Which long range scope?

[Penkop]

Hi Guys,

I'm busy convincing myself to get into the long range shooting game. I'm on a bit of a tight budget and must get it right the first time!

I'm strongly cosidering a 6.5 Creedmoor (would love a 338LM, but it's just too expensive).

I'm only familiar with SFP scopes, but will definitely consider FFP options.

I'll mostly use the rifle for target shooting (mostly 100-500m, but up to 1000m) and as the occasion arises for hunting small game (400m max).

I'm hoping to be one of the lucky few to get my hands on a Ruger Precision Rifle with 20MOA rail when they touch ground over here (maybe rather "if" than "when"...)

The following scopes are on my list thus far:

NF SHV 5-20x56
Leupold VX3 6.5-20x50
Leupold VX3 8.5-25x50
Leupold VX6 3-18x44 (slightly over budget)
Zeiss HD5 5-25x50
Vortex Viper PST 6-24x50
Burris XTR11 5-25x50 (not yet on our shelves)
Is it wise to consider the HST and HS scopes?

I understand that Lynx is bringing out a LR scope, not sure if that will be worthwhile waiting for? Something like a 8-32x50?

Currently the SHV is at the top of my list, but it hasn't been on our shores long enough to get reliable local feedback and advice.

What would you suggest? Am I on the right track or am I missing something?

I would prefer the scope to be MOA, I will want to use the reticle for hold over (hunting situations), but will dial in when on the shooting range.

Not sure if I prefer FFP to SFP. Is there any real advantage this way or that way?

Thanks in advance! Looking forward to your advice.

Regards

 

[Grumulkin]

I can address a couple of your questions. The ONLY advantage to a FFP scope is if you wish to use the reticle for range finding. In order to use if for that purpose, you have to know the dimensions of an object at the range at which you intend to shoot and have to do a calculation. I can't see that it has any advantage for target shooting and most wouldn't practice enough to be competent in hunting situations (a range finder would be much faster).

You can also use mil dot reticles in SFP scopes for range finding but unlike FFP scopes, the data will only be valid at a certain magnification (15X with my particular Nightforce scope).

While a high magnification scope gives an advantage at 1,000 meters, it's not particularly advantageous for hunting at 400 meters. I had a Nightforce scope that went to 25X; it was big and heavy and I sold it with no regrets. For hunting to 400 meters, I consider 15X way more than adequate and would be quite happy with a good scope of 7X to 10X on the top end. With a high magnification scope, there will be a disadvantage for close shots and you'll need to fiddle with parallax.

As far as the scope brands on your list go, the only ones I've used have been Leupold and Nightforce. If you wish to go Burris, read some reviews first. Various companies like Cabela's and MidwayUSA post product reviews which I've found helpful.

 

[taliv]

The ONLY advantage to a FFP scope is if you wish to use the reticle for range finding.

ranging isn't even the primary advantage, much less the only advantage. for example, holding for wind


to the OP

stick to 6.5 creedmoor. it's a good choice. 338lm is a horrible choice. especially on a budget. don't even think about it.

you didn't really explain what kind of target shooting you're doing. if you mean sitting at a bench and shooting paper targets leisurely, then you should look at one of the high magnification benchrest scopes. you don't need to waste money on illumination, or tactical features like locking turrets, single or dual turn, zero stop, side focus etc. stick to an adjustable objective and simple target knobs. the larger the objective the better.

the nightforce benchrest scope is a good example. i believe sightron makes some scopes that are popular with the benchrest crowd.

however, if you intend to hunt with it, make sure it will dial down to at least a magnification in the 8x-12x range. and the bigger objective will mean more weight. and you may want illuminated reticle depending on how late you will hunt.

 

[SilentStalker]

Check out the Bushnell Elite Tactical Series of scopes like the ERS 3.5-21X50 or the XRS 4.5-30x50mm. Both of these are excellent glass, have excellent knobs and clicks with 10 mil per rotation, reticles are excellent, FFP, glass made in Japan, etc. etc. These are excellent scopes for the money from my experience and can be had at deals from time to time.

As far as SFP vs. FFP, I am not going to get into the argument there other than for me, FFP is the only way to go.

Oh, and if it were me, I would stay away from the Leopold's. I actually have a couple of higher end leupold's. I love the glass and the reticles but the turrets are terrible when compared to other high end scopes like NF, Bushnell, Khales, Schmidt & Bender, etc. Get the best glass you can afford and never look back.

 

[zerobarrier]

Burris has a nice 8-40x I have been looking at. It would be great for bench shooting and I love the reticle. Burris Tactical or the PST. I just bought a Viper HS 6-24x for my 223 out to 500 yards. It works really well and I do like it.

 

[pdd614]

The bushnell lrhs is tailor made for what you want to do. It is available in mil and moa adjustments.

 

[Sav .250]

While your looking. Give the Natchez site a visit. They have a ton of scopes in the range your looking for.

Get the specs, pictures, and prices.

 

[OpticsPlanet]

NF glass is very good. The hyper they get is worth it and their wheelhouse is long range shooting, so that is a great choice.

Leupold makes a great product and has a wonderful warranty/customer service, which is always a nice reassurance but especially so when you are attempting a new discipline.

I think Zeiss scopes are pretty great quality, but it seems that their lack of tactical or fancy features keeps them from snagging a larger market share.

I love Vortex products and their customer service is beyond amazing, but I think for the money you are trying to spend you can do a bit better (especially if you are not set on FFP).

It seems like your budget is approx. $1000-$1200, correct?

I would add the Bushnell Elite DMR 3.5-21x50 to your list. As another mentioned, Bushnell Elite scopes are definitely worth taking a look at.

Also, the Steiner 4-20x50 would be another excellent scope that I would advise checking out.

Overall, you have a list bursting with quality choices so don't feel like you can make a wrong choice. Often, you cannot know exactly what you like or what works for you until you get some time on the range so I wouldn't overthink the decision too much.

-Matt S.

 

[Bart B.]

You won't shoot any rifle any more accurate with a $3,000 one instead of a $500 one. And variables are typically less repeatable in their adjustments than fixed power ones. If you get a variable, set it to maximum or minimum and the reticle will stay in place better relative to the target image on it. I'd get a Weaver T24.

What kind of accuracy do you expect you'll get from a Ruger Precision to shoot at long range; 700 to 1000 yards?

 

[Penkop]

Thanks for the advice and comments.

I'm definately not a benchrest shot, and would rather take a hunting scope than a dedicated BR scope. Most of my rifle shooting simulates hunting scenarios at different distances and stances (prone, kneeling and off hand standing).

But I would like to be able to ring a gong at 1000m consistently just for the fun of it! And thats what this rifle and scope will be for.

That said, I still want to use this rifle for hunting as well. So a huge heavy scope and rifle, that may be perfect for ringing gongs at 1000m, will not suit my objective.

What I'm hearing is to consider the Bushnell's as well?

I know Bushnell does a good job as a hunting scope, but is it on par with NF and Leupold for long range shooting? Dialing back and forth?

Scope specific questions:

NF SHV 5-20x56

Is this scope as good as its little brother (4-14x56)? Or does the extra magnification bring problems?

Is the 56 lens a benefit, or a disadvantage contributing unnecessary weight?
At 29oz, won't this scope be a bit clumsy?

Over here we mostly have clear sunshine days.

Leupold:

These scopes weigh in at 20oz and less, in what way are the VX3's inferior (if thats the right word to use?) to the VX6?

Is the VX3 6.5-20x50 as good as the SHV 5-20?

Vortex

Is the PST the scope to go for? Or will I get all I want with an HST or HS? (At considerably less $$$?)

Bushnell

Will this scope be as good the listed scopes? Price difference between the Elite 4.5-30x50 and Zeiss 5-25x50 is very little. Will I get a better scope than the Zeiss?

Thanks again for your contributions!

 

[zerobarrier]

Vortex HS has capped turrets and a BDC or mildot, wired reticle. $599
HST has MOA or Mrad reticle and exposed target turrets with zero stop, wired reticle $639
PST has the illuminated MOA or MRAd reticle and FFP, etched reticle $949, but they do make the PST in SFP for about 749 at midway if you don't care about FFP.
Prices are from Midway.

I went with the HS because I decided I did not need illumination, didn't care if the turrets were capped, and was fine with the BDC wired reticle and it was on sale at optic planet for 549 plus 5% off for THR members and free shipping. Total $522

I can't speak about the other scopes because I don't know about them

If you don't care about illuminated reticle, etched vs wired reticle, or FFP - I think the HST will be just fine for you.

 

[Penkop]

Thanks Zerobarrier,

Silent Stalker, is Leupy realy that bad? I always thought Leupold is a well respected name?

Just a quick question regarding the calibre: I understand that the Creedmoor handles 140gr bullets better than the .260. Question: How much better? Is it a deal breaker, or is the upside so little that I can change my choice to .260 if a special offer comes my way?

 

[243winxb]

Scopes

does the extra magnification bring problems?

Heat can be seen in the higher power scopes that make the target dance, so a variable can help here. Better for hunting also. Leupold would be my first choice, then Bushnell. Two companys that have been around a long time, to cover a warranty if needed. The Creedmoor seems to need a long barrel for 1000 yds to get the velocity up??

 

[Bart B.]

Penkop, both cartridges are virtually the same size and shoot a given weight bullet out about the same velocity. The same twist in each handles different weight bullets the same.

Each bullet needs a small range of spin rates in rpm to stabilize it. Any combination of muzzle velocity and rifling twist that spins it correctly is good.

 

[BigBore45]

Look at SWFA scopes. They are very good for the money. To shoot at 1000yrds or so you don't need more that 15 magnification. Lower magnification for hunting is wise. Also if you want to hunt with it, nothing is wrong with the 6.5 or a .243 Winchester or a 25-06. For small game anyway. Best budget long range round is gonna be .308 win.

 

[SilentStalker]

Penkop, the Leupold isn't that bad until you have had the opportunity to use something better. I have several of the higher end scopes with M5 turrets and TMR reticle etc. I don't remember the models right of the top of my head but they are the cream of the crop Leupold has to offer. The glass and reticle are superb but for the price one would cost its just not worth it IMO. Granted mine are about 4 years old and I have heard they made some improvements to them based on several recommendations. I just know that I did not have to pay anywhere near full retail because of my job and for that reason it was a fair price. However, based on my experience I would never pay full price for one of these. It's just not reasonable. For their fu retail price there are certainly much better options out there IMO. Like I said there is nothing wrong with it until you have used something better. What Leupold does have going for it is decent glass and a TMR reticle but considering the price and the fact that there are a lot better scopes out there for the price range with more features they just aren't worth it IMO.

I also second whoever said you don't need tons of magnification to make hits at 1000yds. You really don't. It's nice to have I guess but you should be able to do that with a 15x scope.

As far as the .260 vs. 6.5 goes, they are very very similar. However, from my experience the .260 is a lot more temperamental. The 6.5's I have are awesome with factory loads but the .260's always seem to require a but of finesse in the performance department to get the same results.

 

[buckhorn_cortez]

If you really want to shoot 1,000 meters, you're going to need at least a 25x maximum magnification so that you can zoom in to look at the target, and if available, surrounding flora so that you can attempt to figure the wind conditions at the target.

Cheap glass is...cheap. Expensive scopes have better light transmission, contrast, eye relief, and multi-coating that cuts down on glare. Expensive scopes will generally have a greater range of adjustment, and the reticles will be much sharper and cleaner.

I personally like FFP MIL reticles because you can do calculations from them, and the hold over or windage corrections stay the same no matter what the distance you're shooting as the FFP keeps the same measurement per division on the reticle.

I use a U.S. Optics scope that was custom built to my specifications. I would suggest that you look at Night Force, Schmidt and Bender, and U.S. Optics if you're really serious about shooting long distances.

While tools don't make the shooter, they go a long way in helping make you better.

As an example, I took my neighbor out to the local range, and after I dialed in the scope - he was able to make multiple hits on a 1,000 yard target - and he'd never shot a rifle in his life.

 

[Bart B.]

Reading and correcting for wind at long range moved to Rifle Country Forum:

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?p=10015359#post10015359

Covers why the wind closest to the shooter has the most effect on bullet drift at target range. Wind at the target range has virtually no effect; the bullets already there.

 

[OpticsPlanet]

The larger objective like a 56mm is great for gathering light...so if you are dusk or dawn hunting than a 50 or 56 is very useful

If you are mostly shooting/hunting in prime daylight hours and like you said, most of your days are sunny, than the 56mm becomes less useful and more of a weight

I would narrow the choices down to the NF, Bushnell Elite, and Steiner.

-Matt S.

 

[strambo]

I can't speak to most of those models specifically. Generally I think magnification in the 3 ish to 18 ish range and 50mm objective will get you to 1000+ easy without being overly big for hunting.

Might as well go mil/mil also, way more popular, way more scope choices and thinking in mils is just as easy as thinking in MOA.

 

[Sheepdog1968]

Night force scopes are popular with the local bench rest shooters.