This is what I'm leaning towards. Thoughts?
NX8 - 4-32x50mm F1 - ZeroStop™ - .250 MOA - DigIllum - PTL - MOAR™
The NX8 4-32x is a more usable scope than the 2.5-20x, however they both have significant drawbacks for general hunting use even at distance. 20x and 32x are both hindrances, not advantages, for killing living things. MOA lacks some advantages that mils have in both a consistent and logical drop scale and wind holds. I’ve used every scope mentioned quite a bit and a 4-32x NX8 in MOA is about the last choice of any decent choice. All high magnification does is shrink your FOV, make it impossible or highly unlikely that you will not spot your own impacts/misses, make it probable that you will lose the animal if it moves before or after that shot, make it significantly harder and take longer to reacquire the animal after the shot, and make follow up shots harder. High magnification is range and visual comfort thing, not an advantage for most shooting.
So let’s say you get a decent magnum rifle and high mag scope. You line up on a deer at 643 yards, prone, the buck bedded on a hillside with mixed in brush and trees on the opposite ride, across a draw. It feels like there is no wind. You dial up your magnification to 15-32x and shoot. You lose the deer during recoil, you catch movement going into a small tree stand and can see half a deers body standing there, but not it’s head. You aren’t positive that there weren’t other deer in the cover that you didn’t see. After a bit, the deer walks through the tress and over the ridge tail slightly flicking. There isn’t snow. What do you do now? How confident are you to find this deer? What do you do next?
These are the things that people don’t talk about. There are very few people that have a legitimate high first or second round hit rates past mid ranges in mountainous conditions, even though everyone believes they are one of the few. How they get that idea without shooting in mountainous conditions constantly and in less than ideal situations and logging the data I can’t fathom.
A person that does not have someone skilled spotting their shots for them while hunting is going to have a relatively high mishap rate on live animals past the 400-500 yard range, unless they are extremely experienced with shooting under stress and from imperfect positions; as well as extremely experienced with animal behavior, tracking, and killing. Even still the success rate will be lower than most think and way lower than if that person has a skilled spotter.
All of this leads to legitimate ranges for people that are truly shooting and practicing correctly constantly being much shorter and/or limiting than people believe.
Let’s say someone is going to get a rifle and scope setup that is solid and capable past MPBR. They will learn to shoot in the field correctly, take a good class (if there were any), and start competing in LR shooting with their actual hunting rifles and not 28lb 6mm Dashers. They’re going to learn factual terminal ballistics, and on demand performance. They’ll shoot 1,500-3,000 rounds this year before season from those hunting rifles away from the bench and from alternate positions until under time constraints and some stress they are on demand 2 moa hitters. So on deer they are mechanically capable of grouping on deer/antelopes to about 600 yards, and elk to past 1,000y (ignoring external factors).
Now this example is already way, way beyond what almost anyone does. The issue left is how is that person going to gain any experience shooting in mountain/broken terrain if they do not live in the mountain west? Let’s say they do live in the mountains and they do all the above things to prepare- there still is the issue of killing experience. Its a thing. Killing is a skill like every other, and there are not enough tags available in the west for someone to gain experience in even a decade of hunting and filling every tag available that they can get their hands on. Varmints help, but it is not the same animal reactions, factors, or behaviors that medium and large game exhibit. AND that behavior is different when shot at long range.
Missing and wounding is a fact at all ranges including “long range”. If someone wants to say they haven’t missed or wounded and animal at long range (any range) then they haven’t killed enough- no condition or scenario is a 100% hit rate. Following up, finding, and recovering wounded animals is a whole other skill. How are you gaining that experience?
A 9x scope is plenty of magnification for sub 700’ish yards on big game, and that is about the farthest that even practiced and prepared individuals will have a high 1st or 2nd round hit rate. Past that, you need a spotter. If you have a spotter, then you don’t need high magnification to aim. This season I had people line up on elk at 910y at 9x and 994y with 6x with no issue at all quartering the vitals. One of those was a clean kill, one was a miss and the miss had zero to do with magnification and everything to do with incorrect data.
Personally my last few deer and elk I’ve killed have been at 676y on 8 or 9x, 801y at 11x IIRC, 457y at 6x, 644y at about 10x, 532y at 11x, 606 at 12x IIRC, 666y at 9x, 732y at 7x, etc, etc. Now there were quite a few animals at sub 400 yards in there, all of those would have been 6x or below. For those I’ve been spotting for just between last season and this one, 735y at 7x, 620 at between 10x and 20’ish x and the only true scenario that caused issues (there’s a clue), multiple between 400-600 with magnifications between 6x and 9x, and lots of sub 400 with all 6x or below.
The question of how to choose a scope that will be used past close ranges is easy- one that maintains zero regardless of handling or abuse, FFP and mil, usable magnification of 6x to 15’ish X, with a consistent spaced and visible reticle in low and high powers. That narrows it down to a very few options.