KAC lpr ammo and Glass suggestions

[TurretGunner]

For your price range stick a vxr 3-9 into a bobro mount. If you absolutely need FFP ,Go with a vortex x32 or a swfa 3-15

Save even more with a 1 piece badger mount

[joshrunkle35]

If you can only shoot out to 200 yds, I'd probably go with a red dot.

[TurretGunner]

What's the point of a red dot on a lpr?

Why buy an accurized rifle made to shoot small groups and throw anything other than quality magnified optics on it?

[Koshinn]

If you can only shoot out to 200 yds, I'd probably go with a red dot.

A red dot as primary optics seems like a waste on a 18" stainless steel krieger barrel.

[bp7178]

Hard not to like a 3-18x Mark 6 for a SPRish rifle.

I'm between that and the 2.5-10x42 NXS.

[TurretGunner]

The nightforce is not worth half of what it sells for. Shitty reticles and no FFP at that price.

Bushnells new 3-12 is also a serious optic you should take a look at. Speced by George Gardner. There is also the 3-12 FFP G2 Bushy that can be had for $6-700 with mil discount

[Boba Fett v2]

Check out the Leupold VX-R 2-7x or 3-9x. Falls within your budget and will do what you need it to do.

Sent from my piece of s**t phone using Tapatalk2 (which can be equally unreliable when coupled with a junk phone)

[bp7178]

The nightforce is not worth half of what it sells for. Shitty reticles and no FFP at that price.

Bushnells new 3-12 is also a serious optic you should take a look at. Speced by George Gardner. There is also the 3-12 FFP G2 Bushy that can be had for $6-700 with mil discount

I disagree with all of this. I don't think FFP is absolutely needed in a 2.5-10x power range. Generally, under 6x the subtentions on the reticle are too fine to quickly make out. The reticle choices are very good, but I've always been partial to their mil-dot or the MOAR. The only thing that gives me pause with the 2.5-10x42 is the push button illumination. I didn't like it on my VX-6, and sold it for that among other, reasons. What I like about the NXS, is the field of view. 44' on 2.5x is pretty damn big. For what you'd be using a scope on 2.5x, with a SFP scope you have a reticle that's easy to track combined with a huge field of view.

In something like a 3-18x, I see FFP being more needed. With the 2.5-10x, its pretty much going to be used on 2.5 or 10x. With an upper end of 18x, that may be high for some situations, so dialing back to 10x, 12x or 15x may be needed. It was brought up in another thread, heat mirage. Not a big factor at 10x, but on 18x it is. So it would be important on something that high power to be able to dial back a bit and not loose the reticle, also useful in low light.

I looked at the 3-12x44 Bushnell, but it seems like pretty old tech. Long and huge turrets, illumination is shitty and uneven. The hunting G2 version isn't illuminated, which is a no go for me, and the exit pupil in the high end receives a lot of complaints. That form factor is on the way out IMO. The 3-18 Mark 6 does a lot in a 12" package. The illumination is a kick in the wallet, but there is a mil/LE program. The newer version that is illuminated with the TMR reticle and the new low profile turrets is everything I want, albeit expensive.

[TurretGunner]

The point is, at the price NF is selling their optics, FFP should be a given. NF used to be a good value/performance but that time has come and gone. The only two products they sell that are interesting are the 2.5-10x24 (only to mil) and the new BEAST(which is $3K). Anything else they sell has a better option on the market cheaper, better or both. A good reticle can be used at low end, and at high end (ALA Bushnell G2). No one is using holdovers at 3x on higher mag scope.

For 1-4 or 1-6, FFP is not needed. Getting above that, where you will actualy be dialing your elevation (and windage unless you use holdover) FFP is a godsend.

Plenty of people out there running the new Vortex 2.5-10x32 FFP, and LOVE IT. It owns that segment. Once you go FFP, you never want to go back. I can dial in where I want and not worry about converting the calcultions or holdovers. Its easier, quicker and less error prone. Mirage is not always a factor, and is location dependent. If it was such a killer, then all the top end scopes wouldnt be 5-25x.

Illumination is not needed. the 3.5-21x50 Bushy was speced by a specail operations unit. None of the Horus or G2 retticles are illuminated, nor are there plans to (Strait from Alpha@ Bushy Mil's mouth). The 3-18x does not have illume, and its not needed. Why are you arguing for illumination when the scope you champion does not even have it? Why buy the Mk6 Illume 3-18 Tremmor 2 for $3300 @ Mil price when you can buy the MK8 3-25 with Illum for less than $2500 Mil price. Makes zero sense. Bushnell also came out with a New 3-12x, if you would have read my post, that fixes those issues you talk about. The fact that George Gardner is behind it, tells you all you need to know.

[Koshinn]

It's crazy how illumination on the mk6 3-18s adds $800 - $1300 to the cost.

The Mk8 3.5-25 with illum is not less than $2500 mil price. Mk8 3.5-25 with illum tremor2 is slightly more than a mk6 3-18 with illum tremor 2. Mk8 with illum mil dot is much more than a mk6 with illum tmr.