So im currently searching for a replacement scope for my rem 700. The optic on it was originally purchased as a temporary placeholder till funds allowed, but that never quite happened. Some background on the rifle: it is a LH sps-v with a 20" barrel in a mcm A3 stock.
Ive pretty much settled on the NF 2.5-10x32 as a proper scope for my needs. The rifle is used primarily for target shooting but it is also my hunting rifle. Max range that i can get out to is 400 yards and ranges when hunting whitetail will probably be inside of 200 yards. if going with this optic it will be the mrad turrets and mil dot reticle.
If anyone has any experience with these ranges/applications and this type of scope i am open to any input and suggestions.
I find little use for magnifications under 4x unless dealing with zero magnification red-dot’s on AR’s and such. 4x can be used effectively down to less than 25yds, so I fail to see the need for less magnification than that.
A 4-16, or even 3-12 would be on the very low end of what I’d consider.
Is there any optic you would suggest for this application?
I do want something durable because this is a field rifle. It just seems that when going mil/mil the prices tend to jump. id like to stay at or under $1500 but have been considering the 3.5-15 nxs which is more.
I really appreciate your input as you definitely have more experience in this field.
Call Scott @ Liberty Optics. He will have Vortex Viper PST 4-16x50 mil/mil/ffp within a couple weeks. Great scope for what you are looking to do and will cost much less than $1000. Illuminated reticle, zero stop, defined turrets with great clicks, parallax down to 25yds, excellent reticle, good eye relief. Can’t ask for much more at that price.
If you want something right now, then check out the 3-12 bushnell tactical. Its also mil/mil/ffp illuminated but no zero stop, and the reticle is standard mildot instead of the genII style.
I’m sure Scott would be able to set you up with something.
If you want to step up above that, then I’d go with a nightforce F1. Above that, S&B. But you better have your wallet open.
I don’t hunt but I do like my 2.5-10 x32 Nightforce. I have it on my Larue Stealth and I have shot it out to 550 yards against steel targets adn paper ones. Mine has the velocity reticle.
Pat
I do like the features of the pst line and definitely like the pricepoint but im not totally sold on the build/glass quality. I’m also leaning to this particular NF model since even at 350-400 yds i was not needing to go past 10x. More mag is always nice, but in this case I’m more concerned with durability, not having zero shift if the scope is impacted, and return to zero of the turrets.
I realize what you are saying. Vortex does have a reputation for good products and service… but they obviously don’t have the combat experience that nightforce does.
You won’t hear me say bad shit about nightforce stuff other than their price maintenance schemes are anti-American… just like premier and a few other manufacturers.
It is just my experience that magnifications under 4x are pointless unless a CQB type setup, in which case anything beyond a zero magnification/no parallax red dot is too much. So the answer is to hang and RMR off your 4-whatever power scope.
Seriously though… spend the money and get something mil/mil/ffp or moa/moa/ffp.
In my opinion, a NF is way overkill for deer at the ranges you mentioned. I would not personally spend the $$$ for a NF unless it was a duty or competition gun, maybe an SD gun…
For deer out to 400 you might look at the Weaver 3-10x tactical if you want mil/mil. Not FF but plenty of optic to get you on 200 yd deer as you mentioned. And you can use the other $600 for ammo or camo or something.
Hitting a deer isn’t as important as hitting a steel target? Hmm… interesting viewpoint. … one that I don’t agree with.
Optics cost or selection has only to do with the mission at hand and which one will most likely aid you in putting the round where it belongs. Cost as it relates to deer or steel or paper is irrelevant.
I agree with what you are saying. Think the poster meant most hunting situations at least up here involve large targets at relatively short ranges. For example in moose hunting most hunters take shots at 150 yards or less. on a huge vital area.
Pat
The NF might be overkill, but its the build quality im concerned with. I have an aimpoint on my AR because of their reputation for durability, i dont beat on my stuff on purpose but i like it to be able to handle abuse.
Reading some reviews on the vortex pst there seems to be positive feedback regarding glass and tracking, but has anyone done torture testing on one? Once again this is not primarily a deer rifle, it is a field target rifle (that has been run over by an atv).
Alaskapopo, what is the parallax on the NF set to (as i cant find it posted online) and does it become an issue for you at range?
I agree and if I started to go hunting with my friends I would want a scope like my Nightforce 2.5-10 on a hunting rifle. Taking the life of an animal is important enough to do it right without needless suffering.
Pat
Remember, there was a time when nightforce was new and “unproven” as well. The same things were thrown around about “why would I buy a nightforce when leupold is there?” Oh how the tide has turned.
With modern machining, tolerances can be made tighter much easier than 10 years ago. As a result, more optic manufacturers can turn out a reputable product.
At the end of the day, the markup on ALL of them is so astronomically huge that they will all basically send you a new one with no questions if the need arises. They can build 4 scopes with the profit they reap off of one sale. That is no bullshit.
Companies I buy from with confidence:
bushnell
vortex
nightforce
zeiss
S&B
… and a couple others when the need arises.
… because lets face it, I can’t afford to put $3,000 glass on all my rifles.
Put simply it is an outstanding optic that has been proven in very harsh conditions. Buy with confidence.
I don’t buy into the buy cheap glass mentality. IMHO choosing the right optic is pretty damn important, and generally speaking you get what you pay for. I would rather spend a little more upfront and have an optic that will last a lifetime than buy a cheap optic that needs replacing after a few years of hard use. YMMV
I just went through this dilemma. I had the money in hand and intended to be a guinea pig on a 4-16 FFP Viper PST when they were finally available. Along comes Euro Optic with a lightly used Nightforce 2.5-10x32 for $1,100. Bye bye Viper, hello Nightforce. He was even nice enough to take what I has saved as a deposit and hold the scope while I scraped together the extra $$$.
If you are not going to go past 400 and are not trying for prarie dog headshots out that far, you will likely not miss the extra magnification.
Not less important - just significantly easier. Think about it - a deer with a 10" vital zone is 5 MOA at 200 yds. My buddy shoots f-class and in a year he’s gone from a Weaver tactical to a NF and he has his eye on an even better NF. That’s because he’s trying to hit a 1 MOA x-ring at 600 yds. I think it’s great - he wins a lot. The OP wants to plink and shoot deer. Neither of these should be a strain on the shooter or the equipment and the best-of-the-best is simply not required unless you just want one to say you have it, which is fine, but let’s not pretend it’s anything else.
I’m not saying you shouldn’t get a NF - you should get whatever you want - it’s your rig. But to say that a Weaver Tactical isn’t a completely adequate and capable scope for deer at 200 yds or even targets at 400 is absurd. How many deer are killed each year with a Weaver as compared to an NF? Hundreds of times as many. And the deer are just as dead.
Look, the deer hunter mentality of being happy with “paper plate” accuracy has no business in a precision rifle forum. Precision rifle doesn’t mean 8" at 100yds. It means different things to different people, but virtually no one here would accept that definition as accurate unless you are using a civil war cannon.
You are right in that either of them will get the job done on a deer. Yet that kind of accuracy is not why we are here. All things being equal, if both scopes are in good repair, both will put bullets where they belong. It comes down to functionality and user preference.
Why you need a nightforce when a weaver will do?
Why you need a 1 ton when you can drive a 1/2 ton?
Why you need $50 when $40 will do?
Why you need a 6" hunting knife to dress a deer when you could do it with a pocket knife?
My $80 tasco placeholder scope can also kill deer just as dead as a nf, but if my rifle falls onto the optic the hunt is over. Not something I want to deal with. I am looking to high quality precision optics because this is my only bolt rifle, I dont own plinking guns.
