Rifle Scopes Help me choose a sorta .22 scope

[TommyTwoGuns]

Just got a CZ 455 Varmint Evolution in .22 and am expecting my CZ-USA .17 HMR barrel next week (I hope). The local .22 match is silhouettes. The Chickens are at 40 yards, Pigs at 50 yards, Turkeys at 75 yards and Rams at 100 yards. I have an Athlon Argos 8X34 on my Tikka TAC A1 in CM and a Nikon 223 on my Tikka CTR in CM. I like almost everything about the Argos except the restrictive (at least to me) eye box. Also have an Eotech with a flip out of the way 4X on my FN PS90.

My first thought is to maybe upgrade the TAC A1 scope and switch around with it on some of the shorter range stuff. Of course I could also just get a scope specific to my CZ 455. Thing is I will be shooting the CZ in .22 more than anything else in matches so it might make sense to put my best glass on it. The only range I can realistically shoot at maxes out at 300 yards and even a poor shot like me can hit stuff that close with the TAC A1. While I don't have anywhere to use it in a match I also expect to shoot the .17 HMR a lot at 300 yards if I am that capable.

The biggest issue for me is what I will call my desire for a really big eye box with a fairly high power. I would like to keep the price point under $US1,000 or so. I have never really shot using anything like a NF or Kahles (pick your poison here) and am wondering if getting a $US3k+ scope would provide a realistic bang for the buck in terms of a better eye box. I really don't like to shoot in bad conditions so dim light is not really a consideration.

 

[patriot07]

I wouldn't personally spend $3k+ for a 22 scope that won't be used past 100 yards. I have a $100 Bushnell on my 10/22 and it shoots awesome.

Completely top end, I'd consider something like a PST Gen 2. The 5-25 has a very generous eyebox under 20x, and the 3-15 is supposedly the best of the entire lineup.

That being said, if eyebox is really a problem, you should consider a stock pack or something similar to make the rifle fit you a little better. Even scopes with tight eyeboxes aren't a huge problem if the gun fits you properly.

 

[TommyTwoGuns]

[QUOTE="patriot07, post: 7083068, member: 116841SNIP

That being said, if eyebox is really a problem, you should consider a stock pack or something similar to make the rifle fit you a little better. Even scopes with tight eyeboxes aren't a huge problem if the gun fits you properly.[/QUOTE]

I have set up my scopes as well as I can, and according to what I have seen on the internet they are set up correctly. The thing is when you are switching targets you may well be moving your head and body which can take your eye out of the eye box. Even shooting at paper when I switch from the top to bottom bullseyes I sometimes get out of the eyebox.

Which was why I asked for scope recommendations that had a big eyebox.

 

[PAYDIRT]

I have the swfa 3-15 on my CZ, it was out of my budget but I worked memorial weekend to make it happen. Don't skimp on 22 glass, it's the rifle you will shoot the most. We shoot 22's a bunch, in the evening when it cools down we shoot, sometimes 3-5 guy's. If $1000 was my budget I'd try the pst gen 2 , a guy can shoot one for 6 months and if he doesn't like it you wouldn't loose much if you resold it. As for eyebox I try to have my rifle set up so I don't have to deal with it.

 

[steve123]

For lack of a way to say it most scopes out there have normal eyebox's??? This is something that I got used to.

The only scopes that come to mind that have the truly forgiving eyebox's are the Hensoldt's but they don't focus close for 22 shooting at less tha 50Y.

That particular Argos IMO doesn't pull off 34x the best/ 34x is lot to ask for a sub $400 scope.

I have a Cronus BTR 4-5 -29x56 and so far I like it a lot on my 22rf, backed off to 16-18x the FOV is huge and I haven't had any complaints. 29x it's starting to get tight, but again, this is normal. On 29x I'd be prone off the bipod so no eyebox problems.

So I'm unsure what to suggest to you in your budget??? BTW I'm pretty happy with my Ares BTR 4.5-27 but I consider the eyebox normal too.

 

[spaniel]

Most of my 22s wear 2-7 $70 scopes. A couple precision up to 15X. I can't imagine a reason for more magnification unless the gun will NEVER be shot at shorter ranges. If I can shoot highpower to 1K yards with a 4-16X kinda hard to justify such glass on a 22....

 

[patriot07]

I have set up my scopes as well as I can, and according to what I have seen on the internet they are set up correctly. The thing is when you are switching targets you may well be moving your head and body which can take your eye out of the eye box. Even shooting at paper when I switch from the top to bottom bullseyes I sometimes get out of the eyebox.

Which was why I asked for scope recommendations that had a big eyebox.

Honestly, not trying to be rude...but if you are moving from the top bullseye to the bottom on paper and you lose your sight picture, it's a rifle stock fit problem, not a scope problem. Especially if we're talking about a 22 scope that probably shouldn't realistically go past 15x. Your gun should be set up to where you don't have to constantly adjust your head/neck to keep a sight picture.

Look up the Triad Tactical stock pack. I know it's $50, but buy one and when you get it, install it and add padding under the stock pack if necessary to raise the cheek weld to where you get a good sight picture without any effort. That will make the scope's eyebox much less important.

Then go get a PST Gen 2 3-15 and thank me twice.

 

[SubOptimal]

I'll agree with @patriot07
You have a stock fit problem, not an eye box problem, unless there is something seriously wrong with your scope.
Try this:
Close your eyes and mount the gun.
Open your eyes, you should be dead center behind the scope and in the middle of the eye box fore and aft.
If not, adjust the stock for length of pull or adjust the scope position on the gun for fore and aft adjustment.
For side to side adjustment add a cheek pad or shave the stock till the damn gun fits you.

As a long time competitive trap shooter, I would spend weeks working on stock fit till the gun shot where I wanted it. Initially on a patterning board and later on flying birds. Since there are no sights on trap guns, there are, but they are never used, gun fit determines wether or not you will go 200 for 200 or break 199 and lose. It is no different on a rifle. When a gun fits you, it requires zero muscle to set up behind the gun and zero muscle is the key to accurate shooting.

 

[bunsen27]

All my rimfire rifles wear a Vortex Viper 6.5-20x44. Originally you could get them from CameralandNY for $250 but the price has gone up to about $300 and Cameraland is no longer a Vortex dealer. The scopes are a little harder to find as Vortex has technically discontinued them, but they are still out there.

http://www.vortexoptics.com/product...4-pa-riflescope-dead-hold-bdc-reticle/reticle

https://www.sportsmanswarehouse.com...PfC78R1OMsvECcNXEu1vZG2XCo_pZ7kxoC0AMQAvD_BwE

 

[TommyTwoGuns]

Let me rephrase my question. I have seen multiple posts on the internet that a Kahles has a much bigger eye box than lower tier optics. I know the definition of exit pupil and how to calculate it but have never seen a formula to calculate the eye box. So the question is does anyone know if there is a formula to calculate the exit box. Or to make things easier for me a chart that lists the eye box size for different scopes.

The whole point of my original question is that if you are shooting silhouettes you will be shooting off hand and moving the weapon and your head to acquire the next target and realistically a larger eye box will be more forgiving doing that. I am not trying to avoid the question of setting up the scope right, just saying when you start moving from one target to another target, especially off hand you may well get your eye out of the eye box and have to get it back in.

As an aside when shooting my Tikka TAC A1 in CM from a tripod or a bench with bags I am happy with how fast my eye gets in the eye box since I set the tripod up in my den, put the scope at highest magnification and put the scope on the rails as far away as possible when the sight pix had no black at the edges. But I am setting up a new weapon for a much different shooting experience and my take is getting a scope with the biggest possible eye box will be an advantage.

Bottom line is I am asking which scope/scopes have the biggest eye box, not advice on how to mount a scope.

 

[PAYDIRT]

Rain on the $50 deal. Try this for $13.00.

 

[TommyTwoGuns]

Rain on the $50 deal. Try this for $13.00. View attachment 6910972

How many .22 shells will it hold.

 

[PAYDIRT]

How many .22 shells will it hold.

One is all you need if you "do your part" right? The shell holder is detachable.

 

[TommyTwoGuns]

One is all you need if you "do your part" right? The shell holder is detachable.

The whole point of using a rimfire .22 to train with is to put as many rounds down range as possible so one is not all you need. But my OP was about scopes and which ones had the largest eye box. Not sure how a second rate over priced buttstock would help.

 

[patriot07]

What magnification are you planning on shooting this scoped 22 at offhand?

 

[TommyTwoGuns]

What magnification are you planning on shooting this scoped 22 at offhand?

That is a good question I don' really know the answer to. The offhand targets are the NRA standard silhouettes in matches. Shooting my TAC A1 I will go up to 34X with the Athlon for paper but that is off a tripod. If the truth be known I don't really have much recent offhand experience with silhouettes.

My experience has been that often times the key to solving a problem is often to ask the right question and you may well have asked the question that will solve my problem. I have shot the Nikon 233 3-9 at 100 yards and can easily hit paper with the CTR. So now I am thinking the best solution may be to shoot something like the Nikon for silhouettes and use a higher power scope when I switch out the barrel to the .17HMR at paper with small dots.

Thanks for asking a question that headed me in the right direction.

 

[Kny88]

I'd buy one of Primary Arms prism optics. Lets you shoot with both eyes open. The low power is gonna have a good field of view for quick transitions.

Just make sure if you go for one you get the reticle that is either not precaliberated to another caliber or one of the ones designed for 22lr.

Also, to echo other posters. 100% sounds like your getting an inconsistent cheek/chinweld related to how your optics are setup. If you're having the black border come into play consistently something is off.

 

[alaskalanche]

https://www.amazon.com/Allen-Buttst...ifle+pouch&dpPl=1&dpID=41b-1NF4Q+L&ref=plSrch

I used that one on my 22. Can stock a few spare loaded 10 round mags in there or 50+ rounds just tossed in the zippered pouch. And just like the other ones add foam under as needed until you can get a good cheek weld with your eyes closed and open your eyes to a full sight picture in the scope.

 

[patriot07]

That is a good question I don' really know the answer to. The offhand targets are the NRA standard silhouettes in matches. Shooting my TAC A1 I will go up to 34X with the Athlon for paper but that is off a tripod. If the truth be known I don't really have much recent offhand experience with silhouettes.

My experience has been that often times the key to solving a problem is often to ask the right question and you may well have asked the question that will solve my problem. I have shot the Nikon 233 3-9 at 100 yards and can easily hit paper with the CTR. So now I am thinking the best solution may be to shoot something like the Nikon for silhouettes and use a higher power scope when I switch out the barrel to the .17HMR at paper with small dots.

Thanks for asking a question that headed me in the right direction.

Glad it helped. The best way to open up the eyebox is by dialing back magnification. Most folks shooting multiple targets in abnormal (non-prone) positions are going to be dialed way back to something between 8x and 16x (ballpark). Trying to use 34x in that scenario would be nearly impossible. My SWFA HD 5-20 dialed back to 10x-14x has a huge eyebox and is fantastic for offhand-type shooting. I still think the PST2 3-15 is a fantastic rimfire scope that would suit dialing or holding at distance, as well as paper-punching from prone or shooting offhand positions. And for the level of scope it's at, it has a very generous eyebox. It's not Kahles, but it's also a third of the price and way more than a third of the performance if you're talking about a rimfire application.

 

[PAYDIRT]

The whole point of using a rimfire .22 to train with is to put as many rounds down range as possible so one is not all you need. But my OP was about scopes and which ones had the largest eye box. Not sure how a second rate over priced buttstock would help.View attachment 6911009

Thanks for bringing me up to speed there. Can't believe I missed the fact that people shoot multiple rounds with their "trainer." My post was a response to another stock pack post, just trying to put some other options out there. Good luck with your eye box problems.