3-9x Powered Scope vs 10x Powered Scope Questions

[ColtJ]

Hello,

While my question pertains to scopes/optics, it mostly has to do with accuracy/achieving accuracy not scope/optic brand or quality so I assume this is the correct sub forum to post these questions.

I just completed an AR build (completed the rifle) and now need to add a scope to it.

I had my heart set on a fixed 10x powered scope with paralax but have been doing quite a bit of reading, etc... and am now considering a 3-9x ffp powered scope instead.

The goal for the rifle is a precision build (a practical one) not just a range bench rest rifle. So i am starting to wonder if less power may be more...?

Range will be 100-400 (mostly 100) yards max (5.56) and I would like to have a sub MOA rifle after everything is dialed in. Also given the caliber I am starting to assume it is a given to go with lower magnification.

My reasoning is I can put an entire mag into a standard bullseye target (10" or 12" I think, never pay attention) at a 100 yards. So given the intended range and use, I am assuming I am correct in thinking 9x should be more than enough to achieve my goals even at 400 yards (based on no zoom at 100 yards)?

I apologize if my question seems a bit dunce but I have zero range time behind a scope and have no idea what either option will provide. I only have experience with iron sights. I would love to just purchase both but that is not a luxury at the moment so any feed back will be greatly appreciated.

Thanks for reading.

[ALCOAR]

Your logic in respect to fixed vs. variable is solid. In a real world environment w. real world environmental conditions present, fixed powered optics are a no go in my book. This is especially true on such a versatile(distance wise) gun as a SPR/MK12 or Recce is.

Some can shoot better w. lower magnification however I have found through years of shooting precision based ARs that I required a max power of 10x(in your case 9x would be ok) in order to adequently engage targets out to the full envelope of the 5.56(600-750yds). I also require the 10x in order to effectively group at 100/200yds for accuracy and ammo evaluations.

All around the board the variable is the way to go on any practical real world light precision rifle.

[Belmont31R]

'What range will my scope work at' depends on more than just what magnification the scope is set at.




For instance there are some scopes I see posted here with extremely large center areas of the reticle. It would obscure a target at longer range. My scope has a fine center area of the reticle which allows me to shoot relatively precise shots at a range most wouldnt consider too far for a 1-4X scope.


You need to also look at the optical quality of the scope. If your long range target is hazy and dark it wont do as good for the shooter as a scope of a lower magnification that is bright in low light settings with a reticle that allows a good sight placement.

[Suwannee Tim]

The first center fire rifle I scoped I put a 1.5-4.5 power scope on and since that time over 30 years ago I have used increasingly higher magnifications for the same application. Unless you are going to be snap shooting hogs or deer, low powers are not that important. You can get a 4X zoom range on many scopes now that will get you a 3-12 or 4-16 power and there is no reason not to go that route.

[ColtJ]

Your logic in respect to fixed vs. variable is solid. In a real world environment w. real world environmental conditions present, fixed powered optics are a no go in my book. This is especially true on such a versatile(distance wise) gun as a SPR/MK12 or Recce is.

Some can shoot better w. lower magnification however I have found through years of shooting precision based ARs that I required a max power of 10x(in your case 9x would be ok) in order to adequently engage targets out to the full envelope of the 5.56(600-750yds). I also require the 10x in order to effectively group at 100/200yds for accuracy and ammo evaluations.

All around the board the variable is the way to go on any practical real world light precision rifle.

Thanks for the reply.

Although i am not sure how my rifle compares to a SPR/MK12 type rifle. Mine is pretty heavy...

It seems I am gaining a lot more than losing by going with the 3-9x.




'What range will my scope work at' depends on more than just what magnification the scope is set at.




For instance there are some scopes I see posted here with extremely large center areas of the reticle. It would obscure a target at longer range. My scope has a fine center area of the reticle which allows me to shoot relatively precise shots at a range most wouldnt consider too far for a 1-4X scope.


You need to also look at the optical quality of the scope. If your long range target is hazy and dark it wont do as good for the shooter as a scope of a lower magnification that is bright in low light settings with a reticle that allows a good sight placement.

For reference I am looking at the SWFA SS series as they're not too much, seem to offer quality and seem to have great cs with a great warranty.

In other words my goal was to find a good quality scope that isn't going to break the bank in order to get my feet wet until I gather enough experience to justify a better scope or not as I have nothing (scopes or experience) to compare to.



The first center fire rifle I scoped I put a 1.5-4.5 power scope on and since that time over 30 years ago I have used increasingly higher magnifications for the same application. Unless you are going to be snap shooting hogs or deer, low powers are not that important. You can get a 4X zoom range on many scopes now that will get you a 3-12 or 4-16 power and there is no reason not to go that route.

Thanks.

[Belmont31R]

For reference I am looking at the SWFA SS series as they're not too much, seem to offer quality and seem to have great cs with a great warranty.

In other words my goal was to find a good quality scope that isn't going to break the bank in order to get my feet wet until I gather enough experience to justify a better scope or not as I have nothing (scopes or experience) to compare to.


Im not going to recommend a specific brand but just a few tidbit of info to help you make a choice.


Most people are moving to having matched reticles to turrets. Meaning if your reticle is calibrated to mils you want the turret to move in mils too. If its a MOA reticle you want MOA turrets. First focal plane (FFP) is preferred to second focal plane (SFP) for any reticles that have a ranging feature (ability to calculate range to target base on how much space the target takes up in the field of view based on the reticle).


If you get a scope with a mil reticle and MOA turrets you have to an extra calculation to get the distance to target by converting mils to MOA, and then making the adjustment on the scope.

If you have a ranging reticle FFP allows you to calculate the range at any magnification. SFP requires you to put the magnification in a certain power (usually 10X) otherwise the ranging will not be accurate. The difference is FFP the reticle stays the same size in relation to the target no matter what magnification you are at. SFP the reticle stays the same size no matter if you are at 3X or 12X. FFP you zoom in on the target and reticle together. SFP zooms in on the target only. The reticle stays the same size at 3X or 12X.



Its a PITA to learn all this stuff but the more you know the less mistakes you will make in purchasing equipment. Ive made my share of mistakes, and just trying to teach other people so they make informed decisions.


Also make sure, if you plan to shoot long range, to seek qualified instruction. You can have the best equipment in the world and not be able to shoot yourself out of a paper bag. The 5.56 round really starts dropping quick after 300 yards, and starts a kamikaze run after 500. With wind, and other environmental effects it really takes a good shooter to make good hits....especially first round hits on 2 and 4 legged critters. I can make good hits after making adjustments but Im still really working on making good 1st round hits. Im usually within a couple clicks but Id like to make more 1st round cold bore hits than I am now. My range is good for mirage and wind making it that more difficult.

[ColtJ]

Belmont31R,

I would like to say I understand everything above but i think i just got the gist of it.

In regards to MOA from my understanding, 1 MOA is 1" at a 100 yards and 2" at 200 and so on. So if you have an MOA scope with 1/4 increments you would adjust accordingly based on inches to dial it in correctly. IE: 1" high and 1" left at 100 yards left you would need to go right 4 clicks and down 4 clicks to be on target...? (double amount of clicks for 200 and so on)

As far as Mil, 1 click is one dot, so if you high 3 dots and left 4 at 100 yards you go right 4 and down 3 to be on target...?

So with that logic I can see where having a mis matched reticle and turret make a bad mix as you need to be able to convert one to another. Doesn't seem very sensible...

One of the options I am looking at is FFP and Mil/Mil, so from your post it would be accurate to adjust the scope based on above the same regardless of zoom as it will be accurate for any zoom since the reticle zooms with the target (where as SFP does not).

I apologize if I just repeated your post in mine; however, thanks for taking the time to post and help.

[MistWolf]

I have a 3x9 and a 10x scope. With the magnification of the 3x9 at the highest setting, difference between the two is negligible. At 3x, the scope will have a wider field of view and make it easier to locate and identify your target. The fixed power is a simpler scope, the variable more versatile. All else being equal, a fixed power is generally lighter, more durable and of better quality for the same money.

However, there is no reason to choose a fixed power scope over a modern variable for your application. If you need to buy something cheap until you can save up for the scope you want, buy a scope used.

In regards to the 10x scope I have, I would have done better to have bought the variable with the new fangled (then) second focal plane reticle instead

[ColtJ]

Thanks MistWolf.

May I ask why you would rather an SFP over FFP?

[Belmont31R]

MOA does not exactly equal 1" at 100 yards. Its 1.047" at 100. Not significant, of course, but thought you should know.



The issue with differing reticles and turrets is you have to do a conversion to make accurate changes in the reticle. For instance if you are shooting at 500 yards, and your POI is half a mil left...yet your turrets are in MOA you have to convert half mil at 500 yards to MOA. If you have mil/mil you just adjust the turret half MOA to get your POA to match your POI.



FFP/SFP is really only important with a ranging reticle or to spot your own shots. For instance with a FFP your magnification can be on any power, and 1 mil spacing on the reticle is going to be 1 mil no matter if you are on 3X or 12X. SFP the power has to be set on a specific magnification for 1 mil to equal 1 mil. Again with SFP the reticle never changes size your eye no matter what power its on. FFP the reticle gets bigger as you are looking at it because you're zooming in on both the target and reticle together.


With SFP when you zoom in the reticle covers more of the target so the lines on the reticle are only accurate at one specific power setting.


Some people like SFP because FFP reticles can be a little thin on lower magnifications. The detail of the reticle can be a little hard to pick out. SFP the reticle is "large" no matter what setting.


I think a SFP would be better for more close in work where you aren't going to be doing much changes to the turrets. 5.56 shoots flat enough theres really no need for changes to the turrets out to about 250 yards. When you get up closer to 300 and beyond it becomes more necessary to start inputting changes or at least have accurate hold overs.

[MistWolf]

Thanks MistWolf.

May I ask why you would rather an SFP over FFP?

Because my brain slipped into reverse and I typed "second focal plane" when I meant "first focal plane".

I blame it on dyspepsia. Yeah, that it! Dyspepsia. When your brain switches numbers and letters around, getting your words mixed up...

Back in the day, folks said that with first focal plane reticles, the cross hairs would cover up too much of the target at high magnifications. But FFP scopes were rare and far above my pay grade and I never got to really check one out. Now, you can't walk into an AR boutique shop without tripping over three or four before you get to the counter. From what I've seen, the disadvantage of FFP reticles were greatly exagerated. Now, I just need to sell my Leupold Mark 4 M1 10x to help fund the purchase of a modern, up to date optic

[saleen]

IE: 1" high and 1" left at 100 yards left you would need to go right 4 clicks and down 4 clicks to be on target...? (double amount of clicks for 200 and so on)

No. At 200 yards those same 4 clicks will get you two inches (approx), so doubling it will get you 4, and that effect carries exponentially as the range increases.

1MOA = (approx) 1" @ 100, 2" @ 200, 10" @ 1000, etc.

I'm still very much a neophyte in this, but I've chased enough impacts around from misplaced adjustment assumptions to see an opportunity to save you a headache.

I pretty much concur with the 10X max from an earlier post above. When I decided to step out and get a Nightforce, I got the 5.5-22x because I didn't see any reason not to. And while I occasionally will move it up to 15x, it pretty much stays at 10x for the ranges you are talking about shooting.

Just my (limited) .02


Saleen

[ColtJ]

MistWolf ,

No worries, I tend to do that a bit myself.

saleen,

You're correct, even though i understood ~1" at 100 and ~2" at 200, i was thinking of doing the corrections hoping to achieve 1" at 200 and somehow messed everything up.

Thanks for clarifying.

[ColtJ]

Thanks for all the reply's, they're appreciated.

If for nothing more but to put this thread to an end, I ordred a 3-9x, FFP, MIL/MIL scope this morning.

Will update when i get it.

Thanks again.

[Chameleox]

If I'm not too late, I'd add that being able to drop the magnification comes in handy when trying to track moving targets. Whether or not this is a factor for you, I don't know.
I use a 3.5-10 at work on a light precision rifle; Out to 500m it works fine for our purposes.

[ColtJ]

If I'm not too late, I'd add that being able to drop the magnification comes in handy when trying to track moving targets. Whether or not this is a factor for you, I don't know.
I use a 3.5-10 at work on a light precision rifle; Out to 500m it works fine for our purposes.

Not too late. Thanks.

Scope came in today, range this weekend. :D