2.6-16 or 4.5-30 Bushnell Elite 6500 for .243?

[RoughNeck182]

Hey guys,

Anyone have any input on this? Looking to put a scope on my new Rem 700 SPS Varmint in .243 (first gun I have purchased), to be used for mostly target shooting (I'd like to push out as far as I can) and perhaps hunting coyotes on a rare occasion. I'll be loading 105gr A-max's for this purpose (to start off with). I have places to shoot that would probably get me out to 1000 yards easy so I thought the 30X would be needed for trying something like that? I have no real experience with scoped rifles so I'm not sure which would be more practical - I like the idea of the 30X magnification but is 4.5X going to be too much magnification at the low end for hunting purposes?

Thanks for any advice on this - just want to make sure I won't regret the $800+ bucks I'm going to drop on this scope.

 

[Maverick223]

You should do fine with either, but you are in the price range where there is only one scope to consider IMHO...a Ziess Conquest. The glass is much better than anything else without spending quite a bit more. The 4.5-14x50AO would be my choice...http://www.zeiss.com/c1256bcf0020be5f/Contents-Frame/c6b062a1c5089a5585257546006e354d. Pay little attention to the price, expect to pay no more than $100 less than MSRP.

 

[Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow]

Definitely the 4.5-30 for that gun/use, but both would work well.

 

[aubie515]

IMO, 30 power is way too much magnification. You will get some serious mirage issues with higher power scopes.

If it was my money I'd be looking at the Sightron SIII or the Vortex Viper line. I have never owned a Vortex, but they are getting good reviews. I've owned some Bushnells and they were alright.

 

[MAX100]

The 6500 4.5-30 only has 50 moa total elevation adj and it probably has a little less than that. Even with a 20 moa base you may not have enough adj to get to 1000 yrds.

The Sightron SIII 6-24x50 LR MD scope is a better choice: Ultra clear glass, sharp audible click target turrets, 30mm tube and 100 moa total windage & elevation adjustment. They are hard to get because they are very popular & stay sold out.


GC

 

[Maverick223]

The 6500 4.5-30 only has 50 moa total elevation adj and it probably has a little less than that.

It will get you 700yds with a 20moa base but I don't like it too little elevation. Sightron makes a good product, but I still like Ziess at this price point (it offers about 70moa).

 

[rcmodel]

IMO, 30 power is way too much magnification. You will get some serious mirage issues with higher power scopes.

+1

I use nothing but 3-9 scopes on my coyote rifles, and run around with them set on 3x most of the time.
Maybe 6x if long range is anticipated.

Close range calling, and running shots at longer range make higher power pretty useless most of the time.

9x at 500 yards looks like 55 yards away. I can throw rocks at a coyote & hit him that far.

I very seldom shoot them at more then 500 yards because bullet performance is poor beyond that, and they can take a hit and keep going.

Anyway, 1,000 yards with a .243?
You are a far better man then I.

rc

 

[MAX100]

Some are having problems with the 6500 scopes.

Here's the link:
http://www.snipershide.com/forum/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=1155211&gonew=1#UNREAD



GC

 

[Maverick223]

If you want magnification, and you are up for saving a bit of cash...give this one a try... http://www.swfa.com/pc-8773-2201-nikon-6-24x50-monarch-riflescope.aspx

 

[Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow]

IMO, 30 power is way too much magnification. You will get some serious mirage issues with higher power scopes.

So what? Just dial it down. Better to have too much unused than too little, when you can just dial it down - there's a lot of magnification between 16 and 25 than CAN be utilized to make a more precise shot, before mirage emerges, 95% of the time.

Don't listen to them; they are wrong!

Now, as for the # of adjustments, that IS a valid point, and perhaps a reason to go to another brand/line, but that wasn't the question.

Edit:

I take it back! Apparently, according to the link above - this one at snipers hide: http://www.snipershide.com/forum/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=1155211&gonew=1#UNREAD

The 6500 4.5-30s ARE pretty bad in resolution past 18 or 20 power. That would make it not worth the extra money. I am very happy with my 2.5-16x50mm 6500, however, and would recommend it.

 

[Maverick223]

The 6500 4.5-30s ARE pretty bad in resolution past 18 or 20 power. That would make it not worth the extra money. I am very happy with my 2.5-16x50mm 6500, however, and would recommend it.

I have heard unfavorable reviews of all of the 6500 series (basically that they are about the same as the 4200 series). I take it this has not been your experience?

 

[rcmodel]

I'm still thinking if coyote hunting is in the cards, a wider field of view is much more important then way more horsepower on the X's.

Course, I only started hunting coyotes seriously back about 1962, so what do I know.

rc

 

[Maverick223]

Course, I only started hunting coyotes seriously back about 1962, so what do I know.

Yeah...what do you know? I agree a 25x is more than enough, and most of that will likely be wasted...14x is about the maximum needed for most guns IMO.

 

[Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow]

I'm still thinking if coyote hunting is in the cards, a wider field of view is much more important then way more horsepower on the X's.

That depends on how far away they are, & the terrain, wouldn't it?

On 4.5 power, the Elite 6500 gives you a field of view of 72 feet at 300 yards. A coyote is about 3 feet long, so you can see 24 times the length of the yote. At 100 yards, its 216 feet, or 72 times the length of a yote. How much more field of view do you need than that? I guess you might if hunting up close, less than 30 yards or so, so I can see your point. It really just depends on what distances you'll see them at. Is it woodsy/grassy/brushy, or wide open?

So I guess I agree more than disagree. If you might get one at 20, 30, 40 yards, then you betcha, that 2.5 minimum will be indispensable as compared to the 4.5 minimum.

Maverick, give me a minute and I'll compare a 4200 side by side with my 6500 (2.5-16) this evening before the sun sets, when light is low, and report back.

 

[Maverick223]

Maverick, give me a minute and I'll compare a 4200 side by side with my 6500 (2.5-16) this evening before the sun sets, when light is low, and report back.

Sounds good.

 

[Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow]

OK, I compared a 4200, 2.5-10x40mm, to a 6500, 2.5-16x50mm, with both on 10 power. Look out at about 200 yards in low light, and they looked just about the same; if anything the 4200 might have been slightly better, but it was hard to tell. It WAS certainly better until I got the side focus on the 6500 adjusted, so chalk up a win to the KISS principle. When comparing the 6500 on 16 power to the 4200 on 10 power, the 6500 was indeed clearer (more resolution), but I cannot say that it was by a whole lot. The win overall goes to the 4200 (performance per weight, and performance per price), because the 6500 *should have* offered better resolution in low light, since the objective lens size is 10mm larger, but it didn't; it was a tie on an absolute scale.

 

[Maverick223]

Wow, so the reviews have been confirmed by the good doctor...Interesting. I still maintain that the 4200 is a good buy for the money, and the 6500 is not that bad if it is about equal (just less bang for buck ratio). A lot of people would not give a fair review because they spent the extra money on the 6500 series, thanks for an impartial review.