|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
May 16, 2012, 03:06 PM | #1 |
Member
Join Date: May 20, 2011
Location: Texas
Posts: 66
|
Scope for Combo Hunting/Long Range Precision Shooting
I am looking to purchase a new scope and I hope to kill 2 birds with 1 stone.
My budget is roughly $1500 and I want the most scope for the money that will serve my purpose. I want the scope to go on my primary hunting rifle which is a .270 which I use for deer/elk hunted primarily in Texas and Colorado where my average shots are between 100 and 300 yards. I also want the scope to allow me to start training for long range precision shooting. Because of the later requirement, I want it to be a mil-dot style reticle and have mil-based turrets. I am looking at the Leupold Mark 4 ER/T 4.5-14x50 with the tactical milling reticle and M5 knobs, but I want recommendations. Thanks in advance for your help.
__________________
Soli Deo Gloria Only one life, 'twill soon be past. Only what's done for Christ will last. http://scottrossonline.com/ |
May 17, 2012, 09:42 AM | #2 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 18, 2010
Location: Independence Missouri
Posts: 4,582
|
Something in a Vortex, in that price range, has alot of possibilities. Plus they have Super CS, and Lifetime Warranty.
__________________
Keep your Axe sharp and your powder dry. |
May 17, 2012, 09:47 AM | #3 |
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Austin, CO
Posts: 19,578
|
I'd look at USOptics, in that price range.
__________________
Nobody plans to screw up their lives... ...they just don't plan not to. -Andy Stanley |
May 17, 2012, 08:02 PM | #4 |
Member
Join Date: May 4, 2012
Posts: 47
|
I'm not sure if you can get into a Nightforce at that price but you're getting close. If you are willing to drop that kind of change on glassso what if it takes another couple of hundred bucks to get one spend it it is totally worth it.
|
May 17, 2012, 10:17 PM | #5 |
Member
Join Date: May 20, 2011
Location: Texas
Posts: 66
|
Trijicon Accupoint?
I went to Cabela's today to check out glass and the sales guy recommended I look at the Trijicon Accupoint. I tested the 5-20x50mm and it was really sweet. The reticle is awesome.
I compared it side by side to Swarovski Z5, Leupold M4, Zeiss Conquest and Nightforce NXS. Granted it was just in the store looking at stuffed animals on the opposite wall but the Accupoint had a clearer picture and brought my eye on target faster than the Leupold or the Conquest. The glass on the Z5 was, as to be expected, amazing, but the reticle is not as good and the Z5 is almost $600 more. The Nightforce was the only scope that I felt could be considered truly superior but it has some design quirks. For example, when you adjust the magnification it rotates the entire eye piece which, in addition to being odd, prohibits the use of flip lens caps. On top of that, it is $700 more. Does anyone have any feedback on the Trijicon Accupoint? Has anyone compared these in the field under more real-world conditions? Thanks in advance.
__________________
Soli Deo Gloria Only one life, 'twill soon be past. Only what's done for Christ will last. http://scottrossonline.com/ |
May 17, 2012, 10:39 PM | #6 |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 3, 2011
Posts: 317
|
Leupold Mark4's are in that price range but as previously stated, Nightforce is better.
__________________
Fat White So Cal |
May 17, 2012, 11:00 PM | #7 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 29, 2008
Location: now living in alabama
Posts: 2,433
|
I have been contemplating on getting the Zeiss Conquest in 6.5-20x50 with #43 reticle for my new build. Check out their website and see if it is what you are looking for. Surprisingly it is within your price range. As far as quality glass, your not going to do much better.
__________________
No such thing as a stupid question. What is stupid is not asking it. |
May 17, 2012, 11:59 PM | #8 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 21, 2008
Posts: 557
|
I have Sightron SIII's (better optical clarity than NF at higher magnification... IMO) a US Optics SN-3, and various Leupolds including an older Vari-X III LR 4.5x15x50. That scope has taken many deer and helped me shoot a 194/200 in 1000 yard F Class competition. I would not hesitate to buy the Mark 4 version if I were in the market.
|
May 18, 2012, 12:12 AM | #9 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 10, 2007
Location: Arizona
Posts: 980
|
Quote:
|
|
May 18, 2012, 03:13 AM | #10 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 30, 2004
Location: God's side of Washington State
Posts: 1,601
|
If you are going to shoot at known ranges no need for a mil dot. A fange finder is quicker to use too.
__________________
God Bless our Troops especially our Snipers. |
May 18, 2012, 03:32 AM | #11 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 13, 2006
Posts: 8,272
|
I do not represent myself as an expert on the topic,but for a long time the standard US Army Sniper scope was a Leupolld 3.5-10 30 mm tube Mil-Dot.Brother has that scope on his AR-!0.
I have the 4.5-14 version on my Win 70 Laredo.MilDot,30mm,side p-lax,etc. I had Kenton Industries make a set of knobs.Within reason,altitude,etc,I just twist a range. I am not saying there are no better scopes.These have worked real well for us. I would not do it any different,myself. Laser rangefinders are great. But,a Mil-dot is in the scope as you look at your target.If you are skilled with a Mil-Dot,the Mil-Dot,and the skill,make the laser less necessary.True,at very long ranges,a 25 yd error means a miss,but in the 300,400,etc zone,where a reasonable trajectory forgives a little ranging error,why fumble with more equiptment? Really,truly,if you know how to use a Mil-Dot,300,even pushing 400 yd rangefinding for gamehunting,as the op mentioned,its the laser you don't need. OP,I have great respect for the 270 as a hunting round.At any reasonable hunting range,its a good cartridge...Actually,the Cartridge itself is not an issue. What you may eventually run into as a limitation,the standard .270 twist is tailored to bullets that are efficient at reasonable hunting ranges. They are not typically twisted for the long,heavy,high ballistic coefficient bullets .And,the way this works out,as there are few rifles that can stabilize such .277 bullets,bullet mfgrs do not have a market to offer long range bullets . So,depending upon what you consider "long range",I suggest you bias your scope selection toward the hunting spectrum,a 3.5-10 is plenty.I believe I might go toward 40 or 42 mm,rather than 50. I am not saying the 1000 yd-ish stuff cannot be done with a .270,but a 6.5,or 7mm,or 30 will give you a much better selection of long range bullets Just my opinion. Last edited by HiBC; May 18, 2012 at 03:56 AM. |
May 18, 2012, 05:13 AM | #12 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 9, 2000
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 2,194
|
At that price point, look at a Vortex and Bushnell Elite.
http://www.sportoptics.com/vortex-rifle-scopes.aspx I personally think you get more features for less money with these over a Leupold. US Optics and Nightforce are a step up, if you can find one at that price. You also need to decide if you want First or Second Focal Plane. If you know your range or have a range finder, Second Focal Plane is fine. May I also suggest Seekins Precision scope rings. |
May 18, 2012, 06:23 AM | #13 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 16, 2010
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 3,577
|
Nightforce is a great scope if you have $$$$$$..The one i see coming on real strong in F-Class open and FTR class now is Sightron. I have a 8-32 x50 on order now. Tracking is second to none and the glass is very crisp and clear. I also go with other post,No need for a mil dot scope.
__________________
NRA Certified RSO NwCP- Performance Isn't Optional |
May 18, 2012, 06:53 AM | #14 |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 21, 2005
Posts: 433
|
The Swaro will serve you better in very low light conditions and I would get the 4A reticle as the BR reticles can get lost in low light and lets face it, thats when what you want to shoot comes out.
|
May 18, 2012, 07:15 AM | #15 |
Member
Join Date: May 4, 2012
Posts: 47
|
If the Trijicon Accupoint is something that fits the bill by all means buy it. I've had an interest in it myself and the reviews I've found have all been positive. Not to mention the company itself has been making solid products for a long time. Glass a lot of the time is more important than the rifle but like the rifle the shooter has to like the fit or they can't get the most out of their setup. I'm sure the quality is there and if it saves you some change in the process all the better, now you can buy more goodies. Take all of our suggestions for what it cost you and buy the scope that you find fits you the best regardless of price or opinion. Every "hunting" rifle I own is topped with Simmons scopes. Are there better? Could I afford better? Sure, but They offer what I need and like at an attractive price and they have yet to disappoint so I keep buying them even though I get the occasional "junk" comment. It's your money and in the end it's about you so buy accordingly.
|
May 18, 2012, 01:12 PM | #16 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 31, 2009
Location: Charleston, SC
Posts: 2,071
|
I have a Bushnell Elite 6500T 4.5-30x50 and it has been a great scope holds zero, tracks well and even at 30x it's still pretty clear. The only thing I don't like about it is the blacked out markings on it makes it hard to see what settings it's on.
|
May 18, 2012, 01:20 PM | #17 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 5, 2009
Location: Lexington, SC
Posts: 106
|
Check it out
Check out the Bushnell Elite 6500. I don't own one but the specs are awesome.
2.5-16 magnification [this is what I find the most interesting] or 4.5-30 30 mm tube lots of optional feature Priced under $900
__________________
Shack |
May 18, 2012, 06:27 PM | #18 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 1, 2010
Location: Tampa Bay
Posts: 4,556
|
I think that's a bit of a tall order, but as long as you're willing to compromise...
I don't hunt, but if you need quick target acquisition at a 100 yard shot, you're probably going to want no more than 4x on the low end... On the other hand, for long range (if mirage allows) more magnification is always better. I prefer 20-24x...yeah, my son shoots his 6.5 Grendel at 600 with his 3.5-10 Vortex Viper, but I don't feel it's optimal. Like I said, compromise. He can bang steel with it, but if you were trying to shoot groups, not enough magnification. I'd go with a 4-16 or something in that range. This would be my choice, mil-mil, FFP: http://swfa.com/Vortex-4-16x50-Viper...pe-P44561.aspx |
May 19, 2012, 06:28 AM | #19 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 13, 2006
Posts: 8,272
|
I'll fling back,one more time,then let it go.
I have a very light 257 Ackley Imp,with a 1 in 10 bblI can push 3100 with a 115 gr Ballistic tip.The BC is about .440,+-. Generally speaking,the .270 is in the same BC league.I do not think you will find many .500+ or .600 + BC bullets for a .270. IMO,that makes no difference at reasonable hunting ranges.For my concept of "long range" it does make a difference. Have fun,do it your way,but,IMO,I would focus a .270 on what a .270 is excellent for.I would bias toward a hunting rifle with a good hunting scope that had some long range talent.I do not know the 3-9 Trijicon,but the ACOG s are good glass. I also know really good optics of modest power are better than mediocre optics of high power. IMO,for most purposes,a .270 does not need more than 10 x in quality glass.I think larger than,say a 3.5 to 10 by 40 mm or so would be out of balance on a .270 to hunt with. Two other brands to look at(I have no experience with)Valdada and Minox. |
May 19, 2012, 07:10 AM | #20 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 9, 2011
Location: Central KY
Posts: 552
|
+3 on the Vortex Viper PST 4-16x50 FFP. Wonderful scope, and you'll come in $600 under your budget limit. I got this one for $899 from an outfit called opticsbestbuy.com; they were out of stock everywhere else. Wasn't a bad move at all!
I was gunning for the 6-24, but in hind sight, I like the 4-16 better for the lower power range; that'll be great for deer hunting at lower ranges (I hunted inside of 150 yards last year with a fixed 10 power..yikes! That sucked.). The 16 power hasn't stopped me from putting down 1.25" groups at 300 yards. The camera optics didn't know how to handle looking through a scope so there's some blooming, but here's an iPhone photo from the other day looking at my 200 yard target at 16x. In the real world, the view is crystal; I can see my .308 hits on paper at 300 yards. Adjustment; I'm mounted on a EGW 20moa rail. With a 200 yard zero, I've still got 18mil of vertical adjustment left before I hit the internal hard stop. That'll come in handy if I manage to make it to Fort Knox for a 1000 yard attempt.
__________________
~Mark NRA Endowment FTW |
May 20, 2012, 10:28 PM | #21 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 7, 2011
Location: Southern NM
Posts: 141
|
+1 on the Swaro. Nightforce and the Leopold Mark 4 are excellent scopes but don't compare with the Swaro for clarity and light gathering capabilities. I have all three and prefer the Swaro for hunting. Ballistic turrets are nice at the range but always not practical when hunting.
__________________
"Emergencies have always been the pretext on which the safeguards of individual liberty have been eroded" - F.A. Hayek |
May 21, 2012, 08:01 AM | #22 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 2, 2007
Location: Northern Orygun
Posts: 4,923
|
Vortex Viper PST or Nightforce. Do some reading at snipershide.net.
Overall the NF is a better scope but I think the PST is more bang for the buck. The PST is considerably less money, about 1K vs 1.5k. Either scope well serve you well and handle long range with ease. At 1000+ yards you can not have too much magnification. |
May 21, 2012, 12:40 PM | #23 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 6, 2009
Location: Albuquerque
Posts: 2,832
|
I think you're spending a lot of money on a bad compromise. A good long range scope makes for a lousy hunting scope. Too heavy, and not enough low magnification options for the quick shot at under 100 yards. I at least tend to run around with the scope at minimum magnification for the fast shot, assuming that if I need to shoot at 300 yards I have time to dial up the mag. Get a Zeiss conquest 3-9 for your hunting purposes at $400, and then save up for that Nightforce. If you use decent QD rings you can swap them out for hunting season without having to do much sighting.
__________________
I used to love being able to hit hard at 1000 yards. As I get older I find hitting a mini ram at 200 yards with the 22 oddly more satisfying. |
May 21, 2012, 02:07 PM | #24 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 9, 2011
Location: Central KY
Posts: 552
|
That's the main reason I went with the 4-16 PST. Since I bought it, I've had the opportunity to look at a couple of suicidal deer on the rifle range through it. I feel like I'm at a rather good compromise. Field of view is just as important. Used my leftover dough to buy a Jewell trigger. ;-). Around here, you don't hunt. You wait... For the big dumb ones to walk out in front of you. So weight isn't much of a deal breaker; not packing the rifle for miles. Helps to have a tractor running in the background and a lit cigarette. Lol
Last edited by WWWJD; May 21, 2012 at 04:13 PM. |
May 21, 2012, 03:38 PM | #25 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 31, 2009
Location: Charleston, SC
Posts: 2,071
|
Quote:
__________________
“The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.” -Margaret Thatcher- |
|
Tags |
long range shooting , optics , scopes |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|