-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Scope recommendations for PRS < $1000
- Thread starter adaptive
- Start date
We can discuss what would be best for you and then you can hook up with my buddy Robbie, or you can reach out to him and tell him I suggested itThanks @gr8fuldoug for the help, I forgot to mention, I am located in Canada
|
Vortex Viper HD 5-25x50mm FFP VMR-4 MRAD Riflescope VPR-52502
FREE SHIPPING on Vortex Viper HD 5-25x50mm FFP VMR-4 MRAD Riflescope VPR-52502
The difference in price between
ATHLON ARES ETR 4.5-30X56 and Vortex Viper HD 5-25x50mm in Canada is $70. Athlon being more expensive.
Which of these is better?
Vortex… Better warranty, too. And unlike Athlon, the new Viper HD is built in the Philippines, with Japanese glass. People have been saying the glass in the Viper HD is on par with the older Razor Gen2 scopes. I have the same scope I linked you to, but have not looked through it outside yet. I also have a new Razor Gen3 6-36, that I can compare it directly to. If you want, I can try to setup and take some pics through them both, and see if it does the glass any justice?
Both are fine, and both have their bonuses (as @FuhQ stated Vortex has a significantly better warranty).
I would add in here though, that the Ares is a 56 objective, compared to the Vortex with a 50, as well as the Ares is a 34mm tube. The larger the objective, the better your exit pupil will be. The better your exit pupil is, the better your eyebox will be. In match shooting, especially disciplines that require a lot of varying positional shooting, you'll find that the more forgiving eyebox is, the happier you will be, especially starting out.
Whatever you wind up with, make sure you get it in mils. Don't get an MOA scope. You can certainly make an MOA scope work, and I've competed with both just fine, but mils will certainly make remembering/recalling your dials significantly easier. Shooting out to something as simple as 600 yards, my MOA dial is 4 figures (or 3 if you are using shorthand) that I have to remember, vs 2 digits for an MRAD.
Last edited:
I would love to see that and I am sure other will do as well. Thanks!
Thank you for your feedback. I didn’t know that a 34mm can give you this much of an advantage of 30mm. I will make sure to get Mil not MOA.
It doesn’t… I own lots of 30 and 34mm scopes, 50 & 56mm… Good glass and a well designed scope makes a much bigger difference than those 2 factors.
The main advantage to a 34mm over a 30mm is the amount of travel adjustment. Typically 34mm scopes have a little more adjustment over 30mm scopes, but this can also be offset by using higher MOA bases, allowing you to zero closer to the top of the adjustment range, giving you much more down travel, allowing you to retain as much adjustment as possible in a 30mm.
To solve for aperture, you take the the focal length and divide it by the lens diameter (or in the case of rifle optics vernacular, the "objective lens"). The bigger the objective, the lower the aperture number will be for a given focal length. The lower the aperture number is, the better photon transmission you will receive.
To put this in human lingo, at 25x, your light transmission will always be better with a larger objective than with a smaller objective. In reality, it's much more complex than that, but this is roughly as simple as it can get.
I've competed and done fine with all different types of tubes, but when it comes to spending my own money, I'm getting the larger objective 10 times out of 10.
Burris XTR III?
It's $1k at EuroOptic
It's $1k at EuroOptic
Don’t buy a Bushnell…Especially for $1,500…
Its $1,425 Canadian, which translates into $1000USD. But I noticed it is not even illuminated, so that is a no no.
Illum isn't as big of a deal as you might think. Illum comes in handy hunting at weird hours or odd lighting conditions, but I very rarely use it in a match. This entire season I've been using a non-illuminated MK5, and it's been fine. I would, however, absolutely agree with not spending four figures on a Bushnell.
Unrelated question 
if my scope says a torque of 18 inches/pound and my mount says 30 inches/pound. Which of these should I follow?
if my scope says a torque of 18 inches/pound and my mount says 30 inches/pound. Which of these should I follow?30 is for rings to base and 18 for rings to scope. At 30 on the scope you will crush your tube.Unrelated question
Just to clarify, the bottom screws are 30in/lb and the top screws at 18in/lb?
Attachments
You got it!
Follow the specs in the manual, each set of rings is slightly different, but all are the same in regards to - the bottom to the rifle are always more than the top to the scope.
I'm almost positive my American rifle company rings and mount are the same spec of 55 in/lbs on top and bottom.
follow the directions of the mount if it's a good mount.
I would say follow the advice of your first response, the commercial supporter.
Why? Because we do get brand bunnies in here and normally, this kind of thread quickly escalates into a Spectaculo del Caca of people straining at the very limits of body and mind to see who can insult the other people even further.
Whatever the price, get glass quality over fancy features.
So, the hard part is finding out which one looks good to your eyes. Everyone is different.
Why? Because we do get brand bunnies in here and normally, this kind of thread quickly escalates into a Spectaculo del Caca of people straining at the very limits of body and mind to see who can insult the other people even further.
Whatever the price, get glass quality over fancy features.
So, the hard part is finding out which one looks good to your eyes. Everyone is different.
LOL so fucking true. And half or more of the shit they say is just wrong.
BTW imma steal your spanglish Spectaculo del Caca.
That is correct ARC M-Brace rings are recommended by ARC @ 55 inch-pounds for both the ring and base clamp. Easy to keep up with. And if you use something repeatable like a Fix-It-Stix 55 in-lbs. torque limiter, then it will be very repeatable zero incase you have to remove the scope for some reason. I'd still check zero, of course, but it will either be dead-nuts, or very close, provided you use the same torque specs.
Similar threads
