I just bought a Forbes 270 and am considering this scope. Just wanting opinions about it's reticles tracking and durability. Right now I'm considering getting the BT with 4W reticle. I would dial elevation and use reticle for windage.

My main concern is the visibility of the reticle at dark in timber as this may be use for both long and medium range. long range for me is 400- 500 yards.

Is there a better choice that will do 200-500 yards just as well or better that doesn't weigh 20 ounces or more?


Don't have the gun in hand yet,so no idea actual weight.The listed weight is 5.5 lbs. Should I splurge and get the NF 2-10X42 NXS and say to heck with the weight? I should still be very close to 7 lbs shouldn't I? If NF ,which ill reticle?

Much as I like Swaros, I have found myself opting for other glass on a couple of rifles, simply because the Swaro (other than the x5) did not offer the elevation/windage adjustment range that others do. This may not affect the OP, but I like having a little room to play . . .

BTW, the Z5 3.5-18x44 BT is cgonna tip the scales right at 16oz. Not sure how that compares to the NF 2-10x42 NXS.

Good scope, but the duplex was way too fine for hunting. I sent mine back for #4 retrofit, which is still pretty fine, but better. Aggravating to spend even more money after buying an expensive scope. I like the BT. You can use a Sharpie to write yardages on the aluminum discs, remove with acetone.

DF

The ill model is 20.5 ounces. I may be making too much of 4.5 ounces for what the NF brings to the table with accurate dependable tracking and an ill reticle which should eliminate my reticle visibility concerns.

I am however a little concerned about eye relief on the long action with the compact body design and 3.5" eye relief. If I had to ditch the Talley Lightweights for a heavier rail, even more ounces.

I do seem to mount my scopes farther back than some folks. I've had issues with 3.5" eye relief scopes on Sako IV (270 length) actions.

I'm also wondering if something like this will get me to 500 without a turret.
http://www.scopelist.com/kahles-kxi-35-10x50-illuminated-4d-dot.aspx

I don't have any experience shooting long range. I've shot at one and killed one deer in 40 years of hunting at 400 yards. I was in a shooting house with a good rest. There just isn't any long range hunting here at all unless it's on a power line and I'm one to pop shots at moving targets from farther than 100 yards. I want to set this rifle up just in case I travel but it will get more use under 200 yards.

Dark visible reticles are my main concern,which is why ill would be very comforting.

I have said optic on one of my 300 WSM's. I love it due to its lightweight and capabilities. I went through Outdoorsmans for an etched turret which they specialize in & it will take me out to 700 yards.

I love the performance of the scope & plan to buy another for my 280 AI. I did consider Nightforce but determined not to add the weight to the gun.

https://outdoorsmans.com/products/outdoorsmans-custom-turret

I am watching this post closely as I am really considering this scope as well. I have often wondered if it should hold zero better since the scope uses a different system that most other scopes to hold the erector tube in place. Sorry for the high jack!

No high jack worries. The new erector system is news to me. I appreciate you mentioning anything relevant.

Going to order that Outdoorsman's turret for my Z5 on my Fierce Edge 28 Nosler after I figure out what it likes to eat.

Swaro Z5 & Z6 scopes use a dual coil spring system for the erector assy. Most brands use 2 leaf springs which isn't as good. The older model Swaro PV and professional hunter model 30mm scopes had dual coil springs and were known to hold up to hard recoiling calibers.

I have a Z5 3.5-18x42 with BHR reticle mounted on model 70 EW rifle. It's performance has been flawless so far.

Do you find the BHR reticle adequate in last light, 30 min after listed sunset time?

I have used and witnessed used a bunch of Swarovski Z3, Z5, and Z6 scopes. They are no more durable or reliable than any other decent hunting scopes. That is to say- no, they are not built to dial. Swarovski does make a scope meant to spin turrets.... The X5. Ironically it shares similarity to the other scopes built to actually use.


Initially Swarovski thought that they could just us the Z6 as the basis for their "LR" scope line. Their own testing proved that they couldn't....



If you are going to dial, get a scope that's purpose built to dial. No, you r hunting scope won't do it no matter what the internet says.

Do you find the BHR reticle adequate in last light, 30 min after listed sunset time? [/quote]

Honestly I do not but it wasn't bought for that purpose.The glass is more than adequate but the reticle is to thin and busy for a low light reticle.

My dedicated low light rifles wear Zeiss Victory HT scopes with illuminated and #4 reticles.

No matter how many times you ask the question, no matter how many different places, the answer isn't going to change. Anything that tracks well is going to start at 19ounces, if you want 12x+ it's going to start at 24 ounces. Despite the hand wringing and carrying on from many, the earth won't stop spinning just because you mount a mid-weight scope to a lightweight rifle. The combination of a mid-weight scope and a light weight rifle works surprisingly well. People that have actually tried it mostly like it.

You seem to be completely ignoring the SWFA SS 3-9x42 reccomendation. It is a fantastic value for the money at normal prices, and unbelievable deal at black Friday sale prices. It has a reticle superior to anything Nightforce offers and provides a low light solution without the need for illumination.

David

Thanks brother for recommending it. I have been considering it ever since you suggested it in my other thread. I simply like to rule out lighter options first.

The reports of tunneling on 3X and the fact it doesn't have ill make me consider the Nightforce as well when we are talking heavier scopes that will track.Glad to hear the SS reticle is good for low light though.

Do you prefer the 3X9 to the 6X in the SWFA SS? I'll likely wind up with a NF NXS or SWFA SS if I find this Forbes to be accurate enough for a long range gun.

I like the 3-9x42 much better than the 6x.

1) The reticles are supposed to subtend the same at 6x for each - to my eye the 3-9x42 reticle is slighlty thicker at 6x (this is comparing three 6x's and two 3-9x42's). Regardless it is definitely thicker at 7-9x. I used this scope to make a shot on a whitetail in the woods 2 years ago, overcast evening, last 2-3minutes of shooting light - I had no problem using the reticle, scope was set to 7x. I'm 48 (46 at the time) have glasses for astigmatism.

2) The knobs on the 3-9x42 are noticeably firmer than the 6x. They are not going to get bumped off accidentally. They are slightly mushier than the 6x, but over-all I prefer the 3-9x42.

3) The turretts are noticably smaller and more rounded on the 3-9x42 as compared to the 6x. I would prefer a capped windage in general, but the 3-9x42 turretts are very good for a hunting scope.

4) The 3-9x42 is physically smaller than the fixed 6, makes it less obtrusive.


I prefer to havee FFP and always have my reticle match my turretts. I prefer the 3-9x42 over the Nightforce offerings due to FFP and a superior reticle. If you really feel the call for more X's and are OK spending extra $, I would go straight to the Bushnell LRHS.

Stop listening to all the people trying to convince you that you will suddenly turn this light handy rifle into a turd just because you mount a scope that will track/rtz/hold zero. It's not going to feel quite as nice as it would with an 11ounce scope, but it will still handle nicely - much nicer than a 7-8 pound rifle with a 20ounce scope...

Again - For the price you can buy the 3-9x42 this weekend, you should be able to re-sell at near zero loss if you decide later you don't like it.

David

This is with a Leupold 6x and Talley LW's. Wouldn't track after several trips to Leupold. Broke a top strap on the LW's on my main hunting rifle, so I figured I'd try out the Dual Dovetails with a 6x MQ just to see how bad it would feel. Never went back and don't plan to. Added 9 oz.