ZeroTech TRACE ADV 3-18×44 FFP Shoot2Hunt

[BLJ]

I come up with 5.68” with an enlarged photo of the scope, a piece of paper, a yardstick, and the calculator on my phone. I might need a full rail if I go with an undependable 700 clone.

Rails just add another failure point to the system.

Maybe consider a nice 308.

 

[BAKPAKR]

5.6”

Thank!

Now, I need to figure out if it was the piece of paper, the yardstick, or the calculator on my phone that was off.

 

[BAKPAKR]

Rails just add another failure point to the system.

Maybe consider a nice 308.

I would only go with an integral rail. The Bat Vampire might be an option because it has an extended split rail. Or, maybe, the CDG Light action. No, scratch that thought, I couldn’t stand the look of that.

 

[Q_Sertorius]

5.6”

By my measurements, that appears to be only about 0.15 less than on the SWFAs. I could see that being a bit tight on some rifles (e.g., a traditional Mauser or the Sauer 100 with two-piece bases). But it will be lovely on a Tikka!

 

[BAKPAKR]

By my measurements, that appears to be only about 0.15 less than on the SWFAs. I could see that being a bit tight on some rifles (e.g., a traditional Mauser or the Sauer 100 with two-piece bases). But it will be lovely on a Tikka!

My SWFA 3-9 is just a hair over 5.9”. I pulled my long action 700 out of the safe and it is 5.4” from outside to outside of the Hawkins LR Hybrid rings. So, it would fit but there wouldn’t be much room to play with eye relief. I think @Ryan Avery had responded earlier that it could be tight on a long action.

It would be a non-issue on the Tikka.

 

[Q_Sertorius]

My SWFA 3-9 is just a hair over 5.9”. I pulled my long action 700 out of the safe and it is 5.4” from outside to outside of the Hawkins LR Hybrid rings. So, it would fit but there wouldn’t be much room to play with eye relief. I think @Ryan Avery had responded earlier that it could be tight on a long action.

I was measuring from the parallax dot to the bell. And I have four scopes in rings sitting here since I had to mail out some rifles today, so I also took a quick measurement of the outer edges of those rings just to get an idea.

I got one-piece rails for the Sauer 100s to replace the two-piece ones I had. Ironically, they were delivered right after I shipped the 6.5 off for customer service and the 9.3 off to Feldkamp for cutting and threading.

This new scope is going on my Tikka .243.

 

[BAKPAKR]

BTW - while I had the 700 and the Tikka out for measurements, I just had to cycle the actions. There is no comparison in smoothness. I might have to go with a cartridge that will fit in a Tikka.

 

[tony]

So, I probably missed it.
The scope does not have locking turrets.

Wish this thing was here already, I see a lot of lesser quality for the same or more money.

 

[eltorro]

I hope when they do a moa reticle they take the THLR and morph it to a moa approximation, and get rid of the 6mils (~20moa) of windage. Half of that is plenty for most of us. Plenty. And having the wider outer crosshairs come in closer, would be great in low light. They could just taper them if they were worried about blocking FOV.

There is already one, developed for Gunwerks, by Thomas Haugland and Aaron Davidson, made by Leupold in the MK5 series.

 

[tstowater]

Looks like a rail is in the future for the X-bolt in the 7 PRC. I was going to be changing ring setup anyway as I have Leupold rings currently. Yes, I am behind and playing catch-up.

 

[Nine Banger]

@RancherJohn Any thoughts from you or anyone else in the class on the hashmarks above the main center dot? With the removal of the aim short dot, it’s one area I’ve wondered if it would have been better to just remove them to reduce clutter.

Maybe. But your eye is drawn to the center of the reticle.

That said, In comparison to the Minox, it looks like the topmost hash mark is where the aim short dot should be, so now I’m wondering if most users will just keep that in the back of their minds to use it that way in the field.

I was thinking that the dot staying in place makes a rapid differentiation between a half mil hold and a 1 mil hold for a faster hit without comparing dash size as a confirmer before firing like I do on hash mark reticles.

 

[JDMBEND]

The answer to aim short question.

 

[nortac]

Are they in yet???

 

[rbutcher1234]

Lol

 

[pods8 (Rugged Stitching)]

So, I probably missed it.
The scope does not have locking turrets.

Windage is capped. As for elevation turret locks folks have posted there are patent issues on that subject. I'll let someone more versed on the topic speak to it.

 

[Brap01]

That reticle looks amazing!

 

[DangerRanger]

It has toned down a bit over there, with some of the house trolls moving on.

I genuinely do understand why people don’t like the drop tests.

What I don’t get is the emotional attachment to the concept that manufacturers are testing everything in the best way and nothing on the market could possibly be shifting zero with impacts.

It still doesn’t solve why every nightforce passes and every modern leupy or vortex fails, that has to be chocked up to a form is rigging the test so that 4 years later unknown can make 15% on a 999 scope and sell a million nithtforces, trijicons swfas Schmidt’s in the process

It feels like when you’ve picked a side and made it your personality and just are not interested in thinking it may be wrong. Which I guess could be said about the roksliders also, but if roksliders are wrong nothin really changes we just got duped into buying a 999$ low scope or have less options in the scope market I guess

 

[Formidilosus]

Windage is capped. As for elevation turret locks folks have posted there are patent issues on that subject. I'll let someone more versed on the topic speak to it.

Locking turret wasn’t a patent issue, the OEM stated that the locking turret systems reduce reliability/zero retention and pushed to not use them.

 

[Formidilosus]

It has toned down a bit over there, with some of the house trolls moving on.

I genuinely do understand why people don’t like the drop tests.

What I don’t get is the emotional attachment to the concept that manufacturers are testing everything in the best way and nothing on the market could possibly be shifting zero with impacts.

It still doesn’t solve why every nightforce passes and every modern leupy or vortex fails, that has to be chocked up to a form is rigging the test so that 4 years later unknown can make 15% on a 999 scope and sell a million nithtforces, trijicons swfas Schmidt’s in the process

It feels like when you’ve picked a side and made it your personality and just are not interested in thinking it may be wrong. Which I guess could be said about the roksliders also, but if roksliders are wrong nothin really changes we just got duped into buying a 999$ low scope or have less options in the scope market I guess

A better, and simpler question- why doesn’t any of them just go to the range, zero their rifle, drop and it and then see what happens..?

 

[pods8 (Rugged Stitching)]

Locking turret wasn’t a patent issue, the OEM stated that the locking turret systems reduce reliability/zero retention and pushed to not use them.

Understood in regards to this scope.

For clarification are locking turrets a patent issue also (if you are familiar)? I feel like that has been stated and not sure if you can clear that up or not.