PDA

View Full Version : 20 moa scope bases


DubC-Hicks
December 25, 2010, 01:23 PM
I would like to get into long range shooting. (600-1000yds) I have a Rem 700 .308 with a 26" bull barrel. In order to get out to these ranges, will I need 20 moa bases or will I be fine with normal ones? Thanks.

shanzlik
December 25, 2010, 01:27 PM
It all depends on how much elevation adjustment you have left in your scope after you zero it. If you start with a 60MOA of total elevation scope, you may need one. If you have one with 80MOA or more, you likely won't need one.

Slamfire
December 25, 2010, 01:33 PM
I needed one on my 308 Ruger.

Ruger factory rings are made so the centerline of the rings are parallel to the centerline of the bore.

Lets say it is about 15 MOA from 200 yards to 600 yards with a 308. My scope had enough elevation to make that.

However when I went back to 1000 yards, and I needed about 24 additional MOA to do that and I ran out of elevation adjustment.

The 20 MOA scope mount allowed me to be on at 1000 yards. The disadvantage was the high scope mounting. Must have moved the scope up at least an inch, probably more. Later I rolled a tee shirt into a square and duct taped that on the stock as a cheek piece.

Actually, works fine, looks awful. :D


http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v479/SlamFire/Ruger%20M77%20Glassbedded/96ReducedRugerM77afterGlassbeddingD.jpg

DubC-Hicks
December 25, 2010, 01:47 PM
ok thanks guys. I am still looking for a scope also, so I am not sure how much adjustment I will have in it. I have been looking at the Mueller 8-32x44. I would like the scope to go up to at least 25x with a side parallax adjustment. I'm not sure if I want a 30mm or 1" tube. I'm on about a $300 budget so if you guys have any suggestions, that would be great.

shanzlik
December 25, 2010, 02:09 PM
Usually a 30mm tube will have more adjustment range, but not always. It's tough to get really good glass for $300 that also has the magnification range you're looking for, but the Mueller is probably a good choice.

You may want to check out the Bushnell Elite 3200 series 5-15x40 for about $300. The mag range is lower but you're probably getting better glass. It does lack a side focus though. You would want a 20MOA base with it. You can often see better using scopes with better glass even though their mag range is lower.

Another good option is the Nikon Monarch 4-16x40 with side focus for $400 or so. Very good glass.

My long range setup uses a Bushnell Elite 4200 6-24x50 mildot in Burris XTR rings and an EGW 20MOA rail. The scope is about twice your budget though. Not cheap, but very good short of spending $1K or more on a scope.

DubC-Hicks
December 25, 2010, 02:22 PM
Shnazlik,

Is the 6-24 enough magnification? Or would less still be fine for the longer ranges? Also, do you guys prefer side adjustment or is the AO fine?

shanzlik
December 25, 2010, 02:38 PM
Really, you can get by with something like a 3-10x40 at a 1,000 yards. I like side adjustment but it's not always needed. I would personally rather use a good to very good 10x than a passable 24x. I have a Weaver 3-10x40 Tactical Grand Slam on a mid to longish range AR that was $300 at MidwayUSA that is very good. If you want a mildot (don't need one unless you want it) it has mil turrets so that your reticle and turrets use the same measurement system.

Here's the Weaver. No side adjustment.
http://i1143.photobucket.com/albums/n634/G27RR/IMG_1075.jpg

Here's the Bushnell 4200 with side adjustment.
http://i1143.photobucket.com/albums/n634/G27RR/Howa1500SCELP12-2.jpg

Here's the Nikon I mentioned before with side adjustment. It's on a .22 that I often shoot at <100yds where parallax can be an issue.
http://i1143.photobucket.com/albums/n634/G27RR/SavageMarkIITRrtside.jpg

shanzlik
December 25, 2010, 02:42 PM
Forgot to mention it may be worth giving up side focus to get better glass with something like the Weaver if your $300 budget is firm. If you can, try them out in the store. I kept hearing good things about a particular Millet, but in two different stores the ones I tried got cloudy on their max magnification setting. Sometimes different people will perceive the same scope to be different clarity levels.

Jimro
December 25, 2010, 02:44 PM
You need about 45 minutes of "UP" to get to 1k. If you use a 20 minute scope base you need a scope that has a minimum of 50 minutes of verticle travel AND that is the bare minimum, if the scope zeroes off center then you won't make it. 50/2=25, 25+20=45 MOA.

Better bet is to get a Vortex, IOR, or other scope with 70 plus MOA of travel. That way you have 35 Minutes to play with right away, and you don't get close to maxing out the scope travel to zero or get to 1K.

Hope this helps.

Jimro

DubC-Hicks
December 25, 2010, 02:48 PM
I think I'll start a new thread so other people can put in their opinions.

DubC-Hicks
December 25, 2010, 02:50 PM
Jimro,

Which vortex would you recommend?

bamaranger
December 26, 2010, 02:34 AM
I'm doing a bit of F-TR shooting, and can say w/o reservation, for that pursuit, 16x and more is better. It is not unusual for competitors to run scopes at 24x and up. The F class x ring is 1/2 MOA, and the 10 ring only a full minute. More magnification is a help on those targets. Can you stay in the black at 600 and 100 with less? Definitely, but more magnification will get you additional points, all else equal.

For a pseudo-tactical rifle, that will only see improvised targets on the weekend, 10x would be OK I guess.

I shot my first XTC 3-5-600 yd course w/ a fixed 12x and felt handicapped at 600.

By all means, by a bit more scope than you think you can afford. You will be selling your Remington short if you don't.

madcratebuilder
December 26, 2010, 06:30 AM
ok thanks guys. I am still looking for a scope also, so I am not sure how much adjustment I will have in it. I have been looking at the Mueller 8-32x44. I would like the scope to go up to at least 25x with a side parallax adjustment. I'm not sure if I want a 30mm or 1" tube. I'm on about a $300 budget so if you guys have any suggestions, that would be great.

Not all Mueller scopes are the same quality. That Mueller 8-32 is made in China and has reported durability issues. Look at the Mueller 3-10X44 TAC II, it's made in Japan with much better glass, excellent scope at it's price point.

The Bushnell 3200 is being closed out and I see them as low as $150 on sale. The new Weavers are nice scopes. How much do you want to spend on scope, rings and base?

I would give up the side focus and target turrets for better glass. For long range shooting glass is the most important.

The major advantage of the 20moa base is it keeps your scope adjustment closer to center as ranges increase. As you adjust the vertical near max range you loose a lot of the horizontal adjustment.

Norrick
December 26, 2010, 06:48 AM
Slamfire what kind of base is that on your Ruger? Drill and tap?

Slamfire
December 26, 2010, 08:30 AM
Slamfire what kind of base is that on your Ruger? Drill and tap?

It is a Ken Farrell 20 MOA base.

http://www.kenfarrell.com/RUG-M77-S-1-20.html

http://www.kenfarrell.com/images/items/360x360/RUG-M77-S-1-20.jpg

I had a bud drill and tap my receiver.

Jimro
December 27, 2010, 03:02 AM
I recommend for the Vortex Viper 6.5-20x50 if you can afford it, right at five hundred bucks from libertyoptics.com. The cheapest long range scopes on the market are fixed 10x scopes, the Bushnell Elite 3200 10x40 and the SuperSniper. Both have plenty of adjustment to get out there and can be had for 200 and 300 respectively.

The Viper has an advertised 68 MOA of adjustment, so 34 moa up and down. You add a 20 moa scope base and you have up to 54 MOA of "UP" adjustment, which is about 10 MOA more than you need to go from 100 to 1,000.

But there are a lot of good scopes that have plenty of adjustment, you just have to look for them. If you have any doubts about long range optics contact Scott Berish, the owner/operator/chief bottle washer of www.libertyoptics.com. I started buying scopes from him long before he had a website, and can't recommend him enough.

Jimro