I agree with t-star on the high priced scope. I hope your M14 is already tweaked for accuracy with iron sights. Otherwise the scope would not help you at all IMHO.
The best scope for your battle rifle at medium range
- Thread starter wildphil24
- Start date
I agree with t-star on the high priced scope. I hope your M14 is already tweaked for accuracy with iron sights. Otherwise the scope would not help you at all IMHO.
At what point is money being spent unnecessarily? There are some outstanding scopes out there. But just how expensive a scope is really necessary? Obviously a scope must be clear, bright, strongly built, and reliable. If it won't hold zero, it is a waste of time.
For the use suggested, a variable that goes as low as 2 would be nice. Upper limit of 7-10 power would be great.
As far as reticles go, my personal preference is for something simple. I do not want multiple aiming points. If I am shooting in a hurry, there is too much risk of using the wrong point; prefer to just hold off. If there is time, I will use the elevation knob, for a precise setting based on my known elevations. Same approach to windage corrections.
For the use suggested, a variable that goes as low as 2 would be nice. Upper limit of 7-10 power would be great.
As far as reticles go, my personal preference is for something simple. I do not want multiple aiming points. If I am shooting in a hurry, there is too much risk of using the wrong point; prefer to just hold off. If there is time, I will use the elevation knob, for a precise setting based on my known elevations. Same approach to windage corrections.
i would be led to beleive that 2k on a scope for an m14 would be excessive- me, i've got 4 of them and i've got 4x12 banner, 4x12 scopechief, and a couple of 4x12 x40 that i can't remember the name of- and i used to work in a lens camera repair shop- most swiss, but some japanese lenses- geodesic werke
Bushnell 6500
I just mounted a Bushnell 6500 seiries 2.6 -16 x42 tactical on top of my Springfield M1A. It is extremely versatile. Lebarons had them on special for $555, down from $777. It's got a 30mm tube, so you'll have lots of elevation out to 600yds. Do check these scopes out.
I just mounted a Bushnell 6500 seiries 2.6 -16 x42 tactical on top of my Springfield M1A. It is extremely versatile. Lebarons had them on special for $555, down from $777. It's got a 30mm tube, so you'll have lots of elevation out to 600yds. Do check these scopes out.
For hunting past 200 yards he needs a scope. Yes, I hunt with an M305. Yes, I have shot at paper up to 500 meters with iron sights. Yes, I qualified expert. I find it hard to believe that $200 scope will work fine, but a $2000 scope will fall apart on an M14. Spend all you can afford on optics. I like how the original poster is going about solving this particular problem. I will consider something similar myself.
"... but a $2000 scope will fall apart on an M14".
Well, does that mean that the big sturdy Schmidt & Bender scopes would fall apart on M14 type rifles ?
I wonder what the good people at Schmidt & Bender would have to say about it ... After all, what is the purpose of having a high end scope if said scope can't stand the recoil - among other things ?
The Nightforce scopes too are supposed to be very recoil resistant. Maybe Schmidt & Bender and Nightforce scope owners would like to chime in ?
Well, does that mean that the big sturdy Schmidt & Bender scopes would fall apart on M14 type rifles ?
I wonder what the good people at Schmidt & Bender would have to say about it ... After all, what is the purpose of having a high end scope if said scope can't stand the recoil - among other things ?
The Nightforce scopes too are supposed to be very recoil resistant. Maybe Schmidt & Bender and Nightforce scope owners would like to chime in ?
the EASIEST way to solve this is to go to the US ARMY MARKSMAN SITE, look BACK to when they were shooting the m14/m1a et al, and COPY that- that way you get a good scope that was used by professionals- chances are it's the leatherwood art, but there are equivlents out there- they were using the 3x9 art when i was using, so i got the best bushnell i could at the time- the scopechief- but i wanted a little more , so i got a 4x12
'200 yards needs a scope?' in basic, RAW RECRUITS are taught to hit up to 600 with IRONS only- at 200 you should be able to see WHERE you're hitting on the target UNAIDED- 300 is where you begin to lose definition, and at 6 your front sight is EXACTLY the height of a 6foot man- that's why your snap targets are 200 yards out and your battle sights are set for 200- that's your see and go distance- something pops up at 200, you shoot without thinking- and you're set for that or less
Oh! There's much more input on week-end. Thanks everybody.
Last fall I hunted moose with M14 NM irons. I noticed that I could have shot almost 30minutes more each day with a scope. At dusk/dawn you can't really see your post and ring.
Most M14 in Afghanistan and Irak are wearing glass. I take this as a clear statement that a scope can be effective and rugged.
Good idea. That or a JMG MOA, the illuminated donut must be nice at close range.
But for this scope I just prefer a BDC reticle like the Burris XTR where you don't need to count clicks or mil-dot. This rifle should be fast and simple. I don't want a calculator, an angle indicator and a Kestrel. It's not a sniper rifle. I'm looking for 600m, not 1km.
I already made a little ballistic table and I understand it's the way to accuracy. But after you have your table, you still need to factor the atmospheric conditions, the elevation, etc.
In your last sentence, do you mean Swarovski don't make the most rugged scopes? I noticed their website was talking only about hunting, not even LE applications...
1) I guess on your bolt-gun you enjoy a great scope because the gain in clarity and repeatability allow you to group better.
In my case, the assumption is that a hi-quality glass will perform better in low-light and be more rugged/reliable. Eventually it will also be a gain in versatility with 1-6x / 1-8x scopes.
2) I didn't hear of many scopes falling apart on the M14. My understanding is that nowadays hi-quality scopes designed for duty use can withstand the recoil of a .50BMG year long.
So for now I'll settle on the Burris XTR 156. It's features and specs are perfect for my needs and it should be a good bang for the buck.
In a few years if I feel limited by it, maybe Nightforce, USO or S&B will make a scope that I'll dream about.
I get your point. I made my homework and practiced with my irons. My eyesight is pretty good, I got good results up to 3-400m.
Last fall I hunted moose with M14 NM irons. I noticed that I could have shot almost 30minutes more each day with a scope. At dusk/dawn you can't really see your post and ring.
Most M14 in Afghanistan and Irak are wearing glass. I take this as a clear statement that a scope can be effective and rugged.
Good idea. That or a JMG MOA, the illuminated donut must be nice at close range.
But for this scope I just prefer a BDC reticle like the Burris XTR where you don't need to count clicks or mil-dot. This rifle should be fast and simple. I don't want a calculator, an angle indicator and a Kestrel. It's not a sniper rifle. I'm looking for 600m, not 1km.
I already made a little ballistic table and I understand it's the way to accuracy. But after you have your table, you still need to factor the atmospheric conditions, the elevation, etc.
In your last sentence, do you mean Swarovski don't make the most rugged scopes? I noticed their website was talking only about hunting, not even LE applications...
1) I guess on your bolt-gun you enjoy a great scope because the gain in clarity and repeatability allow you to group better.
In my case, the assumption is that a hi-quality glass will perform better in low-light and be more rugged/reliable. Eventually it will also be a gain in versatility with 1-6x / 1-8x scopes.
2) I didn't hear of many scopes falling apart on the M14. My understanding is that nowadays hi-quality scopes designed for duty use can withstand the recoil of a .50BMG year long.
We all learned that you get what you pay for (generally). I agree with you that at some point on the price spectrum, the little extra quality becomes too expensive.
So for now I'll settle on the Burris XTR 156. It's features and specs are perfect for my needs and it should be a good bang for the buck.
In a few years if I feel limited by it, maybe Nightforce, USO or S&B will make a scope that I'll dream about.
the reason the 14s in the sandbox are"wearing glass" as you call it, is because they're MISSION SPECIFIC- ie DESIGNATED MARKSMAN rifles- ranges at which the m16/223/et al are ineffective- at those ranges they need precision, and probably no collaterateral damage- the 14 used nowdays isn't all that different from the ones used in the highlands in nam- sure, teh mounts have improved, but they've only gone up 1x in magnification, but they're making 600-800 yard shots whereas the nam ones were only doing 4-5
i DON'T have a bolt- won't have a bolt-they're too slow and i don't go out far enough to justify having one-my point was that the m14 doesn't have ENOUGH ACCURACY to justify the high end scope- not the other way round- they can also replace that glass if it does get broken by simply walking into the q/ms and filling out a form, if that-if not a WHOLE NEW RIFLE- that's something most of us can't do- then it's just a matter of some range time and re-zero- i don't know about now, but a lot of guys used to carry a spare in their rucs and with the single point mount, if the scope got damaged, it was spin the damaged one off and the new one on- it was already pre-zeroed- there's ALL kinds of tricks and procedures available to front line folks that aren't available to civilians
the other thing to remember is that with the large objective scopes that you lose the "tunnel" that allows you to use the irons if need be-
and the rifle with a scope on it , will tend to ' TWIST" up and away -out of your hands- this was proven when the starlight scopes were mounted-
So where are you getting this conclusion from? I've not seen the discussion where this was the "norm" at the end of the day. Not saying it didn't happen, just wondering about your statement. The scopes that I have seen most agreed upon are the Supersniper and the Leopold Mark IV. Both of these are Milspec, both were used by the military at one point (the Leopold is the current choice) and they are different price points with the SS around $400 and the Leopold around $1500.
Been there, done that, in person, don't need your bs rant to fill in any memory gaps. To see animals in cover past 200 yards and have reliable sound bullet placement a scope is part of the necessary gear. A kill shot while hunting at 200 yards is not a shoot without thinking affair, if you are a responsible hunter.
As a convenient (for me) aside, I'll be (hopefully) welcoming the coming of spring, and my birthday, with open arms clutching a new M14 and have been pondering this question myself. I intend on installing a national match rear and smith tritium front sights, but have it in my head to spend some time on the milling machine to make up some form of QD optic mount. The idea being that I can have the M14 racked up in the truck, with the optic safely secured in a locker for flexibility's sake.
But, not having the budget that Swar./S&B/USO/NF demands, I was playing with the idea of getting something from Millett. I've had a couple already, and have been impressed with them, and am just curious as to what you folks think of its survivability on an M14. I've been considering the 4-16x50 TRS model, just for the record.
EDIT: No longer interested in Millett, as I just discovered they now make their scopes in China. WTH!
But, not having the budget that Swar./S&B/USO/NF demands, I was playing with the idea of getting something from Millett. I've had a couple already, and have been impressed with them, and am just curious as to what you folks think of its survivability on an M14. I've been considering the 4-16x50 TRS model, just for the record.
EDIT: No longer interested in Millett, as I just discovered they now make their scopes in China. WTH!
2-7 Redfield with the Accumark reticle. I have one on my M305 have shot it with good results out to 300m. Dont see any reason why it wont work just fine out to 500 there is a very nice video of it on the redfield web site on a SR 25 hammering milk jugs in sequence from 100 - 500m. Price is very good ust shy of 200$ (my arms 18 mount cost more) and has a lifetime warrenty from Leupold only down side I have seen so far is a lack of target turrets all and all I'd say the best value for your money out there.
