Re: My first bolt-action rifle. Help modifying please?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ZackG</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: clj94104</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If I do spend the money for a new scope now, I don't want to have to buy another for a long time.</div></div>
Leupold Leupold Leupold! Look at the VX3 and Mark 4 models. They will serve you well, and will last an eternity with Leupold's amazing lifetime warranty.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: clj94104</div><div class="ubbcode-body">My intended purpose for this rifle is shooting mainly at 500-600 yards after I learn the rifle and am intimately familiar with it, and have a maximum range of 1000 yards. I may decide to go hunting some time in the future, I don't know. Haven't really been in forever (more than a decade), but this rifle would be more than capable of doing something like that. </div></div>
Well, here's the deal. Since you're on a budget, you need to find a nice scope at a decent price. To reach distances of, or near, 1000yds, its mandatory that you learn to reload your own custom ammunition. Factory match ammunition will get the bullet there, but it won't be nearly as accurate as you need it to be. Reloading equipment, coupled with the countless trial and errors before finding that perfect load, is going to require a decent monetary investment. Save a little on the scope and find yourself some reloading equipment.
With that said, the Mark 4 is an amazing scope, but at a pretty high price tag. VX3 is not much different than the Mark 4 (less features, really), but with the same magnification of a Mark 4 you'll save a few hundred dollars. My advice: VX3.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Again I'm really new to scopes, so no I don't understand what it is completely. It adds $100 to the scope to get FFP. As I understand it, it keeps the recticle the same values at high powers? </div></div>
Typical scopes are SFP (second focal plane). That means that as you increase or decrease magnification, the reticule stays the same size.
<span style="font-weight: bold">Pros</span>: If you are shooting at a paper target that has a small bullseye that is covered by your reticule, simply increase the magnification. The bullseye will increase, but the reticule will remain a consistent thickness, enabling you to make a more precise shot. Increasing magnification solves the issue of your crosshairs or mil dot covering the target.
<span style="font-weight: bold">Cons</span>: Ranging a target by measuring it against your reticule can only be done at a specific magnification (usually its max). If you're in a scenario where you need to range a target quickly without a rangefinder, this would be inconvenient. Target acquisition is rough when looking for a small piece of paper 500yds away at maximum magnification.
Some scopes are FFP (first focal plane). That means that as you increase your magnification, the size of your reticule will also increase.
<span style="font-weight: bold">Pros</span>: Ranging targets with your reticule can be done at any magnification. Great for situations where you are required to shoot quickly at multiple targets without a rangefinder. You can keep the scope at a manageable low power where you can range a target, shoot, then easily find your next target without making any adjustments. Useful for hunters without rangefinders.
<span style="font-weight: bold">Cons</span>: reticule is often too large to be precise. If trying to shoot a plate sized target at 1000yds, you may find that your reticule covers the entire plate.
Basically, SFP is for precision, FFP is for tactical (generally speaking, of course).
My advice: from what it sounds like in your OP, I think SFP is the best option for you....AND its cheaper!
Hope this helped. </div></div>
I don't know if I can emphasize these words enough. THANK YOU for taking the time to help me with that. I was extremely lost. LOL. I agree with you, SFP sounds better for my application...
