Long range rifle scopes

[grasshopperglock]

Exactly... That's why my favorite scopes are Nikon. I like getting a lot for my money, and trying to get that last little bit of performance from a piece of equipment just results in diminishing returns.

If money was truly no object, I think that makes choosing a good scope easier. Also takes some of the fun out of it

Ive had some high dollar stuff. And every Nikon Ive had matched them. If Nikon started their prices at a $1000 for a prostaff 3-9, instead of $150.....people would still buy it. Their glass is stupid bright. You almost have to wear sunglasses looking through one. I'm not kidding.

 

[SC-Texas]

Leupold Mk 8

 

[dee]

Ive had some high dollar stuff. And every Nikon Ive had matched them. If Nikon started their prices at a $1000 for a prostaff 3-9, instead of $150.....people would still buy it. Their glass is stupid bright. You almost have to wear sunglasses looking through one. I'm not kidding.

Nikon is decent but in no way is it better than $1000 dollar scopes unless maybe a Leupold (their QC is hit and miss), and pray you never need their warranty service it is one of the lowest if not the lowest ranked in the scope business.

 

[Mike D Texas]

Nikon is decent but in no way is it better than $1000 dollar scopes unless maybe a Leupold (their QC is hit and miss), and pray you never need their warranty service it is one of the lowest if not the lowest ranked in the scope business.

Surely someone isn't saying that a $150 Nikon Pro Staff scope is on par with $1k plus optics. That's just ridiculous. And scope will look good in bright light. It's at dusk/dawn or just any low light situation where you will see the difference. Also in the higher magnification ranges is where clarity flaws will show up. In addition repeatability and return to zero when dialing in dope for windage and elevation is where cheap will not perform. Point being is that there is more to higher $$ optics than just brightness in full daylight.

I've never had to deal with Leupold CS on any of their optics but I do have one of their trail cams that I have had problems with and their CS has been outstanding to work with.




Sent from iPhone/Tapatalk

 

[deemus]

Ive had some high dollar stuff. And every Nikon Ive had matched them. If Nikon started their prices at a $1000 for a prostaff 3-9, instead of $150.....people would still buy it. Their glass is stupid bright. You almost have to wear sunglasses looking through one. I'm not kidding.

Never bought one of their Prostaff scopes, but the Monarch UCC scopes are great. I have 3 of them. The 4-16 (?) x 50 AO is top shelf.

 

[TheDan]

Surely someone isn't saying that a $150 Nikon Pro Staff scope is on par with $1k plus optics. That's just ridiculous.

Of course not, but a $300 Nikon is about 95% as good as a $1000+ scope. I find it ridiculous to pay $700 more for a negligible increase in performance.

 

[SIG_Fiend]

It's the whole sports car analogy. $300-400 Nikon Monarchs are good scopes, and will do just about all anyone needs for any typical hunting/sporting purposes. Beyond that, there is a bit more than a 5% difference in performance IMO. I would say a Monarch will give you ~80% to almost 90% the performance of a Leupold Mk4, but that last 10-20% of performance is substantial. Put the average person in a 911 GT3, and they most likely will not know how to extract that last bit of performance out of the car and could get by just fine driving a run of the mill family sedan.

For the dialed in end user that understands the advanced applications, performance improvements, etc. then yeah that extra cost and few percent of performance is probably worth it and they will probably be able to utilize it. For those that haven't experienced a high quality optic like a Leupold Mk4 (which is considered one of the "lower end" optics in this range, although still a decent one), NightForce, Zeiss Hensholdt, US Optics, Premier Optics, Schmidt & Bender, etc. I highly recommend trying one out. Next time you're at the range and happen to see someone running a gun with a nice optic like that, strike up a conversation and see if they'll let you take a look through the glass and maybe even put a few rounds down range. The improvements in clarity, parallax, precision adjustment of the turrets, consistency of adjustment, robustness of maintaining adjustments, etc. can be impressive if you understand what you're looking at.

 

[biglucky]

For long range it is not about the scope for me as much as the Reticle.

The absolutely best reticle system for long range shooting IMO is the Horus system.

You can get it in many different price point scopes from $4k S&B, to $3-3.9k Leupolds, to $2-2.9k Nightforces, to $1.4-1.9k Bushnells or Horus Vision scopes. Once you learn the Horus system you will never want anything else for long range.

 

[dee]

For long range it is not about the scope for me as much as the Reticle.

The absolutely best reticle system for long range shooting IMO is the Horus system.

You can get it in many different price point scopes from $4k S&B, to $3-3.9k Leupolds, to $2-2.9k Nightforces, to $1.4-1.9k Bushnells or Horus Vision scopes. Once you learn the Horus system you will never want anything else for long range.

There is too much going on with the Horus for my liking, it's a good concept but not for me.

 

[SIG_Fiend]

There is too much going on with the Horus for my liking, it's a good concept but not for me.

Please keep in mind, I'm extremely inexperienced when it comes to shooting long range. Only done it a handful of times out to 1k, and a few more than that from 500-750yds. So take my words with a grain. I had a chance to shoot a Horus reticled scope exactly once, so take this for what it's worth. The real attraction with that reticle is all the feedback you get. With proper follow through, you stand a better chance of picking up where any errant shots went, and being able to more precisely adjust on the fly. No more Kentucky windage. See the impact on the grid, adjust your hold to that spot, now you're on target. All without having to guesstimate where that exact point is between mils/hash marks on a standard mildot scope, or any other standard duplex or plain crosshair scope. It looks overly complicated at first, but it seems to have a lot of capability, if you are able to utilize it.

 

[dee]

It certainly can make for fast follow up shots If needed, but if you are reasonably close on your dope you shouldn't have a problem figuring the second out if It's needed.

 

[biglucky]

It certainly can make for fast follow up shots If needed, but if you are reasonably close on your dope you shouldn't have a problem figuring the second out if It's needed.

The other key thing that Horus has going for it is the ability to get highly accurate on your wind with your hold over. If you know you have a 3 mil hold over at a range and have called a 2 mil wind you just go up 3 over 2 and send the round as opposed to up 3 and then try to figure out if it is under the second mil in open space.

Lots of guys just say "I will dial" but when on the clock in a match or in a combat situation when you have targets at different ranges are you going to dial each of them?

 

[kusai]

^ Damn you guys, Just ordered a USO with Horus reticle. You guys just put me in a $3500 hole.

 

[dee]

Dialing for wind in anything besides BR or F-Class is foolish and is a recipe for disaster in timed events. You still have to dial for elevation with the Horus or at least you should

 

[biglucky]

I mean dialing for elevation, not windage. The whole point of Horus is you don't dial for elevation, you hold over. If you have targets at 500, 700, and 1000 yards that you need to eliminate are you going to dial between each shot??

 

[TheDan]

No more Kentucky windage.

Master Kentucky windage and you don't need any of that fancy stuff

 

[dee]

It's only gonna help in elevation if your drop for the Target distance is in even mils with no tenths to guess for.