Schmidt & Bender PMII 6x42 P3 1/10mil Capped Turrets Special Release $1999.99

[eamyrick]

You Projecting You Tender Feelings.

My feeling (singular is intentional) is buried deep, One Who Drop All Balls no can find.........

Anyway, have a good night son. I'll help you find your balls some other time.

Are you really arguing with Big Stick? It’s gonna be like hitting yourself in the foot with a hammer until it doesn’t hurt anymore.

 

[atmat]

Are you really arguing with Big Stick? It’s gonna be like hitting yourself in the foot with a hammer until it doesn’t hurt anymore.

Big Stick got the ban hammer so let’s just drop this convo now so it doesn’t devolve further lol

 

[fwafwow]

Ok. So where can one get this scope?

 

[amassi]

Big Stick got the ban hammer so let’s just drop this convo now so it doesn’t devolve further lol

Man that was a painful weekend


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[atmat]

Ok. So where can one get this scope?

Outside of glass quality, why would you pick this over an SWFA 6x at 10% the cost?

I like my SB Klassic variable. But it’s only twice the cost of an SWFA 3-9x. For me, that’s worth the illumination, capped windage, smaller elevation turret, and zero stop.

But at 10x the cost those aren’t worth it to me (and the SB fixed 6x doesn’t have illumination or parallax adjustment).

 

[fwafwow]

Outside of glass quality, why would you pick this over an SWFA 6x at 10% the cost?

Great question, and since I have the 6x, one I struggle with. I’ve thought that I may end up with only SWFAs on all rifles, and it’s something I’m toying with in getting rid of a brand new SHV. But then there isn’t any current inventory (and the wait times thread sounds like a long wait), and all SWFA could get boring. And if the glass is better, that’s one reason - but I doubt that would justify 10x the cost for me.

I like my SB Klassic variable. But it’s only twice the cost of an SWFA 3-9x. For me, that’s worth the illumination, capped windage, smaller elevation turret, and zero stop.

I like this suggestion too. I’ve lost track of which (if any) S&B’s have been drop tested, or which are assumed to be reliable based on other models. I’d like a small dot of illumination (that occurred to me this weekend when using the 6x against a dark background), and a zero stop and smaller turret and capped windage would be nice. I will look at this option too, but admit I am (at least currently) enamored with the simplicity of a fixed power.

But at 10x the cost those aren’t worth it to me (and the SB fixed 6x doesn’t have illumination or parallax adjustment).

A used one at a much smaller multiple would be interesting. But I am in no rush (I’m still in the position of having more than needed), so maybe the 2024 SWFA line will produce more options.

 

[atmat]

Great question, and since I have the 6x, one I struggle with. I’ve thought that I may end up with only SWFAs on all rifles, and it’s something I’m toying with in getting rid of a brand new SHV. But then there isn’t any current inventory (and the wait times thread sounds like a long wait), and all SWFA could get boring. And if the glass is better, that’s one reason - but I doubt that would justify 10x the cost for me.

I like this suggestion too. I’ve lost track of which (if any) S&B’s have been drop tested, or which are assumed to be reliable based on other models. I’d like a small dot of illumination (that occurred to me this weekend when using the 6x against a dark background), and a zero stop and smaller turret and capped windage would be nice. I will look at this option too, but admit I am (at least currently) enamored with the simplicity of a fixed power.

A used one at a much smaller multiple would be interesting. But I am in no rush (I’m still in the position of having more than needed), so maybe the 2024 SWFA line will produce more options.

Where are you located? If you’re close to me you can try my SB Klassic variable. Form signed off that SB Klassics in general are robust enough for hunting.

 

[fwafwow]

Where are you located? If you’re close to me you can try my SB Klassic variable. Form signed off that SB Klassics in general are robust enough for hunting.

That’s a great offer. I’m in Georgia though. Not that I’m researching scopes from work… but would it happen to be the 3-12x42 LM P3L?

 

[Formidilosus]

Outside of glass quality, why would you pick this over an SWFA 6x at 10% the cost?

I like my SB Klassic variable. But it’s only twice the cost of an SWFA 3-9x. For me, that’s worth the illumination, capped windage, smaller elevation turret, and zero stop.

But at 10x the cost those aren’t worth it to me (and the SB fixed 6x doesn’t have illumination or parallax adjustment).

Not only that, but in a 6x fixed scope is is quite hard to tell the difference between decent to good “glass” and very good to excellent “glass”. The 6x SWFA is good glass, the S&B is very good glass. In 10x I can maybe see someone wanting “the best” glass if they are fanatic, dedicated user of fixed 10x. On a 6x paying 9 times more for a worse reticle, no PA, and way less elevation with no real upside, is a bad compromise.
However, even still the SWFA HD 10x has very good glass, has a better reticle, parallax adjustment, way more elevation range, is very reliable, and is nearly a third the cost.

 

[atmat]

That’s a great offer. I’m in Georgia though. Not that I’m researching scopes from work… but would it happen to be the 3-12x42 LM P3L?

Yeah. If you pay shipping I’ll send it to you in Tikka rings after deer season and let you play with it? Just let me know.

 

[fwafwow]

Not only that, but in a 6x fixed scope is is quite hard to tell the difference between decent to good “glass” and very good to excellent “glass”. The 6x SWFA is good glass, the S&B is very good glass. In 10x I can maybe see someone wanting “the best” glass if they are fanatic, dedicated user of fixed 10x. On a 6x paying 9 times more for a worse reticle, no PA, and way less elevation with no real upside, is a bad compromise.
However, even still the SWFA HD 10x has very good glass, has a better reticle, parallax adjustment, way more elevation range, is very reliable, and is nearly a third the cost.

Thanks for weighing in. It is hard to imagine paying so much more after experiencing the SWFA. The SEFA 10x is also on my mind. But I had sort of ruled it out because of my not hunting at great enough distance (that may have been due in part to posts on other threads), but I think I remember you saying that the 10x rear focus is fine and that side focus isn’t needed (for an extra $100).

 

[fwafwow]

Yeah. If you pay shipping I’ll send it to you in Tikka rings after deer season and let you play with it? Just let me know.

Let me think it over. I’m prone to wild goose chases and I’m trying to overcome that (one of many of my) problems.

 

[eamyrick]

I’ve been using the 3-12x42 P3L for the past 2 seasons. I’m pretty happy with it and have found it to hold zero through fairly rough treatment. It does not like being mounted on a Winchester action for some reason and I’m unable to get more than 1.5 mils. On a Tikka I can get the full 3.2 mils of elevation which gets me to 550.

 

[atmat]

I’ve been using the 3-12x42 P3L for the past 2 seasons. I’m pretty happy with it and have found it to hold zero through fairly rough treatment. It does not like being mounted on a Winchester action for some reason and I’m unable to get more than 1.5 mils. On a Tikka I can get the full 3.2 mils of elevation which gets me to 550.

Now they’re made with 4.8 mil turrets. Unfortunately I could only get 3.2 mil on my tikka as well. This is still outside my ability on game, so I’m okay with it. But I wish I had the full 4.8. I may end up using a 10 moa rail eventually.

 

[eamyrick]

Now they’re made with 4.8 mil turrets. Unfortunately I could only get 3.2 mil on my tikka as well. This is still outside my ability on game, so I’m okay with it. But I wish I had the full 4.8. I may end up using a 10 moa rail eventually.

Are you sure? I swear this had been discussed at length and they were still 3.2 despite some pictures floating around.

 

[Formidilosus]

Are you sure? I swear this had been discussed at length and they were still 3.2 despite some pictures floating around.

They are 4.8 mils now.

 

[eamyrick]

They are 4.8 mils now.

That’s awesome. Much more usable. I got Ryan on the phone as I was about to lose my mind with the 3.2 model on a custom Winchester. With windage adjustment to zero it taps out the elevation. I’ve seen it on two custom Winchesters. Zero issues with the 3.2 on a Tikka as they seem to require very little windage adjustment.

 

[Formidilosus]

That’s awesome. Much more usable. I got Ryan on the phone as I was about to lose my mind with the 3.2 model on a custom Winchester. With windage adjustment to zero it taps out the elevation. I’ve seen it on two custom Winchesters. Zero issues with the 3.2 on a Tikka as they seem to require very little windage adjustment.

That’s sucks. On M70’s especially with that scope, Burris Two Piece XTR bases and XTR Signature rings are the way.

 

[4th_point]

I’ve been using the 3-12x42 P3L for the past 2 seasons.

It does not like being mounted on a Winchester action for some reason and I’m unable to get more than 1.5 mils.

I got Ryan on the phone as I was about to lose my mind with the 3.2 model on a custom Winchester. With windage adjustment to zero it taps out the elevation. I’ve seen it on two custom Winchesters.

Some vintages of M70 are known to have jacked up receivers. I know someone that collects them and he shims the rear base to get rings sort of aligned. If not, the scope gets put in a bind. Might have the rear bridge over polished like some 700 receivers. I don't think they are bent like some claim but I don't own any Winchesters.

Now that I think of it, I worked with a few more that had to shim their M70 as well. I think Brownells used to sell shim kits but we had various shim stock on hand.

I've used the Burris rings that Formi mentioned on several 700 receivers with similar geometry problem. Especially with more "delicate" scopes.

 

[eamyrick]

Some vintages of M70 are known to have jacked up receivers. I know someone that collects them and he shims the rear base to get rings sort of aligned. If not, the scope gets put in a bind. Might have the rear bridge over polished like some 700 receivers. I don't think they are bent like some claim but I don't own any Winchesters.

Now that I think of it, I worked with a few more that had to shim their M70 as well. I think Brownells used to sell shim kits but we had various shim stock on hand.

I've used the Burris rings that Formi mentioned on several 700 receivers with similar geometry problem. Especially with more "delicate" scopes.

Yeh it was two different actions with a decade different vintages. Two different Smith’s checked them for square. While not perfect they weren’t so out of whack that S&B scope just doesn’t have a lot of elevation as is.