Maven, Leupold, Trijicon, NF

[stayzeroed]

Here's a horse at 9X zoom with a 42mm objective at 43 yards. I think you're overestimating the "difficulty" of killing on 6x at 70 yards.

View attachment 787642

I get what your saying, but that horse is standing still and you likely have a good rest.

 

[JohnJohnson]

No shade caught, but please understand the clarification that I made. I have not owned an LHT before, what failed in your optic? Does it seem to be widespread?

I used and then sold an LHT last year. I didn't experience a failure but the turret feel as far as the "clicks" was I think one of the worst I've ever felt. Astonishingly bad for the pricepoint. Though in my opinion the "glass" actually did quite well for its price.

 

[Strider]

No shade caught, but please understand the clarification that I made. I have not owned an LHT before, what failed in your optic? Does it seem to be widespread?

Clarification noted.
I had the original LH on a light .300wby mag. After maybe 50ish rnds it was shooting shotgun sized groups. Sent it in and was told it was "broken". Suprise suprise. They sent me the LHT 3-15. I honestly really liked the scope. The issues were almost all in zero retention and tracking. Had a lot of shots that broke perfect but impact wasnt where the shot was breaking. A lot of adjusting a couple clicks and the impact not following that on target. After hard use zero would be off by about 1moa. A lot of this Could have been mounting and the nut behind the trigger but after just switching to a know reliable scope on the same rifle my shooting somehow improved and there was zero silliness at the range. This was all before for I read the drop evaluation of the LHT which lined up to my experience.

Drop evaluation

Vortex Razor HD LHT 4.5-22x50mm Field Eval

Ryan Avery asked if I would review this scope in the same vein as the Meopta Optika 6 and Tanget Theta evaluations and I agreed. I get queried about these scopes almost as much as any, and even though I have seen poor performance from the prior LHT’s, this is a different design and will be...

rokslide.com

 

[AlwaysChasinTailNHorns]

Have a whiskey and for its price point I like them. However I had one before they had a zero stop and lost a deer that way. Moved up to a tango and wasn’t thrilled with it. So while I’d go back to a whiskey for a mid grade scope, looking for higher end and don’t think sig fits that bill

Totally get it man! Luckily I have the zero stop feature on mine but I just figured I’d toss my two cents in the hat. I will say I got two buddies who shoot trijicons on their rifles and they haven’t ever complained about a thing and I’ve seen those scopes go through the ringer in the back country and perform time and time again.

 

[Nards444]

Here's a horse at 9X zoom with a 42mm objective at 43 yards. I think you're overestimating the "difficulty" of killing on 6x at 70 yards.

View attachment 787642

Guess it comes down to preference. I dont find that hard either. I routinely zero at 100yds on 5-6 power. Like I said where this scope will be used im not worried about taking 50 yd shots, deer dont sneak up on you in this terrain. Even if one did, Im willing to risk that small probability against having higher magnification at range.

 

[Macintosh]

I’ll be the first to say that I very, very, very strongly prefer a low powered scope for close range stuff, i can make 4-8x work at short range too, but its far from ideal especially if recoil is involved. Its just crazy easy to lose the animal from your field of view and not be able to pick it up again because one hop has it outside a narrow field of view. And its often a follow up or trying to stay on the animal becausenit moved just as you were about to swueeze the trigger, rather than just a simple first shot. I just dropped close to $1000 on a new 1-6x because the 3-9 Id been using was too narrow at 3x.

That said, this isnt the situation the OP is in and it doesnt seem this scope matters whether low magnification is 2x or 8x. I would be far more concerned with whether a reticle in a higher-powered ffp scope is usable against a broken background at all at 6-8x, than I would be about exactly what the low magnification is. I have a 5-25 and a 4.5-29 scope in front of me right here, and neither reticle is at all useable below about 8x if the background is at all brushy or poorly lit.

 

[Marbles]

I found the SWFA 6x to be poor at close range. Not hunting, but sub 10 foot brain shots on pigs that would not let me get closer, it was hard to make sure I was aiming at the correct spot on their head.

No applicable to the OP's situation, but I like a low low end magnification. The near defensive encounters were I thought I might need to DLP an animal have been sub 20 feet.

 

[diverc18]

Maven Rs1.2 2.5-15 is my pick. It never leaves 6x and have taken shots from 15 yards out to 400. Still have the option for 15x or 2.5x if preferred. And the reticle is great

 

[R7RMag]

I have a Christensen arms mesa in 7mm rem mag and originally bought the Maven RS.5 because they didn’t have the 1.2 in stock. Immediately after mounting the scope I realized it was HUGE for that rifle, and that rifle isn’t exactly small. So I sent it back and decided I’d just wait for the 1.2. Glad I did. Fits the rifle much better, has zero stop and illuminated reticle just like the 5 and is $200 cheaper. I wouldn’t go bigger than the 1.2 for a traditional hunting rifle.

 

[neill_88]

Rifle Scope Field Evaluations

rokslide.com

Maven rs 1.2
Tenmile 3-18
Nightforce nx8 4-32 f1

Can’t go wrong with any of these.

 

[Mtank79]

^^^ What he said.

While those scopes you mention are each pretty cool pieces of equipment - here are a couple of things to consider:

1) Anything above 15-18x, and you're almost certainly going to lose the animal in your scope when you shoot. Almost no animal goes down on first shot if you're doing a heart/lung shot.

2) The scopes going way above 18x have become the rage largely because of PRS games. Those go on very heavy rifles, mostly shooting light-recoiling cartridges, on targets that didn't evolve to blend into the environment. In that context, shooters actually get use and value out of higher top-end magnification. PRS isn't field realities, however, where it's easy to lose an animal in your scope with recoil, darkness, etc.

3) Those PRS scopes are chonky, heavy instruments. More mag, especially larger mag ranges, generally means heavier scopes. The places were higher magnification would theoretically help are also the same places (ie, western big game hunting) where you're going to be hauling your gun and gear the greatest distances and altitude gains/loses. Light is good, at least to the point where it becomes less reliable.

4) I have very expensive taste in glass, having been quite a fan of Swarovskis. But new information and perspective changes minds. The next hunting scope I'll be giving a shot is the Maven RS 1.2. That might say something. I don't expect it to have as good of glass or low-light capability of my Swarovskis, but at this point, subject to personal validation later on, it may be one of the most optimal hunting scopes out there.

I prefer a lightweight scopes & didn’t have good luck with my z5 swaro purchase. That being said I keep looking at the x5i 3.5x18.

Looking for my first high end scope. Want to keep it to these 4 brands, been down a ton of rabbit holes already but have it narrowed down. I would consider myself a mid range shooter in the 300-500 range, with longest take on a deer being 700. So 7-800 yards is important. This is an out west gun where I have never shot anything under 300yds. Light properties are important, along with clarity and durability. We do a lot of turret work so that important.

These are all the same price relatively, with the Maven on the low end and the NF on the higher end.

Maven RS.5 maybe RS.3, 4-24x50
Trijicon Tenmile HX 5-25x50
Leupold VX5HD 4-20x52
NF NX8 4-32x50

Maven and Trijicon both have a 56mm reticle that looks attractive as well.

Sort of hesitant on boutique brands like Maven, only been around 10 years, long term warranty claims. NF almost falls into that, as well as being heavier and people not liking the reticle. Ive read some of the zero issues with Leupold, but dont know how much stock to put into it. The one brand I have not any rumor mill stuff from is trijicon

At the price point/weights you’ve mentioned I will give you another option & I doubt any of the ones you’ve mentioned touch it in glass quality . Eurooptic has a demo swaro x5i 5x25 demo for $1599,

 

[Nards444]

Figured I would circle back for the next guy looking. Ended up at Cabelas twice to look at NF, looked at the 2.5-20 and 4-32 NX8. Feel and look of the scope looked like quality. the 4-32 tunneled really bad and I couldn't get to fit my eye very well, the 2.5-20 was better. They were both FFP scopes, and the cross hairs were useless, until cranked up half way, which is possibly expected on FFP. However comparing both of those to a Zeiss V6, glass was subpar, was dark in a light up store. Didn't compare side by side but same day looked a Vortex venom and that glass was all of the NF. Bottom line here, I wanted to get the NF really bad, but I couldn't handle the $2k price tag for average glass and tunneling.

Ended up taking a runner on a Trijicon tenmile 4.5-30. Glad I did. Glass is clearer and brighter and is clear edge to edge, with no black ring like the 4-32 NF. To be fair the Trijicon does tunnel some at around 25 power, but again is expected. I got the MOA long range reticle, which Im not crazy about, but it is simple and uncluttered. Really like the scope. Dials move smoothly IMO, maybe not as crisp as the nightforce. Haven't shot yet, just mounted and played around with it outside. Trijicon also came with Neoprene scope cover, Tenebrex scope covers, sun shade and lens pen

 

[JohnJohnson]

To be fair the Trijicon does tunnel some at around 25 power, but again is expected

Tunneling in the way people use it for scopes means decreasing the magnification and the image gets smaller but the FOV does not increase. Glad you like the Trijicon though, seems like many do.

 

[Nards444]

Tunneling in the way people use it for scopes means decreasing the magnification and the image gets smaller but the FOV does not increase. Glad you like the Trijicon though, seems like many do.

I get that, just pointing out at what power the scope tunnels.

 

[JohnJohnson]

I get that, just pointing out at what power the scope tunnels.

To be clear, you are saying the Trijicon image gets darker at 25x right?

 

[Nards444]

To be clear, you are saying the Trijicon image gets darker at 25x right?

What I mean by tunneling is looking through the scope it gets harder to maintain a crisp view and has an effect of black rings around the edges and harder to maintain a sight picture

 

[Encore4me]

I have a Nightforce NX8 2.5-20, if I had to do it over again I would get the NXS 2.5-10 or 3.5-15. It would still be a Nightforce though. I don’t know if Leupold even belongs in the high end scope talk anymore.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk