Scope recommendations for 17 HMR

B

Bloodstriker

Regular
EE Expired
Rating - 100%
16   0   0
Location
Vancouver
I will be purchasing a Savage 93R17 TRR-SR soon, and I'm looking for recommendations on scopes as this will be my first scope purchase.

I don't hunt, so this scope will be for shooting paper at 50-150M. My budget is up to $1000.

What magnification is recommended? I find that at 4x, I can't really see holes in a target at 100M. I even have trouble seeing it with a 9X bino....

So far, I've been looking at Ziess and Nikon, but other brands/models will be considered as well.

I would also like to know what reticle is best for target shooting? I see that some Nikons have a reticle with a dot in the middle. They say this is for long range accuracy - but wouldn't a simple crosshair provide more accuracy as the dot might obscure some of the target?
 
If you want to more easily see the holes in the paper at 100yds+ look into something that goes up to 12x to 16x. 40mm minimum and preferably larger objective.
A couple of things to note about going with higher magnification: higher mag = lower light gathering, narrower fov, require a more stable platform/bench.

Personally I like Leupold and Zeiss, I am looking at a Schmidt & Bender for my long range target rifle.

Regarding reticles, it is often just personal taste. For long distance I'm fine with most of the common reticles like duplex, mildot, varmint, ballistic, bdc, etc.
As far as a center dot reticle, it will depend on the size of the dot (I had this discussion on another thread). A 1 MOA dot will cover 1" at 100yds, 2" at 200yds, etc. So the smaller the dot the better for long distance target. Especially if you want to actually see where you are shooting and not just one of the target's outer circles.
 
I have a Nikon Buckmasters 6-18x40SF on top of my 17 HMR, and I like it. It's a nice middle of the range scope that performs quite well. I used to have a couple of scope with the target dot reticle, but I didn't like them at all. The standard duplex has worked the best for me.
 
Bloodstriker said:
I will be purchasing a Savage 93R17 TRR-SR soon, and I'm looking for recommendations on scopes as this will be my first scope purchase.

I don't hunt, so this scope will be for shooting paper at 50-150M. My budget is up to $1000.

What magnification is recommended? I find that at 4x, I can't really see holes in a target at 100M. I even have trouble seeing it with a 9X bino....

So far, I've been looking at Ziess and Nikon, but other brands/models will be considered as well.

I would also like to know what reticle is best for target shooting? I see that some Nikons have a reticle with a dot in the middle. They say this is for long range accuracy - but wouldn't a simple crosshair provide more accuracy as the dot might obscure some of the target?
Click to expand...

While I've used Vortex PSTs on the rest of my rifles, I chose the Vortex Crossfire II 4-12x50 for my TTR-SR. It's cost efficient, clear and has good build quality. Check it out, it may be what you're after (and certainly all you need in this case).:cheers:
 
After looking around at different brands and models, I really like the Zeiss Conquest line. I'm trying to decide between a 4-14x44AO and a 6.5-20x50AO. I'm also torn on what reticle to get. I really like the Rapid Z reticles, but I'm not sure if any of the ones Zeiss makes would be compatible with the 17 HMR round. Does anyone have any experience with this? Also, would mil-dot be a suitable substitute?
 
Personally I would look for a 2011 Bushnell 3200/4200 type scope on sale. Good deals to be had for a 225$ rimfire scope there. Could easily serve you as a backup centerfire scope too.

Personally, if I opted for a conquest on a rimfire it would be the plane jane 3-9x40...
 
I have a 4-16x44 Nikon Monarch, and a Sightron Sll Big Sky 4.5-14x44 on the way. Both of these scopes are relatively short compared to most 50mm diameter object scopes, and nicely proportioned to a rimfire. These rifles will be hunted, so the bottom end magnification is important. If it was strictly for hunting, then the lower magnification would be around 2x. If only for targets, then a lower magnification of 6x is fine.

Also depends if you want to shoot offhand with it. For offhand, lower power is better, high power exaggerates every little wobble, and can make you less accurate because you end up trying to stabilize the sight picture and forget about all other points of good shooting form.

They are going on CZ 453s

A general note. You will be able to see holes better with a high quality lower powered optic than with a higher powered, cheap scope.
 
Well, there was one more option. The Minox ZA5 3-15x42. I havent seen one in person but all the reviews say the glass is good. My only concern is lack of parallax adjustment.
 
SandRoad said:
A general note. You will be able to see holes better with a high quality lower powered optic than with a higher powered, cheap scope.
Click to expand...

Agreed.

I'd second what deegee said~minimum (for my eyes) to see a .17 diameter hole @ 100 yards is 12x and even then, it had better be a pretty decent quality scope. Something in the 14x range (and up) would be what you're probably wanting to look at. In the last 18 months, I've purchased 3 scopes, all adjustable objective. Typing this making sure my wife isn't looking over my shoulder. :) They are;

Mueller APT 4.5-14x40 for a Savage .22WMR

Vortex Viper HS 4-16x44 with the BDC reticle for a Savage .223

Vortex Crossfire II 4-12x40 for an Anschutz 1450 .22lr

I honestly think they're all nice scopes for the asking prices, and I feel like I hit a home run with all them, for their intended purposes. The Viper HS is the most I've ever spent on any scope and IS, without exception, the nicest scope I've ever owned/hunted with. At about $600, to my way of thinking, you're getting allot of scope for the money and the reticle is REALLY fine for small targets at long ranges~something I like when all I can see is the top half of a groundhog's head at 150 yards+. :) Now, the Crossfire II I've only had for a few weeks, and I was really anxious about it since I had to order it sight-unseen, something I hate doing with scopes. It has exceeded my expectations for sure, and looks great compared to some of the first generation of Crossfires. I noticed they have a 6-18x40 AO in the Crossfire II, with the BDC reticle I like so much. If I were buying/scoping an HMR today (hunting being my primary consideration) this scope would probably be at the top my list;

http://www.vortexcanada.net/products/riflescopes/crossfire2/crossfire2_6-18x44ao_bdc.html

If it was a dedicated target gun..it would still be the one I'd look at first, but a Viper HS would be tempting if $ allowed.
 
I just put a Minox 4-20x50 with side parallax adjustment on my cz 453 in 17HRM. It "fits" the 453 better than the Leupold 6.5-20x30 mm that I considered taking off a custom Ruger #1 Varmint to trying on this rifle. Am just breaking the gun in with only a few test rounds fired. So far it has impressed me. The optics are very bright with lots of detail visble at 100 yards ( and greater distances). Speaks well of Minox's heritage.
I almost pulled the trigger on a Nikon Monarch 6-24x50
Like Nikon, Minox has an excellent reputation for camera optics, binoculars and spotting scopes. Have to admit that my decision was influenced by some very good product reviews.
The price was very good, too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom