Rifle Scopes New to long range.. asking for scope help & opinions.

[RIDE]

So after years of shooting AR’s and a bit of the NFA game, I have decided to take on the challenge of long distance shooting.

What scope would you recommend. What reticle would you recommend? Mil vs MOA?

My use:[b/]
I will be target shooting at 1,000 yds and beyond (as I improve my technique and skill)


My Budget:[b/]
I am in the $1,000 to $1,200 range for the optic. If there was value/significant benefit I could probably be convinced to widen that range to $800 to $1,400


My history:
A fair amount of short range target shooting mostly with AR’s and SBR’s 25-200 yds. With the occasional 400 yds shots.
I occasionally hunt with a .257 Wby Mag.
While the .257 wby mag can do some longer distances in hunting, and because of the fast and flat trajectory I’ve never really done and real trajectory math while shooting it, especially at sub 400 yds, it’s true just “hold on brown”.
The reason I mention this is to say that I’m NOT already accustomed to either mil or moa.

I am leaning towards mil to mil scopes as my understanding is that will be the easiest and shortest learning curve. FFP seems to be the better choice for me as well, with my limited understanding at this point.

I reload .257 Wby Mag. (Because shooting factory Ammo for it is as costly as shooting solid gold bullets)


My gear:
I just picked up a Ruger Precision Rifle Gen 2 in 6.5 Creedmoor. This is the rifle I am needing a scope for and the reason behind my questions in this post.


TLDR: what scope and reticle, mil/mil vs mil/moa etc for long range shots from RPR 6.5C for 1,000 yd shooting?

Thanks a ton! This site and the members here are such an amazing resource. I very much appreciate any and all help/recommendations/advice.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

 

[steve123]

The Athlon Ares BTR 4.5-27x50 will be perfectly appropriate for your RPR.

Although expensive I like ARC scope rings.

Top priority is getting a decent laser range finder and a ballistic app for your cell phone. Once all correct data is imputed you'll be getting hits on 1.5 moa sized steel in calm conditions no problem.

 

[CSTactical]

For that price point, the Burris XTR II 5-25 or Vortex PST Gen II would fit the bill nicely. If you're starting from scratch, I'd recommend going with mil/mil since it's based on 10 which tends to be simpler than converting inches at various distances. Feel free to call 916.670.1103 if we can be of help.

 

[RIDE]

The Athlon Ares BTR 4.5-27x50 will be perfectly appropriate for your RPR.

Although expensive I like ARC scope rings.

Top priority is getting a decent laser range finder and a ballistic app for your cell phone. Once all correct data is imputed you'll be getting hits on 1.5 moa sized steel in calm conditions no problem.

Thank you. I hadnÂ’t looked at the Athlon Ares at all. IÂ’ll add it to the list and do some research on it.

Yes, IÂ’m looking for a range finder as well. ThereÂ’s a ton out there, like scopes. Lol.

For that price point, the Burris XTR II 5-25 or Vortex PST Gen II would fit the bill nicely. If you're starting from scratch, I'd recommend going with mil/mil since it's based on 10 which tends to be simpler than converting inches at various distances. Feel free to call 916.670.1103 if we can be of help.

I agree, the Vortex PST Gen 2 5-25 keeps moving higher on my list, and is probably at the top.

ItÂ’s a bit more expensive but IÂ’ve also been looking at the NightForce Benchrest 8-32 or 12-42. Though, I agree, I think mil/mil would be best for me, but it seems this NF model is only available with a MOA reticle?

Anyone have any comparisons/Pros-Cons/thoughts on the Vortex PST II vs the NF Benchrest scopes? NF worth the extra $300? Very well worth it??




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[CSTactical]

Thank you. I hadnÂ’t looked at the Athlon Ares at all. IÂ’ll add it to the list and do some research on it.

Yes, IÂ’m looking for a range finder as well. ThereÂ’s a ton out there, like scopes. Lol.






I agree, the Vortex PST Gen 2 5-25 keeps moving higher on my list, and is probably at the top.

ItÂ’s a bit more expensive but IÂ’ve also been looking at the NightForce Benchrest 8-32 or 12-42. Though, I agree, I think mil/mil would be best for me, but it seems this NF model is only available with a MOA reticle?

Anyone have any comparisons/Pros-Cons/thoughts on the Vortex PST II vs the NF Benchrest scopes? NF worth the extra $300? Very well worth it??



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

I wouldn't recommend a Benchrest scope unless you're doing true benchrest shooting, if you don't mind paying a bit more than you should look at the NXS 5.5-22 which is a solid scope as well. The Nightforce NXS line is a much better built scope than the PST II line.

 

[PlinkIt]

Do you have other people you will likely be shooting with?..

If it's a bunch of PRS guys around you get mil/mil
If it's a bunch of bench rest or Palma guys get moa/moa

I only say that because it's nice to speak the same language as everybody else without needing an interpreter..

Whatever you do, DON'T GET MIL/MOA!!! Ain't nobody got time for that

 

[Mordamer]

Watch MidwayUSA tomorrow or the next day. Athlon Cronus 4.5-29x56 will be going on sale for $999.99. That is a normally $1800 dollar scope that will fall right into your price range.

 

[Hondo64d]

My vote would be the 4.5-18 Bushnell LRTS or LRTSi. I’ve had the 3-12 LRHS for several years and it’s been rock solid. Tracking, return-to-zero and zero retention have been outstanding and image quality well above its price point. So far, my LRTSi is more of the same. I think it is probably the most scope you can get in that price range. If you watch closely, you can find some exceptional deals on them in ‘Hide PX.

John

 

[IanHusaberg]

Watch MidwayUSA tomorrow or the next day. Athlon Cronus 4.5-29x56 will be going on sale for $999.99. That is a normally $1800 dollar scope that will fall right into your price range.

If this is true, I'll be jumping all over it even if it's in MILS and I shoot MOA. I've owned a Cronus before and its just a step or two below the razor gen2. Really nice glass, good reticle, bright illumination. All the functions of a tier 1 scope at a fraction of the price.

 

[patriot07]

I just got into the long range game myself. There are lots of great options in that price range. I just picked up a Vortex PST Gen 2 5-25 FFP mil/mil. Haven't shot with it yet, but I have had it in the backyard for quite a while checking functions/features and glass clarity and it's been quite impressive. It's clear and bright through the entire mag range, the reticle is fantastic, the focus knob and turrets have a great feel, eye box is pretty good, the illumination is well done, and it's just an excellent overall package for around $1,000.

If you aren't already set on MOA, there isn't really a great reason to use it. Mils is just easier to remember, especially with a cartridge like the 6.5 creedmoor that has some oddities that make mils even easier than MOA than it already is for other cartridges.

I'd take a look at the Vortex Viper PST Gen II, Burris XTR II, SWFA 5-20 HD non-illuminated, or the Athlon Cronus for $999 would be a great deal. Find a scope with a reticle that you like and glass that is easy to look through and with turrets that track accurately and have a good feel and you should be set.

 

[308pirate]

Using a mil/mil scope is not any easier than using a MOA/MOA scope. They're just numbers. Make your dope in whatever units your scope uses and go. Anything else is a BS excuse.

Shooting with other guys that use units different from you is only difficult if you both can't call your own misses and self correct using the ruler 3" in front of you AND fail at extremely simple math (.1 mil = .34 MOA but equating it to .25 MOA is good enough for quick wind call adjustments)

In fact, being fluent in both is an advantage


And to reinforce what PlinkIt said, DO NOT GET A SCOPE WITH A MIL RETICLE AND MOA TURRETS. Now THAT is retarded.

 

[patriot07]

Using a mil/mil scope is not any easier than using a MOA/MOA scope. They're just numbers. Make your dope in whatever units your scope uses and go. Anything else is a BS excuse.

Shooting with other guys that use units different from you is only difficult if you both can't call your own misses and self correct using the ruler 3" in front of you AND fail at extremely simple math (.1 mil = .34 MOA but equating it to .25 MOA is good enough for quick wind call adjustments)

In fact, being fluent in both is an advantage


And to reinforce what PlinkIt said, DO NOT GET A SCOPE WITH A MIL RETICLE AND MOA TURRETS. Now THAT is retarded.

Not trying to turn this entire thread into a mil vs moa debate, but there is very little debate that mils is easier to remember and work with quickly compared to MOA when doing wind holds. Can you get proficient with either? Sure, but it's much easier with mils. Especially with a 6.5CM, since elevation corrections are often right at 1 mil from 500-600 and 600-700 (and sometimes 400-500 and 700-800 as well).

Advice to the OP - don't make your life harder than it has to be.

 

[308pirate]

there is very little debate that mils is easier to remember and work with quickly compared to MOA when doing wind holds.

I think the debaters never learned to shoot in MOA, if that was their conclusion.

If you want a fast wind dope for a 10 mph full value in MOA, (Range/100)-1 works for loads with drift similar to that of a 175 gr 308, Range/100 works for 223 heavies, and (Range/100)-2 works for stuff that drifts like a 140 gr 6.5

Whatever, I know both equally well and can shift on the fly

 

[patriot07]

I think the debaters never learned to shoot in MOA, if that was their conclusion.

If you want a fast wind dope for a 10 mph full value in MOA, (Range/100)-1 works for loads with drift similar to that of a 175 gr 308, Range/100 works for 223 heavies, and (Range/100)-2 works for stuff that drifts like a 140 gr 6.5

Whatever, I know both equally well and can shift on the fly

That works fine if you don't mind being wrong. Just ran the numbers for my Tikka CTR 6.5CM and it was a full MOA off.

Even if it was right, you're still doing math just to find your wind hold and then multiplying difficult numbers from there. Not impossible at all, but not even close to being as easy as mils. Let's say I have a 7-8 mph crosswind at 700 yards. Per your math, I'm holding (700/100)= 7 - 2 = 5 * .75 = 5 * 3 / 4 = 15 / 4 = 3.75 for 7-8 mph at 700 yards. Unfortunately, the wind hold for 10 mph wind for my 6.5 is 3.82 MOA at 700 yards (2.87 MOA for 7-8 mph wind @ 700), so the entire equation is wrong from the start because you had to use rules of thumb to mentally calculate your baseline holds because they're too difficult to memorize. You just made my entire case for why MOA is inferior. Even if the baseline number was correct, the subsequent math is more difficult.

In mils, I know my 5 mph holds from 500 to 1000 are all .2 less than the yardage/1000. So for 700 yards, my 5 mph hold is .5 mils. Multiply times 1.5 to get .75 mils for 7-8 mph at 700 yards. Easy. Two-decimal place numbers with easy patterns are just easier to handle for mental arithmetic than trying to take a memorized chart that might include something like 5.75 MOA and then ask to you to multiply that times 3/4 or 2/3.

I have a bachelors in mechanical engineering with a math minor and after 10 years in the industry, I just started working on my graduate degree that includes a course in human factors engineering, which studies how the brain processes these type of calculations. The case for MOA being easier is impossible to make if the user has no history with either system.

 

[Denys]

Not trying to turn this entire thread into a mil vs moa debate, but there is very little debate that mils is easier to remember and work with quickly compared to MOA when doing wind holds. Can you get proficient with either? Sure, but it's much easier with mils. Especially with a 6.5CM, since elevation corrections are often right at 1 mil from 500-600 and 600-700 (and sometimes 400-500 and 700-800 as well).

Advice to the OP - don't make your life harder than it has to be.

Right, F-class shooters like to make things difficult for themselves. Everything there is in MOA. To be honest, I haven't read anything so silly in a long time.

 

[patriot07]

Right, F-class shooters like to make things difficult for themselves. Everything there is in MOA. To be honest, I haven't read anything so silly in a long time.

And PRS Shooters all use mils. What's your point?

Once again, MOA is fine if you shoot all the time and you're going to memorize it either way. If you are just trying to get into the long range game and aren't a competitive shooter, then why not make life easier on yourself?

MOA shooters always try to make the argument that either way is fine. Mil shooters can easily make the argument that mils are superior for most applications. OP can make his decision. My last post on this thread regarding mils vs MOA. I'm not trying to take over the OP's thread, but I did want to make the point since he's picking a scope. I've made the case with math and with words - none of us are going to solve this debate now because the MOA guys won't admit they're wrong.

 

[Denys]

PRS shooters use FFP Mils for ranging, something at which SFP MOA scopes are very poor.

I will also point out that if you make translation from MPH to Mils or MOA in your head, you might want to invest in a dope sheet or a cheap ballistics app. And just to be different, I don't ever convert from MPH to anything. I convert the flags to MOA.

 

[Denys]

I know about converting dollars to toys, does that count for anything in mil vs moa?

Absolutely. It shows you know how to make a proper conversion without going through arcane transformation.

 

[koshkin]

I am firmly on the mrad side of things. Both work, but mrad is a more coherent system especially for range estimation. Both are miles better than the mismatched systems we used to have.

ILya

 

[Twinsen]

Mil reticles are standardized. Use mil turrets to match.

Most people go mil. Go mil to increase chances of being able to work with your potential spotters. No need to go MOA to match guys with fixed parallax 3-9s.

 

[Denys]

Mil reticles are standardized. Use mil turrets to match.

Most people go mil. Go mil to increase chances of being able to work with your potential spotters. No need to go MOA to match guys with fixed parallax 3-9s.

Wow, that really put me in my place. Now, which standard Mil reticles are we talking about here, USA or USMC?

 

[NvTwist]

Watch MidwayUSA tomorrow or the next day. Athlon Cronus 4.5-29x56 will be going on sale for $999.99. That is a normally $1800 dollar scope that will fall right into your price range.

Hoping this is true, currently looking for a scope as well and just looked up the info on the Athlon scope and at $1k can’t pass that up at all. Price hasn’t dropped yet but def gonna be keeping my eye on it. Thanks for the heads up Mordamer.

 

[Twinsen]

Wow, that really put me in my place. Now, which standard Mil reticles are we talking about here, USA or USMC?

Lighten up, Francis. If it helps, I apologize for all the terrible things I said about your mother in my previous post. I really went over the line. I fully understand why you're so defensive.

I was referring to the increments. I can pick up 50 or so mil based reticle scopes and instantly understand them and use them effectively. Every damn MOA reticle is like a different variadic quarternary-binary nonsensical freakshow orgy of random numbers. I do not find myself alone in preferring decimal.

 

[wareagle700]

While I prefer a mil based optic overall, I have no problems picking up a MOA based scope and using it effectively. It just not as big a deal as many people make it, to me at least. I have yet to look at a MOA based reticle in a decent scope and find it significantly more difficult to use than a mil reticle. Its just a reference scale, use it, don't over think it.

 

[308pirate]

While I prefer a mil based optic overall, I have no problems picking up a MOA based scope and using it effectively. It just not as big a deal as many people make it, to me at least. I have yet to look at a MOA based reticle in a decent scope and find it significantly more difficult to use than a mil reticle. Its just a reference scale, use it, don't over think it.

Exactly

 

[Erud]

It may be worth noting that probably 90% of rifle shooters never get to the point that they are using their reticle to range objects, make corrections, etc. They just put the crosshair on the target and shoot. If it's not in the middle, they adjust until it gets into the middle. They will never range objects with their scope, shoot on a team with a spotter, or fast-rope out of a helicopter. There's nothing wrong with that, not everyone was born to operate like the badass alpha's in this thread. If you are a member of this overwhelming majority of shooters, MIL/MIL, MOA/MOA, or MIL/MOA won't make a bit of difference.

 

[Denys]

Lighten up, Francis. If it helps, I apologize for all the terrible things I said about your mother in my previous post. I really went over the line. I fully understand why you're so defensive.

I was referring to the increments. I can pick up 50 or so mil based reticle scopes and instantly understand them and use them effectively. Every damn MOA reticle is like a different variadic quarternary-binary nonsensical freakshow orgy of random numbers. I do not find myself alone in preferring decimal.

Since there are many different shooting disciplines out there, as well as a wide variety of shooting needs, one would not expect something as personal as a riflescope to be the same for everything.

For instance, as my signature states, my predilection if F-TR competition, a discipline in which FFP scopes in general and Mildot reticles in particular are eschewed outright.

1- We thrive on magnification, (40X and above), something rare in FFP scopes.
2- We like our reticles to stay the same size at all magnifications because we do no ranging whatsoever, we dial the exact distance and we dial wind and hold on target.
3- We like our reticles to be fairly uncluttered and more on the horizontal than the vertical. Many of us also dislike any markings on the reticle above point of aim.

On the other had, my AR-10 for example, sports a 2.5-10X44 scope with a mildot reticle.

The proper tool for the job.

 

[WaltHer]

I think the debaters never learned to shoot in MOA, if that was their conclusion.

If you want a fast wind dope for a 10 mph full value in MOA, (Range/100)-1 works for loads with drift similar to that of a 175 gr 308, Range/100 works for 223 heavies, and (Range/100)-2 works for stuff that drifts like a 140 gr 6.5

Whatever, I know both equally well and can shift on the fly

Relax Pirate. Pat-ycakes has an engineering degree n stuff, and a reading comprehension problem as well. We all know that it's MUCH easier to drop a zero than divide by four -especially if you don't have your scientific calculator handy. No one has told him that amateurs debate hardware, professionals debate software.

OP-pick one you like. Master it. Call it good.

 

[308pirate]

Relax Pirate. Pat-ycakes has an engineering degree n stuff, and a reading comprehension problem as well. .

No worries, having used both enough to be fluent on them I know how easy they are both to learn and use.

Evidently he missed the point that rules of thumb are for fast field use and need to be tempered with experience.

And I happen to be an engineer as well..........

 

[patriot07]

No worries, having used both enough to be fluent on them I know how easy they are both to learn and use.

Evidently he missed the point that rules of thumb are for fast field use and need to be tempered with experience.

And I happen to be an engineer as well..........

Point is with mils, the charts are so much easier to memorize that you don't have a need to use incorrect rules of thumb. Apparently you missed that point. Easily memorizing the right data is always superior to calculating the wrong data.

You can memorize MOA, but the data is more difficult to consume. That's the point. Of course MOA can be used. You can use a bicycle to go 5 miles down the road also. As for me, I'd rather jump in my truck.

 

[IanHusaberg]

Vortex Viper PST Gen II rifle scopes will give you advantage in the shooting arena or hunting field in all situations, right from long range shooting to close range ones. In terms of magnification, there are basically 4 types of updated shooting range models and they are 5-25×50, 3-15×44, 2-10×32, and 1-6×24..you can sure have a go with one of those

I'd recommend the 5-25 pst 2. I could be happy with it for ever, even after owning(still) a gen2 razor. Only thing really lacking is locking turrets(2nd rev indicator). I had a XTR 2 on my RPR and it served me well.

You might consider that there is a hand guard around the barrel. Hence, you have to have the scope mounted higher for a larger objective bell. I had a Spuhr 1.5" high cantilever mount that worked well.
XTR 2 is a 50mm objective. PST gen 2 is the same. You might have a hard time with a 56mm obj. or bigger?

 

[airstream]

only 1-6x cronus on sale at Midway so far.