Rifle Scopes Looking for mid to higher end scope with reticles and I can actually see

[Macdaddy]

I currently have two NF NSX 2.5x10x42 MOAR scopes on two of my hunting rifles. Love the glass but my older eyes just have a tough time seeing the reticles.

I am used to (and require) higher end glass (Premier Reticles, S&B, Swaro, etc.) due to some eye issues.

Problem I'm having is finding a physically smaller/lighter scope (under 25 oz.) in the mid-power range (3-15 or 3-18) in an objective preferably under 50mm (if possible) that has reticles that are clearly visible to me. Illumination is a strong desire but not a requirement.

I am open to recommendations for lesser expensive glass if they meet my criteria as there are some surprisingly nice "sleepers" out there too. I just don't know where they are.

I have considered the March scopes but have not been able to locate one that I can physically look through.

Looking for suggestions:

Thanks,

 

[lennyo3034]

Where are you located? Perhaps someone near you has scopes you're considering.

 

[pmclaine]

H2CMR fits that description for me.

The open mill dots are plenty visible at high mag and become standard mil dots at low mag.

It was my first reticle with a function and I was able to quickly understand the subtensions in my newness.

 

[Macdaddy]

Where are you located? Perhaps someone near you has scopes you're considering.

I'm in N. VA.

 

[Macdaddy]

H2CMR fits that description for me.

The open mill dots are plenty visible at high mag and become standard mil dots at low mag.

It was my first reticle with a function and I was able to quickly understand the subtensions in my newness.

Any suggestions as to which scopes utilizing this reticle?
Thanks,

 

[pmclaine]

I have it in a S&B PMII 5-25, also available in more compact models.

 

[lennyo3034]

I'm in N. VA.

I'm in MD and shoot at peacemaker as well as several ranges in the MDPRS series (New Holland and Mayberry). I have both the March 3-24x42 and x52 if you want to have a look through them.

 

[Macdaddy]

That's great. I am a member of Peacemaker too. Joined the first year they were opened. I would LOVE to see the March scopes and get your opinion on them. Let's do a sidebar (conversation) and try to arrange a get-together some time.

 

[Dirty8404]

A Leupold Mark 5 3.6-18 might be a good fit for you. They have an illuminated TMR reticle option, and the people that have them love them judging by the thread that’s going.

It’s small, in your weight range (26oz I think) 44mm objective, reports on glass quality are really good, reticle though is something only you can decide.

If you like that S&B reticle and want German glass the Ultra Short 5-20 might be worth a good look.

 

[Codiekfx400]

Leupold vx6 would fit that description. Very nice hunting scopes.

 

[lancetkenyon]

March is a great option. I recently picked up a 3-24×52 w. FML-1 ill. for a lightweight hunting rifle. Reticle is great for that option. Fine portions are plenty visible at 3x, and, the heavy outer stadia really draw the eyes in. Zoom in, and the subtensions are very usable. Glass is very good. Not as good as my S&Bs and Premiers, but close to my Kahles Gen 3.

Lightweight @ 24.4oz
Shortish @ 13.4" (?)
Low profile turrets

 

[Glassaholic]

Mac, the H2CMR in the Schmidt & Bender full size 3-20x50 is phenomenally thick, so is the March 3-24x52 with FML-1 reticle. For a lower price option I'd recommend looking into the GA Precision deal on the Bushnell LRHS 4.5-18x44 scope with G2H reticle as this is a little thicker than other more competition oriented reticles. One of my favorites is the Vortex AMG's EBR-7/B (the new B version has a center dot instead of the crosshair shown in my pic). More usable than the H2CMR (IMO) but still on the thicker side would be the MSR reticles used in Schmidt, Kahles, Steiner and some others. Maybe check out the new Kahles K318i with MSRK reticle, CS Tactical had a demo one they were selling at a great price a week or so ago. Here's some pics to give you an idea of how these look:

G3 reticle is close to the G2H where the G2H has the more friendly lower magnification circle

 

[CSTactical]

The Tangent Theta TT315M Professional Marksman 3-15x50mm with the Gen 2 Mil-Dot will give you the premium optical system that you are used too while being 27oz. https://bit.ly/2CQvoIK

 

[buffalowinter]

I have the same problem. Trijicon Accupoint series of scopes has an illuminated dot in the reticle that is visible in daylight conditions, just like their ACOG or a red dot sight. I'm very impressed with mine, wish it came in a higher power than 5-20. Can be found for right under $1000.

Trijicon AccuPoint®
The Trijicon AccuPoint is a high-quality, variable powered sporting riflescope featuring
a battery-free illuminated reticle, superior glass clarity and rugged construction. Designed
to stand up to the elements, the AccuPoint maintains the refinement needed for precise
windage and elevation adjustments. The multi-layer coated lenses provide superior light
transmission, while the illuminated reticle aids in quick target engagement. The AccuPoint
provides a quick focus eyepiece and long eye relief.

 

[Glassaholic]

The Tangent Theta TT315M Professional Marksman 3-15x50mm with the Gen 2 Mil-Dot will give you the premium optical system that you are used too while being 27oz. https://bit.ly/2CQvoIK

That's another fantastic scope, I had the Premier LT version

 

[CSTactical]

I figured you had a pic somewhere

That's another fantastic scope, I had the Premier LT version
View attachment 6910668

 

[lennyo3034]

Would love to try one of those. A premier version popped up for sale about a month ago but sold before I could jump on it. Can't afford the TT version. .

 

[W54/XM-388]

The S&B P4 would be a good reticle to try.
However if you want something that you can clearly see the reticle in big when you are at the low magnification settings, you'll need to go to SFP as if you do FFP like most want, at the very low end it is going to be fairly fine lines (The P4 is better for low end than the thinner P4FL).

 

[Macdaddy]

The Tangent Theta TT315M Professional Marksman 3-15x50mm with the Gen 2 Mil-Dot will give you the premium optical system that you are used too while being 27oz. https://bit.ly/2CQvoIK

thank you SOOOOO much. This was a well thought out response and very helpful.

All responses from everyone have been incredible. Some things I already knew and had forgotten and some new information to consider.

BTW: I have owned two Premier Reticle scopes with the Gen II and loved them both. The scopes however, were too big and heavy for my lightweight, carry hunting rifles. The reticle however is almost perfect for me.

 

[beetroot]

Leupold VX6hd and VX5hd are two very good options and more of a hunting scope than others mentioned.
If you aren't after a "tactical" reticle then the firedot duplex is very good.

You probably already know this, but a SFP scope is more suited to hunting than FFP, as with FFP when you have the scope set to a low magnification for close/snap shooting the reticle is very fine and can be tough to pick up. A firedot reticle for this type of shooting is perfect.

 

[Macdaddy]

Leupold VX6hd and VX5hd are two very good options and more of a hunting scope than others mentioned.
If you aren't after a "tactical" reticle then the firedot duplex is very good.

You probably already know this, but a SFP scope is more suited to hunting than FFP, as with FFP when you have the scope set to a low magnification for close/snap shooting the reticle is very fine and can be tough to pick up. A firedot reticle for this type of shooting is perfect.

I agree. In fact, I've been looking at the VX5 & VX6 as options.

I have owned and shot several FFP scopes as well as SFP scopes. Since I don't range with my hunting scopes, I have no strong preference but have found the SFP to be generally more suited to my requirements (size/weight/reticle thickness). Having said that however, I personally prefer a .mil dial-up vs MOA which seems to be more prevalent in the FFP world. Again, no strong preference in FFP/SFP or .mil/MOA. Size and weight of scope along with glass quality and reticle visibility are the four things that I won't compromise on. Everything else becomes a distant second or third area of importance to me.

 

[Glassaholic]

BTW: I have owned two Premier Reticle scopes with the Gen II and loved them both. The scopes however, were too big and heavy for my lightweight, carry hunting rifles. The reticle however is almost perfect for me.

Mac, I'm assuming you had the "big" Premier's (possibly the 5-25's?) because the TT315M is anything but big and heavy, at just under 28oz and 13.8" it is ideal for a carry rifle.

 

[Glassaholic]

You probably already know this, but a SFP scope is more suited to hunting than FFP, as with FFP when you have the scope set to a low magnification for close/snap shooting the reticle is very fine and can be tough to pick up. A firedot reticle for this type of shooting is perfect.

I would disagree with this statement, I do not think SFP is more suited to hunting than FFP, it's a matter of learning the limitations of your gear, in fact, I would say that FFP is better for hunting than SFP. Yes the reticle does get smaller as you dial down magnification, but how many people are actually taking a shot at 3x with their scope? If you live out east and are always hunting in thick bush I doubt you're going to be looking for a 5-25 anyway. The problem with SFP is that if you're going to use your reticle for drop you are limited to a particular magnification where that reticle is aligned with the mil/moa values it was designed for, most SFP units don't have very good turrets and often times they are capped making it difficult to dial elevation/wind. I used to have this mindset though (SFP for hunting, FFP for long range) but as I used and became familiar with FFP I soon realized, why the heck am I hindering myself by using SFP in my hunting gear and then I got rid of all my SFP scopes (well I still have a Burris 3-9x40 sitting around somewhere). I also used to have the mindset that I had to have at minimum 4x on the low end, but that has also changed and I've realized that while it may be nice it is not completely necessary - again if you're not always hunting in the thick stuff. I'm not saying there is something wrong with SFP, but I do believe there are more limitations to SFP and if hunters would take the time to understand the benefits of FFP they would soon be making the switch.

 

[CSTactical]

thank you SOOOOO much. This was a well thought out response and very helpful.

All responses from everyone have been incredible. Some things I already knew and had forgotten and some new information to consider.

BTW: I have owned two Premier Reticle scopes with the Gen II and loved them both. The scopes however, were too big and heavy for my lightweight, carry hunting rifles. The reticle however is almost perfect for me.

Let us know if you want one and we'll be happy to help you

 

[Macdaddy]

Mac, the H2CMR in the Schmidt & Bender full size 3-20x50 is phenomenally thick, so is the March 3-24x52 with FML-1 reticle. For a lower price option I'd recommend looking into the GA Precision deal on the Bushnell LRHS 4.5-18x44 scope with G2H reticle as this is a little thicker than other more competition oriented reticles. One of my favorites is the Vortex AMG's EBR-7/B (the new B version has a center dot instead of the crosshair shown in my pic). More usable than the H2CMR (IMO) but still on the thicker side would be the MSR reticles used in Schmidt, Kahles, Steiner and some others. Maybe check out the new Kahles K318i with MSRK reticle, CS Tactical had a demo one they were selling at a great price a week or so ago. Here's some pics to give you an idea of how these look:

Mac, the H2CMR in the Schmidt & Bender full size 3-20x50 is phenomenally thick, so is the March 3-24x52 with FML-1 reticle. For a lower price option I'd recommend looking into the GA Precision deal on the Bushnell LRHS 4.5-18x44 scope with G2H reticle as this is a little thicker than other more competition oriented reticles. One of my favorites is the Vortex AMG's EBR-7/B (the new B version has a center dot instead of the crosshair shown in my pic). More usable than the H2CMR (IMO) but still on the thicker side would be the MSR reticles used in Schmidt, Kahles, Steiner and some others. Maybe check out the new Kahles K318i with MSRK reticle, CS Tactical had a demo one they were selling at a great price a week or so ago. Here's some pics to give you an idea of how these look:

View attachment 6910646

View attachment 6910647

View attachment 6910649

View attachment 6910648

G3 reticle is close to the G2H where the G2H has the more friendly lower magnification circle

Mac, the H2CMR in the Schmidt & Bender full size 3-20x50 is phenomenally thick, so is the March 3-24x52 with FML-1 reticle. For a lower price option I'd recommend looking into the GA Precision deal on the Bushnell LRHS 4.5-18x44 scope with G2H reticle as this is a little thicker than other more competition oriented reticles. One of my favorites is the Vortex AMG's EBR-7/B (the new B version has a center dot instead of the crosshair shown in my pic). More usable than the H2CMR (IMO) but still on the thicker side would be the MSR reticles used in Schmidt, Kahles, Steiner and some others. Maybe check out the new Kahles K318i with MSRK reticle, CS Tactical had a demo one they were selling at a great price a week or so ago. Here's some pics to give you an idea of how these look:

View attachment 6910646

View attachment 6910647

View attachment 6910649

View attachment 6910648

G3 reticle is close to the G2H where the G2H has the more friendly lower magnification circle

Went to the GA Precision site and got into them via the link but when I tried to put the scope in my "cart" it wouldn't load simply advising the scopes were not currently available. I sent them a note and tried to call - but to no avail. I'll keep trying to contact them. In the meantime, I did get the opportunity yesterday to pick up and look through the Leupold VX5HD scope. Not bad at all. Now just need to see what I can get one for via a Hide supporter.

 

[beetroot]

but how many people are actually taking a shot at 3x with their scope? If you live out east and are always hunting in thick bush I doubt you're going to be looking for a 5-25 anyway.

As the original poster had said he currently uses a 2.5-10, it's pretty fair to assume that a 5-25 is not what he is after in a hunting scope, as well as due to his struggling to see his current reticles a SFP scope is likely to suit his hunting scopes better.

There are plenty of very good hunting scopes that have exposed turrets and are SFP the best part of the Leupold line has exposed turret options as well as the best part of Swazorski and Zeiss' line ups, all of which are entirely aimed at hunters and are very popular with hunters around the world.
I actually live in New Zealand and even hunters who shoot fairly long range still like to have less than 3x on the low end with 2x being even more popular, as you never know when you will come across an animal an need to shoot quickly, which is the mind set in much of Europe also.

SFP in a scope with a max magnification of 15x is not much of a problem anyway, as you are either shooting something at close range on less than full power or you are taking your time dialing for a long shot which is very likely to be on max power anyway.
Now if you are predominantly hunting long range then yes you may prefer a FFP scope and there are many reason FFP may be more suitable, but if your idea of an average hunting scope is a Vortex Razor 4.5-27 or a PMII 5-25 then I'd say your not actually buying a hunting scope.

 

[Macdaddy]

I figured you had a pic somewhere

I've owned both the Premier Heritage 3x15x34mm and the Premier Lite 3x15x30mm and loved them both. In the Heritage I started with the XLR reticle and then purchased a GEN II XL due to inability to see the XLR reticle clearly. In the Lite Hunter, I also had the GEN II XL. Loved the reticles but the scopes themselves were physically impractical for a light carry rifle which I am packing around at 10K elevation. At my age, the adage "ozs equals lbs" when carrying all day is definitely true. (I was partial to the Premier scopes since their production facility was located only about 10 miles from my house. I could go into the facility and inspect the different units with a little notice. In fact, I did a review here on the Hide about the Lite Hunter version before it went into full production. This was all before they sold to ATI and moved out of VA.) Anyway, something smaller with the same GEN II XL reticle would be great.

 

[Glassaholic]

As the original poster had said he currently uses a 2.5-10, it's pretty fair to assume that a 5-25 is not what he is after in a hunting scope,

You took my quote about the 5-25 out of context, I was referring to hunting in the east predominantly in the thick stuff. We all look for equipment that will fit our particular needs, a 5-25 doesn't make much sense for short range only and a 1-4 doesn't make much sense for long range.

as well as due to his struggling to see his current reticles a SFP scope is likely to suit his hunting scopes better.

But this is where I think the fallacy is, if you think of most FFP scopes they have some type of mil or moa hash type of reticle which allows the reticle to be used at any magnification, very few SFP scopes have this feature, most fall into some type of duplex style or BDC and if they do have mil/moa hash marks those marks are only calibrated at one specific magnification making confusing to some. I believe those scopes have limitations that are not outweighed by their benefits. I am okay with you and others disagreeing with me, but I think more hunters need to look into this.

There are plenty of very good hunting scopes that have exposed turrets and are SFP the best part of the Leupold line has exposed turret options as well as the best part of Swazorski and Zeiss' line ups, all of which are entirely aimed at hunters and are very popular with hunters around the world.

I never said there wasn't.

I actually live in New Zealand and even hunters who shoot fairly long range still like to have less than 3x on the low end with 2x being even more popular, as you never know when you will come across an animal an need to shoot quickly, which is the mind set in much of Europe also.

Again, another fallacy I believe, how many shots have been taken at 2x that couldn't have been taken with 4x or even 5x? I think this is more of a perception than it is a reality and I think there are many perceptions that hunters need to be educated on.

SFP in a scope with a max magnification of 15x is not much of a problem anyway, as you are either shooting something at close range on less than full power or you are taking your time dialing for a long shot which is very likely to be on max power anyway.

While I do agree that some FFP reticles in 3-15 or similar scopes get pretty thin, there are others that are better balanced, again, I'm going to say that the benefits of FFP outweigh the limitations.

Now if you are predominantly hunting long range then yes you may prefer a FFP scope and there are many reason FFP may be more suitable, but if your idea of an average hunting scope is a Vortex Razor 4.5-27 or a PMII 5-25 then I'd say your not actually buying a hunting scope.

Why not, I could mount a telescope on a rifle and shoot an animal and call it a hunting scope, this is exactly the notion I am trying to get across, a hunting scope can be "any" scope that is used to get the job done, just because a particular scope may not fit within the norms of a shooting style doesn't mean it can't be used, and used quite effectively.


I'm sorry OP for derailing your thread.

 

[beetroot]

I am okay with you and others disagreeing with me, but I think more hunters need to look into this.

Again, another fallacy I believe, how many shots have been taken at 2x that couldn't have been taken with 4x or even 5x? I think this is more of a perception than it is a reality and I think there are many perceptions that hunters need to be educated on.

What makes you think the majority of hunters are un-educated?
I know a lot of hunters who are well schooled on the pros and cons of FFP vs SFP owning many FFP scopes, yet choose a SFP scope for their hunting rifle.
They also have enough experience hunting to know that having 2x or 3x on the bottom end is more useful than 25x on the top for 99% of their hunting needs, not to mention a 3-15 scope will often be smaller and lighter than a 5-25 or similar.

It's great that you find FFP suits your style of hunting, but for the reasons the OP listed on the original post SFP would likely be more suited and he confirmed in post #21.

 

[beetroot]

I've owned both the Premier Heritage 3x15x34mm and the Premier Lite 3x15x30mm and loved them both. In the Heritage I started with the XLR reticle and then purchased a GEN II XL due to inability to see the XLR reticle clearly. In the Lite Hunter, I also had the GEN II XL. Loved the reticles but the scopes themselves were physically impractical for a light carry rifle which I am packing around at 10K elevation. At my age, the adage "ozs equals lbs" when carrying all day is definitely true. (I was partial to the Premier scopes since their production facility was located only about 10 miles from my house. I could go into the facility and inspect the different units with a little notice. In fact, I did a review here on the Hide about the Lite Hunter version before it went into full production. This was all before they sold to ATI and moved out of VA.) Anyway, something smaller with the same GEN II XL reticle would be great.

If weight is of major importance the Swaroski Z3 or Z5 lines are worth looking into, the Z5 3.5-18x44 is less than 16oz, with options for exposed elevation turret. If you really want illumination then the Z6i line has a few lightweight options.

If you liked the GEN II XL reticle, the Leupold TMOA is somewhat similar but MOA not MIL.
The VX6hd 3-16x44 is still only 19oz and physically not a big scope, the reticle is a bit on the fine side but the illumination helps with that.

 

[Ironman8]

Went to the GA Precision site and got into them via the link but when I tried to put the scope in my "cart" it wouldn't load simply advising the scopes were not currently available. I sent them a note and tried to call - but to no avail. I'll keep trying to contact them. In the meantime, I did get the opportunity yesterday to pick up and look through the Leupold VX5HD scope. Not bad at all. Now just need to see what I can get one for via a Hide supporter.

Macdaddy,

It looks like they closed that link for the $750 LRHSi pre-order deal and reopened it as a package with the MUT tool like they had in the past for $800.

Here’s the link: LRHSi 4.5-18x44

 

[Macdaddy]

Ironman; Thanks.

 

[lancetkenyon]

I have a S&B PMII 3-20×50 MTC LT (non-US) and a March F1 3-24×52. Both are great scopes for their purposes. Here is my take on the comparison of the two scopes.

Weight-March @ 24.4oz
Size-March
Low profile-March
Features-S&B (MTC, LT, 2nd rev indicator)
Turrets-S&B except the MTC feature can be difficult hitting the .1MIL past the MTC detent. A bit more distinct and tactile though. 14MIL is a bit closer on the S&B vs. 10MIL on the March.
Tracking-Both have tracked spot on for me out to 8MILs so far (well past 1k). Furthest I have taken them.
Parallax-S&B. March is touchy, but not so much that I can't get it set easily.
Eye relief-toss up. Both are great.
Eye box-S&B is a bit easier to get behind.
Mag range-March (extra 4x on top)
Elevation range-Both get me plenty to reach out as far as I will ever shoot on the rifles they sit on (S&B on a 7RM, March on a .280AI)
Scope caps-S&B comes with Tenebraex
Illumination-S&B, I like the dial over the push button, daytime bright, 11 settings vs. 4 of March. But March is plenty bright still.
Reticles-Neither one are my favorite. I have H2CMR vs. FML-1. H2CMR is fantastic at 5x and up. Subtensions are usable above 7x, and the .2MIL Mark's are great for accurate wind holds. A bit thin, but illumination makes it plenty visible on 3x, even in the daylight. Not so heavy as to obscure even very small targets at distance. I can see 1/4" circles at 200 with it. FML-1 is much more visible at 3x, as the heavy outer stadia draw your eyes to the center. Floating dot becomes visible at 5x or so, and is nice and thick for easy viewing. Center dot is .1MIL, or about .33" @ 100. Not bad for a hunting reticle st all. "Only" has .5MIL subtensions though. Works fine for me.
Glass: remember, all subjective....
Clarity/resolution-S&B hands down. The 3-20 is clearer than my 5-25 on 20x. The March is still very clear. Very close to my Kahles K624i Gen 3. But still not a S&B.
Color-S&B
Contrast-S&B
CA-I can't see any on either scope.
Edge to edge-S&B. March gets just a bit blurry on the outer 10%.
Brightness-S&B. The March does get a bit darker from 20-24x, but at reasonable hunting distances, both are plenty bright to use well beyond legal shooting light to see your target and beyond.
Diopter-Both were very easy to set to my eyes.
Warranty-S&B has 20 year, March has a "5 year". But, the best warranty is one you will never use.
Price-You get what you pay for. Neither are cheap. Both are more than 95% of people would ever pay.

Overall, for a lightweight hunting rifle, I think the March is an awesome choice. Smallish, light, plenty of magnification from 20 yards to a mile if you can reliably shoot that far. For keeping everything as light as possible, this is a great way to go. If you can cut 8-10oz other places, or live with it, the S&B is an even better choice. There really isn't much better than a S&B. Except maybe TT or Hensoldt....

Speaking of TT.....think about the TT TT315M 3-15×50.

 

[lennyo3034]

Clarity/resolution-S&B hands down. The 3-20 is clearer than my 5-25 on 20x. The March is still very clear. Very close to my Kahles K624i Gen 3. But still not a S&B.

And this is why glass comparisons are subjective. I felt my S&B and March had comparable resolution (S&B better optically overall), but think my Gen 3 Kahles is better than either of them in all categories.

 

[cleric]

And this is why glass comparisons are subjective. I felt my S&B and March had comparable resolution (S&B better optically overall), but think my Gen 3 Kahles is better than either of them in all categories.

There is SOOO much variation comparing is hard. There is scope to scope variation, eye ball to eye ball, and test conditions to test conditions.


It’s hard to decide scopes just best on what others think. For example I care more about light transmission then edge quality. I primarily hunt so low light performance is a must. Others who shoot competition and may look at targets across the fov in the afternoon have different needs

 

[Glassaholic]

What makes you think the majority of hunters are un-educated?

I never said that, you keep putting words in my mouth and taking my comments out of context. For sake of this thread and the OP I don't see any point in drawing this out, you make some valid points, I just happen to believe there are those out there who don't fully understand the benefits.