Scope preference?

S

Samurai1981

Inactive
So I am looking for a new long range, mil-dot illuminated scope for my Remington 700 .308.

I'd love to see what kind of ideas or experiences everyones had....to include ones NOT to purchase. :)
 
I am partial to redfield revolution scopes but those have been low zoom powers, still held up to the recoil of a contender in 45-70 and a springfield 1903 in 30-06.

I have nikon prostaffs on all my other rifles(that have glass anyway) and they are pretty decent for budget brand but probably not what you would want in a long range target gun.

you can try leupold but I have had bad experiences with them so I don't tout them that much.

strangely enough I have had good luck with barska but they have all been mounted on low recoil rifles(22lr mostly) so I don't know how they hold up to heavy recoil.

if you have an unlimited budget then I would recommend nightforce scope but they cost more than many peoples rifles.
 
I always recommend Leupold scopes, they are a good scope with a great warranty, and you will have a hard time beating them for ruggedness. If you don't want to lay out the cash for a Leupold, get a Weaver Grand Slam or T series, a Nikon, or a Bushnell Elite series.
 
Leupold, Vortex, are what I have, the only one with the dots would be my Vortex Diamondback, but Vortex has acouple different "mil-dot" scopes to check out, and their warranty is awesome too.
 
None of those have dots and are illuminated. Sorry, I cannot help much with illuminated either. If you can live without an iluminated reticle I'm really fond of the "new production" VX-2's with long range dots. At $330 it is an awful lot of scope. I'd make sure it is a new 2012 made scope. They made some major improvements just this year.

They, along with the older Burris FF-II, have a much less cluttered, easier to use dot system. I don't care for any of the others, even the newer Burris E-1.

What not to purchase can be opening a can of worms. My feelings are that anything that the regular, not on sale, price is under $200 is probably not a good investment in the long run. For light duty, occasional use in good light and good weather they work fine. But to hold up to long term hard use in both hot and cold temps, and in rain and in low light, they don't get the job done.

A budget range would be helpful. Some guys consider a $400 Leupold as out of reach, others think nothing of spending $2,500. In my expereince a $300-$400 scope is the best value. A $300 scope will usually prove to be much better than a $250 scope. You'd probably have to go over $1,000 to tell any difference over a $400 scope.

Most scopes in the $200-$300 range are pretty good, but going up is worth the extra cost to me. Either a Leupold VX-2 or VX-3 is never a bad choice.
 
"long range, mil-dot illuminated"

Well, I can't think of many. There are cheap scopes that have the right specs. Those are probably the ones to stay away from.

There is the Vortex PST. The EBR-1 MRAD Reticle isn't exactly a mildot.
There are the Nikon Monarch X and the Leupold LRT.
And I think there's a Bushnell Elite Tactical with an illuminated mildot.
 
When I bought my secondhand .308, I decided I would not skimp on a scope.

The rationale being that a good scope does not need to be sold with the gun. Now I know that there are lots of excellent high-end scopes, but my understanding is that this model is by no means bottom of the pile.

It is a Burris XTR 312 with 30mm tube and 50mm objective. It has clear parallax adjustment and nice big turrets for the rest. It is a plain type reticle without illumination.

The only reason I was able to afford this was that it was in a clearance sale. It cost me a lot!!!! Despite this I would have forked out the additional £50 to buy the illuminated mil-dot version had someone not beaten me to the last one in stock...:(

I don't know what people think of this scope, but personally, I am very pleased with it, in term so image, build quality and value for money.
 
I use a Millett TRS-1 4-16x50 (30mm tube) on my Rem 700 (.308). It is a good scope, and it has an illuminated reticle. They also make the LRS that is a 6-24x56 with a 35mm tube. Prices are around $325 for the TRS and around $425 for the LRS I believe.
 
I don't know what your budget allows, but the Leupold VXR 3-9x40 is a very nice illuminated reticle scope. I have 3 different Leupolds and am considering this scope to replace an older Nikon on my 300 WM. I recently had a demo at a gun show and was really impressed with the glass clarity and brightness of this scope.
 
Any thoughts on BARSKA scopes??
Click to expand...

If there was such a thing as a 1-10 rating for quality, the Barska optics would rate a 1 thru 3.

.Zeiss, Steiner, Swarovski, Schmidt & Bender, March, Nightforce, Leica, Premier Reticle and US Optics are 8's thru 10's.
.Valdada IOR, Trijicon, Leupolds, Meopta, Vortex, some Bushnells, Redfield, Nikon, and Burris are 5s thru 8's
.Weaver, some other Bushnells, Millett, Hawke, Nikko Sterling, Simmons, Sightron, Swift and Tasco are 2s thru 5s... and a few 6s.
.Barska, Konus, BSA, NcStar, et al, are 1s thru 3s... at best.

I'm sure many would argue my, to be honest, subjective ratings (I've certainly not owned all these brands) and would move the brands up and down based on their own impressions... but this gives you a pretty decent idea of the levels of optic quality out there.

When I buy a scope, I decide what I need for the application. Then I look at my budget, then I add at least 25% to what ever my budget is (because it can be a few years between scope buys) and then I look at what's available... and almost always spend at least as much for the scope as I do for the gun.

My last scope buy was a smokin' deal on a Valdada IOR 3-18X42 FFP reticle for $1050.

C
 
Creeper made a very viable point. Plan to spend 25% or more for the quality that you want. Example: I have a older Bushnell 6500 Elite and its been on 4 different rifles because I sold the rifles and would not let the scope go with it. Buying a nicer scope now could actually be a smarter investment because if you decide to sell the rifle at a LGS, most likely they would not give you anything close to what you would have in the rifle with optics.
 
My IOR's glass is lightyears beyond the scopes that Creeper put in the same category. It is on par and in some cases better than Nightforce. German glass is different looking when coated from Japanese and American glass, more of a brownish/amber tint (warmer), where I find most Japanese and American glass is more of a blue tint (cooler).

That said if you get a mil reticle make sure you get mil turrets too. I own this one with the MLR reticle, I don't think they have it in the 5.5-22 in the FFP yet though. http://nightforceoptics.com/3-5-15-x-50-f1-nxs/

I also have this one as well and it is every bit as good as the Nightforce and better in some instances, it is a bit cheaper in price too. http://www.valdada.com/scopes/tacti...al-scope-digital-illum-mp-8-xtreme-x1-reticle

The Nightforce the whole reticle lights up and on the IOR only the floating dot.
 
impalacustom said:
My IOR's glass is lightyears beyond the scopes that Creeper put in the same category.
Click to expand...

No worries impalacustom. Just my opinion based on my samples.

The IOR went into the second category because I've owned 5 of them. Admittedly, I still love the damn things. :D
The first was an M2 in around '96. It was excellent and would have easily been a 9+.
The 2nd through the 4th, bought from '98 to '05 were all very good, but to a scope, were (slightly) not clear at the edges, and one with side focus tended to lose focus. It took two trips to IOR to get that issue corrected.

My most recent, "the smokin' deal" FFP-R, is easily a 9+ again. Perhaps I'm being a little too harsh with IOR Valdada as I personally think they are one of the best optic values on the market... but taken as a whole, for the 5 I've had, and trying to be objective, they are a 8+.

Cheers,
C
 
Creeper I would agree about the earlier years of the IOR, the new ones are built soo much better, as you know I'm sure. You are 100% right though, spend the money on the glass.
 
Creeper your rating of scopes is very intresting to say the least. Your rating of Sightron seem's on the low side. As 4 of your (5 thru 8's) are far inferior to sightron scopes. I understand like you said you have not owned most of these scopes.

Sightron Scopes are a awesome scope. Clarity is great,Trackng is very crisp and repeatable. I started shooting F-Class open this year and Nightforce and Sightron are the 2 most common scopes out there. That is what made me get one. I could not Afford a Nightforce ,so i went for the next best thing

Just what i have seen
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top