each year I keep anxiously awaiting what comes out of shot show each year. I keep hoping we get a long range hunting scope that is tailored to our needs. There have been attempts made in the past but the optics world seems to have been taken over by the tactical community. sewer pipe diameter main tubes and FFP reticles seem to be where all the new stuff is going. I guess I will just have to accept the long range hunting community is actually pretty small and isn't the one driving optics sales. what I am looking for in a long range optic

1)30mm main tube
2)ZERO STOP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
3)low profile capped windage!!! even the tactical guys should want that
4) simple reticle with wind hold offs, we have a turret we don't need fancy doohicky marks on the vertical. must be easy to see in low light, not require illumination, and easy to pick up very quickly
5)must have a low power around 3x and no higher than about 16x, that could be a 3-15, 4-16, or 3.5-14 etc. if you go around that power range a reticle with 1 moa hold offs will show up great in low power and in low light.
6) second focal plane reticle SFP,
7)needs to track perfectly, actually this should be number 1!
8)glass should be bushnell elite 3200 or burris FF2 quality or higher.
9)price it around $1k
10) provide the elevation knob be capped if desired or ran without the cap.

Sound good except for it should go to at least 20X. And rather than a specific magnification on low power, how about calling for more than 20' field of view?

SFP is a inferior system
Sounds like you need a S&B.

dave

I have a good long range hunting scope. It's a swfa 3x15.end of story. Killed a coyote at a pretty fair poke with it today. Just like many before it.

not in the power ranges I suggested. go adjust your FFP scope to 3x and see how great it works without or even with illumination. S&B is insanely over priced. I am not spending 3 grand for a scope.

SWFA has big turrets that area easily moved. The scope is mil based as well. mil is for the my hose is bigger than yours crowd. there are other downsides to that scope. I suggested them making a MOA/MOA version but with SFP reticle. its not high enough power to really need FFP

I really like mils. I have shot moa too, they are all just clicks, and a form of measurement. Let me give you an example of the easiness of mils. My hd b binos give me the yardage,and then the number of clicks in mils. For example.43 clicks. With mils you know that would be 4.3 mils of adjustment. Just add a decimal. I can range and dial in a couple seconds. With moa. I have to divide the total # of clicks by 4 as there are 4 .25 moa clicks in 1 moa. This adds a step and takes longer. Both methods get you there, moa just has an extra step. This takes longer and adds a Sep for a possible mathematical mistake.

Nightforce SHV covers A LOT of those requirements.

Gotta be Shepherds scopes...

A used Nightforce cost more than the grand the OP requested.

False.

With your FFP aversion aside, have you played with the bushnell LRHS in either power range?
If so , what did you find fault with?

VX-6 is Über

To my knowledge, the OP has not played with the Bushy LRHS, nor has he played much with any FFP reticle. By the sounds of it, he hasn't done much with SWFA SS turrets, or any mil-based scope, either. Most of his biases are based on poor assumptions and incorrect notions.

Essentially, he's just going to have to accept that his ill-informed opinions and preferences are NOT representative of the LR hunting community at all. That community is a fairly loud voice in industry, and plenty of scopes have come to market to fulfill its requests, while cummins' is but a single, faint voice asking for something that actual experience with currently available optics shows is inferior and undesirable.

well said. you can lead a horse to water but.......

Here's your 2FP. Not MOA, but mils are super easy. Zero stop kit is only $22. I look forward to your range report.

John

http://swfa.com/SWFA-SS-3-15x42-Tactical-Rifle-Scope-P87716.aspx

funny you mention that. you have that problem because whoever designed the leica geovid's evidently never let any western hunters try them out and test them first. It was an oversite that the ballistic program outputs like the way it does in MOA and makes you divide by 4. So don't fault the unit of measurement, ie MOA when its an equipment defect.

shocking to some of you guys I actually own an SWFA ss scope. so checkmate.

the FFP vs SFP lordy I am sick of the argument, a hunting scope spends most of its time on LOW power, at least mine does. when I need the features of the reticle I dial to max power to take a long range shot. if you have a scope from 12x to 16x in max power your NOT, I repeat very unlikely to use anything but max power. its not too much power to dial down for mirage, so with that said FFP is just a downside because the reticle isn't useable and is probably hard to see at low power where the scope spends most of its time.

FFP is for dynamic shooting situations where your likely to be changing scope power more often. maybe your shooting at moving targets, maybe your scope maxes at say 24x that is when FFP makes sense. that is why its preferred by competitors. This is a hunting forum and I said a hunting scope!

I think you had better stick to open sights. You might be able to run those.

Some of what you describe sounds like a Swarovski BT 4W. I have a Z5 5x-25x on a varmint rifle and I love it.

I dunno' what we'd all do without cumminscowboy's laundry list of scope requirements. I'm on the edge of my seat to see who else fugg's their scope line up for SHOT Show 2017.....

Tanner

Cummins,

You keep talking about western hunting, what was the last thing you killed in the west?

Your list implies you know wtf you're doing, so I'm curious.

Thanks!

I think it's reasonable to have both turrets and the doohickey marks on the vertical. It's called redundancy. There have been times I have made successful quick shots using reticle holdover only with no time to spin the turret. Shots from 250 out to 450 yds.

I giggle a little when I hear people that "need" to see reticle holdover points on low power and low light. Chances are that if a shot is to be taken at low power and low light, the target will be within MPBR of most any big game center fire cartridge. Hold center and squeeze.

Long range hunting started in Pennsylvania.

Seriously you must not look around much. There are scopes out there meet your demands and more.
See Swarovski X5, Leupold VX6, Vortex Razor HD LH to name a few.
Your whine bears no merit. There are plenty of products out there to suit your needs.

Sound good except for it should go to at least 20X. And rather than a specific magnification on low power, how about calling for more than 20' field of view?[/quote]





Ringman and cummins have got to be giving safariman a run for the biggest idiot....toss dumb don in for sport too.

Long range and hunting

Classic oxymoron

Oh, you know not what you speak.

Have used the 1.5-6x42 S&B for many years with no issues of any kind.From point blank to 500 yards.Same for the 3-12 and the 4-16.

dave

I disagree. A long shot for me is a easy shot for others. Most wouldn't consider 250-300 yards long range but I know a slew of guys that'll shoot up all their "shells" at that distance and not touch hair.

Yep, but only in a small part of it, not the whole state.
These other scopes you guys talk about, are they something like
a Unertle?

Kaleb,



I would bet what I consider big money that the vast majority, let emphasize vast, would think 200 yards is long range if you showed it to them in the woods.

I would bet good money that in todays tough economy, manufacturers are going to offer more bread and butter products and cater to the bigger audience .

XX company could deliver per your exact specs and you'd still find a reason to beotch about it.

The Nightforce SHV lineup covers about everything on your wish list.

The 4-14x50 can be had for $1066, if I didn't like my SWFA stuff so much, I'd try one.

actually it doesn't nightforce doesn't have that great of low light reticles. the SHV 4-14 only comes in 56mm obj. the 3-10 model comes with the IHR and MOAR, while I love the MOAR its not suited to the 3-10 model. I suppose I could get the 4-14 but I would just have to deal with the 56mm objective, but weight becomes an issue. at that point I would probably go 3.5-15 NXS, which is what I have done on one of my guns.

online forums are funny when someone comes with real substance and questions things, attack the messenger and inpune them personally. more optics options benefit YOU!

I just bought a LRHS and it looks pretty nice to me. A bit over the price, but it certainly has a bunch of bang/buck.

NF just brought out a 4-14x50 SHV that literally covers almost every bullet point on your magical scope wish list. If you'd actually looked around at SHOT you'd have seen it at multiple booths.

Tanner

4-14x50 costs $66 more than he can spend. Keep looking.

the new SHV is FFP only, again did you read the requirements I put forth? I haven't seen the reticle in person but its going to rely heavy on illumination on low power. imagine what 1 moa subtensions are going to look like at 100 yards through a 4x scope on low power. the reticle will wash out at low power. This is what I keep saying. in all honesty FFP in that scope the reticle will be better in the mil version.

The other thing is it is the same weight as an NXS. I would probably pay the extra couple hundred and buy a NXS on the used market over that particular model of SHV even if they made it in a SFP.

The SHV 4-14x50 can be had with an illuminated reticle.

Here ya go, SHV 4-14x56 SFP illum. MOA turrets/reticle, low capped turrets, 30mm tube, 56mm for low light, $1100.

http://www.eurooptic.com/nightforce-shv-4-16x56-25-moa-moar-illuminated-center-only-c522.aspx#tab-2

But does it come in silver? Grin....

lol

The happiest people don't HAVE the best of everything, they MAKE the best of everything.

56 mm = Hubble telescope. 40 45 mm is enough to get beyond legal shooting light

Lol

Just accept it, you'll never get exactly what you want.

Find something you can work with, and make it work. Or get into the optics design business.

cummins,

Please shoot more, and post less. Do us all a favor.

+1

So true.

Well said.

Scope Weight:28.5 oz........to heavy
Max magnification: 14X.......not enough magnification

Amen

You would bitch about a miracle.

I'll bump this so some can reread a thought that likely sailed over a pointy head or two.

Absolutely. This forum is filled with people who feel the need to regurgitate what others have said if for no other reason than to either gain acceptance or to not feel someone's else's wrath. Try what you have. Try other things. Sort through opinions of all.

Brevity on the fire makes me unhappy.

that's funny after me having to educate you on your own range finding binoculars. You didn't even know that was a Leica defect. You just spout the Internet pack mentality. Forum parrot is what I call it. If you don't like what I am saying you know there is an ignore feature. Or simply don't read it. 2 options. With that said GFY. You might need to google what that means.

None of the photo-hosting sites meet his stringent requirements on what a photo-hosting site should be.

I agree with him. And I don't need help with my binos.

LOL

Hahahaha

IMO the biggest piece of gear needed for long range hunting is the shooter. Practice at 500 and 600 meters, in wind and other difficult environmental conditions. My local range has a rifle silhouette range that I use off-days. Once you are really good, then look for equipment to enhance your capabilities, which you can develop with ordinary equipment.

Notice his answer to that? I've asked him the same thing in the past. IIRC, he did post one picture of a coyote he shot.

Don't forget, he claims that Utah is the center of the US hunting world. All the hunting stickers in the truck windows were his rationale...

"Back Country Badasses" with a picture of 2 big mule deer on the back of a lifted Cummins seems to be the image I have in my mind....

Tanner

When you make it back and after you answer Starsky.... Riddle us all this....

Under "hunting" conditions, with your "hunting" rifle with scope on 4x in "low light".... WTF do you feel you need the use of the subtensions at 100 yards? Do you hunt in F5 tornadic winds or just that anal/clueless? I've read plenty of your scope biatching threads to get a good idea on the latter question, by maybe you can shed some light on the first....

I've got a 13yo girl that's learned to "slide" the reticle around on steel and hogs in low light, using the wide posts to "bracket" the kill zone or plate if needed. This has been with SS MilQuads, Bushy LRHSs, and NF SHVs and NXSs.....

This schit is just as hard as you make it.....

Probably damn close, but I'm sure the last word would be "Badarses" as he wouldn't want to get in trouble.

Maybe this one!


Don't forget the uber diameter chromed out exhaust!

They are useless for anything but mini calibers with 2.8" of eye relief. The first time you take an uphill prone shot you are going to get your eye socket blasted.

I haven't found the perfect scope either. I like an uncapped elevation turret and have not preference for the windage can be either way. 30mm is good, glass has to be better than Elite 3200 or FF2, way better. The right reticle works fine on low power and high power even in FFP. Mil/Mil is OK too. Just set your chart or software to use it. The good scopes have 10-12 MILs in one revolution. What's not to like about that. I like the zero stop feature too.

Scope has to track perfect and hold up to hunting rifle recoil which far exceeds anything a tactical rifle can throw at it.

I'm with Ringman on the 20X high end. Sure makes it nice when practicing at long range to have those extra Xs. I have scopes with them and like it.

Everybody has a different idea of what long range is so that has to figure into your choices. Plenty have commented that they think long range hunting is an oxymoron. Everyone has their style.

I must've got lucky... 7mm mag, up hill prone off a pack. Keep guessing.

Isn't that technically a Mini Caliber? SHV worked here too... 7 Mag too... Same one... Only 180gr Scenars though.

Have you ever used one...

No, I have used plenty of scopes with inadequate eye relief. 2.8" is going to get someone hurt eventually. Just because it is a nightforce doesn't mean that 2.8" is OK. So you guys got away with it. There will be shot presentations that will get you banged with it.

Talus had a Vortex Viper on his 7WSM with only 3.1" eye relief. That thing tapped me in the glasses several times. Shooting a rifle that you know might tap you causes flinches.

I looked at them (SHV) at the SHOT show. They wouldn't let me touch a round off, however.

Ok.

So then you'll make assumptions on something you've never used before as if you have a clue... It has nothing to do with it being a NightForce... The SHV that Montana Marine linked has a 3.14-3.54" eye relief... All the SHV's have similar eye relief except the new SHV F1 which has 2.81-3.1" eye relief... So in your infinite wisdom the 1/3" difference is gonna get people hurt...

I'd worry more about your scope mounting technique, basic shooting skills and recoil management if you have any weapon moving 3" during a recoil impulse than I would about eye relief... Just because YOU had one tapping your glasses one time at band camp doesn't mean anything was wrong with the platform... The problem was more than likely in the shooter...

Might be worth heeding EHG's advice.

Nightforce would seem to fit your described goals.

They can be picked up used for a nice price with a bit of patient waiting and watching.

I've not used the SHV other than zeroing a rifle for someone at a range. The turrets were not as crisp as the NXS, but it seemed like a nice scope and I do not remember any issue with eye relief.

The NF NXS 2.5-10x42 has worked nicely for me on a 300 Win Mag, which does not have a brake on it. It is light enough to be comfortable, while in the Colorado mountains last fall. Turrets may be had capped or uncapped. Having used both, I much prefer uncapped.



The 5.5-22x56 works nicely when more magnification is preferred and have used it up to 338 LM's and never been bitten by either.

I posted last week about the new newer SHV F1 in 4-14X50. That scope does have a more shallow eye relief of 2.8-3.1" I confirmed with a call to NF and they stated it was not a typo. The SFP scopes are not quite as shallow.

Inadequate eye relief is inadequate eye relief and it will eventually bite you... remain cocky and they might eventually learn.

Got in a bad spot about 35 years ago in a remote spot on Kodiak when a buddy shot a deer on a ledge almost straight above him.

But don't worry, chicks dig scars...

Eye relief on the NXS Compact 2.5-10x42 is listed as 3.5". The 5.5-22x56 is 3.9".

Been enough for me on the lighter weight 300WM without a brake as well as the 7WSM's and 338LM's with brakes.

For comparison the SWFA SS 6x42 is 3.5" of eye relief, and it has never bitten me either.

S&B 3-12x50 PMII is 3.7" and the 5-25x56 is 3.7".

How much do y'all think is the minimum acceptable amount of eye relief?

And which scope is that?

Leupold 3.5x10

Extreme up hill with a 300 Win Mag....you're asking for it.


Unless you are very deliberately careful. There is a tendency to crawl the stock and tilt your head further into the scope unless you're careful. Plus the rifle recoils up and back,and has a shorter distance to your skull.

Indeed......

I think 3 1/2" is minimum. I like 4" myself.

I own Leupold VX-6 3-18's and 4-24's for the reasons stated by the OP.

Absolutely no complaints.

What rail is this? On the Long Action I have had to cut any base I tried to clear the objective.

EGW, and yes cutting was required to clear the objective.

Well, at least I am not the only one. Thanks.

Based on what you're looking for, I feel like I'm in the same search. Here's what I've narrowed it down to:

Leupold VX-6, 2-12x42 CDS turrets with zero lock and firedot windplex reticle or

NF 2.5-10x42 with turrets and zero lock and either the mil-dot or Velocity 600 reticle

Eye relief is 3.8 vs 3.5 if I remember correctly. Leupold makes the same scope in a 3-18x44 for basically the same weight and size as the 12x but I can't see needing an 18x on a hunting rifle.

So those are the two scopes that have me up at night wondering which is best.