New scope opinions

Ive had the 2 Freedom and 3 Argos HMR, and the hmrs a better scope except for the weight. I went with the mil and AHMC reticle over the bdc, and wish they offered the AHMR reticle in the Argos HMR.

Havent tried the new Burris yet, but ive been happy enough with the others ive owned id like to try one.

Turrets are much more precise and tactile, power ranges are wider, and at least to my eye the glass has noticeably better resolution....i cant compare low light performance directly. Because both hmr versions had noticeably larger objectives.

I gave away both freedoms and the two smaller HMRs on rifles, the others riding around on my Savage 10ml2, and has so far handled some rather stupendous recoil.

Ive got a Leupy Vx-3HD and if going that route id pay the extra for that over the Freedom.



Again tho....for what you want any of the above scopes will do well.

Because you mention going longer than 300 at the range, but yet still want to hunt 0-300yds, I think the 2x15x42 is the better choice. I don't have the Argos yet, I do have the Helios and a couple others that I'm very happy with. I also own several Burris scopes and happy with those other than power rings on some are a little stiff until broken in.
If I was getting the Signature Hd, I'd want to compare the 2-10x40 and the 3-15x44. The 2-10x40 has 30mm tube, so it probably has a few more Moa of adjustment over the 3-15x44, which has a 1" tube. That may or may not out weigh the extra 5x of the 3-15x44??

Hugger-4641 said:

Because you mention going longer than 300 at the range, but yet still want to hunt 0-300yds, I think the 2x15x42 is the better choice. I don't have the Argos yet, I do have the Helios and a couple others that I'm very happy with. I also own several Burris scopes and happy with those other than power rings on some are a little stiff until broken in.
If I was getting the Signature Hd, I'd want to compare the 2-10x40 and the 3-15x44. The 2-10x40 has 30mm tube, so it probably has a few more Moa of adjustment over the 3-15x44, which has a 1" tube. That may or may not out weigh the extra 5x of the 3-15x44??

Click to expand...

Just a note, the two Argos HMR sizes are 2-12x42, and 4-20x50, ive had a couple of both now that i think about it.
The Midas HMR is 2.5-15x50, ive got one of those on my S20

LoonWulf said:

Just a note, the two Argos HMR sizes are 2-12x42, and 4-20x50, ive had a couple of both now that i think about it.
The Midas HMR is 2.5-15x50, ive got one of those on my S20

Click to expand...

2.5-15x50 would seem a perfect choice for me unless I was planning to stretch out 500yds or more.

Lawman84 said:

Remington 700 30-06 ... mainly for hunting at 300 yards and under with the possibility of shooting longer at the range

... around $250 ... budget

Click to expand...

I have Burris FF E1, Vortex Crossfire II 6-24x50mm and Vortex SE listed below (Also Athlon Argos 10-40x56mm) and for the current price of $188 and $9 shipping from Dack Outdoors, Burris FF E1 6.5-20x50mm will be hard to beat for your budget and it is not made in China (Made in Philippines) if that's a factor.

Burris Fullfield E1 6.5-20x50mm (1" tube) with Ballistic Plex reticle is $188 with $9 shipping and has side parallax down to 50 yards - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...20x-50mm-169-9-shipping.893341/#post-12023578

Athlon Talos 6-24x50mm (1" tube) with BDC illuminated reticle for $229 + free shipping - https://www.eurooptic.com/Athlon-Talos-6-24x50mm-CSF-1-BDC-600-SFP-IR-Riflescope-215012.aspx

Vortex Crossfire II 4-16x50mm (30mm tube) AO Dead-hold BDC reticle for $279 + free shipping - https://www.eurooptic.com/vortex-cr...with-dead-hold-bdc-reticle-moa-cf2-31039.aspx

Vortex Strike Eagle 4-24x50mm (30mm tube) with EBR-4 MOA is $299 and free shipping (Illuminated reticle and 80 MOA adjustment) - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...329-free-2-day-shipping.903761/#post-12257114

Hugger-4641 said:

2.5-15x50 would seem a perfect choice for me unless I was planning to stretch out 500yds or more.

Click to expand...

Its a good scope, weve had it out to 900ish on steel and it's been great.

I'm sort of with the rest, the Athlon at 15x and illuminated for $250 is tough to beat. I'd trust loonwulfs experience and try one based on that. I love my Leupolds but with your discount seems like you get a little more with the Athlon.

-Jeff

I'm somewhat at a loss to recommend a specific brand right now. The upper end Leupolds are never a bad choice, although you may can do better for the dollar somewhere else. But I do have some advice on magnification.

If this is primarily a hunting rifle for game inside 300 yards don't overdo it on magnification. At 300 yards you don't need anything over 9X or 10X and even 6X is more than adequate for big game at 300 yards. Even in western states most shots are under 100 yards and I don't like to go over about 3X on the lower end for those quick shots at woods ranges.

When you get to scopes with 5X or more on the low end you're buying a target or varmint scope. Stay with something around 3X, no more than 4X on the bottom.

jmr40 said:

I'm somewhat at a loss to recommend a specific brand right now. The upper end Leupolds are never a bad choice, although you may can do better for the dollar somewhere else. But I do have some advice on magnification.

If this is primarily a hunting rifle for game inside 300 yards don't overdo it on magnification. At 300 yards you don't need anything over 9X or 10X and even 6X is more than adequate for big game at 300 yards. Even in western states most shots are under 100 yards and I don't like to go over about 3X on the lower end for those quick shots at woods ranges.

When you get to scopes with 5X or more on the low end you're buying a target or varmint scope. Stay with something around 3X, no more than 4X on the bottom.

Click to expand...

I agree with this. I don't know where you are hunting but here in Georgia unless you are sitting on a bean field or a power line clearance most places you can't see over 300 yards. It stinks when a deer pops out right on top of you, you look through your scope & all you can see is brown (my scope was sat on 3x when that happened). I still got the deer but it made it a bit more difficult. If you are out West or where things are a lot flatter it might be different.

Folks need to learn to shoot with both eyes open.

My go-to hunting scopes for over 25yrs have been 4-16x ballpark optics, 4.5-14x, 3.5-21x, 3-18x, 4-12x, 4.5-18x, etc. Enough FOV and small enough profile with 44mm objectives (predominantly) for short range shooting, but still with enough zoom for reach long, or zooming in to count points.

I have a few Sig Tango4 4-16x44mm’s on my dedicated hunting rifles these days. Very content with them.

Lawman84 said:

New here and looking for some opinions on a new scope to mount on my Remington 700 30-06. It will be used mainly for hunting at 300 yards and under with the possibility of shooting longer at the range. ...

Click to expand...

Do you want to dial? Hunting with a 30-06 within 300 yards is practical without dialing. With a 200 yard zero, you could hold over for 300, or you could use a BDC reticle or even just subtension on a simpler reticle.
"Shooting at longer range" is going to make using a laser rangefinder and dialing more attractive. If dialing becomes a critical part of placing shots with precision, then the design and construction of the turret and erector will be important, and you will want a scope that can track dependably.

I'm going to put a plug in here for a fixed-power scope. Shooting out to 300 yards with a flat shooting cartridge like the 30-06 creates the circumstances for which a simple, lightweight, fixed-power scope is ideal. There are few left on the market, but I will commend the Leupold FX-3 6x42. The quality of the optics is as good as you will get without spending more than twice as much. At 13 oz, it's lighter than anything but a 20mm objective variable. The 42mm objective is an ideal fit on most bolt-action rifles without needing high rings to mount the scope far above the bore axis. With 6X, you get a good field of view as well as having deer-sized game at 200 yards appear in the ocular in generous size and detail. While more X can be desirable when the deer are out at 300 yards, you'll have to suffer a larger objective or a smaller exit pupil to get it, not to mention the narrower field of view and the time lost to zoom in and out. Compared to ranging, dialing and zooming with a feature-rich scope, I greatly prefer to raise a fixed-power scope to my eye and have no other task to distract me from the game. Optics suffer at higher powers. Chromatic aberration only gets worse as you zoom in, and no amount of zoom can burn through atmospheric haze and mirage. Especially on the low-end of opto-mechanical systems, less is more. My Swarovski Z5 has some noticeable advantages over my FX-3, but just, and at triple the cost. Even at that, the Z5 has only mid-tier optics. Swarovski isn't known for their tracking, and although the Z5 is lighter weight than scopes with more features, it lacks many. The point is, without a much bigger budget, paring down the feature list can net a better result. I've heard some arguments that economy-of-scale helps makers deliver features at lower cost, but I haven't seen features delivered with quality at the bottom end of the riflescope market.

I think that the best value right now in the power range that the OP was looking into is the Burris 4.5-14x42 FF.

https://www.amazon.com/Burris-Fullf...-Ballistic/dp/B00U1AVWUG?ref_=ast_sto_dp&th=1

I bough the AO version last year and am impressed with the clarity and tracking, although I've only shot it from the bench. My only complaint is that the objective bell is the same diameter as my 50mm scopes although it is advertised as 42mm. That's a little too bulky for my tastes in a hunting scope.

I followed your link to Amazon as I am soon going to be in the market for a scope for a 223. I know nothing about Burris scopes except what I have read and that is mostly positive. I do like their reflex red dot sights and have three that have given no problems at all. I may try out the 20X one as most of my shooting will be off a bench.

I'll admit I'm biased towards higher magnification.
I've found I rarely if ever turn my variables lower than 6. I also rarely feel I NEED the top end when hunting, but the wide range variables do well at giving you the best of both worlds, if one uses both ends of the spectrum.

Those 4.5-14x42 fullfields, and even the droptines are good buys for set it and forget it scopes. I actually prefer the AO versions to the SF.....for some reason I have less issues with AO scopes focus range.

LoonWulf said:

I'll admit I'm biased to higher magnification, I've found I rarely if ever turn my variables lower than 6, and rarely feel I NEED the top end when hunting but the wide range variables do well at giving you the best of both worlds, if one uses both ends of the spectrum.

Those 4.5-14x42 fullfields, and even the droptines are good buys for set it and forget it scopes. I actually prefer the AO versions to the SF.....for some reason I have less issues with AO scopes focus range.

Click to expand...

I might even go so far ad the say the 4.5-14x42 Fullfield E1s are among the best values for your dollar while they're riding in the $150-$200 price range. There's a reason I have them on half my rifles, which isn't many, but still. I recently sold a rifle with one on it to my brother-in-law and he was blown away by it. He's no optics snob, but he's been hunting for many years so he's looked through his fair share of scopes.

LoonWulf said:

I'll admit I'm biased to higher magnification,

Click to expand...

The older I become the more biased I become.

doubleh said:

The older I become the more biased I become.

Click to expand...

Truth. I just have to remember that my biases are formed by my experiences. Someone doing the same thing I am doing in different environments/conditions might have different experiences than me.

Bias can be formed from misunderstanding. We want to see better. Our bias towards thinking that more power is "better seeing" is based on a logical fallacy and oversimplification of how optics work.

VX3HD is what I like currently

westernrover said:

Bias can be formed from misunderstanding. We want to see better. Our bias towards thinking that more power is "better seeing" is based on a logical fallacy and oversimplification of how optics work.

Click to expand...

There definitely are trade offs that have to be considered, especially at the lower price points.
For hunting, and minimal dialing fine targets, I'll take better optics. For more active dialing, especially reactive target work, I'll sacrifice optical quality for better dials. Buying cheaper optics, I accept a reduced life span due to parts ware, and more compromise in function....which will still get me everything I need for most of what I do.

Also as @Mike J said, One has take into consideration what one uses their optics for and the conditions under which the are used.
Then you also have familiarity with the equipment to take into consideration.

Buying a NEW optic it's up to the user to decide what will work for them, and sometimes we're dead wrong for reasons we didn't consider (like me trying to use my Forge on an Xbolt and not being able to eject shells due to the big turrets and shells) or just we might have misjudged our needs. Which is one of the places the newer wide range variables with good turrets help minimize issues.
Rarely will you get something that just strait up sucks for a given situation.

Ks5shooter said:

VX3HD is what I like currently

Click to expand...

For a mid priced hunting optic I really like my VX3HD too!