• Please consider adding your "Event" to the Calendar located on our Home page!

Sightron SIII FIELD TARGET 10-50X60 IR Why is it so recommended/used for field target?

I also found the X50 reticle too fine in low light condition. Maybe younger eyes wouldn’t have this problem but it was a deal breaker for me. Uj
I had heard that, but after checking the specs, it is the same as the SIII, so I wasn’t as worried. We will see once I get it mounted.

The new Athlon is apparently 1/3 the size of the SIII and Falcon! Talk about thin!!!!

This is an important factor people overlook. It is one thing I liked about my Kahles. It was almost 50% thicker than the SIII/Falcon. It was actually thinker than an FFP scope I compared to. Most of my shooting is in low light, so that was important to me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MysticalDragon
I think I'm gonna start doing unlimited for hunting practice. There is nothing about Field Target here in the USA that is supposedly about hunting. Nothing, I've hunted all my life with all sorts of guns and Hunter class has nothing to do with hunting. People can say all they want that is supposed to represent hunting it does not at all And I'll piss people off but I don't care it's true. I think the closest thing to hunting is the UK version of Hunter. But that'll never happen here in the states.
But I knew going into this Field Target has nothing to do about hunting it's about shooting and I like to shoot.
You a dang heretic! Rabble rousing Okie! BURN THE WITCH!!!
 
I had heard that, but after checking the specs, it is the same as the SIII, so I wasn’t as worried. We will see once I get it mounted.

The new Athlon is apparently 1/3 the size of the SIII and Falcon! Talk about thin!!!!

This is an important factor people overlook. It is one thing I liked about my Kahles. It was almost 50% thicker than the SIII/Falcon. It was actually thinker than an FFP scope I compared to. Most of my shooting is in low light, so that was important to me.
I’m surprised to hear that the SIII and the X50 share the same reticle line thickness. At one time I owned both and when comparing a couple of different SIII reticles to the X50, the SIII was always easier to see in low light. I do find that the SIII at 16x doesn’t range-find any better at 40-55yds than my Hawke 30 but the IQ is much better……………..Uj
 
  • Like
Reactions: MysticalDragon
Please don't hesitate to give advice just because you aren't currently shooting a division or dont see yourself participating in it, when you have recently.

I've only shot two hunter division matches, both with an S510XS with an athlon argos that I borrowed from a friend who had it as his backup rifle and a solid dope sheet. I noticed that often my holdovers were .25 to .5 mil. Thankfully the scope had .5 mil markings. Ive been surprised by many scopes that were recommended that didnt have at least this. Or they have them after 5mils etc not near the center where we need them for hunter division.

What quality scopes have you found with a .2 mill marking in the center of the reticle?
If I was going to shoot Hunter class right now, I would use a Riton X3 Conquer. For me, the reticle feels like it was designed for FT Hunter class. Glass is decent and ranging is as good as anything else at 16x. You can pay 5 times more for an SIII, but you aren't getting 5 times the scope. And later if you decided that you have to have a Sightron or a Kahles or a March, you can put the Riton on your FT Pistol and it will do fine. It is FFP, so at 12x the reticle shrinks a little but it's still usable for 10 to 35 yards. I actually bought a second one for my pistol, and I don't even like shooting pistol FT.
 
In my opinion, for Hunter the reticle is of primary importance. Since you can't click, being able to hold over with precision is necessary. Half-mil hashes is not the level of precision I am looking for. It's rare to find a scope that ranges very good past 40 yards at 16x, so being able to bracket is also important, which goes back to the reticle. Motorhead had an interesting post recently where he talked about setting up his Hunter class dope to the nearest .2 mil. At the time, I felt like this was unnecessary because all of my scopes had half-mil hashes. Since then I've bought scopes with .2 mil hashes and now I get it.

I know a lot of people use the SIII for Hunter class, and they are probably all smarter and better looking than me, but I feel like it's overkill. I would (and have) rather spend half as much for a scope with a more suitable reticle. I hesitate to give a recommendation because I've decided not to shoot Hunter class for the foreseeable future. It just doesn't get my blood pumping the way that WFTF does. For WFTF and Open, the SIII is hard to beat for price .vs performance.
I personally like the Sightron MOA-2 reticle and have never found that it doesn’t have enough detail. The MOA reticle is layed out with 1/2 marks at the center and is 3 MOA between full marks at 16x. It turns out that 3 MOA the same as a 1.5” kill zone at 50 yards.

If we were shooting in the UK or Europe a MIL radian reticle would make sense since they measure their courses in meters and kill zones in millimeters. We happen to be shooting courses layed out in freedom units and most of us think in freedom units.
IMG_3415.jpeg
 
  • Like
Reactions: cavedweller
Thank you again everyone for the feedback. I pulled the trigger on an SIII FT today through sightron direct. With the 35% ex military discount, $15 shipping and discounted sunshade it came to $1075.

Now to find a magnetic wheel to go on it. I'm leaning towards a Jd custom designs one.
 
Thank you again everyone for the feedback. I pulled the trigger on an SIII FT today through sightron direct. With the 35% ex military discount, $15 shipping and discounted sunshade it came to $1075.

Now to find a magnetic wheel to go on it. I'm leaning towards a Jd custom designs one.
JD will take care of you.
 
I to am amazed at all the Hunter class people shooting a 10-50x SIII? It seems way overkill. Sometimes it makes me think they are turning them up in power to cheat. I shoot open and wftf because I like using high powered scopes. I wouldn’t buy an expensive 50x scope to shoot Hunter when I could only use a 16X scope.
Ha! I'm one of them. The cost wasn't the issue, at just over $1k. It just happened to be one of the few scopes I had on hand that could really focus from 8-55 yards. And that is literally the entire focus range - 8 to 55 yards. Not 7, not 60. 100 is right out. So it's stayed on my HFT all year. I would like something lighter, assuming the ranging is as good or better than the Sightron. Plus I wasn't sure if I'd want to shoot in the Open class.

I've been shooting HFT all year and my 10-50x60 has stayed at 12x. The reticle is acceptable but not ideal. I've *never* cheated by adjusting magnification on a match day. As it is, 12x standing is a bear and for that reason I'm not sure I'd use 16x if mine was marked for it.

Now I'm thinking of changing to another scope (maybe a March for reliable POA in all temps) but the 10-60x56 seems like even more overkill. But if it has no advantage over a lower mag scope for Hunter class FT, maybe I could commit to Hunter and buy a less heavy and expensive scope with lower magnification(?).
 
I to am amazed at all the Hunter class people shooting a 10-50x SIII? It seems way overkill. Sometimes it makes me think they are turning them up in power to cheat. I shoot open and wftf because I like using high powered scopes. I wouldn’t buy an expensive 50x scope to shoot Hunter when I could only use a 16X scope.
@BrazosbyNemo , I know you cheat, and you don’t know what to do with 5” so what makes you think you can handle 6”.

We don’t need a Sightron for Hunter class, but the great Japanese glass, big wheel, and reasonable price for a high quality scope seem to be a hit with many shooters. I am of the opinion that you always spend as much on a scope as you do on the rifle, but that is just me. I will never blame my equipment for a poor showing at a competition. If I do poorly, then that is on me.
 
I personally like the Sightron MOA-2 reticle and have never found that it doesn’t have enough detail. The MOA reticle is layed out with 1/2 marks at the center and is 3 MOA between full marks at 16x. It turns out that 3 MOA the same as a 1.5” kill zone at 50 yards.

If we were shooting in the UK or Europe a MIL radian reticle would make sense since they measure their courses in meters and kill zones in millimeters. We happen to be shooting courses layed out in freedom units and most of us think in freedom units.

Here is the reticle for the Riton X3 for comparison, in case anyone cares. Strelok cut it off, but you get the idea.
riton.jpg
 
@BrazosbyNemo , I know you cheat, and you don’t know what to do with 5” so what makes you think you can handle 6”.

We don’t need a Sightron for Hunter class, but the great Japanese glass, big wheel, and reasonable price for a high quality scope seem to be a hit with many shooters. I am of the opinion that you always spend as much on a scope as you do on the rifle, but that is just me. I will never blame my equipment for a poor showing at a competition. If I do poorly, then that is on me.
I did not accuse anyone of cheating. I have though, only twice, witnessed Hunter class shooters turn their scope power up to range and turn it back down to 16X to shoot. This was a few years ago but as you know I haven’t shot much in the past couple years. So it does happen. As the match director I had a talk with the individuals. Fortunately for me their scores were so bad as not to change any outcomes. In both cases the shooter assumed, since they could have a scope of much higher power than 16x, they could use the higher power to range as long as they took the shot using 16x. Maybe they truly were that ignorant of the rules or maybe they were cheating and got caught. As the MD I had to make a judgment call to DQ them or let it be a learning of the rules situation. I opted for the latter as they were newer shooters at my range, relatively new to FT, their scores sucked anyway, & they were not shooting major matches. I determined I would rather not embarrass them and hope they would return with a new understanding of the rules. These same people are out there shooting your matches.
 
Here is the reticle for the Riton X3 for comparison, in case anyone cares. Strelok cut it off, but you get the idea.
View attachment 397769
I have two of these scopes and use them on EFT and hunting. I tried them for FT but found the focus ability very lacking. But as with many more time using them to range could end up working. I have looked through the X5&7 and they seem to be better.
Mark
 
  • Like
Reactions: cavedweller
I will be interested to hear your thoughts on the Falcon X50. Do you think the lack of illuminated reticle of the X50 could be a problem?

I've participated in two hunter division ft matches at our field so far. There were a couple times it was hard to see the reticle due to the lighting and target and background being dark.
the sightron only has what I will call a useless not well enough lit center dot. It is illuminated but does not work for me. My Kahles is the best ever with the whole reticle lighting up and range finds very very well. The sightron is proven and alot of people use them. They used to be affordable, but now are pushing 1600 usd. No thanks......
 
the sightron only has what I will call a useless not well enough lit center dot. It is illuminated but does not work for me. My Kahles is the best ever with the whole reticle lighting up and range finds very very well. The sightron is proven and alot of people use them. They used to be affordable, but now are pushing 1600 usd. No thanks......
Useless? IMO it makes the Scope an Excellent triple duty Scope FT/HFT and with the lit center dot, it helps your eye focus on the Bull in BR! And as MD pointed out they can be had for less than the MSRP price.