Rifle Scopes First FFP scope! 6.5 Grendel build

[Mr. Monday]

I am ready to take the plunge into my first FFP scope. The scope will be topping an 18" 6.5 Grendel precision AR and will primarily be used for varmint and white tail hunting anywhere from 50-400 yds. I also have access to private land where I can shoot targets out past 1000 yds and I would like to test the capabilities of my barrel and the Grendel cartridge. I will be mounting a 45 degree 2 moa red dot so I think that a min mag of 3-4x would be ideal with 5x being the highest I feel comfortable with. I don't care if the reticle is illuminated but I do prefer MIL/MIL and xmas tree reticles. I prefer lighter weight to higher durability, Nikon scopes have been plenty durable for me so anything more durable than that is overkill. I have a maximum budget of $1200 and I would prefer to buy used from a company with a strong warranty and good resale value. It would be awesome if I don't need to use my entire budget to accomplish these goals. I have done a good amount of research and have a few optics in mind but I would love to hear what the SH community recommends.

 

[steve123]

Athlon Ares BTR 4.5-27x50 is the first scope that comes to mind and well under your budget at $850 MAP. A friend has that on his AR and I wish I did. I have a Bushnell Elite 3-12x44 LRHS which is in the classifieds, if interested in lower power.

 

[koshkin]

Do you have any sort of a weight budget in mind?

If you are talking about new scopes, the best fit for your budget is probably Vortex PST Gen 2 5-25x50 or 3-15x44. Athlon Ares 4.5-27x50 is a good option as well and will save you some money. I am looking at it right now next to the PST Gen 2 and so far Vortex is a better scope. However, whether that justifies the price difference is a personal choice that I can't make for you.

Personally, for an application like yours, I would be leaning toward a 3-15x44 or 3-18x50 or 3-18x44 or something similar. Sometimes, less is more and on a rifle like yours. As a fair disclaimer, I have a 6.5 Grendel with an 18" barrel and I am currently using it to test the PST Gen 2. While the 5-25x50 work fine on it, I would lean toward the 3-15x44 for field use.
In this picture, the Vortex PST Gen 2 5-25x50 (with a sunshade which makes it loo longer) is on a 6.5 Grendel with 18" barrel, while the Athlon Ares 4.5-27x50 is on a LR-308, also with a 18" barrel:
https://photos.smugmug.com/photos/i-...KX3d5SF-XL.jpg




If you are looking for used scopes, what you can get is sorta in the eye of the beholder. If you can deal with the weight, Vortex Razor Gen II 3-18x50 would probably be an ideal option for you from a features stnadpoint. Bushnell LRHS 4.5-18x44 should also be somewhere near the top of the list. I have not done a detailed test onthe LRHS, though.

ILya

 

[hlee]

A new Vortex viper PST will leave some room in your $1200 budget for a mount/rings/ammunition/etc.

 

[.30kal]

I have a Bushnell LRTSi 4.5-18x44 on my 6.5 Grendel and its a good fit for an 18-20" barrel. May be a tad out of your budget new, but you may be able to find a LRHS used around $800. It's made in Japan versus the Athlon and Viper (China and Philippines). I've had good experience with Bushnell's Elite Tactical line and the LRTS/LRHS seems to have a good overall track record on this forum. I've seen a few Viper Gen 1s go down in person and heard about a lot more. No experience with Athlon personally. However, better to spend a little more on a scope than to cut corners as you'll end up buying the nicer one down the road, while selling the cheaper one at a loss.

 

[Mr. Monday]

Do you have any sort of a weight budget in mind?

If you are talking about new scopes, the best fit for your budget is probably Vortex PST Gen 2 5-25x50 or 3-15x44. Athlon Ares 4.5-27x50 is a good option as well and will save you some money. I am looking at it right now next to the PST Gen 2 and so far Vortex is a better scope. However, whether that justifies the price difference is a personal choice that I can't make for you.

Personally, for an application like yours, I would be leaning toward a 3-15x44 or 3-18x50 or 3-18x44 or something similar. Sometimes, less is more and on a rifle like yours. As a fair disclaimer, I have a 6.5 Grendel with an 18" barrel and I am currently using it to test the PST Gen 2. While the 5-25x50 work fine on it, I would lean toward the 3-15x44 for field use.
In this picture, the Vortex PST Gen 2 5-25x50 (with a sunshade which makes it loo longer) is on a 6.5 Grendel with 18" barrel, while the Athlon Ares 4.5-27x50 is on a LR-308, also with a 18" barrel:
https://photos.smugmug.com/photos/i-...KX3d5SF-XL.jpg




If you are looking for used scopes, what you can get is sorta in the eye of the beholder. If you can deal with the weight, Vortex Razor Gen II 3-18x50 would probably be an ideal option for you from a features stnadpoint. Bushnell LRHS 4.5-18x44 should also be somewhere near the top of the list. I have not done a detailed test onthe LRHS, though.

ILya

I would like to keep the weight around 30 oz but less weight would be welcome. 3-18x44 would be ideal but the only options I see are the IOR and Mark 6 with the Mark 6 being my dream scope for this build. The Bushnell 3.5-21x50 is also a contender but it is on the heavier side. Do you think I can find these for $1200 used? Where should I be looking other than the classifieds here and eBay?

I agree that the Razor 3-18x50 is ideal but it is a bit heavier than I would like. If I can't find a 3-18 in my budget then I would rather bump up to a 4-20 than go down to a 3-15 but it seems like the Burris is my only option in that range. If I have to go up to 5-25 then I like the PST GII and the T5Xi and the Razor G1 (5-20).

 

[gr8fuldoug]

The Athlon Optics Ares BTR 4.5-27x50 - APLR3 FFP IR would be an excellent choice. With SH member pricing (please give me or Neil a call, 516-217-1000) you'll come in way below budget.

Thank you for your continued support.
If there is anything else we can assist you with please let me know.
Doug
Camera Land
720 Old Bethpage Rd
Old Bethpage NY 11804
516-217-1000
Please visit our website @ www.cameralandny.com

 

[BurnOut]

While I like the Athlon Ares scopes (on paper; I have not had a chance to get my hands on one), I'd recommend the 2.5-15 rather than the 4.5-27 for your uses. I think that the magnification range would be more useful for your intended uses.

FWIW, I recently completed a hunter-weight Grendel AR build myself, and went with a Sig Tango6 2-12x40. It's not the big glass that I usually go with (I usually go with 50mm+ on the objective), but I think that the weight trade off is probably worth the poorer low-light performance that will go along with the smaller objective.

 

[Mr. Monday]

While I like the Athlon Ares scopes (on paper; I have not had a chance to get my hands on one), I'd recommend the 2.5-15 rather than the 4.5-27 for your uses. I think that the magnification range would be more useful for your intended uses.

FWIW, I recently completed a hunter-weight Grendel AR build myself, and went with a Sig Tango6 2-12x40. It's not the big glass that I usually go with (I usually go with 50mm+ on the objective), but I think that the weight trade off is probably worth the poorer low-light performance that will go along with the smaller objective.

In that mag range I like the Ares 2.5-15 and the SWFA 3-15, anything less than 3x min mag is overkill since I also have a red dot mounted that I feel comfortable with out to 75 yds and I would like to do some long rang target shooting as well so I don't want to go any lower than 15x max mag. I looked at the Tango6 3-18 but disqualified it due to weight since the Mark 6 does everything the Tango6 does at over 10 oz lighter.

The more I post, the more I want that Mark 6, I may just save up and bide my time waiting for a used deal. Any suggestions on where else to search for used glass?

 

[koshkin]

I would like to keep the weight around 30 oz but less weight would be welcome. 3-18x44 would be ideal but the only options I see are the IOR and Mark 6 with the Mark 6 being my dream scope for this build. The Bushnell 3.5-21x50 is also a contender but it is on the heavier side. Do you think I can find these for $1200 used? Where should I be looking other than the classifieds here and eBay?

I agree that the Razor 3-18x50 is ideal but it is a bit heavier than I would like. If I can't find a 3-18 in my budget then I would rather bump up to a 4-20 than go down to a 3-15 but it seems like the Burris is my only option in that range. If I have to go up to 5-25 then I like the PST GII and the T5Xi and the Razor G1 (5-20).

As much as I like the XTR II, you mentioned you want a Christmas Tree style reticle and I am not sure I like H59 for a hunting rifle. To each his own, though.

I have seen Bushnell HDMRs for $1300ish used, although those were not illuminated.

If you do not insist on a Christmas tree reticle, your options open up some. As a general rule, as you think about opening up your options, do not get too stuck on magnification. Chasing magnification at the expense of quality seldom works out. A higher quality 3-15x will work better for than a lesser 4-20x.

Anyhow, you really need to decide what you want and how much you want to spend. In principle, in terms of bang for the buck, it is hard to do better than SWFA SS 3-15x42. It is a comparatively no frills scope by modern standard, but it has an excellent rack record and basic optomechanical quality is quite good. If you are willing to take a chance on a newer brand, Athlong Ares 2.5-15x50 should be near the top of your list. Both of these will run you about $900 or so together with a mount.

For me, less is more, so to speak, so when I am not testing anything on the Grendel, I have a SWFA SS 3-9x42 on it. It is not the flashiest scope in the world, but it has not skipped a beat despite some extensive efforts to break it.

If you decide to get closer to your price limit, of what is out there right now, I think Vortex Viper PST Gen2 3-15x44 is your best bet in terms foof performance and weight. PST Gen 2 seems to be a solid step up from the original PST.

ILya

 

[Birddog6424]

Rumor has it that the XTR II may have something in the very near future in a tree reticle..

 

[Mr. Monday]

As much as I like the XTR II, you mentioned you want a Christmas Tree style reticle and I am not sure I like H59 for a hunting rifle. To each his own, though.

I have seen Bushnell HDMRs for $1300ish used, although those were not illuminated.

If you do not insist on a Christmas tree reticle, your options open up some. As a general rule, as you think about opening up your options, do not get too stuck on magnification. Chasing magnification at the expense of quality seldom works out. A higher quality 3-15x will work better for than a lesser 4-20x.

Anyhow, you really need to decide what you want and how much you want to spend. In principle, in terms of bang for the buck, it is hard to do better than SWFA SS 3-15x42. It is a comparatively no frills scope by modern standard, but it has an excellent rack record and basic optomechanical quality is quite good. If you are willing to take a chance on a newer brand, Athlong Ares 2.5-15x50 should be near the top of your list. Both of these will run you about $900 or so together with a mount.

For me, less is more, so to speak, so when I am not testing anything on the Grendel, I have a SWFA SS 3-9x42 on it. It is not the flashiest scope in the world, but it has not skipped a beat despite some extensive efforts to break it.

If you decide to get closer to your price limit, of what is out there right now, I think Vortex Viper PST Gen2 3-15x44 is your best bet in terms foof performance and weight. PST Gen 2 seems to be a solid step up from the original PST.

ILya

I would like to mention that I put QD mounts on all my scopes and this scope will also be used on a precision 22lr AR as well as a precision 223 wylde AR, so parallax adjustment and accurate tracking are essential features.

I have only ever used MOA SFP scopes with plex sights so I'm having trouble deciding which reticle would best suit my needs and I'm not set on an xmas tree they just seem like they make the best use of the FFP feature, I definitely prefer a fine reticle that looks like a standard plex when zoomed out.

I already have the Razor 1.5-8 SFP for my lightweight build so I would like to be able to have more precision at 2-300yds with my next scope purchase. Speaking of higher quality 3-15x do you think that the T5Xi 3-15 is worth $200 more than the PST G2 3-15? I have been leaning toward 18-20 max mag because I don't want to feel like I don't have enough scope but realistically I would be perfectly happy with a scope that is crisp and clear at 15x.

I've been finding the Leupold Mark 6 3-18x goes for $1400-$1600 used which I am willing to stretch to because I like the compact size and light weight and I can easily turn around and sell it for the same amount if I decide to upgrade in the future. I think the TMR ret is probably the rational choice for my applications but it does cover more than I would like at high magnification. Leupold really needs to come up with an xmas tree ret. I much prefer the IOR x1 ret but the IORs are quite difficult to find on the used market, maybe I'll pick one up the next time I'm in Germany, they are about $300 cheaper over there.

Without blowing my current budget out of the water it seems like my best options are the Ares 2.5-15 and the PST G2 3-15.

edit: I said that I didn't want illumination because I won't be using the scope in low light conditions but it seems like the reticle can really disappear in hunting situations. I suppose I can always zoom in once I have acquired the target to better see the reticle but it is a bit disconcerting coming from SFP scopes.

 

[koshkin]

Rumor has it that the XTR II may have something in the very near future in a tree reticle..

I have heard that rumor, but I can't make recommendation based on a rumor, right?

ILya

 

[koshkin]

I would like to mention that I put QD mounts on all my scopes and this scope will also be used on a precision 22lr AR as well as a precision 223 wylde AR, so parallax adjustment and accurate tracking are essential features.

I have only ever used MOA SFP scopes with plex sights so I'm having trouble deciding which reticle would best suit my needs and I'm not set on an xmas tree they just seem like they make the best use of the FFP feature, I definitely prefer a fine reticle that looks like a standard plex when zoomed out.

I already have the Razor 1.5-8 SFP for my lightweight build so I would like to be able to have more precision at 2-300yds with my next scope purchase. Speaking of higher quality 3-15x do you think that the T5Xi 3-15 is worth $200 more than the PST G2 3-15? I have been leaning toward 18-20 max mag because I don't want to feel like I don't have enough scope but realistically I would be perfectly happy with a scope that is crisp and clear at 15x.

I've been finding the Leupold Mark 6 3-18x goes for $1400-$1600 used which I am willing to stretch to because I like the compact size and light weight and I can easily turn around and sell it for the same amount if I decide to upgrade in the future. I think the TMR ret is probably the rational choice for my applications but it does cover more than I would like at high magnification. Leupold really needs to come up with an xmas tree ret. I much prefer the IOR x1 ret but the IORs are quite difficult to find on the used market, maybe I'll pick one up the next time I'm in Germany, they are about $300 cheaper over there.

Without blowing my current budget out of the water it seems like my best options are the Ares 2.5-15 and the PST G2 3-15.

edit: I said that I didn't want illumination because I won't be using the scope in low light conditions but it seems like the reticle can really disappear in hunting situations. I suppose I can always zoom in once I have acquired the target to better see the reticle but it is a bit disconcerting coming from SFP scopes.

I am glad you like the little 1.5-8x32 HD LH. I have one on my 458 SOCOM. I am sorta partial to the reticle in it since it came out of a long session of whining to Vortex at one of the SHOT Show. I sketched out what I thought would make a nice general purpose reticle for a lightweight hunting scope. Next SHOT, they show me a scope with the reticle in it. That was kinda fun.

Speakign of reticles, you mentioned you want a tree reticle of some sort. "Tree reticle" usually means a reticle that allows for both elevation and wind holds. SCR. Mil-Dot, Mil-Quad, etc are usually not referred to as "Christmas Tree" reticles because they do not provide for wind holds at distance.

The reason I keep on talking about Athlon Ares and Vortex PST Gen 2i s that they reticles do and that is what I thought you wanted. If you are OK with something like the SCR reticle, then Steiner T5Xi 3-15x50 would be a very nice choice. I wrote a long article where I looked at a bunch of scopes, Steiner T5Xi and Mark 6 among them: http://opticsthoughts.com/?p=1673

I will stay out of the IOR discussion. I stopped reviewing IORs a few years ago. There is a reason for it.

On reticle disappearing in low light conditions: this is a problem with many FFP scopes and it is mitigated by illumination and/or better reticle design.

On reticle being too thick: unless you are aiming at something very small, I think this issue is greatly overblown in terms of how it effects shooting accuracy. Then again, a lot about reticle is personal preference and we all have out own.

ILya

 

[probitron]

I have the 3-12 and 4.5-18 Bushnell LRHSi on ARs, which I also use for hunting. If you use the lower magnifications often, I really like the little "circle of death" that helps compensate for the thinness of the reticle. They have a great lifetime warranty too.

If the Ares has been out when I got mine, I would have been very tempted by it.

 

[Mr. Monday]

I am glad you like the little 1.5-8x32 HD LH. I have one on my 458 SOCOM. I am sorta partial to the reticle in it since it came out of a long session of whining to Vortex at one of the SHOT Show. I sketched out what I thought would make a nice general purpose reticle for a lightweight hunting scope. Next SHOT, they show me a scope with the reticle in it. That was kinda fun.

Speakign of reticles, you mentioned you want a tree reticle of some sort. "Tree reticle" usually means a reticle that allows for both elevation and wind holds. SCR. Mil-Dot, Mil-Quad, etc are usually not referred to as "Christmas Tree" reticles because they do not provide for wind holds at distance.

The reason I keep on talking about Athlon Ares and Vortex PST Gen 2i s that they reticles do and that is what I thought you wanted. If you are OK with something like the SCR reticle, then Steiner T5Xi 3-15x50 would be a very nice choice. I wrote a long article where I looked at a bunch of scopes, Steiner T5Xi and Mark 6 among them: http://opticsthoughts.com/?p=1673

I will stay out of the IOR discussion. I stopped reviewing IORs a few years ago. There is a reason for it.

On reticle disappearing in low light conditions: this is a problem with many FFP scopes and it is mitigated by illumination and/or better reticle design.

On reticle being too thick: unless you are aiming at something very small, I think this issue is greatly overblown in terms of how it effects shooting accuracy. Then again, a lot about reticle is personal preference and we all have out own.

ILya

Thank you for all of your detailed responses thus far. I read the blog post you sent me and it was very interesting. I have decided that I have a hard budget of $1400 and that I want to buy a used optic. I could get the K312i for $1600 used or the March 3-24x42 for $1800 but that is just over my budget unfortunately. The post also helped me decide that I definitely don't want anything over 30 oz and under 25 oz is ideal.

Since this will be my first scope where I am planning to actually use the reticle hold overs instead of dialing I'm sure that I will do fine with any reticle from Mil-Quad to Tremor3, the only reticle that I refuse to buy is the Mil-Dot. I much prefer a reticle that is usable at 3x mag but I am definitely intrigued by the Horus rets and I'm sure I would be able to learn it well and become comfortable with it at any range; that said, it is very busy. The APLR3, EBR-2C, G2DMR, and X1 are my favorite rets of what I can afford. I would also prefer a ret that doesn't require illumination to be seen while hunting in forested areas but that may be too much to ask for.

I have heard that IOR had some issues in the past but the ELR guys really speak highly of the newer ones. I would love to know what it was that put you off of them to the point where you won't even review the new ones. Regardless, in order to find one within my budget I would have to ship one over from Europe or get really lucky and find one used.

I wasn't put off by your relatively negative review of the Mark 6, I really like its compact light weight. However, It seems like I would have to settle for a non illuminated TMR ret to stay within budget.

The only other scope in the same weight class as the Mark 6 that I have found is the SWFA 3-15x42. I actually find these two scopes to be quite similar for me: both wouldn't have illumination, both would have relatively basic MIL rets, and both would be 24oz. I don't like the fact that the SWFA doesn't have a 0 stop, but having 3x less mag on the top end doesn't really bother me.

The sub 25oz category is where I would like to be but the Ares BTR at 27.3 oz looks like the lightest scope I can afford that is above 25oz so I am strongly considering it. With the 2.5-15x50 being the same size and weight as the 4.5-27x50 I am very tempted to go for the 4.5-27x50 and sacrifice some low end FOV. The 4.5-27 seems easier to sell on the used market when I do decide to upgrade in the future. I really like the Ares ret and if the glass is on par with the Gen 1 PST then it seems like a no brainer, I'm finding them for less than half my budget used. The next lightest scope I have my eye on is the PST G2 3-15x44 which is .8oz heavier than the Ares and $200 more on the used market, I still haven't decided if it is worth the extra weight and $$. The heaviest optic I am looking at is the Steiner 3-15x50 at 29.8 oz and $3-400 more than the PST G2 with worse reticles; it's hard to justify unless it completely outclasses the PST G2 optically. That said, I think this is the most beautiful of the bunch and I really like the turret design. I could see myself loving this scope for a long time but it's so close to the used Mark 6 price that I think saving up for the Mark 6 is the wise choice when I get into scopes over $1k on the used market.

I really like the Bushnell FFP optics, they have great reticles but the only one that really excites me is the 3.5-21 and it's too heavy. the 4.5-18 would be serviceable but its the same weight as the Ares and I'll take the cheaper price and extra zoom of the Ares every time I have the choice. However, looking through them side by side could change my mind. Is there anywhere I can find high resolution images taken through these scopes at various magnifications? It would really help me make a decision.

 

[Shadow knows]

I too am looking for a 6.5 Grendel also. I have it narrowed down to a ares and a pst gen 2. Problem is the wait for the discount on the vortex though I like it better

 

[Mr. Monday]

I too am looking for a 6.5 Grendel also. I have it narrowed down to a ares and a pst gen 2. Problem is the wait for the discount on the vortex though I like it better

I agree, these two seem like the best options. Are you looking at the Ares 2.5-15 and PST G2 3-15 or the Ares 4.5-27 and PST G2 5-25? Is there a rebate available for the PST G2? Please enlighten me.

 

[Shadow knows]

I agree, these two seem like the best options. Are you looking at the Ares 2.5-15 and PST G2 3-15 or the Ares 4.5-27 and PST G2 5-25? Is there a rebate available for the PST G2? Please enlighten me.

If I do the ares it will be the 2.5-15 and pst g2 3-15. Vet discount

 

[Monstershot]

I went through a similar effort for my Grendel. I was considering primarily the Vortex G2 3-15, and the Athlon Ares 2.5-15. I liked the EBR-2C reticle better and so chose the Vortex. I went to the range once and sold the Vortex as I felt it was more precision oriented than I was looking for for my Grendel. Ultimately I decided that the Mark 6 is what I want and am now saving for it. I'll likely go illuminated TMR.

The Mark 6 is really in a league of its own assuming you can get one on the used market for a good deal. Light weight, and compact, great mag range for the Grendel.

 

[Mr. Monday]

I went through a similar effort for my Grendel. I was considering primarily the Vortex G2 3-15, and the Athlon Ares 2.5-15. I liked the EBR-2C reticle better and so chose the Vortex. I went to the range once and sold the Vortex as I felt it was more precision oriented than I was looking for for my Grendel. Ultimately I decided that the Mark 6 is what I want and am now saving for it. I'll likely go illuminated TMR.

The Mark 6 is really in a league of its own assuming you can get one on the used market for a good deal. Light weight, and compact, great mag range for the Grendel.

I'm glad there are other people in the same boat. I'm thinking the Mark 6 would be ideal but at less than half the price the Ares is hard to pass up as a stepping stone. Have you taken a look at the March 3-24x42? It's in the same price range as the Mark 6 Illum TMR on the used market and the same weight.

Edit: I'm curious why you felt it was too precision oriented? I usually think of more precision as a good thing. Are you referring to the reticle or the weight?

 

[koshkin]

Thank you for all of your detailed responses thus far. I read the blog post you sent me and it was very interesting. I have decided that I have a hard budget of $1400 and that I want to buy a used optic. I could get the K312i for $1600 used or the March 3-24x42 for $1800 but that is just over my budget unfortunately. The post also helped me decide that I definitely don't want anything over 30 oz and under 25 oz is ideal.

Since this will be my first scope where I am planning to actually use the reticle hold overs instead of dialing I'm sure that I will do fine with any reticle from Mil-Quad to Tremor3, the only reticle that I refuse to buy is the Mil-Dot. I much prefer a reticle that is usable at 3x mag but I am definitely intrigued by the Horus rets and I'm sure I would be able to learn it well and become comfortable with it at any range; that said, it is very busy. The APLR3, EBR-2C, G2DMR, and X1 are my favorite rets of what I can afford. I would also prefer a ret that doesn't require illumination to be seen while hunting in forested areas but that may be too much to ask for.

I have heard that IOR had some issues in the past but the ELR guys really speak highly of the newer ones. I would love to know what it was that put you off of them to the point where you won't even review the new ones. Regardless, in order to find one within my budget I would have to ship one over from Europe or get really lucky and find one used.

I wasn't put off by your relatively negative review of the Mark 6, I really like its compact light weight. However, It seems like I would have to settle for a non illuminated TMR ret to stay within budget.

The only other scope in the same weight class as the Mark 6 that I have found is the SWFA 3-15x42. I actually find these two scopes to be quite similar for me: both wouldn't have illumination, both would have relatively basic MIL rets, and both would be 24oz. I don't like the fact that the SWFA doesn't have a 0 stop, but having 3x less mag on the top end doesn't really bother me.

The sub 25oz category is where I would like to be but the Ares BTR at 27.3 oz looks like the lightest scope I can afford that is above 25oz so I am strongly considering it. With the 2.5-15x50 being the same size and weight as the 4.5-27x50 I am very tempted to go for the 4.5-27x50 and sacrifice some low end FOV. The 4.5-27 seems easier to sell on the used market when I do decide to upgrade in the future. I really like the Ares ret and if the glass is on par with the Gen 1 PST then it seems like a no brainer, I'm finding them for less than half my budget used. The next lightest scope I have my eye on is the PST G2 3-15x44 which is .8oz heavier than the Ares and $200 more on the used market, I still haven't decided if it is worth the extra weight and $$. The heaviest optic I am looking at is the Steiner 3-15x50 at 29.8 oz and $3-400 more than the PST G2 with worse reticles; it's hard to justify unless it completely outclasses the PST G2 optically. That said, I think this is the most beautiful of the bunch and I really like the turret design. I could see myself loving this scope for a long time but it's so close to the used Mark 6 price that I think saving up for the Mark 6 is the wise choice when I get into scopes over $1k on the used market.

I really like the Bushnell FFP optics, they have great reticles but the only one that really excites me is the 3.5-21 and it's too heavy. the 4.5-18 would be serviceable but its the same weight as the Ares and I'll take the cheaper price and extra zoom of the Ares every time I have the choice. However, looking through them side by side could change my mind. Is there anywhere I can find high resolution images taken through these scopes at various magnifications? It would really help me make a decision.

A couple of comments: I liked the Steiner T5Xi 3-15x50 quite a bit and aside from the reticle preferred it to the Mark 6 in terms of optomechanical quality. Mark 6 is very impressive in terms of how light it is and, honestly, I am thinking of buying one for myself, but with David Tubb's reticle: http://www.davidtubb.com/dtr-scopes I think DTR is a brilliant system and if memory serves me right the V1 reticle works exceedingly well with the Grendel. To be blunt, the only way I would buy this Mark 6 is with David's reticle and illuminated. It is expensive, but it gives you an incredible capability in a compact optic. If yo go for a Mark6, make sure you get one with "C" turret. "B" turret was not impressive. The only thing that is preventing me from buying one right now is the fact that I just spent a bunch of money on a precision rifle and I like being married.

I disagree with your comment on the 4.5-18x44 LRHS. It is a better scope than the Ares and that is why it costs more. Extra magnification range of the Ares is a nice feature, and for what it costs it is a very interesting design. However, LRHS is a better scope. If you can swing it, go for it. Broad magnification range, except in some specific situations, is more important for marketing than in actual use.

Fundamentally, you need to decide what you are willing to spend. You keep on going back and forth and it is not going to help you. If you want to stay in the $700 range, get the SWFA 3-15x42. In the $850 range, get the Ares. If you can spend $1100, get the PST Gen 2. If you can spend $1400, get the LRHS. If you can spend $1700, get the Steiner.

Once you get into $1k+ range, there is no excuse for not getting one with a non-illuminated reticle. Most of the designs you are looking at have fairly thin reticles for precision shooting. I am not a fan of that trend personally, but that is what we've got. Illumiantion helps. SWFA does OK for a non-illumianted design. Bushnell is OK non-illuminated too, but for that money, I would go with illumination.

ILya

 

[Mr. Monday]

A couple of comments: I liked the Steiner T5Xi 3-15x50 quite a bit and aside from the reticle preferred it to the Mark 6 in terms of optomechanical quality. Mark 6 is very impressive in terms of how light it is and, honestly, I am thinking of buying one for myself, but with David Tubb's reticle: http://www.davidtubb.com/dtr-scopes I think DTR is a brilliant system and if memory serves me right the V1 reticle works exceedingly well with the Grendel. To be blunt, the only way I would buy this Mark 6 is with David's reticle and illuminated. It is expensive, but it gives you an incredible capability in a compact optic. If yo go for a Mark6, make sure you get one with "C" turret. "B" turret was not impressive. The only thing that is preventing me from buying one right now is the fact that I just spent a bunch of money on a precision rifle and I like being married.

I disagree with your comment on the 4.5-18x44 LRHS. It is a better scope than the Ares and that is why it costs more. Extra magnification range of the Ares is a nice feature, and for what it costs it is a very interesting design. However, LRHS is a better scope. If you can swing it, go for it. Broad magnification range, except in some specific situations, is more important for marketing than in actual use.

Fundamentally, you need to decide what you are willing to spend. You keep on going back and forth and it is not going to help you. If you want to stay in the $700 range, get the SWFA 3-15x42. In the $850 range, get the Ares. If you can spend $1100, get the PST Gen 2. If you can spend $1400, get the LRHS. If you can spend $1700, get the Steiner.

Once you get into $1k+ range, there is no excuse for not getting one with a non-illuminated reticle. Most of the designs you are looking at have fairly thin reticles for precision shooting. I am not a fan of that trend personally, but that is what we've got. Illumiantion helps. SWFA does OK for a non-illumianted design. Bushnell is OK non-illuminated too, but for that money, I would go with illumination.

ILya

I agree, the Tubb reticle is awesome! Do you know if he will retrofit it? I think that the next best option for the Mark 6 is the TMR, I would dial in elevation and hold windage with this ret. I really like the CMR-W ret as well but I believe it's caliber specific because all the ones that I have seen with that ret have a caliber written on the box.

I definitely like the turrets on the LRHSi better than the turrets on the Ares but I think the glass quality on the Ares punches above its price point. Yes, I would like to have better optical quality but the Ares is not bad at all compared to what I'm used to. However, I'm looking more closely at my 2.5-3x min mag options than I am at my 4.5-5x min mag options and I don't want anything lower than 15x on the top end unless we are talking Tangent Theta quality glass (Or I could forget all that and get the 20oz Leupold 4.5-14x50).

I specified that I'm willing to spend up to $1400 on this scope purchase, I will likely sell this scope at some point in the future and move on to something in the $1500-$2000 range. I'm going back and forth because I'm still trying to understand what I gain by spending more. Between the Ares and the PST G2 it's pretty obvious that the PST G2 is built better, has better turret design, and has slightly better glass while the Ares is cheaper and has more magnification range. Between the PST G2 and the Steiner, the Steiner is built better, has better turret design, has better illumination, and has slightly better glass while the PST G2 is cheaper and has superior customer service. Please try to understand that it's difficult for me to understand where the law of diminishing returns kicks in for my usage without handling the scopes in person. Since you listed new prices, I will list the used prices that I'm looking at so you can better understand the price spread.

SWFA FF 3-15x42: $550-$600
Ares BTR 2.5-15/4.5-27x50: $600
PST G2 3-15x44: $800
LRHSi/LRTSi: $1000
T5Xi: $1100-$1200
Mark 6 3-18x44 TMR: $1400
IOR 3-18x42: $1450-$1550
K312i: $1600
Mark 6 3-18x44 TMR illum.: $1700
March F. 3-24x42 FML-1: $1800

I like illuminated reticles if they are daylight visible. From what I've seen, the Ares and PST G2 are not while the T5Xi and Mark 6i are, I'm not sure about the LRHSi.

I'm leaning toward the T5Xi but I think I would be perfectly happy with the PST G2 as well.

PS: thanks to your blog post I have a new dream scope, the March F. 3-24x52 FML-T1 illum. it's dreamy. It's hard to resist the urge to sell a couple guns and buy it. Maybe in a couple years.

 

[koshkin]

I agree, the Tubb reticle is awesome! Do you know if he will retrofit it? I think that the next best option for the Mark 6 is the TMR, I would dial in elevation and hold windage with this ret. I really like the CMR-W ret as well but I believe it's caliber specific because all the ones that I have seen with that ret have a caliber written on the box.

I definitely like the turrets on the LRHSi better than the turrets on the Ares but I think the glass quality on the Ares punches above its price point. Yes, I would like to have better optical quality but the Ares is not bad at all compared to what I'm used to. However, I'm looking more closely at my 2.5-3x min mag options than I am at my 4.5-5x min mag options and I don't want anything lower than 15x on the top end unless we are talking Tangent Theta quality glass (Or I could forget all that and get the 20oz Leupold 4.5-14x50).

I specified that I'm willing to spend up to $1400 on this scope purchase, I will likely sell this scope at some point in the future and move on to something in the $1500-$2000 range. I'm going back and forth because I'm still trying to understand what I gain by spending more. Between the Ares and the PST G2 it's pretty obvious that the PST G2 is built better, has better turret design, and has slightly better glass while the Ares is cheaper and has more magnification range. Between the PST G2 and the Steiner, the Steiner is built better, has better turret design, has better illumination, and has slightly better glass while the PST G2 is cheaper and has superior customer service. Please try to understand that it's difficult for me to understand where the law of diminishing returns kicks in for my usage without handling the scopes in person. Since you listed new prices, I will list the used prices that I'm looking at so you can better understand the price spread.

SWFA FF 3-15x42: $550-$600
Ares BTR 2.5-15/4.5-27x50: $600
PST G2 3-15x44: $800
LRHSi/LRTSi: $1000
T5Xi: $1100-$1200
Mark 6 3-18x44 TMR: $1400
IOR 3-18x42: $1450-$1550
K312i: $1600
Mark 6 3-18x44 TMR illum.: $1700
March F. 3-24x42 FML-1: $1800

I like illuminated reticles if they are daylight visible. From what I've seen, the Ares and PST G2 are not while the T5Xi and Mark 6i are, I'm not sure about the LRHSi.

I'm leaning toward the T5Xi but I think I would be perfectly happy with the PST G2 as well.

PS: thanks to your blog post I have a new dream scope, the March F. 3-24x52 FML-T1 illum. it's dreamy. It's hard to resist the urge to sell a couple guns and buy it. Maybe in a couple years.

The law of diminishing returns kicks in the moment you get beyond the SWFA SS 3-15x42. There is very little you can not do with that scope. However, just because you have to pay a fair bit more to get a little more performance, does not mean it is not worth the money to get that little bit of performance.

On top of that, noone but you know what exactly is important and how you will use it. In this general category of scopes you are looking at, my favourite design (and not by a small margin) is Tangent Theta TT315M. I think it is absolutely worth $3k, but that does not mean that everyone has to spend $3k on a scope, simply because I think it is worth it. However, I have my personal preferences specific to how I use scopes and TT315M ticks virtually all of them.

On illumination: daybright illumination in a scope with fairly high magnification would be the least of my concerns. It really becomes important when the light fades. You are not going to be doing CQB with this gun and if you really want to, add a miniature red dot in a 45 degree offset mount.

Between PST G2 and Ares I have (5-25x50 and 4.5-27x50), the difference in image quality is pretty noticeable. I would not call it slight. Another notable difference is with how the eyepiece is designed. There is a noticeable black ring around the image of the Ares (this is not tunnelling, it is a different effect) while the image of the PST G2 has a very thin border around it. Some people are more sensitive to it than others. Also, PST G2 has significantly wider FOV, which is important when you are int he field. I havn't done a low light comparison yet, but I will soon.

In other words: there is a reason for the price difference. This same argument goes on as you go up in price, so if you are willing to spend $1400, do so and do not agonize over $600 scopes. Pick the amount you will actually spend and work off of that.

ILya

 

[260284]

I have both the LRHS and the LRSTi in the 4.5-18 and I feel you can't get a better reticle than the LRHS for running it on the lowest setting without illumination. I have seen both of these scopes for $950-$1050 shipped here on the Hide. I ran my LRHS on my Tikka CTR for deer and matches last year and now it is on my 20" Grendel in an ARC mount. I put the LRSTi on my Tikka in place of the LRHS.

 

[Mr. Monday]

The law of diminishing returns kicks in the moment you get beyond the SWFA SS 3-15x42. There is very little you can not do with that scope. However, just because you have to pay a fair bit more to get a little more performance, does not mean it is not worth the money to get that little bit of performance.

On top of that, noone but you know what exactly is important and how you will use it. In this general category of scopes you are looking at, my favourite design (and not by a small margin) is Tangent Theta TT315M. I think it is absolutely worth $3k, but that does not mean that everyone has to spend $3k on a scope, simply because I think it is worth it. However, I have my personal preferences specific to how I use scopes and TT315M ticks virtually all of them.

On illumination: daybright illumination in a scope with fairly high magnification would be the least of my concerns. It really becomes important when the light fades. You are not going to be doing CQB with this gun and if you really want to, add a miniature red dot in a 45 degree offset mount.

Between PST G2 and Ares I have (5-25x50 and 4.5-27x50), the difference in image quality is pretty noticeable. I would not call it slight. Another notable difference is with how the eyepiece is designed. There is a noticeable black ring around the image of the Ares (this is not tunnelling, it is a different effect) while the image of the PST G2 has a very thin border around it. Some people are more sensitive to it than others. Also, PST G2 has significantly wider FOV, which is important when you are int he field. I havn't done a low light comparison yet, but I will soon.

In other words: there is a reason for the price difference. This same argument goes on as you go up in price, so if you are willing to spend $1400, do so and do not agonize over $600 scopes. Pick the amount you will actually spend and work off of that.

ILya

Agreed, the SWFA is a good base line but for the same price as the Ares, I think the Ares is the slightly better/more modern option.

The TT315M is awesome and they go for $2300-$2500 used which isn't bad; I like the March 3-24x52 FML-T1 better but thats probably my lack of experience speaking.

I have never had IR in the past so I don't really know what I'm missing out on, but I can say that I'm perfectly happy with packing it up when the light fades. That said, it can get dim in the forest even during the day. Your comment that everything $1k+ should have IR has me thinking that the T5Xi may be worth the extra weight over the Mark 6.

I have narrowed it down to the PSTG2, T5Xi, and the Mark 6. I can only afford the basic Mark 6 without IR so deciding whether I need IR or not is the deciding factor.

If I decide I do need IR then I have to choose between the T5Xi and PSTG2. This is a really tough choice, the Steiner is $3-400 more expensive and has the less desirable reticle. I really wish I could look through these side by side to decide whether the better glass in the Steiner is worth the $$ and the reticle sacrifice.

 

[Mr. Monday]

I have both the LRHS and the LRSTi in the 4.5-18 and I feel you can't get a better reticle than the LRHS for running it on the lowest setting without illumination. I have seen both of these scopes for $950-$1050 shipped here on the Hide. I ran my LRHS on my Tikka CTR for deer and matches last year and now it is on my 20" Grendel in an ARC mount. I put the LRSTi on my Tikka in place of the LRHS.

I will admit that I have an irrational bias against Bushnell products. That said, the LRHS ret is perfect for my needs. I am only leaning toward the T5Xi and PSTG2 because I have a feeling that I'm going to wish I had a wider FOV on the low end if I go with the 4.5-18 LRHSi.

 

[FireShooter]

I have the 3-12 LRTS and the Steiner T5XI 3-15. I use the LRTS on my 223 Tikka Coyote hunting rifle. I use my T5 on my 6.5 creedmoor. Of the 2 I used to feel I liked the bushy more but after using both over time it's pretty much a draw. The glass in both optics is good. FOV is good in both. It is better in the T5 of course. I don't use 3x on either scope. I feel the reticle gets too small on both to be usable at 3x I don't use my scopes at low power though. I live in the Oklahoma panhandle and out here you can see for miles. My lrts doesn't go below 5x when I'm hunting. It's been effective in hunting and competition for me and my hunting partner bought an LRTS after seeing mine and he likes it alot even compared to his ATACR.

I love the G3 reticle and if I could put it in all my scopes I would. The SCR reticle isn't bad and the more I use it the more I appreciate it. But I prefer a half mil hash compared to a .2 mil hash.

​​​​​​The turrets on the T5 are great. I prefer them to the bushy turrets. Both are usable and function fine. The T5 turrets are 12 mil vs 10 mil on the Bushnell and it's easier to keep track of your turret rev on the T5.

I would recommend spending the money for the T5 from what you have described due to the paralax going lower. I will be using my T5 for deer this year and feel confident it will be a decent hunting scope in this capacity. For less than $1500 I don't think you can do better than the T5. Mine was a demo model and I got it in the $1200-1300 range. Koshkin has seen as many optics as anyone and I bought my T5 in a big part due to his advice in reading his articles. I'm glad I did.

 

[koshkin]

I will admit that I have an irrational bias against Bushnell products. That said, the LRHS ret is perfect for my needs. I am only leaning toward the T5Xi and PSTG2 because I have a feeling that I'm going to wish I had a wider FOV on the low end if I go with the 4.5-18 LRHSi.

We all have personal preferences and prejudices. Nothing terribly unusual about that.

ILya

 

[Monstershot]

I'm glad there are other people in the same boat. I'm thinking the Mark 6 would be ideal but at less than half the price the Ares is hard to pass up as a stepping stone. Have you taken a look at the March 3-24x42? It's in the same price range as the Mark 6 Illum TMR on the used market and the same weight.

Edit: I'm curious why you felt it was too precision oriented? I usually think of more precision as a good thing. Are you referring to the reticle or the weight?

My Grendel feels incredibly balanced, and maneuverable. It will be used a good portion of the time off of a bench. At 4oz heavier and 2" longer the Vortex was still not bad in terms of feel but those are not insignificant measurements and I think I will feel a significant difference. I want this to be a leaner meaner fighting machine. The Vortex was also not great at 15x. Eye box was tightish and the image wasn't great. I found myself pulling back to 12x to get the better image. I've heard the Leupold and the March have similar issues but they also have more mag range. If I can get a clean 3-15 out of the Mark 6 I'm good.

Reticle is the other issue. I want something I can pick up a little quicker for hunting than the ebr-2c but still useful for groups, ranging etc. I *think* that will be the illuminated TMR with the open center. I spent some time behind a Scar 17/Mark 6 h59 combo, and didn't hate the h59 but I don't care for the clutter either. I may get the TMR and ultimately move to the h59. Dunno yet.

The March seems good, though there are just as many opponents and proponents as the Mark 6. Some love 'em some hate them, but there are fewer out there, I rarely see them below $2k used and I suspect (but don't know) that warranty work would be more complicated.

 

[Mr. Monday]

I have the 3-12 LRTS and the Steiner T5XI 3-15. I use the LRTS on my 223 Tikka Coyote hunting rifle. I use my T5 on my 6.5 creedmoor. Of the 2 I used to feel I liked the bushy more but after using both over time it's pretty much a draw. The glass in both optics is good. FOV is good in both. It is better in the T5 of course. I don't use 3x on either scope. I feel the reticle gets too small on both to be usable at 3x I don't use my scopes at low power though. I live in the Oklahoma panhandle and out here you can see for miles. My lrts doesn't go below 5x when I'm hunting. It's been effective in hunting and competition for me and my hunting partner bought an LRTS after seeing mine and he likes it alot even compared to his ATACR.

I love the G3 reticle and if I could put it in all my scopes I would. The SCR reticle isn't bad and the more I use it the more I appreciate it. But I prefer a half mil hash compared to a .2 mil hash.

​​​​​​The turrets on the T5 are great. I prefer them to the bushy turrets. Both are usable and function fine. The T5 turrets are 12 mil vs 10 mil on the Bushnell and it's easier to keep track of your turret rev on the T5.

I would recommend spending the money for the T5 from what you have described due to the paralax going lower. I will be using my T5 for deer this year and feel confident it will be a decent hunting scope in this capacity. For less than $1500 I don't think you can do better than the T5. Mine was a demo model and I got it in the $1200-1300 range. Koshkin has seen as many optics as anyone and I bought my T5 in a big part due to his advice in reading his articles. I'm glad I did.

Good to hear from someone who has owned both. Which one is better at max magnification?

I will be driving up to Oregon this Friday for coastal Elk season and it is anything but flat. In the past I've always kept my optics on there lowest magnification while hunting for quick target acquisition and I want FFP so that I can quickly zoom in after acquiring the target and not have to fiddle with dials.

If the T5Xi is usable at 15x then that will be my choice. If it isn't then I will probably spring for the LRHSi or Mark 6 TMR.

My Grendel feels incredibly balanced, and maneuverable. It will be used a good portion of the time off of a bench. At 4oz heavier and 2" longer the Vortex was still not bad in terms of feel but those are not insignificant measurements and I think I will feel a significant difference. I want this to be a leaner meaner fighting machine. The Vortex was also not great at 15x. Eye box was tightish and the image wasn't great. I found myself pulling back to 12x to get the better image. I've heard the Leupold and the March have similar issues but they also have more mag range. If I can get a clean 3-15 out of the Mark 6 I'm good.

Reticle is the other issue. I want something I can pick up a little quicker for hunting than the ebr-2c but still useful for groups, ranging etc. I *think* that will be the illuminated TMR with the open center. I spent some time behind a Scar 17/Mark 6 h59 combo, and didn't hate the h59 but I don't care for the clutter either. I may get the TMR and ultimately move to the h59. Dunno yet.

The March seems good, though there are just as many opponents and proponents as the Mark 6. Some love 'em some hate them, but there are fewer out there, I rarely see them below $2k used and I suspect (but don't know) that warranty work would be more complicated.

I completely understand where you're coming from. I'm struggling with the same issues. I'm hoping that the T5Xi is significantly clearer and more useable than the PSTG2 at 15x. If the T5Xi isn't useable at 15x then I'll go for the 4.5-18x44 LRHSi which has an awesome reticle for both long range and hunting and is a little lighter than the Steiner. You might want to check this one out if you're okay with 4.5x on the low end, only 26.5oz.

I really want the Mark 6, but I can only afford the one without IR. The March without IR goes for $1800 used and you can find it brand new under $2k, I assume that the IR version would cost $2-300 more.

 

[FireShooter]

Mr Monday both are usable at max mag. I do feel the LRTS may do a little bit better in dusk type conditions. I've had both out this week in these conditions and I felt like it took less strain on my eyes to try to resolve images through the LRTS than the T5. This is just my eyes. I ran a mock stage the other day with 5 targets ranging from 360 to 750 yards with 5 rounds and cleared it on max power in a minute. Not that it's super fast but it did require me changing my prone position to transition between targets quickly. All on max power. Hope this helps.

I have the 3-12 LRTS non-illuminated. I can't say anything about the 4.5-18x version. I've heard it has a tighter eye box than the 3-12 version. However that is also something The mk6 3-18 is known for. The T5Xi has a pretty easy eye box. I haven't noticed myself strain to get a good sight picture in it. I still feel I can recommend it for your application. If you have any specific questions I can take a look at it tomorrow and answer them for you. PM them to me and I'll get back to you.

One thing I will comment on is the LRTS is not very paralax sensitive. Both my hunting buddy and I feel the same way about it. I usually set focus between 2-300 and drive on when hunting.

 

[Schroedernd]

I have a Bushnell 4.5-18 LRTSi on my Grendel and its a perfect match for it out to 1000y. Optic is very bright and clear as well and the turrets are great.

 

[supercorndogs]

LRHS. LRTSi, DMRII, TX5i, all have glass that looks pretty much the same. The big difference I saw between all these scopes was the SCR disappears at 3x. I use my LRHS's on 3x all the time. In general that is magnification I use when hunting. Another big difference speaking LRHS vs TX5i is going to be internal adjustment. The LRHS has considerably less than the TX5i. The never lost turret on the TX5i is cool, but the little windows make it hard to see the numbers in low light.

 

[Lmatt]

So what did you end up getting? I decided to get a T5Xi 3-15 simply because I had it on the radar and it went on sale. I had a smokin deal on a 3-12 LRTSi that fell through. I don’t have any high dollar glass to compare it to. So I’m sure I will be happy. The best I have currently is a SIII 10-50x60.

 

[Birddog6424]

Do you have any sort of a weight budget in mind?

If you are talking about new scopes, the best fit for your budget is probably Vortex PST Gen 2 5-25x50 or 3-15x44. Athlon Ares 4.5-27x50 is a good option as well and will save you some money. I am looking at it right now next to the PST Gen 2 and so far Vortex is a better scope. However, whether that justifies the price difference is a personal choice that I can't make for you.

Personally, for an application like yours, I would be leaning toward a 3-15x44 or 3-18x50 or 3-18x44 or something similar. Sometimes, less is more and on a rifle like yours. As a fair disclaimer, I have a 6.5 Grendel with an 18" barrel and I am currently using it to test the PST Gen 2. While the 5-25x50 work fine on it, I would lean toward the 3-15x44 for field use.
In this picture, the Vortex PST Gen 2 5-25x50 (with a sunshade which makes it loo longer) is on a 6.5 Grendel with 18" barrel, while the Athlon Ares 4.5-27x50 is on a LR-308, also with a 18" barrel:
https://photos.smugmug.com/photos/i-...KX3d5SF-XL.jpg




If you are looking for used scopes, what you can get is sorta in the eye of the beholder. If you can deal with the weight, Vortex Razor Gen II 3-18x50 would probably be an ideal option for you from a features stnadpoint. Bushnell LRHS 4.5-18x44 should also be somewhere near the top of the list. I have not done a detailed test onthe LRHS, though.

ILya

You must live in California....

 

[koshkin]

I do, indeed. All my ARs have to be neutered. I reconfigure them when I get out of state to take classes and re-neuter them before heading home.

ILya