Reticle / scope for 300 Win Mag

[coppermushroom]

I am finishing a 300 win mag build and am having a devil of a time deciding on what scope to top it with. This gun is intended to chase everything from elk to sheep; my glass is narrowed to Zeiss HD5 or Leupold VX6 with CDS. I am leaning towards the VX6 but here is my question - what reticle do you guys prefer? Illuminated B&C, firedot, or standard duplex? Would the combo of both the CDS / B&C offer the best combination?

I think I am simply over thinking this - I am not into 500+ yard shots and with a zero of 250 or 300 yards my MPBR should be plenty for 90% of situations faced. Thoughts?

 

[Pinecricker]

If I am not mistaken, illuminated recticles are illegal in some states. They definitely are not legal in Idaho and Montana. Check the states you plan to hunt.

As for which style recticle, if you're not doing long range shooting, I would go with duplex. The way I have my .300 set up, the top of bottom the thick duplex post is good for 500 yds, with the scope of 4x.

 

[deer_shooter]

I prefer standard duplex and take a look at the Swarovski Z3 too. I was looking at pretty much the same scopes as you for my 300 and went with the swaro

 

[hank4elk]

I picked up a Zeiss Conquest for my -06 last year on a deal.3.5x14x44, Rapid 6 reticle.
I don't shoot out much past 200 either.But it sure is sweet to just put the 300 yrd line on the target and have it be accurate!! Awesome scope. Designed for 30-06 & 300 WM....

 

[noharleyyet]

VX6 2x12x42 firedot duplex CDS (from Schmalts) tops the 300 WSM Kevin Weaver built a couple seasons ago. My first illuminated. Also have a Z3 & Conquest on other rifles...all fine glass but right now the VX6 is the best IMO....and I really like the firedot. I might add that the CDS is simple enough for a true technophobe...and it works.

Question; In states where reticle illumination isn't legal, could you have the feature and not battery the firedot?

 

[1_pointer]

I'd go with the Leupold as I've read some less than stellar reviews of the HD5, especially if your considering turning turrets.

I would would highly suggest looking at Leupolds new WindPlex reticle. IMO, it makes great sense when paired with a CDS turret. Dial for elevation and hold for wind. It also comes in a FireDot version.

 

[WyOpitz]

Vx6 is nice but jeez that's a lot of extra weight. I wanted to top my rifle with one until I saw the size of it. Ended up with the VX3 with BDC reticle and love it. It works awesome out to 400 yards, haven't been able to test the 450 and 500 mark but everything else is spot on.

 

[MinnesotaHunter]

I would also take a second look at whether or not you want to go with the 30mm glass if your intent is to use this primarily as a western rifle. If you were looking for a beanfield rifle that can give you some extra minutes of light that is a different thing.

I own both Zeiss and Leupold, and have had zero issues with both, but I like leupold for their compact size vs other similar powered glass and the fact that they are US made.

As for the scope I would go with: VX-3 3.5-10x40mm CDS with the new Windplex (like Pointer mentioned), or if you want a little more magnification you could do the 4.5-14. Another thing to consider is ordering from their custom shop and getting one done with the M1 turret and dual erectors. You could also look at the TMR reticle, I like it, but it is personal preference.

 

[MKotur325]

Like was mentioned before, you may want to check the regs in the states you plan to hunt before purchasing a rifle with an illuminated reticule. They in fact, Are, legal in Montana. The way the statute reads, it is as long as no visible light is emitted from the scope, and they do not enhance existing light (i.e. night vision). They are legal for use in MT.

As far as reticules go. I've shot several Leupold optics, I have a Zeiss conquest 4.5-14 RZ-800, and a 3.5-15x Nightforce with a reticule with hash marks on the crosshairs in all directions. I have had some really positive experiences with Zeiss's Customer Service. The reticule chipped on my first conquest, and they replaced the damaged scope no questions asked.

Anymore, if I have the chance, I will dial for elevation correction, and hold off for wind. A reticule that has wind markings on the horizontal cross wire is, to me, a must. I like the look of the Leupold VX-6. At those price territories, you might also consider a Nightforce SHV with the MOAR reticule. It is an MOA scale reticule. I tend to prefer a scale reticule like the MOAR, NP-R1, NP-R2 from Nightforce, or something that will give me MOA markings on the horizontal crosshair. My mind thinks in Minutes and not wind speeds. To me it is more valuable to have markings for wind in Minutes, or Mill rads instead of MPH wind. The B&C, Zeiss RZ reticules, the Nightforce Velocity reticules and in fact most "Christmas tree, range reticules" use markings for wind speed at range. They tend to clash with how my mind works. Your mind may work differently. There are also a myriad of Mill rad scale reticules like these that are available if you would prefer a Mill rad scale.

Also worth noting, These reticules are typically second focal plane, meaning that the subtensions change as the magnification changes. Your drop curve will only be accurate at one magnification setting. For most it is Max power. Just something to remember before you head out into the field. Dialing turrets is accurate at any power setting on the scope.

Before you go shooting these... take note, there is a difference between a scope that is listed in 1/4MOA for adjustments and one that lists 1/4" at 100yds. The difference is slight, but you will want to know before you try to push your ranges at all. Zeiss uses 1/4" at 100yds, Leupold and Nightforce use MOA. Not saying one is better than the other, just a slightly different scale. It ends up being about a 5% difference in the number of clicks used. The further you shoot the more difference there will be. Please also note, if you go with an RZ reticule from Zeiss, all their calculations are in Inches/hundred yards.

 

[1_pointer]

I would also take a second look at whether or not you want to go with the 30mm glass if your intent is to use this primarily as a western rifle. If you were looking for a beanfield rifle that can give you some extra minutes of light that is a different thing.

For what its worth, brightness or amount of light "gathered" is not a function of the size of the scope tube (1" vs 30mm). Objective size and magnification are.

The VX-3 with CDS is also now going to be offered with the WindPlex. However, the new VX6-ZL has a tab on the CDS knob to lock it in place so it doesn't spin unless you want it to. I don't think the VX-3 comes with that option, but I think it can be retrofitted for it.

 

[MKotur325]

For what its worth, brightness or amount of light "gathered" is not a function of the size of the scope tube (1" vs 30mm). Objective size and magnification are.

#Truth

Light transmitting ability is not determined by the main tube. In fact, IMHO the biggest determining factors to how much light is transmitted are glass quality and coatings, followed by magnification and objective size (exit pupil). 30's are quite a bit heavier, this is also true. My 3.5-15x50 Nightforce weights about 31-32oz, compared to 13.5oz Leupold VX3 4.5-14x40 ao cds.

The biggest advantage that can, but is not always seen, in a 30mm optic is more adjustment range. If you look at the VX6 most have 75MOA of adjustment, most of the 1" VX3's have 50-60MOA of adjustment. To some this can be a significant difference. It's not uncommon to see 30mm tube optics with 80-110 MOA of adjustment range for elevation, while it's quite rare to see 1" optics with more than 60moa of adjustment.

 

[.280 Remington]

For what you describe, I'd get a decent scope with a LR reticle and leave it at that. Something like the Leupold B&C.

 

[Bambistew]

Don't know what the big deal is... according to the experts all you need a 4x fixed.

 

[ShootsManyBullets]

great info

 

[coppermushroom]

Thanks for all of the good info. One other thing while we are on topic - what is the best way to simulate altitude while practicing? Here is Ohio I am at a staggering 630 feet above sea level. While I do shoot a lot - have 600 yard range in the back yard - ordering a turret for say 7000ft and 30degrees sounds good but I would like to verify that it is dead on before heading west.

How big of a difference would you estimate POI at 400 yards @ sea level vs 400 yards @ 7000 feet? I have read everything I can but would rather hear from guys that have real world experience with this. Thanks again for the help.

 

[ewludwig]

I would go with the Rapid Z. Ask Ross what happens when you forget to adjust your CDS during the excitement of a well executed stalk.....I would rather not worry about adjusting the dial after getting an accurate range. It all comes down to muscle memory and repitition. If all your scopes are CDS and adjusting the turret is an automatic part of your pre shot routine, then go with it.

Only thing to keep in mind with a Rapid Z is that the lines will not be exactly at 100 increments. Depending on the load, mine vary from 8-26yds

 

[.280 Remington]

Thanks for all of the good info. One other thing while we are on topic - what is the best way to simulate altitude while practicing? Here is Ohio I am at a staggering 630 feet above sea level. While I do shoot a lot - have 600 yard range in the back yard - ordering a turret for say 7000ft and 30degrees sounds good but I would like to verify that it is dead on before heading west.

How big of a difference would you estimate POI at 400 yards @ sea level vs 400 yards @ 7000 feet? I have read everything I can but would rather hear from guys that have real world experience with this. Thanks again for the help.

You don't need a turret for a 500 yard shot with a 300 mag. Keep it simple with a LR reticle. Less headache, less hassle.

 

[MKotur325]

Thanks for all of the good info. One other thing while we are on topic - what is the best way to simulate altitude while practicing? Here is Ohio I am at a staggering 630 feet above sea level. While I do shoot a lot - have 600 yard range in the back yard - ordering a turret for say 7000ft and 30degrees sounds good but I would like to verify that it is dead on before heading west.

How big of a difference would you estimate POI at 400 yards @ sea level vs 400 yards @ 7000 feet? I have read everything I can but would rather hear from guys that have real world experience with this. Thanks again for the help.

I'm not aware of a good way to simulate elevation for shooting purposes. I'd love to hear about any that other people have.

With my Ballistic solver. it shows, from a 250yd Zero, with a .308" 180Gr Nosler partition starting at 2950fps, it shows 17.7" drop at 400yds based on 29.92inHG (standard pressure for 0' elevation). It show 14.7" drop at 400yds based on 23.1inHG (standard pressure for 7000' elevation. This load is set zeroed to 2.75" high at 29.92inHG at 59 Degrees. IIRC when you send Leupold the information for your load, you can say, this is shot at 630' elevation, I'm going to be hunting at 7000' can you cut a turret for 7000'? Please correct me if I'm wrong... The change in drop will become Much more significant as you extend ranges beyond 400yds. At 500 yds it shows 40.8" drop at 29.92inHG and 34.3" drop at 23.1inHG. That change just doubled within 100yds...

PM me if you would like any other insight, or if you would like me to play with any of the variables to get a more accurate idea for you.

 

[ewludwig]

THis is my ballistic calculator. I realize that the Rapid Z-800 is too much for a .270. I also realized after paying attention to detail, that the scope would perform best if I were to change my zero at 100yds to 1.2" as that would give me roughly a 200yd zero. That is according to the calculator based on my load data. This would make the lines closer to 300, 400, 500 etc.

As stated, the main limitation is that you are limited to one magnification, or two if you were to slide the red dot on the calculator to a more desireable magnification than the one given by the calculator.

I probably oversimplified the Rapid Z in my initial post. There are certainly merits and limitations to both options.

 

[jryoung]

How big of a difference would you estimate POI at 400 yards @ sea level vs 400 yards @ 7000 feet?

The math shows the following as a frame of reference, but actual results will certainly vary. You'll need to test rather than guess.