Irrelevant
Well-known member
Considering I've never seen one in a scope I assume there's a completely simple reason that just don't know about, but it sure seems like it would be really useful. Anyone know why there isn't?
Why don't all scope have internal anti cant bubbles?
- Thread starter Irrelevant
- Start date
D
Deleted member 16014
Guest
You mean inside the optic itself? I'm assuming it would screw with the integrity of the glass and view...light transmission, clarity, CA control, etc. I have to think with the sun at a bad angle it would do a number on your view, but maybe I'm wrong.
I wouldn't want it cluttering my view but that's more personal preference.
I wouldn't want it cluttering my view but that's more personal preference.
Yep. Mostly useless. mtmuley
Irrelevant
Well-known member
Maybe this is just a problem with me. But when I lay down, throw my gun across my pack and try to make a poke out in the 300-400 yard range, I don't want to have to pull my eye away from the FOV to check some external bubble, because it'll likely change in my movements . And maybe I'm the only idiot with this issue (which I'm honestly only speculating I have), where in certain terrain (typically steep) I'm not sure I'm holding perfecting level.
And I mean, why would it be any different than certain reticles? I mean it doesn't have to be big. But having the proper hold over doesn't mean jack if it ain't level.
Shoot with both eyes open. Dominant eye uses the scope. Other eye picks up the level off the side.
D
Deleted member 20812
Guest
This.
Irrelevant
Well-known member
See, I knew there was a readily available answer that I was completely blanking on...
...though, I can already foresee that my buck fever driven tunnel vision is going to handcuff my poor petite brain's ability to process two things with two eyes... then somehow make a decision that doesn't leave me going "WTF!!!"
Last edited:
All about practice
Doublecluck
Well-known member
On one hand it’s seems like a good idea but on the other I hate busy reticles. I’ve been using flat line ops lately and they work perfect for people who shoot with both eyes open, even if you don’t you can stop and double check before you pull the trigger. also easy to verify they are accurate where as a bubble inside the scope would be at the mercy of the manufacturer to be accurate.
D
Deleted member 16014
Guest
My thought was just that bubbles go with liquid, and I don’t want liquid in anything I’m looking through.
It’s gotta be real far or real crooked to matter in my experience, which—in terms of levels on scope mounts—is somewhat limited. I no longer use them.
Irrelevant
Well-known member
well that shoots down (pun intended) my hypothesis on some recent poor shooting.
Irrelevant
Well-known member
Com'on weren't you the one chiding me for coming to MT to fill some wt does tags? How else do you practice buck fever (which I can assure you I get on does too- and chukar)
Last edited:
fishing4sanity
Well-known member
There are a few scopes with built in levels. I think Leupold has a reticle that flashes red if the reticle isn't held level. Also, I think US Optics, Sig and Revic have had the level option on some models. I've had the external bubble level on some rifles, but have no experience with the built in ones.
Because 98% of the scope manufacturers do not make a scope that holds zero, dials precisely or returns to zero. Most are worried about trinkets and trash to catch a consumer’s eye vs. engineering something that works and intersects POA/POI every time under field conditions. I’d love an internal bubble level to confirm orientation on a scope designed, engineered and manufactured to work properly.
OntarioHunter
Well-known member
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2020
- Messages
- 5,881
If the gun fits you properly and scope installed vertically, the crosshairs should square up when the gun is shouldered. Mine does. 
D
Deleted member 16014
Guest
Learned something new.
Schaaf
Well-known member
The VX-6hd illuminated reticle have that feature. I don’t believe the Mark 5s do.
amo16
Well-known member
That's all fine and dandy until you're in rugged terrain and the gun being squared up to you doesn't mean much.
As to the OP's original post, I think for most shooters it just really isn't necessary. 300 yards is a long shot for a lot of guys, and the rifle being a few degrees out of level doesnt really amount to much at the ranges most guys are shooting.
