I just finished putting together a RECCE type rifle based on a “16” Noveske Light RECCE Low Profile" upper. I’m looking to mount a variable optic at 1x-4x.
I cant afford the S&B Short Dot, which would of been my first choice, so I’m looking at the following alternatives. Your experience, ideas and comments are greatly appreciated. The 1-4x variable options post pinned on this board had some great info but most of it seems to revolve around the pricier optics which I can’t afford.
I am going to assume that you are referring to a rifle with a 16" barrel that is heavier and more precision oriented than standard, generally intended to provide precision shot placent out to 600m. If that is what you mean, I would highly recommend anoptic that features either finger adjustable elevation and deflection or an accurate drop compensator reticle. Anything else limits performance.
I like the reticle of the Burris the best (although I don’t have one). It seems to have the best features for both CQB and distance. I especially like the bullet drop compensation out to 600 yards. Anybody know if these good to go for “hard use”?
and the more information provided the better the answers can/will be.
The internet seems to be defining “RECCE” as a 16" barrel carbine ( perhaps with a stainless barrel), free-float tube, and 1-4x optic, but who know if that’s accurate to the original “real” guns or if those specs even fit any particular end-user.
I understand that hits can be made out to 600m and beyond. Though even with the most superior 5.56 loads does the cartridge have any thing going for it at 600m as far as terminal effectiveness is concerned? Or even beyond 300m. I have heard so much conflicting info on the internet and by word of mouth. “It is a 200m and under cartridge” is what I always thought. But info seems conflicting on that. It even seems the true definition of a RECCE is be becoming more widely varied. I too am after the right optic for a RECCE type build. I probably would opt for a Short Dot (I used to have) if I had the $$. As far as second from what I have seen the Nightforce.
I am not the only guy that has gotten hits in real life past 600 meters. Even if that doesn’t make him pop like a balloon, it has enough juice to penetrate sufficiently to significantly affect the situation. It will definately suffer in wind deflection and cover destruction, but on an exposed target it will work well if fed something like Mk262.
I too am after the right optic for a RECCE type build. I probably would opt for a Short Dot (I used to have) if I had the $$. As far as second from what I have seen the Nightforce.
I think that the 2.5 to 10 NF is a great option. For long distance shooting accurate range estimation is very important, and therefore I consider Mil-Dots to be important.
Once again, it comes down to definition and expectation.
I think people start to get too wrapped around the axles on definition of things like SPR, Recce, etc. and lose sight of what should be the true driving force behind choices and that is application. (disregard if you’re attempting to build a replica gun, but in that case it strikes me that the decisions are pretty well laid out as you just buy what they used, or else you don’t have what they have, and then it’s not really a replica).
If you have a need to make hits at 600 meters, and use 5.56 to do so, and keep the overall carbine size down, then pick your barrel, optic(s), and other accessories accordingly.
Going with a 4 power only limits you in range, the gun will give you terminal performance out to 300-400 with 77 gr (MK 262) no problem.
The original gun that DEVGRU designed were 16" with a Leupold 3.5-10. Once the Army got hold of the idea/program they insisted on 18". You don’t need 18", in fact 16" is actually too long! For real world distances (300-400) and terminal performance (meaning you KNOW you can hit and kill) you can shorten the barrel to 14"-as long as it is a high quality, heavy one, and you use the right ammo.
In the late 90s we went to a Nightforce 2.5-10 which made it a little more user friendly for up close stuff. By summer 2000 almost all of us who used one for a living mounted a JPoint on top or at 1 o’clock (right handed) or 11 o’clock (left handed). That made it so we could actually go inside if needed.
All that said, S & B makes the best optics on the planet if you can afford them. If not go with the NF-it will serve you well.
I like! I will be picking up the 2.5-10x30 based on a recommendation. I do like the size a bit better on the 24mm though. Seems like great glass at a fair price.
I’d also like to hear feedback, if anyone has any, on the “Velocity” reticules offered by Nightforce, and if they are of any use which one would be best suited for 5.56 rifles in the 16" barrel variety.
Hmm, I like that too. I would also be interested in feedback on that reticule. I was going to go with a mil-dot for variable distance steel and paper shooting, but that looks like a better option for my needs…
We had the NXS 2.5-10 X 24. I’m not sure if the X32 was even out then.
I’m not familiar with NF’s code for recticles, sorry, but we used the one that had round, HOLLOW Mil-dots. The hollow mil-dots are key for more accurate range estimate, and hold-overs, unders.
That particular one did not illuminate. If might now, I don’t know. The MK12 was issued with one that did not and still is to my knowledge. For us, the lighted recticle was a nicety but not a neccessity.
NF scopes that do have illumination do so in the cross hair section up to the first mil dot. It appears red in color, and is turned on/off by pulling out on the focus knob on the left side.
As for use- very good for use at dawn and dusk before NODs and lasers work at their best. Also works good in situations were tgt area is black. Without it, you have a blk cross hair on a blk tgt, and it is extemely hard to find center. NF has done a good job of making the cross hairs fine, so in that situation it is even harder to find them. Hunters also might find that feature useful in a dark forest situation.
My thoughts on it are that it is a superior scope to that of Leupold for a few reasons;
The zero stop in itself is all that needs to be said. In my opinion one of the most beneficial things for a scope company to come up with in years. For mil/LE it is a must. Especially if you’re doing any low light work.
NFs gather light better in low light conditions than Leupold.
Price wise there is not that big of a difference.
In my mind a NF scope is more than enough glass for ALL shooters. It is also more than enough glass for about 90% of the calibers.
Another thing that NF did that sent them over the top with 30 cal guys was they put 100 MOA of adjustment in the scope. We used to have to shim the crap out of the Leupolds to angle them for 1000 yds and over- What a pain!! No worries with a NF
Once you get into .300 WINMAG and above though, there is only one- Schmidt & Bender, and yes, they are that good.