Optics For Practical Long Range Rifle Shooting

[Zak Smith]

Bogie,

Have you seen the video of the USO SN3 being used to hammer a nail into a 2x4" (with its objective bell)? It's impressive.

But you make a good point. With all that stuff hanging out there, it increases the force the scope mechanics and mounting system have to handle. You also make a good point about absolute repeatability of click values. The way I see it, I am going to send back any scope which has a moving reticle (eg, visible during dry firing), fails a box test, drifts, or does not repeat. I've seen a handful of $800-1300 scopes sent back because their reticles moved.

I wrote the article with "what do you need" and "what features provide those functions" in mind.. An entire article could (and ought to) be written about what mechanically makes a good scope, and how to test.

3 barrels for 15,000 rounds? Are you serious? I'd figure at least a dozen

The example was for a practical rifle shooter / tactical marksman shooting an AI in 308. Those barrels will be good to go from the box, and will easily last 5000 rounds, probably closer to 10. Somebody shooting a game with higher accuracy requirements with a 6XC is going to go through a lot more barrels than the 308 shooter. The economic argument was meant for those guys who don't think about recurring costs over time, whereas the 6XC guys already know about barrel life, etc.

best regards
Zak

 

[106rr]

Zak;
I wanted to thank you for taking the time to educate the shooters. I have a .308 Steyr SBS heavy barrel that I want to try out at long range. I will have to start with a Sightron 4X16X44 mildot. I know this scope isn't perfect for the job but it should give me some idea about the practicality of the outfit. The rifle came with the 20 mil base.

 

[Zak Smith]

The most important attributes for a scope to have:

1. solid zero that does not drift, shift, or get loose
2. repeatable, regular, and calibrated elevation adjustments.

-z

 

[ctdonath]

Any word on adjustable rings? I've needed a set for a while, and just recently found out about the Barrett adjustable rings - but can't find details short of ordering a set.

 

[355sigfan]

I learned a lot thanks. I want to take a precision rifle course just have not had the time yet.
Pat

 

[Zak Smith]

ctdonath,

Adjustable rings are generally not needed, except if the mounting rail is not in-line with the barrel in some gross way, or if you need a HUGE amount of built-in elevation. For most appropriate scopes for applications out to 2000 yards, the commonly available bases with 20-40 MOA built in are sufficient.

If I can solve the mounting "problem" with non-adjustable rings, I'd prefer to. Fewer parts and "adjustments" mean less things that can shift and change my zero down the line.

-z

 

[Inner Monkey]

Excellent work.

 

[Thin Black Line]

"Accuracy costs money. This is the equivalent of a top-fuel dragster. The AK is the equivalent of a 1960s Volkswagen. They'll both get you somewhere, but they've got vastly different uses."

+1. A sniper rifle would be of little use while on convoy when you need to
keep moving out of the kill zone. But they're great on top of tall
buildings in Iraq for removing a bad guy who's about to launch an RPG

These are very nice pics, and I, too, would like to find the $8K for one
as well. Alas, I had to settle for a Ruger 77V that shot hole in hole groups
(handloads) with a Redfield and a Rem700VS with an underpowered 14.5X
scope that can't seem to break 3/4 moa no matter how hard I try to tune
my ammo.

We've come a long way from the days when mosins with their little
scopes and wood-stocked winchesters used by snipers in past wars to
make amazing shots that are still legends to this day.

I always felt the Israeli sniper philosophy was most on target with the
statement of "if it hits between the 1st and third button, you've done
your job."

 

[Zerstoerer]

Zag Smith - you should get the THR award of the year for this excellent post.

 

[rangerruck]

excellent article, i would have liked to have seen some pro/con about fixed power scopes, and also exernal/ringmount elevation windage adjustment, which I personally think is far superior.

 

[Zak Smith]

Historically, fixed power scopes enjoyed a real advantage in durability compared to variable power scopes. This is not true any longer; every new daytime sniper system scope adopted by the U.S. is a variable power, the most recent being the S&B 3-12 PMII adopted by the USMC. Variable power scopes have real advantages over fixed power for: field of view (for observation, or tracking of movers), target location, close targets, and low light. There is no reason to get a fixed power scope nowadays, if you can afford a Leupold, USO, or S&B.

With regard to external adjustments, I am not aware of any modern sniper setups that use external adjustments. If you are, could you please post a reference to it? I know that the ELCAN optic used on the Canadian M16's has external adjustments, and one of their complaints is that it gets jammed up because it's exposed. Again, I would just repeat that there are no problems with durability or repeatability of the internal adjustments, so I would question the alleged advantages of the external ones.

Good arguments welcomed on either account..

-z

 

[ctdonath]

Adjustable rings are generally not needed

I need 'em. It's either: get 'em or spend 10x as much on a new rifle. Much as I'd like the latter, it's not economically feasable - and the platform I have works perfectly except for the lack of a 20MOA slope on the scope mount, which a GOOD set of adjustable rings would solve nicely.

 

[nvshooter]

dakotasin...

I have to agree with you.

 

[SRMohawk]

Zak et. al.,
I thought it might be a good idea to post this inquiry here: What would you put on a heavy .338 Lapua Magnum - a prone gun that will overwhelmingly be shot at ranges from 1000 to 1500 yards - if the choice were between a Schmidt & Bender PM II 4-16x50mm and a USO SN-3 3.8-22x58mm?

The rifle is going to be built around a Nesika Bay Precision single shot, round class receiver and into a McMillan A-2 stock with full length, solid glass fill. The barrel will be a heavy, SS, straight taper, 28" Krieger.

The reason I ask is because I've never owned either of the above two scopes. I've only seen them at Shot Shows. I currently own 2 Mark IVs in 16x and a Nightforce NXS 5.5-22x56mm. I won't purchase another of either of these scopes for this rifle, however, seein' as how the quality of Nightforce scopes has deteriorated so much and the Mark IV doesn't have the low light capability that premium scopes with 50mm+ objectives have.

SRM

 

[Zak Smith]

SRM,

I have no experience with the 58mm USO's.. Both my SN3s have 44mm objectives. That said, a more appropriate comparison would be the 3.8-22 SN3 with the 5-25x56mm S&B PMII.

Besides the objective size difference, I have used both of these scopes on my 338LM. I find the S&B to have a little more brightness (its objective is 12mm larger); clarity is comparable. I leave the 5-25 S&B on the rifle because I find that I can retain the sight picture more consistently during recoil with the S&B, due to I think a combination of exit pupil size and eye relief. Presumably the 58mm SN3 would have a larger exit pupil than my 44mm, and I am not sure how much effect this would have.

One thing to take into account is that both the S&B and the USO have first focal plane reticles, which means the crosshairs will appear much thicker than the Mark IV or Nightforce. In low-contrast target situations this can start to be an issue with even an IPSC silhouette @ 1500 yards. It's just 1.5 MOA wide at that distance.

S&B has a "Fine P4" reticle, which has line thickness about half the width of their regular P4. I am not sure if scopes with these reticles are "in stores" yet.

-z

 

[SRMohawk]

Z,
That's all I need to hear. Admittedly, I was leaning slightly toward the S&B anyway, but continued to deliberate due to that fact that I've been hearing great things about the USO scopes from friends who have used them in Iraq. Interestingly, I heard almost nothing good about US Optics and their products from people 'in the know' prior to the death of J. Williams, Sr. (God rest his soul), but his son has apparently 'cleaned house' since then and the quality of USO products had reportedly improved greatly.

I was aware of the 5-25x56mm S&B, but thought it too new (and therefore unproven) to take a chance on it. After all, the little bastards are $2500+!

SRM

PS - What propellants do you use in your .338 LM ammo? I got extraordinary results with VV N560, but stopped using because barrel life is so damn short with it (i.e. < 600 rounds, believe it or not). Other powders I've used include VV N165 and Norma MRP2 (the latter powder has been discontinued).

 

[Zak Smith]

We have had good luck with H4831SC, RL25, Retumbo.

 

[DROPSHORT]

Weaver rail

can anyone tell the advantages of fitting a weaver rail or tactical rail
to my 700p
thanks

 

[Zak Smith]

You just need some way to connect the rings to the receiver. A one-piece rail will be mor stable than a two-piece base.

 

[KINGMAX]

I went w/ the 'SEE-THRU' Weaver scope mounts.

I wanted to retain the use of my 'Iron Sights' on my Remington 700, so I installed a Bushnell V 4-12 X 40 scope using the Weaver See-Thru mounts. I have zeroed my rifle to where I can put three rounds down range, cover them w/ a penny. I can put three round grps into a bulls-eye the size of a fifty-cent piece consistantly in 7-10 seconds, (remember this is a bolt action rifle). I have concentrated on making that first shot my best shot. That being said, I think it's ready for Deer Season.
I have wanted a Remington 700 ADL in .270 for a long time. It is a beautiful Laminated stock which has been hand rubbed w/ several coats of 'Natchez Solution'. The additional rubbing has brought out the real beauty of the stock. $700.00 would not buy it away from me. It has become one of my favorite rifles in my working collection. (Only one of my rifles is a non-shooter, a Mosin-Nagant dated 1896 captured by the Finnish) All others were bought to shoot, & they all get equal trigger time.

 

[RayDog]

How da hell does this Zak Smith guy know so much about this crap anyway?

 

[Balddragn]

Because he is one with his gun

 

[sscoyote]

Great writeup Zak, as i mentioned on Sniper's Hide. Only one change tho i would've made. I think i would've sold it 1st. Your writing/vocabulary skills r topnotch, and your knowledge-base is far and above many successful gun writers. Shame Tactical Shooter isn't still up and running. Would've looked good in there, and had some $ attached too. Some nice little kudos for writing too.

My handgun shooting partner Ernie Bishop just got his APS 7mm Dakota XP-100 built for intermediate-long-range hunting. He's got the 200 gr. Wildcat blasting out the 18" muzzle @ 2700+/-. We just got finished doing the Bower Long-Range Handgun Shooting Seminar in NE this past May. While there, after he sighted in the rig for 200 yds. i challenged him to hit the 36" 1000 yd. disc on the 1st shot. He punches the figures into Exbal on his Pocket PC (figuring .8 BC for that big bullet), and runs the dope into the 8.5-25X Mk 4, sets up on the bench, and nails the sucker @ 4 o'clock 8" off center. We about fell off our spotting chairs when we saw it.

Loved the reticle-ranging feature of the TMR in those Leupold's. .02 mil accuracy was giving us +/- 1-3% out to 1000 yds. on 15, 17, 24, and 36" silhouettes. We used the Varmint Hunter and Ballistic Plex reticles also by adapting the mil-ranging formula, and were real close out to 600 yds. on the same silhouettes.

Hope to meet u in person when we get to Raton's Practical Riflery Comp. one day with our handguns. As an aside, are there any practical riflery comps. that require reticle-ranging besides the Allegheny Match that anybody here knows of??