. Optics, they trend towards tactical and target. Burris is not even in the same league as the others.
It all depends on what your application is. If you are looking for a scope to go on a hunting rifle, you should resist the temptation to get high power variables with big objectives. I would look at 2.5X8, 3X9 or 3X12, possibly 4.5X14? But more than that and you are getting into rifles for shooting squirrels which is what it is; live targets, emphasis on "target".
Personally, I don't think a calling rifle needs over 40mm objective. If you consider mirage, anything over 12 power is not useful at all. At night, same thing. You have great difficulty identifying animals under a spotlight at more than 12 power. I did very well for many years with a 3.5X10 power Leupold, which is still a great choice, as far as I am concerned.
The three main (daytime) calling rifles I use: two of them have a 2.5X8 and the other has a 1.8X10. A lot of that is personal preference, of course, but if you start asking around, seeing what others are using, it gives you some insight, from which to form your own preferences.
Good luck, El Bee
Posted by CrossJ (Member # 884) on August 24, 2014, 07:52 AM:
Lb pretty much covered it. Don't rule out Vortex also. Their new genII glass is awesome. Had a guy tell me it was equel to his Schmitt(his opinion).. Reticles are also something to consider. I prefer a simple reticle with maybe just a few sub tension references for hunting. That kinda rules out NF....LOL. The old Kahles TDS or swaro heavy br reticles are nice.
Maintain
Posted by DanS (Member # 316) on August 24, 2014, 08:12 AM:
This interest me too. Though some of you spend in another league than I. The few Leupolds in VX3 I have as getting into high dollar. I don't do a lot or turret twisting, but I want good glass and a solid scope that stays zeroed.
I like 3-9x40's but am thinking of going up to a 12 or 14 power.
What's the recommendation for say under a grand?
Posted by DAA (Member # 11) on August 24, 2014, 08:49 AM:
For a calling rifle - which means daytime for me - I put the emphasis on weight and form factor. How a rifle handles matters a lot to me on stand.
And, just me personally, I'll take lighter weight over the raw muscle and toughness of a "tactical" scope, for calling. I simply do not need to be able to drop my rifle out of a helicopter and pound tent stakes with my scope.
Stock and scope mounting height need to work hand in hand too. My calling rifles all have classic style sporter stocks. Not well suited to mounting big objective glass.
I have never, not once, turned dials on a coyote. So, again, the repeatability that is so desirable for knob twirler, is not a factor in my scope choice for a calling rig. Mine just needs to hold a zero and not change too much as the magnification ring gets turned.
I do occasionally like to be able to crank up the magnification, to dump a yapper. But, I could probably hunt coyotes the rest of my life with a fixed 6x and be happy. My calling rifles do all sport variables but they are stuck on 5x and the only time they ever get moved from 5x is the occasional long yapper mentioned above. But, even then, sometimes I don't bother cranking it up. Have shot many, many a coyote at over 300 yards using 5x and it's not a real handicap.
So... Most of my calling rifles sport the same Leupold 4.5x14-40's. Nothing exotic or sexy about them. Not even all that super high quality, really - not compared to the list you have above. But, they are relatively small and light weight and fill all my needs on a day time calling rig quite nicely.
- DAA
Posted by Lone Howl (Member # 29) on August 24, 2014, 09:37 AM:
I have the exact same opinion as Dave. I have posted this before, but I used a straight 6X for years and shot many many coyotes with it, and never felt handicapped. Those were the days when my goal was to shoot 100 per season and I reached it several times with a simple 6X.
I love badass scopes, but for recreational calling, I just don't need all that. I run Leupold or Burris 4x12's on my calling rifles, have since late 80's, no knobs to get in the way or any of that shit, and 99 percent of the time they are set on 6 power. I have used higher end stuff at different points in my calling "career" but can't honestly justify it...for me.
Also, my idea of a calling rifle is a regular sporting weight style hunting rifle. I love all the various AR'S and stuff, but I can't stand actually lugging one around to hunt with, and I've rarely met anyone who can utilize them any better on follow up shots than a guy on a bolt gun, but...we are boys with toys and we all like cool looking and different stuff so to each their own.
My idea of predator calling, is actually calling them close...that is the thrill for me, not shooting long range or pretending to be some sort of sniper or whatever. I love all that kind of stuff but it's just not necassary for me. Svelte, fast handling, non snagging, easy carrying rifle/scopes are what I like for calling.
Hope I didn't stray to far off topic.
Mark
EDIT.. cause I didnt spell svelte correctly : )
[ August 25, 2014, 07:20 AM: Message edited by: Lone Howl ]
Posted by Dave Allen (Member # 3102) on August 24, 2014, 10:33 AM:
Aaron,
Sorry dude, really can't help you in regards to your question's. Just have to say I couldn't agree more with what Leonard, Dave and Mark had to say.
I've used 2x7 Leupolds for years, and never been under-scoped hunting the high desert of Idaho & Oregon. Honestly, I'd get by just fine with a fixed 4X..
All that being said, I'm leaning towards a VX3 1.75X6 Leupold with heavy cross hairs for my next "ultimate" for my budget scope, and be done.
If the brands you mentioned offer configurations as has been mentioned in this thread. I'd probably lean that direction. IMO.
Good luck, Amigo.
Posted by Prune Picker (Member # 4107) on August 24, 2014, 12:56 PM:
Aaron, unless your rifle weighs 10+ lbs putting a 2 lb scope on it is probably a mistake, they tend to be top heavy and are a bitch to carry. Personally I don't own a scope over 12x and only use it for 100yd rim fire targets. Like most who have posted have said a 3.5 x10 is a lot of scope on a sporter weight rifle. With a SAFE trigger pull of 3-4 lbs I have a had time managing a 20x scope on a bench or stalking on foot. Give me a GOOD low powered scope and I am happy and confident.
Posted by Aaron Rhoades (Member # 4234) on August 24, 2014, 01:57 PM:
Ok, out of the list that narrows it down to these two: http://nightforceoptics.com/compacts/2-5-10x42-nxs-compact-riflescope/
http://www.kahles.at/kahles-united-states-of-america-usa/products/helia-c/helia-c -25-10-x-50/
[ August 24, 2014, 01:57 PM: Message edited by: Aaron Rhoades ]
Posted by Lone Howl (Member # 29) on August 24, 2014, 02:30 PM:
Kahles.
Mark
[ August 24, 2014, 02:31 PM: Message edited by: Lone Howl ]
Posted by Prune Picker (Member # 4107) on August 24, 2014, 02:45 PM:
Aaron, seems like DiYi treated himself to a very nice scope last year, not sure what he wound up with but similar specs and brands that you are looking at. Hopefully he sees your question.
Size wise, those are both large scopes that probably require tall (or higher) rings, depending on your barrel contour. As others have said balance and close to bore centerline makes or breaks a user friendly rifle/scope combo. If you are buying sight unseen, compare advertised objective size (40-50 or larger obj and weight) usually means one thing, high or Xtra high rings. If your local gun shop has either or both in stock see if you can mount one on your rifle, if either compromise's the balance ouch! that's a costly mistake. Look twice, spend once.
Posted by TOM64 (Member # 561) on August 24, 2014, 08:55 PM:
Out of the two you chose, the NF.
But what's your rifle blueprint look like?
My bolt guns are light weight so I'm not gonna mount 1.5 lbs of scope and rings on a 6 lb rifle.
The blueprint dictates the scope. My calling scopes on bolt guns are Leupold VX3 3.5-10x40 1" tubed scopes with CDS dials.
The VX6 I have on my machine gun is a 1-6 and the glass is nice but I almost prefer the 3.5-10 simply due to the reduced weight. I've shot the 1-6 out to 500 yards and my 3.5x ACOG to 400 so it's not the glass or power but simply the balance and eye box that matters more to me. I have good binoculars to glass with, the scope just puts the shot on the target.
Posted by knockemdown (Member # 3588) on August 25, 2014, 04:42 AM:
Excellent input already, so I'll just reiterate what's been mentioned.
I want a scope to "match" the rifle, dimension-ally, and spec-ed to maximize the cartridge.
If you're building a svelt calling rifle, then you'll want a scope that'll compliment that. Leupy's 2.5-8x36 is a great "little" hunting scope. Nice glass, good zoom range, lightweight and can mount LOW on the rifle, thanks to that 36mm bell. The 1.75-6x Dave Allen mentioned would fit that bill, too.
Some guys prefer to shoot on lower power & enjoy a wider field of view, while others might want/need a bit more zoom factor to engage a critter. Bad/aging eyes, personal preference,or whatever.
10x max IS plenty of magnification to shoot shit waaaaaaay far away, but certain scopes are available with a 5x zoom range, so you can have some extra top end available. Generally speaking, the larger the zoom range, the larger the price tag. That's why 3-9x scopes (3x zoom range) are generally the best 'value' in a riflescope, they're cheaper to make and more easy to make right...
As for matching the scope to the cartridge, I'm talking caliber choice and ballistics. Seems like most predator hunters want to shooot fast & flat, for obvious reasons. And IIRC, you're building a 17/204, so that definitely qualifies for both! In that case, employing a simple reticle design utilizing an MBPR zero makes heckuvalotta sense. A standard duplex or #4 reticle, with bold outer x-hairs and a finer center intersection makes it easy on the eye to get centered up reticle.
Personally, I've kinda come back around from wanting a lightweight calling rifle, and prefer them to be 9-11 lbs., finished weight. A hefty rig is just more forgiving to hold on target and shoot well, and allows alot more latitude in scope choices. Runnin' a 50mm obj. scope isn't going to throw off the balance and symmetry of the rifle. That said, a 3-15x50 is my flavor of choice for an 'ideal' hunting scope...
Anyhoo, if I had to choose between the NXS and that Kahles Helia C, for your 17/204, I'd pick the Kahles. You really don't need turrets on a .17Hotrod, and overall, the Kahles glass is gonna kick azz on the NXS. I have a couple Khales Helias with #4A reticles and they are super nice...
Good luck!!!
[ August 25, 2014, 04:44 AM: Message edited by: knockemdown ]
Posted by Leonard (Member # 2) on August 25, 2014, 11:15 AM:
Just be careful about objective creep. You know, 56mm is wonderful in low light, but I think it is only useful sitting on a hillside waiting for a mule buck when it's really too dark to see unless you look through the scope.
For a coyote stand, for all practical purposes, you are done for the day just past sundown. Sometimes I have had nothing better to do, at the end of the day, last stand of the day, might as well just sit there, with no time to make another stand.
Really, it sounds good, but I don't get a tremendous amount of animals when it's that dark. Many reasons, but it's visibility primarily. You just can't pick them up like you can when there is more light, therefore (yeah) they might be there, but if you can't see them you can't shoot them and this is why I think super, light gathering scopes sound better than they really are, in practice. If a coyote is nothing else, he is excellent for concealment in low light conditions.
Put your money in field of view, which is lower magnification. Put your money in clear, uncomplicated reticles, the absolute worst is a Horus Vision, for daylight coyote stands. Don't think I can't appreciate Horus Vision, because I think they are great for certain applications.
But, in a daylight coyote scope, I want an uncluttered view. If it's true, as mentioned above that Nightforce has complicated reticles, I'm not interested. Actually, I have always felt that Nightforce are kinda overrated. Big and bulky, and very pricey. Never been a fan.
So, of the two scopes making the finals, a Kahles would be far and away my choice. And, like Dave said, I have never dialed in a coyote standing out yonder. That's why I want a flat shooting cartridge so I don't have to mess with the turrets. That and the fact that I have a practical limitation on range. I just don't like to waste my time chasing a cripple past 500 yards. It has a way of burning daylight and coming up empty anyway. I think I can make two more stands rather than trekking out there looking for an animal that routinely drops out of sight, hit or missed. Therefore, if you are going to shoot, you had better have a landmark to go by. When there is monotonous landscape, it's very difficult to gauge distance and exact point of the compass. The further away, the more difficult it is. 400 yard shots are reasonable, in some cases, but beyond that, I have to question the advisability. Maybe prone, but off sticks, it's difficult to make a precision shot where he will go down without a fuss.
Long winded, I know. Take it for what it's worth.
Good hunting. El Bee
Posted by Q-Wagoner (Member # 33) on September 05, 2014, 09:24 AM:
I would take a hard look at the NF 2.5 x 10 x 42 With the Mil-R reticle. You can stager your zero somewhere between 170 and 200 yards and have nearly spot on impacts at 300/.5 mil. At 400 and 450 the stadia lines should line up ok @ 1 and 1.5 mil as well allowing for some solid reticle based hold overs. The NF set up will also allow you to dial if you need a more precise aiming point. The side parallax is also a nice feature for the longer shots. Not necessarily for focus but for true parallax adjustment.It is not a necessary feature on a 10x but it will improve your groups at extended ranges.
good hunting.
Q,
[ September 05, 2014, 09:25 AM: Message edited by: Q-Wagoner ]
Posted by knockemdown (Member # 3588) on September 05, 2014, 10:29 AM:
Excellent interpolation & reticle use!
I've done a similar bit of 'swaggin' while gettin' better acquainted with this .22-243AI, pushing 75Amaxs. This is what I've settled on:
Turret is "zeroed" @ 100yds (always)
For HUNTING, I will dial & leave 0.4 mils UP on the scope.
That nets me a ~250yd POI zero (dead on) with the main x-hair. That translates to "hold on fur" to 300yds (only ~2.5"' of drop @ 300yds)
With the turret dialed & left @ 0.4mils UP, a 350yd correction is a simple 0.5mil holdover. That correlates to the first subtension hash in the GenII Mildot reticle, works out GREAT!
450yd correction is a full 1.0mil holdover. Another great 'match' to the Gen II reticle.
~400yds, split the difference & hold between the 0.5mil hash and the 1.0mil dot ![[Wink]](wink.gif)
Best part is, my scope is a first focal plane design, so these holdovers can be used, regardless of the scope's magnification setting. So, if ya got a good range, you can holdover and get a quality shot off, without ever touching the turret!
In a rare instance beyond those ranges, imma get a solid ranger with the LRF, and dial the dope right into the elevation turret.
It's all about knowing your rifle, the dope of your load, and using your scope as a tool...
(and i luv this kinda shit )
Posted by Q-Wagoner (Member # 33) on September 05, 2014, 12:19 PM:
After shooting long range tactical matches for a season I have grown to appreciate ffp Scopes among other things. If you are planning on using your reticle for hold overs a ffp is the way to go. I can get away with reticle based hold overs on my sfp Scopes that are 10x because I leave them on 10x most all of the time. If I dial down I'm usually in country so tight I'm not worried about hold overs. Anything over 10 X I would definitely go with a first focal plane. The NF 2.5 x10 is a sfp unfortunately but on 10 power it can easily be used on a calling rifle.
Good hunting.
Q
Posted by Leonard (Member # 2) on September 05, 2014, 12:34 PM:
I can agree with the above. My primary calling rifle, presently has a 1.8X10 ffp reticle. One that I can pound tent pegs with, if need be. I don't take much time to fool with knobs though. I can't get a lot of those retreating coyotes to hold still long enough, while I dial it in; speaking of multiples. It's all about a flat shooting cartridge so I can hold on fur. Kinda old school.
Good hunting. El Bee
Posted by Q-Wagoner (Member # 33) on September 05, 2014, 01:02 PM:
I guess if a caller does his part you should hold "on" all the time. LOL
Good hunting.
Q,
Posted by Q-Wagoner (Member # 33) on September 05, 2014, 01:11 PM:
For hunting I am a big fan of reticle based hold overs. they are almost always dynamic in nature. Reticle based is just faster. I just got back from Africa and used my full blown tactical match rifle. It was deadly but frustrating at times as I was trying to dial and keep up with moving game. The speed factor lost me several shot opportunities and defiantly saved a few baboons.
Good huntin.
Q,
[ September 06, 2014, 06:57 AM: Message edited by: Q-Wagoner ]
Posted by Leonard (Member # 2) on September 05, 2014, 03:08 PM:
Yeah, and that's really my point. I seldom mess with turrets when hunting predators.
Good hunting. El Bee
edit: I'm going to put my comments here, rather than stepping all over Quinton's post, which is a good one, and one with which I concur and heartily agree. If you want to know something about the practical aspects of hunting coyotes or predators, in general, read below, and then have it laminated for your wallet. LB
[ September 07, 2014, 11:27 AM: Message edited by: Leonard ]
Posted by Q-Wagoner (Member # 33) on September 06, 2014, 11:02 PM:
I have never spun a dial hunting coyotes and I have never spun a dial hunting anything else for that matter until this last year. You can hunt in a manor which affords you the opportunity to dial your dope if you specifically hunt for long range shooting opportunities. Even under normal hunting situations you could dial your dope from time to time.
Over the last year shooting tactical matches that is all we do is dial for everything so I am getting comfortable doing it. Dialing is better for precise long range engagements. Some reticals like the Horus are very precise but they are very busy. For coyote hunting though I am not going to get caught up in all of that.
In my world 90% of the coyotes I shoot are under 400yards and the vast majority fall between 100 and 200 yards. Statistically these numbers are not going to change all that much no matter what gun/scope combo I use. Why? because I am a pot hunter of sorts and my style of hunting is not going to change. My coyote rigs are set up for 100 to 400 yards because that is just the "fit" for my area and style of hunting.
My guns are optimized for those ranges but fully capable of more. I don't want to pack a 17lb match rifle with a 25x on it to stands all day because it may give me a slight advantage on a 500 yard shot that may or may not come up.
I like my calling guns a little heavier than most and my Scopes set at 10x and I like a solid reticle based holdover at 400 or so.
For most of the hot rod coyote rounds out there with a good bullet and a 200 or so zero you are looking at 12 to 14 inches of drop and 12 to 14 inches of drift in a 10 mph wind.
The space between the hair line on a coyote and his elbow joint happens to be 12 to 14 inches as well. So technically you have a nice reliable range finder right in front of your face. So for most all calling situations you really only need two holds. If the primary crosshair and the 400yd stadia line fit in the kill zone then shoot. If the crosshair is sitting on the coyotes back and the 400yd line is on his elbow, use the 400yd line and center it up. Simplicity=speed.
Good hunting.
Q,
[ September 06, 2014, 11:38 PM: Message edited by: Q-Wagoner ]
Posted by Brent Parker (Member # 4354) on September 11, 2014, 07:33 PM:
I have looked thru or owned several of the scopes mentioned, If your not dialing turrets and want great glass with some decent reticule options I would buy a Swaro Z-6 2-12x50 with the BRH reticle. Other wise though heavier I would look at a hunting version of a Schmidt and Bender. I dont think you will complain about glass clarity, resolution in either of those. I have a preference for a ffp scope for hunting.
Brent
Posted by knockemdown (Member # 3588) on September 12, 2014, 03:58 AM:
Steiner is posta be releasing a new line of 'lite' tactical scopes that I'm real curious about. Price point looks right, and Steiner has come a long way in the last few years in catching up with the competition...
Brent, you still rockin' a Premier?
The 3-15x50 'Hunter' model I put on the .22-243AI kinda shit the bed on me, last month. Didn't fail mechanically, just developed some oil specks in the inside of the ocular lens. Likely from a bit of grease residue being knocked off the inside of the main tube.
Anyhoo, contacted AT online, got an RMA authorization &sent it off to VA. Had it back inside of 2 weeks with a clean bill of health.
No harm, no foul...
Posted by Brent Parker (Member # 4354) on September 12, 2014, 04:06 AM:
Fred no I have switched over to a S&B PM II 3-20x50. The Premier had great glass and reticle but had turrets roll on me and it almost cost me a coyote. Schmidt has locking turrets. If I could have found a Premier Hunter model with the Gen II I would have gone that way.
I would like to save up for a swaro 2-12 for my lightweight rifle. Have a friend that owns one and they are nice. I just wish swaro would go back to making a ffp option.
Brent
Posted by Leonard (Member # 2) on September 12, 2014, 08:49 AM:
You know, that's something I have to watch with my U.S. Optics. That very large erec elevation knob seems to rotate, either putting the rifle in the case or taking it out of the case. Something I am conscious of so I have a habit of checking that the hash mark is on zero. But, annoying. Also understandable, I guess? It's so damned big.
Also, my big 5X25 U.S. Optics was (apparently banged around in shipment, there was a chunk of something inside that broke loose. They fixed it and cleaned it and had it back to me before I could ask for an internal bubble, but the service caught me with my pants down.
I sent back a Redfield, many years ago that has some kind of graphite inside, as soon as I got it back I traded for a Leupold, the first of many. I sold a Leupold to my cousin, a long time ago and I don't know what he did, but he brought it back much later with what seemed to be a bubble inside? He wanted ME to send it in which I did, but told him it was unnecessary. I have sent a total of two scopes to Leupold and they seem to have a great customer service. Now, my 3X12X56 Kahles, if I ever have a problem, I think it has to go back to the factory, near as I can tell by the literature with the scope? Still, has (to my eye) the best optics of any scope I have ever looked through.
Good hunting. El Bee
edit: a few years ago, I was fishing down in Cabo, and the guy in the next cabin was an Austrian. One day, I mentioned Swarovski and believe it or not, he said he had never heard of it? He was an engineer and knew every other optics mfg. but not that one! I was baffled.
edit: it might be just a name recognition. For instance, the shoe mfg. PUMA is called Slezenger, or something like that? in Europe.
[ September 12, 2014, 08:56 AM: Message edited by: Leonard ]
Posted by knockemdown (Member # 3588) on September 12, 2014, 09:29 AM:
Thanks, Brent.
I've accidentally spun turrets, too. More the windage turret than the elevation. Kinda started making it a habit to check 'em & confirm where both are at, when the gun goes on the stix...
Leonard, you're in luck!
Kahles has come along way with their tactical line of scopes, and has a CS contact in Idaho, USA
Customer Service / Warranty Repair
E-Mail: info@hpsoptic.com
Phone: #208-476-0600 or Toll Free 1-866-606-8779
Fax: #208-476-0602
Posted by Leonard (Member # 2) on September 12, 2014, 12:45 PM:
Fred, this (Kahles) scope came with detailed instructions for soldering the scope to the rings. Involves a lot more disassembly than I would ever do. I suppose it's intended for a gunsmith, although you seldom ever hear of this, this side of the pond.
Good hunting. El Bee
Posted by Kelly Jackson (Member # 977) on September 12, 2014, 03:23 PM:
Real good advice above.
If you know your rifle, your load and have time, Dialing is more precise.
Here’s a clip of one shot off sticks and scoped dial after the range was taken. 204AI with a 50gr bullets drops a bit at a ¼ mile.
Most shots are alt closer but these didn’t want to work the dogs a few weeks ago.
http://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=w6VLRJNjoE0
Good luck with your choice.
Stay after them
Kelly
Posted by Leonard (Member # 2) on September 12, 2014, 03:57 PM:
Kelly, very interesting video. Thank you.
A couple observations. First, how many coyotes did you see, looked like at least three, to me?
Second, is that your normal set up? lawn chairs and no camo? My feeling, right off the bat was they saw you? That's why they seemed to get wise and turn around. It could be they saw the dogs, but is it rare when they turn tail at the sight of dogs? When I have seen dogs and coyotes, it's more common the dogs leave, (when coming to a call) than the coyotes.
I know this is more questions than you usually respond to, on a mobile, so whatever you can do to satisfy my curiosity is much appreciated.
And, thanks for sharing!
Good hunting. El Bee
Posted by Kelly Jackson (Member # 977) on September 12, 2014, 04:12 PM:
LB – there were 2 coyotes that came on camera. The dogs were working one that came in behind us in a thicket at that same time. Yes they got too close and saw us, but this stand was about showing that black pup I call Cookie some coyotes. They only learn so much from dead ones so we dinked with these for almost ½ hour before the shot was took.
Oh did you catch that coyote working a grasshopper when it was following that brindle dog in?
Yep lawn chairs and no camo pretty much all the time unless its cold and I’m wearing a jacket.
Here’s a clip from last Saturday that shows pretty good dog work and a shot at more acceptable range.
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Q0gKHuhMxL8&sns=fb
Stay after them
Kellly
edit to add Sugar the black dog in this clip is from Ryan and is a full brother to the male that bred the litter he is selling. Bet they would make a dog for somebody if you was looking for one.
[ September 12, 2014, 04:33 PM: Message edited by: Kelly Jackson ]
Posted by Kelly Jackson (Member # 977) on September 12, 2014, 04:39 PM:
Seen your other question....LB I lost count this summer on the number of coyotes that didn't want anything to do with the dogs.
Lots of reasons why.....
Posted by Leonard (Member # 2) on September 13, 2014, 07:12 AM:
Yeah, in the first video, about the 2:20 mark, there is a lot of movement at the extreme left. Could even be a whitetail? I looked at it three times and still can't be sure of what it is?
Pretty casual, one boy is waving his arm around in the second vid. Which, BTW looks a lot like parts of AZ.
Good hunting. El Bee
Posted by trapper2 (Member # 3651) on September 13, 2014, 08:30 AM:
yep it was a white tail deer
Posted by knockemdown (Member # 3588) on September 16, 2014, 04:18 AM:
Cat Daddy, sure looks like them dogs are gettin' it figured out! Just teasing enough and peelin' off at the right times...
450 off stix ain't no joke, either...great shootin'!
Posted by Lone Howl (Member # 29) on September 16, 2014, 02:01 PM:
Yep, heck of a shot! Nice vids K.
UBB.classicTM
6.3.0