Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 456
Results 76 to 80 of 80

Thread: lightstream vs bushnell

  1. #76
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Burscough, West Lancashire
    Posts
    3,632
    Quote Originally Posted by Gary C View Post
    Having looked through pretty much every Bushnell and the Lightstream, I'd go Lightstream every time.

    I'll no doubt get the "scope snobs" jumping up and down on me but sorry chaps, Bushnell isn't the marque it was.
    Sorry Gary, putting the scopes side by side at Tawd Vale, I really can't agree with you. Granted I was comparing with a bushnell 4200, but not in the same league if you ask me.

  2. #77
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Preston, Lancs
    Posts
    1,382

    Thumbs down

    Quote Originally Posted by bengarzy View Post
    You obviously are NOT an expert as you would realise a REGULATOR conversion would NOT affect the zero, just consistency and shot count.
    Also you have previously stated you found (eventualy) the rifle had had a"knock" which had caused the problem,hardly anything to do with me I think even you will agree.
    Yes I do stock Light-Stream scopes but your test would have drawn the exact same comments from me regardless of what name was on it, it was a thoughtless and ill concieved piece you wrote so lets leave it at that.

    Ben
    The problem on TARGETZERO'S gun was caused by incorrect barrel to breech alignment, which may have been caused while being reassembled after the non standard metal finish had been applied.

    To give you an idea of how "out of true" the barrel alignment was, the muzzle end of barrel touched the fill end of the air tube when the figure 8 bracket was removed.

    The downwards tension on the barrel was so great, it caused the figure 8 bracket O ring to compress on the lower edge - leaving daylight to be visible on the upper edge.

    Mechanical problems aside, it's a disgrace that someone like you should stoop so low as to have a pop at someone for grammer & punctuation - his opinions are as valid as the next unhappy customers.
    http://www.rivington-riflemen.eu/
    Staffordshire Custom Rifles - Maverick & MTC Connect

  3. #78
    TARGETZERO is offline Birds just leave me...but they always come back
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    north of the border/kirkby merseyside
    Posts
    5,979

    Thumbs up l vs b


  4. #79
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    cambridge england
    Posts
    1,977
    Quote Originally Posted by Dave Ramshead View Post
    The problem on TARGETZERO'S gun was caused by incorrect barrel to breech alignment, which may have been caused while being reassembled after the non standard metal finish had been applied.

    To give you an idea of how "out of true" the barrel alignment was, the muzzle end of barrel touched the fill end of the air tube when the figure 8 bracket was removed.

    The downwards tension on the barrel was so great, it caused the figure 8 bracket O ring to compress on the lower edge - leaving daylight to be visible on the upper edge.

    Mechanical problems aside, it's a disgrace that someone like you should stoop so low as to have a pop at someone for grammer & punctuation - his opinions are as valid as the next unhappy customers.
    How has "Non standard metal finish" got any thing to do with any work I may or may not have done to this rifle, I dont do any metal finishing and the barrel would be bent in the condition you describe, certainly not from me.
    I mentioned the way it was written because it was terrible!


    Ben

  5. #80
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Maidstone
    Posts
    2,583
    Can we forget the bickering and consentrate on a review of the scope! After all thats what this tread is for......

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •