Scope recommendations for 6.5 CM Barrett Fieldcraft

[texag10]

I recently purchased a Barrett Fieldcraft in 6.5 CM with a 21" barrel. I plan to use the rifle for hunting mule deer, pronghorn, black bear, and the occasional cow elk as well as practicing shooting in the field to gain/maintain proficiency for hunting. Most hunting will be in my new home of CO, but I might go to WY for pronghorn on occasion. I would like to be effective for 400 yard shots on game when my skills are there and be able to stretch to 6-700 yards for practicing. I plan to buy a steel plate to set up for shooting. I'm new to bolt action rifle shooting, most of my experience is with pistols and ARs at 300 yards and in.

Currently I have a Bushnell 3-12 LRHS on backorder at a price of $1000. The shipping date I was given has come and gone, so I am going to miss the 30% rebate period (ends 3/30) that was originally factored into my price. I like the low profile elevation turret with zero stop, FFP reticle with useful holds, and capped windage turret of the LRHS, but it is a bit large and heavy (~25oz) for a 5 lb rifle.

I have the option to cancel my order and get a new NF 3-10 SHV with MOAR reticle for $799 shipped. I lose the zero stop and FFP reticle, but still have useful holds on the reticle. I have seen other people fashion a shim based zero stop for the elevation turret on the NF and would get a slightly more compact and lighter scope. I figure on longer shots on targets I can just pull the cap on the turret and dial elevation and use the has marks to hold wind with the reticle.

Any input on what I should do would be appreciated.

 

[sheephunteralaska]

Either a Leupold VX3i 2.5-8 with a custom shop CDS installed or a Swaro Z3 3-9. I have the Swaro on that exact same rifle you have and a Leupold on the 6.5-55 Swede Fieldcraft

The Leupold will go a touch past 700 yds with the load I'm using in one turn. The Swaro I am old schooling it with hash marked elevation changes and again just past 700 yds with one turn.

Putting those large objective 30mm heavy scopes IMO defeats the purpose of buying these lightweight rifles. Especially when shooting your farthest practice distances of 700 yds and under.

The 6.5C weight is 6lbs 4oz
The 6.5-55 weight is 6lbs 8oz (that rifle is a long action BTW)

 

[Formidilosus]

I recently purchased a Barrett Fieldcraft in 6.5 CM with a 21" barrel. I plan to use the rifle for hunting mule deer, pronghorn, black bear, and the occasional cow elk as well as practicing shooting in the field to gain/maintain proficiency for hunting. Most hunting will be in my new home of CO, but I might go to WY for pronghorn on occasion. I would like to be effective for 400 yard shots on game when my skills are there and be able to stretch to 6-700 yards for practicing. I plan to buy a steel plate to set up for shooting. I'm new to bolt action rifle shooting, most of my experience is with pistols and ARs at 300 yards and in.

Currently I have a Bushnell 3-12 LRHS on backorder at a price of $1000. The shipping date I was given has come and gone, so I am going to miss the 30% rebate period (ends 3/30) that was originally factored into my price. I like the low profile elevation turret with zero stop, FFP reticle with useful holds, and capped windage turret of the LRHS, but it is a bit large and heavy (~25oz) for a 5 lb rifle.

I have the option to cancel my order and get a new NF 3-10 SHV with MOAR reticle for $799 shipped. I lose the zero stop and FFP reticle, but still have useful holds on the reticle. I have seen other people fashion a shim based zero stop for the elevation turret on the NF and would get a slightly more compact and lighter scope. I figure on longer shots on targets I can just pull the cap on the turret and dial elevation and use the has marks to hold wind with the reticle.

Any input on what I should do would be appreciated.

This week I mounted a NF 2.5-10x32mm on a 6.5 Ceedmoor Fieldcraft. Also have the LRHS, SWFA 6x and 3-9x SS, and 2.5-10x42mm NF on Fieldcrafts. I do not, not had anyone that has shot them prefer the MOAR reticle. The 3-12x LRHS, 6x and 3-9x SWFA SS’s are what I would use do to reliability, durability, reticle and ease of use.

Either a Leupold VX3i 2.5-8 with a custom shop CDS installed or a Swaro Z3 3-9. I have the Swaro on that exact same rifle you have and a Leupold on the 6.5-55 Swede Fieldcraft

The Leupold will go a touch past 700 yds with the load I'm using in one turn. The Swaro I am old schooling it with hash marked elevation changes and again just past 700 yds with one turn.

Putting those large objective 30mm heavy scopes IMO defeats the purpose of buying these lightweight rifles. Especially when shooting your farthest practice distances of 700 yds and under.

Not really. A sub 7lb Fieldcraft with a correctly functioning and extremely durable scope is a fantastic setup. The distances dictate the scope and once you start shooting past 100-200 yards correct functioning and reliability are paramount. Having used miltiole
examples of both of your suggestions, I couldn’t recommend either beyond set and forget close range shooting... and barely at that.

 

[texag10]

Thanks to both of you for your reply. I am definitely going to get a scope that has a reputation for precise and repeatable performance from the turrets.

Down the road I might get a NF NX8, I think that would be a good light option, but I'm not sure how it would perform in lower light. I think I will stick with the Bushnell for now. If I get the rifle well before the scope I can always mount the 1-6.5 optic from my AR to start getting some time with it.

 

[fatbacks]

I put a Leupold VX-6 2-12 on my 6.5 Fieldcraft. It is a 30mm scope and just too big for the rifle. I only put it on there because it was the only spare scope I had laying around. I have a Leupold 2.5-8 with CDS dial on my other custom 6.5 mtn hunting rifle and think it will be way better balanced and appropriate for the intent of a lightweight mtn hunting rifle - I have not shot it yet though as it should be finished up and ready for range time next month.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[sheephunteralaska]

A Leupold or Swar that Ive suggested are examples of high quality. I'd be willing to bet the VX3 series of 2.5-8 are on 10x's more hunting rifles then the optics you have suggested combined. Stating these are only recommended for close range "set and forget" is ridiculous......past 100-200 yards they are not reliable in your "vast experience" is actually laughable. But to each their own I guess. My choices of scopes have never hindered my 50 plus days of mountain hunting in Alaska a year on ranges out to 687 yds on sheep.

 

[Formidilosus]

A Leupold or Swar that Ive suggested are examples of high quality. I'd be willing to bet the VX3 series of 2.5-8 are on 10x's more hunting rifles then the optics you have suggested combined. Stating these are only recommended for close range "set and forget" is ridiculous......past 100-200 yards they are not reliable in your "vast experience" is actually laughable. But to each their own I guess. My choices of scopes have never hindered my 50 plus days of mountain hunting in Alaska a year on ranges out to 687 yds on sheep.

I’m unsure how the amount of scopes that are on rifles has anything to do with proving they work correctly? Walmart blister packs are probably on 100x more rifles than Leupolds....

I’ve seen better than a dozen each VX3i’s and Z3’s in the last year and none of them I would trust for dialing consistently and reliably. Having actually used them in direct comparison to other scopes makes it an easy pass.

 

[R H Clark]

A Leupold or Swar that Ive suggested are examples of high quality. I'd be willing to bet the VX3 series of 2.5-8 are on 10x's more hunting rifles then the optics you have suggested combined. Stating these are only recommended for close range "set and forget" is ridiculous......past 100-200 yards they are not reliable in your "vast experience" is actually laughable. But to each their own I guess. My choices of scopes have never hindered my 50 plus days of mountain hunting in Alaska a year on ranges out to 687 yds on sheep.

I don't doubt that you are correct about the ratio of scopes on rifles, but I also have no doubt that it's only because most hunters evaluate scopes by glass quality first and reliability of adjustments somewhere down the list if they even think about it at all.

I'm not saying that a Leupold wouldn't adjust reliably at all, but I would never expect one to be as reliable in adjustment day in and day out as a Nightforce, SWFA, or Bushnell LRHS. They just aren't made to hold up to it with heavier built internals, which is why they weigh 10 ounces less.

To answer the OP, the SWFA SS 3-9X42 HD may be the best cost,lowest weight solution for a long range dialing scope. If I had plenty of cash and just really wanted a SF and ill reticle then I would buy a 2.5-10X42 NF NXS.

I have the 3-12 LRHS and prefer it over the 3-9 SWFA. I wouldn't worry about the extra weight. I've began to look at light rifles as a platform that allows me to use the optic I want and still have a decent carry weight rifle.

 

[sheephunteralaska]

Keep telling yourself that if it makes you feel better about buying a scope that is unnecessary. Ill put my extra cash I save into my Swaro binos/spotting scopes, my Super Cub or a good set of boots. My 47 VX3's and 12 Z3's have had zero problems.

 

[R H Clark]

Keep telling yourself that if it makes you feel better about buying a scope that is unnecessary. Ill put my extra cash I save into my Swaro binos/spotting scopes, my Super Cub or a good set of boots. My 47 VX3's and 12 Z3's have had zero problems.

Serious question not meant as condescending. Do you honestly shoot all 59 scopes enough dialing back and forth from 100 to 800 yards enough to know they are all perfect? I wouldn't have time to. Or is it possible that you just take one out occasionally and shoot it a couple times without dialing at all and so you say they are all perfect?

My Leupolds will adjust and I can get them set but they aren't always 100% accurate in adjustment amount every time.

 

[4ester]

Another option may be the Razor LH.

I put together a Tikka 6.5 for the exact purpose you did. 700 yard hunting rifle. I’ve using the 4-16 Vortex HST and my setup weighs 7lb 2oz. Loving it so far.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Jimbob]

Keep telling yourself that if it makes you feel better about buying a scope that is unnecessary. Ill put my extra cash I save into my Swaro binos/spotting scopes, my Super Cub or a good set of boots. My 47 VX3's and 12 Z3's have had zero problems.

Easy man, this doesn't have to be a fight. That's awesome that you like Leupold and they work for you, it's also what I use. However, I am not going to argue with a man that tests firearms and scopes as a profession and tell him he's wrong. He shoots over 10,000 rounds a year and is able to do head to head comparisons in a very controlled setting. It is great that he shares some of his findings with us FREE of charge.

Fact: Leupolds do not consistently track perfectly. This is confirmed by a professional, arguing with that just makes someone look like a fanboy.
Fact: Leupolds do not hold zero as good as other options.
I trust that the person who tests professionally has confirmed those facts.

No need to get in a hissy fit with a VERY knowledgeable guy. Share your opinion like an adult and leave the internet drama out of it. With all of your experience I would really love to learn from you but when you conduct yourself this way I am leery of trusting what you say.

 

[R H Clark]

Another option may be the Razor LH.

I put together a Tikka 6.5 for the exact purpose you did. 700 yard hunting rifle. I’ve using the 4-16 Vortex HST and my setup weighs 7lb 2oz. Loving it so far.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I've used a 1.5-8X32 Razor HD LH on a Kimber Montana for a couple years. It has excellent glass and I love the G4 reticle but the clicks are extremely mushy, so much that I can barely tell one from another. I don't know if they are all like that but I would classify them as more of a set and forget scope than a dialing scope and with the reticle choices I think I would pick something different for longer 600-800 yard shots.

In that situation I would much prefer a FFP reticle and mill adjustments like the SWFA or LRHS. Though the NXS SFP would work, you would just have to make sure you didn't accidently have the magnification set under 10X if using the reticle. If the 3-12 LRHS had illumination, I would never consider the NXS and wouldn't even think about the 4-5 ounces extra.

You just have to weigh everything and decide what's the most important to how you hunt.

 

[HuntHarder]

Easy man, this doesn't have to be a fight. That's awesome that you like Leupold and they work for you, it's also what I use. However, I am not going to argue with a man that tests firearms and scopes as a profession and tell him he's wrong. He shoots over 10,000 rounds a year and is able to do head to head comparisons in a very controlled setting. It is great that he shares some of his findings with us FREE of charge.

Fact: Leupolds do not consistently track perfectly. This is confirmed by a professional, arguing with that just makes someone look like a fanboy.
Fact: Leupolds do not hold zero as good as other options.
I trust that the person who tests professionally has confirmed those facts.

No need to get in a hissy fit with a VERY knowledgeable guy. Share your opinion like an adult and leave the internet drama out of it. With all of your experience I would really love to learn from you but when you conduct yourself this way I am leery of trusting what you say.

Who is the professional that proved these facts?

 

[hodgeman]

Putting those large objective 30mm heavy scopes IMO defeats the purpose of buying these lightweight rifles. Especially when shooting your farthest practice distances of 700 yds and under.)

+1... I've got a 2.5-8x on my Fieldcraft for hunting and did some great hunting with it this past season. I've put a SWFA 10x on it for load development and target shooting, but for hunting I think that Leupold might make its way back on there.

Not every situation calls for a big scope with dials.

 

[texag10]

Thanks everyone for the input. I ended up finding a place that had a NIB return 3-12 LRHS in stock for $979 and jumped on it while cancelling my backorder. Hopefully I can still get the rebate.

I'll see for myself if light rifle + bomber scope works for me. Seems like it will be a good mix of capability and if it ends up being too unbalanced I can sell the LRHS and try to find something else that shaves some weight but is still tough and reliable.

 

[Jordan Smith]

The SS 3-9x is the perfect balance of reliability and weight for a SA Fieldcraft, IMO. That’s what mine in 6.5 Creed wears.

 

[luke moffat]

Yup I remember the days (just over a year ago in fact) I would get more twisted up about an extra 8 oz on my rifle over having a solid working reticle and atleast allows for a decent reference for windholds if nothing else. I am not super good at guessing how many inches to hold I have found now that I shoot at distances from 500-1000 somewhat often. Heck my 6.5 cm fieldcraft drifts 15” in a full value 5 mph breeze at 600 yards. For me it’s eaiser to split the .5 and 1.0 mil hash on the horizontal cross hair that guess what 15” is. Let alone working the elevation part of it but that’s the easy by comparison anyways so long as the scope tracks.

I used to think my leupolds were just fine, and they were more my application for the most part as I wouldn’t shoot game much beyond 300 yards and rarely shoot one at 400. But trying to consistently hit gongs from 400-700 with no reticle alone made even the 3-10 SHV NF much easier with atleast a ruler to work with in the scope. So I will suck it up and use a 19 oz scope over a 11.5 oz scope just to make my life easier, cause for me easier is better Again nothing wrong with leupolds if they work for you by all means I just found I am more proficient with other options. If you are getting along fine with yours no reason to switch. Being as the SWFA 3-9 should be going on sale for $450 or so it kinda narrows the gap in price between and other scopes mentioned.

 

[Barnstormer]

I went with a Swarovski Z5 3.5-18x44. I decided I was going to shoot factory ammo in the gun so figured I would go through a lot of brands before finding the best shooting ammo, the ballistic turret design (and their app) really made it easy adjusting for the different ammo. And of course I've always wanted a Swarovski scope. Only previous experience I've had has been with Leupold and Nikon.

 

[Wrongside]

Thanks everyone for the input. I ended up finding a place that had a NIB return 3-12 LRHS in stock for $979 and jumped on it while cancelling my backorder. Hopefully I can still get the rebate.

I'll see for myself if light rifle + bomber scope works for me. Seems like it will be a good mix of capability and if it ends up being too unbalanced I can sell the LRHS and try to find something else that shaves some weight but is still tough and reliable.

Great scope. I think you'll like it. That's what will go on mine, if Barret ever gets around to making a LH version.

Yup I remember the days (just over a year ago in fact) I would get more twisted up about an extra 8 oz on my rifle over having a solid working reticle and atleast allows for a decent reference for windholds if nothing else. I am not super good at guessing how many inches to hold I have found now that I shoot at distances from 500-1000 somewhat often. Heck my 6.5 cm fieldcraft drifts 15” in a full value 5 mph breeze you can hardly feel. For me it’s eaiser to split the .5 and 1.0 mil hash on the horizontal cross hair that guess what 15” is. Let alone working the elevation part of it but that’s the easy by comparison anyways so long as the scope tracks.

I used to think my leupolds were just fine, and they were more my application for the most part as I wouldn’t shoot game much beyond 300 yards and rarely shoot one at 400. But trying to consistently hit gongs from 400-700 with no reticle alone made even the 3-10 SHV NF much easier with atleast a ruler to work with in the scope. So I will suck it up and use a 19 oz scope over a 11.5 oz scope just to make my life easier, cause for me easier is better Again nothing wrong with leupolds if they work for you by all means I just found I am more proficient with other options. If you are getting along fine with yours no reason to switch. Being as the SWFA 3-9 should be going on sale for $450 or so it kinda narrows the gap in price between and other scopes mentioned.

Good post, great points.