+1 on the Swaro. Nightforce and the Leopold Mark 4 are excellent scopes but don't compare with the Swaro for clarity and light gathering capabilities. I have all three and prefer the Swaro for hunting. Ballistic turrets are nice at the range but always not practical when hunting.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Scope for Combo Hunting/Long Range Precision Shooting
- Thread starter hopeisnotastrategy
- Start date
madcratebuilder
New member
Vortex Viper PST or Nightforce. Do some reading at snipershide.net.
Overall the NF is a better scope but I think the PST is more bang for the buck. The PST is considerably less money, about 1K vs 1.5k. Either scope well serve you well and handle long range with ease. At 1000+ yards you can not have too much magnification.
Overall the NF is a better scope but I think the PST is more bang for the buck. The PST is considerably less money, about 1K vs 1.5k. Either scope well serve you well and handle long range with ease. At 1000+ yards you can not have too much magnification.
mapsjanhere
New member
I think you're spending a lot of money on a bad compromise. A good long range scope makes for a lousy hunting scope. Too heavy, and not enough low magnification options for the quick shot at under 100 yards. I at least tend to run around with the scope at minimum magnification for the fast shot, assuming that if I need to shoot at 300 yards I have time to dial up the mag. Get a Zeiss conquest 3-9 for your hunting purposes at $400, and then save up for that Nightforce. If you use decent QD rings you can swap them out for hunting season without having to do much sighting.
I think you're spending a lot of money on a bad compromise. A good long range scope makes for a lousy hunting scope. Too heavy, and not enough low magnification options for the quick shot at under 100 yards.
That's the main reason I went with the 4-16 PST. Since I bought it, I've had the opportunity to look at a couple of suicidal deer on the rifle range through it. I feel like I'm at a rather good compromise. Field of view is just as important. Used my leftover dough to buy a Jewell trigger. ;-). Around here, you don't hunt. You wait... For the big dumb ones to walk out in front of you. So weight isn't much of a deal breaker; not packing the rifle for miles. Helps to have a tractor running in the background and a lit cigarette. Lol
Last edited:
Palmetto-Pride
New member
A good long range scope makes for a lousy hunting scope. Too heavy, and not enough low magnification options for the quick shot at under 100 yards.
While your argument does have merit and I agree with you for the most part I will say that last year my brothers rifle was being repaired so he asked if he could borrow my target rifle for deer hunting until he got his back. Instead I loaned him my hunting rifle and I used my target rifle for deer hunting and when you have a good scope that will go up to 30x it makes 200yds seem like 20 when you are used to a 3-9x scope also identifying deer was much easier. Also I will add that for a hunting scope I think that 4-4.5x should be the max for the low end of the zoom magnification.
phil mcwilliam
New member
I recently purchased a Zeiss 4.5-14x 50mm scope & I'm very impressed with the clarity. I mainly bought this scope to use for longer range hunting, say 100 to 400 yards, for which it works well. Only problem was last week when I surprised half a dozen pigs that basically ran from underneath my feet. I found the 4.5 minimum on the Zeiss hard to track a running pig at close quarters.
I find because hunting can be unpredictable that my 2.5-10 & 3-9 variables work better for me ,as I find myself more often selecting the lowest setting on a variable hunting scope.
I find because hunting can be unpredictable that my 2.5-10 & 3-9 variables work better for me ,as I find myself more often selecting the lowest setting on a variable hunting scope.
hopeisnotastrategy
New member
Trijicon is Best For Money But I've Ruled It Out
I've examined much of the best glass side by side (Leupold Mark 4, Trijicon Accupoint, Swarovski Z5, Nightforce NXS, Vortex Viper PST) and to my eye, the best scope for the money is the Trijicon. The glass is only slightly inferior to the Z5 and the fiber-optic/tritium illuminated reticle is amazing. It brings my eye onto the target very quickly.
Unfortunately I feel like I have to eliminate this scope because I want a mil-dot reticle with mil-based turrets. Alas, Trijicon only offers MOA based turrets on the Accupoint. I called and asked if custom turrets could be ordered and the answer was no.
I haven't made a decision yet, but one option is out and its sad because its the option I liked the best.
I've examined much of the best glass side by side (Leupold Mark 4, Trijicon Accupoint, Swarovski Z5, Nightforce NXS, Vortex Viper PST) and to my eye, the best scope for the money is the Trijicon. The glass is only slightly inferior to the Z5 and the fiber-optic/tritium illuminated reticle is amazing. It brings my eye onto the target very quickly.
Unfortunately I feel like I have to eliminate this scope because I want a mil-dot reticle with mil-based turrets. Alas, Trijicon only offers MOA based turrets on the Accupoint. I called and asked if custom turrets could be ordered and the answer was no.
I haven't made a decision yet, but one option is out and its sad because its the option I liked the best.
Curious- why do you feel that a mil/mil scope is required for long range shooting to the extent that you're eliminating a scope that you want?
Even if you're shooting at unknown ranges, a LRF solves that problem- and does it more accurately than you can do with mil dots, and perhaps Trigicon can do a custom BDC reticle?
I checked Kenton Ind., they don't list Trigicon but perhaps there's another player that can make them.
If not, this is a really cool idea...I just came across this, and just might try to do this one myself...
http://forum.accurateshooter.com/index.php?topic=3783313.0
Even if you're shooting at unknown ranges, a LRF solves that problem- and does it more accurately than you can do with mil dots, and perhaps Trigicon can do a custom BDC reticle?
I checked Kenton Ind., they don't list Trigicon but perhaps there's another player that can make them.
If not, this is a really cool idea...I just came across this, and just might try to do this one myself...
http://forum.accurateshooter.com/index.php?topic=3783313.0
Search an old thread"New Kreiger barrel in AR-10 shoots"
You will see a 600 yd target.That rifle has the same 3.5-10 Leupold that the military bolt sniper rifle...was it the M-40? wears.The Rem 700 .308 rifle.
This target is at 600 yds.That scope can still see just fine at 1000.
Actually,I have a spot I lasered at 1090 yds.At that range,a 5x Acog,a 6x by 42 mm Leupold,and a 6x Israelli sniper scope of unknown mfg I have can all see and resolve a target well enough to place shots.Optical quality trumps magnification.
Lets not forget some darn fine 1000 yd shooting has been done with iron sights.
With my Kowa 77 mm flourite spotting scope set at about 40 X,seeing 4 of the moons of Jupiter is easy.,300 yd sighting in with 22 holes is easy,and I have ,on the right day,seen 30 cal holes in a black bull at 500 yds.
For myself,in terms of big game hunting,at responsible ranges,a quality 6x is magnification enough.
Actually,the standard duplex in a 6x x42 mm Leupold is 2 mils,post to post.That is what I have on my .257AI.
With a 300 yd zero,the tip of the upper duplex is on at 100 yd,and the tip of the lower duplex is on at 420 yds.
If an antelope fits withers to brisket in the duplex he is around 220 yds.center crosshair to post,400+ yds(too far)
The .257 AI is similar in trajectory to a .270.For HUNTING in open country,I find that fixed 6x ideal.I can prairie dog to 300 with it.
I also have a take off B+L Elite 4000 somewhere.Pretty good scope,4.5-14.I would not put it on a hunting rifle.Too big!!
I walk when I hunt.
One more consideration,will you get a first focal plane reticle?If not,your Mil Dot only reads true at one power,typically high power.
Mirage becomes more of a problem at higher X.
If for any reason you turn the power down,you lose your Mil-Mil adj connection.
You will see a 600 yd target.That rifle has the same 3.5-10 Leupold that the military bolt sniper rifle...was it the M-40? wears.The Rem 700 .308 rifle.
This target is at 600 yds.That scope can still see just fine at 1000.
Actually,I have a spot I lasered at 1090 yds.At that range,a 5x Acog,a 6x by 42 mm Leupold,and a 6x Israelli sniper scope of unknown mfg I have can all see and resolve a target well enough to place shots.Optical quality trumps magnification.
Lets not forget some darn fine 1000 yd shooting has been done with iron sights.
With my Kowa 77 mm flourite spotting scope set at about 40 X,seeing 4 of the moons of Jupiter is easy.,300 yd sighting in with 22 holes is easy,and I have ,on the right day,seen 30 cal holes in a black bull at 500 yds.
For myself,in terms of big game hunting,at responsible ranges,a quality 6x is magnification enough.
Actually,the standard duplex in a 6x x42 mm Leupold is 2 mils,post to post.That is what I have on my .257AI.
With a 300 yd zero,the tip of the upper duplex is on at 100 yd,and the tip of the lower duplex is on at 420 yds.
If an antelope fits withers to brisket in the duplex he is around 220 yds.center crosshair to post,400+ yds(too far)
The .257 AI is similar in trajectory to a .270.For HUNTING in open country,I find that fixed 6x ideal.I can prairie dog to 300 with it.
I also have a take off B+L Elite 4000 somewhere.Pretty good scope,4.5-14.I would not put it on a hunting rifle.Too big!!
I walk when I hunt.
One more consideration,will you get a first focal plane reticle?If not,your Mil Dot only reads true at one power,typically high power.
Mirage becomes more of a problem at higher X.
If for any reason you turn the power down,you lose your Mil-Mil adj connection.
Last edited:
.I do not think you will find many .500+ or .600 + BC bullets for a .270
Don't underestimate the 270 as a long range round. Berger's 150 grn VLD has an average BC of G1 .514, G7 263.
If you have a faster twist there are 165 & 175 grn bullets pushing a BC over .600.
The 140 Bergers get about .500.
I shoot the Bergers out of my Model 70 with good long range results. My only problem is my Model 70 is a Featherweight so I can't do a lot of shooting before it gets warm.
Thanks,kraigwy.I appreciate your feedback.
I grew up,as a kid,reading John Jobson,Ted Trueblood,Jack O'Connor,etc.
When I walked into Mountain Armory as a teen kid to buy my rifle,I asked for a Rem 700 .270.(this was post 64)
Frank would have you test fire them out back,so you were sure the worked.This one had a problem,and spit all the rounds out the mag.He did not have another 270,so I walked out with a 7 Rem Mag.
I have never owned a .270,but I respect the knowledge of the men who wrote about them.I do respect the .270 as a hunting cartridge.
If I use my own .257 AI as an example,I know what it will do.It is a lot like a little 270.A killing machine!And,sure,with a 115 Ballistic tip,a BC about .440.It wiil shoot 1000.So will a .308 155 Palma bullet.I certainly do not intend to discourage the OP
I do not not,in any way, put down on the .270 ctg.
You are right,Berger offers some good bullets.Really,all a fellow needs is one good bullet.
It is also true a 45-70 flung by black powder with pig lead and iron sights has made some amazing 1000 yd groups.
In my cartoon,which really does not matter,maybe a Leupold 3.5 to 10 30 MM tube,40 mm obj ,side focus would be as big of a scope as I would want on a hunting rifle.But that is just me!!
Its a balanced package ,based on my preferences.How big af a reel do you want to put on a 6 and 1/2 ft medium light spinning rod?If you think 300 yds of 12 lb test line is the way to go,knock yourself out.Get the big reel.I might be happy with 140 yds of 6 lb.
We can all still have fun fishing!
God Bless America!!!
I grew up,as a kid,reading John Jobson,Ted Trueblood,Jack O'Connor,etc.
When I walked into Mountain Armory as a teen kid to buy my rifle,I asked for a Rem 700 .270.(this was post 64)
Frank would have you test fire them out back,so you were sure the worked.This one had a problem,and spit all the rounds out the mag.He did not have another 270,so I walked out with a 7 Rem Mag.
I have never owned a .270,but I respect the knowledge of the men who wrote about them.I do respect the .270 as a hunting cartridge.
If I use my own .257 AI as an example,I know what it will do.It is a lot like a little 270.A killing machine!And,sure,with a 115 Ballistic tip,a BC about .440.It wiil shoot 1000.So will a .308 155 Palma bullet.I certainly do not intend to discourage the OP
I do not not,in any way, put down on the .270 ctg.
You are right,Berger offers some good bullets.Really,all a fellow needs is one good bullet.
It is also true a 45-70 flung by black powder with pig lead and iron sights has made some amazing 1000 yd groups.
In my cartoon,which really does not matter,maybe a Leupold 3.5 to 10 30 MM tube,40 mm obj ,side focus would be as big of a scope as I would want on a hunting rifle.But that is just me!!
Its a balanced package ,based on my preferences.How big af a reel do you want to put on a 6 and 1/2 ft medium light spinning rod?If you think 300 yds of 12 lb test line is the way to go,knock yourself out.Get the big reel.I might be happy with 140 yds of 6 lb.
We can all still have fun fishing!
God Bless America!!!
I think small improvement would be a Nightforce NXS 3-15x50 Mil/Mil with zero stop for around $1900.
Another alternative would be an IOR riflescope.
I have a IOR 4-14x50 Mil/Mil riflescope which I got for a little over a grand.
Its glass quality (Schott glass from Germany) is definately better than the Leupold Mark4 (Japanese optics) but I am not sure the turrets are as robust. I'm still testing it out. Another downside to IOR is that its made overseas in Romania resulting in potential long turnaround times for waranty problems.
Another alternative would be an IOR riflescope.
I have a IOR 4-14x50 Mil/Mil riflescope which I got for a little over a grand.
Its glass quality (Schott glass from Germany) is definately better than the Leupold Mark4 (Japanese optics) but I am not sure the turrets are as robust. I'm still testing it out. Another downside to IOR is that its made overseas in Romania resulting in potential long turnaround times for waranty problems.