Lucky
Member
Does it really make a difference? At 1000+ does 7x magnification count, or is the 25x with more light going to be easier to see stuff in?
Difference between rifles with x25 and x32 scopes at long ranges?
- Thread starter Lucky
- Start date
- Status
USSR
Member
Actually, I have found somewhere around 20X to be ideal for 1k shooting. My F Class scope goes up to 24X, but I usually take it down to around 20X to better deal with mirage. I would definately not use a 32 power at long range.
Don
Don
aka108
Member
No matter how steady you can hold the rifle, at 32X, you can see your pulse rate in the rifle and will have difficulty in keeping it steady on target.
RugerOldArmy
Member
It depends on what you're doing. I know that when I'm shooting pop cans at mid-range (300-ish yards), with my 24x it's great. But shooting 300m BR, I'll shoot much better with my $400 Weaver T-36, than the 24X that cost 3 times as much. (And in those events, others with higher power BR scopes have an advantage.)
Shooting from bags, you should have no issues with 32x and up, or your form has a flaw.
In general, the higher the magnification, the finer aim you can take, making you more consistent. If you check 6mmBR.com and look at the winning guns in F-Class, they're pretty much all higher magnification.
Shooting from bags, you should have no issues with 32x and up, or your form has a flaw.
In general, the higher the magnification, the finer aim you can take, making you more consistent. If you check 6mmBR.com and look at the winning guns in F-Class, they're pretty much all higher magnification.
Jim Watson
Member
What is it FOR?
I see the top F-class shooters using a LOT of magnification. I am up to 20 on a 8-25 and expect to work my way up to 25X before long. Friend of mine who is a better rifle shot is looking at a 32X.
I see the top F-class shooters using a LOT of magnification. I am up to 20 on a 8-25 and expect to work my way up to 25X before long. Friend of mine who is a better rifle shot is looking at a 32X.
rcmodel
Member in memoriam
I agree that 20x is about the usable limit at 1,000 yards.
Mirage will get you bad at long range on a hot day with any more power then that.
Besides, Hathcock and a lot of others have done pretty well with only 3x-9x glass.
rcmodel
Mirage will get you bad at long range on a hot day with any more power then that.
Besides, Hathcock and a lot of others have done pretty well with only 3x-9x glass.
rcmodel
Lucky
Member
Well it's for shooting targets past 1000m. I was shown a picture of a typical target (18" square on plywood backer) in a scope at a long distance, and at 32x that 18" square was very visible, I wondered how much smaller it would really be at 25x instead. If it grows 28% wider, is that really a big deal?
Essentially what I'm reading here is that if you are dead precise then you can use more magnification.
Essentially what I'm reading here is that if you are dead precise then you can use more magnification.
RugerOldArmy
Member
At 300 meters, the difference between 36x and 24x, TO ME, is huge.
And, FWIW, in 300m BR, most of the other folks are using 45x Leupolds (by far the most popular.)
And that's just 300 meters.
And, FWIW, in 300m BR, most of the other folks are using 45x Leupolds (by far the most popular.)
And that's just 300 meters.
I have not competed at long distance, but having shot plenty of benchrest I can tell you that when the mirage is bad it can wash out the entire target with high power scopes.
The Benchrest Target has a thick black square along with the circles. It is for when the mirage washes out the lines and then all you can see is a blurry black square, but at least it is something.
The Benchrest Target has a thick black square along with the circles. It is for when the mirage washes out the lines and then all you can see is a blurry black square, but at least it is something.
Zak Smith
Member
For practical shooting to about 1400 yards, I normally shoot at 12x or 12x-16x.
-z
-z
Lucky
Member
I was shown this as a rock at about a mile, through a Nightforce@32x (npr1), At 16x it would be half the size, and in your experience would 16x be optimal, or lacking, with an accurate rifle?
i shoot pretty much every weekend at 900 yrds in TN (plenty hot here in summer) with a nightforce 42x and with a fixed 10x swarovski (well, i just sold it, so not anymore). i occasionally drive a bit further to shoot at 1000 yrds.
if the mirage isn't bad, the 42x makes a lot of difference. I can see impacts at 900 yrds. if mirage is bad, i just dial it down to close to 20x. i generally don't screw around with any of the intermediate settings; either 42x or 19x.
like zak implied, it can take a while to find and get on target with a high magnification scope because fov is so small. if i was shooting against the clock, or moving between multiple targets, i'd probably opt for something between 15x-20x
if the mirage isn't bad, the 42x makes a lot of difference. I can see impacts at 900 yrds. if mirage is bad, i just dial it down to close to 20x. i generally don't screw around with any of the intermediate settings; either 42x or 19x.
like zak implied, it can take a while to find and get on target with a high magnification scope because fov is so small. if i was shooting against the clock, or moving between multiple targets, i'd probably opt for something between 15x-20x
rangerruck
Member
I suppose it mostly is about the target you are shooting. If you are trying just to hit targets or gongs or such, a 16 or 20 would do just fine. if you are trying for a sub 5 inch group, on a x ring at 1000, I would imagine over 30 is where you want to be. i know when I shoot a 17hmr at 200 or 300 yds, use a 32 power, and would love to get my mitts on a Weaver fixed 36x.
- Status
