Looking for opinions on magnification

D

Djb1

Regular
Rating - 98.6%
206   3   0
Location
Edmonton
I'm looking for an optic to use with my stag10 308 build.
I want to use it as my hunting rig but also want to be able to reach out to 800M at the local range.
I'm considering scopes in the 3-18 range but I'm wondering if I should bump it up to 4.5-27 mag range.
Furthest I've shot is 500m steel with my 16" 223 ar topped with a 1-8x.
I have a healthy budget of 3K max (ideally looking around 2k) but I am an MOA guy and most high end scopes I'm finding are exclusive MIL/MIL.
Is making the switch worth it?
I have never seen the world in Metric (more relatable to MIL) and work as a carpenter and can estimate in feet/inchs very accurately.
Any advice would be appreciated. Thanks
 
MIL vs MOA, I went with Mil because it is easier for me. For me, the challenge with MOA isn't estimating inches or feet, it's converting to MOA. For example you extimate you are at 743 yards, you think you are hitting 16 inchs low, How many MOA do you come up? that is MUCH simpler in the MiL world.... In the Mil world, 1 mil is 1/1000th or whatever of your distance.... So if I'm at 713 meters, and I'm hitting 60 cm low, I know it's about .9 of a mil without even breaking a sweat (at 713M, .1Mil is 7.13cm.... 60/7 = 8.5)

My brain is just wired to work with mils, and it is easier for me. Now if you run an FFP scope, it minimizes the difficulty in doing conversions (assuming you can see the POI and the POA.

As for the magnification, don't forget resolution. I'd rather have a lower power scope with a higher resolution. 10X is enough to get you out to 600M, so for 800, I'd say a 4-16 is plenty. Is more nice? sure, but a higher quality 4-16 with better resolution might serve you better.
 
Last edited:
I see your point. Though I think the opposite, ie:
743 yards, 1 MOA = 7.5"
16" low = 2 MOA low
1/4" clicks = 8 clicks

I am used to thinking in 1/4s and doing multiples of 4.
My problem isn't understanding the base 10 math.
My problem is seeing that it's 60cm low and not 16"
I'd be spending too much time trying to estimate everything in Metric so simple math isn't really saving me. I'm just going to go with my training.
 
Djb1 said:
I see your point. Though I think the opposite, ie:
743 yards, 1 MOA = 7.5"
16" low = 2 MOA low
1/4" clicks = 8 clicks

I am used to thinking in 1/4s and doing multiples of 4.
My problem isn't understanding the base 10 math.
My problem is seeing that it's 60cm low and not 16"
I'd be spending too much time trying to estimate everything in Metric so simple math isn't really saving me. I'm just going to go with my training.
Click to expand...

yeah, that's why I stressed that it is better for me, everyones mind is wired differently. I would recommend not fighting the way your mind works. and if you work well in MOA and can do the conversions, stick to MOA.
 
Right on. Thanks.
Your point about resolution is something I never payed too many mind. I know some low end scopes get terrible eye boxes and shadow near the top end.
 
it's not just eye boxes, but clarity, contrast, fringing, etc...

I was under the impression my friends vortex PST 6-24 was clear, then I looked through a nightforce ATACR 5-25. With the nightforce, I can easily see 30 cal bullet bullet holes at 300 yards, where I could not with the PST. This difference isn't 24X vs 25X, it is a result of superior glass.
 
To be honest the glass in the NXS series never impressed me a bunch. Clear but kinda lacking colour or contrast. The atacr is one I wanted to look through and almost ordered one but couldn’t justify spending all my savings one a single scope but it sure looks like an incredible scope built tougher than a pioneer woman lol
 
For a hunting rig. low magnification can be much more important if hunting in the woods, and not just from a blind or in fields. I had a 4-16 scope before and the low magnification was a bit too high for some stuff. I run a 2.5-10 x 50 scope now, I wouldn't mind a higher high range, but I would say a low of 3 power is good for a hunting optic that will see bush hunting. Would like to replace with the low turret S-TAC for my hunting rifle but it works too good to change it at this point and I use it mostly for the bush.

In terms of 800 yard shots, I would go at least a high magnification of 20, 25 would be better.

What scopes cover this range? The Bushnell DMR's (3.5-21), the sightron s-tac 4-20 or 2.5-17.5 are close but a bit of a compromise. The vortex strike eagle (4-24) is close to. There are some swarovskis and leupolds that cover this range and are light weight. Delta titanium has a 3-24 which may be good for you to.
 
Last edited:
I'd be all over the DMR if it came in MOA.

so far I'm comparing these:

Leupold VX-6HD 3-18X44/3-18X50
Burris XTR II### 3-15X50/4-20X50
Athlon Ares BTR### 2.5-15x50/4.5-27x50
Bushnell Forge### 3-18x50/4.5-27x50
 
The MOA vs MIL thing seems to come up every couple days. Very, very few people who shoot long range competitively (in dynamic, PRS-type or field matches, not F-Class with fixed distances) or professionally (ie mil) use MOA. That's why it's hard to find high end scopes with those kind of features in MOA. The thinking in inches or cms thing doesn't really apply. Why estimate how far off your miss was in inches when you have a ruler in your scope? It doesn't matter if you think you're 16" low and then convert to MOA. Just measure it in your reticle and either dial in the correction or hold over. The linear distance is irrelevant.

As to magnification, 3-18 is more than enough to get you to 800. How well your glass resolves will be much more important than having some extra magnification. If you talk to guys who shoot lots of long range, especially transitioning from different targets at different distances, most will tell you they very rarely go over 18. Mostly you stay in about 12-16x. The only time I crank the magnification on my scopes is when zeroing or maybe shooting at a very small (sub-minute) target. I've got a 3-12 Bushnell LRTSi on my M14S and have routinely shot it out to 830 yards with no problem. I used to do it with a 3.5-10x.

For the budget you have, I'd be looking at a Leupold MK5 3.5-18, Bushnell 3.5-21 HDMRII Pro, or maybe stretch your budget and get a NF 4-16 ATACR F1 or the Kahles in the same mag range.
 
Djb1 said:
I'd be all over the DMR if it came in MOA.

so far I'm comparing these:

Leupold VX-6HD 3-18X44/3-18X50
Burris XTR II### 3-15X50/4-20X50
Athlon Ares BTR### 2.5-15x50/4.5-27x50
Bushnell Forge### 3-18x50/4.5-27x50
Click to expand...

Please add the Athlon ARES ETR to your list. It is not much more $$ then the Ares BTR and a big step above. The Cronus BTR will fit in your budget as well but for best overall value, I am thrilled with the Ares ETR and will be competing with them in 2019.

I did very well with the Ares BTR in 2018, so very good operational scopes and a great entry point into a full feature 30mm optic, at a reasonable price.

But... with your higher budget, there really is no comparison... unless you are concerned about overall weight.

Jerry

PS - if money no object, Tangent Theta can be had in either MOA or Mil.... :)
 
Unfortunately money is an object very much so these days but I understand the buy once cry once mentality in regards to optics. That's why I'm willing to spend up to 3K for the RIGHT optic but would be more comfortable around 2K.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom