Another Recommendation: SHV/Credo/Tenmile

[Ferrulewax]

Putting it on a t3x 300wm, Right now I'm comfortable to about 400 yards but would like to train to start shooting to around 600. Would prefer something around 3-10+, the more zoom range the better. Not a big illuminated recticle guy (maybe I should be) and I honestly don't know much about the weeds of mils/moa, ffp, recticles etc. Until this point I've been a set and forget guy, and that will still be the scopes main function. Durability and function is #1, then weight, variable zoom range, etc. Though I was settled on the credo 2.5-10 but the 56mm objective is heavy, and I can get alot more zoom for the same weight in other scopes. Shv 3-10 is lighter, but significantly more expensive. I'd like to stay under 1k but preferably 500 to 800ish.

 

[AkMtnRunner]

I can only talk about the tenmile 3-18x44 and the credo 2.5-15x42. Both are up to your task, the tenmile exceeding it, I would say. I had the tenmile mounted and dry fired with but it was a lot of scope, more than I needed. Being FFP, the changing reticle look wasn’t pleasant and was simply unnecessary. After researching a bit more, I swapped it out for the credo. It was the right choice for me as it was certainly more compact but still had all the features I was looking for. If it was a dedicated long range rifle, say for 600-1000 yard distances and I didn’t care about the size and weight, I’d rock the tenmile for sure, but I prefer the credo for a hunting scope.

 

[ResearchinStuff]

At 600, a ffp mil scope is going to be significantly easier to use for wind holds. So, the shv f1 is worth looking at, along with the trijicon ffp options. The sfp shv is not the ideal scope for what you're wanting to do.

 

[Marble]

As far as weight goes, I do not let a pound make a decision one way or another for my hunting rifle. This doesn't mean I want a heavy rifle or don't care. It's more about actual performance of what I want.

I chose a couple of NF scopes for my last two rifles. They are heavy, but I have 100% confidence and comfort with them.

Sent from my SM-G986U using Tapatalk

 

[willfrye027]

How much do you plan to shoot/practice at the 500+ yard range? I have the SHV 3-10 on a 30-06 with a plain duplex. Its main purpose is lightweight, timber/close range but I can and do practice with it out to 600. It works well for that, but the conditions would have to be very good (very little wind) to where I’m not calculating a wind hold in mils. My other rifle is set up with a FFP/mil reticle that I shoot regularly from 500-1400 yards.

There’s not too many options that are good for both short and long range…might have to decide what you will use it for the most. The SHV will not hinder your ability to shoot 600 yards unless you are shooting in a lot of wind and need precise wind holds.

 

[BjornF16]

Shooting to 600 you really don’t need much more than 6-8x magnification.

Tenmile may be more magnification than you need, although nice to have that little extra for assessing game if don’t have spotter handy.

Several good options in Credo. I have 2-10x36 FFP on my 22CM. There are some 3-9 options.

I’d take those over SHV (I have SHV 4-14x50 FFP).

I’d also suggest SWFA 3-9 HD

 

[Fishermen0105]

I’ve had really good success with an shv 3-10. Might try a ffp ten mile down the road. I’ve used the Swfa 3-9 some but more experience with the Nightforce 3-10 and 2.5-10. I shoot steel to 500 no problem with any one of those. Don’t have access to anything farther yet. I like the Nightforce but will probably do ffp on everything in the future.

 

[Southern Lights]

I am a fan of the SHV 3-10x42. Weight is reasonable for the rugged design. They dial reliably. The glass is perfectly fine for any kind of LR shooting I've done. They have capped turrets so they won't move until you want them to. I prefer the older model with side parallax vs. the newer illum reticle that replaced it. If you are dialing for longer range the parallax helps eliminate that small bit of error that can put you inches off and at distance inches matter a lot.

FFP scopes generally have very poor reticles for lower mag ranges. If you want a generalist hunting scope that you can dial the FFP reticles can get easily lost on dark/busy backgrounds at lower powers. The illumination could possibly help, but it's just another thing to go wrong.

For reliability although I think Trijicon scopes are good, I know that the NF scope (even SHVs) are tested specifically for impacts and holding zero before being shipped. If you look around for an older model with parallax they can be found for decent prices and are not likely to cause any drama unless they had obvious bad abuse.

 

[thinhorn_AK]

I have the shv 3-10 w/side parallax, a tenmile 3-18x50 and I’ve used the SWFA 3-9 and 6x a lot (have a 3-9 on the way). All are very different scopes that really shine for their intended uses.

The shv is a great all around scope but for me personally, it’s more or less a bombproof set and forget scope. The tenmile is great as well, lots of features but I got into a deep discount, I’ve used it less than any other scopes I have. The SWFA stuff is solid, no frills but good quality, I think the 3-9 is their best scope but the 6x isn’t far behind.

 

[PredatorSlayer]

You will never regret having more magnification on the top end. You may regret FFP vs SFP or a specific reticle, or not having low enough magnification on the bottom…but you will never regret having more on the top.

 

[themcfarland]

I feel for safe , accurate target identification and some room beyond 600. 16x is a minimum for what I would use from 500 on up . 16x is a min. You will never regret higher , but you may regret not getting it.
FFP is better at distance .

 

[tony]

I have the shv 3-10 w/side parallax, a tenmile 3-18x50 and I’ve used the SWFA 3-9 and 6x a lot (have a 3-9 on the way). All are very different scopes that really shine for their intended uses.

The shv is a great all around scope but for me personally, it’s more or less a bombproof set and forget scope. The tenmile is great as well, lots of features but I got into a deep discount, I’ve used it less than any other scopes I have. The SWFA stuff is solid, no frills but good quality, I think the 3-9 is their best scope but the 6x isn’t far behind.

I looked at that SHV you have and its listed with a fixed parallax? Is yours a one off or special model?

 

[BRTreedogs]

Id order up a swfa 3-9 while there on sale..
If be a great start, and if you don't like it has easy resale.

 

[SDHNTR]

Too much mag in a SFP scope can definitely be regrettable! Ever seen a dude scrambling to find a moving animal at 700 yards on 24x after he just made a poor shot? I have and it’s incredibly stressful! Fov matters. If you want high mag, go FFP. For your needs, that SHV 3-10 sounds perfectly adequate. I own several.

 

[BjornF16]

I feel for safe , accurate target identification and some room beyond 600. 16x is a minimum for what I would use from 500 on up . 16x is a min. You will never regret higher , but you may regret not getting it.
FFP is better at distance .

Just because you have 16x or greater doesn’t mean you have to take your shot at that magnification.

By all means, if you don’t have a spotter then use your rifle scope to verify the animal. You can back off the magnification to take the shot and spot the impact with wider fov

 

[thinhorn_AK]

I looked at that SHV you have and its listed with a fixed parallax? Is yours a one off or special model?

Mine is the older model, non illuminated forceplex with side parallax. When they made the new ones with the illuminated reticles they did away with the side parallax adjustment.

Not sure why, I never mess with the parallax but I don’t really shoot the scope that far. I had the illuminated non-parallax model before and really liked it too, I wish I didn’t get rid of it.

I got the one I have for n a trade here on rokslide, the scope was new in box.

 

[Ferrulewax]

Id order up a swfa 3-9 while there on sale..
If be a great start, and if you don't like it has easy resale.

Any big advantages to the 3-9 over the 3-15? Other than saving 5 ounces? I feel like the extra zoom may be worth it if I go that route. It's stupid, but in all honesty I don't love the SWFA scopes just because they seem cheesy...even though everyone loves them.

 

[BjornF16]

Any big advantages to the 3-9 over the 3-15? Other than saving 5 ounces? I feel like the extra zoom may be worth it if I go that route. It's stupid, but in all honesty I don't love the SWFA scopes just because they seem cheesy...even though everyone loves them.

3-9 is HD glass

 

[ResearchinStuff]

3-9 also has solid diamonds vice open diamonds on the 3-15, and fixed parallax. turrets are also slightly different, 3-9 is slightly lower profile.

 

[BRTreedogs]

Any big advantages to the 3-9 over the 3-15? Other than saving 5 ounces? I feel like the extra zoom may be worth it if I go that route. It's stupid, but in all honesty I don't love the SWFA scopes just because they seem cheesy...even though everyone loves them.

Better glass.
Shorter turrets.
Easier to reset turrets.
Cheaper.
Easier to resell.

The power ring on the 3-15 is backwards.
You don't need parallax at 9x
You don't need 15x to shoot 600.

All the other scopes you mentioned at great.
Everything has its trade offs, you will end up with a preference.
With no experience the chances of you getting what your preference will be the first time is 50/50
Other then used the price of those scopes is the price of those scopes. NF and Trijicon rarely go on sale.
The 3-9 imo is the best value to get you started so you can see what your preferences are.
And will be the easiest to get out of.
I've never seen a reasonably price 3-9 go more the 2-24 hrs on here.