How to choose a new scope?

[Mallers]

Hello,

Im after a new scope but although I can see on the different existing threads different recomendations, im trying to see whats important so I can at least get a shortlist for myself then see if any of those are recomended or not.

All of my shooting at my local rifle club has been iron sights, the one chap who did use a scope has sadly passed away and theres no-one left who regularly shoots long distance (and can therefore give advice!).

 

I have a spare slot for a .308 so in the new year will be buying a Savage 12 F/TR, and am after the scope to go with it. Will be used for paper targets at (in yds) 500, 600, 900 and 1,000. Due to a very small flat, I have no way (space) to reload, so will only be shooting factory loads. Still looking at those, but will probably tend to heavier bullets.

 

So, that's what I'm shooting and what I'm shooting at. What should I be looking for in a scope? The advice I had so far is stay with MOA instead of milrad, and look to be spending a lot on the scope! I like the idea of an illuminated SFP scope, so at long distances the markings don't obscure the target and if there's a problem I can illuminate the markings so I can actually see them.

 

Is there anything else I need to be looking for? I hadn't thought about mounts apart from as a way to connect scope to rifle, but I'm now picking up I may need a tapered rail for the mounts to get the right elevation to reach 1,000yds but still be able to dial back to shoot at 600.

 

Many thanks for any help!

rgds,

Trevor

[The Gun Pimp]

If you want a decent scope that will compliment your Savage FTR you need to go Japanese rather than Chinese.

 

The cheapest Japanese scope which will do the job (out to 1000 yds) is something like the 8-32 Sightron. The LRMOA is and excellent second focal plane reticle. Stick to MOA - much better with the MOA F Class target.

 

Expect to pay about £800 plus for this scope.

 

Get a 20MOA tapered mount (Tier One) and some decent rings - there are plenty around but don't go for the vertically split Weaver.

 

If £800 is sounding a bit too expensive - given that rail and rings could soak up another £150 or more then it'll have to be Chinese. Try the Fox Firearms 8-32 for £125. It's an amazing scope for the money and will get you shooting. When you can afford it and have gleaned a bit of knowledge, you can move to something better.

[gbal]

Trevor, you will need a 20 moa rail-up to half a scope's vertical adjustment go on zeroing it on the rifle...and you will need 35 ish moa to get from 100 zero to 1000y

 

Stay with moa turrets-preferably 1/8 clicks-just allows finer adjustment at 1000y

Second focal plane-you do not want a variable reticule size,and get a fine one-so long as you can see it.

You won't need illuminated reticule (tho' eg NF have them).

You will appreciate the optionto go to around 40x some days,and less than25 (32 better) will be something of a handicap (the current trend to mega mag-60,and 80 is rarely useable and costly)

 

Well recommended scopes would include the Sightron S111,and the NIghtforces(used examples of NF make good buys,and the scopes are excellent-probably the most used LR scopes around.The 12-42 is a great target scope-don't let the not needed ranging bit of the best reticule put you off-the fine small aim cross hair is near perfect for LR,plenty mag,and superb construction.The 8-32 Sightron is good too-don't get a 'mil dot' reticule model,and new is about same as used NF....think £800 ish

Don't be persuaded on 'brightness' etc-the NF is extremely popular with target LR shooters,and you don't need twilight glass.

Somewhat less pricey are the Leupold 8-25s,but think very hard before you invest in anything other than the NF option (or S111 if you must have new and under £1k).

Good choice of rifle,and a NF would compliment it ;then you're good to go. Enjoy.

 

gbal

[ds1]

Trevor, the Sightron and Nightforce nxs 8-32x56 are excellent choices for your stated purpose depending on your budget, a good s/h nxs being probably the best.

 

However you asked for features to make your own mind up, so:

 

20 moa one piece mount - spuhr being about the best and most expensive. A 20 moa mount / base let's you use more of the scopes internal elevation.

 

2. A 30mm or 34mm main tube, for elevation (inch tubes won't give you enough). This is also tied into magnification as the higher magnification in general the less internal adjustment, eg a Nightforce nxs 12-42x56 has 45 moa internal adjustment and a nxs 8-32x56 has 65moa internal adjustment. As you need about 40 moa to get to 1k yard, you can do it with a 12-42x56 but you are near to the mechanical extremes of the erector cell adjustment - most scopes use about half the internal adjustment getting a 100 yard zero, hence the need for the 20 moa one piece mount or base. Also near the extremes of adjustment you loose some of the windage adjustment as well

That being said I have used a nxs 12-42x56 for 4 or 5 years without issue to 1km and had enough elevation on a 308win and 18 moa mount.

 

3. Reticule, you need to see what works for you, some people like dots, some cross hairs. Important is that the click values and cross hair scales are in the same language eg milrad / milrad or moa / moa. For what you state you don't need an illuminated reticule but it helps re-sale value.

 

4. First focal v 2nd focal - for the purpose you state a 2fp will work fine if you are dialing in for each distance as you will be. Ffp comes into its own being able to use the reticule as a ruler at any magnification and usable for hold overs and hold offs at any magnification - look at us Prs type shooting, on the other hand ffp if you want the versatility is still usable at belly benchrest too. Most ffp scopes are higher priced.

 

Magnification -more is better, but you trade off elevation adjustment, the eye box becomes more critical to eye position and at some point you loose clarity and brightness......but never had any problems at 40x and you don't need a spotting scope either.

 

5. Moa v milrad....if your only shooting in ranges marked in yards and on targets with scoring rings in inches then moa type turrets make sense 1/4 or 1/8 moa. One cavet 0.05 milrad turrets (0.5cm) can be thought of as 1/6 moa also.

 

6. Parallax adjustment - you need it, side wheel parallax adjustment is standard. Some scope have it on the objective and is a pain in the ass to reach. Ior have a novel mid tube adjustment. Most scopes parallax down to 50m, some to 10m, only a consideration if you want to mount the scope on a rimfire rifle sometime.

 

7. Optical quality - always nice to have and expensive but for day target shooting good glass is good enough. Get a 56mm objective.

 

There are other considerations also and some specific to the type of shooting you want to do. Look in the s/h section here - interesting options, Sightron or Vortex for about 600 quid, Nightforce nxs for about 900 quid or quality ffp 5-25x56 scopes kahles from about 1400 quid and S&B pmii from about 1700 quid. Comes down in part to how many beer tokens you want to use, what features will get the job done and what features you want.....same principle as choosing a woman really (but much cheaper).

 

Other point you mention - ammunition, have a look at hps re-loaded ammunition. Worth also looking at an Aim 60 dragbag for your kit and Mystic Precision bipod for belly benchrest or otherwise Harris brms 6-9" bipod from fox Firearms to get started.

[VarmLR]

"It is a rich man who can afford to buy cheap glass". Someone clever once said something like that....more likely, someone who spent a lot on various cheap scopes probably said it before realising that the old adage "buy once, cry once" is true. No more so than when considering a good rifle scope.

 

Considerations obviously have to include good glass. Whilst there's plenty of adequate glass for good conditions around cheaply these days, once the conditions change, skies darken or you shoot at dusk, things rapidly change. Good reliable and repeatable turrets are also a MUST if shooting out to 1000 yds, and you rarely get these on cheap scopes (ok....I'll put my neck on the chopping block and say that Falcon scopes may be the exception to the rule here).

 

Many seem to recommend Sightron and a lot shoot with them. Personally, I prefer (for similar money) the Bushnell Elite Tactical LR range of scope (ie the DMR, LRS, HDMR). They have everything you need in a scope for long range shooting. Very good Japanese optics? Check. Good, repeatable turrets? Check. Good performance in poor light conditions? Check. Reasonable price? Yes, if you stick with the DMR.

 

Also, consider the zoom range. You generally compromise light transmission and optical performance the more lens elements and groups you introduce, so the lower the zoom range, the better, and even consider fixed power. Another consideration is that for most part, high magnifications offer no real advantages for longer ranges and indeed can be a significant disadvantage due to things like mirage, loss of brightness, tunnelling, loss of FOV. Even if sighting to 1000, 14 to 16 times mag is plenty enough. Nightforce ATACR or SHV range do some good options with sensible zoom ranges.

 

With that in mind, Nightforce do some good FFP options to around that mag. S&B, if your wallet is deeper, probably better still. Used, as DS1 has stated, the NSX 5.5-22 is a good LR scope as are the Leup Mk4s. I use a 5.5-22 NSX and have no regrets with it. It'll also out last me!

 

Mounts: Avoid cheap mounts at all costs. Stick with quality brands. As to whether you'll need moa rails to get you out to 1000, well, pick a scope like the DMR and in .308, you'll have plenty of reach to get you there due to the masses of internal adjustment. The DMR has a 34mm tube and almost 90moa of elevation adjustment (about half this at 100 yd zero, so enough for 1000 yds with room to spare)

 

Look at what those in competition use. You'll regularly see scopes like the S&B PMII, the odd Sightron, Bushnell DMRs and Nightforce ATACR on long distance shooting rigs.

 

If you can get to look at any before parting with your hard earned, then that is highly recommended. What works for one person may not work for everyone as our eyes differ. The older you get, the more you appreciate good eye relief and FOV combined with a nice bright image. You can't really go wrong with any of the top end or even higher mid priced scopes though. You can go plenty wrong with most cheaper scopes...best avoided. Falcon are the only one's I've used that seem ok, even if if compromised, at a very modest price.

 

Finally, here's a very useful review which most have probably read, but well worth a read. It covers most of the likely contenders. Oddly there's no NSX 5.5-22 x 56, but had it been included, it would probably have fallen in above it's 50mm sibling in performance:

 

http://precisionrifleblog.com/2014/09/19/tactical-scopes-field-test-results-summary/

 

Note the outstanding results overall for performance to price for the Bushnell DMR...

 

Edit: As Chris has rightly pointed out below, context is everything: Take that into account and the results are not all what they seem. Whilst for some, FFP is not a requirement, for others, being able to make rapid adjustments for changes for wind for example, FFP may be useful depending on the ret. For most target purposes, SFP is probably fine. Also, no use having the best optics, if tracking doesn't allow precision from a closer zero out to longer distances. Internal adjustment range is also a major consideration especially where you may not wish to use 10 or 20moa rails or adjustable mounts in order to keep expense/complexity/weight down.

[Chris-NZ]

Be careful to read the text in these reviews. The context is very important and shouldn't be ignored.

 

I was somewhat amused as to the total score for the ATAC-R.

It lost out badly to some other scopes only because it wasn't FFP (which of course is irrelevant to most target shooters). The mechancial and optical performance were right up there.

[ds1]

If you think about it there are only really 4 quality high mag (40+) ffp scopes on the market (excluding uso sn9) - ior crusaders 5.8-40x56 with 40 mm tube and about 100 moa of elevation so excellent for ELR but stuck with factory or spuhr mounts. Cost about 2k. S&B 5-45X56 PMII, think stuck with P4 fine reticule and 4k and March fx 5-40x56, have not found any downside to this scope with fml-1 reticule does precision, tactical and can be mounted on a rimfire with parallax down to 7m and "mid" priced at 3k and S&B 125-40x56, lacks illumination and not fantastic choice of reticules - target / f class scope with a ffp option.

 

 

The market is full of 5-25x 56 quality ffp scopes - S&B Pmii being the benchmark, Kahles 624I, Steiner, Vortex, USO and many more.

[gbal]

Trevor,

YOu have had some very savvy advice,with some consensus-dont buy cheap-you need reliable precise dependable clicks-more important than super optics (though both are possible together-at a price).

ds1 list is very good....I'd just add 'warranty'-you may never need,but good to have and most of the scopes mentioned do.I don't know how you bust a NF,but they fix it.

 

It's always a good idea to see what kit is being used...but the kind (and perhaps level) of competiton is a big factor;and you should try to match that to your fixed range 5-1000 target club shooting.

 

PRS eg is not a good omparison-great though PRS is,it isn't much shot in UK,and its needs differ fro what seem likely to be yours ( ffp mil/mil and the S&B 5-25 are a top choice for PRS,which needs rather fast sho/or two at variable distance gongs,and a wide field of view is useful)>About as far from fixed range

paper targets as you can get....

Side focus is nice-esp as youmay be movig around distances,though not within fromshot to shot.

If you can,try scopes at real distance-and in context of the targets to be used-most won't have huge bulls(your aiming mark-got to be ableto place cross hair precisely on it,not have it somewhere underneath/obscured....1000y Bench Rest eg has a coloured disc-around 6 inches-and a low teen mag won't enhance your precision .....that's where the 30-40 scores.

 

Not to complicate unduly,check out also Accurate Shooter site for lots and lots on target gear-and ccount the NF users. Silhoette shooting won't have the same scopes,but again,can't do it here-and Europe has lots of 300m shooting-again,not so here,and equipment neeeds vary.....though few UK shooting disciplines have (artificial) limits on scopes (CSR does in some classes-but you're not going there with your rig).

I'd quite like a sensibly configured S&B or the like quality-would I replace any of the 12-40 NFs on 1000y serious rifles-not a chance;a 500 yard 'practical'rifle,yes,absolutely,and a more casual medium ranger,yes-accepting mag "limitations"-arguableto 500y-traded against class glass,and a bit of kwality kudos.

 

So 'Horses for courses"...we've all been there/still on the road....bear that in mind when enthusiasts understandably recommend what their discipline favours...a Derby certainty won't place in a steeplechase-and vice versa,and worse yet,the jockey might not much enjoy the ride...and remember,you will be the jockey!

g

[mitch308]

i have a Savage 12 FTR (great rifle by the way) and i use a 12 x 42 NSX with the NP2DD reticle, with a 20 moa rail it easily reaches out to 1000, I went for the NSX over the benchrest as i'm not a fan of the front focus on the benchrest , the NP2DD reticle is perfect for long distance it looks a bit basic but I like the simplicity and uncluttered view of it ,BTW the 8 x 32 would be just as good as i rarely use the full magnification.

 

Good luck with the rifle you will enjoy it

[Brillo]

Trevor, you mention you plan to purchase a Savage 12 F TR. From this we can assume that you may want to get into F Class competition at some point in the future. If so weight is a big consideration and could rule out the heavier options such as S&B.

Just a thought to add to the mix.

[Mallers]

Hi All,

Apologies for the delay in replying, and many thanks for all the advice! Im going through it all now, There's a lot to look at but at least i have some idea of the questions i should be asking!

thanks again,

Trevor