I'm building a .308 for 1000yards. I have decided to use a vortex PST scope. I was wondering what the thoughts are for a 4-16x50 or the 6-24x50. With the bigger scope I would get 65 MOA in total elevation adjustment. The 4-16 has 75MOA total adjustment. I really like using the 2 piece Leupold base. Not sure if I want to use a 1 piece base with 20 MOA elevation. The round I will be building will have the 168 or 175gr Berger VLD match grade hunting bullet. Any thoughts?
I would go with the 6-24. You will lose a little low magnification but you will gain a bunch on the top end. If you are going out to 1000, a little more on the top probably wouldn't hurt. Is this a hunting rifle as well or just a bench gun? If is going to serve dual purpose 6x maybe to much for hunting close in.
I have the 4-16 PST on a 6.5 Creed'. It functions very well & seems to track correctly & the glass absolutely blows. If the glass is the same between the 2, go with the 4-16 as the 24x would be just about worthless. Check SnipersHide for reviews & articles about the PST, I hear the 6-24 has better glass (how that is possible is anyone's guess).
For the money, they track well & repeatability in the short time I've had mine has been great. They seem to be durable I decent looking (except that wart on the ocular housing that operates the illumination).
As to your base question. If you want an extra 20mins (you'll need it with your .308) you can run your 2pc bases with Burris zee rings & offset inserts OR just buy a 20moa picatinny 1pc base & be better off IMHO. I am not a fan of 2pc bases.
"I, however, view ethics as an individual decision. My ethics are mine - and I won't explain or justify them to anyone else. I seek nobody's approval, just that of my own conscience. "
Having used and set up several PST's my biggest gripe is the eye box on the 6~24 is very hard to get into on 24 X. So I am constantly cranking it down. Makes no difference where you mount the scope or what cheek weld it is simply a bugger to get in the eye box. We have shot 10X scopes to 1200 yards with good results. I think if you are going with a PST you will be happier with the 4~16.
I would vote for the 4-16x50. Both PST scopes exhibit tunneling at the low end of magnification. On the 6-24x50 the field of view stops growing below about 7X, as I recall. Glare is moderately high - the image contrast drops significantly above about 18X. Low contrast adds to the eye box problem that Jeff spoke about. These are not serious flaws for a target scope. Given the large number of quality scopes in this price range, I would consider other options for a hunting scope.
Given the large number of quality scopes in this price range, I would consider other options for a hunting scope.
Bruce - willing to offer some of those other cost-comparable options? I've been using Sightron SIII scopes because I don't want my scopes too heavy - weight wise. What other scopes have you compared to the PST line of scopes?