Dream rifle (NULA in 6mm ARC) needs an optic

OP
StupidLightweight
Joined
Jun 7, 2023
Messages
719
Location
Wyoming
Thanks for all the feedback. The AccuPoint is about 13 ounces, which is as heavy and physically large as I'd like to go. A used SWFA 3-9x42 is arriving in a few days, but that scope might overpower the rifle. Same concern with a spare LRHS 3-12x44 I have.

Anyone have experience with Kenton turrets on a Trijicon scope? I'd rarely dial the scope, but I consider it foolish to setup a backcountry rifle today without that capability.

Another option that intrigues me is Nightforce's 4.5x24mm Competition SR Fixed scope. That might be just the ticket. Anyone used that optic?
 

ljalberta

WKR
Joined
Dec 7, 2015
Messages
1,719
I for one have the Talley LW on my .340 Wby. I have a Swarovski Z5 3.5-18x44 BRH mounted in them.They were installed by the gunsmith in Colorado that rebarreled my Wby Mk V. That was in 2015, and have had no problems. I was speaking to him about 3 weeks ago, and told him I have been seeing lots of failure reports on the Talley LW. I asked him what mount he uses recommends now, and his reply was "Still use Talley LW. If you torque them properly, they are just fine." He can use anything on the custom rifles he builds , and he still uses Talley LW.
Mine were fine until they weren’t. I torqued at manufacturers spec and lost zero years ago. Torqued further based on Form’s mounting instructions and thought I’d give it another go and then lost zero this year above manufacturers listed specs.

I think most people aren’t even aware when their rings have an issue. This includes many gunsmiths and long time hunters.

Anyway, that just been my personal experience. If others never have an issue in their life, that’s excellent. I’m paying the extra couple ounces for a little greater security.
 

Clark33

WKR
Joined
Aug 12, 2015
Messages
414
Location
Moxee, WA
I ditched the mini nightforce and talleys.

Mounts have nothing to do with how a scope looks through the lenses
The most important function of a scope is to hold its zero. I'd take NF or SWFA any day.

Also, did I say the talleys affect how the "scope looks through the lenses"... no, I didn't, they are notorious for failing resulting in loss of zero.
 

lungpuncher1

Lil-Rokslider
Joined
Aug 30, 2015
Messages
279
The most important function of a scope is to hold its zero. I'd take NF or SWFA any day.

Also, did I say the talleys affect how the "scope looks through the lenses"... no, I didn't, they are notorious for failing resulting in loss of zero.

I have nothing against nightforce or swfa, never said that. The 2-10x32 nightforce sucked optically.

You said the Talley comment after you did the “bad take” comment so it’s natural to assume that you were connecting the two issues.
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2013
Messages
2,368
Location
New Orleans, La.
Thanks for the eye opening on the Talley's. As long as mine holds it's zero, I'm good, but if anything starts meandering from the zero, I will definitely consider replacing the Talleys. Brings up the next question, what bases and rings are most reliable on a Weatherby .340 and a Swarovski scope? I guess I mean which bases and rings have less of a failure rate than Talley?
 

cowdisciple

Lil-Rokslider
Joined
Dec 5, 2023
Messages
180
SWFA 3-9 when available again or used. I’d also ditch the Talley LWs if you have any concern about zero retention for some rough and tumble roads or hunts. I had them on my Fieldcraft even though there are heaps of gailure stories. Had a failure this year, although thankfully it was only on a doe hunt and i was still able to get the doe.

What did you replace the Talleys with on the Fieldcraft? I have a 6.5 cm Fieldcraft with Talleys that I've been meaning to upgrade, but I haven't found any compelling direct mount options.
 
Joined
Jun 12, 2019
Messages
1,717
what bases and rings are most reliable on a Weatherby .340 and a Swarovski scope? I guess I mean which bases and rings have less of a failure rate than Talley?
More reliable than Talley? Probably a lot of things. I personally like ARC rings on your picatinny rail of choice but there are a lot of great scope ring options available these days.
 

JRS3

Lil-Rokslider
Joined
Sep 24, 2022
Messages
179
The 2.5-10x32 absolutely blows. No parallax, tight eyebox, fisheye image, and terrible reticle options for a whopping .2oz weight savings over the 2.5-10x42.

I think it’s funny that people like stuff just because they can’t get it anymore that was discontinued because it sucked. It’s like taking a toy from a kid that they don’t even like to play with, it sucks until it’s gone.

If that’s the type of optic you want, buy the x42 that’s actually available, it’s head and shoulders above that turd.
Exactly on the can’t get it anymore…..But, I wish the Kahles 2-7x36 would come back.
 

cowdisciple

Lil-Rokslider
Joined
Dec 5, 2023
Messages
180
More reliable than Talley? Probably a lot of things. I personally like ARC rings on your picatinny rail of choice but there are a lot of great scope ring options available these days.

I have some Warne 30mm pic rings coming in a scope bundle that I don't have a use for. Maybe I'll use those. I've been resisting putting a rail on the Fieldcraft. I guess I'm not entirely sure why.
 
Joined
Jun 27, 2022
Messages
1,264
Bad take.

I have 2.5-10x32 with mil dot reticle, it’s a great optic. For SFP hunting scope at 10x I think the whole no parallax is big nothing burger, optic works fine for hunting ranges.

I’d vote NF NXS as well.

Classic “it’s what I have so it’s better than what I don’t and don’t know anything about”.

The lack of parallax adjustment is only one of the drawbacks of the 32 compared to the 42. It has ZERO benefits over the 42 only downsides. You’ll pay more for one and have a hard time finding it just to have an inferior optic. There is zero logic behind buying one unless you could pick them up for the $600 or so they should cost for an outdated inferior optic.
 
OP
StupidLightweight
Joined
Jun 7, 2023
Messages
719
Location
Wyoming
The main takeaways from this thread are to not to buy the NXS 2.5-10x32 and replace my Talley mounts with basically anything else. Good to know. Thanks for the feedback.

I'm surprised someone hasn't recommended swapping the NULA straight-across for a Tikka .223, SWFA 6X or 3-9X, and a minimum of 12 loaded 77 TMKs.
 

Clark33

WKR
Joined
Aug 12, 2015
Messages
414
Location
Moxee, WA
Classic “it’s what I have so it’s better than what I don’t and don’t know anything about”.

The lack of parallax adjustment is only one of the drawbacks of the 32 compared to the 42. It has ZERO benefits over the 42 only downsides. You’ll pay more for one and have a hard time finding it just to have an inferior optic. There is zero logic behind buying one unless you could pick them up for the $600 or so they should cost for an outdated inferior optic.
You assume a lot.

OP SWFA 3-9 is a good option too
 
Last edited:

TomJoad

WKR
Joined
Jul 13, 2020
Messages
420
Location
CO
That’s a beautiful simple rifle. I’d opt for the same in a scope. How about a Schmidt & Bender fixed 6x42? No longer new production but reliable and they pop up used all the time.
 
Joined
Oct 6, 2014
Messages
1,981
Location
Alaska
What did you replace the Talleys with on the Fieldcraft? I have a 6.5 cm Fieldcraft with Talleys that I've been meaning to upgrade, but I haven't found any compelling direct mount options.
My Fieldcraft/NXS 32 went from Talleys to a Murphy Precision Ti rail and NF Ultralight’s.

I couldn’t give a shit if my 2.5-10x32 was like looking through a fish bowl, it’s not quite there, as I know everything I need to know about what I’m shooting from looking through Kowa and Swaro glass prior to getting on the gun. It’s compact, light, has a great reticle for hunting and is tough as an old goat.
 
Top