School me on 1500$ "tac" scopes

V

VinceMarksman

Regular
EE Expired
Rating - 100%
31   0   0
In the market for a scope. Title says it all. Currently have a sightron s tac 3 to 16. I want more magnification and im not sure between ffp and sfp. Main use is for long range shooting from 100 to hopefully 1000y. Not sure I want to buy used. Here are what I need:

-24x magnification or more
-thin reticle with subtentions
-good feeling turrets with big tactile clicks. I liked the feel of the sightron S3 clicks.
 
I can only think of the burris xtr 2 and the upcoming pst gen 2 which I dont even want to consider given the ammount of people requiring vortex warranty services
 
The Gen 2 PST that is about to come to market has a host of features (including improved glass) on board which makes the 1-6x look like a budget Razor HD Gen2. Whether the new line will live up to the hype remains to be seen, of course. What I saw briefly at SHOT looked pretty good all things considered, which is why l broke down and put in a pre-order with one of the site sponsors!
 
One of my rifles has a burris xtrII (4-20).. it replaced a viper pst. No comparison between those 2, maybe the 2gen pst will be improved..

Xtr's are a lot of scope for the money.. ffp, 34mm tube, zero stop.. well built scope, tracks bang on, nice turrets.

Eyebox is a bit tight at max magnification and perhaps isn't completely crystal clear on the outer edges.. at least compared to my nightforce.

I recommend for the price range you're looking at
 
p.Rundle said:
Please if you get a scope with 24x mag and a FFP for $1500, post about it here. FFP is worth it, according to better long range shooters than I.
Click to expand...

To my knowledge, FFP really only comes as a benefit if you're consistently shooting at unknown distances and you're using your reticle to range it, or if you're using hold overs & BDC's on anything but the maximum magnification.
If you're going to be consistently shooting at known ranges, and long distance ranges over 600m, SFP would probably be better as your reticle will be that much finer at higher magnification as opposed to a FFP.
 
The XTRII reticle thins towards the centre and is quite fine on max zoom. I agree, it's probably one of the best tactical scopes for the $1500 range.
 
I agree with FoxAlpha, seems odd to have a reticle get thicker for the longer ranges when what you want is a fine wire for long stuff. SFP has to be used at 1 magnification (only for ranging) but that's usually at, or close to the top end of magnification. So what's the big deal with FFP aside from increased price?
 
Im not sure im comfortable with a used high end scope. No way to know what happened with it. I did see a few nightforce on there but im really not sure about buying used for this.
 
OK, so if you are set on $1500 and a mag of min 24x then you are pretty much certain to be in the market for a SFP scope. That is OK - not ideal but OK. Sightron SIII and Vortex PST come to mind. I sold a Siii 8-32x56 for $1075 last week that would have fitted perfectly for example. A used NXS will cost a bit more but will be well worth it.
 
Warranty on used would determine value but I agree with going new if you're only going to save 500.00 on a used one.
 
VinceMarksman said:
Im not sure im comfortable with a used high end scope. No way to know what happened with it. I did see a few nightforce on there but im really not sure about buying used for this.
Click to expand...

I think we would all prefer new but buying used high end is not an issue - especially as many makers have excellent and transferable warranty.
 
Tomochan said:
OK, so if you are set on $1500 and a mag of min 24x then you are pretty much certain to be in the market for a SFP scope. That is OK - not ideal but OK. Sightron SIII and Vortex PST come to mind. I sold a Siii 8-32x56 for $1075 last week that would have fitted perfectly for example. A used NXS will cost a bit more but will be well worth it.
Click to expand...

Whats your take on the Burris XTRII scopes?
 
VinceMarksman said:
In the market for a scope. Title says it all. Currently have a sightron s tac 3 to 16. I want more magnification and im not sure between ffp and sfp. Main use is for long range shooting from 100 to hopefully 1000y. Not sure I want to buy used. Here are what I need:

-24x magnification or more
-thin reticle with subtentions
-good feeling turrets with big tactile clicks. I liked the feel of the sightron S3 clicks.
Click to expand...

If you like the S3 features, why not just get the SIII6-24X50 FFP scope in MOA or MRAD? Cost is right in with your budget.

If you can find one used, it will be under your budget.

I know FFP is all the rage right now but over the many years I have shot LR and competed out to 1000yds, it is very rare for me to change mag. If you are going to be recreational target shooting that includes paper, rocks and gongs, I doubt you will change your mag at all. I left my S3 6-24's at 24X's and shot from 100yds to 1 mile.

FFP certainly has their use and many enjoy the feature when playing in certain sports or field ranging but there are also downsides wrt to changes in reticle "size" as you change the mag. Some scopes will have quite thick subtension at high mag so that the reticle is still visible at low. Some will have thin subtension at high mag and pretty much dissappear at low mag.

If you feel the need to change mag constantly for the type of shooting you want to do and like to have constant reticle subtension, the FFP scopes are for you.

If you are just aiming at far away targets and leave mag at its most useable setting, SFP will do all that you want and usually offer finer aiming due to lower reticle subtension at max mag. The typical concern will be what if you need to dial back on the mag and have to use the reticle to account for misses?

If you do, just move the reticle the amount of the miss, center and shoot. If you want to dial the scope to account for a new large condition change BUT you must use a lower mag, then figuring out the new reticle subtension is not a big deal.

For recreational LR target shooting beyond 300yds, I doubt you will ever find the need to play with the mag ring....

In my competition rifles, I use 10-50 scopes..... at 24X, the reticles subtends 2MOA per hash mark.... at 32X (where I compete at), it works out to 1.5MOA per hash mark... Not exactly a big change nor hard to do the mental math if needed. I almost never change my mag and if I do, mirage is so thick, you aren't reducing to aim anymore. I am reducing to make the reticle an "open" sight and bracketing the entire target board.

Jerry
 
thanks Jerry

im pretty much set on 2 scopes

either the S3 8-32 or the burris xtr 5-25.

The burris looks amazing but the expensive 34mm rings are a bit of a downside. I would need new rings anyways with the S3 though. The burris has many features and seems very very weel thought out.
 
FoxAlpha said:
To my knowledge, FFP really only comes as a benefit if you're consistently shooting at unknown distances and you're using your reticle to range it, or if you're using hold overs & BDC's on anything but the maximum magnification.
If you're going to be consistently shooting at known ranges, and long distance ranges over 600m, SFP would probably be better as your reticle will be that much finer at higher magnification as opposed to a FFP.
Click to expand...

The choice of FFP is NOT about ranging, UKD vs. KD or distance. It comes down to the types of targets you are shooting at, the number of distances your are shooting at and the time you have to make your shots. The only time SFP is preferred is when you're only shooting at one distance at a time at targets that are sized or have rings that are sized to be a certain MOA so that they can be used as a reference, and when have a generous amount of time to make your shots. Most gallery range shooting sports use targets that have rings or a grid that are sized to be 1 MOA apart at whatever distance is being shot. Shooters make their adjustments off of those rings. They use those rings to make adjustments the same way a PRS/field shooter uses the reticle to make adjustments. If you don't have something simple to reference like that, you're relegated to using an archaic method of estimating a miss in a linear value (inches/cm) and converting to an angular one (MOA/mil). This is very slow and prone to error when done under stress. You are still better off with FFP even when distances are known when you're dealing with multiple distances, odd distances, odd target sizes and/or limited time to make shots.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom