Scope recommendations

[gregp74]

My new Remington 700 VLS in 223 will be on its way soon. It's time to start thinking about a scope and mounts for it.

Most of the time it's going to be used on a bench, shooting at paper. Probably will get a little time using it against far off critters too.

 

[RainDodger]

There are so many options out there that you could get literally hundreds of recommendations... that's how many choices are out there.

My advice is... spend all you can (or want to) afford on optics because you're generally going to get what you pay for.

My usual go-to choices are Leupold and now Vortex. There are many others as well, but I know these two brands will do the job for you. Good luck.

 

[Inebriated]

What ranges are you talking about, and how much money do you have to throw at it, mounts included?

 

[Corn-Picker]

How far away is the paper you're shooting?

I might be in the minority, but I have nothing against cheap scopes when you'll be using them during daylight hours and there's nothing more than paper or small critters on the line.

I recently bought a $79 Tasco 6-24x on Amazon. The adjustments are repeatable, the optical quality is fine, it holds zero, you can dial out parallax with the adjustable objective, and it seems well constructed. What more is there than that for shooting paper out to 300 yards (my max range).

I also have a $500+ Bushnell Elite 6500 2.5-16x42, so I'm not opposed to mid priced scopes either. But for what you're doing, I'd be tempted to go cheap.

 

[Grumulkin]

My new Remington 700 VLS in 223 will be on its way soon. It's time to start thinking about a scope and mounts for it.

Most of the time it's going to be used on a bench, shooting at paper. Probably will get a little time using it against far off critters too.

I've gotten rid of all my cheap scopes. There isn't anything much more frustrating than having one go bad when you really need a shot to count on the "far off critters." My grandson has a cheap scope (maybe a Bushnell) he, as I recall, paid less than $20 for and it works well. On the other hand, I had a Tasco that had gone about 10 inches high at 100 yards over a week and a half that caused a miss on what should have been an easy shot on a coyote.

Just so you know, high magnification won't make your rifle more accurate. With high magnification, you also get into other issues like parallax, weight and mirage. I've found a scope with 7X on the top end adequate for a crow at a bit over 300 yards and a raccoon at about 350 yards. The most magnification I have on any scope is 15X and my favorites have 10X on the top end. Most of my scopes are Leupolds which are durable and have a good warranty. Since the warranty is good on Leupolds even if you don't buy them new, I see no down side to buying them used.

 

[dh1633pm]

I have been moving to Vortex. Its good to standardize on one brand. That way you get used to them from rifle to rifle. Not same model, just same brand. If not Vortex then go with another good brand that you can afford.

 

[farmerboy78]

Swfa ss

 

[HexHead]

You can't go wrong with good glass. I've got a Weatherby Vanguard S2 in .223. I started with a Leupold VX2 4-12x40 AO on it and swapped that out for a Zeiss 3.5-10x 42 Conquest I'm much happier with.

The better your glass is, the less magnification you need. Zeiss glass is my favorite.

 

[gregp74]

What ranges are you talking about, and how much money do you have to throw at it, mounts included?

Probably 200 yards-ish

 

[gregp74]

I have been moving to Vortex. Its good to standardize on one brand. That way you get used to them from rifle to rifle. Not same model, just same brand. If not Vortex then go with another good brand that you can afford.

One of them that I have looked at a Vortex Crossfire II 4-15 x 50mm. It seemed pretty nice.

 

[OpticsPlanet]

Another vote for Vortex products. I own a Viper PST 2.5-10x32 FFP, a Solo R/T monocular, two magnifiers and a SPARC red dot.

I used to have a Bushnell Elite 4200 4-16x40, and found the magnification range very useful at the distances you describe. I would think that the Vortex Crossfire 4-15x50 would serve you well.

Mark H.

 

[Mike J]

I put a Vortex Diamondback 3.5-10x50 on my deer rifle a couple of years ago. I like it.

 

[gregp74]

I've got a Redfield (Revenge?) 6-18x44 that's currently on my CZ 455 .17HMR that I could move to the 700.

Everyone tells me it's too much scope for that little round, but after I shoot I like to be able to dial up the magnification to actually see where those teeny little holes are in the target.

 

[cdb1]

Everyone's eyes are different. I like Vortex binoculars, not so much their scopes. I own Leupold, Burris, Bushnell, Clearidge, Meopta, Zeiss and have one Vortex left on a Marlin Model 60. I'm pleased with all of them. For me glass does triumph over magnification. I do not own Nikon. They make a good scope and I sell many of them to customers, but I don't see well out of them. I'm one of the few that doesn't and I recommend them frequently.

 

[Mike C2]

Natchez has a Nikon 4-12 x 42 they've lowered the price on to $279 (From $449). I have a reconditioned one on a 20" 6.8 AR and it's an excellent all around scope.

But for 16" barrel guns I prefer 1-2 for a starting point and think the VXII (or whatever they call them now!) Leupold is pretty good stuff at $299.

 

[docsleepy]

Unless you're going after expensive game, I'm with the fellow who voted for cheap scopes. Here's my story: getting rid of parallax is your main goal if you're punching paper at good distances. For several years I've used the center point $69 4-16X power adjustable objective Walmart scope. There's something different about their Turrets, that seems to make them immune to recoil. I think they build scopes for airguns. I've used them on a couple of 308 class rifles with good results. I think a lot of shooters have not stabilized their hold and stance, and they blame point of impact changes on the wrong things, usually their scope. I qualified on an 800 yard range with that scope. How many folks hit targets at 800 yards?

So then I bought a 50 caliber. Didn't have a scope for it, but I had a spare Centerpoint, so I stuck the centerpoint on the 50 Cal. I figured if it broke, not a big loss! Well, I've shot that thing as far as 1000 yards, and that Centerpoint just does not lose zero. I load my own 50 Cal rounds, so I've probably put 300+ rounds of 50 Cal and no damage at all.

I have several different brands of scopes, and I can't speak for other cheap scopes, but the only cheap scope I trust on a hard-hitting rifle at the moment is the Centerpoint. It's main disadvantage is the way the Tourette's work, you cannot easily observe your # of complete revolutions...you must keep track of them yourself. That gets important if you're making a 45 or 50 MOa change as one does when going for 1000 yards. Up to 300 or 400 yards, this is not an issue.

 

[Archie]

A scope should be suited to the rifle and task

Going cheap with a scope is usually false economy. Yes, everyone knows someone who has a bargain basement scope that never fails and always brings a deer home in season; however, those are the exceptions, not the rule.

I try to always buy Leopold scopes. I would probably buy Swarovski if I had the money. Determine what you think is going to be the distance at which you want to hit and decide scope characteristics on that. (Power and variability and such.)

Redfield is Leopold's lesser brother. Probably not bad, but not the best.

On the other hand, there's no point spending 1,000 yards worth of money on a 150 yard rifle.

 

[Sav .250]

A collection of opinions while well intended, are just that. You need to do your own home work. Plenty of solid information on the net. Check out Natchez for one.

Making a choice thru your own searching is way more satisfying.

 

[docsleepy]

What's between your ears is more important than what's in front of your eyes.

What you've learned about stance and hold, how you make recoil identically handled each time, your choice of what to do with the fore arm & the recoil characteristics of whatever surface it touches or what you hold it with,

The bullet only spends a Milli second or two in the barrel, so you can't even physically react fast enough, it's what you set the gun up and how you have it set to touch things that counts as to whether that bullet will be dragged off course. People who blame scopes for changes in point of impact usually don't understand these things.

If you are hand loading, it depends on how much you've learned how to control neck tension and seating tension, how you prepare your brass, how you set your primers etc.

If you're getting really fancy, it's whether not you've found accuracy nodes on your loading and are temperature adjusted. Whether you can pull your trigger and not have your aim point Vary by more than a 10th of an MOA with a dry fire.



If you're buying commercial, and it's junk commercial with rough & inconsistent cannelures, and wildly varying seating characteristics, it's not really going to matter what scope you buy.... Junk commercial stuff maybe three MOA accuracy where as quality hunting or handloads may be one MOA or considerably better.

The quality of your barrel means a lot, how you said you were jump or touch to the rifling, all of this makes a lot of difference. Knowing, controlling, adjusting all of these things is depending on what's between your ears, not what's in front of your eyes.

 

[greyling22]

if you don't want adjustable objective, I'd get this scope http://www.amazon.com/Vortex-Optics-DBK-04-BDC-Diamondback-Riflescope/dp/B001EC7KMY The new nikon buckmaster 2 http://www.midwayusa.com/product/48...ifle-scope-1-tube-4-12x40mm-bdc-reticle-matte looked decent at gander mountain, but I hated the reticle.

if you do want AO, I'd look at a mueller APV. 4.5-14x40 for about 130 bucks. Though I will admit, this one http://www.amazon.com/Minox-ZV-Mino...31947&sr=1-1&keywords=Minox+ZV-3+4.5-14x44+SF for 140 intrigues me. The reviews I have read have been hit or miss. some folks love it and say it compares well to a conquest. some folks say it compares well to a tasco.