High-End Rifle Scope Discussion

[Wind Gypsy]

I was one of those guys. I bought a 50mm bell thinking it would let in more light. When I compared it to a 44mm, it was such a marginal difference that it wasn’t worth the cost or the weight. At least from what my eyes saw.

Light gathering is only one of the benefits. A larger objective also helps make eye placement less critical or as folks like to say (big/forgiving "eye box"). On higher magnification powers there becomes a notable benefit but certainly not critical for teens and lower magnification levels most of the time. A very clear example of this is comparing my kowa 553 spotter vs my 82mm meopta - The kowa can resolve very sharply but it's finicky about eye placement comparatively and takes way more concentration and effort to keep a clear image.

In regards to scope size, i don't come across many scenarios where my scope gets in the way of anything. Id much rather have a big scope than a long barrel in that regard. The super short scopes folks have been clamoring for are a bit of a pet peeve for a couple reasons - 1: it limits your mounting flexibility with rings and 2: a super short scope, especially with a large magnification range is usually a recipe for finicky parallax adjustment, shallow depth of focus, and tight eye box. Give me a longer scope without those compromises every time!

 

[badkarma6]

Thanks everyone for the input. I understand what people are saying about the lower magnification scopes in thicker terrain. I agree with that and I have a Zeiss 2.5-10x50 Victory on a .270. Also have an old (but still great) Swarovski 3-9x36mm on a 243. I've got the lower end coverd.

I specifically want this scope for open terrain where I anticipate longer shots. I hunt a farm for whitetails with a lot of open fields where 300-400yds is possible and try to hunt out west once a year. Personally, I like to be able to up the magnification for a shot and "make it big." That's just me, I get the downsides. Also, with the Leupold VX-6 and the CDS dial, I've always had reservations and never bought one. I do understand ballistics and its really not that hard to dial the yardage.

Seems like people hate Vortex. I'm not a big Vortex fan but they aren't bad. Why the hatred? I had a Vortex Razor HD in 4.5-27x56mm and I got rid of it because it was heavy. Nice glass but the thing felt like a brick on my gun. Not a scope for hunting. Have a Vortex Razop spotting scope and it is nice, no complaints.

Think I am going to go with the Leupold MK5 when they come in stock. Thanks again, appreciate y'all.

 

[brockel]

I can respect that. Trijicon is really underrepresented in the magnified hunting optics world

My Trijicon credo hx has become one of my favorite scopes

 

[brockel]

Seems like people hate Vortex. I'm not a big Vortex fan but they aren't bad. Why the hatred? I had a Vortex Razor HD in 4.5-27x56mm and I got rid of it because it was heavy. Nice glass but the thing felt like a brick on my gun. Not a scope for hunting. Have a Vortex Razop spotting scope and it is nice, no complaints.

The hatred comes from the odds of getting to use their lifetime warranty being extremely high

 

[badkarma6]

The hatred comes from the odds of getting to use their lifetime warranty being extremely high

Army’s new rifle, the M7, has a Vortex system on top. If it’s shit, we’ll find quick once it starts getting fielded.

 

[brockel]

Army’s new rifle, the M7, has a Vortex system on top. If it’s shit, we’ll find quick once it starts getting fielded.

I hope they are better than what I’ve had.

 

[Wind Gypsy]

Army’s new rifle, the M7, has a Vortex system on top. If it’s shit, we’ll find quick once it starts getting fielded.

Wouldn't be the first or second time they put questionable optics on a weapon. They've used lots of questionable leupolds on sniper rifles, mark 4 and mark 6 particularly.

 

[badkarma6]

Wouldn't be the first or second time they put questionable optics on a weapon. They've used lots of questionable leupolds on sniper rifles, mark 4 and mark 6 particularly.

Yeah, I've had an M4 with an Aimpoint, ACOG and EOTech. ACOG was the best.

 

[woods89]

Thanks everyone for the input. I understand what people are saying about the lower magnification scopes in thicker terrain. I agree with that and I have a Zeiss 2.5-10x50 Victory on a .270. Also have an old (but still great) Swarovski 3-9x36mm on a 243. I've got the lower end coverd.

I specifically want this scope for open terrain where I anticipate longer shots. I hunt a farm for whitetails with a lot of open fields where 300-400yds is possible and try to hunt out west once a year. Personally, I like to be able to up the magnification for a shot and "make it big." That's just me, I get the downsides. Also, with the Leupold VX-6 and the CDS dial, I've always had reservations and never bought one. I do understand ballistics and its really not that hard to dial the yardage.

Seems like people hate Vortex. I'm not a big Vortex fan but they aren't bad. Why the hatred? I had a Vortex Razor HD in 4.5-27x56mm and I got rid of it because it was heavy. Nice glass but the thing felt like a brick on my gun. Not a scope for hunting. Have a Vortex Razop spotting scope and it is nice, no complaints.

Think I am going to go with the Leupold MK5 when they come in stock. Thanks again, appreciate y'all.

Have you read the Rokslide scope tests? Not suggesting they are the end all but they certainly have some interesting results with some of the optics you're considering.

 

[Don Fischer]

I've always wondered why guys choose scopes with such high magnification and large objectives for a hunting rifle. mtmuley

I have a theory on that. They believe the higher mag will better help them shoot at animals at ranges most are not really able to shoot. Few people have even 300yd ranges to shoot at yet need a set up capable to 400+ yds! I have access to ranges maybe a mile or so. Simply open country. Don't use it and generally confine my shooting at game animals to well under 300yds! I did shoot and kill a deer one time at 330 measured yds for the wrong reason. Just to say I had done it. I suspect, from what I read, most game animals are killed under 200yds. Under 200yds with a 600yd scope and rifle! very important thing I think most need to learn. The only shot you'll ever have to take is the one where a dangerous game animal is 10 feet from you in full charge getting ready for a meal! 15x scope won't be much help there!

 

[Seamaster]

Have you read the Rokslide scope tests? Not suggesting they are the end all but they certainly have some interesting results with some of the optics you're considering.

Do you mean the "drop" tests written by an individual that gets scopes for free from Nightforce? I have been skeptical.

 

[woods89]

Do you mean the "drop" tests written by an individual that gets scopes for free from Nightforce? I have been skeptical.

Skepticism is the chastity of the intellect!

It's pretty obvious that Ryan Avery knows him personally, and if Ryan is willing to stake his forums name on those tests, to me that gives me confidence. Interestingly enough, the scope recommended most by him is the SWFA 6x/3-9x.

One recommendation from the start with those tests is that people test their own gear and come to their own conclusions.

 

[TheTone]

Skepticism is the chastity of the intellect!

It's pretty obvious that Ryan Avery knows him personally, and if Ryan is willing to stake his forums name on those tests, to me that gives me confidence. Interestingly enough, the scope recommended most by him is the SWFA 6x/3-9x.

One recommendation from the start with those tests is that people test their own gear and come to their own conclusions.

Avery loves posting “reviews” on his site of people that have sponsorship deals with companies. I’m almost always skeptical of reviews on their

 

[mtmuley]

Flatten your hat brim before logging on. mtmuley

 

[bayoublaster7527]

I know Rokslide gets a lotta hate around here, mostly in good fun, but it’s a pretty awesome place for gear reviews and buying/selling gear. There are some pretty serious gear junkies over there that provide some good commentary.

 

[mtmuley]

I know Rokslide gets a lotta hate around here, mostly in good fun, but it’s a pretty awesome place for gear reviews and buying/selling gear. There are some pretty serious gear junkies over there that provide some good commentary.

The only good thing I found there. Somehow due to a tech glitch I can't log on anymore. Oh well. mtmuley

 

[woods89]

Avery loves posting “reviews” on his site of people that have sponsorship deals with companies. I’m almost always skeptical of reviews on their

They posted a pretty negative scope test with the Vortex Razor LHT, with Vortex as one of their sponsors.
No question that some of their reviews mean more to me than others, though.

 

[Wind Gypsy]

The rokslide reviews where they are shitting on site sponsors’ products or some product that was given to them for a review hold a lot more weight to me than Les Welch writing “this Mathews bow is the best bow I’ve ever shot” every year.

What’s the scoop on Form getting free nightforce scopes? I recall something along the lines of a scope being sent to him but nothing about him just getting free scopes.

 

[mtmuley]

What’s the scoop on Form getting free nightforce scopes? I recall something along the lines of a scope being sent to him but nothing about him just getting free scopes.

You should ask on rokslide. I think he used to post here once in awhile but I guess HT doesn't measure up. mtmuley

 

[PopcornSutton]

Most of my shooting is in benchrest, so high power scopes are the norm for me. However, a friend was asking for a quality scope for a varmint rifle that will see 98% bench shooting, and maybe a crow of groundhog now and then. So to me, a scope should have some qualities like: first and foremost it has to hold point of aim, and throw in repeatable, consistent adjustments. I like a clean reticle. Crosshairs with a dot, plain crosshairs type are time tested. Some of those reticles are so busy I would forget about what I was shooting at. Many say it's not if your scope will break, it's when it breaks. I don't want to send a scope half way around the globe. And I want the repair done in a timely manner, not set on a shelf. I grew up believing Leupold was hands down the best in service, but I've heard that might not be the case anymore. Needless to say, barring any physical abuse, the scope should be repaired and returned...period.

After reading so far here, I don't see a favorite.