Shv choice

B

brybenn

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
53   0   0
Location
southern ontario
Ive been checking out mid range scopes for a while and decided the nightforce shv line offers what i need and want. I want the center illuminated moar rectical for sure. However i cant decide if i should go 4-14x56 or step up to the 5-20x56.
It will go on a 223 that spends its time split between targets and coyote hunting. The zero stop feature isnt a priority because ill rarely shoot beyond 350 yards and coyotes dont give much time for dialing. On the range i have as much time as i want to count clicks so its basically magnifacation. The length of a cabelas store doesnt give one much opportunity to test each to the fullest. My main concern is if i go with the 4-14 ill be left wishing i had more magnifacation for seeing hits on targets at 200 to 300 yards

Any one with both care to comment. Or at least experience with this line?
 
Can't comment on the scope but as for magnification I shoot yotes out to 400yds with a straight 10x scope on my 22 250 and that works just fine for me.
 
Another vote for the 4-14, I've got mine on a .223 as well and it's devastating in the gopher patch. It also makes easy work of the 7" gong at 500m at the range
 
Thanks. I think thats what im going to get. The shv 4-14×56 illuminated moar. Wish it was just a 50mm but oh well. I may just need a taller cheek piece

If i like it i may buy the 3-10x42 if i can find an illuminated moar version
 
Got Juice? said:
Another scope to look at is the Bushnell 3.5-21x50. Many Reticles available, and it acquits itself well.

precisionrifleblog.com/2014/09/19/tactical-scopes-field-test-results-summary/
Click to expand...

When comparing only in store unfortunately the shv vrs bushnells ziess leupold options only swarovski seemed as clear and crisp as the shv. I didnt look at anything over 2 grand but nightforce seemed the best. The z3 swarovski i really liked as well but the eye relief seemed alot more touchy. Im sure when mounted to a rifle wouldnt b a problem. I have mainly bushnells now and never had an issue with any. Im just slowly upgrading glass quality
 
gophers, beavers yotes and other pesky critters, i have my 4x14x56 bell stopper on a tikka 223, its a match made in heaven, can see everything even in cloudy days,, she's just a little heavy , so if your sub 30years old and feel like carrying a brick, go nuts,, we prefer chairs and shooting stick hahaa but SHV great choice
 
The 5-20 will be better if your trying to shoot small groups,load development, etc.
Much easier to see your bullet holes on paper.

And I think the plex reticle is better for both hunting and target shooting, less clutter.
Unless you plan on using the reticle for ranging at unknown distances.
The 5-20 with duplex reticle is probably cheaper than the 4-14 with illuminated reticle.
Also illuminated reticles are useless anyway.
There's a leupold vx5 hd 3-15 on the EE for $1350, I read good stuff about them.
 
Got Juice? said:
Another scope to look at is the Bushnell 3.5-21x50. Many Reticles available, and it acquits itself well.

precisionrifleblog.com/2014/09/19/tactical-scopes-field-test-results-summary/
Click to expand...

I have that Bushnell and had the shv and the shv is hands down the better option for glass. The Bushnell is quite disappointing considering the price...
 
45C said:
The 5-20 will be better if your trying to shoot small groups,load development, etc.
Much easier to see your bullet holes on paper.

And I think the plex reticle is better for both hunting and target shooting, less clutter.
Unless you plan on using the reticle for ranging at unknown distances.
The 5-20 with duplex reticle is probably cheaper than the 4-14 with illuminated reticle.
Also illuminated reticles are useless anyway.
There's a leupold vx5 hd 3-15 on the EE for $1350, I read good stuff about them.
Click to expand...

I liked the SHV 5-20, I went a different route since the price was a bit higher than I could spend. Also for target shooting a moa or mil reticle is nice for measuring misses is great. Illuminated reticles are good for low light hunting, otherwise not needed.
 
Only a downside if you require a smaller diameter scope Desjard.

The OP will have to decide if he wants to zoom in a bit tighter, or if he wants more FOV for moving Coyotes. 4-14 probably would be fine, especially if you stay under 500 yards.
 
Lead hammer said:
I liked the SHV 5-20, I went a different route since the price was a bit higher than I could spend. Also for target shooting a moa or mil reticle is nice for measuring misses is great. Illuminated reticles are good for low light hunting, otherwise not needed.
Click to expand...
The 5 20 is a big scope,perfect for target,bipod ,etc.
Not so great for offhand though.
Our hunting regs allow for 1/2 hr after sunset.
It's ok for something close,but anything past 100 yards, I think illuminated will make much difference.A couple of days ago, I had the crosshairs on a moose,at a little over 100 yards. I had about 15 minutes of legal hunting time left.
But I couldn't tell if it was a spiked bull or a cow, so I let it go.
I could still see the non illuminated duplex reticle, with no issue.

The reason I went with the 3-15 vx5 hd, is its light enough for hunting and it should have enough highend magnification for me to see the bullet holes from the bench.
 
45C said:
The 5 20 is a big scope,perfect for target,bipod ,etc.
Not so great for offhand though.
Our hunting regs allow for 1/2 hr after sunset.
It's ok for something close,but anything past 100 yards, I think illuminated will make much difference.A couple of days ago, I had the crosshairs on a moose,at a little over 100 yards. I had about 15 minutes of legal hunting time left.
But I couldn't tell if it was a spiked bull or a cow, so I let it go.
I could still see the non illuminated duplex reticle, with no issue.

The reason I went with the 3-15 vx5 hd, is its light enough for hunting and it should have enough highend magnification for me to see the bullet holes from the bench.
Click to expand...

Makes sense. My optic is FFP that is illuminated that I am trying this year for mule deer, so the crosshairs get very small at low power.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom