Best all around scope for all around ar.

[Failure2Stop]

What is your price range? How much do you intend to bench rest vs. carry? Do you need illumination? Do you have to have 1x? Does the scope need to be "hard use" tough? Do you already own a HD rifle?

If you are going to carry the rifle, you want to consider weight. If you want it to shoot 1X and out to 500 yards then = $$$$. If you have money to burn and you are in good shape get a Leupy Mk8, but 8 power is about as low as I would go for 500 yards (maybe it is just my eyesight). The NF NXS 2.5-10x 42 or 32 will just get you to 500.

Or you could consider getting two scopes. One for close to mid, and one for mid to longish.

I don't know if you have already selected or built your SPR, but if you have not you might want to consider a .308 instead.

I've taken the Mk8 1.1-8x out to 1100 meters, on a BCC sized piece of steel, with H27D reticle.
Buddy of mine was doing well with the Mk 6 1-6x CMR-W.
Both guns were 16" SR-25s.
Weather was optimal; super light 12:00 wind, good light, etc, but the point is that the reticle itself stood up and gave the needed data.

[PatrioticDisorder]

I've been going round and round on this topic and clearly the best would be the Mk6 1-6 & Mk8 1.1-8 CQBSS but obviously both are expensive and really need illumination to be useful on 1x... I'm starting to think the Bushnell 1-6.5 in SFP or SWFA SS 1-6 may actually make more sense, especially after reading F2S (Jack's) thread titled "Getting over the need for daylight bright illumination in low powered variables since neither really needs to be daylight bright based on the reticle...

So with that, how many here have used both the Bushnell & SWFA LPVs, any opinions on what is the better of those 2 scopes?

[SomeOtherGuy]

I've been going round and round on this topic and clearly the best would be the Mk6 1-6 & Mk8 1.1-8 CQBSS but obviously both are expensive and really need illumination to be useful on 1x... I'm starting to think the Bushnell 1-6.5 in SFP or SWFA SS 1-6 may actually make more sense, especially after reading F2S (Jack's) thread titled "Getting over the need for daylight bright illumination in low powered variables since neither really needs to be daylight bright based on the reticle...

So with that, how many here have used both the Bushnell & SWFA LPVs, any opinions on what is the better of those 2 scopes?

I've owned the SS 1-6x. Haven't owned the Bushnell but have spent a few minutes with it at a range, courtesy of a friend. Let me start out with two general opinions:

1) Although I demand FFP for high magnification target scopes, I strongly prefer SFP for low power variables, because very few FFP reticles work well at low power (The CMR-W 7.62 in the Mark 6 is the only one I've ever loved, although the discontinued T-reticle (sort of a German #4) that was offered at one time in the SWFA SS 1-4x also works well for me - I still have that scope).

2) I think people looking at low power variables should compare field of view, because it varies a ton among the current options, and will have a significant effect on the scope's usefulness, especially at intermediate 2-3x magnification which I often use in carbine competition (YMMV).

So with those opinions out there - I think the SFP Bushnell is better, based on being SFP, and having what I remember to be better illumination and wider FOV. The SS 1-6x is a well made scope but has rather narrow FOV and while the reticle is useable at both extremes, it occludes the vision between 4x and 5x where the ring is at or near what should be the outer edges of the view (blocking them), and I simply don't like it as well at either end.

I'll also add that if price keeps the Mark 6 out of the picture but allows the Bushnell, I'd shop around for a Vortex Razor 1-6x as a possibly better option than the Bushnell around the same price. It's heavier and I don't love the reticle, but its crosshairs extend to the edges making them much easier to pick up, the FOV is wide, the glass is fairly good, the illumination is simple and works, and it should be quite rugged. I had one of those too, didn't keep it because of the weight and the JM-1 reticle, but it is a solid offering for its price. If I got one again (never say never) I personally would get the newer mil-based reticle that wasn't offered when I bought mine.

[ScottsBad]

I've taken the Mk8 1.1-8x out to 1100 meters, on a BCC sized piece of steel, with H27D reticle.
Buddy of mine was doing well with the Mk 6 1-6x CMR-W.
Both guns were 16" SR-25s.
Weather was optimal; super light 12:00 wind, good light, etc, but the point is that the reticle itself stood up and gave the needed data.

You have better eyes than I do, that's for sure.

[FourT6and2]

I was in the same boat. Wound up going with Kahles 1-6x. Seems like a great choice so far. Got it from Sport Optics for a pretty good price all things considered. It's a pretty no-nonsense scope. A few different reticle choices. Best illumination I could find. Super bright if you need it during the day. Good glass, on par or better than Swaro Z6i from what I've read (never seen a Swaro in person). But they are sister companies. So doesn't surprise me. It's also lighter than most of the 1-6x scopes on the market. Seems to be built very well. Not sure if it is "combat" capable. But I'm not a soldier.

[brickboy240]

People are really paying 2 grand plus for an AR scope?

Wow...the economy must not be that bad after all! LOL

[Failure2Stop]

People are really paying 2 grand plus for an AR scope?

Wow...the economy must not be that bad after all! LOL

They're also paying for fishing boats, SUVs, and time-shares. It's all about priorities.
If you want to shoot small groups, you need good ammo, good glass, and time.
Some people are happy with expending their disposable (or budgeted) income in that direction. Some are not. The money moves where it is needed.

[brickboy240]

Oh I am quite sure the 2500 dollar scope is fantastic. Like I am sure the 100 grand Porsche is also very fun to drive. If you have the cake for both...by all means spend it.

But should the most expensive scopes be in the "best all around" category?

Is there anything decent in the...say...400-600 dollar range?

[SomeOtherGuy]

Oh I am quite sure the 2500 dollar scope is fantastic. Like I am sure the 100 grand Porsche is also very fun to drive. If you have the cake for both...by all means spend it.
But should the most expensive scopes be in the "best all around" category?
Is there anything decent in the...say...400-600 dollar range?

The most expensive stuff is usually (though not always) best. And someone here is bound to have one. It always helps to include your price point.

For $400-600 I would look hard for a used SWFA SS 1-4x, or a gen 1 Burris XTR or even Euro Diamond 1-4x. The Leupold VX-R "1.25-4x" (which Leupold's specs clarify is in fact 1.5-4x) would also be a good option. The Vortex Viper PST 1-4x could also be an option, but I'd choose it after the others listed. Finally SWFA has just announced a new 1-4x that looks pretty good, for $399, but it's a different model made at their lower-cost Japanese partner (which I think is Kenko but I'm not certain) rather than where their original 1-4x and other "HD series" scopes are made (which is Light Optical Works Japan).

[FourT6and2]

Oh I am quite sure the 2500 dollar scope is fantastic. Like I am sure the 100 grand Porsche is also very fun to drive. If you have the cake for both...by all means spend it.

But should the most expensive scopes be in the "best all around" category?

Is there anything decent in the...say...400-600 dollar range?

I can only presume you are referring to me. I had the money to spend. And I wanted the best I could get for the budget I had. There aren't a lot of 1-6x scopes out there. And the Kahles is not $2500, btw. So instead of spending my money on booze or eating out or new shoes or a suit or whatever... I spent it on a scope. Not that hard to figure out.

I had some specific requirements, like true daylight illumination. There are no 1-6x scopes under 1000 dollars that have that. The cheapest competitor to the Kahles is the SWFA SS. And it's illumination is not daylight bright from what I read. I also preferred the reticle in the Kahles. But the SWFA is FFP if that matters to anybody. The only other 1-6x scopes I can think of off the top of my head (TRUE 1x) are the Leupold Mark 6, Meopta R2, Swarovski Z6i, Vortex Razor Gen II, Steiner (1-5, though), and some cheaper ones from Primary Arms and Sightmark. The Swarovski and Steiner are definitely the most expensive of the bunch. The Kahles is up there as well, though. But no more expensive than the Leupold.

If you want cheap, go with the Sightmark or Primary Arms I guess.

But based purely on numbers, the Kahles has the best weight, the best eye relief, the best field of view, and the best illumination. And arguably the best glass. There are some downsides of course, like cost (depending on your budget) and turret design (not intended for on-the-fly adjustment, more of a set-and-forget).

I do agree, though, the "most expensive" scope doesn't automatically mean the "best all around" scope. But when most of the features score high points, cost might be a small price to pay. On the flip side, you can get a cheaper scope but it might lack in other areas.