View Full Version : Scope opinions?
cfortune
10-24-2011, 12:25
I just picked up my first bolt action and would like to get into long range shooting. I'm looking at spending around 8 or 9 on a piece of glass but I don't really know anything about higher end optics (except what I've read on the internet and that my wallet hates them).
I guess what I'm looking for is suggestions within that price range for a scope that has; at least 16x magnification, preferred first focal plane MOA reticle, zero stop, and preferably uncapped turrets. So far all I've ran across is the Vortex Viper PST 6-24x50 FFP EBR-1. I've read some mixed reviews about consistency in adjustments and glass clarity.
Also, is first focal plane worth the extra cash over second? I know the theory behind it but is someone of my skill level (which is pretty novice at this type of shooting) going to even care about? The SFP variant of the Vortex scope mentioned above is $100 cheaper.
Any thoughts/opinions would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!
cfortune
10-24-2011, 12:25
Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaand I just read this is an AR-15 specific sub-forum... fml
CUatTheEnd
10-26-2011, 12:56
I have the Vortex Viper PST 2.5-10x44mm on my Rem 700. Love it! I am sure you have already checked out Sniperhide's website if not, very good site for optics, and great deals. I picked up mine used but in mint condition for $400.00.
Chaffee2
10-27-2011, 19:02
I've had several scopes over the years. I've had great luck with Leupold, the old American made Burris and Nikon Monarchs. Given a choice it would be Leupold hands down.
I've had Simmons and Eagles and have had experience with BSA, Nt Star and they have all been crap. The glass or "plastic" may have been good for awhile but it didn't take long and they either fogged up, lost and wouldn't hold a zero or you just plain couldn't see a .22 or .30 cal hole in the target at 100yds and very little if any resell value.
The reasons for Leupold are quality, American made, lots of choices (power, reticle, 1" or 30mm etc), they hold their value if you ever want to sell and the lifetime warrenty. The glass is very clear and good contrast.
My .02 cents anyway hope it helps.
Night Force is great stuff, worth spending the extra cash for. But i have to say that I sold my NF to buy an IOR Valdada. Some of the clearest glass I've ever used. It's worth taking a look!
bengates
06-16-2012, 23:37
If FFP is not a big deal for you then I would look at getting a used 3-15 NF. You can pick them up for around $1100 and they're super great scopes.
The Viper PST is also a great scope new, but you're best bang for the buck is in something used. I really like the USO ST10 for around $900 used. They're super solid and repeatable with a very large field of view. They're fixed 10 power, but will get you out to 1000yds and negates the need for FFP or SFP.
Just my $0.02
SA Friday
06-16-2012, 23:44
[MOD Edit] I moved this to the Long Range section.
as for the OP, all I can say is "cry once". Get the best optics you can afford.
S&B
Nightforce
Premier
Vortex
All high grade glass.
Cheaper, I've had good luck with Sightron SIII scopes.
Something to consider that may make things a little cheaper. You don't need a 24X scope. I had a 22X Nightforce and sold it for the 15X FFP. Now, I know that the Nightforce is probably out of your price range. BUT I am extremely pleased with the decision to go with the 15X. You'll have no problem shooting to 1000 yards with a 15X scope.
That being said, if you go with something with more power, I would go with the FFP for sure. The mirage will be awful at 24X, so you'll probably be using the scope at a lower power than max. That's when the FFP would be nice since your reticle probably won't be accurate other than at the max power.
Something I would recommend is to have your turrets match your reticle, whether it be MOA or MIL. Having a matched reticle to turret will make things easier. I would also go for FFP if you have the option, I have two that are not and they are workable no doubt but FFP makes me happy. FWIW.
islandermyk
06-17-2012, 10:00
... most times..
you get what what you pay for [Tooth]
Vortex isn't bad... but you can tell the difference in glass between that and a S&B... just saying[Beer]
For cheaper glass I have been surprisingly happy with my HDMR. I can tell the difference between it and a S&B PMII or something from US Optics, but for the money the HDMR is pretty damn good.
As for FFP - yes it is totally worth it to be able to range at any magnification (or at least to have 1 formula for ranging). As someone else also said go with either mil/mil or moa/moa - doing the conversions to mil/moa or moa/mil is a total pain in the backside.
islandermyk
06-17-2012, 14:05
As for FFP - yes it is totally worth it to be able to range at any magnification (or at least to have 1 formula for ranging). As someone else also said go with either mil/mil or moa/moa - doing the conversions to mil/moa or moa/mil is a total pain in the backside.
Yes.. this one is a BIG PLUS!
Colorado Osprey
06-17-2012, 17:56
I just love the Weaver T-36 for strickly long range work. I love the T-24 more but it is no longer available. The T-36 is pretty dark with only a 1.1mm exit pupil because of the smaller objective lens, but most long range is done in good light making it almost a moot point.
An older article but the principals and reasoning are just as valid now , http://demigodllc.com/articles/practical-long-range-rifle-shooting-optics/ ,
Read this it will answer a lot of your questions .
IMO 8-900 gets you entry level glass for a precision rifle , high end glass doesn't start till about triple that .
Nightforce is the best bang for your dollar now but a used one will run 12 - 1500 and the new ones are knocking on 2k now . The only Nightforce that I've seen returned for work was because the rifle was dropped on the concrete and it landed on the windage knob .
The new Leupold stuff shows promise but there old offerings are lacking in the reliability and repeatability market . Pretty much all of us started with Leupy's and between them breaking and tracking issues nobody uses them anymore .
The new HDMR from Bushnell that I played with the glass was on par with the Leupold but the turrets were really mushy and it is in the 1500 range now . I know of 2 of these that didn't make it through 1 complete precision rifle class cycle before they broke .
The higher end Vortex stuff has a decent reputation but there lower end stuff has mixed to poor reviews for the same issues as Leupy .
I've seen half a dozen or so IOR's take a dump and need to be returned for warranty work .
The best advice for entry level glass I can give is look at SWFA's Super Sniper line if you cant wait and then spend the time saving your cash for something else down the line . The SS scopes typically hold there used value better than the other entry level stuff so you'll be able to recoup more of your money when you upgrade .
BPTactical
06-17-2012, 20:28
Decide your budget. Get what works best for your eyes and application. Don't be so concerned about what name it carries but focus on the features and how well it works for you.
I can't justify a NF or USO for what I do.
I have been very happy with my Nikons. Great glass and I think you get a lot for what you don't pay for.
Just my .02
sneakerd
06-18-2012, 08:53
I would say only spend money on high-dollar scopes if your ability equals their quality. Very few of us can do anything that a Nikon Monarch with the BDC reticle can't. Maayybe a 10x SuperSniper- but they are very heavy.
Saddling yourself with cheap glass is a good way to limit your abilities because of the issues inherent with them . Its not optical quality that is the number one criteria its the accuracy and repeatability of the adjustments . If the scope does not track properly or more importantly repeatedly it will cause issues with shot placement . These issues are more often than not dismissed as shooter error when it really is an equipment issue .
It is always a good idea to buy the highest quality equipment that you can given circumstances whether it be firearms or tools or what not . Can't say I've heard someone say that they were disappointed in the performance of quality equipment but I sure have heard people grouching about be let down by " cheap " stuff all the time .
Driving a precision rifle is all about constancy and repeatability , if the most important part in that equation , the sighting system , is neither the results will suffer .
I've got the vortex you speak of. I haven't seen anything that eats it til about double the price but that's not as an owner of them just using friends' really "high end" glass. Personally I think for most of us spending over a grand on optics ends up being a waste. Not that many people can really out shoot their $1000 glass. Don't get me wrong if I had endless funds and money wasn't an issue I'd get as top of the line as possible but scopes like the viper pst ate plenty clear and reliable. I've shot a 223 out to 600 yards and 308 out to close to 1000 and done well. Mind you I consider myself a novice shooter. That coupled with only a mediocre rifle makes me think out shooting the scope will take me a while.
An ideal situation is to look through a few OUtDOORs and seeing what you prefer but that's obviously tough to do
Delfuego
06-18-2012, 18:22
I'll contribute my .02... I only started shooting LR 2 years ago, have only shot out to 1k or so, so I am no expert.
My first rifle came with a 6-20x40 Leupold VXIII, a very nice scope but had 2 drawbacks. First was the reticle (varmint hunters) a good reticle for varmints, but not great for real LR shooting. Second was the eye relief. It was tough to get it right, I kept getting a lot of scope shadow and was a strain on the eyes for long periods.
I was originally looking at Viper PST's, SWFA and Nightforce. The PST's were always out of stock/back-ordered. The Nightforce's are very nice, but to get a 20x FFP mil/mil it would be around $2k (although they can be had for just over $1k for the 3-15x SFP demo's at Mile High Shooting Supply!). A member here let me check out his SWFA and I did like it. He also let me check out a very nice IOR Valdada (check this http://tinyurl.com/6qwwhr2)
I just traded my Leupold into SWFA for $600/credit and bought the SWFA 50-20x50 HD (on sale) and so far so good! It is heavy, but so is the rifle... The glass is very clear and the reticle is good for me, no regrets so far. Their warranty/customer service is awesome too. I just picked up a SWFA 10x mil/mil (same reticle) for a trainer rifle.
With all that being said...
My shooting partner picked up his LR rifle 2 years ago also, (but grew up shooting and served in the Army) He bought a Vortex Crossfire 6-20x50 for $175+/-. The first Scope failed right away. He call Vortex and they sent him a new one in 4 days no questions asked. With the replacement scope he zero'd at 100 yards, then zero'd his turrets. We then shot out to a 10" gong at just over a 1k yards. After that he dialed back to zero and hit a perfect on bullseye on paper at 100y again. Next trip he confirmed zero at 100y, dialed to 1k and hit with the 5 shot. Then back to 100 before we left.
Ultimately I thing the shooter is the most important part. Glass is nice, but not necessarily everything. Shoot me a PM if you want to come by and check out my scope.
If you just plan on doing Kentucky windage and elevation, a cheap-ish scope will be fine.
Its when you start giving those knobs a workout that the expensive scopes pay off.
I think its funny its no big deal to spend 2-3K on a high end AR platform, bolt gun and slap a countersniper on it and think its ok (not saying thats whats going on here), when that rifle is only half the equation. I parted with quite a few things to get into an upper end scope. What I did was sacrificed on other stuff or stuff that would be easier to replace and bought a schmidt and bender, liked it but wanted to try others, so I sold it (lost shipping cost) and tried a USO (liked it more), sold it and lost shipping charges, bought a nightforce (liked it but not as much as the USO), sold it and went back to a USO. That was how I got to try multiple scopes. All bought used and taken care of while I checked them out, and resold and only lost shipping charges. So I see it as I spent 125 bucks (shipping and insurance) to REALLY try out three different brands I wanted to and am happy I did. I am definitely no expert, but just a suggestion on how you can work it if you want. But even from the little I know I like being able to feel a positive click per 1/10 mil I move, can range on any power setting and my mil is still a mil no matter my power setting, and can adjust my parallax at my given range. Not everyone can swing it, I understand that and feel fortunate that I could. Push your glass budget as far as you think you can and then some would be my suggestion. What C Ward said above is right.
The responses here saying that people can't shoot that well or my rifle can't shoot that well are exactly what I'm trying to get across .
Pretty much every rifle out there that is suitable for a precision rifle will shoot MOA or better with good ammo so saying that the rifle wont cut it is just not the case any more .
At every class I've helped teach there has been someone with an economy set up with low end glass that struggles . When either swapping the scope for something else or putting them on a loaner rifle it goes from struggles and frustration to making hits . So was this a shooter issue or were they being limited by their gear ?
The sighting system is the most important part of the equation and if it doesn't do its job everything else that is done will not give the desired results .
Like I said previously driving a precision rifle is all about consistency and repeatability , its not rocket science or voodoo . Execute the fundamentals properly and you will hit .
One last question how many of the economy glass owners have box tested their scopes to the full extent of the travel and what kind of results did you get ?
RonMexico
06-19-2012, 09:04
Decide your budget. Get what works best for your eyes and application. Don't be so concerned about what name it carries but focus on the features and how well it works for you.
I can't justify a NF or USO for what I do.
I have been very happy with my Nikons. Great glass and I think you get a lot for what you don't pay for.
Just my .02
Well said. Everyones eyes are different and some scope are better/ worse for others.
mrfish83
06-19-2012, 09:24
+1 on CWards advice.
My advice - if you need a scope now and are limited on funds, pick up a fixed power SWFA Super Sniper (SS) in 10x power (or 16x if you must), for $300 new. For the price they are hard to beat. I stepped up from a 10x SS to a 3.5-15 NF (Second Focal Plane) once I saved enough money. I'd recommend the same path. Huge improvement moving to the NF.
I shoot a USO now, and it does have improved features over the NF, but I wouldn't say it's worth twice the money.
NF is the economical point for a good quality scope. I never sold my NF... it lives on my AR now.
One last question how many of the economy glass owners have box tested their scopes to the full extent of the travel and what kind of results did you get ?
I box tested my HDMR, but didn't do the full extent, (If I remember right I did 30 clicks each way) due to the limitation of the size of my target. Again I was surprised that it lined back up and did so well.
You know I find it mildly amazing that snipers were able to pull off 6 to 8 hundred yard shots during WWII with crappy war produced rifles and optics that averaged 4x with 6x being pretty rare and very sought after and even in some cases iron sights, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simo_H%C3%A4yh%C3%A4 for a bit on Simo Hayha he was a complete bad ass.
I really have an issue with gear taking the place of actual work on the shooters part. It seems like the only opinion people give any more is if you want to be able to shoot well it is going to cost a gazillion dollars and thats just not the case. Of course the interwebs tell us that if we havent spent at least $200 dollars on the trigger we wont be able to expect repeatable results and of course your $200 dollar trigger better be attached to a $1000 + rifle in a stock that should cost no less than $500 with all of the free floated bedded harmonically balanced fluted bull barreled target crowned match grade adjustable work, that will cost you another $1000, done to it. Lets not forget that your $3 a round ammo should only be shot if you are sighting down a $2000 + optic mounted in $150 rings.
Step 1. Get a decent rifle, they can be had all day for around $500 and most rifles these days are capable of 1 moa.
Step 2. Get a decent set of rings, these can also be had all day for $50 and under.
Step 3. Get a decent optic, something in the 3x9 category is more than adequate, Burris, Vortex, Nikon and other similar quality scopes can be had for around 2-3 hundred dollars.
Step 4. Buy good ammunition or get a decent reloading set up, it doesnt take long to spend way more than it costs to do this when you are dropping $25 - $30 a box on ammo.
Step 5. Learn your rifle every nook and cranny every twitchy idiosyncratic thing there is to know about it. All this requires is shooting it and paying attention while doing so.
Now when you can consistently perform at 500 yards with this set up, some folks can do more this just seemed reasonable to me, all the time every time then step it up a notch. You see at this point you will know what would serve you better be it better trigger or better optic etc. because you will have had time to truly learn your weapon and that lighter smother trigger/higher power optic will be better utilized because you will have spent the time learning. It just seems to me that too many people want a rig that will do the work for them unfortunately a machine is only as good as its operator.
Now I am not saying there is no place for these things as there most certainly is but to me it seems like buying a 16 year old a ferrari, it aint gonna make him a better driver. Every skill requires a good foundation and it seems like all the advice given today is screw hard work or dedication just buy this stuff and you will be fine.l
So those are my thoughts sorry if it came out a little ranty and such I blame 2 hours of sleep. As some of you already know I run a small gun business from my home so this advice is actually harmful to my profit margin but it really is how I see it.
p.s. If you really have to have a $10,000 rig I will sell it to you after all I like money a lot. [Beer]
To run the box test it is more than just having it return to where it started . The values of the clicks need to be measured and the actual value determined and compared to the specified value . The reason to check the whole range of motion is to make sure that there is actually travel at the extremes and that it doesn't change increments . It is a pretty common occurrence that the knob keeps moving but the reticule stops with the lower priced glass .
Haven't heard issues with the HDMR's not tracking properly. The one I handled the clicks were really mushy with no positive feel to them at all . The 2 that broke were being tested down at 10th group and both broke internally and would no longer adjust . Both scopes were sent back and last I heard they weren't getting anymore .
There are also a lot of reports about the HDMR's having chromic aberration issues with the lenses giving color flare and halo issues .
For the money that these cost you can get a new NF for a little more or a used one for equal or less money which is a no brainer in my book .
Lifeon2 , 8 years of running and competing in field practical precision rifle matches doesn't jive with your post . There is most definitely a level as to what will preform at a desired level equipment wise and it doesn't matter if Tubb is driving it or not .
Ward I dont understand I'd Tubb is driving it or not. Auto carrect? <--- See the joke I made there?
The boiled down version of my ranty post is that fundamentals are more important than gear. I'm not sure how that doesnt jive with you especially if this is your field. No matter how good your gear is if your fundamentals suck so will your shooting.
While no doubt fundamentals are extremely important, the fact of the matter is, cheap shit will break. I've seen guys with the most expensive gear finish very poorly in many competitions. But what I haven't seen is guys with cheap set-ups finish near the top.
While yes, you obviously need to be able to drive the rifle. Your equipment still needs to be up to snuff. I think the quote "buy once, cry once" is really quite valid when it comes to the long range game. Especially in regards to glass.
I agree that cheap shit will break but you can get gear that doesnt cost 2 arms a leg and you first born. How is a mid level optic like the ones I listed considered "cheap shit" for folks that are learning? I have owned burris and nikon optics and spent plenty of time behind a vortex as well and other than the eye relief seeming a little touchy on the vortex they have all functioned quite well. You might also note that cfortune mentions that this is his first bolt action rifle thus stating that he is a beginner. He is looking at spending 8-9 hundred not 2 grand. as I read his post I geared my response for a beginner. I also kept my advisement loose as we dont know if his first bolt rifle is a 50 bmg or a 22 short. Once you are competing then of course equipment is going to count for more. However he is a novice so IMHO fundamentals will do him more good than busting out the credit card and driving himself into debt so that he can have several thousand dollars worth of gear for something he may decide as he learns just really isnt for him. Lastly he hasnt made a post since page 1 of this discussion so arguing on the internet and all that.
I suppose I just come from the old school of learning when you started with standard irons then moved up to peeps and then magnified optics to make sure you had actually spent the time to develop skill.
Auto spell sucks .
Look back at the posts where I was talking about shooting errors typically being blamed on the shooter which may not always being the case .
Last year I fought a USO that wasn't tracking properly and shifting zero . For 4 months I wrote it off to shooter error because my practice had been severely limited at the time . Skipping to the end after the big match the it went on the gun for I went out and box tested it and it went back to them and they replaced it with a new one . The moral of the story is two fold it isn't always the shooters fault and every scope needs to be verified .
There are certain pieces of equipment that have a reputation both good and bad for performance which is pretty well defined and it makes no sense to me to limit your performance because " most people can't shoot up to the capabilities " . Every one of these recommendations is from seeing what does and doesn't work .
sneakerd
06-19-2012, 21:28
I totally agree with lifeon2. Absolutely NO reason for a beginner to spend big money on equipment before he knows how to use it.
I totally agree with lifeon2. Absolutely NO reason for a beginner to spend big money on equipment before he knows how to use it.
....or before he knows if he's going to stick with it.
I thought the LR thing would be fun to get into and moved from various Remington 700's to Sako TRG's, replete with the requisite glass on top of them, etc. Then, after years of tossing .308 at distance I tried shooting rimfire out past 400 and sold all the LR centerfire rigs...as well as the uppity glass on them.
An S&B scope is nice....if you plan to stay with the hobby a while. You won't recoup MSRP if you decide to sell it (or any other brand) ;)
First of all, I don't think anybody participating in this thread is "arguing". Simply expressing their opinions. I know for a fact that a couple of guys in this thread have extensive experience in long rage shooting and competitions.
Nobody on here has said to go out and spend $3500.00 on an S&B, U.S. Optics, or the like.
The point is, anybody starting out in long range shooting would be well advised to spend as much as they can on the glass. Be that $500, $1000, or $3500 on an S&B. With the exception of the Super Sniper, spending $200-$300 on an optic would probably end up being a frustrating endeavor. Fortunately the OP said he has a budget of $800-$900, which is a good start. One can certainly get a decent scope for that amount.
People might not agree with this, but this is MY experience with shooting long range competitions and seeing new shooters become frustrated with their set-ups and not being able to put rounds on target.
Spending a little more on equipment out of the gate on a rifle, rings, and especially glass could really save some frustration in the long run.
In my opinion, hedging your bets by spending more up front is simply the best way to go. Chances are, it will lead to less frustration and a far more enjoyable experience.
....or before he knows if he's going to stick with it.
An S&B scope is nice....if you plan to stay with the hobby a while. You won't recoup MSRP if you decide to sell it (or any other brand) ;)
I will if they keep raising their MSRP every year the way they have been!
islandermyk
06-21-2012, 21:34
Just buy a S&B or a USO or a Premier already...[Stooge]
you won't regret it...
... well, make sure you get a reticle you want too [Coffee]
I kid... but for sure, you do get what you pay for.
As ColoWyo has said "$200-$300 on an optic would probably end up being a frustrating endeavor"
.. but with luck and patience, and a lot of trial and error you need to start somewhere just as I have with a budget. Have to learn how to use the darn thing first, right?
Choices of Mil or MOA reticles (I prefer Mil reticles)... I would stay away from the BDC reticles.
If you know your gonna get hooked into this... I would suggest putting aside money now for a really pricey glass while your going through your learning curve with a $200-$300 scope... $3500 would get you there for a S&B [Tooth]
Believe me... there is a world of difference[Beer]
A second-hand Leupy Mark-4 fixed 10x or 16x with M1 turrets. You can generally get them for $900, and can flip it for what you paid when you decide it is "beneath you".
mrfish83
07-02-2012, 09:19
FYI - I have a NightForce for sale in the firearm accessories for sale section. It's a great scope...
I just love the Weaver T-36 for strickly long range work. I love the T-24 more but it is no longer available. The T-36 is pretty dark with only a 1.1mm exit pupil because of the smaller objective lens, but most long range is done in good light making it almost a moot point.
The ts are good scopes
Ill express a OPINION
First the tool must fit technique.
Everbody is dialing for elevation holding off for wind.
wind changes too fast to dial.
range is a constant dial it and forget about it till you break the shot
The scope must be capable of going from zero to whatever is max range and back to zero over and over and over...
the scope must have a calibrated reticle for wind hold off.
The bushnell 3200 10x mil dot does this. $200
For a hundred dollars more the SWFA SS does it better get the mil mil
The SS have 15moa elevation per revolution, (sorry old dude thinks in minutes)that gets you to 600 plus from a hundred zero.
Mirage is easier to read with higher mags thats why i like the 16x.
Just buy the freakin SWFA SS 16x mil mil
spend the rest on the gas to raton for sporting rifle
If your in the field and a coyote poops on your optics you will only cry a little
http://swfa.com/SWFA-SS-16x42-Tactical-Riflescope-P53715.aspx
jetsiphon
07-29-2012, 00:47
I will tell you this....I was in this exact same spot a few years back. I had a 700PSS....that's right a PSS not SPS, so I was already pretty deep into the rifle.
I took a week long class. I needed some glass.
I figured, what the hell, I'll pick up this Millet that's on sale. I forget all the specs, but it had a huge objective, 1/8 MOA turrets and an illuminated ret. I bought it. On the second day the optic had a catastrophic failure.
A guy in class had a spare fixes 10x Super Sniper, so I bought that on the spot...because I had little choice. Now, I am still impressed with a that optic, but, it's not what I want.
So, now, I have to buy my THIRD scope for the rifle.
When I boughty scope for my SPR, I did a lot more research. I asked a lot of people I respect for input. I wanted good low power up to about 10x. Almost everybody told me to not waste my the with the lower power.....but I knew better.
I picked up an IOR 2.5-10x FFP illuminated ret optic. Love it. However, I never use the 2.5.....I really wish I would have gone with something like 4-14x.
What have I learned? Figure out what exactly you want and shop around, a lot. Unless YOU change your mind about a feature, don't compromise on your spec, stick to your plan.
What have I learned? FFP, MIL/MIL and illuminated reticles are a must for me, it's what I like and want. As far as magnification, that depends on application.
The biggest lesson? Buy once, cry once. Having the best scope you can afford will NEVER hold you back. Just look at my 700.....I'm in like $400 for the Millet, $300 for the SS and now another $1200-$1500 for the next scope. Hell, I could have bought a used S&B, for what I'm going to have invested.
That's why I didn't even blink when I bought an ACOG for my 16" AR15, or a S&B Short Dot for my 308MWS, or even the IOR for my SPR. Expensive? Painfully so. Am I held back by my optics, ever? Not at all.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.