Ideal Rifle Scope

[crossone]

When choosing MIL vs MOA, if your going to be hunting with someone else who is already familiar with one over the other, stick with whatever they are already comfortable with. It doesn't make any difference in most situations as long as your hunting buddy doesn't call out "1/2 MOA UP" and you have a MIL scope. Lots of people claim FFP but I've never seen a good one for hunting where and how I hunt. Lots of folks claim this is because I'm an ignorant troglodyte and can't possibly imagine how unfortunate they are to read my words or see my face but I would say be cautious when buying FFP, obviously I've just never seen a good one but I have several higher end scopes so I don't know what you have to spend to get one. As far as Nightforce being too heavy, this is correct, except for the 2.5-10 NXS models. I've found these to be absolutely awesome and you can get them with Zerostop; which I require. (The first time you miss an elk because you were off by an entire revolution and didn't know it, you'll think that an additional $200 for this feature is cheap). The beauty of Zerostop cannot be overstated. Steaming my overweight excuse for a body up 2,000 feet in the dark I'll think, "Oh! Did I reset the rifle to zero after shooting at that rock yesterday?" Pull my rifle off of my shoulder and give the knob a little twist. Yes, yes I did. I RULE!!!

I dial exactly as SDHNTR describes, zero at 200, hold dead on out to about 300 if there isn't much time and dial after that. The only exception to that is that if my scope has MILs or some other lines below the reticle, I will tape a chart to my stock that calibrates these at high power for quick shots during the whitetail run (those bucks seem to never hold still).

Also, I run a chart taped to my stock for every hunt based on the most likely elevation and temperature. The only time that this has caused me problems is when I forgot to change the chart and went from hunting elk at 8,000 feet and 40 degrees F to hunting whitetails at 2,100 ft and -10 degrees F. That cost me a nice buck but other than that, I'm sticking to this because I'm not someone who gets a ton of time to shoot. I have a buddy that often watches elk for 1/2 before he shoots. So he ranges the elk, powers up his phone, types in all of data, dials his scope and waits for the elk to present the perfext shot and shoots. Last year I had 10 seconds so I guessed 350, looked at my chart, dialed and fired. I was a inch or two high so it probably wasn't quite that far but she's in the freezer so I guess close enough.

Just make sure that you have enough ammo to get comfortable with everything at the range before you commit to it in the field.

Good luck!

Cross

 

[Lionhound1975]

Some real good info above in the other posts above for your questions. Although i have a few SFP scopes, they are on rifles that I zero'd for maximum point blank range and will not go past that range on those rifles. For my other rifles, I have FFP scopes with MIL dials and MIL reticle. There are still some scopes out there with a MIL based reticle and MOA turret clicks so avoid those if you are going to dial. The turret click system should be the same unit value as the reticle design. So go with MIL/MILS or MOA/MOAs.

I find the MIL system much easier to estimate distance in my head without having to get out a calculator. Some people shy away from MILS because they think you have to think metric but you can use yards the same way. I have a dope calculator on my phone that I use to print out dope charts and tape them to my butt stock. I carry a rangefinder but I like being able to range targets if I need to using my riflescope in case the rangefinder breaks, batteries, etc. The range estimation formula is the same for MILS whether you think in meters or yards.

Some people don't like the FFP because the reticles can be hard to see on low power. There are some FFP scopes that have thick posts on the outer part of the reticle that allow you to take a quick shot at something close with the scope on 4X and then zoom in and still take a shot at 12X using the fine part of the crosshairs. The thick outer posts don't get in the way on higher magnification since they are out of the image by then but they are still very useful for a quick shot at low magnification.

 

[tdot]

One tip I took away from formidablous was to zero at 100 and then dial up to your 200 or 250 yard zero. I'm a big fan of that system, and all of my rifles are now zeroed at 100.

As mentioned above, I also print out a dope card for every hunt, with the expected elevation and average barometric pressure set. Then I have the option to use that data or pull out my phone if I have time. But most importantly, I have options.

I'm a fan of the NXS 2.5-10 or the SHV. I've sold off all my higher magnification scopes. I've not had a chance to hunt with a ffp scope. I've only looked through a few, and I wasn't comfortable with the reticles at the lowest settings without the reticle lit up. Being in tight woods chasing bears and a difficult to see reticle just seems like a bad combo to me. The moment I find a reticle that I like, I'll make the switch.

 

[Savage99]

^ In case you needed the reminder, WRM. I guess I don't entirely understand the infatuation with telling me I shouldn't be taking 700 yard shots at moving elk tomorrow with this new scope I'd buy. I think I'm a little bit more knowledgable with shooting/hunting than you assume. No offense taken though.. well, maybe a little

Of course I'm going to practice at variable distances. This post wasnt meant for others to talk me out of dialing, it was for recommendations on it. I don't expect to be comfortable with it tomorrow, its just something I'm interested in and would like to learn more on. Better to start messing with it sooner rather than later, I suppose. I've got plenty of time, ammo, and space to practice.

I am pretty dead set on FFP. I'm leaning mil over moa as well. Now just comparing models that offer these things. I am one of those anti-vortex guys. I heard enough about Leupolds CDS tracking issues to scare me off. I'm listening on the Meopta Optikas and the SHVs closest. Zeiss is tempting as well.

Reliability is my number one concern. Weight sucks, I get that, but if thats everyones only knock on Nightforce then I know they're doing something right.

Have you considered an SWFA? Is this not Rokslide and a thread with Form?

Excellent reliability, ruggedness, good reticles, great price, sometimes poor availability...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[k80Titus]

I am in a similar search and am considering a Leupold VX-3i lrp FFP 4.5-14x50mm
It has a zero stop and weighs 20 ozs as well

Does anyone have any experience with this model?

 

[SDHNTR]

Have you considered an SWFA? Is this not Rokslide and a thread with Form?

Excellent reliability, ruggedness, good reticles, great price, sometimes poor availability...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I wish the part you said about SWFA and good reticles were true! If they made that thing with a simple Plex I’d buy a few Rt now!

 

[slick]

I wish the part you said about SWFA and good reticles were true! If they made that thing with a simple Plex I’d buy a few Rt now!

Their ultra lite series has a simplex reticle.

Good luck finding one. They’re all back ordered from fixed 6 to the 5-20x50HD 59 the ultra lite.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Savage99]

I wish the part you said about SWFA and good reticles were true! If they made that thing with a simple Plex I’d buy a few Rt now!

Ha!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[wind gypsy]

OP, I’ve settled on swfa 3-9 and bushnell LRTS/LRHS series scopes for my hunting rifles. The SHV is comparatively heavy and more expensive beyond the 3-10 which doesn’t have exposed elevation turrets or come in Mils. I live in Monticello. You’re welcome to come check my scopes out sometime.

IMO the biggest issue living in MN is finding a good place to practice at distance. And once you find a spot you can shoot more than 100 or 200 yards, there probably isn’t many different setups to shoot from. There might be a prevalent wind, up/down draft, etc at that one long spot that you get used to and causes you to have invalid assumptions when you go somewhere new. There is a HUGE advantage to living out west where a guy can go hang steel on federal lands where you can actually see and shoot as far as you want. My proficiency and confidence has decreased notably since I moved back in ‘18.

I do think it’s fairly reasonable to become proficient up to 4-500 yards as a flat lander. Wind won’t wreck your day as easily at those distances.

 

[tbro16]

Oh trust me, I’ve scrolled through enough threads on this site to know the SWFA SS is what y’all prefer lol. Unfortunately, they’ve been back ordered for the few months I’ve been looking. Read that somebody on here had spoke with them directly and said it’ll be another several months before they’re available.
Luckily I’ve got plenty of space in Minnesota. Dad is a farmer and owns more than enough land for me to set up shop on. Ideally I’d get to a range to zero at 100/200 yds. After that I’d have the opportunity to practice more than enough different positions. Not many hills around here will replicate what I’ll see in the mountains though haha

 

[tbro16]

Awesome info Cross, lion, and tdot. Really appreciate it. Knowing how to set zero and properly dial is way more important than any mil vs moa and FFP vs SFP decision.
Doesn’t seem like many are too high on FFP scopes. Those that like them tend to love and highly recommend them though.

 

[Dobermann]

@tbro16: I can see how you might have come to that as an interim conclusion given many of the posts here so far ... but this thread is out-of-line with much of modern hunting, and much of what you'll otherwise find here on the Slide.

Form's post on the first page points you to why both FFP and Mils have significant advantages. There's a reason that militaries switched to these years ago, and that almost all precision shooters use FFP/Mils.

 

[805Bowhunter]

Anyone have any thoughts on the Maven RS.1? Good dialogue on the thread and was curious as to anyone's experience with this scope in particular.

 

[eddielasvegas]

@tbro16: I can see how you might have come to that as an interim conclusion given many of the posts here so far ... but this thread is out-of-line with much of modern hunting, and much of what you'll otherwise find here on the Slide.

Form's post on the first page points you to why both FFP and Mils have significant advantages. There's a reason that militaries switched to these years ago, and that almost all precision shooters use FFP/Mils.

For hunting, is precision shooting really required? I always thought hunting required accurate and reliable shooting. Getting to the latter should not be especially difficult or expensive; the former, me thinks you'll invest a lot of time and money.


Eddie

 

[WRM]

The OP may have seen this in his personal research, but I found the following thread to have interesting information. Perhaps this is because it touches on many of the issues I raised, but others still may find some value in it.

Leupold VX-III 4.5-14 CDS problems!!

I purchased this scope early 2011, mounted it in Burris Sig. rings with a one piece Burris base. It has been sent back, once again, to Leupold to have the elevation turret either fixed or replaced as it has twice been knocked off and will not hold a 200 yard zero. I took it to Africa this past...

www.hunttalk.com

I am not a member of the hunttalk forum, and did not contribute to that thread. I do not know any of the people who did contribute. A couple of my takeaways:

The "budget' entries in the dial n shoot models use less durable components. Surprise! Usually, something's gotta give when you make a good (or great) product then you make a "budget friendly" version of the product. I think the OP may have experienced this with his Vortex optic. I don't know how this applies to Nightforce--perhaps you can expect 5,000 "revolutions" from the lower end of their line. Still plenty for most shooters, if that is the case.

There are some work arounds, at least with some manufacturers, i.e.--the Leupold custom shop will upgrade components for you. But, that may not be an entirely satisfactory resolution to the issues encountered, at least according to some in that thread.

If you gotta dial, SWFA is another recommended line (and as noted here). I know nothing about this line, but, if you are willing to go with the obligatory weight penalty, it appears to be well regarded.

At least one other person is openly willing to admit a Leupold FIXED 6x scope is an awesome hunting scope. See post 39 in that thread. Clearly, I did like that gem.

I found the thread because I was mildly tempted to buy a new old stock Leupold in a discontinued line I like and it happened to have CDS. Thought I would dig a bit more on that given the OP's comments on CDS issues. While it likely would be fine for what I plan for this scope, I probably won't go with it due to the CDS issues. If I decide otherwise, it will head to the custom shop to have the CDS internals upgraded.

Again, to the OP, I wish you the best. If you go with the Nightforce offering, give us a long term review (after a 1,000+ or so rounds downrange). I'd be interested to hear if you run into any issues.

 

[WRM]

For hunting, is precision shooting really required? I always thought hunting required accurate and reliable shooting. Getting to the latter should not be especially difficult or expensive; the former, me thinks you'll invest a lot of time and money.


Eddie

oh yeah, and plus 1

You can get to the latter with a $300ish scope (Leupold fixed 6), a reasonable amount of practice, and taking shots that allow your level of precision to connect.

 

[WRM]

The thread discussion on canted reticles also made me think of a seemingly little discussed (at least here) long range accuracy topic--rifle cant. In short, a canted rifle (scope) can't shoot to its full potential. And, the longer your range to target, the more this is going to be exposed. Your sub moa range rifle can easily open up its group if the rifle is not level upon firing. Thus, the scope level. I like and use Accuracy 1st, but other options exist. Bottom line--if you want to ding 'em from distance, you best get that rifle/scope level, cuz you can't with cant (reliably).

 

[ecsn7d]

Also not a Nightforce fan here. Too heavy, and reticles that are too complex. If you want to dial at a basic level, get a SFP. If you want to use dots for holdover, get a FFP, that way the dots are useful throughout the power range. SFP and dots mean you can only use max power. I don’t like that because max mag dramatically shrinks your field of view which will likely mean you can’t see your hits, and that’s important. So I’d just get a SFP with a standard clean Plex reticle, and dial as you wish. You’ll be able to do so throughout the mag range. I think this is the best blend of “keeping it simple” yet also taking advantage of the advances in tech available to us nowadays. Personally, I zero at 200. Point on for anything 0-200. I’ll hold a touch high for anything 2-300, and then dial 300+. Just what works for me.

As for exact scope, I’d recommend a Zeiss V4 in either 3-12 or 4-14. Either will be lighter than Nightforce, just as durable and reliable, and less expensive.

If you have a SFP scope with a simple duplex reticle, does the dialing have the same effect for all mag levels?

 

[SDHNTR]

If you have a SFP scope with a simple duplex reticle, does the dialing have the same effect for all mag levels?

Yes

 

[MeatMissile]

At the risk of being presumptuous, it sounds like you are "relatively" new to hunting, and, perhaps, shooting in general. Forgive me if I am wrong. I have been involved with shooting and hunting for well over 45 years. So, my thoughts are based on experiences I have had over that time and what I have seen happen in the shooting sports over that period.

First, finances allowing, I would put a "good" scope (whatever that means to you) on a mediocre(ish) gun any day BEFORE I would put a crappy scope on a great gun or pair a crappy gun with a crappy scope. In other words, my focus would be on the glass, first, period. Most guns shoot "good enough" for hunting purposes. The scope puts that bullet where it needs to go. I'm not talking about paper punching accuracy that you can brag to your friends about. I'm talking about responsibly harvesting game accuracy. The two are not the same, and they should not be confused. That brings me to my first point.

You likely aren't going to harvest an animal at a range of 600-700 yards. WE may all like to dream of "that shot", but very few will ever make it successfully, assuming we even are presented with it. Forget about that as even in your wheelhouse of goals. Are you really willing to spend years/hours practicing behind a .300 Win mag to feel you are proficient enough to attempt that shot, which may never even present itself in the field? I am taking out of the equation the "cheats" that are rapidly appearing (Swaro super scope, ballistic calculator software on the phone, etc). If you can afford those options and/or want to take advantage of them, then that certainly is a potential. Without them, shooting at the distances you reference in the field takes skill, opportunity, luck and probably other things as well. Personally, I'd never try that shot. Many would, I'm sure, and that is their prerogative, of course. And, we haven't even begun to broach the issue of terminal energy on game at the distances you reference.

My "best" scope is a Kahles Helia CSX 3-12 x 56, currently residing on a Mountain Ascent in .280 AI. I picked it up years ago from Kahles "scratch and dent" bin, and it was neither scratched nor dented. I paid well under a grand for it. I doubt I'll ever need to upgrade that scope. It does everything I need it to in the category in which I use it. Light enough and a powerful light transmitter. I could not afford a (Swaro) Kahles today, so it's nice that I picked it up when and how I did.

I have looked at Nightforce a couple of times and scratched it from any options I need. Too heavy, too big, too elaborate, and way too expensive (for me). But, to each his own, as it is a personal choice. That gets me to my real point, however.

Leupold FX II 6 x 36 . (or the 6 x 42 if you are so inclined--you'll just pay more for the extra objective mm)

Stupid simple. Lifetime warranty. Clear glass and very good light transmission. Shop around and a sub $300.00 price is possible. I bought one for a .338 Win mag and it is a great pairing.

I can hear you laughing---a fixed power scope with no turrets and adjusters--what a dipsh##. At one time, fixed power scopes ruled. And for good reason. They work. There is very little to break. It is very likely you will never shoot better in the field than that scope will. Save a ton of money and put it in other gear that will let you get where you need to be to stalk within 300 yards of your quarry. I doubt you'll ever regret the purchase, even if it is just a step in your journey to find the ideal scope. Or, buy a Nightforce, lug that monster around everywhere and fiddle with dials. It is your choice.

I also am a big fan of Meopta optics. I don't care for their models that emulate Nightforce in size and complexity, but they make GREAT glass for a lot less. If you want a big, bulky, turrety scope, you still can feed that desire with a Meopta AND keep a bunch of bucks in your pocket. IF I needed to replace my Kahles, a Meopta very likely would take its place.

Best of luck in your quest for the ideal rifle scope--a unicorn if there ever was one. A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step, however, said some dude.

I’m with you!

Winchester M70 7x57 with 6x36. According to some, I shouldn’t be able to hit anything with it!