Rifle Scopes Going from a K624i to AMG?

[alaskalanche]

Hello,

Lurking for years finally biting the bullet and posting.

Anyways, I have a Kahles K624i currently. I am eyeing picking up a used Vortex AMG in an effort to save a bit of weight and bulk on my rifle. Is it worth the switch or am I just gonna be chasing my tail wishing I had the K624i with it. Mainly use it as a hunting and long range steel plinking scope and perhaps dabble in matches a bit down the road.

Thanks for any input.

 

[5RWill]

While i haven't looked through the AMG, i doubt the quality between either is lacking. The weight difference is like an ounce if that..

 

[JS624]

Personally if I was you I'd go buy the AMG and do a side by side first maybe do a few range trips with the AMG see what you like better. The AMG is already used so I doubt you'll lose much if you put it up for sale a month later
depending on your reticle preference I think the skmr3 is the best reticle right now. So my vote is keep the kahles.

 

[alaskalanche]

While i haven't looked through the AMG, i doubt the quality between either is lacking. The weight difference is like an ounce if that..

The Kahles is 33.5 oz to the AMG 28.8 granted not a huge difference when putting it an 8.25 pound chassis rifle but it is smaller in every dimension as well.

Thanks for the input and the quick response.

 

[alaskalanche]

Personally if I was you I'd go buy the AMG and do a side by side first maybe do a few range trips with the AMG see what you like better. The AMG is already used so I doubt you'll lose much if you put it up for sale a month later
depending on your reticle preference I think the skmr3 is the best reticle right now. So my vote is keep the kahles.

That’s likely a good point. Not really out too much if I hate it. Likely can sell my NXS 5.5-22 to help fund a good portion of a used AMG as well.

 

[5RWill]

The Kahles is 33.5 oz to the AMG 28.8 granted not a huge difference when putting it an 8.25 pound chassis rifle but it is smaller in every dimension as well.

Thanks for the input and the quick response.

Interesting i could've sworn that the Kahles was 29oz. Seems they've changed the weight designation. Hell i'm almost 100% positive it was 29.xx oz. Still though i think it would be more of a lateral move if anything. TT has some phenomenal scopes in a light weight range but you'd lose magnification dropping to 15x. I've never looked at March but that's another outlet for sure. 3-24x52 is 24oz. Clicks i hear are great, as is glass to my understanding, i'm not fond at all of their reticles.

 

[BWB]

I have both and feel they both serve a purpose. The AMG is on my hunting rifle and for that aspect I really like having the 50mm obj instead of 56mm. I have Kahles 624i on my match rifles and anywhere the bulk of the 56mm obj doesn't matter...I prefer the Kahles. Everything about it in my mind and eyes is better than the AMG (Reticle, Glass, Turret function) That said, I don't know if you can beat the AMG on a strict hunting rig.

 

[lennyo3034]

Is 6x magnification low enough for hunting? Obviously fine for longer range shots but I've also been snuck up on by animals where I felt even my 3x optic was too much.

 

[BWB]

I don't think there is a cut and dry answer to that question. Everyone hunts in different areas with different purpose. I really feel you are the only one that can answer that question with the part of the country you hunt. For me...6x is plenty low for my needs. It has more to do with how comfortable you are with the optic and how fast you can acquire the target in your environment.

 

[alaskalanche]

Interesting i could've sworn that the Kahles was 29oz. Seems they've changed the weight designation. Hell i'm almost 100% positive it was 29.xx oz. Still though i think it would be more of a lateral move if anything. TT has some phenomenal scopes in a light weight range but you'd lose magnification dropping to 15x. I've never looked at March but that's another outlet for sure. 3-24x52 is 24oz. Clicks i hear are great, as is glass to my understanding, i'm not fond at all of their reticles.

Yeah I should just suck it up and go with 4-16 ATACR as the all rounder at 30 oz but if I wanna dork around and plink to a mile every once in a while the 24X could be nice. I thought about the March 3-24X52 seems so good, huge magnification range and oh so light, but fears of tight eyebox, touchy parallax, and one year warranty kinda make me pause at trying one cause I am afraid I'll be left holding the bag if it craps out.

 

[alaskalanche]

I have both and feel they both serve a purpose. The AMG is on my hunting rifle and for that aspect I really like having the 50mm obj instead of 56mm. I have Kahles 624i on my match rifles and anywhere the bulk of the 56mm obj doesn't matter...I prefer the Kahles. Everything about it in my mind and eyes is better than the AMG (Reticle, Glass, Turret function) That said, I don't know if you can beat the AMG on a strict hunting rig.

Good to know. I will likely just pick up a used AMG and compare it heads up to the Kahles for a couple months and see if I can't live without one or the other....loser goes down the road.

Thanks so much for the heads up comparison since you have and use both.

 

[alaskalanche]

Is 6x magnification low enough for hunting? Obviously fine for longer range shots but I've also been snuck up on by animals where I felt even my 3x optic was too much.

That is a good point to consider. Most of the areas I hunt are pretty open here in Alaska on the tundra. I used my 5.5-22X56 NXS all this year on my 6.5 Tikka CTR and even with its 17' FOV at 100 yards on 5.5 I didn't find it too limiting. The thing I didn't like the most about it was having to be always on 22X for the reticle to mean anything so wanting to go FFP. Usually always dialed up to max mag when shooting especially if hunting and taking the time to hold wind, but options are good. Also the eyebox is certainly tighter one the NXS than the Kahles it seem. Especially since the chassis is setup for me perfect when others use the rifle having a more forgiving eyebox is better for everyone.

This scope will be going on the dedicated LR rifle...if I am hunting areas that have tighter cover and shorter shots where more FOV is needed, I have several sporting rifles that 35' FOV on their lowest setting and I will take those instead. I am sorry I should has specified this is not going to be my only hunting rifle.

 

[LR-Shooter]

I have both and while they are both awesome scopes this is my opinion on them. I like the K624i slightly better, it is brighter, and the parallax adjustment is better (more about this below) but the AMG is sharper, color seems more real, and I like the clickless zero and locking turrets.

The Kahles I think loses some sharpness because it is so bright. I think of it like turning up the contrast on your tv and you lose some sharpness. They are both awesome and I use both. In some situations I like the AMG better so it all depends on what you are going to be doing with it.

Another weird thing with them is after zeroing each of them on the same rifle at 100 yards with a 20 MOA rail I have 17.1 mils left of adjustment on the Kahles and 19.1 mils left on the AMG.

The parallax is way different on the Kahles, it is more forgiving where you can move the adjuster ring further without affecting the parallax where the AMG is very tight (not physically tight), once you move a little past the perfect point is goes out of parallax alignment quickly. To me this makes it easier to be more accurate with the K624i.

 

[Ledzep]

Yeah I should just suck it up and go with 4-16 ATACR as the all rounder at 30 oz but if I wanna dork around and plink to a mile every once in a while the 24X could be nice. I thought about the March 3-24X52 seems so good, huge magnification range and oh so light, but fears of tight eyebox, touchy parallax, and one year warranty kinda make me pause at trying one cause I am afraid I'll be left holding the bag if it craps out.

The March is a good scope. I just sold one to buy a Vortex PST Gen II -- to pocket the difference, not because the Vortex is better-- it's "good enough" for now. Anyway, I never noticed the eyebox being an issue, and the parallax is forgiving for as "compressed" as it is. I shot a couple PRS style matches and used it hunting and steel plinking a lot and never had issues. I went to the March from a Vortex Gen2 razor 4.5-27.

On cool cloudy days I could see 6.5mm holes in cardboard @300yd. Really incredible clarity throughout the zoom range and the FML reticle has been one of my favorites.

 

[alaskalanche]

The March is a good scope. I just sold one to buy a Vortex PST Gen II -- to pocket the difference, not because the Vortex is better-- it's "good enough" for now. Anyway, I never noticed the eyebox being an issue, and the parallax is forgiving for as "compressed" as it is. I shot a couple PRS style matches and used it hunting and steel plinking a lot and never had issues. I went to the March from a Vortex Gen2 razor 4.5-27.

On cool cloudy days I could see 6.5mm holes in cardboard @300yd. Really incredible clarity throughout the zoom range and the FML reticle has been one of my favorites.

Very interesting....was this the 3-24X52mm model? You literally went to like half the scope weight going from that Gen 2 razor to the March huh? Thats quite the difference....I like it.

 

[alaskalanche]

I have both and while they are both awesome scopes this is my opinion on them. I like the K624i slightly better, it is brighter, and the parallax adjustment is better (more about this below) but the AMG is sharper, color seems more real, and I like the clickless zero and locking turrets.

The Kahles I think loses some sharpness because it is so bright. I think of it like turning up the contrast on your tv and you lose some sharpness. They are both awesome and I use both. In some situations I like the AMG better so it all depends on what you are going to be doing with it.

Another weird thing with them is after zeroing each of them on the same rifle at 100 yards with a 20 MOA rail I have 17.1 mils left of adjustment on the Kahles and 19.1 mils left on the AMG.

The parallax is way different on the Kahles, it is more forgiving where you can move the adjuster ring further without affecting the parallax where the AMG is very tight (not physically tight), once you move a little past the perfect point is goes out of parallax alignment quickly. To me this makes it easier to be more accurate with the K624i.

Thanks for the heads up....that is certainly something I will look for when I compare them side by side to see which one stays.

 

[Ledzep]

Very interesting....was this the 3-24X52mm model? You literally went to like half the scope weight going from that Gen 2 razor to the March huh? Thats quite the difference....I like it.

Yes, the x52 version, and yes lots of weight loss. The Razor G2 is a great scope, but holy shit it's a pig. The parallax on the March is compressed but hardly needs adjusting between 300yd and infinity. Otherwise up close I would zoom past it, then slowly back it off until the picture cleared up and that was good; no parallax moving my head around.

Another scope to check out is the Leupold Mk6 3-18x. I had one of those a few years back and liked it well enough. I would get the low profile turrets if you go that route, not the squish-lock turrets. Glass is on par with the NF NXS line, but I'd say not quite to the same level of the March or Gen2 razor, really splitting hairs, though.