Remington 700R Milspec

These are typical of the informal ranges where I shoot, and is representative of actual field conditions where the 9-13 simply works better. The 6-9 would have me looking through weeds and unable to get the elevation to get on target at long range. YMMV.
P5310742.jpg

P9140025_zps74b5a2ca.jpg
 
Super info on the bipods guys. Thanks a TON! The 9-13" sounds like what I need because I will preferentially shoot prone in the field. I don't plan on making a bench to shoot from and then dragging it a hundred miles into the mountains, lol... Plus, I like the feel of prone shooting for distance. Anything 300 yards or less I generally use my bog pod and crouch or sit, but longer stuff I feel more stable prone.

Also, now that I am just about gagging to get home and track a 5R down to love like a first born child... Let talk spotting optics.

20-60x60 Bushnell is the spotter I have now, but it's really old... like 40 years old. It's "ok" out to 500 yards, but... It's probably not up to the task of what I'm going to ask it to do. I'd like to hear suggestions on brands and powers and pros/cons of each. My old man will use it primarily so it's light gathering needs to be tip-top and mag power should be as high as is reasonable for the cost. I have a decent 1600m range finder with 7X mag so I'm thinking I don't need a spotter with built in ranging.

If I've learned anything over the years, price is NOT the only factor when buying something, but it generally shows the quality of an item. Do I want a $300 spotting scope? No, that's silly... I don't know the appropriate price range for what I'll be needing though. Hit me with some suggestions!!!
 
So far I've routed up a few that tickle my fancy...

http://www.opticsplanet.com/leupold-kenai-30x-25-60x80mm-hd-spotting-scope-angled-gray-black.html - $899

I'd get the kit for that one with the case as I need another short tripod for my range finder anyway and glass needs a decent case. (I'm clumsy, lol!)

http://www.opticsplanet.com/vortex-viper-hd-20-60x80-spotting-scopes.html - $899

Heard Vortex stuff is good... No personal opinion yet other than the small hunting scope I have on my 527. Good light gathering on it, but it's fairly low power so I would expect that.

http://www.opticsplanet.com/celestron-regal-100-f-ed-100mm-spotting-scope-52303.html - $678

^--- That one has me wondering why it's so cheap with a final power of 100mm... Waterproof, high mag and supposedly great glass for 300 bucks less? Tell me why not? DAMN! Just realized it's on for like half freaking price!!! Feedback on this one for sure.... That's a great deal!!!
 
Check out Camera land in New York. They are a site sponsor and there are no issues with sporting optics other than scopes. They have all your "bird watching needs". The cheapest I would consider would be a Pentax. The Zeiss, swarovski or There is another major one used at competitions. Starts with a K if I remember right. Look at birding sites for good spotting scopes.

I have a decent budget system. I have the previous model Pentax 65 but I have the eye piece for the 80 in it which is higher quality and ups the scopes resolution etc. This is the minimum setup. I would suggest an 80 or bigger for serious target use. The only Vortex that will be good enough for your use would be their top of the line Razor stuff. But at the price may as well just go with one of the others which are better known and easier for resale if you needed to sell it.
 
I have to disagree with some posters on FFP vs. SFP. If you're ever using different magnifications and shoot in the wind, it's nice to be able to use the reticle to hold off for wind, without taking magnification into account and making calculations. The hash mark on the reticle that is 2MOA is 2MOA, regardless of magnification. I find it very useful, and I don't use my scope for ranging, nor do I use the reticle for vertical holdover.
 
Epoxy7 said:
Check out Camera land in New York. They are a site sponsor and there are no issues with sporting optics other than scopes. They have all your "bird watching needs". The cheapest I would consider would be a Pentax. The Zeiss, swarovski or There is another major one used at competitions. Starts with a K if I remember right. Look at birding sites for good spotting scopes.

I have a decent budget system. I have the previous model Pentax 65 but I have the eye piece for the 80 in it which is higher quality and ups the scopes resolution etc. This is the minimum setup. I would suggest an 80 or bigger for serious target use. The only Vortex that will be good enough for your use would be their top of the line Razor stuff. But at the price may as well just go with one of the others which are better known and easier for resale if you needed to sell it.
Click to expand...

Thanks man!!! I know there are some weird import/export laws regarding optics, but if Cameralandny is a site sponsor then hells yes I will use them instead of optics.com! The Pentax PF80 ED w/ Zoom Eyepiece (Angled) I can get for $1150 + S&H and it comes with a small tripod and a window mount (have one from my Bushnell, but two is better than one, lol!). If the soft case it came with is garbage I'd just modify one of my Pelicans to fit it into. Looks like it's MUCH lighter than the Celestron too. Celestron I think is a decent brand name, but I thought they only made telescopes tbh, lol!

Kowa is the name of the scope/spotter manufacturer you're trying to think of. They are pretty premium as far as glass goes, but much too expensive for the budget I think. I'm not looking to break the bank, but rather get something in the middle of the high end to leave some $$$ to work with for the actual scope on the rifle. Thanks again for the site!!! I'll poke around more and see what other 80-100mm objectives I can find on there.

Cheers
 
Jordan Smith said:
I have to disagree with some posters on FFP vs. SFP. If you're ever using different magnifications and shoot in the wind, it's nice to be able to use the reticle to hold off for wind, without taking magnification into account and making calculations. The hash mark on the reticle that is 2MOA is 2MOA, regardless of magnification. I find it very useful, and I don't use my scope for ranging, nor do I use the reticle for vertical holdover.
Click to expand...

I can see the advantages of both really... But will it benefit me as a total noob on glass and extreme distance shooting? I'll consider it and the extra $$$ input only if it will be a tool I can use to learn more and learn better really. I don't want to put myself too far ahead or behind a rock when it comes to really learning to shoot those distances, gauge windage, and be on target...
 
KaptinKaos said:
Super info on the bipods guys. Thanks a TON! The 9-13" sounds like what I need because I will preferentially shoot prone in the field. I don't plan on making a bench to shoot from and then dragging it a hundred miles into the mountains, lol... Plus, I like the feel of prone shooting for distance.
Click to expand...

I was talking about shooting prone, but then again I don't have to contend with weeds / grass so the 6-9 works for me and so far the 9 would be WAY too high for my prone shooting I've been doing.

Most of our mountain locations around here have little hills to shoot from. Everything is a bit below you shooting across valley's or rolling hills. At least from what I know. Pretty new at this.
 
When it comes to shooting, gauging, and holding windage correction, FFP is actually simpler and easier to learn on than calculating different holds for different magnifications using SFP. It's one of the best LR tools that I use, since I don't dial for wind. I prefer to use the reticle to hold off for wind, and FFP makes that easier.
 
Jordan Smith said:
When it comes to shooting, gauging, and holding windage correction, FFP is actually simpler and easier to learn on than calculating different holds for different magnifications using SFP. It's one of the best LR tools that I use, since I don't dial for wind. I prefer to use the reticle to hold off for wind, and FFP makes that easier.
Click to expand...

Well, this is a bit less mag than a 12-42 or 8-32, but it's FFP...

http://nightforceoptics.com/beast/
 
I would buy that exact scope if I had the money. Another good option is the NXS F1 5-15x. I think you'll find that 15x is plenty of magnification for hitting steel plates at 1000 yards. I agree with other posters that if you're shooting BR or F-class at 1000 yards, then you want all the high-quality magnification you can get, but for banging steel it's just not needed. I have high-mag scopes, and I typically use about 15x for shooting at 1000 yards, even though my scopes can go higher.

Just as a point of interest, last week I was out smacking steel, and once I got my dope on target at 1000 yards, I placed 4 consecutive shots on a 12" square with my 7WSM using a 6x42 fixed power scope. Like I say, 15x is more than enough for that kind of work...
 
Jordan Smith said:
I would buy that exact scope if I had the money. Another good option is the NXS F1 5-15x. I think you'll find that 15x is plenty of magnification for hitting steel plates at 1000 yards. I agree with other posters that if you're shooting BR or F-class at 1000 yards, then you want all the high-quality magnification you can get, but for banging steel it's just not needed. I have high-mag scopes, and I typically use about 15x for shooting at 1000 yards, even though my scopes can go higher.

Just as a point of interest, last week I was out smacking steel, and once I got my dope on target at 1000 yards, I placed 4 consecutive shots on a 12" square with my 7WSM using a 6x42 fixed power scope. Like I say, 15x is more than enough for that kind of work...
Click to expand...

Nice! I have been trying to source a 24"x24" piece of AR-500, but 12"x12" is the biggest I can find, :(. I fly back to Canada tomorrow and will be able to talk to my sources about scope prices. I think I have a few good choices with the Nightforce line and my budget is pretty good for the quality I'm looking for.

Did a bunch of reading/YouTubing on reticles and my question now is concerning the MOAR reticle... I know there is an issue with having a mildot reticle and using MOA due to them being a different measurement. Would an MOAR reticle be a better choice than a mildot to show true holdover/windage values or is it just dependent on the shooters preference?
 
Reticle is purely shooter preference, but I would highly recommend getting a reticle that is marked in the same units your turrets operate in. If you get 1/4 MOA turrets, use an MOA-type reticle- whether the MOAR, NPR-F1, etc. If using 0.1mil turrets, then a mil-dot or other mil-based reticle would be good. When you spot your misses, it's nice to be able to visually measure the needed correction using the reticle, and dial it into the turret for elevation, or hold off that much more for wind (unless you like dialing wind, in which case dial it in!).
 
Last edited:
Jordan Smith said:
Just as a point of interest, last week I was out smacking steel, and once I got my dope on target at 1000 yards, I placed 4 consecutive shots on a 12" square with my 7WSM using a 6x42 fixed power scope. Like I say, 15x is more than enough for that kind of work...
Click to expand...

Hey, great shooting!

(How do you like the "I can't see the damn thing, but I'm hitting it every time!" school of shooting? ;-)

KaptinKaos said:
Nice! I have been trying to source a 24"x24" piece of AR-500, but 12"x12" is the biggest I can find, :(. I fly back to Canada tomorrow and will be able to talk to my sources about scope prices. I think I have a few good choices with the Nightforce line and my budget is pretty good for the quality I'm looking for.
Click to expand...

No need for good expensive steel if you're going to be shooting at it at 1000 yards with a .308. Use ordinary el-cheapo mild steel and you'll be fine (don't shoot mild steel at closer ranges, or you'll punch right through or badly gouge it).

Bullet penetration is *strongly* dependent on the speed of the bullet when it hits the target.
 
Yup mild steel at distance is no problem. This was out at 1100 yards shot with a 260 Remington. Impact velocity roughly 1285 fps according to trued up ballistics. Slightest mark of a dimple.
Also don't be too concerned with a giant piece, sure you hit it more often, but not nearly as fun when you do connect!
IMAG0222_zps1a4b4aa9.jpg
 
Thanks! The reticle obscures about half of the plate, but I could still make out enough of it to get the correct hold.

And I totally agree that once you pass 600-700 yards, 3/8" or thicker mild steel works just fine. Unless you're using a big boomer like a 300gr Scenar at 2950fps ;)

rnbra-shooter said:
Hey, great shooting!

(How do you like the "I can't see the damn thing, but I'm hitting it every time!" school of shooting? ;-)



No need for good expensive steel if you're going to be shooting at it at 1000 yards with a .308. Use ordinary el-cheapo mild steel and you'll be fine (don't shoot mild steel at closer ranges, or you'll punch right through or badly gouge it).

Bullet penetration is *strongly* dependent on the speed of the bullet when it hits the target.
Click to expand...
 
Just to get the thread back on track, I have a 5R and its as good as all above say - I changed the trigger to a timney, and its (IMHO) much better - as the trigger adjust screw on the x-mark protruded to the point where it was rubbing on my finger. I had a bad x-mark, the lowest I could get was about 5-6lbs.
Mine likes the 175-178 gr bullets (pick brand), but LOVES the 155 gr Lapua Scenars. Last time I was out I put 10 bullets in a 5" circle at 500yds, and if I were a better shot, prob could tighten that up a bit! Lapua brass/Varget is also what I use - The Lapua brass is more expensive initially, but if its like my 260 brass, will last a long time.
I am thinking of bedding the alum block - will post my results when the weather smartens up!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom