Lightweight Hunting Scope for 600 yards max range

[SDHNTR]

I have several Z5s and while they are a superbly bright, sharp and lightweight scope, their erector system isn’t great for a ballistic turret. Mine wear the BDH reticle which has proven very effective over time as I limit my shots to ~500 yards or less.

Believe the new Z5+ will prove much more durable. They are a metal erector system and more robust than the original Z5. In fact, I put my money where my mouth is and just put one on my 6.5 PRC. Still very lightweight for the feature set. With illumination and the ballistic reticle ~19oz, and with the ballistic turret ~21.

I’d LOVE for the new Z5 to prove more durable.

 

[jfk69]

no parallax

Not even remotely needed on a 3-9x scope.

 

[HornPorn]

Not even remotely needed on a 3-9x scope.

Yeah, whoever at NF thought they should put parallax on their 2-10x42 are idiots. You should go give them a seminar

 

[jfk69]

Yeah, whoever at NF thought they should put parallax on their 2-10x42 are idiots. You should go give them a seminar

You do you. The typical NF reticle tells me they know everything required in a hunting optic.

 

[AZ_Hunter]

Trijicon AccuPoint 3-9x40

I wish tirjicon would simply add a locking elevation turret to this.

 

[B_Reynolds_AK]

Yeah, whoever at NF thought they should put parallax on their 2-10x42 are idiots. You should go give them a seminar

Well my NXS 2.5-10x32 C458 Mil/Mil does not have parallax and I've routinely used it from 500-1,000 yards over the years and there is no difference in hit rates between it and the 42mm NXS version with parallax. Like it was stated above, for a scope for 500 yards and in, it is a non issue.

 

[199p]

Z5+ will be going on my next build, 2-10 on either a 6-6.5prc or 22cm

 

[mtwarden]

Hmmmm—I wonder if (Swaro) will make a Z3+????

 

[SDHNTR]

What I don’t understand…. With all these YT and promotional vids out there on this new Swaro scope, why has not a single one tested durability? Everyone knows that’s Swaro’s Achilles heel. If they built a new design that’s supposedly more rugged, why is nothing out there showing just that? Swaro could sell a ton of scopes and own the market with their glass and light weight IF they actually held up. Thats the one question mark. Yet it’s ignored in all promotional material.

 

[Macintosh]

S&B klassik 3-12 is 20oz, has a thicker reticle than the nightforce, mil reticle for wind holds, and will dial past 600 yards on most centerfire cartridges. AND its popular with the “congregation”. Focus is crisp from bayonet range to infinity.

 

[JCMCUBIC]

Well my NXS 2.5-10x32 C458 Mil/Mil does not have parallax and I've routinely used it from 500-1,000 yards over the years and there is no difference in hit rates between it and the 42mm NXS version with parallax. Like it was stated above, for a scope for 500 yards and in, it is a non issue.

I use both the x32 and x42. I agree with most saying parallax isn't needed on most 10x or less scopes...but...the design of the x42 NXS needs the parallax adjustment. Some of it is dependent on objective focus setting, but across the power range in the x42 version the parallax will help with resolution on target...a lot in some cases. This isn't the case with the x32 version (or most 3-9x scopes).

My preference in lighter scopes for use to 600 yards:

S&B 6x42 PMII

NXS 2.5-10 - x32 or x42 - if you want the best non-dialing hunting reticle, find a Velocity 600 in the LV/MV/HV that matches the bullet/velocity you shoot. It's a bolder reticle and made for hunting.

S&B 3-12 P3 w/BDC

SWFA 3-9x42

SWFA 6x42

 

[SloppyJ]

What you want is what we all want and it's not out there. You have to make choices and balance the tradeoffs. Typically it's weight for durability and I'll trade 4 to 8oz for a scope I know will retain zero riding in my truck, quad, or even taking a spill on my back. Nothing is more frustrating than chasing a zero and not knowing what the problem is. I don't have the patience or time to do that.

All of the best options have been mentioned. Google all the specs and make your call.

 

[prm]

Someday I am going to give in and get one of those Schmidt Bender 3-12x42mm Klassik LM P3L BDC scopes. That looks close to perfection to me.

 

[z987k]

Someday I am going to give in and get one of those Schmidt Bender 3-12x42mm Klassik LM P3L BDC scopes. That looks close to perfection to me.

Either they quit making them or they haven't made one in a good while. They've been out of stock everywhere since December.

 

[Pickettpuncher]

Since anything reliable and repeatable is out of the question, a 6-18 vortex crossfire should serve you well.

 

[Doc Holliday]

I'd look at the Leica Amplus 3-18x44 with L4a Reticle. At 23.6 oz. it's not what I would call lightweight.
I just put it on my Kimber build and so far there is a lot to like.

I second this. Picked up the Mil version (model 50210) recently and am loving it. The MOA version can be had for several hundred dollars less.

 

[HornPorn]

These will be released soon, I’ll be picking up the one with exposed elevation and illuminated wind plex reticle for the same use case.

Fullfield 3-12x42 | Burris Optics

www.burrisoptics.com

If this was in MRAD it would be perfect

 

[z987k]

If this was in MRAD it would be perfect

I wish it was in FFP though.

 

[Dave0317]

Even if you don’t believe in drop testing, those reviews do have a lot of info other than durability/zero retention after drops.

Lots of your other preferences get discussed in those reviews as well, such as parallax adjustments, reticle usability, turret function, eye box, etc. No need to worship the drop tests to benefit from reading the review as a whole.