Optics, what's your preference for your rifles?

[whacko]

Late to the party.....but it depends on what the rifle is being used for. There is no use.....and it even reduces usability......of a high powder scope on a deer rifle in most of new england terrain. For that purpose it's irons or 1x red dot.

Defense.....acog or some type of cco of course.

Guns are tools......you need more than one wrench in the tool box right?

 

[paul73]

it still has image clarity issues out at farther ranges.

yeah, shooting at 300 with it isn't that great, but, i can hit a squirrel`s head with it at 100yds from my pencil PredatAR.
it is a fun toy, considering i paid $450 for it, not a $3500 for a razor.

i gonna pull the 3-18x from light 308 AR10 and drop a 1-6x pst2 on it. horses for courses.

 

[TheArizonan]

It amazes me how bad the MRO is

It really is bad.

 

[cathouse01]

Anyone running the Vortex Strike Eagle 1-8x FFP optic?? Looking at getting that for my short AR10 build (12.5" barrel). My eyes are pretty crappy without help. OK, so I'm farking blind without either contacts or glasses. I figure the 1-8x aspect would be good overall for my use case on this one. I do see some 1-8x and 1-10x optics out there from solid makers as well. I'm not sold on the first focal plane deal, so I could go with second focal plane too. Chances are, I'll be zooming in at anything close to (or over) 100 yards away anyhow.

Brownells has the Vortex optic at a decent price currently. Includes a mount.

I did a short comparison of the Vortex Strike Eagle 1-8x24 to the Athlon Optics Helos BTR GEN2 Rifle Scope 34mm Tube 1-10x28mm, the Swampfox Arrowhead LPVO 1-10x24 and the Trijicon 1-8x28 AccuPower (replaced by the Credo). It was the older SFP version but it does give you some idea of the quality.

See here : Deals and steals

Summary, I preferred the Swampfox over the Strike Eagle and the Helos, but if you can get a good price on the Strike Eagle, it’s would be a good LPVO.
Of course the Trijicon beat the pants off of all three but it’s twice the price of the Strike Eagle FFP.

If you’re not married to FFP, the Swampfox gives you a bit more magnification (to 10X) for $50 less but you’d have to get a mount for it.

 

[paul73]

I did a short comparison of the Vortex Strike Eagle 1-8x24 to the Athlon Optics Helos BTR GEN2 Rifle Scope 34mm Tube 1-10x28mm, the Swampfox Arrowhead LPVO 1-10x24 and the Trijicon 1-8x28 AccuPower (replaced by the Credo). It was the older SFP version but it does give you some idea of the quality.

See here : Deals and steals

Summary, I preferred the Swampfox over the Strike Eagle and the Helos, but if you can get a good price on the Strike Eagle, it’s would be a good LPVO.
Of course the Trijicon beat the pants off of all three but it’s twice the price of the Strike Eagle FFP.

If you’re not married to FFP, the Swampfox gives you a bit more magnification (to 10X) for $50 less but you’d have to get a mount for it.

twice? the credo is $1329. arrowhead is still at $469 at OP, was lower. and, 10x is a 10x, it is not a 8x.

 

[Golddiggie]

I did a short comparison of the Vortex Strike Eagle 1-8x24 to the Athlon Optics Helos BTR GEN2 Rifle Scope 34mm Tube 1-10x28mm, the Swampfox Arrowhead LPVO 1-10x24 and the Trijicon 1-8x28 AccuPower (replaced by the Credo). It was the older SFP version but it does give you some idea of the quality.

See here : Deals and steals

Summary, I preferred the Swampfox over the Strike Eagle and the Helos, but if you can get a good price on the Strike Eagle, it’s would be a good LPVO.
Of course the Trijicon beat the pants off of all three but it’s twice the price of the Strike Eagle FFP.

If you’re not married to FFP, the Swampfox gives you a bit more magnification (to 10X) for $50 less but you’d have to get a mount for it.

Brownells has mounts included with a bunch of the LVPO optics right now. I'm probably going to pull the trigger on either the 1-8x or 1-10x Swampfox (arrowhead) soon (SFP).

 

[cathouse01]

twice? the credo is $1329. arrowhead is still at $469 at OP, was lower. and, 10x is a 10x, it is not a 8x.

I was comparing the Trijicon 1-8x28 Credo from B&H at $1,136 to the Strike Eagle 1-8x24 FFP from Brownell’s at $600 (which includes a mount).
When I said the Arrowhead was $50 lower than the Strike Eagle I was only looking at the Swampfox site at the MIL reticle (which is what I have). Optics Planet does have the BDC and MOA reticles for $469, $80 less.

ETA OP does have the MIL reticle for $469, just in a different place.

I did get the Arrowhead 1-10x24 with the MIL reticle direct from Swampfox when they had one of their 25% off sales. Scope with mount was $457.58 free shipping and no tax.

 

[Tallahassee]

It amazes me how bad the MRO is

I wanted to try one, and heard about how bad they were. I called and was told they fixed the issue on the latest gen models. But, everything I read, still says they are horrible.

Sucks, I do like their scopes and rmr. They have awesome customer service as well.

 

[Admin]

I wanted to try one, and heard about how bad they were. I called and was told they fixed the issue on the latest gen models. But, everything I read, still says they are horrible.

Sucks, I do like their scopes and rmr. They have awesome customer service as well.

I wanted one too until I watched a bunch of reviews. @Molon 's post above really clearly shows how bad they are.

 

[Tallahassee]

I wanted one too until I watched a bunch of reviews. @Molon 's post above really clearly shows how bad they are.

I kept reading they had some shift. But, that post shows they are absolutely horrible! How do they not address that? Not like its a $35 dot.

 

[Cap]

Interested to see how these perform:

Home

DetailsThis rifle scope is part of the top tier optics line called PLx. PLx optics meet the exacting demands of professional use, offering impeccable glass clarity and advanced features from state-of-the-art production facilities.Improving on its predecessor, the fully redesigned PLx 1-8x24mm...

www.primaryarms.com

1-8x, 17oz, japanese glass for $1500.

 

[TheArizonan]

Interested to see how these perform:

Home

DetailsThis rifle scope is part of the top tier optics line called PLx. PLx optics meet the exacting demands of professional use, offering impeccable glass clarity and advanced features from state-of-the-art production facilities.Improving on its predecessor, the fully redesigned PLx 1-8x24mm...

www.primaryarms.com

1-8x, 17oz, japanese glass for $1500.

Is there a planned SFP? Any FFP is a deal breaker with me but that 17 ounce is a great start to get folks on board with.

 

[PappyM3]

I kept reading they had some shift. But, that post shows they are absolutely horrible! How do they not address that? Not like its a $35 dot.

I heard they did reduce some parallax error with newer ones, but I haven’t seen anything confirming that.

 

[PappyM3]

Interested to see how these perform:

Home

DetailsThis rifle scope is part of the top tier optics line called PLx. PLx optics meet the exacting demands of professional use, offering impeccable glass clarity and advanced features from state-of-the-art production facilities.Improving on its predecessor, the fully redesigned PLx 1-8x24mm...

www.primaryarms.com

1-8x, 17oz, japanese glass for $1500.

The field of view specced on it is outstanding. I don’t care for chevron reticles, but I’m tempted to give it a try. Just waiting for them to get the BDC subtensions on Strelok.

Is there a planned SFP? Any FFP is a deal breaker with me but that 17 ounce is a great start to get folks on board with.

It has really long/tall crosshairs for usability at 1x, even though it’s FFP. It doesn’t have the eye box of a SFP Razor Gen II, but it surprisingly has better field of view.

 

[TheArizonan]

It has really long/tall crosshairs for usability at 1x, even though it’s FFP. It doesn’t have the eye box of a SFP Razor Gen II, but it surprisingly has better field of view.

It doesn't matter, what good would that do for me when you'd need to take a shot here & now but can't because you have to take the time to zoom to where you can finally see it and create tunnel vision just to even be able to make use of the ACSS rangefinder?

Hint, it wouldn't and I'd have bought a scope that is now dead weight to me but more useful to you. Whom do my rifles belong to again?

I'd need lightweight and a SFP. Seventeen ounces is a great leap forward. But at FFP means that this is still a hard pass.

 

[PappyM3]

It doesn't matter, what good would that do for me when you'd need to take a shot here & now but can't because you have to take the time to zoom to where you can finally see it and create tunnel vision just to even be able to make use of the ACSS rangefinder?

Hint, it wouldn't and I'd have bought a scope that is now dead weight to me but more useful to you. Whom do my rifles belong to again?

I'd need lightweight and a SFP. Seventeen ounces is a great leap forward. But at FFP means that this is still a hard pass.

Huh? If you wanted to use the ACSS ranging tools on a SFP, you’d need to zoom all the way in to max magnification to accurately use it. With the FFP, you just need to zoom to where you can see it. I’m not following your logic. SFP is even worse, given your concern there.

But if a threat is so immediate that zooming in would prove dangerous, then do you really need ranging anyway?

 

[Georgiak9]

Looking at the SFP more now due to how the FFP reticle shrinks a lower magnification levels. My old eyes need the help.
I was looking at the Arrowhead as well. Just trying to figure out which reticle to get. Mil dot, MOA dot, or BDC.
My [current] plan is to get one, try it out and then decide what I'll do for other "short range" builds. I'm putting dots on the pistol caliber items (either AR15 pistols, or the Stribog pistol) since those are much shorter ranged items. The barrel in the AR10 build is good to at least 600 yards (accurately) due to independent testing performed.

I have the BDC reticle and wish i got either MOA or mil reticle. Not matter what distance i zero it at the holdovers do not match up. Been struggling with it for awhile and finally have up. It is a good scope though.

 

[TheArizonan]

Huh? If you wanted to use the ACSS ranging tools on a SFP, you’d need to zoom all the way in to max magnification to accurately use it. With the FFP, you just need to zoom to where you can see it. I’m not following your logic. SFP is even worse, given your concern there.

But if a threat is so immediate that zooming in would prove dangerous, then do you really need ranging anyway?

Huh nothing, the beauty of the SFP is that there's no need to zoom at all in order to be able to see it. The TA31 with ACSS proved this and that contrary to your own biased opinion, the SFP from where I stand is indeed not worse but is in fact, much better than FFP. So once again, you are speaking from orbit about this topic. And you're still trying way too hard to be relevant to my thoughts on the subject.

Remember high drag, that that this is about the user and not about you. If they say that they don't like it and prefer something else, then that's it here. End of discussion and should never have been argued with over.

But to answer your question, no, I'd use a red dot piggybacked instead if a threat suddenly materialized just like I would with my ACOGs. Time, place, conditions, etc.

 

[PappyM3]

Huh nothing, the beauty of the SFP is that there's no need to zoom at all in order to be able to see it. The TA31 with ACSS proved this and that contrary to your own biased opinion, the SFP from where I stand is indeed not worse but is in fact, much better than FFP. So once again, you are speaking from orbit about this topic. And you're still trying way too hard to be relevant to my thoughts on the subject.

Remember high drag, that that this is about the user and not about you. If they say that they don't like it and prefer something else, then that's it here. End of discussion and should never have been argued with over.

What’s your problem? I was saying I didn’t follow your logic and explaining why. Use whatever you want. I don’t care. But I still don’t get your logic here.

Yes, you can see a SFP reticle’s BDC/ranging features really well at the lower magnifications. But that doesn’t mean you can actually use them. Those ACSS ranging features are not accurate in a SFP optic unless you’re at maximum magnification. So seeing them at lower magnifications doesn’t do you any good.

I’m not poo-pooing you, SFP scopes, or anything else. I’m not trying to change a user’s preferences. Hell, I like SFP scopes for some things. They have their benefits over FFP. But being able to use ranging features at all magnification ranges isn’t one of them.

The TA31 is a fixed magnification. It has nothing to do with the need to zoom considerations of SFP/FFP.

 

[Tallahassee]

I heard they did reduce some parallax error with newer ones, but I haven’t seen anything confirming that.

I think I am going primary arms 1x prism for my next optic anyways. They seem to have a good following. I do have one of their red dots already, it seems to be doing alright with the abuse that it is subjected to.

 

[TheArizonan]

What’s your problem? I was saying I didn’t follow your logic and explaining why. Use whatever you want. I don’t care. But I still don’t get your logic here.

Yes, you can see a SFP reticle’s BDC/ranging features really well at the lower magnifications. But that doesn’t mean you can actually use them. Those ACSS ranging features are not accurate in a SFP optic unless you’re at maximum magnification. So seeing them at lower magnifications doesn’t do you any good.

I’m not poo-pooing you, SFP scopes, or anything else. I’m not trying to change a user’s preferences. Hell, I like SFP scopes for some things. They have their benefits over FFP. But being able to use ranging features at all magnification ranges isn’t one of them.

The TA31 is a fixed magnification. It has nothing to do with the need to zoom considerations of SFP/FFP.

My problem is that I created this thread for others to discuss what best suits them, not for someone to discuss what they think that they're better suited for.

And the times you've sniped certainly didn't help the situation.

I like listening to what others like. I like this subject a lot. What I don't like is someone expecting someone else to fully explain themselves for any comment being made.

The entire purpose of the LPVO was to have the means to PID and then put a round where it needs to go. Other than that, everyone with a suck has an opinion on the subject, often it being a parroted from of a parroted form that often gets repeated on a loop.

This means that while you can't use them, it still doesn't mean that others cannot. I consider precision to be able to put a round where it needs to go into the CNS so long as I do my part. What I don't consider necessary is splitting hairs and getting into the weeds of why someone needing the round to go into not only what eye, but choosing which eye or which nostril to which I'm finding to be a pointless waste of time. This fully explains the differences between you and I over what focal plane.

The ACSS values don't change, I have no clue who had mislead you, but you need to file 13 that space shuttle gunnery ASAP. Pile it on top of the magwell hold too while you're at it.

The TA31 was used as an example to prove that you were and still are, WRONG.

I suggest next time we talk, I suggest first that you sit back and read everything you have ever written down at me. You may, just MAY, be able to see a pattern here where it's you poo pooing on me the entire time. Remember, it wasn't me that was trying to argue with your own decisions on what optic you had found to be better suited for YOU. Oh wait, that was you with me.

Take the hints please, this is unwinnable for you. And it's also highly toxic to be wanting to poo on what someone else prefers over what you prefer.

 

[PappyM3]

My problem is that I created this thread for others to discuss what best suits them, not for someone to discuss what they think that they're better suited for.

And the times you've sniped certainly didn't help the situation.

I like listening to what others like. I like this subject a lot. What I don't like is someone expecting someone else to fully explain themselves for any comment being made.

The entire purpose of the LPVO was to have the means to PID and then put a round where it needs to go. Other than that, everyone with a suck has an opinion on the subject, often it being a parroted from of a parroted form that often gets repeated on a loop.

This means that while you can't use them, it still doesn't mean that others cannot. I consider precision to be able to put a round where it needs to go into the CNS so long as I do my part. What I don't consider necessary is splitting hairs and getting into the weeds of why someone needing the round to go into not only what eye, but choosing which eye or which nostril to which I'm finding to be a pointless waste of time. This fully explains the differences between you and I over what focal plane.

The ACSS values don't change, I have no clue who had mislead you, but you need to file 13 that space shuttle gunnery ASAP. Pile it on top of the magwell hold too while you're at it.

The TA31 was used as an example to prove that you were and still are, WRONG.

I suggest next time we talk, I suggest first that you sit back and read everything you have ever written down at me. You may, just MAY, be able to see a pattern here where it's you poo pooing on me the entire time. Remember, it wasn't me that was trying to argue with your own decisions on what optic you had found to be better suited for YOU. Oh wait, that was you with me.

Take the hints please, this is unwinnable for you. And it's also highly toxic to be wanting to poo on what someone else prefers over what you prefer.

Oh my. My first post in this thread was explaining what I use and why I use it. Did I use hyperbole? Sure. But my use of “you” was the universal you, as in discussing a person in a CONOPs. They were my opinions, which you asked for when starting this thread. I wasn’t telling you, specifically, to do anything.

Back to actual optics discussion:

Please explain to me how you use the ACSS ranging features in a SFP scope when you’re not at max magnification. I’m sure others are curious as well.

PS and for the third time, the magwell hold is not preferred. It should not be your go-to grip. It is merely what almost everyone will devolve to when the rifle has gotten too heavy over hours of constant aiming. And I’m not talking about doing ready ups during the course of a day of training. If you, personally, don’t use it use it, ever, then great.

 

[PappyM3]

For anybody curious about why the new PA PLx-C reticle design makes it more usable at 1x, this is its reticle at 1x. Simple, yet easily visible where the center is, even without illumination. Older ACSS reticles just had the encircled chevron floating in the center with no crosshairs to draw your eye in. At 1x, they easily got lost in background clutter since they were poorly illuminated.

 

[TheArizonan]

Oh my. My first post in this thread was explaining what I use and why I use it. Did I use hyperbole? Sure. But my use of “you” was the universal you, as in discussing a person in a CONOPs. They were my opinions, which you asked for when starting this thread. I wasn’t telling you, specifically, to do anything.

Back to actual optics discussion:

Please explain to me how you use the ACSS ranging features in a SFP scope when you’re not at max magnification. I’m sure others are curious as well.

PS and for the third time, the magwell hold is not preferred. It should not be your go-to grip. It is merely what almost everyone will devolve to when the rifle has gotten too heavy over hours of constant aiming. And I’m not talking about doing ready ups during the course of a day of training. If you, personally, don’t use it use it, ever, then great.

Your posts present themselves for what they are and second, there's nothing further to explain as I no longer do LPVO's so honestly IDGAF anymore.

As a southpaw, your absolute is just a narrative to what hold people will devolve to. My default is the VFG, muscle memory and training trumps narratives, bud. And as an effective way to not get fatigued more easily, is by lightening that load meaning your precious LPVO and the mounts for them. Smarter, not harder. Plus the magwell if switching shoulders from right to left that's determined by cover and angles of fire around corners and making the best use of cover & concealment, is rather unsafe and can cause jams. At least try to put some actual thought into this before suggesting really bad forearm gripping locations.

Let's face it, you're just not good at this whole you talk and I should listen. It's rather, you can talk, and I shall talk as well and correct you while you're trying to correct me.

We can do this all damn day.

Or...

Give it up and show some respect and I in turn will give respect so long as you continue to not want to question everything that I do. Deal? I'd hate to use this site's ignore feature but as of now you're giving me no other choice because you really are determined to try to piss on me for dominance over this subject, only to be pissed on in return.

Still proven that this is an unwinnable argument for you.

 

[paul73]

you can see a SFP reticle’s BDC/ranging features really well at the lower magnifications. But that doesn’t mean you can actually use them

i do not intend to get in between you two - but it is not exactly true. well, it is true - you cannot use them, BUT, if you shooting at anything in 50-200 yds range with a 100zero, then with a 5.56 at least you are within 1.5 inches of drop, with is rather negligent. at 300yds we get to 4 inches drop. so, realistically, if you shoot at a center of 8" plate with SFP reticle - you going to hit it anyway, any magnification.

SFP reticle makes target acquisition faster. at least with arrowhead i like how it is, and if i need to use reticle measures i just dial it into 10x, it is not an issue.

 

[PappyM3]

Is there a planned SFP? Any FFP is a deal breaker with me

what good would that do for me when you'd need to take a shot here & now but can't because you have to take the time to zoom to where you can finally see it and create tunnel vision just to even be able to make use of the ACSS rangefinder?

the beauty of the SFP is that there's no need to zoom at all in order to be able to see it.

The ACSS values don't change, I have no clue who had mislead you

there's nothing further to explain as I no longer do LPVO's so honestly IDGAF anymore.

Then why did you even ask if they will offer it in a SFP?

Fact: the values of the ACSS ranging in a SFP scope do change as magnification changes.

For a horizontal stadia line, representing a 19” wide shoulder at 300 yards, it would have the following MOA measurements at the various magnifications:

1x: 48.39 MOA
3.4x: 14.23 MOA
8x: 6.05 MOA

So, if you were at 1x, that line representing 19” at 300 yards would actually represent 152” at 300 yards.

 

[Tallahassee]

i do not intend to get in between you two - but it is not exactly true. well, it is true - you cannot use them, BUT, if you shooting at anything in 50-200 yds range with a 100zero, then with a 5.56 at least you are within 1.5 inches of drop, with is rather negligent. at 300yds we get to 4 inches drop. so, realistically, if you shoot at a center of 8" plate with SFP reticle - you going to hit it anyway, any magnification.

SFP reticle makes target acquisition faster. at least with arrowhead i like how it is, and if i need to use reticle measures i just dial it into 10x, it is not an issue.

I have yet to try a 1-10x, or even a 1-8x. I still have 1-4x that I still use, and like. I may have to enter the 21st century at some point.

 

[PappyM3]

i do not intend to get in between you two - but it is not exactly true. well, it is true - you cannot use them, BUT, if you shooting at anything in 50-200 yds range with a 100zero, then with a 5.56 at least you are within 1.5 inches of drop, with is rather negligent. at 300yds we get to 4 inches drop. so, realistically, if you shoot at a center of 8" plate with SFP reticle - you going to hit it anyway, any magnification.

SFP reticle makes target acquisition faster. at least with arrowhead i like how it is, and if i need to use reticle measures i just dial it into 10x, it is not an issue.

Don’t disagree with any of that. And is essentially why I asked why one even needs ranging features if you’re facing an immediate threat. And why I brought up the FFP PLXc having a reticle that’s now a lot better at 1x. At 1x it’s a lot more like a simple SFP scope now.

But he was talking about needing to see reticle ranging features at any magnification range so he could use them. And they will just not be accurate unless you’re at one magnification range.

 

[TheArizonan]

Then why did you even ask if they will offer it in a SFP?

Fact: the values of the ACSS ranging in a SFP scope do change as magnification changes.

For a horizontal stadia line, representing a 19” wide shoulder at 300 yards, it would have the following MOA measurements at the various magnifications:

1x: 48.39 MOA
3.4x: 14.23 MOA
8x: 6.05 MOA

So, if you were at 1x, that line representing 19” at 300 yards would actually represent 152” at 300 yards.

For the record, you weren't the person being asked. You butted in, and got slapped for being rude.

You are stretching goalposts, using straw men, and are being way too internet serious over what I like and prefer. And you were given enough chances to stop being wound so tight over basic benign differences that neither affects you nor me on the questions I ask or what I prefer that conflicts with what you want me to like.

FFS already...

Seriously, how old are you? Never made it past E-4 I take it? Professional Private even? Don't even bother responding, you are my first on the ignore. And that takes a lot from me to even consider using as I am a very nice person. Unless I'm being crapped and sniped at relentlessly when I had done nothing even remotely wrong to deserve such petulant behavior from some random on the internet who's only control in life is trying to be a narcissistic ass on gun boards.

I've got enough time in to know what I like and what I don't. A lot of experience, time, training, and actual effort that also includes trigger time down range on multiple combat deployments that has brought me to where I am now. And a lot of money was spent chasing garbage that had no practical purpose for me as a civilian with life after the service, other than being heavy pieces of expensive crap that served no other purpose better than either an ACOG with a piggybacked RMR or just a regular dot. My case use is everything. If I was going to go the LPVO then I would need lightweight, easy ranging, point and shoot. You aren't going to get that with FFP at 1x that anyone possibly with 20/15 at 18 might be able to see and that's a rarity.

I digress. You don't need to be explained anything at this point. You just need to be told to pound sand and to STFU as it's ad nauseam and the status quo still hasn't changed. Get it through your stubborn head already. I am very tired of having my time wasted by some twit seeking to enflame things over and over to no avail other than wanting to argue over trivial things that no one will be weighing in on afterwards.

Ignored, you can thank your self for that as you gave me other choice in this matter.

 

[PappyM3]

For the record, you weren't the person being asked. You butted in, and got slapped for being rude.

You are stretching goalposts, using straw men, and are being way too internet serious over what I like and prefer. And you were given enough chances to stop being wound so tight over basic benign differences that neither affects you nor me on the questions I ask or what I prefer that conflicts with what you want me to like.

FFS already...

Seriously, how old are you? Never made it past E-4 I take it? Professional Private even? Don't even bother responding, you are my first on the ignore. And that takes a lot from me to even consider using as I am a very nice person. Unless I'm being crapped and sniped at relentlessly when I had done nothing even remotely wrong to deserve such petulant behavior from some random on the internet who's only control in life is trying to be a narcissistic ass on gun boards.

I've got enough time in to know what I like and what I don't. A lot of experience, time, training, and actual effort that also includes trigger time down range on multiple combat deployments that has brought me to where I am now. And a lot of money was spent chasing garbage that had no practical purpose for me as a civilian with life after the service, other than being heavy pieces of expensive crap that served no other purpose better than either an ACOG with a piggybacked RMR or just a regular dot. My case use is everything. If I was going to go the LPVO then I would need lightweight, easy ranging, point and shoot. You aren't going to get that with FFP at 1x that anyone possibly with 20/15 at 18 might be able to see and that's a rarity.

I digress. You don't need to be explained anything at this point,. You just need to be told to pound sand and to STFU as it's ad nauseam and the status quo still hasn't changed. Get it through your stubborn head already. I am very tired of having my time wasted by some twit seeking to enflame things over and over to no avail other than wanting to argue over trivial things that no one will be weighing in on afterwards.

Ignored, you can thank your self for that as you gave me other choice in this matter.