S&B 5-20x50 PMII Ultra short for LR

[Denns]

Hello!
Im currently searching a scope for my FNH Ballista in .338 Lapua.
I am a complete beginner in LR shooting and i want to start with shooting at paper or steel targets 1000+ yards away.
Competition shooting is not planned right now but could be interesting in the future when i have more experience.

But now to my question:
When i was searching for the "classic" scopes which are well known to work for LR shooting (Kahles K624i, S&B PMII 5-25x56,...) somebody offered me a as good as new PMII 5-20x50 ultra short with single turn turret , no illumination and P4FL reticle.
I really like the look of it and the price seems to be ok with about 2200$ (already converted from euro)

The thing is i actually don't need such a compact scope on my rather big rifle but i don't know if the compact size has any disadvantages compared to a full size PMII like the 5-25x56.
In terms of the magnification i think 20x should be ok for this distances or would you prefer to go with more?

Maybe somebody here can help me make a decision, go with the ultra short or search for a 5-25x56, K624i or similar?

Thank you!

Greetings Simon

 

[cageli]

Simon - my answer would be quite short. Would that work for you? Yes. Would that be the best for you? prolly not. It's more about the reticle...P4F is quite basic, if you always dial should be fine, not much to hold over for tho.

5-20 did not work for me, as the eye box is a bit too strict. I'd go 5-25 with XT or H59 reticle or K624 personally.

 

[Glassaholic]

The 5-20 has a massive FOV vs the PMII 5-25 because the 5-25 tunnels pretty heavily below 7x so if you think you’ll benefit from that at the low end that is something to consider. It is an ultra short design but keeping the erector at 4x helps them maintain functionality optically like the longer scopes. You will not have an issue with 20x at the top shooting 1000y and the single turn will be more than sufficient to 1000 with 338 Lapua.
While the P4FL is a traditional .5 mil hash reticle it is more than sufficient if you plan to always dial elevation. I prefer .2 mil reticles but have not been handicapped by .5 mil reticles, it’s more of a perception issue than it is a true handicap IMO. I like the 5-20 US better than the 3-20 optically. If you’re worried about it being “too short” throw a sunshade on there and you’re G2G.

 

[Denns]

Thank you for your opinions!
I have to say i look especially for used optics. Currently there are a 5-25x56 PMII LP/MTC/LT with LRR Mil reticle and a K624i with AMR reticle on a auction.

I wait if i can get one of these for the price of the 5-20x50 US and if not i'll go with the ultra short.

Nevertheless i would still like to hear some more opinions/experiences.

Oh and i have a 20 moa picatinny on my Rifle, would you still go for a scope mount with additional cant or are 20 moa ok? (The K624 mentioned above comes with a 0 moa era tac mount)

 

[VargmatII]

I would not go for a single turn scope on a 338 lapua. Even if there is a lot of elevation on tap it might barely be enough, the same scope is available with double turn turrets and that gives you more than enough to use. Even if there is not a used one out right now, there probably will be one in some flavour or another within weeks. There are a lot of great scopes floating around out there.

A friend has a 3.5-20x50 PM2 Ultra short and its an awesome scope. Ive had a 5-25x56 PM2 and it is probably the scope I regret the most that I sold. I personally dont like the LRR MIL reticle, mine had the MSR reticle but thats a personal thing. If you like it, the scope is great and a very proven performer.

I acctually just ordered a Kahles k624i, Ive been wanting to try one out for a long time. A 20 MOA rail is ok, if you really want to crank out everything out of it, you could get a 20 MOA mount too. But with most modern scopes (with double turn turrets) there are plenty of elevation available to get you way out there.

 

[Glassaholic]

Something to keep in mind about the LRR-Mil reticle - it is very thin. If you like thin reticles you will like it very much.

 

[Denns]

Thin does't sound too bad, one thing i fear with the P4FL is that the cross fully covers the target at long distances.

I don't know what to think about the Kahles Amr, i currently just have simple reticles on my hunting scopes and i think that the Amr might be too "loaded up" for me with all its markings.

 

[Glassaholic]

Thin does't sound too bad, one thing i fear with the P4FL is that the cross fully covers the target at long distances.

Buddy shot a KAC SR25 shoot out in Vegas earlier this year and crushed it with his US 5-20 P4FL out to 1000. Previously he’d been using MSR, MSR2, Gen 3XR, Mil-XT and many others. Now he swears by the P4FL, had no issues with the thickness of the reticle obscuring targets at distance. Maybe if you’re shooting F-Class or tiny bug holes but even with my P4FL I never had an issue. I think reticles get in our heads and we think we need something we really don’t. I’m not trying to sell you on the P4FL but just wanting you to think about what you really need.
@MNTC

 

[Denns]

@Glassaholic thanks for sharing this, seems like my fear was unfounded. At the end i'll have to test the reticle i get because i have no experience what will work best for me.

 

[Denns]

Little update, i narrowed it down to two scopes:
1, 5-20x50 PMII US for 2300$ (mentioned above)
2, 5-25x56 PMII for 2600$ with illumination, dt locking turrets and mtc
both with P4FL reticle

The US is in pristine condition, the 5-25 has lost some paint because the mount was glued. (i think the new mount should cover that.)

I'm not 100% sure if the 5-25 is worth the extra money. After all the information i got from you i'm pretty sure both would work for me.

How much would you say that paint damage lowers the value? (its RAL8000 not black)

 

[Hogrider2000]

I would go with # 2 if it was me planning on doing what you want to do. If the mount was glued then the mount was wrong not put on correctly. Use a Spuhr mount and it will never move again.

 

[goosed]

You're considering some great scopes, you can't pick a bad scope out of the group. So it comes down to personal preference more than anything else...

The single turn MTC turret is pretty low profile with very close click spacing. It's pure personal preference, as some love them, but it's not for me. Do you have the option to handle any of them?

 

[Denns]

@Hogrider2000 thanks for your opinion, it actually was a high quality mount but over here in Austria there are still a lot of people who think every mount must be glued which is clearly not true and often results in a damaged coating.

@goosed that's true and i know both scopes are top level. I wasn't aware of the issue with the close click spacing so i must consider this when i decide. Unfortunately i have no option to handle them as most gun shops here focus on hunting and don't have the PMII's on stock.

 

[ma smith]

I feel like the S&B 5-25 is a natural fit for .338 Lapua, the only real downside to the optic is the 5x is FOV more like a 7x. Also if you need packable/low profiel turrets/etc its not going to be first pick off the table.

 

[ULTRAEDGE]

You might want to consider ZCO or Swarovski X5i, both made in Austria.

 

[264win]

I have owned both scopes and if it were me, I would buy the 5-25 pm11.
That said both are incredible optics and either will do a fine job.

 

[Denns]

Seems like the 5-25 will be the one to go with. I don't need the compact size of the US and i think i will rarely use the 5x mag.

@ULTRAEDGE i actually have beside one S&B Polar all of my hunting optics from Swarovski (scopes, binos....) but for me their strength is in the hunting sector and i rather go with the battle proven Schmidt. It's funny that ZCO is so well known in the states, here in Austria you hear or see nearly nothing from them.

 

[A.Redd]

I’ve had or have all the scopes you are considering. If you have narrowed it down to the 2 SB I’d go with the 5-25. The 5-25 is really a 9-25 in my opinion, even after it stops tunneling they eyebox does something weird until 9 power or so. After that it has phenomenal glass. The 5-20 is a full tear lower in glass quality in my opinion. The kahles is also a good choice as I believe it has the best reticle options and an absolute massive eye box and field of view. However, as we all know the kahles is a tear lower in glass quality as well.

 

[clubsportmark]

I had the 5-20 US, I have to 3-20 US & the 5-25 PMII.

Can’t go wrong with either but for your application I would have the 5-25

 

[Denns]

Thanks for all the information and for telling me your experiences. I'll definitely go with the 5-25 now.

I just received some pictures from the 5-25 i mentioned above. Don't know what to think about it. Is it worth nearly 2700$? It costs about 3800$ new over here.
Maybe it's better to wait for another one but they're pretty "rare". (only about 4 used ones on the market right now in Germany and Austria, all of them way to pricey or sfp which i don't want)

 

[cageli]

It looks pretty good. The paint on this scope is very soft. The fact that the paint on turrets are good, means that scope didn’t see much use.

 

[Denns]

It looks pretty good. The paint on this scope is very soft. The fact that the paint on turrets are good, means that scope didn’t see much use.

That would match with his story. Rarely used but paint damage because of the glued mount. It also looks like the tube wasn't squeezed or anything. (as far as i see it, maybe the optic experts here can tell me more)

Do you think its possible to cover this with some spray paint? Or better put new rings on it which cover the marks and never think of it again.

 

[goosed]

That would match with his story. Rarely used but paint damage because of the glued mount. It also looks like the tube wasn't squeezed or anything. (as far as i see it, maybe the optic experts here can tell me more)

Do you think its possible to cover this with some spray paint? Or better put new rings on it which cover the marks and never think of it again.

Main tube has the most wear, but if you look close there is some paint spots missing from each turret.

I get wanting it to look perfect when spending that much money, but the paint wear might not be a bad thing. Just like guys that have exspensive classic cars they never drive for fear of that first ding or scratch. If it was too perfect you might be too worried about usage marks to fully enjoy it.

Only you can decide what's right for you though. There will certainly be more deals down the road if you pass on this one.

 

[cageli]

It’s a scope, I will just use it and potentially abuse it to do whatever

 

[Mr.BR]

Just avoid the S&B High Power scopes ,parallax adjustment in those seems to serially break

 

[Denns]

I think i will pass on this one, i asked S&B which year it was made and its from 2013 so quiet old.

Thank you all for helping me!

 

[A.Redd]

Not trying to necessarily persuade you but the age of a Schmidt Bender wouldn’t concern me (within reason). They are built like tanks, at one point I was using a PM 6x42 made in the early 80s that performed flawlessly. They use top notch components that stand up well over time.

 

[Glassaholic]

Not trying to necessarily persuade you but the age of a Schmidt Bender wouldn’t concern me (within reason). They are built like tanks, at one point I was using a PM 6x42 made in the early 80s that performed flawlessly. They use top notch components that stand up well over time.

I would agree, any of the PMII scopes are going to be very long lasting, I wouldn't worry at all about a 2013 scope from S&B and I think their warranty is now 30 years, but S&B USA has a stellar record for taking care of customers should you ever have an issue. I had a S&B US 3-20 that had a very stiff parallax, sent it to S&B USA (Jerry) and he had it back to me in less than a week with much better parallax dial.

 

[Denns]

Ok, so the age should bother me less than wear marks wich indicate more or less the usage. (better old and a "safe queen" than newer and dialed 1000's of times)
I thought maybe Schmidt made some improvements over time but am i right that the 2013 Model is still 100% the same as the ones sold today? (of course they came up with some new turrets but the ones which the scope from above has are still available)

 

[goosed]

Of course there are more turret options today, but those turrets are still available today and as far as I know haven't changed at all since released.

 

[Mr.BR]

Ok, so the age should bother me less than wear marks wich indicate more or less the usage. (better old and a "safe queen" than newer and dialed 1000's of times)
I thought maybe Schmidt made some improvements over time but am i right that the 2013 Model is still 100% the same as the ones sold today? (of course they came up with some new turrets but the ones which the scope from above has are still available)

Improvements they made when they made High Power lineup ,resulted with parallax that keeps on failing.

 

[pucker]

Improvements they made when they made High Power lineup ,resulted with parallax that keeps on failing.

I haven't noticed this link between S&B HP and parallax issues discussed here previously. Thread?

 

[Denns]

Hello again!
What do you think about the Steiner M7Xi 4-28x56 with MSR-2 reticle? Is it comparable to a 5-25 PMII in quality and durability?

I could buy one for about 2500$ but i don't have any experiences with Steiner scopes. (Only have a T332 of them on my AK)

 

[ma smith]

@koshkin is probably your best bet for advice

 

[koshkin]

Hello again!
What do you think about the Steiner M7Xi 4-28x56 with MSR-2 reticle? Is it comparable to a 5-25 PMII in quality and durability?

I could buy one for about 2500$ but i don't have any experiences with Steiner scopes. (Only have a T332 of them on my AK)

M7Xi with MSR2 for $2500 is a very good deal. The first batch had some CA, but affterwards they got it all worked out. If it is a recent production scope, I would consider it strongly. It is in the same league as the PMII.

ILya

 

[Denns]

M7Xi with MSR2 for $2500 is a very good deal. The first batch had some CA, but affterwards they got it all worked out. If it is a recent production scope, I would consider it strongly. It is in the same league as the PMII.

ILya

Thanks for the information, it is only a few months old so the CA issue should be no problem. I think i will go with the M7Xi if the PMII, which i am currently bidding for, goes further up than 2500$.

 

[Denns]

Hello!

I got the Steiner M7Xi today and it`s a damn good scope. The MSR-2 Reticle is a bit fine at the low end but perfect in the magnification i shoot mostly. (16x +)

Can't wait to take it out to 1000 yards but thats only possible at events on military shooting facilities here in Austria and theyre currently closed to the public because of covid....

Thanks to everybody who helped me!

 

[A.Redd]

It looks the part, nice rig.