Too Much Scope???

[dcmdon]

Pricing mistake at Amazon

Anyone who shoots long distances has lusted after a Kestrel. Especially the 4500 or above.

So Caldwell, best know for shooting accessories has come out with a copy with a MSRP of $100.

My wholesale on this item is $64. Amazon has them for $32. For that kind of money, its worth a shot. I just ordered one. It seems they've confused the price with the cheaper caldwell that doesn't do any barometric calculations. But the photo and the model number on this item are correct for the MSRP $100 item.

Hey, for $32, its worth a shot.

Don

Go through this link and search on Caldwell Crosswind Professional Wind Meter to find it and have a piece of your purchase to got Comm2a:

http://www.amazon.com/?_encoding=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=390957&linkCode=ur2&tag=com0d0-20

 

[Shotgun Scully]

Thanks gents. This has turned out to be very informative.
i have a lot more research to do now and probably some more saving before I can get the scope that suits my needs.

next question.

MOA vs MRAD? Who is using what and why?
i'm currently more partial to MOA because I think the calculations can be done faster on the fly.
what say you?

 

[WatchCityCPA]

Thanks gents. This has turned out to be very informative.
i have a lot more research to do now and probably some more saving before I can get the scope that suits my needs.

next question.

MOA vs MRAD? Who is using what and why?
i'm currently more partial to MOA because I think the calculations can be done faster on the fly.
what say you?

Whichever you are most comfortable with. For most people the decision iis made based on their previous experience and existing glass.

 

[white feather]

MOA is "finer". Either one is OK. Most people understand MOA in a basic way. MILRAD less. Just make sure that the reticle and turrets are in the same unit.
White Feather

 

[dcmdon]

I agonized over whether to get Mill or MOA. It really doesn't matter, its more important that the reticle match your turrets. If you have a scope with mill dots and MOA adjustments, its a pain in the ass.

I chose Mil because of something I read on longrangehunter.com. Which is that when you write mils, its easier to write and remember.

Your come up from 100 to 200 yards may be .4 mils. But its 1.5 moa. And if it were a bit more or less, it might be 1.75 moa, in which case you are writing 3 numbers rather than 1. It doesn't seem important until you are at 600 yards dialing for distance and its much easier to track.

Part of the difficulty with the decision process is that my brain has been doing MOA calcs in my head for years. It took some time to adjust. Like speaking a foreign language, you have to reach a point where you think in that unit. You don't want to be converting back and forth in your head. A mil is a 3.6" at 100 yards but thats not how you want to think of it. A mil is one thousandth of the angle required to make a full turn.

One mil at 1000 yards is 1 yard
at 1000 meters its 1 meter.
at 1000 (any unit) , its 1 unit.

So at 100 of any unit, its .1 unit.

So at 100 yards, one mil is .1 yard (3.6 inches)
At 100 meters its .1 meters, or 10 centimeters.

Don

 

[radioman]

I recently was able to acquire me dream scope. Its all about what you want not what you need. My scope is WAY to big for me and for New England for that matter but I like it and when I shoot it, it puts a smile on my face. You have to ask your self one question? Is it what I want or what I need??

PS-- If anyone is interested my dream scope is here-- http://www.opticsplanet.com/nightforce-atacr-5-25x56mm-zerostop-riflescope.html

 

[white feather]

So if you get 0.1 MIL per click, you might not be able to make a small enough correction... 1/4 (or1/8) MOA is smaller and allows more precise adjustment. I would just go with MOA unless you have been trained in Mildot.
White Feather

I agonized over whether to get Mill or MOA. It really doesn't matter, its more important that the reticle match your turrets. If you have a scope with mill dots and MOA adjustments, its a pain in the ass.

I chose Mil because of something I read on longrangehunter.com. Which is that when you write mils, its easier to write and remember.

Your come up from 100 to 200 yards may be .4 mils. But its 1.5 moa. And if it were a bit more or less, it might be 1.75 moa, in which case you are writing 3 numbers rather than 1. It doesn't seem important until you are at 600 yards dialing for distance and its much easier to track.

Part of the difficulty with the decision process is that my brain has been doing MOA calcs in my head for years. It took some time to adjust. Like speaking a foreign language, you have to reach a point where you think in that unit. You don't want to be converting back and forth in your head. A mil is a 3.6" at 100 yards but thats not how you want to think of it. A mil is one thousandth of the angle required to make a full turn.

One mil at 1000 yards is 1 yard
at 1000 meters its 1 meter.
at 1000 (any unit) , its 1 unit.

So at 100 of any unit, its .1 unit.

So at 100 yards, one mil is .1 yard (3.6 inches)
At 100 meters its .1 meters, or 10 centimeters.

Don

 

[josh2600]

Both me and my daughter qualified at Pelham's 600 yd range using an AR-15 with 1x-5x scope (Weaver Super Slam, just over 400 USD). Could use a bit more magnification, but do not go nuts on magnification - focus on good quality glass, the type of reticle you like and you'll be fine.

Yes, good glass is expensive... but mine works fine for what I need...

http://www.amazon.com/Weaver-Super-...=1412953847&sr=1-1&keywords=weaver+super+slam

And Amazon has it for $352.

How is the 1x on that? Can you shoot it both eyes open?

 

[Dean Crawford]

I have a Sightron 10-50X60, I call it my Mini Hubble Telescope, and it is not to much scope at least not for me anyways, lets just say at 500 yards I can tell if it is a male or female squirrel.LOL

Dean

 

[Mountain]

I have a Sightron 10-50X60, I call it my Mini Hubble Telescope, and it is not to much scope at least not for me anyways, lets just say at 500 yards I can tell if it is a male or female squirrel.LOL

Dean

10-50X, holy cr@p! Where is the Mars Rover today!

 

[dcmdon]

So if you get 0.1 MIL per click, you might not be able to make a small enough correction... 1/4 (or1/8) MOA is smaller and allows more precise adjustment. I would just go with MOA unless you have been trained in Mildot.
White Feather

a .1 mil click is .36 inches at 100 yards.

So if you want more precise adjustment, yes, you are probably better off with MOA. I haven't seen mil-dot scopes with any increment less than .1

As you said, a 1/4 moa would give .25" of movement per click and a 1/8 moa would give .125" of movement at 100 yards.

If a mil dot scope gives .36 inches of adjustment per click and a 1/4 moa scope gets you .25 " per click, we're talking about the ability to be .11 inches more precise at 100 yards.

IMHO, this is inconsequential for anyone other than a benchrest shooter.

 

[TOM1960]

IMO If this rifle is going to be a hunting rifle, There is really no need to go crazy on power. A 3X9 Redfield which is made by Leopold would cover all you most likely plan to do, or you can go to a Leopold. The higher the magnification, things like heartbeat and the natural body swaying becomes exaggerated.

A 3X9 Leopold is what I have on my stainless Ruger .308 bolt-action rifle. Honestly, I never adjusted it past 3X; just wasn't necessary at the ranges that I was shooting at in MA and NH. Here in coastal Alabama, pretty much the same. Ranges are typically 100 yards or less. Any telescopic sight in excess of 3X-9X is gross overkill. Why dish out the extra $$$ if it is not necessary?

 

[Hoon]

a .1 mil click is .36 inches at 100 yards.

So if you want more precise adjustment, yes, you are probably better off with MOA. I haven't seen mil-dot scopes with any increment less than .1

As you said, a 1/4 moa would give .25" of movement per click and a 1/8 moa would give .125" of movement at 100 yards.

If a mil dot scope gives .36 inches of adjustment per click and a 1/4 moa scope gets you .25 " per click, we're talking about the ability to be .11 inches more precise at 100 yards.

IMHO, this is inconsequential for anyone other than a benchrest shooter.

Agreed.

I shoot in MOA because that's how i started. MIL is better for any tactical or long range application that requires faster adjustment/ranging in time critical situations.

MOA is better for extreme precision when punching paper, when you have more time to calculate firing solutions and less need for "Kentucky windage".

 

[WatchCityCPA]

How is the 1x on that? Can you shoot it both eyes open?

Yeah, it's a true 1x at the bottom of the magnification range and it works great with both eyes open.

If you are around the Pelham or Londonderry clubs at some point, I'll be glad to meet you so you can try it out - for a $400+ scope, I'm very happy with it.

 

[josh2600]

Yeah, it's a true 1x at the bottom of the magnification range and it works great with both eyes open.

If you are around the Pelham or Londonderry clubs at some point, I'll be glad to meet you so you can try it out - for a $400+ scope, I'm very happy with it.

Considering swapping out my aimpoint pro for a decent 1-4 on my AR, was thinking I'd need to spend at least twice that amount. Ty for the offer, I may take you up on it.

 

[dcmdon]

Josh,

You can get a decent 1-4 for $400 easy. A lot of the stuff on a long distance scope is inappropriate on a 1-4.

I'd suggest you try to find a Nikon Monarch AFRICAN 1-4 built on a 30 mm tube. They were $1000 scopes. But they had a design flaw. The eye relief wasn't long enough for the heavy hitting African cartridges. So Nikon discontinued the scope and dumped them for $395 dealer cost. You can find closeouts on them occasionally for $425.

I bought one, was so impressed I bought another. These two scopes are the finest scopes I own. The glass is AMAZING and they track perfectly. Its kindof strange that they cost 1/4 of what my most expensive scope cost.

This is an old Midway ad for the scope version with the illuminated reticle.

http://www.midwayusa.com/product/15...e-30mm-tube-11-4x-24mm-german-4-reticle-matte

 

[mac1911]

Is there such a thing as having too much scope? I recently purchased a Tikka T3 in 30-06. Now I'm scope shopping. I've been doing alot of research and have found out that a scope is not just a scope. Anyway the more I get into it the more I want the higher end scopes with all the do-dads. The problem I see is that I will probably only be putting about 100-300 rds/yr down range. I have already decided I'm not cheaping out but I'm also not going to have another mortgage payment.
Also with regard to magnification I find myself going big; Is there such a thing as too big? I do want to get into some long range shooting because my club has a 600yd range.
My choices are :
Vortex Viper PST 6.5-24x50 FFP
Vortex Viper PST 4-16x50 FFP
The non FFP versions of above are also an option and a significant price drop. But somehow I feel that I would be cheating myself.

I also like the
Vortex Viper HS-T and HS-LR in the above configurations.

I know the choice is mostly personal preference, but I'm looking for more of a High Power Shooting geek kind of response with regard to personal experiences of their own and other technical jibberish.

There are a few things you need to figure out.
1. Most intended target use. Why because their are reticles that will block out targets.
2. I have a few higher mag scopes in the 300ish range. on high X they are useless for all but bright light conditions.
3. As mentioned if your going to be adjusting knobs frequently you want a scope that tracks true and doesn't have lash or slop in it.
ex: I have a 80s vintage Japan scope. holds zero amazingly well. been dropped many times. PROBLEM it will drive you nuts if you need to adjust it...all is fine if you only go in one direction reverse direction and you will get any where from 4 to 8 clicks before cross hair moves....but it holds zero. so it fits its needs on the rifle it sits.
4. reticle....hmmm that's all on you. I found mildot to busy. fine if your constantly changing target distance and windage and you would rather hold over. I also found out on cheap scopes you need to find out at what distance and X the nil dot is actually a mil dot.
In the end I do not like mil dot style for target shooting.
5. 2 reticles I have come to like is the hawke map 6 . which rides Jo on my pellet gun has a wide FOV and is very clear for the $ I can take out Squirrels @ 100 yd with this set up. Then I'm old school and just like the good old 30/30 fine hair reticle.
6. Software..... I absolutely love the soft ware that hawke provides. you can print out cheat sheets for your scope lenses caps for referral of hold overs and such.

In the end I still love my 1980s VX III 2.5X8X32 zero,tracks well and has old school 30/30 range estimating reticle.

Best thing you can do is go to the range. Most shooters love to show of their gear.

ohh and to echo some past advice and my dads.
you should at least spend at least the same on optics as the rifles worth. Only the highest X you can see clearly through... the higher the mag the more your crosshairs will jump around...

 

[groundscrapers]

There was someone at my Sig class this summer with a SWFA "super sniper" 10x scope. Its fixed so the whole FFP/SFP thing goes away. He was banging the gong at 1000 yards as well as any of us.

The schmidt and bender was on such an amazing rifle, i had to excuse myeslf for a few minutes. Picture an Accuracy International AWM in .300 Win Mag with the S&B glass on it. Figure 12-15K.

I have that same swfa glass and it's great.

 

[x-frog-22]

I use a Weaver T 36 for punching holes in paper beyond 200 yds.{ old eyes }..Tracks shooting the " box " very well . Cost about 450 to 500 dollars.

 

[Bmcl322]

View: https://youtu.be/_HAuHUPX6Vs

 

[mac1911]

Is there such a thing as having too much scope? I recently purchased a Tikka T3 in 30-06. Now I'm scope shopping. I've been doing alot of research and have found out that a scope is not just a scope. Anyway the more I get into it the more I want the higher end scopes with all the do-dads. The problem I see is that I will probably only be putting about 100-300 rds/yr down range. I have already decided I'm not cheaping out but I'm also not going to have another mortgage payment.
Also with regard to magnification I find myself going big; Is there such a thing as too big? I do want to get into some long range shooting because my club has a 600yd range.
My choices are :
Vortex Viper PST 6.5-24x50 FFP
Vortex Viper PST 4-16x50 FFP
The non FFP versions of above are also an option and a significant price drop. But somehow I feel that I would be cheating myself.

I also like the
Vortex Viper HS-T and HS-LR in the above configurations.

I know the choice is mostly personal preference, but I'm looking for more of a High Power Shooting geek kind of response with regard to personal experiences of their own and other technical jibberish.

Yes you can have to much scope.
High magnification does not mean shit if the resolution sucks you will see this more on less expensive scopes.
You really need to narrow down end use and what tou expect. Personally go hang out at the 600 yard line and see what guys are using. Get behind a few scopes on the line.
If your shooting fixed distance and known target sizes you can narrow your needs.
One thing I dont have on my 2 best scopes is a Zero Stop. Which can be a royal pita if you loose track of your adjustments if your dialing in elevation changes .
Last scope I bought was a Sightron SIII
8x32x54 its a beast and I have used it on a few rifles.
Idi like it and I have used at 600 with my AR in NRA 600 yard any rifle any sight type of match.
I really like it on my 1942 Remingron 513t 22lr for 200 yard fun. It basically lives on 24x and theres reaally no gain between 24x and 32x except loss of field of view.
Its set on 24x as thats the subtension of the reticle = moa.
On 24x the center “dot” is .25 moa and the hash marks are 2moa spread.
Reticle choice is another factor. I like simple cross hairs with limitted “hash mark”
Those Xmas tree type give me a headache

 

[mac1911]

Thanks gents. This has turned out to be very informative.
i have a lot more research to do now and probably some more saving before I can get the scope that suits my needs.

next question.

MOA vs MRAD? Who is using what and why?
i'm currently more partial to MOA because I think the calculations can be done faster on the fly.
what say you?

For this it might be go with what you know.
Im MOA brain so I go with MOA.
The math is no different for either ,
Its when you mixing yards/meters
MPH/KPH that it gets a bit wonky.
Like anything though do it enough it becomes easier.
Start simple and learn you basic come ups , start taking notes ( something I suck at)

 

[gerrycaruso]

I believe the answer is yes. You can have too much scope. If you have a scope so powerful that you can see Venus but the rifle isn't capable of shooting 1 hole groups, it will just frustrate the shit out of you.

 

[Rate_of_Twist]

Why?

The less you move the rifle around, the less robust you need your scope to be.

If you shoot in perfect conditions all the time (bipod, rear bag, on a table under a roof on sunny days with no one shooting back) I don't see how you can objectively justify something like a $2000+ USO, NF, S&B, etc...

OP, if you're punching holes at fixed distances, you don't need FFP. Save yourself some $$ and buy the regular Vortex PST 4-16x. FFP is for when you need to range stuff because you don't know the distance, or if you need to hold an exact amount on a target that doesn't have grid lines.

Has ZERO to do with robust and everything to do with glass and repeatability in mechanical adjustments

 

[mac1911]

Has ZERO to do with robust and everything to do with glass and repeatability in mechanical adjustments

Most people are not going to use or test their scope to even notice a difference between $500 and $1000+
Show of hands
How many have actually ran a simple “box” test to see how your turrets track
How many have hung something other than a bulls eye to see how “clear and crisp” your scope is.?
If your shooting fixed distances yeah zero and forget it. You might get away with a $500 scope with a low round count.

in the end get the best with in your needs and budget.
My scopes run from cheep $30 scopes to $1300 with the rest hovering around $300 because the platforms dont demand much more and I could not afford to drop $800+ on every scoped rifle and would be silly to do so on a $100 rifle.

 

[moojpg2]

I'm not a fan of high magnification.

The only rifle I run more than 10x on is my m107a1, and that's just got the standard leupold 4.5-14x on it.

 

[frenchman]

There’s no such thing as too much scope. However, there is “too much magnification” for certain applications. When was the last time you heard someone at the range say “damn, I wish this glass would suck more”? you can dial down your magnification just so much. For hunting/tactical uses, field of view matters. 3.5-15 or 4-16 will cover all your bases in that department. If you’re just plinking for minute of backstop, just about any mag will do. Stick with reputable companies like Leupold, S&B, Nightforce, Hensoldt and such, and you’ll have a scope that’ll last you a lifetime.

 

[Road_Clam]

Is there such a thing as having too much scope? I recently purchased a Tikka T3 in 30-06. Now I'm scope shopping. I've been doing alot of research and have found out that a scope is not just a scope. Anyway the more I get into it the more I want the higher end scopes with all the do-dads. The problem I see is that I will probably only be putting about 100-300 rds/yr down range. I have already decided I'm not cheaping out but I'm also not going to have another mortgage payment.
Also with regard to magnification I find myself going big; Is there such a thing as too big? I do want to get into some long range shooting because my club has a 600yd range.
My choices are :
Vortex Viper PST 6.5-24x50 FFP
Vortex Viper PST 4-16x50 FFP
The non FFP versions of above are also an option and a significant price drop. But somehow I feel that I would be cheating myself.

I also like the
Vortex Viper HS-T and HS-LR in the above configurations.

I know the choice is mostly personal preference, but I'm looking for more of a High Power Shooting geek kind of response with regard to personal experiences of their own and other technical jibberish.

In certain situations yes. The issue with "too much magnification" is an issue in rifle competitions when you have a group of multiple shooters on the line firing at individual targets. What happens is beginner shooters dial up to max magnification and shoot....... at the WRONG target. This is called "cross shooting". Longer distance shooting at 300+ yds most targets will have a large lane number board near the top of the impact berm, and many will also have a small identifying number board placed at the top of the target frame. If you are dialed out to max magnification you can't verify your correct target # and you end up shooting your neighbors' target. That gets you the famous Batman dummy slap...

My sweet spot for adjustable magnification is about 3x per 100 yds . But with certain fixed power rifles I can't always do this. An example is my 1903A4 which has a period correct 2.5x . Another example is my 1874 Sharps which is a 5x . Shooting these rifles at 600 yds is a challenge for me.

 

[Whiskeywon]

There’s no such thing as too much scope. However, there is “too much magnification” for certain applications. When was the last time you heard someone at the range say “damn, I wish this glass would suck more”? you can dial down your magnification just so much. For hunting/tactical uses, field of view matters. 3.5-15 or 4-16 will cover all your bases in that department. If you’re just plinking for minute of backstop, just about any mag will do. Stick with reputable companies like Leupold, S&B, Nightforce, Hensoldt and such, and you’ll have a scope that’ll last you a lifetime.

This. You can never have too much clarity, too much forgiveness in eye relief, too much exit pupil. You can absolutely have too much magnification or additional scope weight that skews the balance of the rifle or substantially outperforms the capabilities of the rifle. Especially when most higher levels of magnification are often just used for target identification. I almost never go over 10-12X on any of my guns shooting out to distance despite owning glass that falls into the 5-25, 6-24 and 7-35 magnification ranges. My favorite piece of glass for shooting out to 600-700 yards is a Leupold Mk4 2.5-8x36 MR/T.

 

[mac1911]

In certain situations yes. The issue with "too much magnification" is an issue in rifle competitions when you have a group of multiple shooters on the line firing at individual targets. What happens is beginner shooters dial up to max magnification and shoot....... at the WRONG target. This is called "cross shooting". Longer distance shooting at 300+ yds most targets will have a large lane number board near the top of the impact berm, and many will also have a small identifying number board placed at the top of the target frame. If you are dialed out to max magnification you can't verify your correct target # and you end up shooting your neighbors' target. That gets you the famous Batman dummy slap...

My sweet spot for adjustable magnification is about 3x per 100 yds . But with certain fixed power rifles I can't always do this. An example is my 1903A4 which has a period correct 2.5x . Another example is my 1874 Sharps which is a 5x . Shooting these rifles at 600 yds is a challenge for me.

Especially when that 6moa bulls eye blends into the + ! I have to use s line hold to shoot my 03a4