New Scope | 300 yards in low-light

[Mr. UML]

@brockel - I don't disagree. I honestly have never been a big fan of FFP, but some people swear that it's the cat's ass for doing long-range shooting. I'm no expert in this area, but I've heard some people say that the lines on the vertical axis account for the same value of drop whether it's at 5x or 40x, whereas the drop value is inconsistent when using SFP. I have no idea if that's true or not. When I sight in a scope, I target shoot to figure out how many lines down correspond to what distances. It would be my expectation that the # of lines down would be true at any level of magnification, but maybe I'm wrong.

@Dave N - I'm not shooting a paper bullseye at 300 yards. I'm shooting a 6" gong. And I'm shooting over open farmland. It's not always easy to tell the deer to come closer

@MThuntr - I personally don't like that reticle given the transition from the small crosshair to the other lines on the scope. It's hard for me to count the lines underneath it (when they're in black) vs. the red crosshair. I'd rather it be consistent.

 

[np307]

This thread is the epitome of "opinions are like assholes, everyone has one". Again, I couldn't give two shits about what you use and makes you comfortable. We're talking about taking life from an animal - and if I say I'm uncomfortable doing so with my equipment at a certain range, I sure as hell am not going to consider voices which say "it's more than enough / too much / my dick is 40" long and I can do it with a fixed 4x".

@jt13 - My feedback regarding muzzleloader recoil is that when I see a lot of these scopes being classified as "target scopes", I have concern that they won't be able to withstand the recoil of a .50cal vs. a .223 / .243. I had a Vortex at one point and shooting with it caused internal damage and you couldn't see anything out of it. Literally black.

@Schism - Honestly, so many of these folks are 5' tall and drive lifted pickups. But man, thanks for making me aware of the ZC840. That is wicked looking, especially since I can get it with the MPCT1X reticle. Beautiful! I like it better than the Tangent Theta 7-35x56mm.

@brockel - I really like the Trijicon as well, and it's quite affordable in comparison to some of the others.

I'd like to hear some additional input on the Trijicon (SFP), Nightforce (FFP), and the ZCO (FFP).

Telling you that you don't need more magnification isn't an ego trip. There's legitimate hunting reasons for limiting your magnification when hunting. The lower the magnification, the broader your field of view. This is extremely important when determining what happens when you pull the trigger. Spotting the animal's reaction and direction of travel is going to be impossible with a 40x scope.

Also, horse scoping aside, what on earth would make it difficult to pick out the vitals about that scope picture?

You're the one that asked for opinions. Can't be too upset when people offer one and it doesn't match what you want to hear.

 

[Mr. UML]

Telling you that you don't need more magnification isn't an ego trip. There's legitimate hunting reasons for limiting your magnification when hunting. The lower the magnification, the broader your field of view. This is extremely important when determining what happens when you pull the trigger. Spotting the animal's reaction and direction of travel is going to be impossible with a 40x scope.

Also, horse scoping aside, what on earth would make it difficult to pick out the vitals about that scope picture?

You're the one that asked for opinions. Can't be too upset when people offer one and it doesn't match what you want to hear.

The first point is invalid regarding determining what happens when I pull the trigger. All I see is smoke for a few seconds. After all, I am shooting a muzzleloader - and it's clear many of the folks weighing in don't understand that you have no visibility after taking the shot. The point is completely moot.

Regarding the scope picture, imagine that picture in lower light. Everything blends in. You won't be able to define the bottom of the animal's torso from the surroundings. That makes it problematic when trying to gauge where the heart is.

 

[Laelkhunter]

I'm thinking for long range shooting, the Trijicon Ten Mile would be a great choice, BUT I am NOT recommending shooting at any game animal that is 10 miles away. That would be foolish.

 

[Mr. UML]

I'm thinking for long range shooting, the Trijicon Ten Mile would be a great choice, BUT I am NOT recommending shooting at any game animal that is 10 miles away. That would be foolish.

Are you kidding? All you have to do is angle my muzzleloader to 70 degrees and launch that bullet on its way!

 

[np307]

The first point is invalid regarding determining what happens when I pull the trigger. All I see is smoke for a few seconds. After all, I am shooting a muzzleloader - and it's clear many of the folks weighing in don't understand that you have no visibility after taking the shot. The point is completely moot.

Regarding the scope picture, imagine that picture in lower light. Everything blends in. You won't be able to define the bottom of the animal's torso from the surroundings. That makes it problematic when trying to gauge where the heart is.

I figured if you're shooting a muzzleloader at 300 yards with a 40x scope you're also using one of the smokeless ones. Guess not.

Buddy I don't know what to tell you if you think that horse wouldn't be distinguishable at low light. Either eat some carrots or stop hunting past legal light or get a thermal scope.

 

[Mr. UML]

I figured if you're shooting a muzzleloader at 300 yards with a 40x scope you're also using one of the smokeless ones. Guess not.

Buddy I don't know what to tell you if you think that horse wouldn't be distinguishable at low light. Either eat some carrots or stop hunting past legal light or get a thermal scope.

Smokeless is illegal in our state outside of a special season. Again, what's good for some people is not for others - and if I'm uncomfortable with it, I'm not going to do it - no matter what folks on here say. There's better equipment available and therefore it's on the table.

 

[TN2shot07]

I still haven’t figured out if this is a legit thread or not…

I tend to agree with most of what’s been posted above regarding chasing too much magnification. You probably would be well served with a trip to a good optometrist and/or ophthalmologist see if you do have an issue that could be corrected.

You aren’t going to get much feedback here on the scopes on your list because most wouldn’t qualify as normal hunting optics. I surely don’t want to add all that weight to a rifle that I plan on toting through the woods.

If you want to add something else in that extreme price range check out stealth vision. The high end (5-30x56) isn’t quite what you’re after in magnification but it has some features you’re after. An eye surgeon designed them specifically to maximize that balance of fov and light gathering for hunting purposes. Give them a call

 

[mtmuley]

eat some carrots

Awesome. mtmuley

 

[Mr. UML]

I still haven’t figured out if this is a legit thread or not…

I tend to agree with most of what’s been posted above regarding chasing too much magnification. You probably would be well served with a trip to a good optometrist and/or ophthalmologist see if you do have an issue that could be corrected.

You aren’t going to get much feedback here on the scopes on your list because most wouldn’t qualify as normal hunting optics. I surely don’t want to add all that weight to a rifle that I plan on toting through the woods.

If you want to add something else in that extreme price range check out stealth vision. The high end (5-30x56) isn’t quite what you’re after in magnification but it has some features you’re after. An eye surgeon designed them specifically to maximize that balance of fov and light gathering for hunting purposes. Give them a call

There's nothing wrong with my vision. I'm simply have a different level of comfort when considering a target at that range.

I checked out Stealth Vision. It looks like they have some sort of nightvision in the scope (which is illegal in Michigan outside of use for coyotes). There's also no details on the reticle.

I don't mind the excess weight. My gun weighs >12 lbs as it is. Who cares about another 1-2 lbs.

 

[TN2shot07]

There's nothing wrong with my vision. I'm simply have a different level of comfort when considering a target at that range.

I checked out Stealth Vision. It looks like they have some sort of nightvision in the scope (which is illegal in Michigan outside of use for coyotes). There's also no details on the reticle.

I don't mind the excess weight. My gun weighs >12 lbs as it is. Who cares about another 1-2 lbs.

The reticle information is listed on the website (photos section), it’s a normal holdover style with hash marks. There is no night vision in the scope. It’s designed with room for a clip that will allow you to use a Leica thermal if you needed it. They are based in Texas so I’d assume hog hunting is the primary purpose.

 

[Mr. UML]

The reticle information is listed on the website (photos section), it’s a normal holdover style with hash marks. There is no night vision in the scope. It’s designed with room for a clip that will allow you to use a Leica thermal if you needed it. They are based in Texas so I’d assume hog hunting is the primary purpose.

Thanks for the input!

 

[peterk1234]

This is the best thread of the month. Thank you.

 

[Mr. UML]

This is the best thread of the month. Thank you.

I do what I can lol

 

[Potsie]

Someone mentioned Urban Dictionary in another thread. Amazing what one can learn with just a simple google search.

 

[TheTone]

No reason to need all that precision and magnification when you’re shooting bullets a half inch diameter. You got so much room for error and wound channel shooting that cannon

 

[Wind Gypsy]

 

[WildWill]

Is this you?

 

[Mr. UML]

@BackofBeyond - You've added zero value to this thread. I'm very clearly saying that my current 4-16x50 doesn't make me comfortable for some of the shots I need to take. Telling me "lol I can do it with 1/10th of that power, omg look at my 4' dong" accomplishes nothing. But keep pretending like I asked your opinion if >16x was too much (because I didn't). Sit on it Potsie.

@TheTone - You're not terribly wrong. Just because it will trash anything it hits doesn't mean that I don't want to do it in the most ethical manner possible.

@WildWill - Thankfully no. I'd ban anyone who shoots a yearling buck at my place anyways.

 

[Mr. UML]

Also - folks that are unfamiliar with this gun and how outstanding it is should look at this page here.