Rifle Setup: Christensen Ridgeline vs. Seekins PH2

[ResearchinStuff]

I have an idea.

@billydonk , can you post a picture of the bolt face on the s20 you have for sale?

 

[Lando]

Any negatives to the s20?

Looks like alot of rifle for $1100. I had a finnlight and other than the finish on the stock melting the fit and finish was very nice. I am tempted to grab a S20 but also saw the youtube review where there were feeding issues

The only negative so far happened tonight--the Sako rings completely cover up the serial number on the SWFA 3-15 scope I listed on my rifle permit for my Coues hunt in Mexico. I learned today that they actually are demanding to see the serial number on the scope when you cross the border (new this year), so I can either take the scope across not attached to the gun and deal with mounting and zeroing there (not my idea of fun) or move the scope to my Tikka 6.5 PRC (also on the rifle permit) where you can still see the serial number without removing the scope, barely.

 

[Doc Holliday]

The only negative so far happened tonight--the Sako rings completely cover up the serial number on the SWFA 3-15 scope I listed on my rifle permit for my Coues hunt in Mexico. I learned today that they actually are demanding to see the serial number on the scope when you cross the border (new this year), so I can either take the scope across not attached to the gun and deal with mounting and zeroing there (not my idea of fun) or move the scope to my Tikka 6.5 PRC (also on the rifle permit) where you can still see the serial number without removing the scope, barely.

Jeez. Good to know

 

[Lando]

Not the 85 bolt. Zero feeding issues for me.

 

[SDHNTR]

Not the 85 bolt. Zero feeding issues for me.

Nope! Not a 85, nor 75. Plunger, not fixed ejector. Ejector 9:00 to extractor, as it should be.

 

[MontanaMuley]

I would recommend that you at least hold/handle the Sako S20 Hunter before you make a final decision. Out of the two you mentioned, I'd say it's a toss up. I sold 3 other 6.5 PRCs and bought a Sako S20 Hunter in PRC after checking one out at Cabelas.

On scopes, for the money you mention, I would absolutely get a Nightforce SHV or save a bit of money and get an SWFA 3-9x42. They are both better than the Zeiss, and the Vortex isn't even in the same galaxy reliability-wise.

Circling back on this. I was able to handle the S20 at Sportsman's. Nice gun, but not for me. Configuration of the stock, action, and weight were all not to my liking.

I'm more partial to traditional stocks and have hunted with Remington 700 mountain rifle the past 6 seasons. I think this is why I'm drawn to the Christensen (based on a Rem 700 action.)

As far as glass, I think I'm going to go with a Leupold VX-5. I've looked though NF, Zeiss, Vortex, Leupold, and Swaro. To my eyes, the Leupold glass looks better (brighter) and like the lightweight and simplicity of the setup. The others were nice, but on a hunting rifle, I like to keep things lightweight and simple.

As of now, I'm leaning toward the Christensen Ridgeline with the Leupold VX5. There are only two things holding me up on the Christensen - consistency of build (could get a lemon) and stock design (doesn't fit me and have to reach for the trigger.) The former isn't as much of a concern, as I can send it back and have it fixed, but the stock design is a concern. Still haven't completely ruled out the Seekins PH2, but 75% certain this is the way I'm going to go.

Appreciate the suggestion!

 

[PredatorSlayer]

With the warranty, there is no risk going with CA. I have gone down the VX5HD route. I recommend looking at the NXS compact or Trijicon Tenmile. Glass in the VX5HD is awesome, zero retention leaves something to be desired.

 

[MontanaMuley]

With the warranty, there is no risk going with CA. I have gone down the VX5HD route. I recommend looking at the NXS compact or Trijicon Tenmile. Glass in the VX5HD is awesome, zero retention leaves something to be desired.

Thank you for the insight. I've heard nothing but good things about NF and Trijicon Tenmile and Credo. That said, the extra weight of the NF is not something I'm looking for on a mountain rifle and I haven't been able to handle a Trijicon and am not willing to roll the dice (in terms of if I will like it) on something I haven't handled.

Really appreciate the suggestions and will look at NF for future builds when weight isn't as much a concern.

 

[BigAl!]

The NXS 2.5-10 is 20.5 oz. The Leupold 2-10 is 16.4 oz, and the 3-15 with the 44mm objective is 19.2. If an extra 1 or 4 ounces is a deal breaker, that's your call. Just want you to know that the weight penalty for the NXS is minimal.

 

[PredatorSlayer]

Thank you for the insight. I've heard nothing but good things about NF and Trijicon Tenmile and Credo. That said, the extra weight of the NF is not something I'm looking for on a mountain rifle and I haven't been able to handle a Trijicon and am not willing to roll the dice (in terms of if I will like it) on something I haven't handled.

Really appreciate the suggestions and will look at NF for future builds when weight isn't as much a concern.

Good luck - just trying to save you some headache, sucks to take a hike in the backcountry and have a scope lose zero, I learned the hard way. My FFT 280AI with a tenmile 3-18x50 mounted in hawkins rings weighs 7.5 lbs. I know it was 6 ounces lighter with the VX5HD, but after hiking way back in for a week and it losing zero, I will cut the 6 ounces somewhere else.

 

[wind gypsy]

Circling back on this. I was able to handle the S20 at Sportsman's. Nice gun, but not for me. Configuration of the stock, action, and weight were all not to my liking.

I'm more partial to traditional stocks and have hunted with Remington 700 mountain rifle the past 6 seasons. I think this is why I'm drawn to the Christensen (based on a Rem 700 action.)

As far as glass, I think I'm going to go with a Leupold VX-5. I've looked though NF, Zeiss, Vortex, Leupold, and Swaro. To my eyes, the Leupold glass looks better (brighter) and like the lightweight and simplicity of the setup. The others were nice, but on a hunting rifle, I like to keep things lightweight and simple.

As of now, I'm leaning toward the Christensen Ridgeline with the Leupold VX5. There are only two things holding me up on the Christensen - consistency of build (could get a lemon) and stock design (doesn't fit me and have to reach for the trigger.) The former isn't as much of a concern, as I can send it back and have it fixed, but the stock design is a concern. Still haven't completely ruled out the Seekins PH2, but 75% certain this is the way I'm going to go.

Appreciate the suggestion!

At least it shouldn't be too hard to find a good aftermarket stock for a christensen, just not cheap.

 

[Harvey_NW]

I've never had a single issue with either of the Zeiss V4's I own. The one strapped to my pack for multiple trips with no zero checks in between went 3/3 on 1 shot kills, 2 of which were dialed shots for 330 yard frontal on a bull, and 583 on a quartering mule deer shot.

Seekins to Christensen is an apples to oranges comparison. One is custom, one is factory. If there's something more desirable about the Christensen to you, more power to ya and I hope it shoots to your expectation. If you're after the hands down higher quality and guaranteed rifle, Seekins is the answer.

 

[PredatorSlayer]

I've never had a single issue with either of the Zeiss V4's I own. The one strapped to my pack for multiple trips with no zero checks in between went 3/3 on 1 shot kills, 2 of which were dialed shots for 330 yard frontal on a bull, and 583 on a quartering mule deer shot.

Seekins to Christensen is an apples to oranges comparison. One is custom, one is factory. If there's something more desirable about the Christensen to you, more power to ya and I hope it shoots to your expectation. If you're after the hands down higher quality and guaranteed rifle, Seekins is the answer.

Seekins definitely isn’t custom…I have owned both. They both have warranties and accuracy guarantees..lol

The closest thing to a custom I have seen or owned is the Bergara Premier series of rifles. Made in georgia..the actions are butter and they shoot lights out. I own a premier approach in 6mm CM and its one of my favorite rifles.

Maybe something to consider OP - also a Rem 700 clone.

Here is a group I shot with mine at 1000 yards with factory ammo a couple weeks ago.

 

[MontanaMuley]

The NXS 2.5-10 is 20.5 oz. The Leupold 2-10 is 16.4 oz, and the 3-15 with the 44mm objective is 19.2. If an extra 1 or 4 ounces is a deal breaker, that's your call. Just want you to know that the weight penalty for the NXS is minimal.

Right on. I should have specified, I'm looking for a 3-15 magnification range. What I've noticed is that the NF beefs up to 30oz in that mag range.

 

[MontanaMuley]

Appreciate the insight @PredatorSlayer and you are right, it's not much of a weight difference. Also, nice shooting!

Yes, nothing like putting a $700 stock on a $1700 rifle haha! @wind gypsy

Thanks for the info on the Zeiss and comparison of Christensen vs. Zeiss @harvey_nw

 

[wind gypsy]

Yes, nothing like putting a $700 stock on a $1700 rifle haha! @wind gypsy

If $1700 is a lot for a rifle than why pay a lot for a rifle with a shitty stock?

 

[MontanaMuley]

If $1700 is a lot for a rifle than why pay a lot for a rifle with a shitty stock?

Right on. No argument there.

 

[Lando]

As far as glass, I think I'm going to go with a Leupold VX-5. I've looked though NF, Zeiss, Vortex, Leupold, and Swaro. To my eyes, the Leupold glass looks better (brighter) and like the lightweight and simplicity of the setup. The others were nice, but on a hunting rifle, I like to keep things lightweight and simple.

You might review posts on here about the reliability of dialing with a Leupold and retaining zero. A rifle scope is an aiming device, not a glassing mechanism, so looking through the scope doesn't tell you much of anything about how reliably the scope will hold zero and adjust to reliably deliver your bullet to the target. Some of the most expensive scopes are among the worst at functioning reliably, but they do have great glass so you can spot your missed shot because the scope doesn't dial or hold zero.

 

[MontanaMuley]

You might review posts on here about the reliability of dialing with a Leupold and retaining zero. A rifle scope is an aiming device, not a glassing mechanism, so looking through the scope doesn't tell you much of anything about how reliably the scope will hold zero and adjust to reliably deliver your bullet to the target. Some of the most expensive scopes are among the worst at functioning reliably, but they do have great glass so you can spot your missed shot because the scope doesn't dial or hold zero.

Interesting perspective and makes sense - prioritizing tracking over glass clarity. It sounds like folks on here gravitate toward NF and trijicon due to their tracking. I'll give their lighter weight scope offerings another look. Thanks for the feedback.

 

[MontanaMuley]

Update: I decided on the Seekins PH2, topped with the Leupold VX5 Firedot, and Seekins Low Rings.

Will give a more thorough review and share more thoughts once I get everything put together and sighted in.