Rifle Scopes Looking for scope opinions (help me pick one)

[Franko]

I grew up with guns and some hunting, but drifted away. I have come back and find that my shooting skills now suck. I want to fix that. My hopes are to punch lots of paper, ring steel and then try PRS style shooting at some point to continue to develop my skills. The end goal is to be a much better shot and to be able to hunt with confidence. I can afford nice things occasionally but have no interest in wasting money. I own one other scope, a Steiner TXi 3-15. My plan is to get a recommendation or two and then watch the trading post until a good deal comes along or Black Friday happens.

The important info:
1. This scope will be mounted on a bolt action rifle (Remington 700, Model 5R)
2. I will be putting the scope on a 6.5 CM (and/or perhaps a really nice 22 if thats what it takes to continue to develop my skills)
3. I intend to use this scope to punch paper and hit steel to begin with
4. I will be shooting during the daytime
5. I intend to shoot at paper to as far as 500 yards and steel to 1000 yards, perhaps further
6. I want a scope with First Focal Plane and MOA adjustments
7. I can afford to go up to $3500 or so

I am currently considering:
1. Khales K25i with the MOAK reticle
2. Nightforce ATACR 5-25 x56 with MOAR reticle
3. Vortex HD AMG 6-24 the MOA EBR-7B

What are your thoughts about these three? What are their strengths, weaknesses, the gotchas you can find only by owning them? Which would you recommend and why? Are there other scopes I should look at (I thought about S&B but don't like their MOA reticles).

Thanks in advance.

 

[lancetkenyon]

With a $3500 budget, that opens up almost any scope.

Don't leave out S&B PMII 5-25×56 or 3-20×50, maybe a used Tangent Theta TT525P if you get real lucky, Minox ZP5, Hensoldt ZF.

I do not think the Vortex Razor AMG is as good as the NF ATACR F1 or Kahles.

 

[Shadow knows]

I loved shooting the kahles gen 3 because of the ergonomics.

 

[Deleted member 10043]

How much was the rifle.

 

[Covertnoob5]

I’d advise getting a scope in mils if you plan on doing prs with any kind of regularity only because most guys are shooting mils so if sharing wind calls, dope, etc you don’t have to do math in your head to convert mils to moa.

 

[BJames]

Look at all the different reticles, pick your favorite, buy that scope. At that level of optic it’s hard to go wrong, they pretty much have all the same features, same level of quality, same level of service, etc. There will be subtle differences here and there, how important are they to you, that’s for you to decide.

 

[Kadams1563]

For that much money a Schmidt would be getting purchased.

With that being said I run a Gen II razor because I got it for less then 1/2 your budget.

 

[Franko]

How much was the rifle.

Rifle was about $1200 out the door and then $200 or so more to put a rail on it.

 

[Deleted member 10043]

Franko, wouldn't a scope in the same price range complement the rifle?

 

[Dirty8404]

Franko, wouldn't a scope in the same price range complement the rifle?

I think this is a great question. I have a 2k scope on an RPR so that’s where I’m coming from.

I’d argue that a good scope stays around for multiple barrel swaps, and since the scope is your main interface with the rifle besides the trigger, it makes sense to spend the money up front. Rifles often get upgraded, i.e. a cut rifled barrel, suppressor, or chassis. A scope can’t be upgraded in a similar fashion so there is pressure (for me) to simply go for something nice.

Then again, I’m currently scope shopping and fuck, it’s hard to sell a dirt bike for 3k and drop all of that on a scope when I need to also buy reloading components.

 

[samnev]

The Nightforce ATACR 5-25 x56 with MOAR reticle is my favorite scope/reticle combination. I wouldn't hesitate to put it on a $1200 rifle.

 

[Franko]

Regarding the cost if the gun vs the scope. I am leaning towards spending much more on the scope because I can (and most likely will) upgrade or change the gun it sits on, but the only way to upgrade the scope is to buy a new one. I'm also single at the moment so don't have to justify the purchase to the wife...

Thanks to all of you for your feedback so far. I greatly appreciate it.

 

[CSTactical]

@Franko we'd love to assist you finding the correct scope, please give us a call at 916-670-1103

 

[Glassaholic]

Do you have a reticle you prefer? You are limiting your choices by going with MOA vs Mil but I understand because I came from a hunting background as well and didn't get "mil" until I "saw the light". If MOA is a must the 3 choices you gave are all great scopes, the AMG is going to be lighter than the Kahles and NF, the NF the heaviest. The NF also has the worst FOV at the bottom end so you won't see as much through the scope but picks up by the top end to provide nice FOV. The AMG has outstanding glass, in some cases better than my old Kahles K624i Gen III IMO but sounds like the K525i has resolved most of those issues. My thought would be to go with the AMG to start with because it's quite a bit cheaper than the other scopes and covers 99% of the range of those scopes (the AMG actually has more FOV at 6x than the NF does at 5x), has a great reticle and is the lightest option as it seems you may use this rifle for dual purpose hunting/tactical style shooting. I tend to prefer "lighter" scopes on my rigs because of their dual role with hunting, but could I tell you the difference between my 28oz AMG or 34oz Minox, I doubt it. One final thought, the Vortex EBR-7B MOA is a Christmas Tree reticle while the MOAK and MOAR are not, and while I do not like busy Christmas Tree styles, the EBR-7B is an outstanding compromise. My 2 cents...

 

[Franko]

I understand the advantages of Mils for competition but still instinctively think in inches and yards (and am not a competition shooter or Military/LE so don't do anything that would help train and reinforce me thinking in Mils). I prefer simple reticles and really like the Athlon Cronus reticle but was thinking that I would prefer the slightly more busy Vortex reticle in exchange for a significant step up in overall scope quality.

Once again, thanks to all of you for the help. I am now leaning towards the Vortex, esp in light of wjm308's comments.

 

[Glassaholic]

^^^ Franko, don't think of MOA as inches and Mil as centimeters, that is an incorrect (but common) assumption, they are both angular units of measure and once you understand that both become very easy to use.

 

[Covertnoob5]

I understand the advantages of Mils for competition but still instinctively think in inches and yards (and am not a competition shooter or Military/LE so don't do anything that would help train and reinforce me thinking in Mils). I prefer simple reticles and really like the Athlon Cronus reticle but was thinking that I would prefer the slightly more busy Vortex reticle in exchange for a significant step up in overall scope quality.

Once again, thanks to all of you for the help. I am now leaning towards the Vortex, esp in light of wjm308's comments.

I concur with @wjm308 about not thinking about in inches vs cm.
1) you probably won’t be rannging with a reticle.
2) what’s easier to remember/read 22.25 moa or 8.7 mils? If your in comps and have to dial quickly on the clock I know what I’m picking.
3) the reticle is a ruler right in front of you. If you missed right 2 mils, move the reticle over and shoot again.

No inches, yards, meters, miles, leprechaun toenails or any other type of measuring used in those examples.

Again to each their own, as I also started in moa then quickly realized moa is more beneficial in the competition arena.

 

[JBELL74]

^^^ Franko, don't think of MOA as inches and Mil as centimeters, that is an incorrect (but common) assumption, they are both angular units of measure and once you understand that both become very easy to use.

^^^ +1 Very good advice.