GUN how much scope is too much?

Discussion in 'On Topic' started by johan, Dec 18, 2008.

  1. johan

    johan Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2003
    Messages:
    5,123
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Sahasrara; magnetic violet infinite
    just got a tikka 308 heavy barrel. Most of my shooting is ipsc, so this is my first bolt action.

    So how much scope is reasonable for this? Due to range limitations most of my shooting will be from 200-600m.

    Was thinking about Leupold 4.5-14x50, but looked through a Nightforce 5.5-22 and what a nice scope.
     
  2. LancerV

    LancerV Something Happened OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2003
    Messages:
    49,829
    Likes Received:
    70
    1x per 100yds for actual target engagement not bench rest. Bench rest put whatever you want
     
  3. Are you talking specifically how much magnification is enough? If you're shooting only from a bench, get as much as you can (in a quality scope.) If you're out looking for deer in the woods, you don't need as much magnification. Both the Leupy and Nightforce are good scopes. Of the two scopes you listed here, I'd take the nightforce. It goes almost as low as the leupold, and its max magnification is significantly more.
     
  4. Depending on what you're shooting at/how you're shooting. I wouldn't want to show up to a 600 yard benchrest match with a 6x scope.
     
  5. LancerV

    LancerV Something Happened OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2003
    Messages:
    49,829
    Likes Received:
    70
    Got me before the edit :o
     
  6. johan

    johan Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2003
    Messages:
    5,123
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Sahasrara; magnetic violet infinite
    Yeah, mostly mag requirements for target, although I'd like to do some hunting too, but mostly its for paper punching.

    I know its not a waste to spend on glass, but the NF is quite a bit more. I guess you could argue that you're getting a lot more too.

    My concern was also that of the trio of requirements: gun, glass, shooter, I wasn't mismatching gun & glass.

    Presumeably if long range ends up being a lot of fun, I won't need to upgrade the glass, and can move the NF to a better gun platform.
     
  7. For sure. You can always move it to something else. If you get the nightforce, which objective lens size are you thinking of? I've got a 5.5-22x56, and it gathers so much light that you can easily see stuff until it's almost too dark to see normally.
     
  8. johan

    johan Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2003
    Messages:
    5,123
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Sahasrara; magnetic violet infinite
    yeah the 5.5-22x56 would be my choice, although it does raise the optic even higher. No adj cheek rest ftl.

    Are you running the zero stop version?
     
  9. It's only going to have to sit 3mm higher.

    I don't have the zero stop.
     
  10. Cannondale

    Cannondale OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2007
    Messages:
    83,565
    Likes Received:
    477
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    I have a Tikka T3 Lite in .308 that I have a 40 year old Tasco 4x40 on. It's fine for hunting but It can be annoying trying to group it at 100 yards.
     
  11. yar1182

    yar1182 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2008
    Messages:
    4,852
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Ventura California
    For most long range applications a 3x9 variable power scope is plenty. If your bench resting you can go quite a bit higher of course. That is an entirely different kind of shooting. I would say it's more matching the scope to the kind of shooting than it is matching it for the gun.

    Say you want a scope for point blank to 400 yards for say hunting, competition, or fighting rifle then a 1x4 variable would be my pick.

    Say you wanted a optic for 200+ yards out to 900 then a 3x9 for same application.

    Your going to need to find targets so lower magnification helps here. If the magnification is too powerful you have a very small feild of view and it is slow to get on target and transition to next target etc. You also might be hiking, running, and doing all manner of stuff to get your heart rate up and your recticle will bounce in time to your heart beat at high magnification.

    If on the other hand your shooting off a bench then your shooting at one known target. Your not winded, perfect breathing, perfectly stable.You can crank that magnification all the way up to eliminate as much sighting error as possible.

    So pick the type of shooting your going to do and get a scope to match. I refrain from saying benchrest is gay but it is definately not exciting enough for me.
     
  12. Of course it will, but having a lesser magnification optic is only going to mask it. Your POI is still bouncing up and down. Breathing and trigger control are going to be your friend here, not having less magnification.


    As to your other points... why limit yourself to something like 3-9 when you can easily have 5.5-22? You can crank it down when you need to, and crank it up when you want to.
     
  13. yar1182

    yar1182 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2008
    Messages:
    4,852
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Ventura California
    Because 5.5 is going to be slow at 200 yards or under. Too small a feild of view. The low end is as much a concern as the top end of magification when your engaging targets of unknown distances from short to long range.
     
  14. Slow for what? The guy said he wants to punch paper, and maybe do a little hunting. I'd gladly take 5.5x over 3x if I can turn the magnification up to 22x when I want, rather than max out at 9x. For what this guy has stated he wants to do, the 5.5-22 is going to be much more useful than 3-9.
     
  15. phrozenlikwid

    phrozenlikwid New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2007
    Messages:
    5,709
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    NKY
    The Leupy MK4 4.5x14x40 isn't bad glass. The 3.5x10x40 IMO is much more flexible. Given the choice (and I've owned both), I go with the 3.5x10 myself. M1 knobs are what you want here.

    I like Nightforce stuff, but wish they'd move in a smaller handy/dandy'er direction. 50mm objectives suck; 56mm obj's suck really bad. It really cuts down on your mounting options IMO, and can easily fuck up a cheekweld on most stocks (Likely, your Tikka) because they set up so high. A lower scope is nearly always mo' betta. My only other bitch with NF (make no mistake, they make a pretty damn good product at a reasonable cost) is that they aren't as "friendly" to use as a 3.5x10x40 Leupy (though most aren't), in regards to eyebox/eye relief/FOV. If NF dropped the 50mm obj, and tried to incorporate a little friendlier mannerisms (and lost that stupid fucking rotating ocular) I'd likely be convinced to buy a fuck load of them.

    As far as accumulating "X's"...... it's not all that it's cracked up to be. I think that this is something that many people get bent on, because its a tangible that they can compare on a spec sheet or in a store. Kinda like "glass clarity". Both usually aren't the first thing I'd look for when weighing optics. Magnification certainly helps, but it's easy to go overboard at the cost of more useable features. FWIW, even on scopes that go higher, I am rarely twisting the zoom past 15x. That's shooting to 1230yds (bout as far as I can get here). I could get buy with a 10x for the majority of my shots.

    You are an IPSC guy, so I imagine you are fairly adept at seperating the wheat from the chaff. Read up some over on SH, and see what you thinhk. Might be a NF group buy getting ready to happen, and often there are guys selling good glass at a discount. You can't go wrong there, as good glass really doesn't "wear out", and it's easily the best investment you can make with a rifle. I'd check out the 3.5x15x50 NF, some Leupy MK4's, and maybe even the IOR SH scope (though I have no dealings with them).
     
  16. yar1182

    yar1182 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2008
    Messages:
    4,852
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Ventura California

    Slow for tracking a moving target under 200 yards mving in and out of trees. Do we really have to make this a pissing contest. People get so butt hurt if they think somebody objects to their suggestions. It's not like we are compeating for a sales commission.
     
  17. one66stang

    one66stang Haters.com

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2001
    Messages:
    13,250
    Likes Received:
    6
    Location:
    Midland Texas
    I would go with the 5-22 Nightforce . The higher mag is nice when looking at targets after the shot, or for really trying to check out an animal.
    I do a lot of deer hunting and I keep my scope on 6x unless I`m sitting in a blind then I may up it to 9x.
     
  18. How is it a pissing contest? He said the rifle is for target shooting, and maybe some hunting. In that case, I'd buy a scope that's better for target shooting, and not worry so much about tracking fast moving targets through trees.
     
  19. yar1182

    yar1182 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2008
    Messages:
    4,852
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Ventura California
    Forget it MG your right.
     
  20. Mideel25

    Mideel25 OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2004
    Messages:
    5,924
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    If you do plan on doing some hunting, where would it be? Brushy? Forest? Open Fields? That is the real determinant of what you want your minimum magnification levels to be if you want the weapon to be decent for hunting.

    Where I hunt, a min mag level of 6 would be very annoying.
     
  21. johan

    johan Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2003
    Messages:
    5,123
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Sahasrara; magnetic violet infinite
    this is great, thanks guys.

    so for those who propose the merits of a lower mag scope, what about the NightForce 3.5-15x50, more suitable/usable than the 5.5-22?

    since the longest I can shoot 600m, and the average distance will likely be in the 300-400m (different ranges, the 600 range is further away).

    I like the idea of the 5.5-22 since I'd like to avoid rebuying significant glass should I move up to a different gun, but whoever talked about the ease of use of a lower 3x-ish power for shorter distances...you have a point there.
     
  22. phrozenlikwid

    phrozenlikwid New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2007
    Messages:
    5,709
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    NKY
    I guess I'm one of those guys who are pimpin the lower mag range.....

    You are getting into the realms of personal preference here. Plenty of people shoot and like the 5.2-22 - It is not bad glass. The magnification range as a number isn't the deal breaker for me, it's the inherent concessions that comes with higher zoom ranges that makes me favor something less. FOV tradesoffs, less friendly mannerisms, size, etc all mean more more to me than a couple more X's. 15 of them is more than plenty for me, and I get by with less just fine.

    When building one rifle to do it all, utility reigns supreme. The more I shot, the more I realized that less is simply more most of the time, and chasing paper perfection ends up creating a rifle that is at best mediocre in a couple niches, and sucks nearly everywhere else. 600 yds isn't hugely far; I'd be surprised if you were cranking up past 15x much to shoot it (barring specialized forms of competition). I don't know where you live, but mirage alone will usually fuck you from using high mags in most locales.

    Be nice if you could fingerfuck some of the optics in question, to get a feel for yourself on what you think. I can only relay my experiences, based on how I shoot. On the upside, good glass never is a bad investment, and can easily be flipped if you feel the desire to do so.

    Try hanging out with some F-class or practical precision guys and getting their opinions on the matter. Check out 6mmBR/24hourcampfire/snipershide and related sites for opinions from those you can't meet in person and see what you think.




    Next big question..... what bullet(s) you plan on gunning?
     
  23. LancerV

    LancerV Something Happened OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2003
    Messages:
    49,829
    Likes Received:
    70
    Also take into account that with a 50mm objective lens you'll prob need a different stock to get a proper cheek weld
     
  24. johan

    johan Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2003
    Messages:
    5,123
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Sahasrara; magnetic violet infinite
    Yeah, great advice all around, thanks for the discussion guys.

    as for carts, I dont reload...I like Black Hills 175, but always hear good things about Federal GM.

    I'll play around before settling on a particular round/bullet weight.
    Cost is a consideration, although not huge, since round counts should be pretty low compared to what I'm used to.
     
  25. cantankerously

    cantankerously Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2004
    Messages:
    61,519
    Likes Received:
    4
    Location:
    South Carolina
    If you hunt deer, get at least a 50mm objective and a 30mm tube.
     

Share This Page