-
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
What magnification do you use?
- Thread starter Nick Leduc
- Start date
- Joined
- Dec 9, 2008
- Messages
- 3,413
- Likes
- 1,215
What ever my max is from 25X through 50X, I like the practice of keeping steady and not wandering.
Dean
Dean
At least 8x. Anything less and I can't see the bullet holes. Plus I don't want to use a spotting scope.
the magnification is just one small factor. the quality of glass and objective size is far more important. honestly i've used crappy optics where couldn't see shit with 9x, even as close as 200 yards. then run a quality 3x optic and can see clearly out to 300+ yards. a good example is my leupold rimfire 4x optic running on the henry 22. that damn thing is so clear it's amazing. with 4x in that type of quality glass there is ZERO reason to ever need higher magnification.
OP- if your'e using a 4x magnified optic at 100 yards and not getting clear images, then the optic is either low quality glass or there's a refractive issue with the human eye.
another nice example: my nikon prostaff 308 with BDC. it's a 4-12x second focal plane scope. by all descriptions shoudl be high quality. it BLOWS. eye relief awful. glass quality shit. cannot see anything at 12x. it just magnifies all the imperfections in the glass. soon i should have it in the classifieds keep your eyes peeled![[rofl]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/013.gif "ROFL [rofl]")
OP- if your'e using a 4x magnified optic at 100 yards and not getting clear images, then the optic is either low quality glass or there's a refractive issue with the human eye.
another nice example: my nikon prostaff 308 with BDC. it's a 4-12x second focal plane scope. by all descriptions shoudl be high quality. it BLOWS. eye relief awful. glass quality shit. cannot see anything at 12x. it just magnifies all the imperfections in the glass. soon i should have it in the classifieds keep your eyes peeled
No. Again if the eyes arent great then again the answer is not higher magnification. The answer is higher density (better quality) glass and a larger objective to collect more light.
Nothing is free. Everything is a trade off. All things being equal, higher magnification has huge trade offs. It's almost never the answer and often the problem.
4x is maybe ok for hunting...
Growing up 4x was generally on 22s with small 5/8 3/4" tubes.
My hunting scope is a 2.5x8x32 leupold VXIII that's 20 plus years old.
Think like this most of these 4x scopes are generally design to hit a target zone...not so much tiny little groups.
I recently bought a sightron SIII 8x32x56 and I really like it. Although I find myself not going over 24x to often. I was at 600 yards 2 weeks ago and I dialed it up to 32x and it was useless the mirage was crazy felt like I was in a fish tank... 12x was fine.
Now I have a 4x16 on my pellet gun and like it on 16 almost all the time.
I was able to try out a lot of great scopes this year. Most where out of my wallets reach.
I used a 40x fixed March brand scope with a 1/16 moa dot and it was out standing.
At 200 yards I could see Inside a 22 hole and could put the dot inside that hole.
Growing up 4x was generally on 22s with small 5/8 3/4" tubes.
My hunting scope is a 2.5x8x32 leupold VXIII that's 20 plus years old.
Think like this most of these 4x scopes are generally design to hit a target zone...not so much tiny little groups.
I recently bought a sightron SIII 8x32x56 and I really like it. Although I find myself not going over 24x to often. I was at 600 yards 2 weeks ago and I dialed it up to 32x and it was useless the mirage was crazy felt like I was in a fish tank... 12x was fine.
Now I have a 4x16 on my pellet gun and like it on 16 almost all the time.
I was able to try out a lot of great scopes this year. Most where out of my wallets reach.
I used a 40x fixed March brand scope with a 1/16 moa dot and it was out standing.
At 200 yards I could see Inside a 22 hole and could put the dot inside that hole.
C'mon. Shooting at steel or at the center dot of a paper target?
- Joined
- May 23, 2013
- Messages
- 4,784
- Likes
- 4,912
My .22 has the cheap POS 3x9 that came on it, my "I'm going to prison" rifle wears an inexpensive 3x9 Leupold, and my M1A(while having an A.R.M.S 18 mount on it) goes naked. I've got a Aimpoint CompM3 kicking about in a drawer that I should put on my "I'm going to prison" rifle and put the Loopy on my .22.
the magnification is just one small factor. the quality of glass and objective size is far more important. honestly i've used crappy optics where couldn't see shit with 9x, even as close as 200 yards. then run a quality 3x optic and can see clearly out to 300+ yards. a good example is my leupold rimfire 4x optic running on the henry 22. that damn thing is so clear it's amazing. with 4x in that type of quality glass there is ZERO reason to ever need higher magnification.
OP- if your'e using a 4x magnified optic at 100 yards and not getting clear images, then the optic is either low quality glass or there's a refractive issue with the human eye.
another nice example: my nikon prostaff 308 with BDC. it's a 4-12x second focal plane scope. by all descriptions shoudl be high quality. it BLOWS. eye relief awful. glass quality shit. cannot see anything at 12x. it just magnifies all the imperfections in the glass. soon i should have it in the classifieds keep your eyes peeled
Its not so much not getting clear images, I think the human eye had more to do with it. I know it has to do with more than magnification. Time of day was around 5-6PM, sun was setting and I was shooting directly into it. I was using a Burris Fullfield Tac 30. The center dot was too large (IMO) with the target bullseye. I was covering the bulls eye, but was relying too much on keeping the crosshairs in the scope level with the horizontal lines of my target and I think that is where I was loosing focus. (focusing between small black lines vs red bulls eye). It would have been nice to realize that the scope illuminates while I was at the range, and not right now.....
All I know is the entire time shooitng, I kept thinking "man, I wish I had a few more times magnification" LOL.
Hopefully I can make it to the range tomorrow to try a few different things to see if I can get some tighter groups. Swapping out my trigger right now. I may bring an extra scope with me to see if that helps me.
Worse case 2.521 and Best at 1.686. That's a big group. What twist do you have on your Grendel and what barrel length. I know with my Radical arms 24' 1-9 I can group 1 MOA at 100 yards and My groups tend to tighten up at 200 yards and my groups are around 1.75. But this is also with bags and I tend to leave my scope set at 12x Out past 200 yards I crank it up too 18x But only so I can use the proper hold overs.
Yeah, Im not happy with the sizes of the groups. That's why Im starting with what were my first complaints (scope) and I assume the $15 trigger doesn't help. I have a 1:9 twist with a 24" (also Radical).
- - - Updated - - -
Eye relief was fine.
I have a factory trigger on my AR. Heavy but crisp. What hornady ammo were you using. I actually found the sst to group slightly better then the amax boat tail. Are you using bags? I can group much better with bags or a lead sled then I can with just my bipod. Bi pod only and my groups open up to maybe 1.25 at 100 and 2.25 at 200.
I was off of bags. I had better luck with the SST compared to the A-MAX.
Try using a lead sled. I know mine grouped 3 shots into a hole the size of a Nickel off of a sled. Takes the human error out of the equation. Granted bags should do the same thing but Iv always felt a sled will show what a gun can truly do if you take the human out of it where with bags it still comes into play.
You have a tactical scope on a upper that your trying to squeeze precision out of it.
That small tube on the optic doesn't let a lot of light in either. That reticle blocks a lot of the target also.
If you can try to borrow a fine crosshair or a 1/8 moa dot target scope.
Your scope has the ballistic CQ or close quarters reticle. The large center dot is over 1/2 moa at 100 yards on 4x. The grendal is supposed to be more accurate than the 5.56 with that scope I think it delivered expected "accuracy"
I don't know much about the grendal but 1/9 seems slow ? Are the grendal bullets short
Last edited:
The only scoped rifle that I possess is a sporterized m96 with a Leupold 2x EER. It really doesn't magnify much, but it does provide a better aim point than the iron sights. At least I can see the crosshairs and can find a target at 100 meters (that's as far as I have on the property).
The rifle is almost 2x as old as my eyes...
Last edited:
good aperture sights allow some darn good accuracy....
Although Jasons should mention a few things.
service rifle and high power rifle is shot at known target sizes the black bull which contains X/10/9 and as far out as the 7 ring on the official targets. SR1 at 100 yards its a touch over 6" with the X being 1.35" at 600 its a 36" bull with a 6" X ring.
If your not familiar with " match sights" or the "match rifles" in NRA high power think long long sight radius and expensive aperture sights front and rear.
believe me im not that good and I shot better at 600 yards with iron sights my first time out than I did with my 400$ match barrel and 800$ scope the first time out at 600.
your vertical shot placement could be head position and breathing?
Last edited:
the reticle on TAC-30 is huge. when i played around with that optic at cabela's, the reticle completely obscured objects at the other end of the store. it also seemed to have rather picky eye relief. for this reason i didn't go with it. they are now selling them with a burris fastfire included for great price, which does sweeten the deal.
i agree with mac1911 above that the TAC-30 is a "tactical" optic ideally for quick aquisition and holdovers, sort of acog-ish. For a 6.5 grendel where the goal is precision and range might be better served with a precision optic. I have zero experience w 6.5 grendel. my understanding is it's a 500+ cartridge where it really shines. i would think for 6.5 grendel you will dial elevation/windage into the optic rather than use holdovers, so really don't need a tactical optic. leupold and vortex make so many great scopes for you setup. i also have a budget burris fullfield II 2-7x which has done alright. it's fine once it's zero'ed but the turrets don't track perfectly so i wouldn't go that route for precision work.
i agree with mac1911 above that the TAC-30 is a "tactical" optic ideally for quick aquisition and holdovers, sort of acog-ish. For a 6.5 grendel where the goal is precision and range might be better served with a precision optic. I have zero experience w 6.5 grendel. my understanding is it's a 500+ cartridge where it really shines. i would think for 6.5 grendel you will dial elevation/windage into the optic rather than use holdovers, so really don't need a tactical optic. leupold and vortex make so many great scopes for you setup. i also have a budget burris fullfield II 2-7x which has done alright. it's fine once it's zero'ed but the turrets don't track perfectly so i wouldn't go that route for precision work.
1x or 3x.
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2009
- Messages
- 16,367
- Likes
- 4,835
I don't ~just~ shoot highpower (or just match rifle for that matter.) Even for the up close "tactical" stuff I personally prefer a simple unmagnified red dot like an Aim Point. It sort of depends on what you're trying to do though I guess.
understood. End use is key....
here is my old Reminton 513t from 1942 god knows how many rounds where put though this tube.... This is 100 yards prone (i shot this after the match saturday, I needed some sort of redemption) with redfield 75 and international up front. Not bad for a worn 22lr. I dont think this rifle will shoot much better with a scope.
I have a 1904a4 reproduction scope and the crosshairs on that will cover a few MOA and its only 2.5X I can pull off 1.5moa groups with it. I think if I had a 10x with a fine crosshair I could shoot sub moa ?
now on my 22lr upper I have set up for steel @ 100 yards I have a vintage Tasco Pro Point it darn near covers the 4" plate at 100 but 99% of the time if the dot is on it you ding it...?
have fun
