Fiber Optics vs Scopes

[Strikenmike]

Greetings everyone.

I am a new visitor planning to buy either an EC Phoenix or Parker Buck Buster 175#.

For years I have hunted with a compound bow using fiber optic sights.

I do not understand why it is so important to have a scope on my crossbow. If you are going to shoot less than 30 yards, why do you need a scope, especially a 4x scope? It just seems to me that a fiber optic sight provides less opportunity for problems and it should be very accurate at short ranges.

Agree or Disagree?

PS If you use fiber optics, please let me know how they work.

[wabi]

Agree that fiber optics are plenty accurate enough.
But..............
I like to hunt from a pop-up type ground blind. Inside the blind in low light the fiber opitc front sight isn't illuminated. A scope lets me see outside targets easily.
For about anything but an enclosed blind the fiber optics will work fine.

[Pydpiper]

I do a lot of target shooting as well as hunting, the scope allows for a more precise POI on smaller targets. A 40 yard squirrel is a breeze with the scope but with the fiber optic sites the target can get covered up by the sights.
the 4X scope is necessary because of how the Excal scope works, it can be tuned to match the speed of the bow, what Excalibur calls the speed ring is actually a zoom ring, a mild zoom is necessary in order to be able to adjust for different speeds.
If you are simply buying a bow to hunt large game the fiber optics will serve you well, if you like to tinker a bit or have any intention of target shooting the scope is a good idea.
Good luck in your choice and welcome to the forum!
Pyd

[Strikenmike]

Good Point:

I will probably be using my Terminator ground blind more now that this rotator cuff injury may keep me out of the trees.

Thanks,
Mike

[Sandman]

I dont know that you have to have a scope with a crossbow. It is what ever you are comfortable with and want to use~!

PS - I would go with the Excal as a matter of choice. Just my bias opinion from up here in the cheap seats.

Cheers,
Robin

[Strikenmike]

I will say this for you guys (and gals) from Canada, you are very loyal to Excalibur. Can not challenge the quality. Recurve vs Cams...that is the honest debate.

Thanks again,
Mike

PS Just got back from a great walleye trip to the Hudson, ON area. $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$....Gas was a killer.

[Turtleman]

Welcome Strickenmike,.......... I'm like alot of these guys, Excalibur Xbows are the best. I care nothing for the cams , i love the recurve limbs. Excalibur has the best slogan "Kept it simple". So far as your question on fiber optics v/s scopes i too have wondered why the scope. I know accuracy is far better but i am trying to keep with the "Kept it simple" idea and stick with the fiber optics sight i just wish excalibur would enhance their sight a little more and light up the one they have already. Just my two cents worth, too each his own!

[Evan]

Scopes are useless for bowfishing, what I mostly use my crossbow for. For me it's the fiber optic sight.

[Cossack]

"I too have wondered why the scope."

For those of us with "tired eyes" scopes are a godsend. Image is brighter, clearer, with the (exact) spot on the target clearly visible. I shoot both, a scope and a reflex sight with dots. With the latter I know I'm in the ballpark when I pull the trigger. With the scope, I'm in the strike zone every time.
One of the most appreciated features of the LumuZone scope, I feel, is the ability to tune the spacing of the reticule's multiple aim points to the speed of the arrow. TruGlo makes a 4 dot reflex sight that can now do that too. But the dots of a red dot tend to get 'fuzzy' for me (I sometimes see two). With one dot or one fiber optic pin, any target over 20 yards involves a guessing game as to where to aim. Yes scopes are heavier, and definitely not simple. They do make most shooters more accurate if they learn to use one.
Simply put: If your objective is to just hit the target, most any aiming device will do. If your objective is to hit a precise spot on the target....then a scope will do best.

[DMc]

For years I have hunted with a compound bow using fiber optic sights.

You can't overlook the stalk on a crossbow when you discuss sights. The reason fiber optics with a peep sight on a compound works so well is that you are the stalk, part of the equation. The peep sight in combination with the front pin forces you to align everything properly.

The crossbow stalk takes care of that variable. So a scope works very well on it. As others have mentioned, it also helps those of us whose eyes have gone to crap.

Dave

[Strikenmike]

Good comments. I also understand the light gathering capabilities if you are hunting from an enclosed ground blind and the magnification compensating for the diminished vision. I also understand the people that shoot IBO or like to shoot varmints or small game. I also agree with the person that talked about the need to have the latest and greatest gadget. Lord knows I have a small fortune wrapped up in the latest and greatest stuff...much of which is disappointing. I use scopes or reflex sights on almost all of my guns, even my pistols, because of vision issues.

You are correct about the peep sight, the kisser button and the fiber optic sight all working in concert to result in consistent accuracy with a compound bow. However, you are still using a sighting pin to identify the point of impact. I always aim for a small spot on a deer, but in fact I want to achieve a double lung hit on a relatively large target area.

I would think 4x magnification at less than 20 yards would be very distracting and simply excessive, given what you have to pay for a good scope.

I am a little surprised that someone is not manufacturing better fiber optic sights for crossbows. If everyone is going with scopes and red dots, maybe that is not justified.

At this point, I think I am going to start with the fiber optic sight since I am getting a late start on this season...then if I feel it is worthwhile I will add a scope next year.

Thanks again,
Mike

[Grizzly Adam]

Welcome to the forum, Srikenmike!

Got to admit, I wondered myself if you must not be under 40 ... if you are over 40, your eyes must be younger than you are!

For those of us who require "progressive" lenses (bi / tri-focals), scopes are the clear winner. Just the way it is.

Trust us ... the magnification, at least on Excal scopes, isn't a distraction, but an aid to precision.

[Strikenmike]

FYI I will be 63 in February, I just had cataract surgery in my left eye, I have trifocal glasses and I am about to undergo rotator cuff surgery on my left shoulder. Did I mention that in the morning my arthritic knuckles hurt so bad I can barely stand it.

Guess you could say I am falling apart!

I can see that I am swimming upstream on this issue. Just find me a 1x or maybe even a 2x with cross hairs (no 6 MOA dots) and maybe I will buy in.

I can not believe that more of you Excalibur fans are not supporting the idea of fiber optics for close-range whitetails. Oh-well, this is not the first argument I have lost.

Later,
Mike

[hawg hunter]

I hunt on a lease here in Texas that does not let u use scopes on anything. The owner is a little funny and believes that this is a way of crippling less animals as well as building up his buck population. You must kill all of your does before you can kill your bucks. There are about 10000 acres and each hunter (15) can shoot 5 does. My wife and I as well as the rest of the hunters have fiber optics on everything. Most shots are under 50 yds, I'm the only one with a crossbow, most shoot compounds and muzzleloaders. Muzzleloaders must have a side exposed hammer, primed with percussion caps or be a. flinter. Some even shoot smooth bore flinters. It's been a 100% kill for the last 7 yrs.

[Grizzly Adam]

Hey, Mike ... we don't argue much around here ... we discuss.

We respect your experiences and preferences!

We'll rejoice with you over every fiber-optic assisted deer kill you tell us about ... so start rolling 'em!

Good luck on that rotator cuff surgery. That can be tough!

Hope you recover quickly.