On Sat, 18 Oct 2014 18:36:52 -0400, Poco Loco
wrote:


Virtually all of the serious target shooters that I know use a scope.
At 100 yards it is difficult just getting on the paper consistently
without one. With a good rifle, good scope and good ammo, you can
shoot 1 inch groups inside the 10 ring.

I would most likely never be a *serious* target shooter. My eyes
aren't good enough for that. I go to the range only because I enjoy
shooting. I haven't really shot a rifle since early Army days with the
M-14. I was very good with it.

In Vietnam I fired the M-16 only a few times. More or less for
familiarization. My First Sergeant and I would go out to the local
laterite pit and practiced on beer cans.

===

A good scope can compensate for just about everything except cataracts
or macular degeneration. Just turn the focus ring until everything is
sharp. Cataracts can be fixed with surgery of course.

This is the one I use on my customized Ruger 10/22 for CMP competiton
at 50 yards:

http://www.amazon.com/Monarch-Riflescope-4-16x42SF-Matte-BDC/dp/B000OZU92K

I used two other scopes prior to the Nikon until I found one I liked.
The others both had excessive parallax error. From the prone position
I can now shoot 97s and 98s with 30 or 40% in the "X" ring.

On Sat, 18 Oct 2014 20:04:38 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Sat, 18 Oct 2014 18:36:52 -0400, Poco Loco
wrote:


Virtually all of the serious target shooters that I know use a scope.
At 100 yards it is difficult just getting on the paper consistently
without one. With a good rifle, good scope and good ammo, you can
shoot 1 inch groups inside the 10 ring.

I would most likely never be a *serious* target shooter. My eyes
aren't good enough for that. I go to the range only because I enjoy
shooting. I haven't really shot a rifle since early Army days with the
M-14. I was very good with it.

In Vietnam I fired the M-16 only a few times. More or less for
familiarization. My First Sergeant and I would go out to the local
laterite pit and practiced on beer cans.

===

A good scope can compensate for just about everything except cataracts
or macular degeneration. Just turn the focus ring until everything is
sharp. Cataracts can be fixed with surgery of course.

This is the one I use on my customized Ruger 10/22 for CMP competiton
at 50 yards:

http://www.amazon.com/Monarch-Riflescope-4-16x42SF-Matte-BDC/dp/B000OZU92K

I used two other scopes prior to the Nikon until I found one I liked.
The others both had excessive parallax error. From the prone position
I can now shoot 97s and 98s with 30 or 40% in the "X" ring.

I've got a cataract in my right eye. Also, I'm right handed, and don't
want to learn to shoot a rifle left handed.

When I get the right eye operated on, it's my understanding I have to
choose between near and far vision. Which would be best for shooting?
Now I'm using my right eye, but the front sight is pretty blurry,
along with the target. However, with a handgun I can switch to my left
eye without much problem.

On Sat, 18 Oct 2014 21:31:04 -0400, Poco Loco
wrote:

On Sat, 18 Oct 2014 20:04:38 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Sat, 18 Oct 2014 18:36:52 -0400, Poco Loco
wrote:


Virtually all of the serious target shooters that I know use a scope.
At 100 yards it is difficult just getting on the paper consistently
without one. With a good rifle, good scope and good ammo, you can
shoot 1 inch groups inside the 10 ring.

I would most likely never be a *serious* target shooter. My eyes
aren't good enough for that. I go to the range only because I enjoy
shooting. I haven't really shot a rifle since early Army days with the
M-14. I was very good with it.

In Vietnam I fired the M-16 only a few times. More or less for
familiarization. My First Sergeant and I would go out to the local
laterite pit and practiced on beer cans.

===

A good scope can compensate for just about everything except cataracts
or macular degeneration. Just turn the focus ring until everything is
sharp. Cataracts can be fixed with surgery of course.

This is the one I use on my customized Ruger 10/22 for CMP competiton
at 50 yards:

http://www.amazon.com/Monarch-Riflescope-4-16x42SF-Matte-BDC/dp/B000OZU92K

I used two other scopes prior to the Nikon until I found one I liked.
The others both had excessive parallax error. From the prone position
I can now shoot 97s and 98s with 30 or 40% in the "X" ring.

I've got a cataract in my right eye. Also, I'm right handed, and don't
want to learn to shoot a rifle left handed.

When I get the right eye operated on, it's my understanding I have to
choose between near and far vision. Which would be best for shooting?
Now I'm using my right eye, but the front sight is pretty blurry,
along with the target. However, with a handgun I can switch to my left
eye without much problem.

===

If you don't mind wearing reading glasses I'd probably go for distance
vision. A decent scope can be dialed in for either however.

On Sat, 18 Oct 2014 21:43:25 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Sat, 18 Oct 2014 21:31:04 -0400, Poco Loco
wrote:

On Sat, 18 Oct 2014 20:04:38 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Sat, 18 Oct 2014 18:36:52 -0400, Poco Loco
wrote:


Virtually all of the serious target shooters that I know use a scope.
At 100 yards it is difficult just getting on the paper consistently
without one. With a good rifle, good scope and good ammo, you can
shoot 1 inch groups inside the 10 ring.

I would most likely never be a *serious* target shooter. My eyes
aren't good enough for that. I go to the range only because I enjoy
shooting. I haven't really shot a rifle since early Army days with the
M-14. I was very good with it.

In Vietnam I fired the M-16 only a few times. More or less for
familiarization. My First Sergeant and I would go out to the local
laterite pit and practiced on beer cans.

===

A good scope can compensate for just about everything except cataracts
or macular degeneration. Just turn the focus ring until everything is
sharp. Cataracts can be fixed with surgery of course.

This is the one I use on my customized Ruger 10/22 for CMP competiton
at 50 yards:

http://www.amazon.com/Monarch-Riflescope-4-16x42SF-Matte-BDC/dp/B000OZU92K

I used two other scopes prior to the Nikon until I found one I liked.
The others both had excessive parallax error. From the prone position
I can now shoot 97s and 98s with 30 or 40% in the "X" ring.

I've got a cataract in my right eye. Also, I'm right handed, and don't
want to learn to shoot a rifle left handed.

When I get the right eye operated on, it's my understanding I have to
choose between near and far vision. Which would be best for shooting?
Now I'm using my right eye, but the front sight is pretty blurry,
along with the target. However, with a handgun I can switch to my left
eye without much problem.

===

If you don't mind wearing reading glasses I'd probably go for distance
vision. A decent scope can be dialed in for either however.

I'll still have to wear glasses. And I'll have pretty good distance
vision with the left eye. I guess the question comes down to which is
more important to see clearly (without the scope) - the front sight or
the target. Right now they're both blurry, but not bad I can't hit the
target. I do better with my left eye however.

Poco Loco wrote:
On Sat, 18 Oct 2014 21:43:25 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Sat, 18 Oct 2014 21:31:04 -0400, Poco Loco
wrote:

On Sat, 18 Oct 2014 20:04:38 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Sat, 18 Oct 2014 18:36:52 -0400, Poco Loco
wrote:


Virtually all of the serious target shooters that I know use a scope.
At 100 yards it is difficult just getting on the paper consistently
without one. With a good rifle, good scope and good ammo, you can
shoot 1 inch groups inside the 10 ring.

I would most likely never be a *serious* target shooter. My eyes
aren't good enough for that. I go to the range only because I enjoy
shooting. I haven't really shot a rifle since early Army days with the
M-14. I was very good with it.

In Vietnam I fired the M-16 only a few times. More or less for
familiarization. My First Sergeant and I would go out to the local
laterite pit and practiced on beer cans.

===

A good scope can compensate for just about everything except cataracts
or macular degeneration. Just turn the focus ring until everything is
sharp. Cataracts can be fixed with surgery of course.

This is the one I use on my customized Ruger 10/22 for CMP competiton
at 50 yards:

http://www.amazon.com/Monarch-Riflescope-4-16x42SF-Matte-BDC/dp/B000OZU92K

I used two other scopes prior to the Nikon until I found one I liked.
The others both had excessive parallax error. From the prone position
I can now shoot 97s and 98s with 30 or 40% in the "X" ring.

I've got a cataract in my right eye. Also, I'm right handed, and don't
want to learn to shoot a rifle left handed.

When I get the right eye operated on, it's my understanding I have to
choose between near and far vision. Which would be best for shooting?
Now I'm using my right eye, but the front sight is pretty blurry,
along with the target. However, with a handgun I can switch to my left
eye without much problem.

===

If you don't mind wearing reading glasses I'd probably go for distance
vision. A decent scope can be dialed in for either however.

I'll still have to wear glasses. And I'll have pretty good distance
vision with the left eye. I guess the question comes down to which is
more important to see clearly (without the scope) - the front sight or
the target. Right now they're both blurry, but not bad I can't hit the
target. I do better with my left eye however.

You want distance. When they did my right eye, was what I went for. Now
only need the glasses for reading. Left eye cataract is getting worse.
Will look in to that problem tomorrow at eye doc appointment. Wife has
distance on one eye and her contact on other eye is for close work. I
think would confuse me, but she had same for years with just contacts.

On Sun, 19 Oct 2014 12:46:27 -0500, Califbill
wrote:

Poco Loco wrote:
On Sat, 18 Oct 2014 21:43:25 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Sat, 18 Oct 2014 21:31:04 -0400, Poco Loco
wrote:

On Sat, 18 Oct 2014 20:04:38 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Sat, 18 Oct 2014 18:36:52 -0400, Poco Loco
wrote:


Virtually all of the serious target shooters that I know use a scope.
At 100 yards it is difficult just getting on the paper consistently
without one. With a good rifle, good scope and good ammo, you can
shoot 1 inch groups inside the 10 ring.

I would most likely never be a *serious* target shooter. My eyes
aren't good enough for that. I go to the range only because I enjoy
shooting. I haven't really shot a rifle since early Army days with the
M-14. I was very good with it.

In Vietnam I fired the M-16 only a few times. More or less for
familiarization. My First Sergeant and I would go out to the local
laterite pit and practiced on beer cans.

===

A good scope can compensate for just about everything except cataracts
or macular degeneration. Just turn the focus ring until everything is
sharp. Cataracts can be fixed with surgery of course.

This is the one I use on my customized Ruger 10/22 for CMP competiton
at 50 yards:

http://www.amazon.com/Monarch-Riflescope-4-16x42SF-Matte-BDC/dp/B000OZU92K

I used two other scopes prior to the Nikon until I found one I liked.
The others both had excessive parallax error. From the prone position
I can now shoot 97s and 98s with 30 or 40% in the "X" ring.

I've got a cataract in my right eye. Also, I'm right handed, and don't
want to learn to shoot a rifle left handed.

When I get the right eye operated on, it's my understanding I have to
choose between near and far vision. Which would be best for shooting?
Now I'm using my right eye, but the front sight is pretty blurry,
along with the target. However, with a handgun I can switch to my left
eye without much problem.

===

If you don't mind wearing reading glasses I'd probably go for distance
vision. A decent scope can be dialed in for either however.

I'll still have to wear glasses. And I'll have pretty good distance
vision with the left eye. I guess the question comes down to which is
more important to see clearly (without the scope) - the front sight or
the target. Right now they're both blurry, but not bad I can't hit the
target. I do better with my left eye however.

You want distance. When they did my right eye, was what I went for. Now
only need the glasses for reading. Left eye cataract is getting worse.
Will look in to that problem tomorrow at eye doc appointment. Wife has
distance on one eye and her contact on other eye is for close work. I
think would confuse me, but she had same for years with just contacts.

My doc says the cataract is not bad enough to operate yet. I'll still
need glasses though, as the left eye is blurry both near and far. Ah,
the joys of becoming senile!

On 10/19/2014 2:13 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Sun, 19 Oct 2014 12:46:27 -0500, Califbill
wrote:

Poco Loco wrote:
On Sat, 18 Oct 2014 21:43:25 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Sat, 18 Oct 2014 21:31:04 -0400, Poco Loco
wrote:

On Sat, 18 Oct 2014 20:04:38 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Sat, 18 Oct 2014 18:36:52 -0400, Poco Loco
wrote:


Virtually all of the serious target shooters that I know use a scope.
At 100 yards it is difficult just getting on the paper consistently
without one. With a good rifle, good scope and good ammo, you can
shoot 1 inch groups inside the 10 ring.

I would most likely never be a *serious* target shooter. My eyes
aren't good enough for that. I go to the range only because I enjoy
shooting. I haven't really shot a rifle since early Army days with the
M-14. I was very good with it.

In Vietnam I fired the M-16 only a few times. More or less for
familiarization. My First Sergeant and I would go out to the local
laterite pit and practiced on beer cans.

===

A good scope can compensate for just about everything except cataracts
or macular degeneration. Just turn the focus ring until everything is
sharp. Cataracts can be fixed with surgery of course.

This is the one I use on my customized Ruger 10/22 for CMP competiton
at 50 yards:

http://www.amazon.com/Monarch-Riflescope-4-16x42SF-Matte-BDC/dp/B000OZU92K

I used two other scopes prior to the Nikon until I found one I liked.
The others both had excessive parallax error. From the prone position
I can now shoot 97s and 98s with 30 or 40% in the "X" ring.

I've got a cataract in my right eye. Also, I'm right handed, and don't
want to learn to shoot a rifle left handed.

When I get the right eye operated on, it's my understanding I have to
choose between near and far vision. Which would be best for shooting?
Now I'm using my right eye, but the front sight is pretty blurry,
along with the target. However, with a handgun I can switch to my left
eye without much problem.

===

If you don't mind wearing reading glasses I'd probably go for distance
vision. A decent scope can be dialed in for either however.

I'll still have to wear glasses. And I'll have pretty good distance
vision with the left eye. I guess the question comes down to which is
more important to see clearly (without the scope) - the front sight or
the target. Right now they're both blurry, but not bad I can't hit the
target. I do better with my left eye however.

You want distance. When they did my right eye, was what I went for. Now
only need the glasses for reading. Left eye cataract is getting worse.
Will look in to that problem tomorrow at eye doc appointment. Wife has
distance on one eye and her contact on other eye is for close work. I
think would confuse me, but she had same for years with just contacts.

My doc says the cataract is not bad enough to operate yet. I'll still
need glasses though, as the left eye is blurry both near and far. Ah,
the joys of becoming senile!



I was very surprised when I had my eye sight tested a year ago. I've
always had good vision but sometimes have a tough time when tired
focusing close up which is very typical for most of us old farts.

The last test (after the infection in my left eye due to shingles had
cleared up) was 20/20 right eye and 20/15 left eye.

Today is my 65th birthday. Big year. Medicare, senior citizen
discounts and high dose flu shots. :-)

On 10/19/14 2:13 PM, Poco Loco wrote:


My doc says the cataract is not bad enough to operate yet. I'll still
need glasses though, as the left eye is blurry both near and far. Ah,
the joys of becoming senile!


I predict a great future for you as a target shooter.


--
The new GOP credo:

Hate the people who are being oppressed,
love the people who are doing the oppressing.

On Sat, 18 Oct 2014 21:43:25 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Sat, 18 Oct 2014 21:31:04 -0400, Poco Loco
wrote:

On Sat, 18 Oct 2014 20:04:38 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Sat, 18 Oct 2014 18:36:52 -0400, Poco Loco
wrote:


Virtually all of the serious target shooters that I know use a scope.
At 100 yards it is difficult just getting on the paper consistently
without one. With a good rifle, good scope and good ammo, you can
shoot 1 inch groups inside the 10 ring.

I would most likely never be a *serious* target shooter. My eyes
aren't good enough for that. I go to the range only because I enjoy
shooting. I haven't really shot a rifle since early Army days with the
M-14. I was very good with it.

In Vietnam I fired the M-16 only a few times. More or less for
familiarization. My First Sergeant and I would go out to the local
laterite pit and practiced on beer cans.

===

A good scope can compensate for just about everything except cataracts
or macular degeneration. Just turn the focus ring until everything is
sharp. Cataracts can be fixed with surgery of course.

This is the one I use on my customized Ruger 10/22 for CMP competiton
at 50 yards:

http://www.amazon.com/Monarch-Riflescope-4-16x42SF-Matte-BDC/dp/B000OZU92K

I used two other scopes prior to the Nikon until I found one I liked.
The others both had excessive parallax error. From the prone position
I can now shoot 97s and 98s with 30 or 40% in the "X" ring.

I've got a cataract in my right eye. Also, I'm right handed, and don't
want to learn to shoot a rifle left handed.

When I get the right eye operated on, it's my understanding I have to
choose between near and far vision. Which would be best for shooting?
Now I'm using my right eye, but the front sight is pretty blurry,
along with the target. However, with a handgun I can switch to my left
eye without much problem.

===

If you don't mind wearing reading glasses I'd probably go for distance
vision. A decent scope can be dialed in for either however.

Forgot to say 'thanks'.

Thanks!

On 10/18/14 9:31 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Sat, 18 Oct 2014 20:04:38 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Sat, 18 Oct 2014 18:36:52 -0400, Poco Loco
wrote:


Virtually all of the serious target shooters that I know use a scope.
At 100 yards it is difficult just getting on the paper consistently
without one. With a good rifle, good scope and good ammo, you can
shoot 1 inch groups inside the 10 ring.

I would most likely never be a *serious* target shooter. My eyes
aren't good enough for that. I go to the range only because I enjoy
shooting. I haven't really shot a rifle since early Army days with the
M-14. I was very good with it.

In Vietnam I fired the M-16 only a few times. More or less for
familiarization. My First Sergeant and I would go out to the local
laterite pit and practiced on beer cans.

===

A good scope can compensate for just about everything except cataracts
or macular degeneration. Just turn the focus ring until everything is
sharp. Cataracts can be fixed with surgery of course.

This is the one I use on my customized Ruger 10/22 for CMP competiton
at 50 yards:

http://www.amazon.com/Monarch-Riflescope-4-16x42SF-Matte-BDC/dp/B000OZU92K

I used two other scopes prior to the Nikon until I found one I liked.
The others both had excessive parallax error. From the prone position
I can now shoot 97s and 98s with 30 or 40% in the "X" ring.

I've got a cataract in my right eye. Also, I'm right handed, and don't
want to learn to shoot a rifle left handed.

When I get the right eye operated on, it's my understanding I have to
choose between near and far vision. Which would be best for shooting?
Now I'm using my right eye, but the front sight is pretty blurry,
along with the target. However, with a handgun I can switch to my left
eye without much problem.


It really pains me to offer up a solution to any problems raised in this
cesspool of a newsgroup, especially to you, but...

You probably should get the distance vision in the right eye.

Then to shoot with iron sights, what you need is a reading glass RX for
the right eye that lets you see the rifle's two sights and you'll be
able to use your left eye for distance vision at the target. It takes a
little bit to get used to it, but it does work and you just end up
shooting with both eyes open.

I need 1.50 reading glasses for my eyes. So, I bought a pair of $10 1.50
readers at the drug store and knocked out the left lens. My right eye
with the 1.50 lens sees the rear and front sight on the rifle (or
handgun), and the left eye focuses on the target. I can shoot very very
tight groups with the metal sights on my pistols and with the metal
sights on my rifles. I now have 2 MOA red dots on my AR15 and Win 92,
and with red dots you also shoot with both eyes open. No reading glasses
needed.

I shared this idea with my gunsmith buddy, who didn't believe it until
he tried it. He was going to pop for a $450 pair of hybrid Rx shooting
glasses, but solved his vision problem with $10 readers. Now, he's going
to bead blast my Ruger revolver and a few other tasks at no charge.




--
The new GOP credo:

Hate the people who are being oppressed,
love the people who are doing the oppressing.