Scope advice for NRL22 competition rifle

[Roslyn]

I don't shoot NRL22 matches, so need some advice for a friend who is building a rifle for his son. He has a Vudoo barreled action, Triggertech Diamond trigger, believe it is mounted in an American Rifle Company Xylo chassis, -- so a nice rig. Plan is for the boy, now 14, to grow into it, and start by getting involved in NRL22 matches.

So which scope to mount? Price not particularly a concern, but relevance to NRL22 stages for sure is. I am guessing that targets from 25 yards out to 250 yards is the sweet spot, but would appreciate any recommendations you all may have that take advantage of your direct experience in these match formats.

Thanks in advance.

 

[oldrifleman]

Good gear deserves a great scope. Money no big concern 5-27 from ZCO, TT or Gen3 Vortex.

 

[Ruff 364]

Get the best glass he cannot afford...

 

[GIXXER2000]

Zeiss 6-36x56 used under 2k very good scope

 

[Criver600]

Nightforce 4X32 NX8 focus at 10 yards, more than enough scope for NRL22

 

[Rob01]

Price not particularly a concern

It’s always a concern so what is your price cap so people aren’t just throwing out scope brands?

 

[LuckyDuck]

I’ve shot NRL22 for a number of years now. Plenty of good options across all price points for sure.

The first few years I ran a Vortex Diamondback FFP on my 1st rig and it worked pretty dang well until I started to grow past it.

My 2nd rig has an Athlon Cronus G2 on it and I don’t have any complaints or apprehensions that the glass is holding back my scores.

As others have said- your question needs a bit more detail/refinement to help narrow down the answers you’ll receive to what is beneficial for your purposes.

With NRL22 in particular & without looking it up- I believe it boils down to option 1 (limited to 100 yards) or option 2 (limited to 200 yards) all of which can be covered using the diamondback reticle without any dialing needed.

If funds allow- by all means throw alpha glass on the rifle but I personally have some internal apprehension on putting a scope over a certain price point on rimfire myself and the Cronus is doing everything I need it to for matches exceeding the NRL22 limits.

Put another way- I’d love to have the NL Pures in my stable, and I have some pretty dang good binos & spotters now, but I keep grabbing my Bushnell match pros because they just seem to work exceedingly well for the given application

 

[mmlook]

best scope ive tried so far is the 7-35 tangent

most forgiving parallax ive found so far.
I've shot an entire NRL22 100yd monthly match without touching parallax

also shot a few NRL22X matches from 75-250yds and barely needed to touch parallax as well

this combined with the great turrets, glass, and reticle make it one of the best imo

 

[Roslyn]

Thank you all.

As to price, I told him a high end scope for PRS might run $6000, but that I couldn't speak to what might be sufficient for NRL22. His goal is to buy once and not worry about upgrading later. He can afford something at that level.

My question probably should have been more specific. Are there scopes you all recommend that work for very short range targets and still have enough magnification or field of view at whatever the NRL uses for longer distances.

His son does pheasant and duck hunting with his father, has shot a .308 out to 200 yards at their local range, so has some time behind firearms. Thought here was to get him set up with a rig he could shoot for several years as he makes his way into competitions and not be frustrated because the glass wasn't keeping up.

 

[Emerson0311]

I shoot a lot of Rimfire matches. I see a lot better with my Vortex Gen 3 Razor, thanks to Scott and Shamus, than I did before with cheaper optics.

 

[Rob01]

Well if he can afford a $6000 scope then have him go buy one. lol The rest of us poor will get by with our welfare scopes. lol

Seriously, at this point and even in the future he won’t need a $6000 scope to shoot .22 matches. There are plenty of scopes below that that people use that will let him shoot and learn over the next few years but if he can swing a TT 7-35 then have him buy him one. I am sure he will be happy with it.

 

[mmlook]

Thank you all.

As to price, I told him a high end scope for PRS might run $6000, but that I couldn't speak to what might be sufficient for NRL22. His goal is to buy once and not worry about upgrading later. He can afford something at that level.

My question probably should have been more specific. Are there scopes you all recommend that work for very short range targets and still have enough magnification or field of view at whatever the NRL uses for longer distances.

His son does pheasant and duck hunting with his father, has shot a .308 out to 200 yards at their local range, so has some time behind firearms. Thought here was to get him set up with a rig he could shoot for several years as he makes his way into competitions and not be frustrated because the glass wasn't keeping up.

you dont need more magnification for longer distances

you can shoot 400 yards with a rimfire at 12-15x no problem
it's all about spacial resolution, which more or less increases with a more expensive scope
- kind of like a 75" 1080p vs. 65" 4K, even with the smaller size, you'll see more detail with a higher resolution

 

[FuhQ]

Thank you all.

As to price, I told him a high end scope for PRS might run $6000, but that I couldn't speak to what might be sufficient for NRL22. His goal is to buy once and not worry about upgrading later. He can afford something at that level.

My question probably should have been more specific. Are there scopes you all recommend that work for very short range targets and still have enough magnification or field of view at whatever the NRL uses for longer distances.

His son does pheasant and duck hunting with his father, has shot a .308 out to 200 yards at their local range, so has some time behind firearms. Thought here was to get him set up with a rig he could shoot for several years as he makes his way into competitions and not be frustrated because the glass wasn't keeping up.

A 14 year old can afford a $6,000 rifle scope? Is he cutting grass for Elon Musk?

When I was 16, I didn’t even have a $6,000 truck…

 

[Roslyn]

I totally get the vibe about a kid owning a multi thousand dollar rig. At that age I was still trying to get the best out of my Daisy BB gun.

Ok, I am getting the drift here, really appreciate the advice and suggestions. It occurs to me his next step ought to be attending an actual match, looking through some scopes to get a sense of the reticles, and going from there.

Thanks again.

 

[ECK]

Here’s my criteria for a rimfire scope (not in any particular order):
Scope that parallaxes down to 25 yds
12-16x magnification is the sweet spot for most stages, but I having 25-30x on the top end is handy
300 yd shots calls for approx 12-13 mils of elevation, 400 yds is something like 22 mils of up. So you want a scope with enough internal travel to be able to dial out that far
I hold on a lot of NRL22 stages, so a reticle that allows elevation and wind holds is key. I would avoid a reticle that is in .5 mils, .25 is better, .2 works best for my brain
At least 10 mils per rotation on the turret

So all that being said there’s quite a few scopes out there that fit the above criteria that folks here have given good reviews on in a wide price range. Just off top of my head that I’ve played with (from low $ to high):

Bushnell Match Pro ED 5-30x56
Burris XTR Pro 5.5-30x56
Leupold Mk5 HD 5-25x56
Zeiss S3 6-36x56

 

[Glassaholic]

I totally get the vibe about a kid owning a multi thousand dollar rig. At that age I was still trying to get the best out of my Daisy BB gun.

Ok, I am getting the drift here, really appreciate the advice and suggestions. It occurs to me his next step ought to be attending an actual match, looking through some scopes to get a sense of the reticles, and going from there.

Thanks again.

Some good advice already given above. For NRL22 he'll want a "close" focusing scope. All three of the LOW designed 6-36x56 scopes (Vortex, Zeiss, Element) are excellent options. The NF ATACR 7-35, the TT 7-35 and the ZCO 8-40 all excellent options as well. Possibly the new Kahle 5-40x56 with extreme FOV might work, but listed bottom parallax at 20m might be "too far" for some. Since your friends son is just getting started I don't think any of the $3k plus options are really necessary (unless his dad is using this to justify getting a nice scope that he will also use).

 

[Glassaholic]

Scope that parallaxes down to 25 yds
...
Leupold Mk5 HD 5-25x56

Pretty sure the Leupold parallax only goes to 75 yards...

 

[ECK]

Pretty sure the Leupold parallax only goes to 75 yards...

Yeah, forgot about that. 50 yds is the lowest it’ll go IIRC

 

[jbell]

Yeah, forgot about that. 50 yds is the lowest it’ll go IIRC

Pretty sure the Leupold parallax only goes to 75 yards...

The MK 4HD corrects down to 25 yards I believe.

 

[Glassaholic]

The MK 4HD corrects down to 25 yards I believe.

He was referencing the Mark 5 5-25

 

[jbell]

He was referencing the Mark 5 5-25

Yes, I know. I was just saying the MK4 HD is an option that would work for his needs. According to Leupold (as I understand it) it is the same scope less some lens coating that was a Mil requirement. But maybe it’s not nearly as nice as the MK5…

 

[TonyAngel]

Man, this is a question that can't be answered. You can't just settle on a scope by throwing money at the question.

Usually, by the time a shooter gets to a point where they're looking at scopes like the ones mentioned here, they have some idea of what it is that they like. Reticle, turrets, size, weight ... many of the options to consider are largely subjective.

I'd tell him to get something like a Tract to start and by the end of a season, he'll know what he likes and what he doesn't.

 

[Roslyn]

TBH this was my initial instinct. I am neurotically fussy about reticles -- some too busy, some not enough detail for hold unders yak yak yak -- which led me to thinking he should just get behind several and see whether any of them rings his chimes. The kid has essentially zero experience looking through optics, so trying to guess which one he will "grow into" seems to me a fool's errand.

That said, knowing something about how close in the scope will let him see targets and how much magnification seems appropriate really helps narrow the field.

Lots of good advice and detail in this thread, all of it much appreciated.

 

[bobby1028]

If it was my 14yr old starting out I'd be in the classifieds looking for an XTR3 or some Athlon, then a case of lot tested ammo and let him run thru a season...the alpha glass choice can then be made knowing exactly the features needed/wanted.

 

[Rob01]

TBH this was my initial instinct. I am neurotically fussy about reticles -- some too busy, some not enough detail for hold unders yak yak yak -- which led me to thinking he should just get behind several and see whether any of them rings his chimes. The kid has essentially zero experience looking through optics, so trying to guess which one he will "grow into" seems to me a fool's errand.

That said, knowing something about how close in the scope will let him see targets and how much magnification seems appropriate really helps narrow the field.

Lots of good advice and detail in this thread, all of it much appreciated.

That’s exactly why buying him a $6000 scope is beyond stupid. Tell him to buy him a Vortex Strike Eagle 5-25 and mount it up and get him shooting. He will have plenty of scope to win a match and get him used to shooting and using a reticle while not being overly invested and he can sell it down the road easily. It also has parallax setting down to 15 yards.

 

[DownhillFromHere]

^^^^ This. Any newbie, young or old, is going to evolve preferences. Spending major $$ right out of the gate is senseless. The current Vortex Strike Eagle 5-25 is a very capable scope in its own right whose reticle is essentially identical to reticles in far more expensive optics.

Whatever is chosen, be sure it's a First Focal Plane (FFP) MRAD reticle. Current PRS and NRL22 style competition has pretty much settled on MRAD as a convention; the older MOA reticles are fine but anyone using them will be talking a different "language" concerning elevation and wind calls at matches or even on most informal firing lines. Even if Dad is an MOA guy, the son will be better served with a mils/MRAD scope. I'm older than dirt and started this rifle silliness 8+ years ago with MOA scopes because that's what I knew... finally switched after a few years. Bottom line is, just start with MRAD.

A word about maximum magnification: I suggest going no higher than 25-27x on max power. The higher the maximum magnification, the more the reticle "shrinks" as magnification is reduced. Most targets are relatively close in NRL22 matches, so 10-12x is in order. I learned that zooming out the Razor 6-36 I had on my Vudoo to that magnification range made the reticle subtensions so small they were too difficult to scan while the timer is running. So now my ZCO 5-27x56 scope, with thicker reticle at lower power, lives on the Vudoo.

Good luck to the newbie.

 

[HayStax]

I really like the NX8 line. I have a couple Kahles and Leupolds. Don’t like the cheap Vortex I’m running on my 17HMR

FWIW, I’ve never looked through the really expensive stuff.

 

[mmlook]

That’s exactly why buying him a $6000 scope is beyond stupid. Tell him to buy him a Vortex Strike Eagle 5-25 and mount it up and get him shooting. He will have plenty of scope to win a match and get him used to shooting and using a reticle while not being overly invested and he can sell it down the road easily. It also has parallax setting down to 15 yards.

im going to disagree here,
if the goal is to get good at NRL22/X and PRS rimfire

then you're going to want to start someone on one thing and never change
- that one thing should be the best possible, that way they can just focus on shooting,
and if they miss, they know it was them and not the gear

I know most will probably disagree, but this is my stand point for newer people who want to get good

decent shooters make 50-75% near perfect shots in a match
good shooters make 75-90% near perfect shots in a match
great shooters make 95-100% near perfect shots in a match

in rimfire especially, a perfect shot is a perfect trigger press and follow through,
where you can see the bullet go into the target

you only learn from perfect shots

so the less perfect shots you make in a match,
the better your gear needs to be to compensate for the less than perfect shots

 

[Rob01]

im going to disagree here,
if the goal is to get good at NRL22/X and PRS rimfire

then you're going to want to start someone on one thing and never change
- that one thing should be the best possible, that way they can just focus on shooting,
and if they miss, they know it was them and not the gear

I know most will probably disagree, but this is my stand point for newer people who want to get good

decent shooters make 50-75% near perfect shots in a match
good shooters make 75-90% near perfect shots in a match
great shooters make 95-100% near perfect shots in a match

in rimfire especially, a perfect shot is a perfect trigger press and follow through,
where you can see the bullet go into the target

you only learn from perfect shots

so the less perfect shots you make in a match,
the better your gear needs to be to compensate for the less than perfect shots

Man I wonder how all those guys are winning matches without $6000 scopes. You better tell them they aren’t supposed to do that. lol

 

[mmlook]

Man I wonder how all those guys are winning matches without $6000 scopes. You better tell them they aren’t supposed to do that. lol

the better you are, the less the scope matters

but in the same breath, look at the scopes used to win the past few years at the NRL22 championship and the prs rimfire finale

NRL22 championship
Nightforce
Tangent
Cronus
Razor gen 3

PRS rimfire finale
nightforce
tangent
nightforce
razor gen3

now look at worlds
tangent
tangent
ZCO

 

[Rob01]

the better you are, the less the scope matters

but in the same breath, look at the scopes used to win the past few years at the NRL22 championship and the prs rimfire finale

NRL22 championship
Nightforce
Tangent
Cronus
Razor gen 3

PRS rimfire finale
nightforce
tangent
nightforce
razor gen3

now look at worlds
tangent
tangent
ZCO

So all the new shooters who started with lower scopes and got good what explains that? Sorry the better you are the less the scope matters is something we will have to agree to disagree on.

And doesn’t matter what those shooters had. You could give the top guy an Arken and he will beat the bottom guy with a TT. You are placing way too much on the scope.

 

[bobby1028]

So all the new shooters who started with lower scopes and got good what explains that? Sorry the better you are the less the scope matters is something we will have to agree to disagree on.

And doesn’t matter what those shooters had. You could give the top guy an Arken and he will beat the bottom guy with a TT. You are placing way too much on the scope.

Agreed. For ELR or centerfire distances sure good quality glass is a real plus, at 22lr distances a luxury, by no means a requirement. If it's in the budget great, otherwise good money should go into other aspects of the build first. Barrel, trigger, a good fitting well balanced chassis...then optic as the lowest priority.

 

[J_D]

I’m a total ZCO fan. Better eyebox, easier parallax better glass, but in all honesty, money being no concern, the Zeiss S3 MRAD is an amazing scope with decent glass. Not really entry level, not full alpha, but won’t be outgrown.

That’s a no brainer. I don’t currently have one anymore, but it was much better than I expected.

 

[DM1975]

the better you are, the less the scope matters

but in the same breath, look at the scopes used to win the past few years at the NRL22 championship and the prs rimfire finale

NRL22 championship
Nightforce
Tangent
Cronus
Razor gen 3

PRS rimfire finale
nightforce
tangent
nightforce
razor gen3

now look at worlds
tangent
tangent
ZCO

I kid of course but still…

 

[FuhQ]

Honestly, this kid might have $6000 to drop on a scope, but he's also only 14, and he's obviously never shot comps, and won't know if he likes it or hates it until he does, or gets distracted by something else a year from now, and stops shooting NRL, and gets into trucks, or music, or something else entirely different than NRL, like turkey hunting... He could shoot 2 matches and give up. I'd recommend something cheap, but good, like the DNT 7-35x56 MRAD to start out with, and if he decides he likes it, buy something higher priced, and put the DNT on something else that might need a scope upgrade. The glass is REALLY good in this scope, and he will have no problems seeing hits on steel at 500 yards with it. The turrets are repeatable, the tracking is true, the parallax is accurate, and it holds zero, and is built like a tank. It's almost bulletproof, and would be a great starter scope for NRL22. Hell, it would be a great scope for NRL22 period...Experienced shooter, or newbie. I have some $3K+ scopes, and I must say that for $600, this scope is damn impressive. Spend $600 on the scope, and spend the rest on ammo for practicing.

https://cameralandny.com/shop/dnt-optics-the-one-7-35x56-ffp-mrad-tor-theone-reticle-to7351tor/7e5bcf10-5cac-013d-d1be-00163ecd2826?variation=3855962

 

[carbonbased]

The higher the maximum magnification, the more the reticle "shrinks" as magnification is reduced.

Let’s take two scopes with the same crosshair thickness (say, 0.03 mils):
- 3-15x
- 4.5-27x

Are you saying that at the same magnification (10x) that the 4.5-27x reticle will be smaller than the 3-15x? As in the distance between mrads will be shorter?

Because if that’s what you are saying, I believe you are wrong.

One of these scopes has a much higher top-end magnification than the other. Can you guess which one?

Both of these scopes are at 10x. One has a slightly thicker recticle ~0.034 vs 0.03, but don’t let that distract you…of course a thicker reticle will appear thicker/bolder at the same mag. And one is slightly more out of focus. No big deal.

Don’t make me break out photoshop to prove that the distance between mrads is the same lol.

My bet is there might be small opto-mechanical or perception-based differences between the scopes I listed at the top of this post, but in general, the mrads are going to measure out the same at a given mag across scopes.

@koshkin

 

[carbonbased]

For a quick and dirty alignment, just zoom in and use the edge of your display, like this:

Mind you that the camera wasn’t perfectly square to the reticle. There is some skewing, especially on the right side, as I was handholding the phone. And not everything is square. But I think you get the idea.

 

[mmlook]

So all the new shooters who started with lower scopes and got good what explains that? Sorry the better you are the less the scope matters is something we will have to agree to disagree on.

And doesn’t matter what those shooters had. You could give the top guy an Arken and he will beat the bottom guy with a TT. You are placing way too much on the scope.

like I said, i know most will disagree

but ive shot with and against the best rimfire shooters in the nation over the past 2 years

both with an Arken, Tangent, and ZCO

yes i beat a few guys at the finale with an Arken, but I would have beaten a lot more with a tangent.

Like i said, its all about making near perfect shots and seeing everything.
Rimfire is just as hard to see stuff as centerfire, plus you have to deal with parallax sensitivity at the 50-250yard range

if you want someone to get good, as fast as possible, the scope will become the limiting factor very quickly

if you want to take your time and have fun,
sure test stuff, buy a bunch of cheap stuff

but that is not the recipe for getting good as fast as possible

 

[Rob01]

like I said, i know most will disagree

but ive shot with and against the best rimfire shooters in the nation over the past 2 years

both with an Arken, Tangent, and ZCO

yes i beat a few guys at the finale with an Arken, but I would have beaten a lot more with a tangent.

Like i said, its all about making near perfect shots and seeing everything.
Rimfire is just as hard to see stuff as centerfire, plus you have to deal with parallax sensitivity at the 50-250yard range

if you want someone to get good, as fast as possible, the scope will become the limiting factor very quickly

if you want to take your time and have fun,
sure test stuff, buy a bunch of cheap stuff

but that is not the recipe for getting good as fast as possible

You wouldn’t have beaten anyone else with a TT. You can make yourself feel better and say that but it’s not true.

Been shooting these .22 matches since 2017 with a number of scopes and know that I am the deciding factor of how I end up. Not small differences in the optics.

Again we will have to agree to disagree.

 

[hlee]

I have a vortex viper pst 6-24 erb-2c on my rimfire gun. Good enough for local competitions. Not ideal if you need to shoot closer than 50y, but that was never a problem when I was shooting competitively.

 

[DownhillFromHere]

Are you saying that at the same magnification (10x) that the 4.5-27x reticle will be smaller than the 3-15x? As in the distance between mrads will be shorter?

Because if that’s what you are saying, I believe you are wrong.

That's what I'm saying. I'll either verify the statement with photos - or recant it if I'm wrong. I'm basing the statement on my perceived differences between the reticles of a gen-3 Razor 6-36x56 and a ZCO 527 (MPCT2).

I have a match tomorrow plus other obligations so it may well be Monday before I get back to this... but now you have me curious as to whether I'm representing my perceptions correctly.

 

[Emerson0311]

like I said, i know most will disagree

but ive shot with and against the best rimfire shooters in the nation over the past 2 years

both with an Arken, Tangent, and ZCO

yes i beat a few guys at the finale with an Arken, but I would have beaten a lot more with a tangent.

Like i said, its all about making near perfect shots and seeing everything.
Rimfire is just as hard to see stuff as centerfire, plus you have to deal with parallax sensitivity at the 50-250yard range

if you want someone to get good, as fast as possible, the scope will become the limiting factor very quickly

if you want to take your time and have fun,
sure test stuff, buy a bunch of cheap stuff

but that is not the recipe for getting good as fast as possible

I have noticed that once I nail down “slow is smooth, and smooth is fast”, along with solid positions, it gives me mental time to devote to using my optic more efficiently. That only works when my optic allows me to see what is going on down range. I would have mocked a Gen 3 Razor making much difference, until I spent some time behind it watching my bullets/trace. It is a big deal. Now I wonder what else I would see with a TT or ZCO. The guy who always stomps me runs a ZCO.

 

[hlee]

Correlation vs causation. Good shooters who are really serious tend to spend more money on gear. It’s them being serious that drives the gear choices, not the gear that makes them good. The gear doesn’t hurt, but they score well because they are good.

 

[Emerson0311]

Correlation vs causation. Good shooters who are really serious tend to spend more money on gear. It’s them being serious that drives the gear choices, not the gear that makes them good. The gear doesn’t hurt, but they score well because they are good.

You cannot separate the 2. Good gear makes the good shooter better. It is apples and oranges to compare a 40% hit rate guy to an 80% hit rate competitor. The 80% guy is trying to hit 90%. A $600 scope will not allow him to see better than the 90% guy with a TT. Not much separates the top 5-6 in a big match. Little thing matter when the difference is a few %. Lots of copium in these discussions from shooters that are not podium contenders.

 

[carbonbased]

That's what I'm saying. I'll either verify the statement with photos - or recant it if I'm wrong. I'm basing the statement on my perceived differences between the reticles of a gen-3 Razor 6-36x56 and a ZCO 527 (MPCT2).

I have a match tomorrow plus other obligations so it may well be Monday before I get back to this... but now you have me curious as to whether I'm representing my perceptions correctly.

Ok. Of course you’ll run into small problems aligning the magnification between the scopes in question…I don’t know how to set two different scopes (different mags and brands) exactly to the same mag. Perhaps one needs fancy tools, or fancy knowledge. Or both.

@koshkin you want to weigh in here? See this post above.

 

[mmlook]

You wouldn’t have beaten anyone else with a TT. You can make yourself feel better and say that but it’s not true.

Been shooting these .22 matches since 2017 with a number of scopes and know that I am the deciding factor of how I end up. Not small differences in the optics.

Again we will have to agree to disagree.

I have and I did

look up the 2024 NRL22 championship and the 2024 PRS rimfire finale

NRL22 championship I shot open with a Tangent,
PRS finale I shot production with an Arken

this really isnt about me,
But I would never advise starting someone wanting to learn to start with sub par gear, if money is not a concern

that’s just not good advice

 

[Rob01]

I have and I did

look up the 2024 NRL22 championship and the 2024 PRS rimfire finale

NRL22 championship I shot open with a Tangent,
PRS finale I shot production with an Arken

this really isnt about me,
But I would never advise starting someone wanting to learn to start with sub par gear, if money is not a concern

that’s just not good advice

Yup you turned me. OP tell that guy to buy his son the $6000 scope. He will be champion in a year or he won’t like the sport and the guy will have a $6000 scope for himself. Seems like he is rich anyways so money doesn’t matter. lol

 

[hlee]

You cannot separate the 2. Good gear makes the good shooter better. It is apples and oranges to compare a 40% hit rate guy to an 80% hit rate competitor. The 80% guy is trying to hit 90%. A $600 scope will not allow him to see better than the 90% guy with a TT. Not much separates the top 5-6 in a big match. Little thing matter when the difference is a few %. Lots of copium in these discussions from shooters that are not podium contenders.

Sure you can. Trade rifles with that shooter. You’ll score a few points better. He’ll still clean your clock.

 

[oldrifleman]

Have any of you considered that he is buying his “Son” a TT or ZCO do gets a new rifle and scope? I built my kids really nice rifles knowing I will get to shoot them 4 ( or more) times for every time they use them.
This whole thread reeks of I want a nice scope so please tell me that I should have one and which one he (I) will like better.

 

[mmlook]

Yup you turned me. OP tell that guy to buy his son the $6000 scope. He will be champion in a year or he won’t like the sport and the guy will have a $6000 scope for himself. Seems like he is rich anyways so money doesn’t matter. lol

Im just saying…

look at the original post
- dad bought a 14 year old who doesnt shoot competition a vudoo
- wants to buy the best scope, money not an issue.

why not start him on the best that’s available

hopefully we can agree that there is a difference between a budget scope and a higher level scope

just like there is difference between a CZ and a vudoo