Hunting match scope

A spinoff of the Bergara HMR thread, I am looking for a scope suggestion.
I'm wanting a scope that will be as comfortable shooting a deer in fading light as it will be shooting a distant steel target.
I am aware that wanting a jack of all trades scope means certain elements will have strengths and weaknesses.

I'm not wanting to spend an absolute mint on the scope. I understand quality glass isn't free but I'm not spending more money on a scope than I paid for my K5 Blazer.

With those qualifications, I would pick between these two -

New - Vortex Viper PST, first focal plane reticle, 6-24 x 50 mm, 30 mm main tube

Used - Any Swarovski with a 30 mm main tube and a TDS reticle. There is a Swarovski Habicht 4-16 x 50 mm on ebay right now for about $1500 that meets all this


I have also heard good things about some of the new Bushnell scopes, but don't have enough time behind one to offer an opinion. The Nightforce SHV is not a bright scope.

Also look at meopta 6.5-20 x 50 HTR. It outperforms my Swaro Z5 any day for fading light and distance clarity. I'm not trashing the Z5, its on my favorite rifle, but to my eye, the meopta edges it out.

I'm guessing weight isn't an issue given the rifle you are putting it on?

Ya within reason, I'm wanting the middle of the road.
It doesn't need to be a 13.5oz fixed power mountain rifle scope but also not wanting a 60oz 34MM tube 8-40X60 super deluxe $5000 tactical wonder scope.

The Swaro and Leupold scopes just aren't built to constantly dial shooting long range. I own them and they will work in a limited capacity but they just aren't designed as dialing scopes like a Nightforce, Bushnell DMR,HDMR,LRHS,Swfa SS, or some of the more expensive scopes I won't even mention. SWFA SS will be the cheapest followed by a Bushnell. I don't think you will beat the closeout we talked about in price and performance if the weight and mag range works for you.

You can get lots of good info on decent dialing target type scopes at snipershide,you just have to decide which ones can be adapted to your hunting style,depending on weight,reticles,and mag range.

Look at the new Zeiss conquest V4 6x24 models. I bought one a couple months ago and mounted it on my 308. Haven't run it out to long range yet to test the turrets but it has an illuminated MOA reticle which will work in low light hunting situations and for ranging. Abot $1300.

I'll have to look into these.

Any input on this?
http://www.nikonsportoptics.com/en/...s/black-x1000-4-16x50sf-matte-x-moa.html

I have the 6-24x50 no complaints here, and they have great reviews. Seen one write up (don't remember his name) where a guy said his test model didn't go completely back to 0, not sure if I believe that nitwit anyhow. But If you look hard enough you'll find something negative on all brands on the market....

Leupold VX5 3-15-44 illuminated reticle.

I’d only look at tactical scopes with good turrets. If you want to shoot long you’ll have to dial and if you can’t trust the turret you might as well not buy it. RH’s list covers most of what you want to look at. Might give Athlon a look too. Their higher end models seem to have good reviews. And if the Bushnell closeout he is talking about is the one GAP is doing that is probably going to be the perfect scope for you since the wind age is capped and George designed it for hunting.

I really like my Nightforce SHV 4-14x50 F1. It had everything I was looking for in a scope that would pull double duty on the range and hunting. Its Illuminated reticle, Mil, and solid turret adjustment. Its built like a tank which brings me to its only downside and that's the weight of it. Its a heavy scope. You can get them fro a hair over $1000 if youll call optics planet and talk to them over the phone instead of ordering it directly online. It lists for $1250

The ER of 2.8-3.1 always concerned me a little on that scope. Have you notice any difference with the ER from any of your other scopes? I suppose it would be fine but I might be concerned on a heavy recoiling caliber shooting prone.

Anthlon Japanese made stuff is getting good reviews but I think we are talking $1500-$1600. Yes, I was talking about the LRHS at GAP. I don't think there's one cheaper and better for the OP anywhere right now.

I got a prostaff 5 thats made for long distance with big turrets that id sell i bought it on a whim just to put on a rifle but wanting to upgrade it dont focus real good under 100 but would kill a deer...

To me the ultimate would be a Nightforce NXS 2.5-10X42 mill reticle if you wanted the lightest long range capable dialing scope. I would go ATACR FFP if weight wasn't a concern. The only drawback is price. If money was no object I would own a Tangent Theta.

I'll be calling GAP Monday to talk with them, they weren't open yesterday.

Right now it is between a Bushnell, PST III and a GPO.

Try to do some research and even ask some questions from guys who actually dial scopes a lot. I suggest Snipershide. To me there's a difference between a scope that can dial and one that is designed to dial. I have both,and they can both be effective in the field but for a serious long range rig where I wanted to practice shooting every week all year long dialing from my zero to max range and all distances between I would want a scope designed as such. With those scopes you necessarily pay a weight penalty,simply because their internals are designed heavier and more robust.

Another thing you want to make sure about is the reticle. Some of the FFP target dialing scopes don't have the best reticle for hunting when on low power. That LRHS has a reticle designed for hunting. Also make sure whatever scope you choose has enough adjustment range to reach your desired max with your load.

How does the SWFA 3-15 fit into the mix?
https://swfa.com/swfa-ss-3-15x42-tactical-rifle-scope-11.html
https://swfa.com/swfa-ss-3-15x42-tactical-rifle-scope.html

Tangent Theta would be like eating prime rib on a raman noodle budget

That scope is approaching yearly ROTH IRA amount. Yup, I am no need for a scope like that. Would rather have $5,000 invested than a single piece of glass.

Here's a scope that makes the Theta look like a Dodge Dakota...https://www.eurooptic.com/carl-zeiss-optronics-hensoldt-zf-35-26x56-riflescope.aspx

I would say it leans more toward the target side simply because the reticle is finer at low power. Not saying it won't work fine for hunting but you might want to use it on 5X-6X on the lowest if there was a chance of 50 yard shots,especially in low light. I would rate their 3-9HD as a better pure hunting scope and always prefer the Mill quad reticle with mill adjustments on any. Always remember that the 3-9 will likely be $450 on Black Friday. and cal also sometimes be found in the sample list for same.

I still prefer the Bushnell 3-12 LRHS overall to either for better reticle,eyebox,adjustments, and better designed hunting turrets with a zero stop. You can sometimes find a used one around $700-800. That's what I gave for mine and I've seen others right after I bought mine.

There is also a Bushnell LRTSi 3-12 that is same but offers illumination. Only thing about it is that the GAP sale will get you a 4.5-18 at half the price with a small weight penalty.

RHC What guns and scopes do you actually own? You quote a lot of specs but do you actually own those scopes or are you just quoting reviews of others who do own them? Just curious.

That's the reason I suggested a scope built for dialing, and a scope with a reticle that keeps you from it.

Swarovski's TDS reticle makes it a fine no-dial option for long range shooting, and it will typically be brighter at dawn and dusk than any scopes not made by Schmidt-Bender or Kahles,

Neither. He just internet trolls websites and spews what the latest talk is about.

Yes,I've owned the SWFA scopes, 3-9 HD and 10X. Currently don't have one because I use the Bushnell LRHS 3-12 which I own and prefer. I've owned just about every Zeiss,Leupold,Kahles hunting scope over the years. Currently only own one Zeiss Diavari, 2 Leupold and one Kahles. I bought a Swaro Z5 with a BT a couple years ago to try on a light weight rifle and still use it. I've also tested the Nioghtforce NXS 2.5-10X32 fairly extensively.

How does the SWFA 3-15 fit into the mix?
https://swfa.com/swfa-ss-3-15x42-tactical-rifle-scope-11.html
https://swfa.com/swfa-ss-3-15x42-tactical-rifle-scope.html[/quote]


I would say it leans more toward the target side simply because the reticle is finer at low power. Not saying it won't work fine for hunting but you might want to use it on 5X-6X on the lowest if there was a chance of 50 yard shots,especially in low light. I would rate their 3-9HD as a better pure hunting scope and always prefer the Mill quad reticle with mill adjustments on any. Always remember that the 3-9 will likely be $450 on Black Friday. and cal also sometimes be found in the sample list for same.

I still prefer the Bushnell 3-12 LRHS overall to either for better reticle,eyebox,adjustments, and better designed hunting turrets with a zero stop. You can sometimes find a used one around $700-800. That's what I gave for mine and I've seen others right after I bought mine.

There is also a Bushnell LRTSi 3-12 that is same but offers illumination. Only thing about it is that the GAP sale will get you a 4.5-18 at half the price with a small weight penalty.[/quote]




RHC What guns and scopes do you actually own? You quote a lot of specs but do you actually own those scopes or are you just quoting reviews of others who do own them? Just curious.[/quote]

Neither. He just internet trolls websites and spews what the latest talk is about.
[/quote]


Naw,I'm not nearly as full of myself as you are.

It’s not much of a concern of mine because it’s sitting on a HMR 6.5. I haven’t noticed the eye relief being different enough from my other scopes for me to be concerned about it. As far as for the heavy recoiling rifles I don’t know as I see no need for them for the shooting and hunting I do. I don’t hunt anything that a 300 could kill any deader than a 7-08. Actually the only magnum rifle I shoot is a 257wby

RHC saves us the trouble of finding reviews on whatever scope we are interested in buying. He has already tested all of them and he knows any scope which can't hammer a nail like a Nightforce is a POS.

Just doing my part to try to make this a great site,like all you other smart asses.

How does one test a Nightforce without owning it outright? According to your previous message, you prefer a Bushnell over a Swaro? Really? You must be loaded with money to own just about every Zeiss, Leopold & Kahles scopes there is. I call BS on that.

I had a friend loan me a Nightforce for a month for evaluation. No,I'm not loaded,but I do like to sell and trade and try different scopes. When I say I've tried just about all I don't mean every mag range but every model, Diavari, Conquest, Conquest HD5, Terra. VX2, VX3, VX6,

Yes,the Bushnell LRHS is a better scope overall than a Swaro Z5,maybe you don't know that because all you know about Bushnell is blister pack Walmart scopes. The LRHS glass is just as good as Swaro. The adjustments are much more tactile,There is greater adjustment range,and in my opinion the FFP reticle is more useful at long range. There is no reason it shouldn't be since they are at the same price point and Swaro elevates the price greatly simply because uneducated folks such as yourself don't know any better.

Did that make you feel better, insulting someone you've never met? I bet your head blew up after writing that post. I simply call BS on your previous statement. You didn't say you had tried the scopes in question but had owned them. Those are a lot of high end, not to mention high dollar scopes you're talking about. I do my research before making a purchase. If I had your money I guess buying and selling may be the ticket, as well as shooting at the range, I don't know. To think I sent you a 35rem reloading die for free and on my nickel. If you have any more silly ass comments you feel you need to make, feel free to come over and make them face to face instead of hiding behind a computer monitor. Now run along and go play.

We really appreciate your contributions RH. Really. Especially the insight on how we are all morons for having a Swarovski scope instead of a Bushnell. I'm gonna put all my swaros and zeiess in the classifieds so I can replace them with the higher quality Bushnell scopes. I won't bother with trying to sell my leupolds as your insight has taught me they're worthless.

No, you never sent me anything. Sorry you got offended but I didn't speak any differently than you did. Yea, it gets a bit aggravating since all I was trying to do was to help someone and give them my personal opinions on stuff I own and have used,and all I get for it is insulted. So sorry that you couldn't take back a little of what you were dishing out.

I have owned 3 different Nightforce NXS scopes, Nightforce ATACR, Zeiss Diavari with target turrets, vortex viper, and zeiss conquest with target turrets.

I have looked through, compared and shot with Burris XTR 2's, swarovski X5I's, a few different Bushnell tactical scopes, Nightforce SHV's, Vortex razor Gen 1 and Gen 2's, and I'm sure a few others.

The NF scopes are as tough as they come. They track true, glass is good and they are great all around scopes but they do lack in late evening visibility/clarity when compared to scopes like swaro, S&B, zeiss diavari and I'm sure some other high end scopes. In all of my time hunting with NF scopes I never felt like they cost me a shot due to glass quality. I would (and probably will) own more NF scopes down the road.

The Vortex viper that I owned tracked true but it didn't have the glass quality/clarity that I wanted. A good friend of mine had one and sent it back multiple times because it wouldn't track true. I seen it happen first hand more than once.

The zeiss conquest tracked true but didn't have the internal adjustment that I wanted. Glass quality/clarity is good for the money.

The Zeiss diavari has tracked true but in all honesty I haven't really stretched it out as far as I'd like to yet but every adjustment Ive made has been spot on. Glass quality/clarity is great but it doesn't have as much internal adjustment as a lot of other LR scopes do. Since its on a flat shooting rifle it will get out further than I'll probably ever take it.

The Burris XTR's and Bushnell tactical scopes are great target scopes but to me they did not have very good glass quality/clarity especially late evening but they do track true from what ive seen.

The NF SHV line doesn't impress me all that much in any area.

I have a few buddies with swarovski X5I's and they track true, glass quality/clarity is great and are amazing in low light/late evening.

The razor Gen2 is better than the Gen1 IMO but both are tough scope with good glass. I would put the Gen2 up there with the NF NXS line as far as glass quality/clarity.


With all of that being said I am a hunter that enjoys shooting long range. I don't compete in any matches or competitions just me and a few buddies that like to get together and shoot long range in the off season and have a good time. After owning, shooting and comparing all the scopes i have had the opportunity to mess around with I wanted scopes with really good glass quality/clarity for hunting but also something I could shoot long range. My primary hunting rifles have a zeiss diavari 6-24x56 with Illuminated reticle on one and I have a 5-25x56 Swarovski X5I on the way for the other rifle. I have a LR 308 rifle as well that will need a scope if it doesn't sell. It won't be a primary rifle and won't get shot very much so I doubt I'll go crazy on the scope. Ive been wanting to play with one of the Nikon black X1000's so that may be a good gun to try one out on.

I own one of the Nikon black x1000’s and for the money it’s a good scope imo. Glass is pretty good and seems to track true. Haven’t used it much but works good so far. It’s the 6-24x50 model.

Random thoughts from me.... Debating the finer aspects of these different model I'm not sure many would like my opinion. The scopes are good, not great and over priced. I am not sure who makes them but it is likely Japanese made by Light Optical Works if they are truly good scopes....and truth be told on that you are likely being overcharged once you break $1k.

If you want the best get a Schmidt and Bender.

My thoughts on a hunting scope.... needs to be in the 2-3-4x range on the bottom end. Anything with more power on the low side is not going to get it done for a hunting scope as a general use scope unless it is tailored to a specific setup like a specific shooting house or mountain side.

And just remember I can do anything you can with a fixed 10x out to 1200 yds. maybe further at the range. So at some point you gotta ask yerself if you are overpaying for something you don't really need in the first place.

Anyone interested in a S&B,needs to call and talk to Doug at Cameraland NY. You can get one a lot cheaper than you might think.

I have asked this question in the past and herd nothing but crickets.

Why do Kahles, S&B some Zeiss, have such a good name when they - at least the ones I have shot have - been cloudy and /or did not have edge to edge clarity? The Kahles and S&B both looked distorted unless the target was directly in the center of the sight picture. It's the same type of distortion I've seen in lower end scopes. Both were cloudy or at least not as bright as my Vortex PST scope. The Zeiss - I believe it was a Diavari - was just distorted.

This may not be the norm, but it's all have to go on. I am by far no expert when it comes to scopes, but I know what looks clear and bright to my eye.

I have a buddy with a Swaro Z6 he got this past Christmas that is distorted on the edges on the high end of the zoom range too.

It just seems to me, for the price they command, they would be perfect. I mean heck, my Vortex PST is clear edge to edge throughout the zoom range and clear for less than 1/3 the price.

I have not noticed this with any of the ones that I have, but mine are all older ones with 30mm main tubes

I've heard other people say that they went through 2-3 scopes of the same model before getting one that had better glass than the others on some of these big name scopes. I think sometimes they depend on name alone and then when someone buys one they make excuses because they spent so much money.

I briefly had a Leica ERi 2.5-10X42. I reterned it in less than 10 days because the edges were so blurry on 2.5X that you couldn't read a car license plate at 25 yards looking through the last 1/3 edge of the glass. You could read it better with the naked eye. That distortion went away at higher power but it was unacceptable to me in a $1500 scope.

They are overpriced. The Nightforce the military kinda uses sometimes is all glued up on the inside. Not the same scope they sell to consumers however their name and marketing demand the price $1500+ for a Japanese scope that is not the same scope their reputation is allegedly built upon.

The reason I would say S&B is maybe worth the cost is not because of the glass but they are military grade. So if a Nightforce is $2k then a S&B is $3k you are actually getting what you are paying for at $3k.

Some are really good glass some are fuzzy... in the end what does it matter. I can take a $500 fixed 10x and make pay dirt on the range all day long. In the woods I can kill whatever you want me to shoot out to what I consider max ethical distances with a $500 Sightron.

I find it funny. Guns themselves are on a race to the complete BOTTOM of the pile in terms of quailty while scope manufacturers are trying to one up the ante somehow....

I'm with you gundoc... I don't see that the means justify the ends myself either.

Good glass is nice but in the end that's not a huge advantage. The fact of the matter is we have to shoot during legal shooting hours/light if you are hunting. On the range you don't need it either. Nobody ever accused Unertl of being in the same league as what we are discussing, however 50 years ago they were ringing 1k yd shots all day long. I can pull one out of the back of the safe... slide a clearly inferior (by 2018 standards) 30-06 in the chamber and pop steel plates at nearly any gun range in the South Eastern United States all day long.

None of us are shooting 2500 yds. regularly where some of these scopes in fact would have a clear advantage.

That's just the reality. I own a couple S&B scopes. But I'm not going to spew a bunch of nonsense about how awesome they are over someone else's scope simply because I own one and you don't. I think that's what the deal is on most of this stuff. Just people bragging on the internet trying to see who's the biggest Rambo.

I mean if I only had 5 guns... I could have a $5k scope on everyone of them too. But in my opinion if you only own 5 guns and have been shooting for 5 years you need to know your role... type less and read more.

Where's the "LIKE" button when you need it. Well said Goatkiller

Put a deposit on the Bushnell from GA Precision.

If you don't like it when you get it PM me. I don't think you could have done better for the money.

Not in the long range game....but I’ve said for a long time that once you get out of the 500-600 range the return on investment is not worth it.