This is a lot of scope for the money.
https://www.natchezss.com/nikon-monarch-5-rifle-scope-5-25x50mm-ed-sf-advanced-bdc.html
https://www.natchezss.com/nikon-monarch-5-rifle-scope-5-25x50mm-ed-sf-advanced-bdc.html
Scopes???
- Thread starter dmorgan
- Start date
Totally understand the capped turrets precision_shooter.
I have not thought about Bushnell Elite line of scopes at all, but will definitely look into them as well.
tobnpr for me right now I would consider "long range fun" 500+. My longest deer kill was around 300 and that was only because he was a monster for my area (probably 120-130 class at the most). Most of my hunting grounds are between 100-250ish, so I know that I don't need a huge magnification for the hunting aspect.
Thanks for the article the possum. There were some scopes high up on the list that I probably would have never looked into.
Thank you all for the helpful information and suggestions. If you think of anymore I am always open to them.
I have not thought about Bushnell Elite line of scopes at all, but will definitely look into them as well.
tobnpr for me right now I would consider "long range fun" 500+. My longest deer kill was around 300 and that was only because he was a monster for my area (probably 120-130 class at the most). Most of my hunting grounds are between 100-250ish, so I know that I don't need a huge magnification for the hunting aspect.
Thanks for the article the possum. There were some scopes high up on the list that I probably would have never looked into.
Thank you all for the helpful information and suggestions. If you think of anymore I am always open to them.
I know that reticles are kind of personal preference but does anyone have any recommendations? I am new to long range shooting but I know that I don't like the BDC style. I am kind of leaning towards the MOA or MIL hashes vs the dots because they don't seem to clutter up the scope picture quite as much.
precision_shooter
New member
Just make sure the reticle matches the turrets.
What I mean is, make sure that if the elevation and windage are MIL, then the reticle subtension should be MIL or MOA and MOA.
Also, not sure if you've given thought into first focal plane (FFP) or second focal plane (SFP) but that plays into the reticle as well. You may already know this, but maybe someone else who reads this doesn't.
With FFP your reticle size will change with magnification. So the subtensions or hash marks on your reticle will always be true. At 3x 1 MOA is still 1 MOA, as you increase magnification this relation stays the same. At 15x 1 MOA is still 1 MOA.
With SFP your reticle stays the same size no matter the magnification. Most hunting scopes are SFP and generally there is nothing wrong with SFP at all. However, the reticle subtensions are only accurate at 1 magnification setting. Usually max magnification or close to it. If you are on 3x 1 MOA is more like .16 MOA give or take. 4x .2 MOA, 5x .25 MOA etc, then at 9x 1 MOA is 1 MOA in the reticle. Not all scope mfg or scopes from same mfg are the same. I had a vortex Viper 6.5-20 SFP scope and the reticle subtensions were only true at 16x magnification.
Could make a difference in hunting when you are less likely to be dialed up to max magnification or whatever magnification the mfg states the subtensions are true at.
What I mean is, make sure that if the elevation and windage are MIL, then the reticle subtension should be MIL or MOA and MOA.
Also, not sure if you've given thought into first focal plane (FFP) or second focal plane (SFP) but that plays into the reticle as well. You may already know this, but maybe someone else who reads this doesn't.
With FFP your reticle size will change with magnification. So the subtensions or hash marks on your reticle will always be true. At 3x 1 MOA is still 1 MOA, as you increase magnification this relation stays the same. At 15x 1 MOA is still 1 MOA.
With SFP your reticle stays the same size no matter the magnification. Most hunting scopes are SFP and generally there is nothing wrong with SFP at all. However, the reticle subtensions are only accurate at 1 magnification setting. Usually max magnification or close to it. If you are on 3x 1 MOA is more like .16 MOA give or take. 4x .2 MOA, 5x .25 MOA etc, then at 9x 1 MOA is 1 MOA in the reticle. Not all scope mfg or scopes from same mfg are the same. I had a vortex Viper 6.5-20 SFP scope and the reticle subtensions were only true at 16x magnification.
Could make a difference in hunting when you are less likely to be dialed up to max magnification or whatever magnification the mfg states the subtensions are true at.
I have put a little thought into FFP vs SFP. Of course all my previous scopes have been sfp since the majority of what I did was hunting. I would like to give a ffp scope a try but I have noticed that most of them are pretty pricey. Is that because of they are a supposed "new big thing" to the world of hunters? I have not done a ton of research on them yet but I also don't want to just drop $200-$400 on an ok FFP scope and then really fall in love with them when I could maybe save and get a good one and if I did not like it I could re-sale it and recoup some of the investment.
I don't want to push this thread into a long drawn out discussion or argument about FFP vs SFP, because I know that there are already plenty of those out there. But are there any suggestions on good FFP scopes (nothing like nightforce or meopta or S&B or the such, I know that I will probably not be able to own one of those for a LONG time) that are a little less inexpensive not "cheap", since that describes quality?
I don't want to push this thread into a long drawn out discussion or argument about FFP vs SFP, because I know that there are already plenty of those out there. But are there any suggestions on good FFP scopes (nothing like nightforce or meopta or S&B or the such, I know that I will probably not be able to own one of those for a LONG time) that are a little less inexpensive not "cheap", since that describes quality?
precision_shooter
New member
Burris Veracity I mentioned are FFP.
FFP cost more to mfg than SFP. How much more I can't say, or even if the difference is what solely contributes to the increased cost. FFP requires the reticle to move along with magnification, couple that with the fancier reticle and ensuring the hash marks are accurate, etc.
FFP cost more to mfg than SFP. How much more I can't say, or even if the difference is what solely contributes to the increased cost. FFP requires the reticle to move along with magnification, couple that with the fancier reticle and ensuring the hash marks are accurate, etc.
FFP is beneficial when you need to range your target. Reticle size grows/ subtension remains constant relative to magnification.
SFP reticles stay the same- meaning they remain thin at high magnification. Makes for more precise aiming at high magnifications/long range; if equipped with a BDC/ranging reticle it will only be accurate at a specific magnification.
For a hunting rifle, longer distance, where you would need to range for bullet drop/windage corrections FFP may be preferable.
Watch this:
http://www.vortexoptics.com/video/first_vs_second_focal_plane
SFP reticles stay the same- meaning they remain thin at high magnification. Makes for more precise aiming at high magnifications/long range; if equipped with a BDC/ranging reticle it will only be accurate at a specific magnification.
For a hunting rifle, longer distance, where you would need to range for bullet drop/windage corrections FFP may be preferable.
Watch this:
http://www.vortexoptics.com/video/first_vs_second_focal_plane
High magnification is unnecessary for hunting. Isn't much required for target shooting either. Usually adds to the weight. Any variable will be heavier and longer.
"...reticles are kind of personal preference..." Totally personal. Partial to the Duplex myself. Helps if you know where the rifle shoots using the bottom vertical post too.
MIL dots are mostly marketing. Far too much to fiddle with for hunting. And you'd need to know where each dot shoots at a given range.
"...reticles are kind of personal preference..." Totally personal. Partial to the Duplex myself. Helps if you know where the rifle shoots using the bottom vertical post too.
MIL dots are mostly marketing. Far too much to fiddle with for hunting. And you'd need to know where each dot shoots at a given range.
People geek out on ultra-high magnification scopes, but it's usually not necessary. Unless you are legitimately capable of shooting .5MOA or less groups (and few of us are), you probably don't need a 20+ power scope. At just over 700yds, it's still pretty easy to see targets and make adjustments with a 15x (and it's probably overkill to be honest.)
Look for 3-12 or 3-15x scopes.
Look for 3-12 or 3-15x scopes.
the possum
New member
Agreed- there's no reason for folks to geek out and get all huffy just because someone's scope can be turned up to higher magnification than you think is necessary.
Please elaborate on that.
Perhaps I am a little more practiced and trained than the average rifle hunter but my preferred reticle right now is the TReMoR2. I can't wait to get into a Nightforce ATACR with the TReMoR3. I find this reticle a pleasure to use at distance and especially helpful when shooting in the wind. Knowing the holds out to 500 yards certainly doesn't require much memory and a little tape with the come ups inside the ocular cover is always a fast cheat card.
And yes, I do rifle hunt with the TReMoR2 in a Mark6. Previously I have used a Nightforce NXS 3.5-15x56 with NPR2 reticle.
As far as weight I don't worry about it much at this juncture in my life. I am still able to live by the montra of if it is too heavy I am too weak, workout harder.
Seriously I feel the MIL and MOA reticle are great for any hunter that is willing to put a little time and effort into learning how to use it.
Saltydog235
New member
Find a Trijicon 2.5X12X42 with the MOA dot reticle. Simple mil-dot crossed with a German #4 reticle with 80moa of travel, capped turrets and the best illumination in the business. Great hunting scope and not too shabby at the range. I just put the 4-16X50 they just introduced on my .300wsm, its sick.