PRS scope that passes drop eval?

[ddowning]

and yet Leupold, Kahles, and Vortex are on every podium.

Why are mid-pack and below shooters unable to be competitive because their scopes don't hold zero, but the top shooters are winning with scopes that don't hold zero?

If a scope breaks that's one thing. But a scope that tracks fairly consistently (not even accurately) and zero moves a tenth up and two tenths right over the course of a match isn't costing anyone a Golden Bullet.

Zero boards are saving them. I have literally zeroed a Vortex scope at my house on a gun that would shoot 20 shots into a half inch, put it in the car, driven 4 hours to the match and had to move the zero 2 clicks after checking zero on the zero board. Now, on matches with no zero board, it will make a difference. Also, one shot over the course of an entire season will lose you a golden bullet. Yeah, any equipment issue can cause you to lose and a scope that shifts zero is on the list. The list of stuff that can cause your zero to move is quite long. However, when you can consistently shrink a small group by 50% or more just by swapping the scope and you can remove the problem of a shifting zero just by swapping the scope, it would seem the scope is the issue.

Also, most people in the comp world have been checking tracking for years. Most scopes track accurately now and even more (nearly all) track consistently. Also, losing zero is on a spectrum. Some scopes hold zero unless dropped or really bounced around, some won't even hold zero under normal use, some won't hold for a car ride, and some, like a typical NF or Trijicon, will hold zero through some abuse. That's to say nothing for barrel to action fitment, bedding, base, rings, action screws, etc that can also cause problems.

 

[alexnelon]

Zero boards are saving them. I have literally zeroed a Vortex scope at my house on a gun that would shoot 20 shots into a half inch, put it in the car, driven 4 hours to the match and had to move the zero 2 clicks after checking zero on the zero board. Now, on matches with no zero board, it will make a difference. Also, one shot over the course of an entire season will lose you a golden bullet. Yeah, any equipment issue can cause you to lose and a scope that shifts zero is on the list. The list of stuff that can cause your zero to move is quite long. However, when you can consistently shrink a small group by 50% or more just by swapping the scope and you can remove the problem of a shifting zero just by swapping the scope, it would seem the scope is the issue.

Also, most people in the comp world have been checking tracking for years. Most scopes track accurately now and even more (nearly all) track consistently. Also, losing zero is on a spectrum. Some scopes hold zero unless dropped or really bounced around, some won't even hold zero under normal use, some won't hold for a car ride, and some, like a typical NF or Trijicon, will hold zero through some abuse. That's to say nothing for barrel to action fitment, bedding, base, rings, action screws, etc that can also cause problems.

This is all true.

Also, none of it matters for PRS or else NF would be on every rifle. That's my whole point. As long as you are shooting in an environment where you can track your zero shot-to-shot, it does not matter if your scope can pass the RS drop eval. You don't need it to. Other things are more important in the game. Not hunting, the game you're playing.

 

[Hydra6]

All true to an extent. Bad shooters always blame gear though and always think they can buy points.

I have a solid rifle and haven't had to slip a turret in 3 years, but if I handed my entire setup to a new or poor shooter to shoot a match, after 4 stages of abject failure 90% of them would be questioning and complaining about the gear.

Most people can't shoot well enough to notice a 1-2 tenth shift, but everybody thinks they can.

Every guy who pulled a shot 4 tenths left on the final stage with the match on the line will convince themselves it was an equipment failure long before they admit their nerves got to them.

Junk scopes fail constantly, and guys using scopes that fail drop evals win matches left and right. Both are true.

For hunting, yes it's mandatory to have a scope that doesn't move. For PRS, $2k on ammo will buy you way more points than $2k on a scope.

I shoot a lot of PRS - one of the local pros a few weeks ago had one of the biggest names in PRS scopes shift 3 inches of zero at 100 yards after riding in a side by side. Multiple top pros have moved from big name scope brands due to wandering zeros.

I have good luck so far with my Vortex Razor G3 but if I get a zero shift at an event then I am moving on. I moved to a Nightforce ATACR 7-35 on my PRS22 rig after wandering zero on another brand scope.

 

[Lawnboi]

This is all true.

Also, none of it matters for PRS or else NF would be on every rifle. That's my whole point. As long as you are shooting in an environment where you can track your zero shot-to-shot, it does not matter if your scope can pass the RS drop eval. You don't need it to. Other things are more important in the game. Not hunting, the game you're playing.

Maybe it dosnt matter to some. It does to me. Being able to trust my zero, and tracking allows me to focus on stuff that actually matters.

Your saying a reliable scope for PRS and nrl dosnt matter, that’s just not the case.

Scopes don’t take a beating at a match like they do in the mountains that is a fact.

 

[alexnelon]

Your saying a reliable scope for PRS and nrl dosnt matter

No, I'm saying that reliable for hunting and reliable for games are not even close to the same thing, and having a "hunting reliable" scope on a gamer gun does not add a ton of value, which is proven out by the fact that basically no one wins with NF, and no one really has problems with razors and vx5s, even though they are proven for a fact to be unreliable in a hunting scenario.

 

[LongWayAround]

I don't know much about these things having just shot my first couple matches last year.

But...

At one of them, a guy who is regarded as being a very good shooter was complaining about how his scope lost zero after the gun was accidentally knocked over (presumably setting on the bipod) by someone else. This individual basically cashed out from whatever stages they had remaining and the zero range was closed.

I don't know what he had for a scope or rings.

It seems like it matters that your scope holds up to some minor abuse.

 

[Hydra6]

No, I'm saying that reliable for hunting and reliable for games are not even close to the same thing, and having a "hunting reliable" scope on a gamer gun does not add a ton of value, which is proven out by the fact that basically no one wins with NF, and no one really has problems with razors and vx5s, even though they are proven for a fact to be unreliable in a hunting scenario.

Austin Buschman runs a NF ATACR 7-35 - is he a no one?

 

[Hydra6]

 

[Hydra6]

I would suggest that for PRS - Leupold is at a great price point plus features. Tangent Theta and Zero Compromise are extremely expensive and with a lot of cool kid flex. Kahles is losing market share to TT and ZCO. Vortex is losing market share. New March scope is interesting.

Will be very interesting to see how many PRS competitors move to the NX6 6-36

 

[Lawnboi]

No, I'm saying that reliable for hunting and reliable for games are not even close to the same thing, and having a "hunting reliable" scope on a gamer gun does not add a ton of value, which is proven out by the fact that basically no one wins with NF, and no one really has problems with razors and vx5s, even though they are proven for a fact to be unreliable in a hunting scenario.

I guess agree to disagree. I don’t know any serious shooters who knowingly run an unreliable scope in any comp. I don’t shoot a ton of PRS or NRL so may not be the most knowledgeable but I do know enough to know that reliability is a big deal even for a mid pack shooter like myself. Not everyone knows about the Rokslide tests, and iv never seen a comp rifle dropped 36”. What I am saying as a PRS shooter I value reliability and realize it’s hard to improve skill when you’re chasing mechanical issues.

Plenty of guys do good with Nightforce as well, have you been to many PRS matches?

 

[Formidilosus]

View attachment 1012244

Not that what PRS uses means much, but it is interesting that NF has the same top placements as ZCO and TT.

 

[Formidilosus]

I guess agree to disagree. I don’t know any serious shooters who knowingly run an unreliable scope in any comp. I don’t shoot a ton of PRS or NRL so may not be the most knowledgeable but I do know enough to know that reliability is a big deal even for a mid pack shooter like myself. Not everyone knows about the Rokslide tests, and iv never seen a comp rifle dropped 36”. What I am saying as a PRS shooter I value reliability and realize it’s hard to improve skill when you’re chasing mechanical issues.

Plenty of guys do good with Nightforce as well, have you been to many PRS matches?

Oh one of the best competitors in history knowingly used a scope with a known vertical shift of .2-.4 mil day to day. But his gun legit shot 20 rounds groups of less than 4” vertical at 800 yards, and he would adjust his data on the fly.

I’m not saying it’s a good idea or makes sense, but I could and have used scopes in PRS/field matches that will lose zero, and still place well or win.

 

[Hydra6]

Oh one of the best competitors in history knowingly used a scope with a known vertical shift of .2-.4 mil day to day. But his gun legit shot 20 rounds groups of less than 4” vertical at 800 yards, and he would adjust his data on the fly.

I’m not saying it’s a good idea or makes sense, but I could and have used scopes in PRS/field matches that will lose zero, and still place well or win.

You sure are muddying the water here on scope zero retention.

 

[Lawnboi]

Oh one of the best competitors in history knowingly used a scope with a known vertical shift of .2-.4 mil day to day. But his gun legit shot 20 rounds groups of less than 4” vertical at 800 yards, and he would adjust his data on the fly.

I’m not saying it’s a good idea or makes sense, but I could and have used scopes in PRS/field matches that will lose zero, and still place well or win.

Good shooters can make stuff like that work and adjust on the fly. I do know shooters that are not afraid to adjust their solver on the fly, based on who knows what.

Someone just getting into it means they are going to burn a hole in the ditch for 10 rounds and be scratching their head.

 

[alexnelon]

Austin Buschman runs a NF ATACR 7-35 - is he a no one?

Of course not. I wasn't speaking literally.

Austin is great, but Morgun won the bullet shooting a Leupold that will lose zero from a stiff breeze.

If you want to shoot matches with your hunting rifle like I do, get a scope that is solid. But reconcile in your mind that hunting and gaming are not the same and you can't assign values to one based on the other.

Every top shooter will pick certain features that they feel are more important than maintaining zero through the car ride to the range, and for the game of PRS, they're right.

I would take a SWFA on a hunting gun over a Leupold mark 5 every time, but vice versa on a comp gun.

 

[Hydra6]

Good shooters can make stuff like that work and adjust on the fly. I do know shooters that are not afraid to adjust their solver on the fly, based on who knows what.

Someone just getting into it means they are going to burn a hole in the ditch for 10 rounds and be scratching their head.

How many people reading RokSlide and adjust on the fly as you describe? Also, that adjusting on the fly is based on making a great shot, seeing the impact, and making a great correction on the fly (including some mental math). Yeah, I took the classes from the top pros too.

That mule deer or elk may not hang around for that.

 

[alexnelon]

You sure are muddying the water here on scope zero retention.

No he's not. Hunting and playing a game are not the same.

The water is muddy from people assuming that what is true for hard use must also be true for soft use. It's not.

 

[Hydra6]

No he's not. Hunting and playing a game are not the same.

The water is muddy from people assuming that what is true for hard use must also be true for soft use. It's not.

Those nuances will not communicate well. I see the quotes writing themselves.

 

[benconfused]

General question that seems appropriate for this thread as I start my NRLH journey. What do you guys typically look for in the way of scope requirements?

Thinking of things like scope power, reticle, tube diameter, weight, etc. Please include a little bit of the "why" with your answer. Thank you!

 

[Lawnboi]

No he's not. Hunting and playing a game are not the same.

The water is muddy from people assuming that what is true for hard use must also be true for soft use. It's not.

Hitting targets is hitting targets.

Maybe not a big deal to everyone but it is to me. I value the same in a scope be it for hunting or PRS.