Scope Recommendation - 400 yards

[huntsman22]

taxcheat is going to be soooo disappointed in his choice. It don't meet the original criteria of 35,36 or 40 x that he just HAD to have. We'll never hear the end of it, now...

 

[TaperPin]

Quite a conservative choice. Many guys love that scope - I predict you will indeed be able to shoot deer out to 400 yards with it.

 

[Axlrod]

Ended up going with the Nightforce ATACR 5-25x56mm with the MOA reticle. Lots of folks testified to it.

HAHAHA
That scope is NOT on your drop dead list of the ONLY 3 scopes you would even consider for 6 pages!

Post #58:
I am asking about (3) specific scopes. How in the hell is that so hard for people to weigh in on?

Post #1:
I look forward to your opinions!

 

[mxgsfmdpx]

Ended up going with the Nightforce ATACR 5-25x56mm with the MOA reticle. Lots of folks testified to it.

Definitely the best choice out of your list.

 

[Old-Cat]

This strikes me as trolling pure and simple, but for a real answer:

Get a vintage Redfield 3-9 Wideview.

You those scopes were the stuff! TV vision

 

[huntsman22]

Definitely the best choice out of your list.

Except it wasn't even on his 'list'......

 

[Axlrod]

Folks - eat my ass. The majority of those in this thread are complete dickheads. I asked for feedback on the (3) scopes. Some folks helped, but 99% didn't. I went to a forum which actually provided constructive help and figured this out in under an hour.

Again - consume my execretor.

That's not even a real word!
You are in the majority with the most posts!
Good choice on scopes, you wouldn't have liked more magnification.

 

[ihatetaxes]

That's not even a real word!
You are in the majority with the most posts!
Good choice on scopes, you wouldn't have liked more magnification.

I always have loved saying "consume my excretor" - just because it sounds hilarious.

Sure I have the most posts - I had to respond to countless stupidity in order to keep the thread on track. Oh well.

 

[fwafwow]

Sorry to have missed this thread dumpster fire. Should have gone with the ZCO. If not too late, return and switch. Everyone knows if you pay more, it’s better.

 

[PredatorSlayer]

I always have loved saying "consume my excretor" - just because it sounds hilarious.

Sure I have the most posts - I had to respond to countless stupidity in order to keep the thread on track. Oh well.

Why wasn’t tangent theta on the list?

 

[PredatorSlayer]

Ended up going with the Nightforce ATACR 5-25x56mm with the MOA reticle. Lots of folks testified to it.

Lol - how is this different than the S&B you currently have?

And it wasn’t even on your original list

 

[35WhelenAI]

Lol - how is this different than the S&B you currently have?

And it wasn’t even on your original list

Good point... more so that it's considered alpha glass and isn't cutting it vs being on the list. Good luck with the NF, hope it does what is needed.

Fwiw, you said it was a x56 mm in the first post, post #31 says x50.

 

[Kimber7man]

I was just waiting for the OP to post the reticles he was considering on the 3 scopes. Hard to give advice without knowing that important fact.

 

[Soj51hopeful]

I always have loved saying "consume my excretor" - just because it sounds hilarious.

Sure I have the most posts - I had to respond to countless stupidity in order to keep the thread on track. Oh well.

You do see the irony in all your defensive posts about how you only wanted opinions on the three scopes, didn’t want to hear about anything else then all of a sudden buy a scope not on the list because it was highly recommended right?

 

[bene-201]

Ended up going with the Nightforce ATACR 5-25x56mm with the MOA reticle. Lots of folks testified to it.

NF makes a great product

 

[StupidLightweight]

Now that we got the scope figured out, back to this tax thing.

How exactly do you avoid paying taxes on “firearms or scopes?”

I don't pay taxes on firearms or scopes, so this will be a purchase I don't worry about that on.

 

[Wyobohunter]

See comments above. Just looking for feedback on the ones I noted, not critiques of "why".

Maybe you could settle things by explaining exactly why you prefer so much magnification.

 

[Wyobohunter]

Rather than laugh at me, could you kindly explain why having a wider conduit for light to flow through wouldn't translate to improved light transmission?

I figure if the objective lens is larger, that gathers more light, then if you channel it through a larger funnel (tube diameter), you'd get more light at the eyepiece. That seems to make sense.

I won't consider lower magnification ranges but appreciate your input.

All else being equal, a larger exit pupil is what transfers more usable light to your peeper. Calculate exit pupil by dividing by objective diameter by magnification. The average person’s pupil can dilate to ≈ 5mm.

Example:
6-36x56mm FFP, 34mm tube
- 6mm @ 6 power (very good)
- 1.55mm @ 36 power (terrible)

This is physics and can’t be overcome by throwing money at the problem. While it is true that a $3,000 scope with a 3mm exit pupil will probably transmit light better that a $200 scope with a 3mm exit pupil, the $3,000 scope would transmit a lot more light with a 5mm exit pupil.

 

[Soj51hopeful]

he’s gone fellas. I think he crossed that line with the mods.

 

[trickyricky3898]

Maybe something like this?

View attachment 814939

Thats what I need