Optics for 7 PRC

[llbaker21]

I purchased a Seekins PH2 in 7 PRC. The plan is for this to be my hunting rig. I will load rounds. The majority of rounds through it will be at steel targets with the hope to get really comfortable with the rifle. 300 yards would be a long shot for me hunting. However, I have access to 1400 yard targets and wish to put optics on the rifle adequate for that as well. I put a 3.5-28 z8i on a 6.5 CM this winter that I will also shoot at steel, though I have shot it yet. The glass is amazing. My old eyes love how well I can see through it in low light. I am tempted to put the same thing on the Seekins but would love to hear what you all think. Price of course matters but I am most concerned with performance. Again, my old eyes like low light gathering qualities. Thanks for any advice.

 

[Davisjj8]

I purchased a Seekins PH2 in 7 PRC. The plan is for this to be my hunting rig. I will load rounds. The majority of rounds through it will be at steel targets with the hope to get really comfortable with the rifle. 300 yards would be a long shot for me hunting. However, I have access to 1400 yard targets and wish to put optics on the rifle adequate for that as well. I put a 3.5-28 z8i on a 6.5 CM this winter that I will also shoot at steel, though I have shot it yet. The glass is amazing. My old eyes love how well I can see through it in low light. I am tempted to put the same thing on the Seekins but would love to hear what you all think. Price of course matters but I am most concerned with performance. Again, my old eyes like low light gathering qualities. Thanks for any advice.

Leupold mk 5 is a great scope. Can’t go wrong with the swaros.

My scope of choice would be the march F 2.5-25x52. It’s great glass, turrets track perfectly, and it’s very light for a FFP with the amount of elevation travel it has.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[TxLite]

I had a kahles 525 on my prs rig. I don’t think I ever got it above 15-18x shooting out to 1100 in a match. You really don’t need a ton of zoom to reach out there.

For your hunting at 300 yards I’d be comfortable with a 10x on the top end, but if you want to use the same scope for targets at 1000 then new maven rs1.2 2.5-15 would work great for your application in my opinion.

 

[IrkedCitizen]

I don't understand why people think their cartridge needs a specific optic. Buy a scope that is proven reliable and you shouldn't have any issues on your 7prc.

As far as magnification, 6x is deadly past 300 yards.

 

[llbaker21]

Thanks all. I have not viewed a March or a Maven before. I will take a look at them.

Probably because I am used to a SFP with simple reticles, I have not considered a FFP. I have one with the Tremor reticle and I don't really enjoy it. I see the value if hold over is coming from your reticle, but I plan to dial for yardage. Is there a reason to go with a FFP if I don't use a BDC reticle?

Thanks

 

[IrkedCitizen]

Anymore I won't entertain a scope if it isn't FFP and MIL. FFP has correct subtensions throughout the entire magnification range. MIL over MOA because adjustments are 0.10" increments versus 0.25" increments.

 

[dirtytough]

MIL over MOA because adjustments are 0.10" increments versus 0.25" increments.

That’s true depending on the yardage you are adjusting for. To move 0.1” with a MIL scope I believe your target would be @27.78 yards away.



Op if I was shooting out to 1400 yards I would want 15x-18x. 6x magnification would be tough at that distance.

Light gathering has a lot to do with exit pupil size. 10x magnification with a 40mm objective gives you a 4mm exit pupil. I believe the max exit pupil humans can utilize is 4mm-5mm. So if you are on 8x magnification for a 300 yard shot you would only need a 40mm objective rifle scope.

Since you are hunting to 300 yards something in the 3-15/18 range mag wise would be pretty decent for hunting/target shooting.

 

[Article 4]

I had a kahles 525 on my prs rig. I don’t think I ever got it above 15-18x shooting out to 1100 in a match. You really don’t need a ton of zoom to reach out there.

For your hunting at 300 yards I’d be comfortable with a 10x on the top end, but if you want to use the same scope for targets at 1000 then new maven rs1.2 2.5-15 would work great for your application in my opinion.

Also run Kahles on 7 of my rigs. Kahles is a swaro comapny so if you like the swaro high end glass and couple that with nightforce like turrets and tracking - then Kahles is the right scope for you

 

[IrkedCitizen]

That’s true depending on the yardage you are adjusting for. To move 0.1” with a MIL scope I believe your target would be @27.78 yards away.



Op if I was shooting out to 1400 yards I would want 15x-18x. 6x magnification would be tough at that distance.

Light gathering has a lot to do with exit pupil size. 10x magnification with a 40mm objective gives you a 4mm exit pupil. I believe the max exit pupil humans can utilize is 4mm-5mm. So if you are on 8x magnification for a 300 yard shot you would only need a 40mm objective rifle scope.

Since you are hunting to 300 yards something in the 3-15/18 range mag wise would be pretty decent for hunting/target shooting.

If I am shooting at 1000 yards and my kestrel says my adjustment is 6.12 UP. With a MIL scope I can adjust to 6.10 whereas with MOA I'd have to adjust 6.00 or 6.25.

I also never said that 6x was top magnification I would use. I simply said that 6x is plenty to kill animals at 300yd. So as long as the scope has 6x in its zoom range then you are good. You definitely don't need 25x to shoot 1400 and it's overkill for the ranges the OP hunts.

 

[Balderdash]

I have a Bushy LRHS 3-12 on mine. Have shot the ranges you stated and have not wished for more X.

The LRHS reticle can be controversial, but I like it for all around big game use that might include both long shots and close shots at moving game in heavy cover. For open country hunting and target shooting, there are better options than the LRHS and other "doughnut" reticles.

Lot of good options listed, but if you like higher X yet still want a simpler reticle, the SWFA 5-20HD might be a good option. Solid mechanically and, FWIW, glass on the HD'S is pretty good.

Like some have stated, I'm primarily interested in FFP. I can suffer a SFP that tops out at 10x, but still prefer a well designed FFP. Its too important to maintain FOV on long shots at game. Further, being at lower X enables settling in for shots much quicker because the inconsequential tiny movements aren't magnified.

 

[dirtytough]

If I am shooting at 1000 yards and my kestrel says my adjustment is 6.12 UP. With a MIL scope I can adjust to 6.10 whereas with MOA I'd have to adjust 6.00 or 6.25.

I also never said that 6x was top magnification I would use. I simply said that 6x is plenty to kill animals at 300yd. So as long as the scope has 6x in its zoom range then you are good. You definitely don't need 25x to shoot 1400 and it's overkill for the ranges the OP hunts.

Your 1000 yard scenario could end up spitting out 6.15 UP. What happens then with a MIL scope? You decide to dial 6.1 or 6.2. Pretty basic. Just like if you had an MOA scope and it said to dial 6.12 UP. You would dial 6 or 6.25. Basic.

I’m not sure what that has to do with you saying you can adjust a MIL scope in 0.1” increments though.

 

[Kimber7man]

For a SFP you could go NXS 5.5-22. SFP with an elevation turret has not bothered me because if I'm shooting longer range, I'm dialing not holding off the reticle.

 

[llbaker21]

Well, I spoke with the Swaro folks at SCI and came away with a Kahles 525i in mil mil. It is not much of a hunting scope in my opinion, there is just a lot reticle and it is heavy, but for the hunting I do it will be fine. Thanks for all the advice.

 

[Article 4]

Well, I spoke with the Swaro folks at SCI and came away with a Kahles 525i in mil mil. It is not much of a hunting scope in my opinion, there is just a lot reticle and it is heavy, but for the hunting I do it will be fine. Thanks for all the advice.

It is heavy, most quality items are. You will love it as a hunting scope; appreciate low light capabilities and that if you do have to turn it up to 25, you won’t lose anything.

 

[llbaker21]

I have been putting off spending the time to get comfortable with FFP. This is as good of a time as any to do that. Thanks

 

[AirborneA$$hole]

Nightforce NX8 2.5-20x50. It's FFP, mil or moa, low enough magnification for close shots and high enough magnification for long shots, and it has an illuminated reticle. It's pricey though.
A good budget option, IMO and experience, is the Vortex Strike Eagle 3-18x44. FFP, and I think it also comes in mil or moa. Low enough and high enough magnification for your needs, and it also comes with an illuminated reticle. I own and have frequently shot both, and I think both are good options. I will say that the nightforce seems a little nicer, has a clearer image, and collects more light.

 

[hunting1]

SWFA 3-15 at 23 oz is hard to beat IMHO.

 

[ultrarunner]

Using an NXS 2.5-10x42. it’s an SFP in mil or moa (I like mils) . I like the SFP for hunting as the reticle on FFP is so damn small it’s hard to find it when zoomed all the way out. It’s also insanely light weight. Word of caution though, if you have a split rail action, the rings you choose may not fit.

The 10x is more than I need too. A lot of guys like to have as much zoom as possible but you’re paying a weight penalty to have all sorts of zoom that you probably won’t use in 99% of hunting scenarios.

My .02.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[MOwhitetail]

I have been putting off spending the time to get comfortable with FFP. This is as good of a time as any to do that. Thanks

Sounds like you found a good option. I’ll tell you a story that made me a believer in FFP. I always thought FFP was for comp guns and I didn’t need/want one on a hunting rifle. A month ago I was out in the mountains. I had a trophy rock chuck in my sights at 850 yards. I I dialed my elevation and held off for wind using my reticle. I pulled the trigger and watched as my bullet impacted several feet left of my target. Thought I made an extreme error in my wind call until I looked at the zoom. I was only at 8x on my 3-15 SFP scope. I was basically holding twice what I intended. Luckily it was a rock chuck instead of a real trophy animal, but that made a believer out of me.