scope and reticle for long range/precision shooting

[A5scott]

Hey,

So I am looking for a scope to put on a 308. I would like to try hitting metal targets out to 1000 yards, and if I'm good at it, maybe precision rifle comps, or just competing against myself and friends.

I want to learn to use a mil dot reticle with mil adjustments, and I found a good deal on a brand new NF NXS 5.5-22x50 mil dot/mil turrets. My buddy is trying to point me in the direction of a christmas tree reticle for easy hold offs and quicker shots without dialing, especially for comps. His thinking is I won't be able to be as precise with the mil dot reticle, and I will be making a compromise to save hundreds.

Am I wrong to think that I will be fine with mil dots?

I also want the NF 2.5-10x32 mil dot/mil turrets for another lighter 308.

all the best,

scott

[B Cart]

I compete in local and PRS matches, and i think it's much easier to work in MILs vs MOA in my opinion, so you're on the right track there. I also much prefer first focal plane scopes (the NF you are looking at is second focal plane), especially if you think you might shoot matches. In most matches there will be multiple stages where it's beneficial to shoot at lower magnification, and it's nice to have the mils adjust to be correct at any magnification when spotting misses, vs SFP where the mils are only correct at full power. I've also shot both reticle types (christmas tree and non), and a christmas tree can be nice if it doesn't stand out too much. I don't like really busy dark christmas tree/horus reticles because they can take up a lot of the scope view and make it hard to spot misses. It comes down to personal preference.

If I was in your shoes and looking for a $1,500 mil/mil scope to shoot out to 1,000 and possible long range matches, I would get something like the Gen 1 Vortex Razor HD 5-20 with EBR-2 reticle, or the SWFA SS 5-20 HD. Both have great glass and are mil/mil in First Focal Plane. If you can pony up a little more, the Gen 2 Razor 4.5-27 is fantastic.

That is my .02.

[A5scott]

Thank you, yes I was a bit hesitant about the second focal plane. I was thinking I'd be using it mostly on full power mostly, but when you mention I can more easily find my misses, then yes, for a scope like this, I definitely want FFP.
good choices to think about. I may get the 2.5-10 first and wait on a 20+ power

thanks again

scott

[TehLlama]

I'm with BCart, if you want the NXS 2.5-10x, I'd just snag that and see how you do out to a click there - really should be adequate to start with, and if that means you can budget and research more for a longer reach optic, then you'll be outright ahead for the whole deal.

[A5scott]

Thanks TehLlama,
Yeah I was planning on getting the 2.5-10x first and my buddy was steering me to the 20+ power. I think I'll stick with my gut.

Anybody think I should get the MilR reticle or a hashed reticle instead of a mil dot type? I guess just personal preference

Thanks again
Scott

[Leftie]

I've got a NF 2.5x10x42 with mildot reticle/MIL turrets and love the optic. The optic is clear and I find that the system is intuitive if you understand how to use mildot. It's all about being fluent in your reticle/adjustment/ranging system.

Snipers hide has all just mental great post on this for their blog. I'll see if I can't find it for you.

[B Cart]

Anybody think I should get the MilR reticle or a hashed reticle instead of a mil dot type? I guess just personal preference

Thanks again
Scott

I personally don't like mildots. I think they are too big. I would go with mil hashes if possible and I think starting with the 2.5-10 will be a good start

[waveslayer]

I have the Horus 59 and love it on a BEAST. As for the argument with the power of scope it's like I have said before I have never complained that my car had too much power, if it's a fast car just don't punch it. In other words, get the more magnification and keep it on ten power all day long and when you figure out that having 20 plus power is that much better in some situations you won't have to buy another scope!

[A5scott]

Yeah totally want more power, I get it that it's better to have more magnification and not need it. I have 4 rifles and so far 1 magnified optic, which is a 1-4x. So I'll start with the 2.5-10x and go from there


Scott

[waveslayer]

Scott don't be afraid... it's like driving my buddy's sports car. It's gnarly at first but then you get used to it and you will want all that power...[emoji12]

[A5scott]

Haha yeah I know what you mean. Anybody know if I can get a compact Hubble telescope to mount on my Carbine?

Scott

[Jmanwit]

Another great option with a STELLAR reticle is the Bushnell Elite Tactical 3.5-21 with the G2DMR, you can usually pick one up for ~$1100. Clean reticle, decent glass for the money.

[TehLlama]

Mil-Line with Mil turret for pure precision stuff is really quite impressive - if being able to do quick and dirty holdovers isn't part of that rifle's job description, I would take NF's MLR reticle over the MilDot every single time.

If the long range optic package is more for target use, I'd actually very seriously look at the Bushnell, Vortex, and similar offerings. The biggest thing the mid-range scopes give up is weight, with the second being light transmission in mediocre light environments - and for a 1k precision rig that's not much of a loss (but you can sometimes find a preferable optic as far as reticles/features/turrets for a few hundred rounds worth of M118LR clone less money

[chris@so]

Hey,

So I am looking for a scope to put on a 308. I would like to try hitting metal targets out to 1000 yards, and if I'm good at it, maybe precision rifle comps, or just competing against myself and friends.

I want to learn to use a mil dot reticle with mil adjustments, and I found a good deal on a brand new NF NXS 5.5-22x50 mil dot/mil turrets. My buddy is trying to point me in the direction of a christmas tree reticle for easy hold offs and quicker shots without dialing, especially for comps. His thinking is I won't be able to be as precise with the mil dot reticle, and I will be making a compromise to save hundreds.

Am I wrong to think that I will be fine with mil dots?

I also want the NF 2.5-10x32 mil dot/mil turrets for another lighter 308.

all the best,

scott

There are better options out there other than a traditional mil dot. Most competitive shooters that I know that are shooting dynamic matches (including myself) prefer a reticle that is broken down into .2 mil. It makes life easier imho especially for work with movers. I think that is what your buddy is getting at.

The MIL-R reticle is and example.
http://www.sportoptics.com/nightforce-nxs-2-10-32-scopes.aspx

I shoot a 2.5-10 on my LMT and love it.

As others have already said, a FFP rifle scope for dynamic shooting would be better suited because the reticle maintains a 1:1 ratio on whatever power you are on. Its one less thing to worry about when you're on the clock.

[A5scott]

Thanks for all the replies. Anybody have input if the 2.5-10x42 with the side focus and digiilum is worth the extra $200 over the NF 2.5-10x32?
I'm definitely switching to the Mil-R reticle.

Thanks,
Scott

[ccoker]

yes, I would go for the 42mm

You don't need a lot of magnification to shoot out to 1K. 10-12 with decent glass will let you center up on steel plates fine.
With great glass at 12X you can shoot clay pidgeons at 1K though very hard to do consistently, especially with a 308.

The Steiner 3-15 Tactical is another great option you might want to look at.

[waveslayer]

larger objective lens the better for light admission. .. keep that in mind

like my Grandma would always say, "go big or go home!" she was a cool Grandma

[Leftie]

Love my X42. The digillum comes in handy and the parallax adjustment is an added benefit. I'm running a straight Milldot reticle on mine, and there is a noticeable difference in lower-light compared to the X32

[Failure2Stop]

larger objective lens the better for light admission. .. keep that in mind


All else being equal, yes.
Lowering quality of glass and coatings wo go to a larger diameter objective will usually decrease transitional light performance.
50mm lenses are not needed. 44 with good class and coatings will do the job.
Even 24mm lenses do pretty well if they're from upper-end companies.

[waveslayer]

All else being equal, yes.
Lowering quality of glass and coatings wo go to a larger diameter objective will usually decrease transitional light performance.
50mm lenses are not needed. 44 with good class and coatings will do the job.
Even 24mm lenses do pretty well if they're from upper-end companies.
yes but you add all those, the coatings, glass quality, etc and put that on a 56mm then you have a major advantage. so yes you get the results as I posted earlier. bigger is better if all things being equal

[Leftie]

yes but you add all those, the coatings, glass quality, etc and put that on a 56mm then you have a major advantage. so yes you get the results as I posted earlier. bigger is better if all things being equal

While you do get the advantage, you give up size and weight. I know that if I mounted a 56mm on my AR it would be total overkill for my specific needs. Needs drive everything (price is a factor for some, however).

I chose the X42 over the X32 due to the options afforded by the optic, as well as the ability to shoot in lower light than with the X32. a 50mm+ objective for me wasn't practical. Maybe it would be for another application than the one that I have for my rifle.

[waveslayer]

While you do get the advantage, you give up size and weight. I know that if I mounted a 56mm on my AR it would be total overkill for my specific needs. Needs drive everything (price is a factor for some, however).

I chose the X42 over the X32 due to the options afforded by the optic, as well as the ability to shoot in lower light than with the X32. a 50mm+ objective for me wasn't practical. Maybe it would be for another application than the one that I have for my rifle.
agreed but remember what grandma said, go big or go home... lol

[interfan]

Some good reading here: http://precisionrifleblog.com/2014/07/01/tactical-scopes-field-test-overview-rifle-scope-line-up/

[Failure2Stop]

The most important thing when selecting the optic is: exactly what is the purpose?
What competitions, specifically, are you going to be shooting?
F-Class has a different approach than SPR.

For example;
I am a big fan of the H59, and maybe the TReMoR3, for the kind of shooting that I do.
If I am going for utmost precision, I prefer a simple thin reticle, maybe with a 1/8 MOA dot depending on target.

There is a reason that "tactical" precision scopes have the reticles and features that they do, which are different than what known-distance, bullseye-type competition oriented optics have. One thing to consider is that a tactical reticle can do 90% of what a target reticle can do, but a target reticle can only do 10% of what a top-end "tactical" reticle can do.
It does require the shooter to do some learning. There is no such thing as a "busy" reticle, only shooters that don't need/understand the information being provided.
*Well, sure, somebody could find a complete garbage reticle just to prove me wrong.
I find that the H59 gives me everything I need, with very little that I don't.
A TMR gives me some of what I need, but is fine if I am dialing range and holding wind.
A traditional MilDot is ok, but lacks a lot of the range estimation and wind hold of the TMR (doesn't hold a candle to the H59).
The TReMoR2 is decent, but really good for quickly getting wind once you know the reticle.
The TReMoR3 is supposed to be really good, from what I know of it, but don't have hands-on (eyes-on?) yet. I will probably get one to try out. I don't know full availability, but it looks like NF has it in a couple offerings. I'm not sold on the wind/ToF dots, but I won't bash it until I have given it time.

Modern reticles give a lot more than those of the past, but they require learning.

[waveslayer]

The most important thing when selecting the optic is: exactly what is the purpose?
What competitions, specifically, are you going to be shooting?
F-Class has a different approach than SPR.

For example;
I am a big fan of the H59, and maybe the TReMoR3, for the kind of shooting that I do.
If I am going for utmost precision, I prefer a simple thin reticle, maybe with a 1/8 MOA dot depending on target.

There is a reason that "tactical" precision scopes have the reticles and features that they do, which are different than what known-distance, bullseye-type competition oriented optics have. One thing to consider is that a tactical reticle can do 90% of what a target reticle can do, but a target reticle can only do 10% of what a top-end "tactical" reticle can do.
It does require the shooter to do some learning. There is no such thing as a "busy" reticle, only shooters that don't need/understand the information being provided.
*Well, sure, somebody could find a complete garbage reticle just to prove me wrong.
I find that the H59 gives me everything I need, with very little that I don't.
A TMR gives me some of what I need, but is fine if I am dialing range and holding wind.
A traditional MilDot is ok, but lacks a lot of the range estimation and wind hold of the TMR (doesn't hold a candle to the H59).
The TReMoR2 is decent, but really good for quickly getting wind once you know the reticle.
The TReMoR3 is supposed to be really good, from what I know of it, but don't have hands-on (eyes-on?) yet. I will probably get one to try out. I don't know full availability, but it looks like NF has it in a couple offerings. I'm not sold on the wind/ToF dots, but I won't bash it until I have given it time.

Modern reticles give a lot more than those of the past, but they require learning.
I love my H59, used it last weekend with DTA fooling around with them doing some timed PRS on targets from 100 to 1000, I dialed in at 300 as my zero which gave me 1.2 mils low out to 600... using my 6.5 SAUM.

the TreMOR3 would be sick! it's all in application that was perfectly described above. I would have a hard time not having a reticle like the H59 now. takes time learning but once you do, it's awesome. great for spotting shots for friends too. I can tell them exactly how many mils off they were if they missed.

[ccoker]

The most important thing when selecting the optic is: exactly what is the purpose?
What competitions, specifically, are you going to be shooting?
.

yes sir, you are spot on..
what are you going to use it the MOST for..