Swiss Arms Carbine and long range scope?

UncleWalther

UncleWalther

CGN frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
241   0   0
Location
Alberta
I am thinking of turning my 17.9 SAN Carbine (second from the top) into a longer range shooter (shooting mainly 300 and 400 yards). I don't own the Black Special anymore. I was thinking of getting another. But, if the carbine would do the trick, then there is no point.

So, my question: would a Nightforce 5.5-22x50 be a decent match for my 17.9 Carbine? Or is this simply too much scope for a carbine?

Thanks!

IMG_2372.jpg
 
For 400 yards a 1.1-4x is easily adequate, with the great ancillary benefit of relative speed at close quarters.

I often shot with my S&B 1.1-4x at 500 yards against the almighty 'steel ram' target. Engagements to 400m against hanging 18" gongs were trivial.
 
I have a similar question about my Classic Green full length.

I own a great CQB now, and currently have an ACOG TA13F on the classic green. I would like something good for service rifle up to 300-400 yards+

The classic green is good to 800 metres, so maybe I should go for that as a goal instead.

Sorry to jump on your thread Uncle Walther, but i have the same goal

Looking at NF, S+B, Leupold and anything top drawer. Not doing Bushnell as I think their support has slipped, and don't mind spending good money on a good rifle. In fact, I enjoy it.
 
sprint said:
For 400 yards a 1.1-4x is easily adequate, with the great ancillary benefit of relative speed at close quarters.

I often shot with my S&B 1.1-4x at 500 yards against the almighty 'steel ram' target. Engagements to 400m against hanging 18" gongs were trivial.
Click to expand...


I hear ya.... but I have the close quarters stuff covered with the CQB and the 14.3 Carbine (and a couple of Elcan Specter DRs). I want a rifle with a high power scope, so those 300 yard targets seem like they are right in front of my face. I don't enjoy shooting at great distances with the lower powered scopes.

Would the high powered scopes be mismatched to this rifle?
 
That much glass will turn an already heavy rifle heavier, making positional shooting increasingly problematic. If you are off a bench, you will still likely have big issues with it being top heavy.

The NF compact series are better choices IMO.
 
UncleWalther said:
I hear ya.... but I have the close quarters stuff covered with the CQB and the 14.3 Carbine (and a couple of Elcan Specter DRs). I want a rifle with a high power scope, so those 300 yard targets seem like they are right in front of my face. I don't enjoy shooting at great distances with the lower powered scopes.

Would the high powered scopes be mismatched to this rifle?
Click to expand...

I would mount a Schmidt and Bender PMII 10X42 P3 reticle on it in a heart beat.
 
I put my falcon 5.5-25 on my Classic.. Worked good. I found that I shoot better with a 1-5x better though. For that matter, the irons shoot just fine to 400m.

Bigger is not always better.
 
DMcFaul said:
I put my falcon 5.5-25 on my Classic.. Worked good. I found that I shoot better with a 1-5x better though. For that matter, the irons shoot just fine to 400m.

Bigger is not always better.
Click to expand...

I too am surprised at the accuracy of the iron sights. Irons are as accurate as my Elcan Specter DR at 100 yards. I've never shot beyond that distance with the iron sights.
 
nf 5.5-22x56

The balance is not significantely different with the larger scope on the carbine than with the 1-4. it still feels great. thats a NF 5.5-22X56. Haven't shot it yet as I just picked it up today and its going on a different gun, just mounted it for the 'photo shoot'
 
Its just to early for me to tell if I prefer the LB or Std Carbine.

I've yet to run my Carbine really hard, and running it on a course is the only way I figure I'd work that out for sure.


But from a relative rarity standpoint, you're a lucky bastard to have all 3 in your safe.
 
I would think that a 5.5-22x would eb a little overkill. If you've got a spare lying around, go right ahead, but I think something a bit smaller and lower powered, say a NXS 2.5-10x or Mark 4 3.5-10x, would be better.

Remember, at 500 yards at 10x the target looks the same as with the naked eye at 50.
 
the nice thing about a 5.5-22 is that is still gives you 5.5 to 10 power all day long and if want that extra look at the little x in the middle of the target you can see it with the 22 power. No perfect scope for these guns, just plenty of options and sometimes it really is fun to play with the high power stuff.
 
I believe there is a threshold where an increase in magnification is a diminishing return, and at some point, becomes a hinderance to good shooting.
The type of shooting you do is obviously as large a factor as how far you shoot, as are other factors, such as the type of ammunition you use, what targets are used, etc. At the end of it, only you can judge what that threshold is.

A variable 5.5x22 power scope is not only overkill, but would be a hinderance in my opinion.

Some things to consider:
- higher weight
- increased bulk
- increased cost
- with higher magnification comes: less field of view, increase effects of mirage.
- increase in noticed shooter movement (breathing, heartbeat, muscle strain)

I don't think it is likely to translate what advantages it offers into an increase in accuracy at those distances.
 
Stick to a more compact low magnification scope. The big, high magnification scopes are out of place on a black rifle.
 
This is a decision that I have been struggling with for a little while. What I finally decided, maybe is to get two of those mounting pieces and have two scopes mounted and zeroed. That way if I want to do some benchrest I can just put on a higher powered scope in minutes or the MK 4 2.5x8x33 MR T M1 that I have been eyeing up. I like to see what I am shooting at in the distance and feel that this rifle may be capable of sub-moa groups at distance.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom