See All Open Sight: Part 5

by Tom Gaylord, a.k.a. B.B. Pelletier

Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
Part 4

See All Open Sight
The See All Open Sight is revolutionary!

This will be a different Friday blog — I promise you.

First of all — all talk of machining the See All Open Sight sight is off the table. I spoke with the See All creators and learned that the reticle is actually on film — shrunk to the size where the point of the triangle is 0.0002 inches across. That’s two ten-thousandths of an inch, or 0.00508 millimeters! This in in the realm of optics — not mechanical things. So, don’t try to modify the sight.

Second, they told me some folks may need to wear their glasses when using this sight. I haven’t been doing that, so I wore them for this test.

What I thought might happen today
After the last test in Part 4, I thought the sight might work better if it was held farther from my eyes — like it would be when mounted on a pistol. The magnifying optic enlarges the reticle even more the farther away it is, so this sounded like a possible solution to the reticle being indistinct on target. Also, it’s easier to tilt the sight when it’s mounted on a handgun. I’d hoped that would make it easier to align the peak on the end of the triangle. This is what I was thinking when I told some readers I had a better idea of how to test it.

What went wrong with this test?
When I first attempted to test the sight on Tuesday, I mounted it on a Beeman P1 pistol using an 11mm-dovetail-to-Picatinny adapter that you cannot buy. I used this base because it has some droop, and I thought I needed that droop to get the shots on paper at 10 meters. What I got, however, was pellets striking the target too low after all the upward adjustment in the sight had been made. The results were so bad that I quit testing the sight and moved to something else. I mentioned that in the introduction to Wednesday’s blog.

While I was resting from this first attempt, it occurred to me that maybe this sight works in the reverse of how I was thinking. It has seemed that way every time I attempted to test it. So, for today’s initial test, I turned the base around so it’s sloping up toward the muzzle. The sight was pointed slightly up in relation to the top of the pistol.

For safety, I began shooting at 12 feet. If the gun was off at that distance, it would still be hitting the pellet trap.

I’d already fired a group of 10 7.9-grain Crosman Premier lite pellets at 10 meters with the P1′s open sights. They landed in 0.598 inches, so that was how well I was shooting the gun on this day. I know from experience that the Crosman Premier lite is one of the best pellets in this pistol.

See All Open Sight test P1 target with open sights
Ten Premier lites went into 0.598 inches at 10 meters with the pistol’s open sights. The P1 can shoot.

It seems I can still shoot my P1. Now, how well can I shoot it with the See All Open Sight mounted? Well, I was right about the droop in the first place. Reversing the mount so it sloped up landed the pellet 12 inches below the aim point at 12 feet! I did need a drooper base after all, and one with the most aggressive slope possible. Fortunately, I had just what I needed, so that base was mounted on the gun and the sight was attached to it.

See All Open Sight test P1 with sight mounted
See the steep slop of the base adapter? It still wasn’t enough to raise the pellet to the point of aim.

With this new steeper-sloped base, the point of impact did rise; but even with the See All sight adjusted as high as it would go, the pellet still struck about 3 inches below the aim point when shooting from 12 feet. And, yes, I did read the adjustment directions as I was adjusting the sight.

I couldn’t get the pellet to strike the point of aim, so on to Plan B. Plan B is where I move the aim point very high and let the pellets impact below. At least that would tell me about the sight’s potential. I used a black dot as an aim point and backed up to 10 meters. When the first shot landed 5 inches below the point of aim, however, the test was over. That is so low that it risks not hitting the entire pellet trap, and that’s a risk I’m not willing to take. Two more inches and the shot goes off the paper.

See All Open Sight test low impact point
A 5-inch drop below the aim point was enough to make me stop the test. This is the end of the P1 test.

This test (on the P1) is over
I have tried for two agonizing days to get the See All Open Sight to work on my Beeman P1, and everything has failed to work. I now have more pellet holes in my house (Edith knows about them), and that’s as much damage as I’m willing to do.

I’m not saying the See All Open Sight doesn’t work. There are too many reports that it does work — including one from our blog reader GunFun1. But I’ve done everything in my power to get it to work for me, and you’ve seen the results. My shooting buddy Otho has done the same. He did get better results than I did, but even he wasn’t satisfied with what he got.

I’m going to set the sight aside and just think about it for awhile. If I were testing this item for Pyramyd Air, my recommendation would be “don’t buy” right now. That’s not saying I won’t find a gun it works on; but, for now, I’m pretty burnt out.

131 thoughts on “See All Open Sight: Part 5

  1. Wow, I did not realize how small that triangle is. I guess marking up your own reticle shapes is out if the question.. was the drooper base adjustable? Sounds like that may be necessary. Also like to apologize to anyone that read my “just doodle on it” comments, that was foolish, especially since I haven’t used the sight myself. Can’t teach what you haven’t learned.



      • Hey B.B.
        I just done reading through the five parts of your test of the see all open sight that Gunfun1 and you let me have a early look last week. I found it to have a lot of use full info for setting the sight up and adjusting it. I might have a solution for converting from the dovetail on most airguns to the weaver/picatinny rails. UTG makes an adapter that I have used to mount scopes with weaver/piactinny base to the 11mm dovetails,( UTG dovetail to Picatinny rail adapter # MNT-DT2PW01) the adapter fits inside the weaver rails and is spring loaded so that when you snug the weaver screws down to secure the scope the adapter also compresses with the weaver rail to grip on the 11mm rail. It also has two set screws like the see all open sight that you can screw down to secure it to the dove tail. The only issue that may not allow this adapter to work on the see all open sight is that the see all sight has a fixed mount weaver type system that slides on to the weaver rails rather than having screws to compress and grip the rails. It would depend on how snugly the see all sight fits the weaver rails as whether it would make a tight enough fit on the 11mm dovetail to hold in place securely. It was just a thought as I don’t have a see all sight to try them with. They come in a pack of two and are fairly cheap, I know they work very well on standard type weaver scope mounts that have the screws to tighten to secure the scope to the gun. I d9id not know if you were aware of those adapters or not as you may have already tried to use them in the test and because they would not work you did not mention them. Just thought I see if you were aware of them
        Mike



          • BB
            Yea I didn’t think that they would work because of how you stated the sight mounts in the blog, but i just thought I would run them by you just in case they might. you are right they key into the slots and require a mount that compresses to hold them in place.
            Mike


  2. And for those wondering if I ever sleep? I have two answers, quite hardly and I wish! Long time 3 or 4 A.M.er, plus I get to be the first to post! Nanana na nana! Just kidding, good night.


    • RDNA
      Hows it going. And I have a pretty good reputation of being a first poster many times. I got it down pretty good when the next days topic posts the night before.

      So all I can say is I let you post first this time. I will post first the next time the new days blog comes up. ;)

      Of course just joking. Usually the next days topic is up by 11:15 pm.



        • RDNA
          I could just see what everydays new blog would start out like if we did that.

          It be like you would say “I got you GF1″. Or I would say “Better luck next time RDNA”.

          Then also we would both be trying to post at the same time like at 11:01pm and then when we got through posting and got directed back to the blog. Guess what we would both loose and somebody else would have their post up already and they would be the first post of the day.

          And everyday people would be going what the heck are they talking about. So I don’t think we should do it. And I will just call it as you won. ;) Sound good. :)


          • Yes I agree, lets just pretend we already did it and it was as much fun as you’ve made it sound. That way the expectations don’t go unfulfilled. Id never end up saying “I’ll get you gunfun, next time…. next time….” in that cool voice with a mean cat and a metal hand so yeah its not worth it.



  3. BB
    First thing I see is the sight is to close to the muzzle end of the gun. When you tilt the gun up to line up the top point of the triangle to the top of the magnifying lens you will not move the muzzle of the gun up very much. Your pivot point of the sight verses the pivot point of the barrel is reduced that way.

    If you slide the sight back towards the breach when you line up the point of the triangle to the top of the magnifying lens the muzzle end of the gun will now be pointing higher.
    I would say if you move the sight forward more than what half of the guns overall length is you will not achieve enough up movement of the barrel.
    The farther back that you can mount the sight on the gun the more up movement you will have from the barrel when you line the triangle point and top of the glass up.

    That’s when I found out about the second problem I had. (notice I said second problem I had; not the second problem the sight had) Now I needed to make sure that I had the full view of the triangle in the magnifying lens. To do that I had to move the sight forward when I had the gun held the way I normally would as if I was shooting in a standing position like when I walk through the woods hunting. In other words I shouldered the gun like I picked it up off a table and looked at the sight and it was naturally centered in the glass everytime I shouldered the gun. In other words repeatability in my hold and sight picture.

    When I was setting it up I moved forward and I started getting close and well a little over that half way mark of the gun when I got the sight picture right. So now I didn’t have as much up adjustment because I was changing how much the gun pivoted on its center axis. Here is where a longer length of pull will help out. You can get the full sight picture and have the sight closer towards the butt of the gun.

    So do you see what I mean. You have to move forward so all the points of the triangle contact a part of the sight. Top of the point to the top of the flat surface of the lens.
    And then both of the other points of the triangle need to contact the radius of the black frame of the sight. But you need to be far enough back so the geometry of the sight will produce more up movement of the end of the barrel.

    So in my case when I had the gun shouldered as normal and I could repeat the hold and sight picture I shot the gun. STILL LOW. My length of pull is fixed on both of the guns I used the sight on so I couldn’t move the sight back or I would lose the contacting points of the triangle.

    I had to lift the magnifying lens up about a1/16 of a inch to put my up adjustment in the middle of its total movement. I did that by loosening the 2 flat head screws on each side of the sight with a .050″ allen wrench. I slid the lens up flush with the top of the black part of the sight housing then screwed the flat head screws in till they touched the lens and I gave them a slight snug just enough to hold the lens in place.

    I shot the gun after that and I could now get to gun to shoot high even out to 50 yards. My thinking about why the sight needs more up adjustment is because of the lesser power that a airgun makes verses what a firearm makes. The sight was developed for firearms in the first place.

    Take a good old multi pump gun and pump it up 10 times and shoot at a target with a scope zeroed for 30 yards. And you adjust your POI (point of impact) for the pellet for bullseye.
    Now put 4 pumps in the gun and aim for bullseye and go look at the target after you shot and I bet the POI of the pellet will be drastically lower. So then you will see what I mean about how the sight is affected by the power of the gun.

    Sorry for all these words. And I hope I didn’t muddle it up to bad and make it hard to understand. Hope this helps.


    • Step back from the coffee and no one gets hurt.

      I think I might have some serious issues with this thing. I really like the clean compactness of this thing. I am wanting to mount something similar on top of a scope for quick, close in shots, but there may be some serious issues for me with it. This thing would likely be sitting to far from my face to work properly, although if you can use it on a pistol it should work how I was thinking.

      I guess you are just going to have to bring it to Roanoke and let me play with it a bit.


      • RR
        When the sight is mounted on the gun and you look at the lens all you see is a triangle floating in the lens. Your eye does not perceive the depth of were the sight is mounted.

        The farther away it is mounted the bigger the triangle appears in the lens. If you move to much forward all you see is black. As you bring the sight closer to your eye the triangle starts getting smaller the closer you get. If you had it almost right by your eye the triangle would be very small like in the picture above.

        The best I can say is your eye will pickup the black triangle and you never pay attention to where the sight is actually setting on the gun. You just see the sight and your eye finds the triangle naturally.

        And yes if I can make it I will definitely bring it to Roanoke and you can try it out.


    • And I should say this. When you adjust the elevation (up/down movement) on the sight.

      The small silver set screw by the green glow material adjusts the sight up (point of impact of the pellet moves up on the target) by screwing it counter clockwise which lowers the the the green glow material block.

      Maybe that helps to understand how the pivot point of the sight works in relation to the lens,triangle and barrel.Triangle moves down so you have to tilt the barrel up to line the lens and triangle up.


      • That is what is bothering me. My thinking is I am not wanting to spend valuable time aligning the triangle and the lens and then the target. A good quality dot sight may be more to my liking although it will be much bulkier than this. I may just have to just take out an equity loan and get me a Trigicon.


        • RR
          Trust me. When you get it set up right The sight and target acquisition is just as quick as a dot sight.

          I can shoulder the gun and the triangle is centered immediately in the sight and then the top point of the triangle is placed on your target. If the sight was on my Monsoon and I had targets set up in multiple places in the yard. I could use that gun and the See All Sight just like they do the rapid fire competitions with the pistols. It is seriously that fast. As fast as I can pull the trigger and move to the next target and lock on is how fast the sight works.

          I actually have my second one setting on my desk right now that came yesterday. Its going on my Winchester 190 .22 cal. semi auto rim fire gun.

          And the only thing that they need to do to make the sight more usable for airguns is if they made the lens raise or lower like I did with some kind of adjustment set screw also and still keep the green part adjustable also. That way you could get alot more elevation out of the sight.

          Well and they should offer 2 versions with both types of mounting designs. The 3/8 and 11mm style and the Picantinny style.


    • GF1,

      I have a little room to move the See All sight to the rear, but the P1′s front sight is also the recoil stop. The P1 recoils backward fro most spring guns, so sights move forward.

      B.B.


      • BB
        I’m thinking the sight probably doesn’t need to be set up against a stop. The sight is so lite and with the design of the 2 set screws that hold the sight in place on the picatinny rail should keep the sight from moving. That design should keep both screws gripping harder as something try’s to move them.

        And do you see what I mean by if the sight is forward when you tilt the gun up to make the sight level the barrel only moves up a little. And if you move the sight back about 3″ and then make the sight level the barrel will move up more than with sight forward.



          • BB
            Your right. Wasn’t thinking about the base.

            So maybe if the See All Sight people would get on the ball and and design multiple versions that already have the correct mounting devices built into their sight we wouldn’t be having these problems that we are figuring out for them.

            Hows this one for you. Customer based research and development. Happening live right here as we speak.



            • First step would be to put a Picatinny/Weaver /cross-pin/ to act as a recoil stop.

              Problem: that means either a pin that is inserted after sliding the sight over the base rail, OR a change in the sight mount to have a movable side piece.

              Currently, one has the condition of sliding the sight onto the rail, and either running the screws down between slots — where they will act as recoil stops IF they are long enough to also tension the wedges; OR running them into the top of the rail and forgoing any recoil stop (unless they are spaced such that one falls into a groove while the other hits the top — Picatinny defines an even spacing in grooves, Weaver doesn’t [assumption is that the scope rings could be shifted to fit the spacing of Weaver bases].


            • Yes, except couldn’t the makers have done this before. With all the problems that B.B. has had as a pro, I’m convinced there is something seriously wrong in the design of this sight.

              Matt61


  4. The fact that it is a film may preclude modifying it by DIYers, but it may be quite easy for the company to change out reticles. Perhaps they could sell various models or even additional sight blocks. Personally I think a clear triangle with the rest black so the triangle itself glows would make for easier sight acquisition.


    • RR
      Then if the frame of the sight was painted white that would help make the side points of the triangle stand out if the triangle glowed green.

      But with the sight the way it is now the green really stands out. And then you can tell if your not locked in right on your sight picture in the lens. And I believe they did it this way because it does help in the lower light situations. That way there is more green surface being reflected towards the magnifying lens.


      • GF! and the rest,

        my problems with my AirForce Talon tank with the Talon Tunes Airtank Adapter (or TTAA) has apparently been solved. As you recall, I had a leaky valve and even the installation of a new delrin plug or valve seat and spring didn’t solve the problem. I even tried lapping in the new delrin seat with no success so after thinking on it a few days, I called AirForce on the procedure for sending the valve to them. As I talked with the young lady who takes care of us customers, she asked what shape the O ring was in the valve plug or insert. Well, there was an O ring in there but when I started suffering from leaks after installing the TTAA, I openned the valve and the O ring must have fallen out. I did find the O ring and re-inserted it and right now, the tank is holding 2,000 psi of air with no leaks! I’ll check this evening to make sure it’s still holding and then re-assemble everything but this looks like what the problem was. However, I haven’t figured out why I would feel air coming out the center of the top hat without that O ring but not out of the threaded area where the insert screws into the valve body. I did check this area multiple times and could discern no leak. More thinking on this is needed. Apparently, I had two problems – first a bad or leaky Delrin plug or seat and then a missing O ring. Never simple.

        Next is to re-mount the scope and see how I like the rifle now with the drop that TalonTunes’ adapter provides.

        Fred DPRoNJ


        • Fred
          I’m glad you got it fixed. And as far as where the air seemed to be coming from can get tricky sometimes. The air will usually flow around the shape of something.

          At work I have a spray bottle with soapy water in it to spray on the air leak. I have found leaks coming from a completely different place then where I thought they were coming from.

          And do you have the adapter set up on your gun yet for how you hold the gun?


  5. If it was me testing this sight i would have come to the conclusion that i was flogging a dead horse by now, however you sir have a much higher level of perseverance than myself I’m sure you will find an application for this sight where it comes into it’s own. The theory behind it looks fine to me, but its just a matter of combining the many variables to find a pistol or rifle it comes into its own. I thank you Mr B.B. for your effort that goes high and above, as i said it’s a cracking idea and i would love to see it working to the degree we all hope it should do. This is something that i would have trouble buying because of the price but would be ideal as i have plenty of old 60′s/70′s springer with all the rear sights missing, and the See All would give me the ability to to use all these rifles without a scope. Thanks for another excellent series of reports and keep up the good work for us mere mortals, LOL (chuckle).

    TTFN

    Best wishes, Wing Commander Sir Nigel Tetlington-Smythe


  6. I am very interested in the concept of the See All, but it sounds like it is not yet ready for market. For those of us who are mortals, we need something that can be set up with little bother and work easily. I can set up a red-dot or a scope, but I don’t think I would want to go the trouble I have seen with this item. Perhaps the company could write out instructions that would make it possible to set it up quickly without all of the experimenting needed here. If Tom cannot set it up to work, how in the world is it possible for us mere mortals?
    Michael in Georgia



    • I suspect the biggest problem is that airgun distances are so short relative to the firearms that the sight is likely targeted at.

      These short distances mean that all adjustments need to be much larger — a 1″ adjustment at 25yards would be a 4″ change for a short 100 yard range firearm. And that firearm is likely on the ascending zero at that distance!

      I still haven’t mounted/tested mine (unless you consider balancing it on a banana “pistol” as a test — done at work so a coworker could see how easily the sight picture could be picked up)

      Granted, I’d consider 25 yard to be a first zero for a hunting pistol.


  7. I cannot say for sure if my method would work with this sight, but here goes. It works on open sights, scopes and red dots. I use a laser bore sighter that that plugs into the end of the barrel. I have one for .177 to .22, and another for .22 to 12 gauge shotguns.

    This method has saved me from frustrations of sighting in, waste of ammo and untold pounding from big bore rifles and shotguns. It is not any good outdoors, but it will get me on paper, and at air gun ranges will get me on target. It really helps with a 10 meter sighting.


    • I think the point GunFun1 makes is why a laser bore sight really wouldn’t be that much more of a benefit, repeatability. Without all this fuss for alignment as to how its pointed every single time, its just a rear sight it would seem.


      • But it does show if the barrel is lined up with the sight when you are holding the gun. It would definitely show being off by 12 ” at 10 meters.


        • Thats true but an 8″ groups no good either, it sounds like if you don’t do all the finnagling with the lens and the shouldering then you’d just be using a laser to line up a rear sight by itself, you could get close but it would be pointless without another reference point. Again, I haven’t used the sight so this is just theoretically speaking.


          • RDNA
            Bore sighting is a benefit if you have a gun that shoots a expensive round like the big cenerfire rounds. It will get you on the paper a little quicker.

            I don’t no how to say this but to just say it. I suppose you know that a bore sighter is placed in the bore of the barrel and it is supposed to shoot the laser beam out to the target in true relationship to the barrel. So when you hold the gun and if you have a scope on the gun; when you look through the scope the center of the (+) or reticle should be imposed over the top of the red dot from the laser. If its not you use your scopes adjustment knobs to make the reticle line up to the dot.

            At that point you take the bore sighter out and fire the gun and see where the projectile hits. It should be on the paper and then you can make a few adjustments of the scope and then your sighted in.

            Im sure you know already but I thought it may help somebody that doesnt. So dont take it as for you but for anybody that wants to know.


            • Ive never used a bore sighter but yeah I do know how it works. Would it be less useful for irons? Not considering the see-all, just in general.


              • RDNA
                That’s a good question. I thought about it and I would think you could sight a gun in with a laser bore sighter and conventional front rear type open sights. I just never done that so I cant answer truthfully.



                  • Yeah that’s what i meant, just have the laser point sitting on top off the front post right? They must work really well for dot sights.


                    • To get the most precise sight in the “lazer bore sight” should be inserted in the muzzle end of barrel “ps make sure to use the proper insert for you guns caliber”. Point the lazer on the bullseye and while looking through the sights of the gun adjust them so you can see the bullseye and lazer. pull the lazer bore sight out the muzzle of barrel and take the shot . Its basically a one time use after the first shot its all on the gun sights to adjust were the bullet hit the target if it didn’t hit the bullseye.



                    • Gunfun1, I know you did, I don’t know as much about airgun you and RifledDNA but RifledDNA last commet sounded like he wants to put the lazer bore sights on top where the front sights are and try to see if he could see the lazer through the rear sights. I didn’t want for other readers that are not aware what we are talking about to be clear The Lazer bore is a instrument to sight in their gun with a scope with effecency with out waisting ammo or shooting. It can also determine if the bore of the barrel is off if a person cant seem to make the open sight (iron sights ) work, to see if a scope will help or they have to bend the barrel (only if its a air gun). Not to cofuse with lazer sights like you see on TV that are meant to stay on as the primary sights.


  8. One mans opinion.From what I have gathered from these test and as others have expressed,a airgun may have to much arc in its flight path for this sight.Seem to be only for a powder burner and its ”Way to much trouble” I would not at this time waste my time and money and choice cuss words on this item any time soon! BB,sometimes at the end of the day or when you ever get time if you would mine to go off subject,Could you make a quick comment on a subject I read about the making of springer or piston big bore airgun that is supposed to be coming soon?I can’t remember what blog you spoke of this or how long ago,seems like under a year or so.I only do hand pumps and could not ever see me pumping up a large bore .Gas piston seems like the answer for ageing person such as me.



      • Has asking if there’s a big bore springer coming and whether or not you’d mentioned it already, if I’ve translated correctly, lol


    • Steve,

      There will never be a big bore spring gun. They don’t generate enough power.

      A few years ago I wrote an April Fool’s article about a big bore springer, but that was just a joke. The spring gun just doesn’t have the power needed to run a big bore airgun.

      B.B.


      • Thanks for the reply and on my behalf ”DAAAAAAAAAA” I not only got fooled by a April fools joke,but many months later.I thought It sound sounded a little to good to be true.So it’s to late to save face now so I think I’ll just duck and run and maybe you all wont remember me for that queston next week.Please Scotti,beam me up NOW!
        good day


        • Steve
          Its all good. Don’t worry about it. That was one of BB’s best April fool’s blog. I think anyway.

          And I think Pyramyd Air even ran a ad about a pellet that came in different flavors that you could eat. They even displayed the tin of pellets and some pellets laying by the tin like they normally show a product. It was great.


          • GF1,

            The flavored pellets were an April Fool’s Day joke on Pyramyd Air’s site that was also included in the April 1 blog. Here’s that defunct product page. The images aren’t there, but the text is. Plus, we had so many people actually interested in this after April 1 (because it got indexed in Google) that I added bold, red text at the top saying it was an April Fool’s Day prank.

            When the blog readers saw the pellet listing, they wrote up fake customer product reviews. Those are still listed there.

            Edith


            • Edith
              I never new it went that far. I remember reading that. It was just absolutely great. I got to check out the fake reviews now. I luv that stuff. :)


            • Edith
              Now that I looked at the reviews I do remember reading those also.

              And again I luv this stuff. And look what next month is already. And just thinking ahead I hope I don’t fall for the next April fools blog. And maybe this year do a lead in blog to the April fools day blog. Then you will really get us. ;)




                  • I know what you mean, me and my wife have been together for 5 years and I always mean to give her a start on April fools day and always forget. As far as it coming more often, I just take a look at the news if I want to see fools, like the drone “accident” that just occurred. That technology can shoot a fly off of a dogs nose but somehow they took out a friendly outpost? Hmmm….



          • Thanks Gunfire1.I never minded anyone to get a good laugh at my expense.If people are laughing its all good! I’m working on a nuclear fusion a powered airgun that only needs refueled every seven years.Gotta go now for some reason my keyboard has hair all over it and my skin burns? I let you know when this gun is ready to test fire.


    • Steve , 2years there was a 30cal barrel, breach for a HW 80 and the tap and dye for making 30cal pellets from round balls. I think it could be possible that one of these air gun manufacturers may make a 30cal springer. I would think the pellet weight would be 20grains -30grains.


  9. Hello B.B. Pelletier, good morning !

    I don’t know is this is the right place to post my question but I haven’t found any better.
    I consider myself a very good airgunner with large experience in PCP, CO2, Springers as well gas ram system.
    I always scope my guns and I never had a problem like that.
    This time I’ve scoped a S-410 and something strange is happening.
    For example: I zeroed the scope for 11m, thus the far zero would be around 44m. When shooting that distance although the elevation is fine the POI shift to right around 7cm.
    If I re-zero the scope in 44m and shot back to 11m, although the elevation is fine the POI shift to left around 4cm.
    I think the only reasonable explanation is the scope is out of axis of S-410 dovetail.
    Do you have any idea what can be happening this case?
    Thanks in advance and sorry for my bad English.

    Regards

    Roger


    • I ve got the same thing with one of mine, if its zeroed to 30yds or so the poi at ten is to the left and if I straighten it out for ten its an inch or so right, really annoying. The groups are tight too so maybe a helical flight path? I don’t know.



      • RDNA,

        You seem to be talking about some things I reported on years ago.

        Yes, pellets do fly on a spiral path sometimes.

        But FAR FAR more common is when the axis of the scope isn’t aligned with the axis of the bore. The gun will be on at the zero point, only and off on one side when the shot is closer and the other side when it’s farther away.

        B.B.


    • Roger,

      this is not unusual and can be caused by one or two things – (1) the pellet you are using is flying in a helical path. That is, it’s rotating around it’s path in circles so it hits the target spaced at different distances at different points in it’s path. Think of a wood screw with the pellet following the threads. (2) The spin on the pellet is strong enough to cause an effect called a spin drift or coriolis effect. The pellet is drifting off it’s intended path with a force induced by it’s spinning. Read this: http://www.appliedballisticsllc.com/spindrift.html

      Fred DPRoNJ


      • Fred DPRoNJ and RifledDNA

        I don’t think so, because I’ve tested 3 different types of pellets, all of them JSB (18gn, 15,8gn and 14,3gn) all of them had same behavior.
        I also played at power knob of S-410 in order to increase and decrease the muzzle velocity and the result was almost the same, thus I eliminate the hipostesys of pellet nutation and precession.
        Any other coments will be welcome :)
        Thanks in advance.
        BR

        Roger


        • It sounds exactly as BB diagnosed. Your scope may be mounted properly however, the bore of the barrel may not line up properly with grooves.

          First thing to do is look at your scope mounts closely. If your mounts use a little side plate to clamp to the grooves as most do, most of these little plates are made with both the top and the bottom edge bent inward with a thin edge to engage in the groove. If you look carefully, they are usually of different lengths so as to be usable on different width grooves. If your front mount has the long edge in the slot and the rear has the short edge in the slot, it will cant your scope off to the left and vice versa. Both plate edges in the groove should be of the same length. Also, the front and rear scope mounts should have the plates on the same side as that can also cant your scope to either side. Look at your mounts and see if everything is all matched up as it should be and also make sure the edges of the mounts are properly engaged in the grooves on both sides.

          Now if everything is all hunkadorey as far as how the mounts are on there and you still have this issue, you could have a real problem. Either your scope mounts are no good, which does happen on occasion, or your barrel bore is out of line with the scope mount grooves which unfortunately is not that uncommon.

          You can sometimes use the mounting plates and which side the plates are on to correct for some bore misalignment. If your mounting plates are the same front and rear, try putting the “long” edge of the front scope mount plate in the groove and the “short” edge of the rear mount. Now that is with the plates on the left side of the rifle from the shooter’s viewpoint. If the plates are on the right, do the opposite. Zero at your 11M and see how it does at 44M.

          If that does not cure the problem, you may have to find mounts that will adjust for windage.

          Gosh, I hope I got all that right. If I didn’t, someone please speak up and chastise me properly.


          • Thanks, I forgot about those stupid little plates, and yes mine look like they’re “reaching”. Id like to get some rings or mounts that are split down the middle and clamp evenly.



        • Nope. One effect is the result of gravity pushing the pellet down. The other effect is from the earth’s rotation. The later is the reason the bathtub water draining turns clockwise in one hemisphere and counter clockwise in the other hemisphere.

          But I think BB’s explanation is probably the solution.

          Fred DPRoNJ


          • So the scope being mounted crooked is the solution to earths gravity and differences in hemisphereical magnetism? I think Im more confused… gravity pulls straight down and lead is non magnetic, I think the centripicle force theory and its implementation in a coriolis spiral was more apt to apply to our pellets deviations in flight. Hopefully its just the scope….


            • RDNA
              Coriolis effect would cause the projectile to pull to one side. That would be part of the projectiles trajectory.

              On the scope axis you have to picture a centerline going through the middle of the scope diameter. And then picture the same for the barrel. They have to run parallel to each other. If that centerline is shifted then the scope reticle (+) will go of at a angle to the barrel centerline. No way then to keep the projectile shooting in the spot that the scope see’s.


              • Only place the scope would see correctly would be at the distance the scope was zeroed at. The farther distance you get from your zero point the more the projectile will not be correct to what the scope see’s.

                I think I just repeated myself.


          • Coriolis effect. I don’t know if I spelled it right.

            That’s why on the old Gasser drag cars back in the 60′s had the velocity stacks angled in different ways. And it was also suppose to straighten out the path to the valve.

            And then If you look at the stacks they were a certain length to help tune the engines power band. A longer stack more bottom and mid-range torque. A shorter stack made more mid-range and upper end horsepower. That was usually determined by what type of stroke the engine had. Short stroke=short stack and long stroke=long stack. But that could be changed if needed to tune the engine in.


            • Like Fred said about the toilets when they flush. It is suppose to have something to do with the Earth’s gravitational pull.

              That’s what I was talking about with the drag cars.


              • GF1

                I just got a surprise a few days ago. Just got a new Camero with a 6 in it . Figured that this would be just fine. Then I find out it has 323 HP .

                twotalon


                • TT
                  That’s suppose to be a heck of a engine. I think the Cadillacs used them first. You know in their luxury cars. Fit right in with their non-race car luxury theme. You know a 6 cylinder. And since the day that engine showed up its been getting tweaked more and more every year. 300 plus horsepower is a good thing to have in my books. But I’m a horsepower freak. So more is better for me even if I can’t make the car hook up.

                  Yep those Camaro’s are nice. My nephew has a (2012 I believe) with the big 396 small block in it. And his wife has a V-6 model.

                  What color did you get? And is it a stick shift or automatic. And just sayn’ I was never brand loyal when I had all my muscle cars. I had them all. But I did find myself buying Z-28′s everytime I bought a new car.

                  But I will tell you I keep hearing the new Dodge Challengers calling my name. I want a plum crazy purple one with some type of silver stripes. Well I want a new Corvette also. Who knows what could happen. :)


                  • GF1

                    It’s what they call midnight blue or something like that . Very dark with metal flake. Depending on the light, it can look blue, dark grey, or black. The color and sound of the engine should not attract cops.

                    Transmixer is a 6 speed auto/manual/tap shift. I have trouble keeping a steady speed because I don’t hear enough engine to sync my foot to. Then there is the analog speedometer. I am used to looking at the dial to see that it is pointing just shy of straight up (55). Well, 55 is about where 40 should be on this. I really don’t want to have the dial pointing almost straight up. I am trying to get into the habit of using the digital right in the center of the dash. I also set the speed limit warning control on . And set the cruise control too, for the roads I can use it on.

                    twotalon


                    • TT
                      I shouldn’t even get this started. But all that stuff they do to cars now days. Well you know they will be driving themselves before we know it.



              • Sorry Fred you said that about the Earth’s rotation. And if I remember right looooong range snipers worry about that when they calculate their shot.


                • I was just splittin hairs and pullin legs, hence the I hope its just the scope, if I can’t line up my scope right how am I gonna adapt for obscene scientific eccentricities?? And what am I supposed to do when the earth starts spinnin the other way?! I’ll lose my mind the first time I flush the toilet!



                    • Hahaha, really, can we rehash the code brown for this one? My kids love Monsters vs Aliens (movie) and the president says “Set the terror alert to brown cause Im gonna need a fresh pair of underpants.”


                    • The magnetic poles will reverse first… and the interim before the magnetic fields reform will be a time of high solar radiation as particles won’t get trapped in the aurora’s and maybe even the Van Allen belts will collapse.


                  • If that happens it would be like a domino effect. Who knows it could all come back around and there could be a new Earth.


    • Roger,

      I am almost positive the line of your scope is not aligned with the bore line. You have described the exact set of circumstances that are used to diagnose that problem.

      I see, by reading RDNA’s response to you and also by reading what Fred has said that I need to write some scope basics blogs. I am scheduling this one for next week.

      B.B.


      • That would be great as that’s my main interest at the moment, getting some quality optics together, one more day for the adapter! Yaay! Thank you B.B.


    • Roger
      I’m with BB on this one. If the line of sight from the scope is not parallel with the barrel you will have problems with your POI (point of impact) at different ranges.

      Then if you move in to a closer range or out to a farther range then what you are zeroed at. The point of impact will not be true to your zero range.

      In other words if you took that bore sighter and put it in the barrel and zeroed the scope at 30 yards to line up with the laser dot then moved out to a farther distance say 35 yards. The dot and scope would not be aligned to each other anymore. And that mis alignment will increase the farther you move from your 30 yard zero distance. You normally can detect this if your group changes in the side to side POI (point of impact). It will change at different range distances.


      • So do you turn the rings around, shim in the rings …. all the above or is there a best way? Sorry for asking if its written somewhere already, Im about to go look.



          • Lol, sorry! I wish I had enough knowledge of this stuff to write an educational report. I hope to be there someday, I actually have aspired to being an author but there’s this square thing in my head… ooh, wait, that IS my head!


  10. Yes sir my queston is off topic if you don’t mind.queston is ,I remember a short time ago that you had a short statement about a new spring or gas piston don’t remember which one .Anyway the subject was a break barrel large bore in the 30 cal.or above that you had tested and was very pleased with.I think you said this airgun was expected to hit the market with en a year?If have any of this wright and the foot pounds are suitable for my needs I would be very much interested in one because as I said age is creeping up ad pumping a large bore with the hand pump is something I would not want to do but the idea of a nitro piston seems like a good idea.Thanks,Steve


    • Steve,

      I wrote an April Fool’s Day gag report about a big bore spring gun. Unfortunately, they won’t work (very well). Spring-piston powerplants do not have enough power to make big bores practical.

      B.B.


      • Or if they did, they would be almost impossible for us mortals to cock and I sure would not want to be the one who pulls that trigger.


  11. For whatever it is worth–I, too, gave up on the See All and sent it back to the company. I got the promised full refund in only a few days.

    This sight sounded good and seemed to fulfill a need for shooters with poor eyesight, but it flunked real world testing for me both on airguns and firearms.

    Thanks for all the efforts, B.B.


  12. Hey everybody,

    As fate would have it, I went to the range with Otho today, and he tested the See All Open Sight on an SKS. The results were stunning!

    The sight worked very well and Monday I will have a complete report for you. With photos of groups.

    B.B.



    • That is great B.B.! I have mine on a 9mm carbine, and have had excellent results. I also tried it on a 10/22 with similar results. My standards are not up to yours of course as far as group size, and having 9mm holes makes the group seem smaller in scale….. I really appreciate your thoroughness on these reviews, the best on the net in my opinion. I know they have PCP shotguns out there, and think that checking the See All Open Sight on a .410 would be interesting as well, it is a fast acquisition sight. I could hear your frustration with the pistol mount you were trying, and thanks for the perseverance…..


    • BB
      I know your going to talk about it Monday. But I wanted to say this.

      I’m guessing that you didn’t have to use a adapter to mount the sight on the gun. So that is making me think of 2 things. But if you still used the adapter then that throughs this thought out the door.

      First thing is the sight is closer to the barrel. So that means you wouldn’t need as much up adjustment out of the sight if I’m thinking right. So that would help with the problem of not enough up adjustment.

      Then the second thing would also be related to the sight being mounted on the gun with no adapter. That would help when you shoulder the gun to keep your line of sight locked in. Well if the ergonomics of the butt stock is correct.

      Does Otho have one of the aftermarket stocks on the SKS that uses the AR style butt stock?

      And BB just tell me to be quiet and wait pationatly if you want to wait till Monday to talk about it. I guess I can make it 2 more days.





    • Chris,

      Feinwerkbau did introduce a new sporter springer at SHOT. Lots of similarities with the 124/127 series but the stock appears more functional.

      Remains to be seen if they will manufacture them. We’ll see.

      Kevin



        • Nothing to apologize for. Apparently BB just did not notice it when he was there, probably due to his advanced age. ;o)


          • RR,

            B.B. didn’t get to go to IWA. If he did I’m sure he would have seen it. He’s a Feinwerkbau fan from way back.

            Hope the new sporter comes to fruition. I’m sure we’ll hear more about this.

            kevin


  13. Hello BB,

    I have also off topic question, hope it’s okay…

    I am in the search for my first PCP for this spring/summer,
    so I am looking for a good and reliable reviews of three rifles that I am considering:
    AA S510, HW100 and Daystate Mk4is.

    Did you ever reviewed any Air Arms or Daystate PCPs in the past, specifically S510 and/or Mk4 series?
    I found a review of HW100 .22 that you did, but not the others…

    If you did not review these in the past, is there a chance that you might plan any of these for review in the near future…? This would be make me so happy to know the review are coming… :)

    Thanks,
    Ariel


    • Ariel,

      Since Pyramyd Air doesn’t stock Daystate, and they no longer sell FX, I haven’t tested a lot of those brands. I have tested a few FX rifle and I have owned a couple Daystates, as well.

      I would probably choose the Daystate these days, as the smooth twist barrel that FX puts on their rifles sounds too pellet-specific in the owner reviews I have read. And the HW100 I tested just wasn’t up to the same standards, in my opinion. The Marauder beats it by a healthy margin in the trigger and quiet operation.

      We have many readers who do own these rifle. Maybe they can weigh in here.

      B.B.


    • Ariel ,all of those rifles are top notch and are winners. You probable looked at every spec on all the above. Some of us have/had one or all, your best bet is to see them all in person or ask a specific question so you can make a decision.


    • Ariel,

      What are you planning on doing with your first pcp? Paper punching, plinking, FT, hunting, or? At what yardage? How do you plan on filling the gun, pump or tank?

      What was the criteria you used to narrow your search to the S510, HW100 and MK4? I’ve owned all these guns (not an S510 but S410) and might be able to help.

      kevin


      • I am interested in accuracy long range Airgun shooting paper and small objects plinking.
        This will be about 70-80% of the time. I am talking about 50 to 100 yards.
        The rest of the time general plinking and fun time with my friends, and maybe 10% hunting small game.

        As I understand up to about 50 yards .177 would be preferred caliber, due to flatter trajectory,
        But starting from 50 and longer ranges, .22 would be better choice. Am I correct?

        Also, I am lefty, so it’s important for me to have a dedicated left handed stock or at least ambidextrous, with righ hand operated magazine and bolt/side lever.

        It seems that daystate would be a winner, but not sure about reliability of electronics and quite big difference in price. I can get air arms s510 for about 1100 Canadian but daystate is about 1700 on sale and 2000 regular price.

        How important is regulator for my usage would be in your opinion?

        Thanks,
        Ariel



        • Ariel,

          Wow! Lots of good questions.

          Let me start by saying I’m a right hand shooter and can’t give great advice on ambidextrous or left hand shooting stocks. I know the S510 is ambidextrous but never shoot it left handed. Had a shooting friend that had an S510 and I still own a S410 in a thumb hole stock.

          You and I have similar shooting disciplines since most of my shooting with pcp’s is at 50-100 yards with a little pest control thrown in when needed.

          With regard to caliber for this use there are many opinions and everyone thinks they’re right. You need to discover for yourself which serves your needs best. My preference is .22 cal since it performs better for me in wind and I like it better for pest control. Flat trajectory is a non issue since you will need to know and adjust for pellet drop in all the airguns you’re considering, at the variety of ranges you anticipate shooting no matter which caliber you choose.

          I need to clear something up. I owned a day state MCT and a day state MVT. I have never owned a day state MK four. I have a shooting buddy that owns a days State Grand Prix also an electronic gun. I had nothing but problems with the MVT. Scott had to send his days State Grand Prix across the pond twice to fix the electronics. I had to send the latest, at that time evolution of days state electronics the MCT back for like Tronic repairs. Scott’s Grand Prix shoots very well. My MCT outshot the MVT but was still An in accurate gun. I can’t stand the electronic triggers on any of the days states that I’ve shot. They feel like clicking a mouse. No feedback. That’s a personal prejudice. To summarize I will never own another day state electronic gun.

          Here’s a comparison I wrote a while back between the H.W. 100 tea and the AAAS for 10 with the thumbhole stock. You can read between the lines and see my preference for the air arms platform.

          The HW 100T (Thumbhole stock) doesn’t fit as well as a AA S410 with the factory walnut thumbhole stock. The S410 stock in trimmer and the grip/thumbhole has a better design. The adjustable butt pad on the factory walnut stock is a big plus to me over the fixed buttpad on the HW 100. The weight difference between these two guns is significant. The HW 100T is 8.6 lbs. (Pounds) and the AA S410 in walnut thumbhole stock is 6 lbs. The AA S410 is a bit longer. Biggest difference for me is the AA S410 has an external power adjuster the HW 100 does not. When adjusted the triggers are comparable but the nod goes to Air Arms. Accuracy, power and shot count (with the AA S410 on highest power) are similar. Sidelever and magazines on the AA S410 are superior to the HW 100 BUT you should plan on buying the RC magazines for the AA S410, if you go that route, since they work flawlessly.

          As far as regulators they certainly titans spreads in velocity and in many cases increase shot count but at the end of the day they are a major component that will fail. Not if but when. I’m not a fan of regulated gun since I have seen guns that can outshoot regulating guns and it is because of the regulator as much as it is the shooter.

          Reread the last sentence since it’s the most important thing that I’ve posted.

          Kevin


          • Ariel,

            One more thing before I forget. As far as benchrest shooting for long range with airguns the stock to me is extremely important. I can’t stand the design of the stocks especially the bottom of the rear stock on the days states nor the current stock on the air arms S5 10.

            My main complaint is the scallop on the bottom of the stock which makes it very difficult for a rear bag to be effective for long-range shooting.

            Again this is a personal prejudice and may not affect you or your shooting.

            Kevin


  14. BB,

    What do you suppose then would be a practical size limit for a springer? In bore size?

    .22 over .177 was an improvement in my experience (with the same gun).

    Les


  15. I don’t have time to read all the commentary this time, so I’ll just throw this in and hope I’m not being repetitive.
    I do agree that this seems to be a very innovative product with very much potential…but I further agree that it seems to need additional R & D to make a truly useful, viable and marketable product.

    Not having physically seen or handled the See All sight, I don’t feel I can really comment on the optics nor mounting issues, other than pointing out any kind of reticule can be easily manufactured with the proper industrial imaging equipment. Hard to imagine? Look up “Printed Circuit” or “Nano Machine” and prepare to be amazed.
    But my real first impression of the See All sight is…”Too many sharp angles and sharp points.” Part of the problem is that it’s not very ergonomic. Neither carry-friendly nor something one wishes to hold up to their face and pulling a trigger. The too prominent edges and points need to be smoothed and rounded which will have the beneficial side effect of making the sight physically somewhat smaller but virtually, MUCH smaller. (AKA “User Friendly.”)
    In any case, I wish the See All company only the best.


    • Well… you don’t hold it up to your face, for one thing. Based on my (still unmounted one) the most effective range is somewhere between one and two feet from the eye. About where the rear sight of rifles with barrel/open sights would be located (and those aren’t all that smooth of a spot to grab either).

      The mount rails do need work. I test fitted it on the Sig X-5 Open (CO2 BB blowback) picatinny mount and couldn’t get it centered. One side or the other was fully engaged in the dovetail wedge, while the other side was on the thinner edge, resulting in the tightening screws canting the sight slightly. Fitting it with a “proper” squeeze rail would add to the cost — currently the sight’s shell is just cut from an extruded shape; milling a recess, tapping holes, and fitting a movable wedge would probably add 30-50% to the cost.

      I don’t expect it to come in as a precise target sight — it seems more aimed (no pun intended) for rapid sight acquisition at firearm hunting or defensive pistol ranges (where acceptable accuracy is more like a 4″ diameter circle rather than a sub-inch dot on paper).


      • It would seem the sight positioning is intended as rather a “new age” peep-sight, not unlike the one installed on a Garand or M14 but not requiring a front sight. I admit I’m at a disadvantage, not having seen or handling one in the flesh, but my impression is the user is expected to place their eye in the “peep” position (necessary due to the positioning of most scope/sighting rails.) Unless one is equipted with eyeballs on a stalk like a sand-crab, that’s likely going to place one’s pretty face up-close and personal with too many sharp edges for user comfort.
        Perhaps the perceived danger is illusion, (would a sight-plant from rounded edges really be much different than sharp edges?) but marketing perception is the name of the game here. Don’t forget, this item is largely intended for firearms and an inadequately designed mounting system (which, as you and Tom point out, it clearly is,) is not only inadequate but irresponsible. How would you like this item flying back into your face/eye under magnum recoil? Or even from the double snap of a springer?Landmark legal cases have been made on much less.
        And finally, the should be little, if any added cost. Correcting the obvious design flaws would apparently involve only simple adjustment of the CNC milling and/or drilling machinery. Nothing involving more than minor reprograming.
        As they say, there’s only one thing more expensive than hiring a lawyer.
        And that’s not hiring a lawyer.
        Still the best thing, is not needing one.
        In any case, I still wish them well.


        • It’s not functional as a “peep” sight. That close to one’s eye one might as well remove the collimating lens as the triangle mark will be nothing but a small image. At 18 inches the triangle nearly fills the lens.

          That means it would be mounted at the front end of the receiver rails (or even on the barrel if you have a picatinny forearm). And on an actual firearm, recoil would result in the unit sliding /forward/ toward the muzzle — it is only the quick alternation of a spring piston recoil that shoves things backwards (which is why many scopes don’t survive — the innards are braced to keep things in place when pulled by a firearm, not when pushed by an air-gun)


        • 103David
          Thinking about safety is definitely important. And what I’m about to say is not defending the See All Sight. And I’m also not taking sides here for what is or is not safe with the sight. I’m just saying it the way I see it which somebody may not like either.

          The sight can be set at different distances from the eye (eye relief). It depends on what you want to see. You can have the sight closer to your eye and the triangle is small. Or you can have it farther away like a convectional open iron sight. As it gets farther away the triangle becomes bigger. So that actually lets you personalize how the sight picture is.

          If you go to the See All Sight webpage the sights are positioned closer to the shooter on the guns they show the sight mounted on. I believe the sight was developed for firearms. I don’t think airguns were thought about when they designed the sight.

          I believe the biggest problem is that We/I have been trying to adapt it to a air gun. Adapt is the word that concerns me. I think if the sight was mounted right on the picanitty rail of a airgun (some air guns have that type of sight mounting system already) that the sight would be more successful. Even on the lower powered airgun verses the more powerful firearm.

          If I would of mounted the sight closer to me I probably would not of had to do anything to get the sight to zero higher on the POI (point of impact). That is where it may be mis-leading. I moved the sight forward so I could make the triangle take up the full view of the lens. When that is done it takes away from how the geometry of the sight works. You will not get the same amount of elevation adjustment.

          And as far as where the scope is mounted and the possibility of it flying off the gun. I don’t think so. Either you messed up big time installing it or you got one heck of a gun. And then think about this. Eye relief. You will no way get the sight mounted on the gun and it ends up being close enough to contact your eye when the gun is fired. There is more danger with the eye relief of a scope than the See All Sight.

          And about the machining process. True to what you said. They could change the screw locations. But I really don’t believe the See All Sight will move. If you remember what BB said above the adapter is what is likely to move. But to me what it boils down to is the sight was designed for firearms from what I can tell. So I say leave the sight as it is for firearms. But I believe that the sight should be looked at by the See All Sight company and they should make some design changes and make another sight with the airgun in mind. The 11mm mounts.

          And remember this all started out with a new product find at the SHOT show that was thought to be able to help somebody with poor eye sight. The thought was that somebody could shoot again with a sight that resembled a open sight that would come stock/factory on the gun. Not peep sights or aperture sights or red dot sights or scopes.

          Some stock/factory sights are precise sights. But then compare them to a scope. I think the See All Sight does allow a person to shoot open sight and it can be just as accurate as a conventional open notch rear/post front sight. Maybe that should be the next test to see if the 2 types of sights compare in performance. And how often do you shoot a open sight out to 100 yards anyway.

          Well and BB says hes got some kind of good results to show from his last time out with the sight. We only got a few more hours now to wait and see what he found.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


+ 9 = 15

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>