What is the Best lamp for foxing?

[TWOTWOTHREE 152]

Hi guys i want to upgrade my lamp ive been using my old lazer light which was fine for my rim fires.Ive also been using it with my 223 for the last 6 months and it has been sound with the shorter ranges but them that stay on the edge of caution which are shootable but the lamp with the filter is not bright enough and the spot it to wide spread. I just want to light up charlie not tin whole field.. What do You advise. I been told the light force is good.? But unsure. Thanks

Edited October 12, 2011 by TWOTWOTHREE

[kingnewport 19]

Light force is the best I think, i've got the 170 with variable switch . Around £100. Just change the connecters on it. There very bright on White light and on red. You won't go wrong with one

[bigears 205]

as above lightforce 170

[SNAP SHOT 194]

yep another vote for the striker 170, good out to 600m you won't get a better quality beam from any other light.

[sako 23]

Yes they are great lamps. personally I prefer the blitz more penetrating, tighter dot when set right for making out body shape in cover to take the long shot. all the blitz range are great lamps. A lot complain about the wiring but it's not that bad and it's simple to rewire them if needed. A dimmer switch is very handy if not essential so is a good battery.

[TWOTWOTHREE 152]

It was the 170 i looked at today they quid and twenty for filter quite liked it.i can fit a dimmer switch if needed.is the beam nice and concentrated about 150 to 200 yards ish?

[sako 23]

You obviously know you can twist the bodywork of the lamp to change from flood to dot right? The 170 stays tight a lot futher than that. The bulb has to be set right for the optimum potential of the nightforce to.

[TWOTWOTHREE 152]

Yea saw that about the adjustable body like the idea.think its the one which gets a great review on here and from others k spoke to so thanks folks i shall be sorting one out.cheers

[jamie g 17]

if it was me i wouldnt get the red filter it cuts down to much of the distance. get amber instead

[DERBOY 18]

lightforce 170 striker, amber filter all the way

[trigger happy tikka 0]

light force blitz all the way wouldnt pick my rifle up to go out if i never had a bitz to lamp with use the red or amber filter because white light is a bit bright for close in charlies i find

[nasher1 258]

I use the 170 sriker just right for on top the gun good spot of light even with the red filter on, I didnt know lightforce did the blitz as a rifle mounted option, also get yourself a good fresh battery makes all the difference to brightness and burntime

[airbourne 128]

striker 170 for me

[nightvision 2]

striker 170 is the job

[sako 23]

If you've got someone else to hold the lamp blitz!

Dont you find the 170 scope mounted a bit on the large side? I've only tried the 140 scope mounted which was ok but I didn't like how it fitted to the gun. It seemed to put to much pressure on the scope when I'd knock it.That was 15 years ago so the mount's probably a lot different now. I've mostly got someone holding the blitz for me to shoot and it's definately better than the hand held 170 or scope mounted 140 for longer shots and brighter with filters on. If Im out alone and mostly only shooting out a couple of hundred yards I've got a deben max pro which just snaps on to the scope. I like it because it's not to big and if I knock it,it just spins. It's got plenty of power with the white or orange or green filter but does go a bit dim on distance with the red. It does nothing to the zero, but the trouble is I changed my scope to a 30mm and they dont do a plastic snap on mount. I now have to do the mounting ring loose as Im forever knocking it. Im just waiting until I loose the screws.

Do you guy's need to zero your rifles with the 170 mounted? What I remember of it I would have thought it would be a fair weight on the scope.

Edited February 11, 2011 by sako