New Sidewinder.

Cass

See Hawke have released a completely new/updated Sidewinder. Called the H5 system it is a completely new scope.

Looks nice and Hawke have, in my opinion, well and truly thrown off the nomer of "budget" scope.

slipperyox

If bought, and turns out to be a lemon.

They saw you coming:D

the new untested is always the gamble

clivej

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2O_zMXBhMdo

extremetaz

First - I like Hawke scope. I've always found them to be reliable, robust, and good value for money; and the Sidewinder has always been a decent value offering, but it seems to me they've missed a couple of opportunities here.

https://uk.hawkeoptics.com/sidewinder-30-ffp-4-16x50-ffp-half-mil.html

They're clearly staying loyal to the hunter target precision market where parallax is used as a range finder (which is why the side-wheel is in there), so the FFP offering makes a huge amount of sense - but the reticle is setup in MIL and the turrets are in MRAD.
!!Why!! would you not make it a matched unit scope? I do not understand this.
Sure - it's FFP so you can just do a conversion - but why not just index the thing to match the reticle in the first place?

Outside of that market I have a bugbear about this insistence on starting at 4x with a scope that will parallax down to 30m.
Give us an offering with a 2.5 or a 3 at the back end.

If this thing had matched units, and a 2.5-~14 option I'd be getting keen on it.
I prefer reticles with a circle element to them though, which would still be a sticking point.

jb88

Hawke scopes are good quality, ive used them for almost 15 years and they have suffered hardships and are still extremely accurate and robust.
I enquired about the 6x24x56 option in FFP MRAD and its 250 more expensive than the traditional sidewinder.

The Eclipse and Sidewinder Models have worked well for me so I may take a punt at the new scope.

Wadi14

extremetaz wrote: »

First - I like Hawke scope. I've always found them to be reliable, robust, and good value for money; and the Sidewinder has always been a decent value offering, but it seems to me they've missed a couple of opportunities here.

https://uk.hawkeoptics.com/sidewinder-30-ffp-4-16x50-ffp-half-mil.html

They're clearly staying loyal to the hunter target precision market where parallax is used as a range finder (which is why the side-wheel is in there), so the FFP offering makes a huge amount of sense - but the reticle is setup in MIL and the turrets are in MRAD.
!!Why!! would you not make it a matched unit scope? I do not understand this.
Sure - it's FFP so you can just do a conversion - but why not just index the thing to match the reticle in the first place?

Outside of that market I have a bugbear about this insistence on starting at 4x with a scope that will parallax down to 30m.
Give us an offering with a 2.5 or a 3 at the back end.

If this thing had matched units, and a 2.5-~14 option I'd be getting keen on it.
I prefer reticles with a circle element to them though, which would still be a sticking point.

Are the terms Mills and MRAD both not short for Millradian ? so a mills turret and an MRAD ret are both the same measurement ? its when you mix Mills or MRAD with MOA turrets you have to do the conversions. Older Hawke scopes suffered from the moa turrets and mills ret, but I think the have it sorted in these newer scopes. Just had a look at their web page, they have a mil /mrad sidewinder which would be grand same measurements but I see moa turrets offered as well but no moa ret, so I have to agree with you that they should have gone the extra mile and offered an moa ret with the moa turrets.

extremetaz

Wadi14 wrote: »

Are the terms Mills and MRAD both not short for Millradian ? so a mills turret and an MRAD ret are both the same measurement ? its when you mix Mills or MRAD with MOA turrets you have to do the conversions. Older Hawke scopes suffered from the moa turrets and mills ret, but I think the have it sorted in these newer scopes. Just had a look at their web page, they have a mil /mrad sidewinder which would be grand same measurements but I see moa turrets offered as well but no moa ret, so I have to agree with you that they should have gone the extra mile and offered an moa ret with the moa turrets.

[Facepalm]

Yes - yes they are. You're absolutely correct and I'm a total knob. :D
For some reason in my daft head I was thinking of precisely that Mildot-MOA relationship but in the wrong terms.

I can only put this down to seeing what I expected to see rather than what was actually there. :rolleyes:

Wadi14

Don't feel bad cus your half right lol, as was I because I thought they had sorted the moa/mills on the new scope only to find out Hawke got it half right too, there moa turrets still seem to have a mill ret.

Feisar

Wadi14 wrote: »

Don't feel bad cus your half right lol, as was I because I thought they had sorted the moa/mills on the new scope only to find out Hawke got it half right too, there moa turrets still seem to have a mill ret.

I don’t understand how mixing the measurement systems was ever a thing.