6.5 PRC glass

[SDHNTR]

Exactly! Why would you crash test a perfectly good car?!

We wouldn’t , because the car manufacturer already did so before we bought it! Which is what all this is asking for. That’s the point. Scope manufacturers should test for impact and subsequent zero retention, SO WE DON’T HAVE TO! And so we could buy their stuff with confidence!

 

[Balderdash]

We wouldn’t , because the car manufacturer already did so before we bought it! Which is what all this is asking for. That’s the point. Scope manufacturers should test for impact and subsequent zero retention, SO WE DON’T HAVE TO! And so we could buy their stuff with confidence!

SD:

I agree with your sentiments on the fact that we should not be beta testers for scope companies. But, I suspect that most know well how rugged their scopes are. They're banking on the fact that the majority of users won't drop test them and that users will, by and large, treat their glass aiming instruments with kid gloves. Additionally, it's clear that a lot of users don't even know that their scopes are letting them down. They accept wandering zeroes or the fact that they have to work off the reticle because they have tracking issues, and then they get on the interwebs and state how their pet brand never let them down.

I've brought this up before, but the lower cost of SWFA's likely has even more people treating them rougher than far more expensive scopes. Form notwithstanding, how many people are purposely dropping TT, Swaro's, S&B's, etc? I suspect most users treat high end scopes with borderline loverly care, whereas a lot of folks have an SWFA or other cheaper scopes on truck guns, loners, work and knock around rifles, etc.

Also, even if companies did more extensive testing, I'd still want to have results from my own or objective third party tests.

 

[Dobermann]

Consensus is basically why would anyone purposely drop a glass anything?

Hi Doug, maybe you could tell those scope company reps that our consensus is that their consensus is wrong.

[And for context - I'm a customer of yours; have bought from you in the past, and hope to again in the future. And I get that this kind of testing might create all kinds of complexity for both you and the companies you deal with. But, if you let them know that we're a sizeable part of their markets, then perhaps we can support you in encouraging them to bring more reliable scopes to market.]

 

[SDHNTR]

SD:

I agree with your sentiments on the fact that we should not be beta testers for scope companies. But, I suspect that most know well how rugged their scopes are. They're banking on the fact that the majority of users won't drop test them and that users will, by and large, treat their glass aiming instruments with kid gloves. Additionally, it's clear that a lot of users don't even know that their scopes are letting them down. They accept wandering zeroes or the fact that they have to work off the reticle because they have tracking issues, and then they get on the interwebs and state how their pet brand never let them down.

I've brought this up before, but the lower cost of SWFA's likely has even more people treating them rougher than far more expensive scopes. Form notwithstanding, how many people are purposely dropping TT, Swaro's, S&B's, etc? I suspect most users treat high end scopes with borderline loverly care, whereas a lot of folks have an SWFA or other cheaper scopes on truck guns, loners, work and knock around rifles, etc.

Also, even if companies did more extensive testing, I'd still want to have results from my own or objective third party tests.

You are probably right. Just yesterday I swapped scopes on my 358 win. Previously I could get groups that were good enough, 1-1.5”, but not great using a Swarovski Z3. I swapped it out for a Nightforce SHV. After I got it sighted in, I proceeded to shoot two five shot groups that were one ragged hole. I didn’t get the calipers out and measure them but the entire group was no bigger than 5/8 to 3/4 inches, including the bullet diameter, in both cases! Same load, same lot of powder, bullets, primers, everything. Only difference was the new scope. Which made me wonder if the gun was really shooting much better before, yet the scope was bouncing around a quarter or a half MOA between shots? I would have never questioned the scope previously. I just would have chased my tail with continued load development.

 

[SDHNTR]

Hi Doug, maybe you could tell those scope company reps that our consensus is that their consensus is wrong.

[And for context - I'm a customer of yours; have bought from you in the past, and hope to again in the future. And I get that this kind of testing might create all kinds of complexity for both you and the companies you deal with. But, if you let them know that we're a sizeable part of their markets, then perhaps we can support you in encouraging them to bring more reliable scopes to market.]

All we are asking for is honest durability testing. This isn’t a big ask. We demand this out of all of our other equipment. If manufacturers aren’t doing this already, they need to start! And if they are, as many of them say, prove it and show us! Where are the videos of the durability testing and the zero retention? So far only Nightforce puts out content like that. Lots of scopes claim X amount of G forces worth of durability. OK fine, let’s go one further than the marketing speak, and show us what that means in terms of the reliability of an optical device put on a rifle to shoot stuff. Walk the talk for real, and show us! This isn’tan outlandish thing to ask for as a consumer. And frankly, the fact that any manufacturer would scoff at such a request is disheartening. I would like to know who those manufacturers are so I can avoid them!

These guys need to understand that the market is starting to change and consumers are starting to demand something that wasn’t widely demanded before, rugged reliability in scopes. So either manufacturers adapt to this shift in consumer demand, or they will get left behind. This is a normal process of product development and delivery. Disruptive change. Get with it, or get gone. Does anybody remember when people thought it was crazy that others wanted to walk around with a telephone in their pocket?

 

[Tex68w]

I have a similar setup, 20” proof barrel and ultra 7. I went with a mk5 3-18 and like how it turned out. Good balance and lightweight.

Seeing how this was one of my main options I was originally considering I have decided to stick with what I know and get the very similar Mk6 with the Illuminated TMR reticle. It's a few ounces lighter, same reticle, lower turrets, FFP and very similar specs (albeit the Mk5 HD does edge it out in adjustment range). I can pick up the Mk6 very lightly used from a buddy for a few hundred less than my discounted price on the Mk 5HD.

Thanks everyone for the input and suggestions, I'll dip out and let the convo resume as it has obviously drifted way off topic lol.

 

[Balderdash]

You are probably right. Just yesterday I swapped scopes on my 358 win. Previously I could get groups that were good enough, 1-1.5”, but not great using a Swarovski Z3. I swapped it out for a Nightforce SHV. After I got it sighted in, I proceeded to shoot two five shot groups that were one ragged hole. I didn’t get the calipers out and measure them but the entire group was no bigger than 5/8 to 3/4 inches, including the bullet diameter, in both cases! Same load, same lot of powder, bullets, primers, everything. Only difference was the new scope. Which made me wonder if the gun was really shooting much better before, yet the scope was bouncing around a quarter or a half MOA between shots? I would have never questioned the scope previously. I just would have chased my tail with continued load development.

I've had the exact same thing happen through the years. Few rigs I thought were mediocre shooters at best really shined with a different scope.

I like hunting with a 358. I've had several throughout the years, but I'm down to an early BLR. I like to grab it for snow tracking and still hunting. They hit way above their weight class. What's yours in?

 

[SDHNTR]

I've had the exact same thing happen through the years. Few rigs I thought were mediocre shooters at best really shined with a different scope.

I like hunting with a 358. I've had several throughout the years, but I'm down to an early BLR. I like to grab it for snow tracking and still hunting. They hit way above their weight class. What's yours in?

Mines a custom APR build on a Thompson Leh action (Ed Brown/LAW 704 design), K&P 20” heavy sporter barrel and McWalnut stock. It’s a wonderful rifle.

 

[Balderdash]

Mines a custom APR build on a Thompson Leh action (Ed Brown/LAW 704 design), K&P 20” heavy sporter barrel and McWalnut stock. It’s a wonderful rifle.

Sounds like a really awesome rig. What do you have your barrel twisted? I have some 35 calibers in 1:12, 1:14, and 1:16. I have a 1:12 35 Whelen that still does well with 200's, so I'd probably do that again.

Keep meaning to build a short, light weight 358 on a LH Tikka. But other projects keep coming up. And I'm happy with the BLR 358 for what I do with it.

 

[SDHNTR]

It’s a 1:12, more than I need, but I shoot monos exclusively so more twist is better than not enough.

 

[slowelk]

Doug, where are the XTR 3s and the GPO Spectras made?

The XTR 3 is made in Colorado for the time being, but I understand it will be moving overseas at some point and they will only be producing the XTR Pro in Greeley.

@OutdoorAg do you have an XTR 3? I had the 3.3-18 with the SCR-Mil Reticle, but never ended up using it. There were multiple reasons for not using it, but a primary one was that that reticle was worthless below 6-8x, and wasn't something I wanted to put on a general purpose hunting rifle.

 

[OutdoorAg]

@slowelk I do not have one in hand. Not yet. I placed an order with Doug for the 3-18 SCR-Mil at his fantastic price. I'm not sure there is another scope on the market that can compete with the XTRIII at $999.

Your concerns with the reticle seem valid from what I've read, that under 8x, its just not going to do much for you. That said, I can't recall the last time I dialed a scope down below 8x to make a shot. In fact, I'm a huge fan of the fixed 10 and fixed 12. I get it - they don't sell, and thats why we are never likely to see someone like NF or Burris do a fixed power. I'll be interested to get my hands on this one and see for myself, but I bought with a specific purpose in mind....going on a switch barrel rifle, where each barrel will have its offsets, and the absolute requirement that the scope will adjust to those offsets when I do switch barrels. That way I don't have to shoot each time I swap.

Remains to be seen if this scope will do that, but my its a good enough bet based on what I've seen, and the customer service from the folks at Burris in CO will take care of me if not.

I expect to be impressed by the XTR III and the SCR-Mil at all X's above 10, and thats where I do most all my shooting and hunting.

 

[slowelk]

@slowelk I do not have one in hand. Not yet. I placed an order with Doug for the 3-18 SCR-Mil at his fantastic price. I'm not sure there is another scope on the market that can compete with the XTRIII at $999.

Your concerns with the reticle seem valid from what I've read, that under 8x, its just not going to do much for you. That said, I can't recall the last time I dialed a scope down below 8x to make a shot. In fact, I'm a huge fan of the fixed 10 and fixed 12. I get it - they don't sell, and thats why we are never likely to see someone like NF or Burris do a fixed power. I'll be interested to get my hands on this one and see for myself, but I bought with a specific purpose in mind....going on a switch barrel rifle, where each barrel will have its offsets, and the absolute requirement that the scope will adjust to those offsets when I do switch barrels. That way I don't have to shoot each time I swap.

Remains to be seen if this scope will do that, but my its a good enough bet based on what I've seen, and the customer service from the folks at Burris in CO will take care of me if not.

I expect to be impressed by the XTR III and the SCR-Mil at all X's above 10, and thats where I do most all my shooting and hunting.

Makes sense, you'll probably be pleased based on your intended uses. I dump into the timber often and like to have a usable low-end magnification in an FFP scope.

 

[OutdoorAg]

Makes sense, you'll probably be pleased based on your intended uses. I dump into the timber often and like to have a usable low-end magnification in an FFP scope.

Yeah I wouldn't want this option for timber hunting. Maybe the new ones with illumination.

I'll circle back to this thread once I have the scope up and running. But for open country LR use, like the PRC lends itself to, I'm not sure what else a guy can buy under $1,000 that will be as rugged and compact. Sure its hefty, but I think most of the optics community has settled on the understanding that the weight penalty is part of the penalty to pay for reliability of the erector system.

 

[Fartrell Cluggins]

@slowelk I do not have one in hand. Not yet. I placed an order with Doug for the 3-18 SCR-Mil at his fantastic price. I'm not sure there is another scope on the market that can compete with the XTRIII at $999.

Your concerns with the reticle seem valid from what I've read, that under 8x, its just not going to do much for you. That said, I can't recall the last time I dialed a scope down below 8x to make a shot. In fact, I'm a huge fan of the fixed 10 and fixed 12. I get it - they don't sell, and thats why we are never likely to see someone like NF or Burris do a fixed power. I'll be interested to get my hands on this one and see for myself, but I bought with a specific purpose in mind....going on a switch barrel rifle, where each barrel will have its offsets, and the absolute requirement that the scope will adjust to those offsets when I do switch barrels. That way I don't have to shoot each time I swap.

Remains to be seen if this scope will do that, but my its a good enough bet based on what I've seen, and the customer service from the folks at Burris in CO will take care of me if not.

I expect to be impressed by the XTR III and the SCR-Mil at all X's above 10, and thats where I do most all my shooting and hunting.

Mine is supposed to arrive today.

 

[ChrisAU]

I got one of those XTR III’s last week and put it on my 6.5 PRC. It is not for timber hunting for sure. I’m setting this rifle up for NRL matches and for the occasional Powerline or large ag field whitetail sit.

 

[Tex68w]

What I settled on, Leupold Mk6 3-18x44 FFP TMR illuminated in ARC rings.