Need scope advice

Status
Not open for further replies.

redneck2

Member
Joined
Dec 25, 2002
Messages
21,660
Location
Northern Indiana
Have a friend that is looking for a scope for his .338 Lapua. 4-24ish power range Obviously decent eye relief. Open on reticule choice

price range maybe $2,500+/-
 
Look at a Burris XTR iii. They are designed for competition use. New reticle designs, Life time warranty. They have much improved optics since the older XTR models.
I suspect the Steiner Optic connection has helped.
 
Nightforce!
Either the 3.5-15 or the 5.5-22 will work fine. Very repeatable adjustments and rugged enough for the recoil

He had looked at the Nightforce. Looks like a good option but simply trying to check out multiple options

Look at a Burris XTR iii. They are designed for competition use. New reticle designs, Life time warranty. They have much improved optics since the older XTR models.
I suspect the Steiner Optic connection has helped.

Hadn’t thought of this. Will research further. Thx.
 
FFP or SFP?
I'd say decide on this first and then look at other features. SFP will cost less, and depending on the scope's magnification range may be good enough. The rifle he has deserves a really good scope, but no use to spend more than you need; more expensive doesn't always mean better.

Vortex makes an excellent scope. The one on my LRR is a Viper HST, 6-24x50. SFP, the reticle marks (MOA) are accurate at 18X, and it has an extended reticle, the graduations go to the bottom of the field of view, and gives over 30MOA of elevation when zeroed at 100 yds. Add a 20 MOA mount and the .338 would be good to go past a mile.
 
It's a relative unknown, but I'd recommend a Tract Optics 4.5-30x56 with a 34 mm main tube. It's designed for Extreme Long Range (ELR) and would likely fit all of your friend's parameters with about $800 left over. Look them up, read reviews, watch reviews on YouTube and investigate them.

I have bought 3 scopes from them and if I could afford it, I'd replace all of my scopes with Tracts. I own two of the 4-20x50mm PRS MRAD scopes and love them.

https://tractoptics.com/riflescopes/toric-34mm-elr-rifle-scopes
 
Last edited:
I have this scope on my M1A. It is built like a tank, and is outstanding in low light. I have the illuminated reticle on mine, Model BK81006. The reticle is mildot, but the turrets adjust in 1/4 MOA clicks. The literature even recommends it for the .338 Lapua. I'm thinking I gave about $750 for it ten years ago:
Millett - Long Range Scopes (millettsights.com)
 
Scopes and reticle choices are such a personal choice. At the price point listed it is up to him/her to decide which they like because any selection would be a great choice. For me, at this price point, I would choose a scope based only on two factors, does it have the reticle I want and secondly does it have enough elevation adjustment to get me the distance I need with minimal help from a 20 or 30 moa base.
 
Nightforce makes scopes that are built like tanks with pretty good glass, but you can get better glass. For all out quality glass, swarovski is a good goto. I mean, considering the budget, why not.

On the other hand, if he doesn't feel compelled to spend that much, but only thinks he needs to, yeah, Sightron, Vortex PST/Razor, Steiner, etc. Lots of good glass to choose from these days. Just make sure it comes with a warranty that you can actually cash in on, should the need arise. In that department, I'd say Vortex.
 
Another vote for Tract Optics. I have 4 of them. Also recently bought a Meopta. Your high end price would easily accommodate the very best Meopta or Tract and I like the reticles a LOT.
 
As always- a few questions first:
-what is the primary use of his rifle?
-how often will he be shooting this?
-proficient is he/what is his current skill level?
-how did he arrive at $2500?
The reason I ask, is if this is for a hunting rifle, and he’ll never take a shot past 200 yards, there is little reason to buy a top of the line optic. Similarly, if he’s never, or rarely ever shot at or past 500 yards, he may be spending a lot of money for quality he’ll never use. I’m all for buying top quality glass, and I think you should spend significantly on the scope, but very few people will ever put a $2500 scope to it’s full use. Typically, the ones who actually NEED that kind of glass already know what they’re looking for.
My suggestion, he answers the above questions, and then looks for the best value to quality buy. He can most likely buy a great optic for under $1,000.
 
Typically, the ones who actually NEED that kind of glass already know what they’re looking for.

[…]

He can most likely buy a great optic for under $1,000.

I’ve alternatively observed that most new folks who would benefit from $2,500 glass on a long range rifle like a 338 Lapua TYPICALLY find themselves wasting a lot of money, time, and frustration by following bad advice to skimp and under-buy optics, so they end up buying two or three scopes before they finally buy what they should have bought first - often because people give this kind of advice online and the neophyte simply doesn’t know any better and believes the advice is good.

Maybe that’s how this guy ended up owning a 338 in the first place - ask online what round to use for 1000+ yards and 338Lap is a common recommendation, for some reason, so maybe he’s already over-gunned due to well meaning but bad advice. Under-scoping his over-gunned rifle doesn’t make any more sense though.
 
I’ve alternatively observed that most new folks who would benefit from $2,500 glass on a long range rifle like a 338 Lapua TYPICALLY find themselves wasting a lot of money, time, and frustration by following bad advice to skimp and under-buy optics, so they end up buying two or three scopes before they finally buy what they should have bought first - often because people give this kind of advice online and the neophyte simply doesn’t know any better and believes the advice is good.

Maybe that’s how this guy ended up owning a 338 in the first place - ask online what round to use for 1000+ yards and 338Lap is a common recommendation, for some reason, so maybe he’s already over-gunned due to well meaning but bad advice. Under-scoping his over-gunned rifle doesn’t make any more sense though.
I agree with what you wrote. The point I was trying to make is that if he’s only going to shoot out to 300 yards 80% of the time, and occasionally shoot to 500, don’t spend $$ for a distance you’ll never shoot. 1,000 yards is a LONG, difficult distance, and there aren’t a lot of ranges that can accommodate this. People like to buy for their dream scenario, when reality can be much different.
 
Buy the best glass that you can afford, and don't be afraid of buying a used top tier scope to get the best bang for your buck. You can find used high end optics for 1/3 of the new price if you look around.
Over the years, I've got some great deals on used S&B, Swarovski, Nightforce, Kahles scopes because some people just have to have the latest and greatest scopes that hit the market.
 
I agree with what you wrote. The point I was trying to make is that if he’s only going to shoot out to 300 yards 80% of the time, and occasionally shoot to 500, don’t spend $$ for a distance you’ll never shoot. 1,000 yards is a LONG, difficult distance, and there aren’t a lot of ranges that can accommodate this. People like to buy for their dream scenario, when reality can be much different.

Maybe you’re projecting the limitations in YOUR reality into that of the OP’s buddy? For many of us, shooting 1000+ yards is our reality, and buying the right gear the first time makes sense.
 
Maybe you’re projecting the limitations in YOUR reality into that of the OP’s buddy? For many of us, shooting 1000+ yards is our reality, and buying the right gear the first time makes sense.
That’s why I prefaced everything with “IF.” IF he’s going to be, spend the $$. IF he’s going to be sitting around sub 500 yards, that’s different. I’m lost as to the point you’re trying to make here, kinda seems like you’re picking at my words just to argue. Either way, have a good weekend, I don’t see anything further to discuss.
 
@redneck2 - I agree with the Kahles at that price point. It takes a bit of practice to get used to the left side windage and top ring parallax, but now I absolutely love it.

The Burris XTR II, III, and III Pro haven’t terribly impressed me for their price point. I have the II and have shot the Pro and III this spring and summer side by side with my Bushnells, NF’s, and my Kahles - and yes, the III and III Pro are better than the II, especially the new .25mil reticle, but I don’t find the Pro or III to be commensurate clarity or color truth to its price point. Super cool features on the Pro, and I WANT to like it a lot, but side by side, it’s not as much scope as the K525i.

Vortex Razor GII’s can be had for less than that mark as well, and would do very well for the task. EBR-7c reticle. The new higher magnification GIII’s are a lot more expensive, and if I were spending that much more, I’d buy Kahles or Tangent Theta.

The Tract Toric is a lot cheaper than $2500, and I do like the .2mil hashes and floating center dot of their reticle, but I’m not convinced the brightness or resolution are as clean as the Bushnell XRS II (1/2mil reticle) or III (with .25mil reticle). Definitely more “blue” than the Bushnells/Vortex/Kahles/NF/Leupold.

The Leupold Mk5HD with the PR2 reticle is another optic I would consider in this class, as is the Nightforce NX8 F1. You’re also getting pretty close to a Nightforce ATACR 5-25x F1.

The Kahles, NF ATACR, Leupold, or Bushnell would be my prioritization order at $2500 and less.

I’m lost as to the point you’re trying to make here, kinda seems like you’re picking at my words just to argue.

Kinda seems like you’re not interested in answering the guy’s question, but rather in telling him his buddy doesn’t actually have use for the rifle he owns or the optic he’s trying to put on top of it, simply because you don’t.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top