I have a new gun in the works, a 6XC being put together by Accurate Ordnance. I have a Nightforce 5-25X56 ATACR and a S&B PMII 5-45X56 on hand. I know both are great optics, but is 5-45 ridiculous for shooting club style matches? (PRS style) It’s on a 50 BMG that I am selling and thought breaking up the package may make it easier to move the rifle as well. I’m not a new shooter, but I’m new to the match scene. Thanks for your input!
-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Rifle Scopes How much magnification is too much?
- Thread starter Emmersom Biggens
- Start date
Nah, that 5-45 is useless on anything, I’ll give you my ancient family secret chicken n dumplin recipe for it and take it off your hands.
On a serious note...
I don’t shoot matches, so can’t comment on that use, but I wouldn’t hesitate to use it. If I could afford them, I’d have one on my 308. Hell, I’d put one on my rimfire.
I think the ATACR might suit a PRS build better, but I also don’t have any experience in PRS so take that for what it’s worth.
On a serious note...
I don’t shoot matches, so can’t comment on that use, but I wouldn’t hesitate to use it. If I could afford them, I’d have one on my 308. Hell, I’d put one on my rimfire.
I think the ATACR might suit a PRS build better, but I also don’t have any experience in PRS so take that for what it’s worth.
In reality I rarely go above 15-16x, and end up 10-12 on most shots past 1000.
I don't shoot matches but I think magnification is personal preference. I am almost always zoomed in at 300 but its kind of a crap shoot at distance. For me it mostly comes down to mirage, light, and if I am holding or dialing, with mirage being the biggest factor. If its bad I am definitely backing it down.
The three times I can think of where more mag is bad would be:
1) Mirage
2) Trying to locate a target
3) If you’ve just run up a hill and your heartbeat is heavy/fast.
With #3, the reticle will be moving the same amount on any mag, but a lower setting may give you the illusion of more stability, a mental confidence boost that could positively affect the shot. Aside from those, seeing the target better is rarely a bad thing.
That having been said, this is a topic that’s been discussed before, and the general consensus seemed to be that most guys were around 15-16x at a maximum when shooting a timed stage, even at 1000K. Some went as high at 18x, fewer still at 20x, and so on. But the majority of respondents said 15-16x.
So your 5-45x would work just fine, you’d just have a boatload of mag that you probably wouldn’t use.
1) Mirage
2) Trying to locate a target
3) If you’ve just run up a hill and your heartbeat is heavy/fast.
With #3, the reticle will be moving the same amount on any mag, but a lower setting may give you the illusion of more stability, a mental confidence boost that could positively affect the shot. Aside from those, seeing the target better is rarely a bad thing.
That having been said, this is a topic that’s been discussed before, and the general consensus seemed to be that most guys were around 15-16x at a maximum when shooting a timed stage, even at 1000K. Some went as high at 18x, fewer still at 20x, and so on. But the majority of respondents said 15-16x.
So your 5-45x would work just fine, you’d just have a boatload of mag that you probably wouldn’t use.
Point taken!!???
In reality I rarely go above 15-16x, and end up 10-12 on most shots past 1000.
My first match I don’t think I zoomed over 20X, but I also know I don’t know all there is to know about this ridiculously addictive hobby!
I live in South Arkansas so all of these high power optics are useless to me. Anything over about 18x is relatively unpleasant due to mirage and whatnot. Plus, I have no problem shooting well over 1000m with 12x with my AMG. Doesn't matter how "good" your glass is. I've had Minox, TT, etc....its all about conditions.
True, 16X is plenty for a mile.
OTOH, I like to see at high mag when conditions are right and too much is never enough.
Maybe outer space, but then you will have to figure non-linear dope for slight gravity variations on your 5000 mile shot.
If you're shooting at 100-200 on paper, higher mag is nice. (Unless you're shooting high power competitions where other brands reign supreme.)
You could save a few pennies by staying with a max of 25, unless you'd prefer the NF atacr.
You could save a few pennies by staying with a max of 25, unless you'd prefer the NF atacr.
I pretty much never go above 20x. On a smaller local match I went to last year, I was never above 12x.
So as much as I like S&B, I would never even consider a 5-45x. I have a 5-25x56 PM2 and sometimes it feels like a bit much.
So as much as I like S&B, I would never even consider a 5-45x. I have a 5-25x56 PM2 and sometimes it feels like a bit much.
I’d only save the SB for f-class if that’s a future possibility or you shoot a lot of paper at 200-300. If not I think selling it for back up funds or another back up 5-25 NF is what I would do if it were me. Having a 7-35 and it’s way more than enough for me.
I just want to be happy with the purchases I buy not just settling on stuff a sales person said it's what I should buy , but be happy with the items . and not feel like i overpaid for less . Having and not needing rather than needing and not having .
My first foray into an upgraded world of LR glass education took around 7 months testing different scopes mostly b/c my friends with said glass don't live next door. Glad I did though b/c testing outdoors in hot and humid conditions taught me a lot. Of course that journey isn't over, but glad I took my time I'm in conditions as bad or worse than you 9 months out of the year. In the end I bought way more mag than I need b/c the deal was so good on a 5-25, but would do a 3-15 or 4-20 max next time. The more time I spend in the soup the more my SWFA 10x seems like not ideal, but as much as I need to bang steel at 1000.
Last edited:
I think that having the ability to dial high on the magnification (greater than 20x) when you need it is great for things like zeroing you're rifle and sometimes target ID. Also, having a 25x scope and shooting targets at 1000m on 12x helps me greatly due to the FOV where I can see wind, mirage, bullet trace, etc. Its easier to come up with corrections that way...for me. Having big magnification in the toolbox is good, however, I rarely use it.
You'll also find that having a 25x scope and shooting at anywhere between 10x and 20x has better image quality than having a scope that has a max power of 15x and using it on 15x. Doesn't matter what brand of optic you use.
Just my thoughts and observations.
Thanks yea I think I sensed that too all the glass I tried was 6-24 or 5-25 from vortex to burris to nf and leupold. in the middle range was the sweet zone for all of em. Once the sun was up and mirage was cooking didn't matter what I was looking through it was on 12-15
Last edited:
Sounds like a good idea! Trying to figure out the whole posting in the PX thing now. I appreciate your input.
Why are so many people going with the Nightforce 7-35x given that so few people ever go above 20x?
Good point! I have a 7-35 ATACR on a 6.5CM, the only time I go over 20 or so is when zeroing on paper, and I could definitely do without it. Im hoping to trade the 5-45 S&B I have for a 5-25 S&B at some point.
i think im in the minority, i have a march 10-60 and the sb5-45 along with the other "regular" mag ranges
not speaking about prs but i find my self trying to use more mag when possible
when looking for little groups, above 35-40X feels like cheating
if i had a 5-25 id swap with you in a second
not speaking about prs but i find my self trying to use more mag when possible
when looking for little groups, above 35-40X feels like cheating
if i had a 5-25 id swap with you in a second
I get it! To each his own, right? I did figure out the PX thing, so its up for sale/trade.
I’m not sure sure why so many are. I like it for zeroing and don’t shoot prs so I’m not on a time crunch. Is it needed? No. But its a popular choice for some reasons Definitely with prs series shooters and king of 2 miles (elr)
I hardly ever use the lower end on any scope so I’d rather have a little more on the big end than the bottom. I’m not going to use 3.5x or 5x magnification.
The 5-45 x56 is a great scope for going to the range and all kinds of things.
It is however rather large and heavy if weight is a big concern.
One other thing is that if you are only using it for matches and don't go high magnification much, you may find that you have to work at not dialing it too much during quick changes in distance.
I think however you'll find that 5x is way wide enough for just about any comps or standard shooting work outside of close up game hunting.
It is however rather large and heavy if weight is a big concern.
One other thing is that if you are only using it for matches and don't go high magnification much, you may find that you have to work at not dialing it too much during quick changes in distance.
I think however you'll find that 5x is way wide enough for just about any comps or standard shooting work outside of close up game hunting.
I'm running a 5-25 PMII (and a 6XC) at PRS matches, and like everyone else I seldom go past 15X. I'd say is hover around 12X most of the time, even out to 1,500 yards. Maybe 2-3 stages a year do I have the luxury of cranking it up to 25x. Now my first match, I ran the whole thing on 25x and timed out a ton hunting targets lol.
The 5-24 S&B is probably really neat scope, but wildly overkill for PRS. I'm honestly baffled by the popularity of the 7-35 NF ATACR for PRS, because no one is using much more than 20X 95% of the time I imagine.
The 5-24 S&B is probably really neat scope, but wildly overkill for PRS. I'm honestly baffled by the popularity of the 7-35 NF ATACR for PRS, because no one is using much more than 20X 95% of the time I imagine.
It really depends a lot on HOW you hunt. I wouldn't even consider a "hunting" scope greater than 16x and a 44mm objective...but I am not looking to shoot a prairie dog at 1,100 yards, and I carry my rifle a lot.
For the .22-250 Remmy, which is almost certainly a slow-twist, the rifle is going to mostly limit you to a range where a 27x 56mm scope is unneeded unless you are shooting field mice in the dark.
That said, MAYBE you just want to be a prepared kind of person for that 6.5mm.
For the .22-250 Remmy, which is almost certainly a slow-twist, the rifle is going to mostly limit you to a range where a 27x 56mm scope is unneeded unless you are shooting field mice in the dark.
That said, MAYBE you just want to be a prepared kind of person for that 6.5mm.
Nope, too much magnification is always an expect of expectations, a long range shooter, hunting and someone who just into precision shooting would definitely need different magnifications and sometime reticle function...so as a hunter, the above is my view on magnification preference,
The OP was asking about 6 XC and shooting PRS. The part about 6.5mm and hunting threw me off.
Is that Schmidt FFP? If so, how thick do those reticle lines get at higher magnification? If not too thick at high magnification, then how difficult is it to see the hash marks at lower magnification? What range of magnification is ideal for the reticle and is that a good range for match use?
A FFP scope is usually better for PRS style matches since there are targets at various distances and you’ll need to adjust the magnification rather than shoot at a magnification for which a SFP reticle is indexed.
A FFP scope is usually better for PRS style matches since there are targets at various distances and you’ll need to adjust the magnification rather than shoot at a magnification for which a SFP reticle is indexed.
Similar threads
