Quote:
Look-up the ballistics of a .270 and I bet you get a chubby. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
But personally, there are other Springfields I like better. I used to own an XDm and really liked it - sold it and upgraded to my CZ when I got my CCL because it took a 19 round mag and as a result the grip was really long and it printed when I was wearing a t-shirt. But it was a good shooter. I really like their new Echelon as well. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
I loved the straight combed stocks over Monte Carlo BDLs The yearly runs of 700 classics caliber and year introduced. https://www.700rifle.com/threads/700...troduced.2740/ The rifle https://image.invaluable.com/housePh...L169117526.jpg |
Any way they can make a phone that is a gun, also? That way I have a deadly weapon but it doesn't take much pocket space.
|
Quote:
John Wall would smile dollar bils when I walked in.. |
Looking at a Vortex Viper HST; 6-24 w/ SFP
https://vortexoptics.com/vortex-vipe...icle-EBR-1~MOA Anybody have any experience with the Viper? I'm trying to figure out why this costs half what some of the high end ones do and the best I can figure is that the really spendy ones are going to be a little better in low light. Any thoughts? |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
They are good scopes, but glass is not as clear as some others. One you start pushing out, you go from looking at 2160P to 720P. Can still get it done, but it’s definitely not going to be the 4K you get the whole time with higher prices. You get the features, just not high end glass. |
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:19 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.