Rifle Scopes 18.5'' bbl .308 needs a 1-8x ffp

[Ejsg19]

I seem to be in an odd situation based on what the target market seems to be for 1-8x magnification scopes. I get the feeling I'm about 5% or less of 1-8x shoppers looking to use it on a .308. Everyone with a ballistic drop reticle gears it toward 5.56, and I can understand why, but that bothers me to use a 5.56 reticle on a .308, even though it could be learned around and made to work.

My thoughts, and thus my dilemma:
1. I'd prefer ffp, and a non-ballistic drop reticle.
2. I'd like it to be on the lighter weight side of the scopes in this class.
3. My budget is a little tight given what some of these scopes can run, I'd like to stay under $1200.
4. Intended use is fun, the odd western hunt (where this rifle's energy limits me to 250-300 yards max on bigger game), and rifle classes where the glass need only be good enough to get me to a paper torso target at 600-800 yards max.
5. I've read reviews on Trijicon, Eotech, Burris, NF NX8, Primary Arms and anything else I think may compete (Crimson Trace is entering the market soon also) until my eyes blur, and you get lost in the quagmire of minor details that bother you enough to create hesitation no matter which you think you might choose. (I realize my hopeful budget doesn't allow for some of those.)

6. Speaking of budget, you can see my intended use. This rifle doesn't get depended on in life or death situations theoretically (Red Dawn could happen am I right?), but being a Patriot Ordnance and one of my nicer rifles, I don't see how I can put a low end scope on it and be content (my personal problem). Having said that, what budget do I need to be at, in your opinion? Repeatable, consistent, durable, medium to good glass are all important, but I don't need to be at the super expensive levels to achieve my goals with this scope. Just seems like somewhere in that $1200 range might land me in the sweet spot of good enough, yet not so cheap I regret the purchase later. You are talking to a guy who so far has prairie dog hunted, deer hunted, and target shot at ranges up to 450 yards, with 300-600 dollar Leupolds and Nikons and been reasonably satisfied, for perspective as to my wants/needs.

Sorry, I ramble, but it is time to let rubber hit the road and stop deliberating this decision. Thank you for advice, info, direction, or constructive jabs at my overthinking a simple purchase. Thank you.

 

[hypno02]

I wouldn't say you're overthinking it at all! If I were in your boat here are the three I'd consider

1. Used mk8 1.1-8 MTMR. You can find these used for sub $1800 pretty regularly.
2. Trijicon Accupower 1-8. Very similar to the leupold when it comes to features
3. Used NF NX8. The lightest of the bunch which would be nice because as you know--AR10's aren't exactly lightweight.

 

[Ejsg19]

Thanks, I usually spend too much time reading, but in the end I typically am happy with the final choice made. Can't find perfect, but can usually minimize the drawbacks.

1. Used optics I'm not necessarily comfortable or knowledgeable to know if I'm getting a good quality scope, in fine useful condition, or if I'm buying a dud. But that would be a heck of a scope if you could buy from a reputable source. Definitely at the far top end of budget though at $1800. That one would have to sneak past SWMBO or she may raise an eyebrow.
2. About the only thing I read of these illuminated 1-8's as drawbacks are eye box, weight, and daylight visible reticle illumination. Weight and eyebox are big deals to me, daylight visible is such a subjective thing, I'm not sure how much "weight" to give and be concerned with that issue.
3. Again, if it weren't for my hesitation of buying used, it seems the NX8 checks a very large number of criteria boxes for me. Even if bought at full price, its a solid contender on paper.

 

[Ejsg19]

I wouldn't say you're overthinking it at all! If I were in your boat here are the three I'd consider

1. Used mk8 1.1-8 MTMR. You can find these used for sub $1800 pretty regularly.
2. Trijicon Accupower 1-8. Very similar to the leupold when it comes to features
3. Used NF NX8. The lightest of the bunch which would be nice because as you know--AR10's aren't exactly lightweight.

Thanks, I usually spend too much time reading, but in the end I typically am happy with the final choice made. Can't find perfect, but can usually minimize the drawbacks.

1. Used optics I'm not necessarily comfortable or knowledgeable to know if I'm getting a good quality scope, in fine useful condition, or if I'm buying a dud. But that would be a heck of a scope if you could buy from a reputable source. Definitely at the far top end of budget though at $1800. That one would have to sneak past SWMBO or she may raise an eyebrow.
2. About the only thing I read of these illuminated 1-8's as drawbacks are eye box, weight, and daylight visible reticle illumination. Weight and eyebox are big deals to me, daylight visible is such a subjective thing, I'm not sure how much "weight" to give and be concerned with that issue.
3. Again, if it weren't for my hesitation of buying used, it seems the NX8 checks a very large number of criteria boxes for me. Even if bought at full price, its a solid contender on paper.

 

[hypno02]

Thanks, I usually spend too much time reading, but in the end I typically am happy with the final choice made. Can't find perfect, but can usually minimize the drawbacks.

1. Used optics I'm not necessarily comfortable or knowledgeable to know if I'm getting a good quality scope, in fine useful condition, or if I'm buying a dud. But that would be a heck of a scope if you could buy from a reputable source. Definitely at the far top end of budget though at $1800. That one would have to sneak past SWMBO or she may raise an eyebrow.
2. About the only thing I read of these illuminated 1-8's as drawbacks are eye box, weight, and daylight visible reticle illumination. Weight and eyebox are big deals to me, daylight visible is such a subjective thing, I'm not sure how much "weight" to give and be concerned with that issue.
3. Again, if it weren't for my hesitation of buying used, it seems the NX8 checks a very large number of criteria boxes for me. Even if bought at full price, its a solid contender on paper.

When you take the quality & robustness of my recommendations and pair that with the respective manufacturers and their warranties you have literally nothing to worry about. I've been doing this long enough and purchased/sold enough shit to the point where buying new 'quality' equipment is a total waste of $$$ at times.

 

[Strykervet]

If I were you I'd try and score a USO 1-8x or a 1.8-10x. They make new ones, the B10 for the 1.8-10x, forget the 1-8x model, but there are also older models like the MR8 I think. I have one of the older models, you can score one of those 1-8x models for less than $1k on here. Solid as a tank. At 1x, the reticle is a circle with a tree reticle in the center, but at 1x it's so small it serves as a dot basically for CQB. At higher mag., the ring grows until it disappears and you're left with the tree reticle in the center. FFP of course, fully illuminated reticle. So it's good close up and far away, fast or aimed targets. Neither is very large and the new models are smaller and weigh less. I love mine, even with the damn blue reticle.

There's the VCOG and the EoTech VUDU, both nice looking optics but sort of costly. Same with the Mk5. There's the Mk4 3.5-10x, don't they make that one in FFP as well as SFP?

I didn't see USO mentioned and I have a few of those and they're all very well made, FFP, mil/mil, tough as nails, great glass, well built, made in USA. Not too expensive either for what you get, kinda the low end of tier one optics IMO but still top end nonetheless.

I have an LR17 on an SR25, a bit heavy and long but I had it already and it turns out 3.2-17x is a damn good range for a 7.62 long rifle and it still allows the PVS 30 to fit. They make the B17 now that's lighter, smaller, simpler without the TPAL and well made. They go for a bit more though. With a carbine the 1-8x or 1.8-10x would be my choice.

There's a lot of options for sale on here, can't go wrong with top mfg.'s because the warranty follows 'em. I've bought several that way. That and Ebay. If it's damaged I just send it back, only had to do that once with an ACOG. In fact, I rarely buy new optics and most I've bought showed up new or like new.

 

[cleric]

I may consider a Swfa 1-6 hd. I think it checks a lot of boxes but sacrifices a bit of magnification

 

[SpeedyR]

opinions are pretty solid above. Im in the same boat from moving my 5-25 to a new bolt gun and wanting a FFP 1-8x for my 308. I'm leaning towards the Burris XTRII 1-8 or maybe waiting to see what comes out at SHOT (haven't read anything about a 1-8 XTR III). Or get something used if a great deal pops up locally or on the hide. I've got a 16" PWS MK216 with a good barrel and trigger, so wanted something good 1x but with a bit extra magnification if I want to shoot it longer. The Burris 1-8x gets very good reviews on the hide especially when you consider the retail prices.

I think with most of the higher end glass, the companies will take care of you if you have any issues, even second hand glass. Vortex has kind of helped update the warranty process for many manufacturers.

Ilya from the hide has some good observations and reviews on the current 1-8 optics on his website (didn't want to put a link, not sure if that's ok). I have a Burris XTR II 5-25 and have been very happy with it and the "bang for the buck" so that helps lean me towards their 1-8x.

 

[Ejsg19]

When you take the quality & robustness of my recommendations and pair that with the respective manufacturers and their warranties you have literally nothing to worry about. I've been doing this long enough and purchased/sold enough shit to the point where buying new 'quality' equipment is a total waste of $$$ at times.

I hadn't really considered the warranty, and being able to transfer warranty to myself, send back, etc. Probably a wise thing to consider. Thanks.

 

[Ejsg19]

If I were you I'd try and score a USO 1-8x or a 1.8-10x. They make new ones, the B10 for the 1.8-10x, forget the 1-8x model, but there are also older models like the MR8 I think. I have one of the older models, you can score one of those 1-8x models for less than $1k on here. Solid as a tank. At 1x, the reticle is a circle with a tree reticle in the center, but at 1x it's so small it serves as a dot basically for CQB. At higher mag., the ring grows until it disappears and you're left with the tree reticle in the center. FFP of course, fully illuminated reticle. So it's good close up and far away, fast or aimed targets. Neither is very large and the new models are smaller and weigh less. I love mine, even with the damn blue reticle.

There's the VCOG and the EoTech VUDU, both nice looking optics but sort of costly. Same with the Mk5. There's the Mk4 3.5-10x, don't they make that one in FFP as well as SFP?

I didn't see USO mentioned and I have a few of those and they're all very well made, FFP, mil/mil, tough as nails, great glass, well built, made in USA. Not too expensive either for what you get, kinda the low end of tier one optics IMO but still top end nonetheless.

I have an LR17 on an SR25, a bit heavy and long but I had it already and it turns out 3.2-17x is a damn good range for a 7.62 long rifle and it still allows the PVS 30 to fit. They make the B17 now that's lighter, smaller, simpler without the TPAL and well made. They go for a bit more though. With a carbine the 1-8x or 1.8-10x would be my choice.

There's a lot of options for sale on here, can't go wrong with top mfg.'s because the warranty follows 'em. I've bought several that way. That and Ebay. If it's damaged I just send it back, only had to do that once with an ACOG. In fact, I rarely buy new optics and most I've bought showed up new or like new.

Interesting points made here. Sub $1k would be excellent, I believe my wishes for this scope allow for some flex on how many dollars "have to be" spent. A simple Tree reticle would be ideal. I won't lie, I'm not a shot doper/clicker at the moment.

Yeah someday I'll get some rifle classes done, and understand ranging, scope adjustments, Mils (i get MOA, but am lazy and don't want to learn more systems like Mil, MRAD, whatever else is out there) all that. Frankly I just want to work on the range with a given hunting load, figure out my holdovers, and go knock down my trophy/venison.

Given my range limitations, that is entirely doable at the moment, with decent gear. Someday when the spin of the earth, and wind at 700 yards is a factor I'll have to do more diligence.

Thank you for the input.

 

[308pirate]

Interesting points made here. Sub $1k would be excellent, I believe my wishes for this scope allow for some flex on how many dollars "have to be" spent. A simple Tree reticle would be ideal. I won't lie, I'm not a shot doper/clicker at the moment. Yeah someday I'll get some rifle classes done, and understand ranging, scope adjustments, Mils (i get MOA, but am lazy and don't want to learn more systems like Mil, MRAD, whatever else is out there) all that. Frankly I just want to work on the range with a given hunting load, figure out my holdovers, and go knock down my trophy/venison. Given my range limitations, that is entirely doable at the moment, with decent gear. Someday when the spin of the earth, and wind at 700 yards is a factor I'll have to do more diligence.

Thank you for the input.

You sound like your average 300 yard deer hunter. Don't even know why would would need any sort of "tree" reticle for that since any decent hunting load would have a 4" radius max point blank range of at least 300 yards and just about anything including a good reflex sight will work for that.

Or do you even know what I'm talking about?

 

[Rerun7]

Based on the shooting you mentioned I’d be looking heavily at a 2-10 optic. Sounds like your shooting is going to be primarily static targets or hunting. No need in stressing about a 1x optic if your targets are going to be 50 yards plus. The pst 2-10 is a great scope for that type of purpose within your budget.

If you feel like you need a 1x then I’d also not count out a good 1-6x. The vortex razor 1-6 can be bought here used for under $1k and include a lifetime warranty for you. Any issues just send it in.

 

[Ejsg19]

You sound like your average 300 yard deer hunter. Don't even know why would would need any sort of "tree" reticle for that since any decent hunting load would have a 4" radius max point blank range of at least 300 yards and just about anything including a good reflex sight will work for that.

Or do you even know what I'm talking about?

That is a very fair and reasonable question. You aren't wrong at all about me, for that particular usage of the gun/scope.

I guess the answer to your scenario is that this rifle will have more than one intended use and it will suffer from being one of those dreaded "I have one gun, I want it to be the best at several various jobs" type of deals. 300 max yardage hunting is one of them. I fully agree, a good red dot will get most guys there in most situations. I personally enjoy some amount of magnification for reloading and load development and I think 8x will help me print groups adequately without the reticle covering up a target bullseye at 100 yds for example. I hate load development when you aren't certain of your POA down to the margin of error that is acceptable to me.

I also intend to use this rifle for some rifle classes in the near future, where at slightly longer distances, this gun will also have to be a compromise, and let me get to targets with some degree of finesse, at ranges up to 600 yards, give or take, depending on who sets up the class.

But yes, certainly for many of the uses, this rifle will be great set at true 1x. Which is where these true 1x-8x scopes look attractive. A tree reticle? Well, I don't want a ballistic drop reticle, which rules out 3/4 of these 1-8x scopes right there. So it's Tree or a simple straight reticle with no other marks/lines for any quick holdover. Well, if the Tree isn't a big deal when set to 1x, I guess I'll take the option of a Tree at 8x versus a simple reticle at 8x. Even though, certainly a guy can learn to use any system or type of scope.

Unfortunately for me, almost every rifle I own sees duty at more than one task. That is not ideal, but that is what my discretionary income (and probably my lack of good sense) gets me.

 

[Ejsg19]

Based on the shooting you mentioned I’d be looking heavily at a 2-10 optic. Sounds like your shooting is going to be primarily static targets or hunting. No need in stressing about a 1x optic if your targets are going to be 50 yards plus. The pst 2-10 is a great scope for that type of purpose within your budget.

If you feel like you need a 1x then I’d also not count out a good 1-6x. The vortex razor 1-6 can be bought here used for under $1k and include a lifetime warranty for you. Any issues just send it in.

I've thought on a 2-10 and honestly I bet I could get used to one just fine. We do some deer hunting where the target is often moving, so the less magnification the better there. Far as CQB goes, it is neat having the best thing for that, but in my lifetime I sure hope that is never a real need. My CQB is a running deer at 0-100 yards if I ever have a moving target. Heaven forbid if it is a higher stakes situation ever.

Whether I actually need a 6x or 8x at the top end, all I know is I've used my Leupold 1-4x quite a bit, and I find 4x to be great for the hunt, but terrible for the load development stage. I'm nervous a 6x isn't enough of an increase, and I hate like heck buying and selling optics, so my gut told me go 8x instead of 6.

Thats just my thought process. Good or bad, up to you folks.

 

[308pirate]

Your desire to work up an ultra accurate load is negated by the non-precision uses of your rifle.

Would you believe me if I told you that it's pretty easy to hold 1 to 1.25 MOA with match loads and a simple red dot sight? All that you need is a large (12 moa or so) round, black target and solid marksmanship fundamentals.

Same goes for a scope that maxes out at 4X. You need consistent sight placement on a high contrast target. You do not need to see the minute details of the paper you're shooting at.

 

[Ejsg19]

Your desire to work up an ultra accurate load is negated by the non-precision uses of your rifle.

Would you believe me if I told you that it's pretty easy to hold 1 to 1.25 MOA with match loads and a simple red dot sight? All that you need is a large (12 moa or so) round, black target and solid marksmanship fundamentals.

Same goes for a scope that maxes out at 4X. You need consistent sight placement on a high contrast target. You do not need to see the minute details of the paper you're shooting at.

I believe you entirely. In fact, holding 1 or 1.5 MOA is what that rifle has done in a few quick sessions, with that 1-4 scope as a temporary. That is perfectly fine for the use of the rifle. But, I'm a reloader and it's purely personal desire to see more detail, and make certain how the rifle is living up to its potential.

Necessary? No. Worth my interest? I think so, better than watching tv.

I could certainly get by other ways. I appreciate and will continue to enjoy further opinions and will take all into consideration.

 

[308pirate]

My CQB is a running deer at 0-100 yards if I ever have a moving target.

Every one of them shot with an Aimpoint-equipped rifle. Even the long, scope looking sights are Aimpoints, either the H30 or H34.

 

[Ejsg19]

Every one of them shot with an Aimpoint-equipped rifle. Even the long, scope looking sights are Aimpoints, either the H30 or H34.

That man is impressive. I like that show they put together on the Outdoor channel.

But point taken.

Your solution, and a perfectly fine one, would be a good red dot during hunting times. Then if I dare put words in for you, go find a cheaper more suitable scope for the odd rifle class down the road. Make the rig dedicated to the job and that job alone...

 

[308pirate]

That man is impressive. I like that show they put together on the Outdoor channel.

But point taken.

Yep, Franz Albrecht Oettingen is a machine. The guy is not only talented but also works his ass off.

By the by, here's 20 rounds of M855 ball out of an AR carbine shot magazine prone at 160 yards (by me) at a fairly rapid pace. Weapon sight is an Aimpoint PRO.

For reference the A zone is 11" tall and 6" wide. Which means the majority of the shots are in a 3.6 MOA group.

 

[BCP]

See if you can find a nightforce 2.5-10x32

 

[Travis224]

I have a nx8 and love it. Used it was 1500$ but worth every penny. Just my opinion.

 

[308pirate]

Your solution, and a perfectly fine one, would be a good red dot during hunting times. Then if I dare put words in for you, go find a cheaper more suitable scope for the odd rifle class down the road. Make the rig dedicated to the job and that job alone...

That's not a bad way to go. Two sights for two different purposes, appropriately zeroed and on QD-RTZ mounts would seem to be a workable solution that lets you easily optimize one rifle.

That's how one of my rifles is set up exactly.

 

[ddavis]

Make sure you are ok with hanging about 24 ounces off what may be a relatively light and well balanced rifle. I wasn't. Even dropping down to a ~17 ounce 1-6 made a huge difference. If Leupold can make a 3-18 scope weigh 24 ounces, I don't understand why someone can't get a 1-8 to be at least a little bit lighter. Also from firsthand experience, avoid any Leupold with the CMR reticle. It doesn't line up with anything.

 

[Ejsg19]

I have a nx8 and love it. Used it was 1500$ but worth every penny. Just my opinion.

That NX8 about all I can see to complain about is a bad customer service experience a very experienced rifle shooter I know had, and maybe that it's only a 24mm or small eye box. From all the miles if reading I've done about it.

Otherwise, price is the only reason I haven't got one yet. It hits all the other parameters I think I want. Weight, simple reticle, supposedly daylight visible beyond doubt, good glass, etc

 

[Ejsg19]

Make sure you are ok with hanging about 24 ounces off what may be a relatively light and well balanced rifle. I wasn't. Even dropping down to a ~17 ounce 1-6 made a huge difference. If Leupold can make a 3-18 scope weigh 24 ounces, I don't understand why someone can't get a 1-8 to be at least a little bit lighter. Also from firsthand experience, avoid any Leupold with the CMR reticle. It doesn't line up with anything.

Though no experience in 1-8 scopes, I've had those same reservations. Weight and over busy reticles for my needs. I dont want any ballistic drop reticle. Sorry, I'm a reloader and can think of 3 different loads at least that I'll put through this gun, for different game and targets. Simple reticle with hash Mark's is good enough.

Weight, I dont know. All I know is the 1-8 is a pretty new idea. I think like computers, the best 1-8 is probably the next one yet to be released...

 

[308pirate]

I dont want any ballistic drop reticle. Sorry, I'm a reloader and can think of 3 different loads at least that I'll put through this gun, for different game and targets. Simple reticle with hash Mark's is good enough.

What units do you want your hashmarks in?

 

[Ejsg19]

What units do you want your hashmarks in?

Getting pretty advanced for a guy like me

I'd say I understand MOA fine at the moment. I could get used to Mils if need be. Anything else I'd need to study up a bit.

I've seen some hash Mark's are about .5 mil, some have finer detail near the center of the reticle. I need simpler more than busier, but some common sense hold points outside the main reticle wouldn't mind.

 

[308pirate]

Getting pretty advanced for a guy like me

I'd say I understand MOA fine at the moment. I could get used to Mils if need be. Anything else I'd need to study up a bit.

I've seen some hash Mark's are about .5 mil, some have finer detail near the center of the reticle. I need simpler more than busier, but some common sense hold points outside the main reticle wouldn't mind.

Your wishes are contradictory.

One one hand you say you will be shooting multiple loads (with presumably different drops for a given distance) and on the other you way you want less rather than more detail in reticle subtentions (what you refer as "hash marks").

You don't want a BDC reticle but you would like some "common sense hold points" outside the main reticle.

I think you're getting ahead of yourself by buying equipment when you simply don't understand the subject matter well enough to define what you want properly.

Go take a shooting class with the scope that you have. Leave the self study alone until you have a basis for understanding what you're reading or you could be winding off in the ditch due to confirmation bias.

THEN, buy a scope that really suits your needs once you have the knowledge to answer some of the questions you've been given.

What I suggest aligns with your dislike of buying and selling scopes, which is likely what you'll do anyway if you start buying stuff now without a better understanding of how reticles are used.

PS, forget the MOA and milliradian stuff for now. They are just two different units for measuring angles. Which one you end up using is significantly less important than knowing how to use angular units to adjust for trajectory and that is the same regardless of how you measure the angle. For the sake of a simple analogy a car traveling at 75 mph is moving just as fast as one moving at 120 km/h

 

[ddavis]

Though no experience in 1-8 scopes, I've had those same reservations. Weight and over busy reticles for my needs. I dont want any ballistic drop reticle. Sorry, I'm a reloader and can think of 3 different loads at least that I'll put through this gun, for different game and targets. Simple reticle with hash Mark's is good enough.

Weight, I dont know. All I know is the 1-8 is a pretty new idea. I think like computers, the best 1-8 is probably the next one yet to be released...

I'm a reloader also. I bought a CMR reticle scope thinking it would be easy to get a load to match up like the PA ACSS reticle (which is excellent by the way) but when I asked Leupold, all they could give me were the subtensions and that it was set up for a bullet moving IIRC 2575 fps. Well in order to get things to mostly line up, you had to use a BC of .460. A .460 BC bullet doing 2575 isn't worth a damn so I sold it. It was a 3-18 scope. I've also had a Bushnell SMRS 1-8 and a friend had a PA Platinum 1-8. The scopes were nearly identical, obviously made in the same plant. The major difference is that the PA scope was half the price and had a much better reticle. I sold that one because it made a light handy AR into a heavy pig. I've also owned a Razor 2 1-6 since then and sold it for the same reason. I'm now using a Burris RT6 1-6 that I like better than any of those other scopes. It weighs about 17 ounces and the glass seems to be just as good.

 

[jljr23]

Trijicon Accupower 1-8. Have one and bounce it from rifle to rifle.

 

[Ejsg19]

Trijicon Accupower 1-8. Have one and bounce it from rifle to rifle.

What is your take on how bright it illuminates in various daylight situations? That seems to be the prevailing review issue from that scope I see.

 

[jljr23]

@Ejsg19 So I can only speak to my experience; however, for me, illumination brightness is a non issue. It definitely does not have an aimpoint sunburst mode but I can see it in broad daylight on the higher spectrum of settings. I think that part is relative to an individual's eyes more than anything else.

With that being said, I do not use the illumination that much. Typically only at sunrise/sunset times will I even bother with it. I have shot quite a bit in broad daylight without and the glass is so crisp I don't feel the need for it. The few times in broad daylight I have turned the illumination on, I readily see it without strain. I will say the red illumination is much better than the green. Friend of mine has the same scope in green illumination and I could see where it would be very difficult on a very bright day.

I typically run it on 1.5x power for magnification unless I need to take longer distance shots. This is a good all round magnification for me out to 300m on a whitetail size animal. If i need more magnification the adjustments are smooth and easy to manipulate.

My only complaint is the weight. If it was 3-4 oz lighter, I would be a happy camper. I vaguely remember it being about 25 oz.

 

[Ejsg19]

@Ejsg19 So I can only speak to my experience; however, for me, illumination brightness is a non issue. It definitely does not have an aimpoint sunburst mode but I can see it in broad daylight on the higher spectrum of settings. I think that part is relative to an individual's eyes more than anything else.

With that being said, I do not use the illumination that much. Typically only at sunrise/sunset times will I even bother with it. I have shot quite a bit in broad daylight without and the glass is so crisp I don't feel the need for it. The few times in broad daylight I have turned the illumination on, I readily see it without strain. I will say the red illumination is much better than the green. Friend of mine has the same scope in green illumination and I could see where it would be very difficult on a very bright day.

I typically run it on 1.5x power for magnification unless I need to take longer distance shots. This is a good all round magnification for me out to 300m on a whitetail size animal. If i need more magnification the adjustments are smooth and easy to manipulate.

My only complaint is the weight. If it was 3-4 oz lighter, I would be a happy camper. I vaguely remember it being about 25 oz.
View attachment 6989438

Interesting, thanks. Yes exactly, I have a couple Leupold VX-R illuminated scopes, and I will often not use the dot when sighting in precisely, or some when we still hunt and targets are stationary. I love it for moving targets, or dim light conditions, it seems to help draw your focus where you want it for me even, among other things.

This 1-8 research more than most things, has made me aware that if I have 10 criteria for example, the best case scenario is I only check off 6 or 8 of my preferences with any possible choice I make. Weight is huge for me too. This POF Edge SPR is not a very light rifle to begin with. I really like it, and I don't intend to take this rifle on my back over 3 mountains on a hunt. That is why they make 7 pound bolt action rifles. The world is full of compromises and there is more than a few ways to skin a cat! I'm just exploring for the best compromise, on a fairly non-essential shopping mission. The VX-R 1-4 that I'm using as a bandaid probably fulfils 3/4 of the uses I want for the gun, but us gun guys know we can find ways to spend money on a more pleasing solution right?

Thanks for the follow up.

 

[VegasHKShooter]

I have to say, though it may not be what you want, 308Pirate is giving you some very solid advise. With all due respect: “you don’t know what you don’t know.”
I would concur that you need to get set up with someone, be it a class, a vetted, experienced friend, an instructor of some type and spend some time.
I teach this stuff for a living, but I still consider myself a student, and try to learn and pick the brains of guys I think are better than me. I tell you this only to point out, there’s a shit ton to know.
Now, if you want to just buy a scope, Mount it up, and go hit stuff out to 300-500 yards, buy a NightForce NX8, or if that’s too much $$, buy a Burris XTRII 1-8, and be set.
If you want to understand the nuances of long distance, slow down, learn a bit, and then look for what best suits you and what you’re doing.

I don’t intend to be critical, or sound like a jerk. If I do, ignore me. I’m simply trying to save you from buying the wrong scope 3 times (potentially $3000) only to finally know enough get what you wanted but didn’t know you wanted it.

 

[Ejsg19]

Your wishes are contradictory.

One one hand you say you will be shooting multiple loads (with presumably different drops for a given distance) and on the other you way you want less rather than more detail in reticle subtentions (what you refer as "hash marks").

I get that you are trying to get a feel for my knowledge. No problem with that, I have broad shoulders. But as it is, my casual term of "hash marks" and your thinking man's term of subtention, doesn't necessarily mean I rode in on the last turnip truck. When I try and read up on something and I see a company like Leupold using a term like "hash marks" to describe their very top end scope reticles, I guess I feel comfortable using the same term. Example: If Leupold says it...

You don't want a BDC reticle but you would like some "common sense hold points" outside the main reticle.

Correct. I don't want a BDC reticle. But, if and when I want to go do some simple, small minded shooting on prairie dogs for example, it is my choice if I'm going to sit, range, click turrets and shoot, or if I'm going to do some quick estimations in my head and place a shot. For example, if I have a few subtensions/hash marks above, below, right and left of the main reticle intersection, and I find at 400 yards and a 15 mile an hour cross wind, that a little mark 2 subtensions down, and 2 points to the left out in the otherwise blank field of the reticle (where a truly simple 1 vertical wire, 1 horizontal wire reticle has none), I think it might be worth the trouble to find a reticle that might happen to have a point at which my shooting conditions make it handy to come back to that reticle mark when I take a very similar distance and wind condition shot. In that case, we often take very similar shots multiple times per session at the same ranges over and over.

Does that mark on the reticle also correspond to my particular rifle load and any hard ballistic data? Maybe, maybe not, but it still might be useful in some way when doing some "close enough is good enough" shooting. I don't speak the language of long range shooting very well I freely admit, and there is a reason for that (lack of knowledge). I just don't really believe these reticles that take a decoder ring from cereal box to understand would be any benefit to me. So simple is better, but a few subtensions would be better than none, so long as it isn't over-complicated.

I think you're getting ahead of yourself by buying equipment when you simply don't understand the subject matter well enough to define what you want properly.

See above. I won't beat this horse. You are right, and some areas I can see my reasoning making sense, but I'm probably not explaining myself very well. I have no doubt at all that I am lacking in knowlege in a great many ways, I'm married, I am reminded of that almost daily I appreciate your wisdom and I gather you are WELL beyond me in terms of skill with a rifle and it's optic.

Go take a shooting class with the scope that you have. Leave the self study alone until you have a basis for understanding what you're reading or you could be winding off in the ditch due to confirmation bias.

Amen to that. You may very well be saving me a dive into deep murky waters.

THEN, buy a scope that really suits your needs once you have the knowledge to answer some of the questions you've been given.

What I suggest aligns with your dislike of buying and selling scopes, which is likely what you'll do anyway if you start buying stuff now without a better understanding of how reticles are used.

PS, forget the MOA and milliradian stuff for now. They are just two different units for measuring angles. Which one you end up using is significantly less important than knowing how to use angular units to adjust for trajectory and that is the same regardless of how you measure the angle. For the sake of a simple analogy a car traveling at 75 mph is moving just as fast as one moving at 120 km/h

Again, I appreciate your willingness to inform, and you make very valid points worth my time and consideration. If I did know all of this, had it all down pat, I wouldn't be here asking what scope is more sensible. Just getting my feet wet, trying to give myself opportunity to accomplish all of the things I have in mind. Very well may be putting the cart before the horse, and my idea of the best path to take certainly isn't always the most appropriate, cheapest, efficient, or otherwise. Again, why I am here asking.

Thanks for the informative posts.

 

[Ejsg19]

I have to say, though it may not be what you want, 308Pirate is giving you some very solid advise. With all due respect: “you don’t know what you don’t know.”
I would concur that you need to get set up with someone, be it a class, a vetted, experienced friend, an instructor of some type and spend some time.
I teach this stuff for a living, but I still consider myself a student, and try to learn and pick the brains of guys I think are better than me. I tell you this only to point out, there’s a shit ton to know.
Now, if you want to just buy a scope, Mount it up, and go hit stuff out to 300-500 yards, buy a NightForce NX8, or if that’s too much $$, buy a Burris XTRII 1-8, and be set.
If you want to understand the nuances of long distance, slow down, learn a bit, and then look for what best suits you and what you’re doing.

I don’t intend to be critical, or sound like a jerk. If I do, ignore me. I’m simply trying to save you from buying the wrong scope 3 times (potentially $3000) only to finally know enough get what you wanted but didn’t know you wanted it.

Very valid. You are completely correct. I hope at some point I have advanced what I know way, way, way beyond where I'm at now. 308pirate is hitting the nail on the head I believe. I'm in the place where I think I may want to buy something cool and neat, and I'm humble enough to admit I probably won't be doing it justice and using it to it's potential right off the bat.

Folks like you can clarify that wondering for me, I'm all for it and I appreciate it.

Neither of you or anyone else has come off like a jerk. This is the internet, and all we get to communicate with is words. It can be difficult to convey thoughts and have them perceived perfectly as you intended by the recipient. No worries at all, thank you guys for weighing in.