What is your primary purpose? If paper punching, I suggest 18x or higher. that will allow you to see holes at 100 yds on paper. I do not recc. getting a scope with a bdc compensator, for a 17. Why? becuase it is a 200 yd max type round.
with a 100 yd zero, it will drop about 3 inches at 150 and about 7 to 8 inches at 200, depending on your rig setup. If you get a scope with a dual reticle, or mildots, you should be able to simply figure out, just through practice, where the round is going, on the next reticle down, or the 1st mildot down, at 200 yds.
The round loses to much steam, and energy after 200, so doing 17 compensation, is overkill, and a waste of time, in my opinion.
plus at 200 yds, the only thing it will reliably kill, would be small stuff; squirrels, birds, pdogs, etc.
October 30, 2009, 01:08 PM
What are some good mil-dot scopes out there? I mostly will be killing rabbits etc with this gun. It really is for targets/small animals anyway.
I want something that I can see clearly at 200 yards would a 4-16x be sufficient for that?
October 30, 2009, 02:22 PM
I have a 3x9 on mine, don't remember the brand. Pentax or Nikon. It was not an expensive scope, but for the mid to lower priced scopes. The glass is good, which I find in scopes from companies with lens experience, and there is not much recoil on these little rim fires.
Part of the fun is learning the gun and knowing how high or low to hold and estimating the distance without all the range finding aids built into scopes. Part of the skill too.
October 30, 2009, 10:00 PM
a 4x16 would be good for game, but for 2 inch dots or smaller, at 200 yds, you will want at least a 24x. with a 18x, on paper with 1 inch dots, you can barely see the holes, with good glass.
I do like the Tasco varmint series scopes, but even better would be a weaver grand slam, or super slam, or a Bushnell 3200 series. Both in hi power.
If you can stand it, from 50 yds, on out to the moon, the Weaver, fixed power, 36x, is a frickin unbelievably clear piece of glass, but just remember, it is fixed at 36x.
October 30, 2009, 10:11 PM
I have a 4.5x14x40 Nikon Buckmaster with parallax on my Marlin .17HMR, no problems at 100yds. is very nice sighting thru, can not speak for 200yds. as range is only a 100, but I would not see a problem at 200 yrs, I do like the Nikon and would buy another one, HTH
October 30, 2009, 10:52 PM
I have a BSA Sweet 17 on my Savage 93r17 BTVS. It's the same rifle as the one you're getting, only with a laminate thumbhole stock, and with that scope, it's a real tackdriver.
October 31, 2009, 11:27 PM
Here ya' go-- www.rapidreticle.com
November 1, 2009, 01:25 AM
I got the same rifle and went through the scope search, which took considerably longer than the rifle search.
If you can afford that Zeiss, by all means check it out. If you're looking for a more reasonable price, check out Mueller. After much research, mostly at RFC, I ended up with the Mueller Tactical 8.5x25 mildot and couldn't be happier. I don't have any high end scopes to compare to, but it's much better than the low end scopes. It's got quite a dedicated following at Rimfirecentral, and for good reason. Check out the 17HMR board there. BTW, mine ran $160. http://www.rimfirecentral.com
The Bushnell 3200 that RR mentioned has a great rep, really great, but I have no personal info. Same with the Nikons and Weavers. Hard to go wrong with any of those brands.
Any scope you end up considering, check out the big online sales sites, they usually have feedback options. Read those and it can be really useful. Take it all with a grain of salt, of course, but you can get a pretty good feel for a relative comparison between models and brands.
The only 17hmr BDC I'm aware of is the BSA Sweet 17. From my research, you have about a 60% - 80% chance of getting a great scope that does what you want. From my personal experience, I will never own another BSA. Up to about 9x power, they're okay...ish. Above that, they're borderline worthless.
November 1, 2009, 08:29 AM
I own the same rifle topped with a 4X Nikon Prostaff.
The rifle came with 3-9X off brand that was not satisfactory as it would not hold zero from one shooting session to the next.
The Nikon however fills the bill rather nicely.
November 1, 2009, 11:17 AM
above dude derserves some props; this looks good, if you have the money.
Allthough hitting at 300 yds, with any wind over 5 mph, would be wishful thinking , at best!!!
And the other above dude is correct as well, for a budget minded scope, a
Mueller is double tough to beat.
Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow
November 1, 2009, 11:31 AM
Well you can "adjust" for range with either the turret adjustments/clicks, or with holdover - you don't NEED a ballistic reticle to do that, although that is simpler. So with that liberal definition of "adjust" in mind, I guess we can recommend non-BDC reticle scopes (?).
FWIW, on what is arguably my favorite rifle, my CZ 453 Varmint in .17 hummer, the scope that serves very very well on it is a Sightron S2, 4.5-14x42mm with AO.
I have another .17 hummer wearing a Bushnell Banner 6-18x50mm, which is a good long-range scope for the price (about $125). Hope that helps.
November 13, 2009, 10:03 PM
I ordered a 6.5-24x50mm Centerpoint Scope. I found a pretty good deal. It was like 109$ at dicks sporting goods online. I found a promotional code for 20% off and ended up getting it for 87$ plus tax/shipping. It ended up costing me 103$ after it was all said and done. Now I just have to wait for it :-(
If you enjoyed reading about "Available scopes for .17 HMR?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!