Tangent theta hunter

[Lawnboi]

New scope coming, looks like they really listened to what people want. Maybe some day for me......

Tangent Theta Model TT315H Long Range Hunter Series 3-15x50mm MOA Riflescope 800102-0405

FREE SHIPPING on Tangent Theta Model TT315H Long Range Hunter Series 3-15x50mm MOA Riflescope 800102-0405

www.eurooptic.com

Looks about perfect. Not too heavy, not too big, nice simple reticle, mil ffp version, locking turrets.

 

[Ens Entium]

I agree it does look ideal for those who can afford it. The M version has been around for some time and the changes for the H version only seem to further cater to hunting.

Some have had their hands on it for a couple months on the Hide and seem to like it as you would expect from that tier of optic. It's the top tier version of the SWFA 3-9.

 

[Trevor73402]

Only on Rokslide would $4k 3-15x50 Tangent Theta be referred to as a better version of a $400 3-9x42 SWFA, LOL.

Yeah, I read that and then had to re-read it. Then I asked myself “wtf did I just read?” For any newbs that may stumble across this post, if you take a SWFA 3-9 and place it on the ground, then drive 1000 miles away from it, walk straight into a full nude strip club, get seated in the VIP section with a steak and shrimp dinner prepared by a Michelin Award winning chef......you’d be at the Tangent Theta finally.

 

[AkMtnRunner]

Funny, I came across the Tangent Theta last night and checked out their website to learn more . . . saw the price . . . and knew that I was in the wrong place like a good 12 y.o. boy walking into that strip joint. Maybe when I grow up.

 

[Lawnboi]

Funny, I came across the Tangent Theta last night and checked out their website to learn more . . . saw the price . . . and knew that I was in the wrong place like a good 12 y.o. boy walking into that strip joint. Maybe when I grow up.

Exactly how I felt. Looks about perfect though. Maybe one day.

 

[cjl2010]

It would behoove you to call site sponsors and gather info on them.

 

[wind gypsy]

Sweet optic but I’d have to have f you $ for it to make sense on a hunting rifle for me.

 

[Lawnboi]

How much is a new dirt bike? Snowmobile? Travel Trailer? Boat? Etc., etc., etc. Not to mentioned all the required supplemental gear. If you are really into shooting, spending $4,000 for what is arguably the best optic on the market is really not that bad.

The biggest detractor for the LRH and TT315M series are the reticle selections, which suck. If they would implement a modern reticle (SKMR 3/4, MPCT2, EBR-7C, etc.), I would have already bought one.

All things I don’t have either....

I actually like the simple reticle on a hunting rifle (for the ranges I’ll shoot at stuff now Atleast). So it’s a plus for me. I think I’m going to start budgeting for one. Seems like a scope I’d keep around for life.

 

[Dobermann]

Only on Rokslide would $4k 3-15x50 Tangent Theta be referred to as a better version of a $400 3-9x42 SWFA, LOL.

And the problem with that is ... ?

 

[Dobermann]

New scope coming, looks like they really listened to what people want. Maybe some day for me......

Tangent Theta Model TT315H Long Range Hunter Series 3-15x50mm MOA Riflescope 800102-0405

FREE SHIPPING on Tangent Theta Model TT315H Long Range Hunter Series 3-15x50mm MOA Riflescope 800102-0405

www.eurooptic.com

Looks about perfect. Not too heavy, not too big, nice simple reticle, mil ffp version, locking turrets.

Although at 27 oz, it's not too much lighter than others in the same reliability class (Atacr is 33 oz, but has a 34 mm tube; SWFA 3-15 x 50, while not as good glass, is a 30 mm tube, and only 24 oz; the LRTS, while only a 44 mm obj, was 24.4 oz).

 

[Lawnboi]

Although at 27 oz, it's not too much lighter than others in the same reliability class (Atacr is 33 oz, but has a 34 mm tube; SWFA 3-15 x 50, while not as good glass, is a 30 mm tube, and only 24 oz; the LRTS, while only a 44 mm obj, was 24.4 oz).

I think a 42mm version would be pretty nice. That said for a 50mm scope, it checks all my boxes.

 

[wind gypsy]

Although at 27 oz, it's not too much lighter than others in the same reliability class (Atacr is 33 oz, but has a 34 mm tube; SWFA 3-15 x 50, while not as good glass, is a 30 mm tube, and only 24 oz; the LRTS, while only a 44 mm obj, was 24.4 oz).

My 3-12 LRTS is 28 oz.

It's no Tangent Theta but I could buy 5 of them for what a TT costs.

 

[Dobermann]

Thanks for the real-world weights on the LRTS, gents ... still surprises me that companies can put out such wrong data, when the production methods mean the items should all be smack-on the same weights ...

So thanks also for the reminder to not go off spec sheets!

 

[wind gypsy]

My un-illuminated 3-12 LRTS is 26.7 oz. It was a good deal at $649, but there's more to optics than weight, cost, and/or spec sheet info. For cheap optics, maybe you can do alright simply looking at spec sheets. But spec sheets are a tiny drop when 'comparing' a cheap optic to an expensive optic.

This morning I was shooting the 3-12 LRTS, a 5-20 SWFA, and a Kahles K525i. Comparing the three is pretty retarded, but since this thread wants to compare apples to rocket ships:

No surprise that the Kahles is the best of the bunch - contrast, resolution, brightness, reticle, ergonomics, turret 'feel', down to the tension & feel of the magnification ring, etc., etc., etc. Oh, and it weighs 33.9 oz and cost more than the LRTS and SWFA.

I prefer the LRTS over the SWFA due to better reticle, zero stop, and locking windage. This is a pretty rare instance where the optic I prefer cost less. But to be fair, I bought the LRTS during the Cameraland blowout. Also, the SWFA is a decade old design, while the LRTS is only a few years old.

All three have been static mounted and I checked tracking and return to zero on a tracking board. Kahles was 100% out to 16 mils. LRTS was 101% out to 16 mils. SWFA was 100% to 10 mils, and then grew to either 101% or 102% to 16 mils (I can't recall which).

I have little doubt that the TT315M/TT315H would perform better optically than the Kahles I was shooting this morning, which in turn performs better than the cheaper optics I had out this morning. There's no free lunch here, and generally optics don't "punch above their weight class" as much as folks on the internet claim or want to believe.

Or course a Kahles or TT is going to offer a better view, more refined features, etc at 4-5+ times the price. What that is worth to someone is up them. Can you think of a scenario in a hunting situation where you would make a shot with a TT or Kahles that you wouldn't also make with a 3-12 LRTS?

I've seen some funny posts on the hide where people justify the TT by talking about "That once in a lifetime hunt, tough situation, absolute reliability that they are not willing to take a chance with a lesser optic".. I just can't come up with an imaginary situation where the TT would magically prevail but other proven "less nice" options would result in a failure.

 

[madcalfe]

Or course a Kahles or TT is going to offer a better view, more refined features, etc at 4-5+ times the price. What that is worth to someone is up them. Can you think of a scenario in a hunting situation where you would make a shot with a TT or Kahles that you wouldn't also make with a 3-12 LRTS?

I've seen some funny posts on the hide where people justify the TT by talking about "That once in a lifetime hunt, tough situation, absolute reliability that they are not willing to take a chance with a lesser optic".. I just can't come up with an imaginary situation where the TT would magically prevail but other proven "less nice" options would result in a failure.

well since ive lost all hope in kahles after having to send mine back after a month of use and messing up half my hunting season. im switching to a night force atacr (proven time and time again that their bulletproof). And for the "once in a life time hunt" situation is pretty easy to justify. would you feel 100% confident taking a vortex, bushnell, Burris and so on on a sheep hunt? say you slipped and racked you rifle/ scope on a boulder while climbing a drainage. Would you have no worries about the lower tier scope still holding zero?. I mean ive been looking hard at zco and TT instead of a atacr but i just cant afford one. look at what the top PRS shooters are running for optics. there's a reason why people spend that much on a scope. reliability. i mean im lucky i live in British Columbia and can hunt 3 sheep species all general open season but if i were say an American coming up here for a stone sheep hunt i wouldn't spend all that money for the hunt and go man i hope this vortex will correctly dial out to 600 yards when shooting at a once in a life time sheep.

 

[wind gypsy]

well since ive lost all hope in kahles after having to send mine back after a month of use and messing up half my hunting season. im switching to a night force atacr (proven time and time again that their bulletproof). And for the "once in a life time hunt" situation is pretty easy to justify. would you feel 100% confident taking a vortex, bushnell, Burris and so on on a sheep hunt? say you slipped and racked you rifle/ scope on a boulder while climbing a drainage. Would you have no worries about the lower tier scope still holding zero?. I mean ive been looking hard at zco and TT instead of a atacr but i just cant afford one. look at what the top PRS shooters are running for optics. there's a reason why people spend that much on a scope. reliability. i mean im lucky i live in British Columbia and can hunt 3 sheep species all general open season but if i were say an American coming up here for a stone sheep hunt i wouldn't spend all that money for the hunt and go man i hope this vortex will correctly dial out to 600 yards when shooting at a once in a life time sheep.

I paid for what will probably be my once in a lifetime dall sheep hunt last year. Used a nightforce nxs 2.5-10x42. I wouldnt hesitate to do it with a SS 3-9 or a LRHS (if they were lighter at least). As a matter of fact that NXS got removed and replaced with a SS 3-9 for the rest of the season and I sold it and have since bought a LRTS and another SS 3-9. I don’t think either of them are better or more reliable than the NXS but I feel they are pretty damn good and now I’m not short a scope. Kind of like how leupold MK5 are winning lots of PRS matches this year- I damn sure wouldnt trust a MK5 over an ATACR, hell I’d trust a bushy elite over a MK5, but they are good enough for people to feel comfortable enough with them.

I’m not sure there is a more reliable scope than the ATACRs but they still go down in matches occasionally. I took a precision rifle course this summer where everyone’s scopes got a tracking test. I didn’t see every scope but I saw all 3 or 4 bushys test perfect, a MK5 fail miserably, and a zco with 1% error.

 

[Trevor73402]

I didn’t initiate the comparison between the TT and the SWFA or LRTS. It just so happened that I had those two scopes that out with a Kahles (not a TT, but probably the closest thing I own). I guess I just don’t get why guys feel the need to justify their decision to buy cheaper gear whenever these threads come up discussing higher end scopes/rifles/tripods/etc.

I agree that ‘worth’ is completely subjective. But I also recognize objectively that better is better. It's no big secret that there are diminishing returns with high end optics relative to cost....or high end anything for that matter. If a dude can only afford a super sniper - cool. But if guys are shooting as much as they say they are on the internet, the price of a “nice” $3k optic is pennies in the bucket.

As far as tracking is concerned, I’ve had that LRTS, an LRHS, and a DMR2 on a tracking board. Not one of them was 100%, but all were serviceable. The flagship SWFA was not 100%, but also serviceable. My Mk5 was 100%, AMG was 100%, a couple Gen 2 Razors were 100%, and that Kahles was 100%.

Maybe we should start a new thread or go back to talking about the Tangent Theta....just a thought

It’s the same all over the net. Whatever scope an individual can afford (or owns) is typically the “best” or “just as good”.

As you said above, when you shoot on a competitive level, a $3K-$4K optic is a mere drop in the bucket vs all your other yearly expenses. I have close to $10K in glass just on 3 rifles. My main rifle, a backup, and a trainer/practice rifle.

When you have $1500-$2000 in fees, fuel, and other expenses in a single weekend, I’m not gonna put it all on the line for a $400 scope......but that’s just me.

 

[Kimber7man]

Mine is fantastic