bravo2

I'm not sure that would stand up to legal scrutiny! I reckon you could argue it under 'zeroing' though, since the clay ground effectively gives permission for you to shoot on their land and you are using your firearm on clay tgts in order to check the aim..... sounds like 'zeroing weapon on land which you have permission to shoot'

I am interested in the replies saying that they shoot clays with a FAC shotgun - I have a FAC semi-auto but it is clear on my licence that it is only for vermin control, so I have never taken it to a clay ground, which is a shame as I would like to get a better feel for it by breaking some clays. Can I get 'clay tgt shooting' added to my FAC? it is up for renewal right now as it happens and if the clay grounds don't mind and the police will allow it then I'll definitely add it to the renewal forms. I am assuming if it isn't on your FAC and you shoot clays with it then you are breaking the law. PS - it isn't about looking pretty - if it works for you go for it.

+1 on that. It is personal choice but I took the above advice and bought a S&B 8x56 - have not regretted it for one second. I have not tried to shoot anything beyond 200 with it but I am confident it would be fine to 300+. I used to use a variable power scope but found I would set it to 8x and never change... therefore fixed power does not bother me.

I have the Yildiz in 20g, it is quite nicely made, shoots well, ejects well - it is not an auto safe though. In fairness it is not nearly as nice as my Beretta, but there again it is less than half the price... pay your money and take you choice. Yildiz definitely good value for money, I paid just under £600 for mine brand new. I might get one in 28g eventually as well.

+1 on the above - my FAC Hatsan s/a cycles everything that isn't 65mm all day and hits stuff.... cost me £200 - what more could you want!

I reckon moderator is less important on 17 as you cannot do anything about the crack the bullet makes anyway - for 22LR with subs a mod can make it nearly silent but that will never be achievable for 17. For my 17HMR I use a SAK, definitely makes a big difference and cheap enough to be semi-disposable.

I use Hawke mediums on my 17HMR - holds zero perfectly and think it sits pretty square - can send pics if it helps. Turbo33 - is scope not holding its zero more likely than mounting issue?

£10 for box of Hornady 17gr vmax sounds like a good price (last lot I bought were £12 a box). I personally think the 20gr are not as accurate but not by a huge amount.

Thanks for the info - I'll check out midway although I think am going to try the Ruger - Weaver adaptor from Burris, then I can take my choice of mounts, not sure if anybody has used these but seems to be the obvious solution.

Anybody have any experience with Ruger mounts? - I have just discovered my new scope is too big to go on the mounts on my Ruger M77 Mk1 (which I had half expected) - not a problem I thought, just change the mounts to a med/high.... that was when I discovered they are completely non-standard. I can get a set of Ruger med off ebay for £25 but still confused as to difference between mk1 and mk2 - are the mounts interchangeable between the two? Any advice much appreciated.

Thanks for all the posts - appreciate the advice, 12borejimbo - think you have it spot on. I'll try the Burris and might even put in an offer to buy it as reading some reviews on it sounds like it should be just the job. My take is that with rabbits another one will always come along before long and the range is normally sub 100yds, hence cheap scope is not a major handicap. Where I will be shooting foxes the opportunities will be much less frequent and range potentially greater, therefore the benefits of better glass become more worth the extra expense. Off to get rifle, fit scope and zero up....

I have had exactly the same experience as phaedra1106 with Comp X in my escort - two cartridges come out of the mag simultaneously which causes a jam. It cycles everything else perfectly - no complaints at all for what is a good value shotgun.

Thanks for the reply - and I agree on your point on getting a lot out of cheaper scopes - I shot 100s of rabbits with a Hawke air rifle scope before I upgraded, and I have to say the scope I changed to is noticeably better in poor light but does it account for a lot more rabbits, probably not more than a few percent. 'Buy the best you can afford' - probably a bit of a cliche only in that it applies to most things in life, glass, rifle or anything else, I guess we all aspire to buy the best we can afford, who wouldn't prefer a top end scope if they had bottomless pockets. My real question was that given I can loan a Nikon or a Burris is there anybody who has had experience with either or thinks one is better suited to foxing? I reckon they are probably so similar in performance that it makes no difference.

I will shortly pick up my new 22-250 for foxing but as always the question is which scope? I have read previous discussion on this and appreciate the 'buy the best you can afford' philosphy, which is what I did for my rimfire. However I have been very lucky in getting offered the choice of the extended loan of a Nikon Prostaff 3-9x50 or a Burris Fullfield E1 3-9x50 for this rifle so I do not need to start with a blank sheet of paper, but which one should I choose, or does it really matter?