My rifle scope saga continues…

[Brontosaurus]

On a NULA, an S&B would make a classy pairing.

This

 

[Hnthrdr]

I agree most FFP reticles can be hard to see at lower magnification. This is why there should be more 3x FFP scopes out there. A lot easier to use with less magnification, and the reticle can be a lot bigger in the lower range to start with.

I'd also argue that all SFP reticles are useless in that 4-6x range because the reticle is only useful at maximum magnification. Sure you can see it better, but the marks are entirely meaningless. A 3-15 SFP at 6x means anything but a simple duplex is a waste of time since it's off by a factor that you will not be doing in your head.

This is why I like a SFP with an exposed elevation turret. I dial, I don’t hold over generally.

 

[z987k]

This is why I like a SFP with an exposed elevation turret. I dial, I don’t hold over generally.

Most people dial and hold for wind I think. But then your wind holds are only useful at max power. The solution as I see it there is to not overpower your scope. 9-12x on top max and you can actually be at that magnification if you're shooting at a distance that wind matters.

 

[ElPollo]

Ok I’ve been here done this but I just can’t make a decision. Quick catch up. I own a NULA(the OG one, not after they went to crap) in 30-06. I live in WV but hunt west once a year. I’m not a “long range” guy. I’d like to get comfortable out to 4-600 at targets. I’ve been practicing at 300 lately. It currently has a vortex diamondback on it. It works. It’s worked for 2 or 3 years. But I read the horror stories. And my hunting buddy had one that he put away fine, and right before our trip last year, got it out to shoot, and it wouldn’t hold a zero.

So now I’m terrified it’s going to go ka-poop on me in the moment of need. I don’t like carrying gear that I’m constantly worrying about.

So I want to upgrade. If I do it, I want to do it right. I’ve looked at nightforce pretty heavily, but they seem on the heavy side. Do I go with their weight even on such a light rifle? Or is there something just as reliable in a lighter design?

I’d like something in the 3-4 min power. Up to 12-15 probably

50mm max

I’m not really picky on mil/moa

Don’t necessary need to be able to dial but nice addition

Illuminated intrigues me but not needed

Like to stay under $1000, but willing to pick one up used so MSRP can be more than that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Interested in what you decided on.

 

[Treeratslayer]

Interested in what you decided on.

Ended up picking up a lightly used NF SHV 4-14. Little heavy but their reputation won me over. Really like it. The mils is a game changer for me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[amassi]

Tough to beat the s&b 3-12 x42
21 oz
Reticle useable through the entire range
At 3 power it’s a simple duplex with an illuminated + at center. At ~5x with my eyes the reticle becomes useful for wind holds and or holdovers
Will dial 4.8 mils so plenty to get you comfortable shooting long range and learning mils
Little out of your budget but worth the wait


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ElPollo]

Ended up picking up a lightly used NF SHV 4-14. Little heavy but their reputation won me over. Really like it. The mils is a game changer for me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

NF are durable scopes you can count on. I would be interested to hear how much you end up using the top end magnification. I tend to like it on paper at the range, but don’t ever seem to use it in field practice or hunting. My scopes usually stay on 6x and rarely get turned up above 8-10x. Lower magnification tends to mean that I am quicker to get on target and more likely to spot my impacts.

 

[Hnthrdr]

Most people dial and hold for wind I think. But then your wind holds are only useful at max power. The solution as I see it there is to not overpower your scope. 9-12x on top max and you can actually be at that magnification if you're shooting at a distance that wind matters.

That’s a fair point. 2-12 or 2-10 would be about perfect IMO

 

[Treeratslayer]

NF are durable scopes you can count on. I would be interested to hear how much you end up using the top end magnification. I tend to like it on paper at the range, but don’t ever seem to use it in field practice or hunting. My scopes usually stay on 6x and rarely get turned up above 8-10x. Lower magnification tends to mean that I am quicker to get on target and more likely to spot my impacts.

My last scope went to 12. I like the power. I keep it cranked down but if I have plenty of time I zoom it in. Aim small miss small. Like to pick out a specific hair


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ElPollo]

My last scope went to 12. I like the power. I keep it cranked down but if I have plenty of time I zoom it in. Aim small miss small. Like to pick out a specific hair


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I have a buddy who says that and shoots a light magnum rifle with a 6-24x scope. He also says he’s never been able to see where his shots hit and doesn’t know where the critter goes after the shot unless he is way out on the flat prairie and it has no where to hide. It all works fine until it doesn’t. We go back and forth about it in a good natured way.

 

[Treeratslayer]

I have a buddy who says that and shoots a light magnum rifle with a 6-24x scope. He also says he’s never been able to see where his shots hit and doesn’t know where the critter goes after the shot unless he is way out on the flat prairie and it has no where to hide. It all works fine until it doesn’t. We go back and forth about it in a good natured way.

Yeah there’s pros and cons for sure. It’s a heat of the moment decision. Sometimes I stay zoomed out. Depends on so many factors. Figured it might be nice to have. My dad is strictly a 3-9 guy. And outshoots me plenty. So maybe he’s on the right track lol


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[atmat]

Yeah there’s pros and cons for sure. It’s a heat of the moment decision. Sometimes I stay zoomed out. Depends on so many factors. Figured it might be nice to have. My dad is strictly a 3-9 guy. And outshoots me plenty. So maybe he’s on the right track lol


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Every good-shooting hunter I know uses lower zoom.

It’s a necessity to spot your shots, follow-up a shot, and/or see where the animal moves to.

 

[JohnJohnson]

Every good-shooting hunter I know uses lower zoom.

It’s a necessity to spot your shots, follow-up a shot, and/or see where the animal moves to.

I'll second that. I just got back from a pronghorn hunt with a Razor 6-36 (I don't have a real hunting scope at the moment) and shot mine on 15 power.

 

[atmat]

I'll second that. I just got back from a pronghorn hunt with a Razor 6-36 (I don't have a real hunting scope at the moment) and shot mine on 15 power.

Even 15 power is far more than most good shooters I know.

I almost never go past 6x now as I’ve learned to dial back.

 

[JohnJohnson]

Even 15 power is far more than most good shooters I know.

I almost never go past 6x now as I’ve learned to dial back.

Well the 6-36 has freakish FOV and eyebox, plus I was shooting a 14.5# rifle in 6.5CM with a suppressor (fully standing off my tripod). So 15 sounds like a lot but it's not with that setup.

 

[ElPollo]

Every good-shooting hunter I know uses lower zoom.

It’s a necessity to spot your shots, follow-up a shot, and/or see where the animal moves to.

I think we can get focused on our own areas and how we hunt. Spotting your shots is dependent on your equipment, but it’s also range dependent. It’s a lot easier in the west where much of the country is more open and ranges for shots tend to be longer. If you’re an eastern forest hunter and your shots are all under 50 yards in thick cover, spotting your impacts may be tougher to achieve. However, not being so point focused and using a lower magnification scope with both eyes open can at least help the shooter figure out where the animal moves after the shot and get back on target if a follow-up is needed.

 

[chindits]

I'd also argue that all SFP reticles are useless in that 4-6x range because the reticle is only useful at maximum magnification. Sure you can see it better, but the marks are entirely meaningless. A 3-15 SFP at 6x means anything but a simple duplex is a waste of time since it's off by a factor that you will not be doing in your head.

False.

Just be consistent and know your dope.

If you don’t want to max your power SFP scope choose a power that you will always use on that scope for stadia holdovers like 6x and learn your dope at that power and the lowest magnification. It isn’t that hard if you like shooting. Just be consistent and always go to your selected power. So easy Fudd’s have done it for years.

 

[Macintosh]

maybe some can. I can't, and have never seen anyone able to do so under any sort of stress, including the couple of fuddy types I know who claimed they could--when they were under any sort of time pressure they fumbled the hold as often as not. Sure, you can think about what your hashes mean at "half of max" magnification relatively easily, but staying in the gun and adjusting magnification WITHOUT checking exactly what power you are on is way more important to me, and even at that rate, in a pinch the inconsistency trips me up. I've tried it extensively, I simply could not do it. To me, at any range I legitimately need a holdover reticle or want to make wind calls using the reticle, FFP is a necessity to be at all efficient, and there are a few good hunting reticles that make this possible for me. If I just absolutely had to have a SFP scope for this purpose for some reason, it's not a want, it's a need for me that the max magnification is low enough as to be useable at relatively shorter ranges without being too zoomed in--9-10x would be better than 12x for this, and anything over about 12x would be a total deal-breaker. Been there, done that. Maybe all those fudds are smarter than me?

 

[Hnthrdr]

maybe some can. I can't, and have never seen anyone able to do so under any sort of stress, including the couple of fuddy types I know who claimed they could--when they were under any sort of time pressure they fumbled the hold as often as not. Sure, you can think about what your hashes mean at "half of max" magnification relatively easily, but staying in the gun and adjusting magnification WITHOUT checking exactly what power you are on is way more important to me, and even at that rate, in a pinch the inconsistency trips me up. I've tried it extensively, I simply could not do it. To me, at any range I legitimately need a holdover reticle or want to make wind calls using the reticle, FFP is a necessity to be at all efficient, and there are a few good hunting reticles that make this possible for me. If I just absolutely had to have a SFP scope for this purpose for some reason, it's not a want, it's a need for me that the max magnification is low enough as to be useable at relatively shorter ranges without being too zoomed in--9-10x would be better than 12x for this, and anything over about 12x would be a total deal-breaker. Been there, done that. Maybe all those fudds are smarter than me?

I tend to agree, and trijicon puts their lower magnification values in their credos… I would still be hard pressed to do that math with a big buck in the scope on the fly.

 

[atmat]

False.

Just be consistent and know your dope.

If you don’t want to max your power SFP scope choose a power that you will always use on that scope for stadia holdovers like 6x and learn your dope at that power and the lowest magnification. It isn’t that hard if you like shooting. Just be consistent and always go to your selected power. So easy Fudd’s have done it for years.

So memorize multiple “dopes/holdovers” at different mags?

That sounds awful. Mil FFP just allows me to use quick drop in <1 second at every mag.