PRS Talk Ideal PRS Scope

Mordamer

Mordamer

Professional Know It All
Supporter
Full Member
Minuteman
    • May 11, 2010
    1,945
    1,858
    Hammon, OK
    #1
    1. Magnification Range 13-26 or 12-24.
    2. 16 inches long so you never have to touch paralax.
    3. 10 mil turrets.
    4. Says Nightforce on the side so you can actually trust it.

    I never dial below 13x or above 24x in a PRS match and I shoot a lot of them. Drives me nuts that so many scopes that are obviously targeted at long distance shooting go down to 4-7x on the low end. Not to mention they are all FFP and that makes it impossible to pick reticle thickness that is usable over the whole range.

    Stupid 15 mil turrets on high end scopes with tiny little lines that make it hard to tell which click you are on. Tangent Theta has a gigantic turret and most of the space on the dial is just empty space because they use tiny numbers.

    Nightforce hasn't released any new top end optic in awhile. I'm sure they won't release this, but it'd be sweet if they did.
     
    • Like
    • Haha
    Reactions: Cody S, Bigrederic, southerngolfer and 5 others
    #7
    I could get into a 10-30x56 with large Gen 3 Razor style zeroing turrets that are coated for use with markers and has a option for a tree reticle similar to either the PR-2 or EBR-7D. Ideally the dots of the EBR-7D rather than the lines of the PR-2.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: iceng
    #8
    Just to play a little devils advocate here but then why not the ZCO 840 with the 1x, 2x, 3x reticle? 8x and 10x are damn near the same thing. The little bit extra top end won’t make it worse. Super forgiving parallax. Has the 10 mil turret option. You can put a turret tape on it for markers.

    There’s also the S&B 10-60 but the reticle sucks.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: Cody S, beetroot and giumau1
    #9
    I'm in the "has been" age bracket and can't see nearly as good and the higher magnification really helps, especially on KYL racks with small targets.

    I've never been a fan of Vortex but the Razor G3 is an outstanding optic, its essentially retired all my Nightforce 25x optics! Better glass, tracks perfectly, more magnification and the DOF is insane, I rarely ever touch the parallax.

    Optics typically work best in the middle range of zoom and I'll run in the 18-25x most stages and it's right in the sweet spot with plenty of magnification. If you really need to crank up the magnification it's always there if you need it.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: rijndael and Hickswr
    #10
    I think the 4x zoom ratio was just perfect for FFP tactical prs optics. I do not like 24x on the high end, I'd love something like a 10-40 and yes I agree, a long tradition style with the most forgiving characters as physically possible.
    say what you want about tangent theta but I've never seen a more forgiving scope at any price point than a tt525p.
    I've heard the new 735p isn't quite the same in that regard which is a damn shame because it's close enough to my ideal of approx 10-40x60 36mm tube, extra long, etc. make it weigh a ton too.
    oh well.
    these are the days.
     
    #11
    Idk, I find myself dialing the mag pretty far back to find the targets, then zooming in to shoot. That’s a failing of mine, no doubt, but a little less mag on the low end works for me.
     
    #12
    could they save any significant cost making a 15-30x56 instead of a 6-30 or whatever? Just wondering if magnification range has all that much to do with the cost, or if it's being a higher mag that adds more cost.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: Taylorbok
    #13
    Ideal scope? I could probably run a fixed power between 16-18. Almost never touch my zoom. Don’t remember the last time I touched it in a match. Parallax down to 15yds. Big field of view. I dial wind so something like the TT JTAC reticle would be cool but if there is a Christmas tree it need not be more than 2 mils of windage either side. And maybe 2 mils of up elevation only. 10 mil turrets. More explicit Markings at every .5 on windage turret. Zeroing no harder than the G3.

    Yeah, that’s the scope I want. I think.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: 458win, Taylorbok, Mordamer and 1 other person
    #14
    Rippey715 said:
    Ideal scope? I could probably run a fixed power between 16-18. Almost never touch my zoom. Don’t remember the last time I touched it in a match. Parallax down to 15yds. Big field of view. I dial wind so something like the TT JTAC reticle would be cool but if there is a Christmas tree it need not be more than 2 mils of windage either side. And maybe 2 mils of up elevation only. 10 mil turrets. More explicit Markings at every .5 on windage turret. Zeroing no harder than the G3.

    Yeah, that’s the scope I want. I think.
    Click to expand...
    Other than the fixed power, sounds like you pretty much described a Kahles k328i DLR with a skmr+ reticle.
     
    #19
    1. Take a Razor G3
    2. Ditch the xmas tree reticle and all those lines and hash marks most of us will never need or use (that mostly just get in the way and make it harder to spot splash)
    3. Replace it with something more minimalist and open (similar to ZCO's MPCT1X or TT's JTAC reticle)

    Perfecto!
     
    • Like
    Reactions: Kickin45
    #20
    Rippey715 said:
    I’ve just heard fixed power offers some of the best visuals since it doesn’t compromise over a range of magnification. So if you don’t zoom anyway 🤷‍♂️
    Maybe it could even be cheaper (yeah right)
    Click to expand...
    There are a few fixed 10x options out there but they aren't very popular. The SWFA 10x42 HD is about $800 and the USO FDN 10x is about $2000.
    At these two price points there are a lot of really good variable power scopes that there's not much of a reason to by the fixed power models.

    If someone introduced a fixed 10x that was around $1000, had a super wide FOV and amazing glass then perhaps it would be a viable option but I'd imagine 99% of people would still buy a variable scope.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: Emerson0311
    #21
    Mordamer said:
    1. Magnification Range 13-26 or 12-24.
    2. 16 inches long so you never have to touch paralax.
    3. 10 mil turrets.
    4. Says Nightforce on the side so you can actually trust it.

    I never dial below 13x or above 24x in a PRS match and I shoot a lot of them. Drives me nuts that so many scopes that are obviously targeted at long distance shooting go down to 4-7x on the low end. Not to mention they are all FFP and that makes it impossible to pick reticle thickness that is usable over the whole range.

    Stupid 15 mil turrets on high end scopes with tiny little lines that make it hard to tell which click you are on. Tangent Theta has a gigantic turret and most of the space on the dial is just empty space because they use tiny numbers.

    Nightforce hasn't released any new top end optic in awhile. I'm sure they won't release this, but it'd be sweet if they did.
    Click to expand...
    There are a few very high magnification FFP scopes on the market now.
    ATACR 7-35, TT 7-35, ZCO 8-40, or if you want cheaper Leupold Mark 4hd 8-32.

    I'm guessing you are wanting a scope that offers the highest possible optical performance but not the ZCO/ATACR price tag.
    Unfortunately any company that spends the money on R&D for such a niche product is going to need to charge a lot in order to get a return on the investment.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: hseII
    #22
    CK1.0 said:
    1. Take a Razor G3
    2. Ditch the xmas tree reticle and all those lines and hash marks most of us will never need or use (that mostly just get in the way and make it harder to spot splash)
    3. Replace it with something more minimalist and open (similar to ZCO's MPCT1X or TT's JTAC reticle)

    Perfecto!
    Click to expand...
    Leupold Mark 4hd 8-32 comes in both the PR2 and PR3, it's very close to what you have described here.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: CK1.0
    #23
    beetroot said:
    There are a few fixed 10x options out there but they aren't very popular. The SWFA 10x42 HD is about $800 and the USO FDN 10x is about $2000.
    At these two price points there are a lot of really good variable power scopes that there's not much of a reason to by the fixed power models.

    If someone introduced a fixed 10x that was around $1000, had a super wide FOV and amazing glass then perhaps it would be a viable option but I'd imagine 99% of people would still buy a variable scope.
    Click to expand...
    nah, I'd totally want a fixed 20x for a target scope.
    I've got a vortex venom I'm going to start testing for 22lr very soon and I think it's glass quality and everything will be livable. amazing what those Chinese kids can do nowadays.
     
    #24
    Cody S said:
    nah, I'd totally want a fixed 20x for a target scope.
    I've got a vortex venom I'm going to start testing for 22lr very soon and I think it's glass quality and everything will be livable. amazing what those Chinese kids can do nowadays.
    Click to expand...
    In that case I don't think you'll ever get your wish, a fixed 6-14x is a pretty hard sell, a fixed 20x would likely never catch on.
    SWFA still do their fixed scopes, so I think that'll be your only option.

    But as you've pointed out the $400-$1000 are so good now there is not much point in buying fixed scopes anymore.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: Cody S
    #25
    Im basing the fixed power between 15-18 because of the average PRS scope being something like 5-25, 6-36, or 7-35, 3-28. So center of zoom be would be in the high teens. Again, if you never touch your zoom in a match you could probably get by without it. It's a weird idea but I really think it might be viable.
    beetroot said:
    There are a few fixed 10x options out there but they aren't very popular. The SWFA 10x42 HD is about $800 and the USO FDN 10x is about $2000.
    At these two price points there are a lot of really good variable power scopes that there's not much of a reason to by the fixed power models.

    If someone introduced a fixed 10x that was around $1000, had a super wide FOV and amazing glass then perhaps it would be a viable option but I'd imagine 99% of people would still buy a variable scope.
    Click to expand...
     
    #26
    Mag above this mythical “high teens” is not nearly as important as; the ability to start a stage with a low mag and large field of view to acquire the targets, then rapidly crank the zoom to something more usable. A fixed scope deletes this ability.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: LR1845
    #27
    I don’t search for targets in the scope though. Find targets and areas with your eyes and just put the gun down pointing at the target. Look up over the scope when transitioning between targets. No need for the low mag either really I guess. Zooming in and out takes time , more body movements, and mental power. Just my thoughts. I have seen some very good shooters who adjust zoom frequently. I was just “advised” early on to set it and forget it.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: Cody S
    #28
    Rippey715 said:
    Im basing the fixed power between 15-18 because of the average PRS scope being something like 5-25, 6-36, or 7-35, 3-28. So center of zoom be would be in the high teens. Again, if you never touch your zoom in a match you could probably get by without it. It's a weird idea but I really think it might be viable.
    Click to expand...
    I tend to be a lower magnification guy, often around 8-10x but will go as low as 6x if my reticle is thick enough to be useful.
    I think trying to find one magnification that is appealing to enough people would be difficult, and even if you could do that I bet majority of people would still just buy a variable scope.

    Unless manufacturer was able to give amazing glass, wide FOV, forgiving parallax and depth of field, all at cheap price, I don't think people would buy one. If I got all the above with high end LOW glass (Razor G2/G3 type glass) for under $1000 I'd maybe consider it but with the USO costing $2000 and when cameraland did the special run of PM2 6x42s they were also $2000, I don't think $1000 is particularly feasible.

    I recall that when cameraland did the limited run of 6x42s they ended up struggling to sell them despite there seemingly being a big demand for them. I may be mis-remembering but I thought this was the case.
     
    #29
    beetroot said:
    Leupold Mark 4hd 8-32 comes in both the PR2 and PR3, it's very close to what you have described here.
    Click to expand...
    I had no idea about the Mark 4HD and the PR3, thanks!

    I had been having a hard time deciding between a ZCO 5-27 or 8-40, and was planning on having to spend a lot of loot just to try their MPCT1X reticle… I honestly don’t even care about getting better glass, I just want to try running a more minimalist reticle (running a Razor G3 now, but think I preferred the Razor G2’s reticle more than I care about the G3’s better glass).

    $1600 sounds like nearly nothing when you’ve been bracing yourself for $4K+ before adding in a new mount and diving board! 😝

    I have a MK4 8-32x56 PR3 MIL on order, if I dig it then I can decide if I really want to jump up to a ZCO.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: stanley_white
    #30
    I had to borrow a rifle for day 2 of a match this weekend and noticed it had more clarity and I could see targets better but I didn't notice why until mentioning it later to the rifle owner and he said it was cause there was not a tree in the reticle. I had not noticed the missing tree but did notice the clarity. I have a Strike Eagle with the EBR 7c and borrowed a Arken with the VHR reticle. Now I'm more interested in getting a reticle that doesn't have the tree in the future. And I dont really mean clarity of glass in this case, it was just while watching my shots and setting NPA, I felt like I was seeing more or had less distractions.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: Taylorbok and CK1.0
    #31
    CK1.0 said:
    I had no idea about the Mark 4HD and the PR3, thanks!

    I had been having a hard time deciding between a ZCO 5-27 or 8-40, and was planning on having to spend a lot of loot just to try their MPCT1X reticle… I honestly don’t even care about getting better glass, I just want to try running a more minimalist reticle (running a Razor G3 now, but think I preferred the Razor G2’s reticle more than I care about the G3’s better glass).

    $1600 sounds like nearly nothing when you’ve been bracing yourself for $4K+ before adding in a new mount and diving board! 😝

    I have a MK4 8-32x56 PR3 MIL on order, if I dig it then I can decide if I really want to jump up to a ZCO.
    Click to expand...
    Interested to hear your thoughts on it vs the G2 and G3 Razors.
    If you get similar performance at a lower price and all your giving up is magnification you were never going to use anyway, then its a no brainer.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: stanley_white
    #32
    beetroot said:
    Interested to hear your thoughts on it vs the G2 and G3 Razors.
    If you get similar performance at a lower price and all your giving up is magnification you were never going to use anyway, then its a no brainer.
    Click to expand...

    I'm curious too... I read in another thread that the new MK4HD glass is the same as what's used in the MK5HDs, and plenty of guys run those and do well. I've never looked through a MK5HD, but from what I've heard/read, it's supposed to be "meh", maybe on par with a Razor G2 or maybe just below that?

    I don't mind giving up the magnification, I park it on 18-20x and leave it there 98% of the time, but I am concerned about giving up too much clarity and I'm hoping there isn't too much chromatic aberration. The Razor G3 has spoiled me a bit in that it's super clear and the colors come through true and unadultered. That said, I was happy with the glass in the G2 and I never felt like it held me back either.

    But, I'm buying the Leupold for the reticle, not the glass. I think @Rippey715 hit it on the head, I just want less distractions, period. It's not really about the money to me either, I'm willing to pay more for good glass (and probably will be doing so if I like the minimalist reticle thing), but it's nice to not have to spend ZCO/TT money to find out if I even like it or not.

    For me, maybe like many of us, I feel like I have stared at a xmas tree long enough to where I feel like I can see it even when it isn't there, I don't need a line or a dot every freaking .02mils in every direction, it's just too much for my eyes/brain to compute and I don't need all that.

    Found this dude on YouTube who by coincidence has videos showing both reticles in action (and I think I know which I like better):



     
    Last edited:
    #33
    CK1.0 said:
    I'm curious too... I read in another thread that the new MK4HD glass is the same as what's used in the MK5HDs, and plenty of guys run those and do well. I've never looked through a MK5HD, but from what I've heard/read, it's supposed to be "meh", maybe on par with a Razor G2 or maybe just below that?

    I don't mind giving up the magnification, I park it on 18-20x and leave it there 98% of the time, but I am concerned about giving up too much clarity and I'm hoping there isn't too much chromatic aberration. The Razor G3 has spoiled me a bit in that it's super clear and the colors come through true and unadultered. That said, I was happy with the glass in the G2 and I never felt like it held me back either.

    But, I'm buying the Leupold for the reticle, not the glass. I think @Rippey715 hit it on the head, I just want less distractions, period. It's not really about the money to me either, I'm willing to pay more for good glass (and probably will be doing so if I like the minimalist reticle thing), but it's nice to not have to spend ZCO/TT money to find out if I even like it or not.

    For me, maybe like many of us, I feel like I have stared at a xmas tree long enough to where I feel like I can see it even when it isn't there, I don't need a line or a dot every freaking .02mils in every direction, it's just too much for my eyes/brain to compute and I don't need all that.

    Found this dude on YouTube who by coincidence has videos showing both reticles in action (and I think I know which I like better):



    Click to expand...

    I've been using a tree reticle for quite a few years now and really don't find it an issue.
    In reality I very seldom use the tree, although I do use hold overs a reasonable bit.

    I guess I'm in the camp of rather have it just in case, as the few times I've needed to hold wind and elevation and not had it, I've regretted it.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: R_A_W, CK1.0 and Cody S
    #35
    Most times I'm a "rather have it and not need it" type, but I guess it's just personal preference... I tend to look at reticles from a "less is more" point of view, and after thinking about it for a second, that seems to be what I prefer in just about any gun sight.

    It probably started for me a million years ago when I switched to all-black irons on my Glocks (back when everyone was chasing Sevigny/Vogal in IDPA/USPSA), and then manifested itself further when I got into 3-Gun and shooting carbines and PCCs in how much I vastly prefer Aimpoint-style single dots over any kind of EOTech "donut of death" or any other gimmicky BDC reticles out there...

    I just like whatever makes it the least visually complicated for my eyes/brain and only want what I really need (because to me the other stuff I don't use just gets in the way).

    I'd probably be totally into a simple fixed-power scope for PRS (like guys were talking about earlier in the thread), I'd just want mine with a simple minimalist reticle too. That PR3 reticle in a fixed 18x would be lean and mean.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: stanley_white
    #39
    the main thing they should see is many prs people do not want to pay for an 8x or 10x erector, a 4x or 5x will do just fine if we are talking a 10-40x56 or something nice we can actually use.
    no more 3-30 bullshit for me. I just want the most forgiving eyebox and accurate turrets with the best glass they can acquire, and a decent reticle, like gen3xr, jtac, etc etc.
    a 10-30 or 10-40 would be ideal mag range for prs shooting it sounds like.
    one of these days I may give the tt735p a try to see if it's as good as the 525p
     
    • Like
    Reactions: Pete B
    #40
    Cody S said:
    the main thing they should see is many prs people do not want to pay for an 8x or 10x erector, a 4x or 5x will do just fine if we are talking a 10-40x56 or something nice we can actually use.
    no more 3-30 bullshit for me. I just want the most forgiving eyebox and accurate turrets with the best glass they can acquire, and a decent reticle, like gen3xr, jtac, etc etc.
    a 10-30 or 10-40 would be ideal mag range for prs shooting it sounds like.
    one of these days I may give the tt735p a try to see if it's as good as the 525p
    Click to expand...

    This.

    And for the love of all things holy, no locking turrets, no capped windsage and 10 mil turrets with big bold numbers and hashes on a white board/vinyl back ground.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: Rippey715, Cody S and Pete B
    #41
    Mormegil87 said:
    This.

    And for the love of all things holy, no locking turrets, no capped windsage and 10 mil turrets with big bold numbers and hashes on a white board/vinyl back ground.
    Click to expand...
    Strongly disagree, I virtually never dial windage and have on more than one occasion bumped my windage dial without noticing.
    Capped windage or at least the option of, is a must for me.
     
    #42
    I do dial winage and I've never bumped my scope. I'd hope stage designers try to avoid that as we spend a lot on the glass..
    I can go for either but I prefer non locking, 10 mil turrets that are very accurate and durable and I'll definitely pay for the tool less zerostop...
    I love that feature and use it more frequently than I'd like.
     
    #43
    Cody S said:
    the main thing they should see is many prs people do not want to pay for an 8x or 10x erector, a 4x or 5x will do just fine if we are talking a 10-40x56 or something nice we can actually use.
    no more 3-30 bullshit for me. I just want the most forgiving eyebox and accurate turrets with the best glass they can acquire, and a decent reticle, like gen3xr, jtac, etc etc.
    a 10-30 or 10-40 would be ideal mag range for prs shooting it sounds like.
    one of these days I may give the tt735p a try to see if it's as good as the 525p
    Click to expand...
    Doesn't the ZCO 8-40 do exactly what you are asking?
    Or the Leupold MK4 8-32 if you want a cheaper option?
    Cody S said:
    I do dial winage and I've never bumped my scope. I'd hope stage designers try to avoid that as we spend a lot on the glass..
    I can go for either but I prefer non locking, 10 mil turrets that are very accurate and durable and I'll definitely pay for the tool less zerostop...
    I love that feature and use it more frequently than I'd like.
    Click to expand...
    The stage designers in my area certainly do not take that into consideration.
    I've had the windage move on me about 4 times, and each time I didn't notice until I was missing for an unknown reason.
    Most people don't dial for wind so I guess that's why there is a trend towards lock and/or capped windage.

    I agree on tool less turrets though, they are an excellent feature.
     
    #46
    Another vote for locking or capped-but-still-useable windage dials... I don't dial wind that often (I honestly need to practice dialing my first wind call more), but I'd be paranoid 100% of the time of bumping the knob or it moving on me when I don't want it to if it didn't lock or get covered lol.
     
    #47
    I've never had it happen on the clock in almost 10 years of competition. Not even sure how it's possible to do on the clock without being reckless with your rifle placement.

    I can see it happening in transit between staged but a semi decent pre stage, pre shot checklist fixes that.

    I guess if a shooter wants them all the more power to that shooter but it definitely falls in the "cons" category when I'm looking at scopes. Same for Christmas tree reticles. I can live with Leupold's locking design because it on locks on 0.
     
    Last edited:
    • Like
    Reactions: CK1.0
    #48
    It’s not the stage designer’s job to take care of your gear. It is their job to create interesting and challenging shooting problems. They are in active competition with shooter gear, including the scope. A stage that causes the careless shooter to mildly monkey fuck his scope is a challenge. But, I’ve never “bumped” the windage turret in a way to cause it to rotate- in competition or while hunting. I think uncapped locking turrets are the best combination of utility and security.

    Pre-stage

    Scope? Check
    Dope? Check
    Rear bag? Check
    Eye/ear pro? Check
    Loaded mag? Check

    “Shooter, are you ready and do you understand the course of fire?

    “Yes”

    “Beep!”

    “There’s the target. Hold edge of target. I’m such a pro. Send it. I’m fuckin Bob Lee Swagger. Click? What the fuck do you mean click? WTF? Oh, I didn’t put the mag in the gun. FML.”

    Seen it happen. Laughed about it. Then did it myself…
     
    #50
    NiteQwill said:
    If Tangent Theta made a 735P with 10 mil turrets, I would buy 5 yesterday.
    Click to expand...
    I've read that the 7-35 isn't as forgiving because it's a slightly shorter design.
    idk if that's true because I only own the 525 but that's literally half the reason I bought it.
    idk what they were thinking. I'm probably going to save a buck this time and get a g3 razor to test. others seem to like them.
     
    You must log in or register to reply here.

    Similar threads

    The4GunGuy
    SOLD SOLD: Vortex Razor Gen III 6-36x MRAD EBR-7D
    Replies
    3
    Views
    653
    LD220
    LD220
    U
    Short Range Tall Target Test
    Replies
    8
    Views
    437
    USMC22
    U
    CValero
    Scoping out a Scope.
    Replies
    45
    Views
    2K
    37L1
    37L1
    N
    Tangent VS Zero Compromise?
    Replies
    23
    Views
    2K
    Cynical
    C
    W
    Rimfire Scope Recommendations
    Replies
    47
    Views
    4K
    MLone
    M
    Top Bottom
    Back
    Home
    Forums
    Merch
    Alerts