Decent scope for the longer term...Suggestions?

Discussion in 'Long Range Scopes and Other Optics' started by No Style, Apr 2, 2010.

  1. No Style

    No Style Member

    Messages:
    16
    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2010
    Hi Guys,

    I've just order my first two rifles, one is a .223 Savage 10FCP-K and the other is a .22LR Savage TR to train on. I'm hoping you can give me some advice on two things, mounting and optics.

    The main purpose for both rifles is long range target shooting (relative to the caliber) and varminting.

    Mounting:

    I'm planning to fit these rifles (and any future ones) with some sort of high quality, but transferable mounting system, which seems to mean a rail system. Based on what I've learnt I'm chasing a Picatinny rail (which as I understand it is essentially a slightly beefed up weaver system, but with better defined dimensions and tolerances). I want to be able to transfer optics and so forth between rifles relatively easily, but be confident that once installed they're not going to move around under recoil (not really an issue with these cartridges, but maybe down the track), will the Picatinny rail achieve this?

    Also, what brands are known for producing high quality mounting components and rings?


    Optics:

    I'm currently trying to work out the scoping options. I want to get a decent stuff that I can keep for a while, but my budget certainly isn't unlimited, it would really hurt, but I could stretch it to about $1200 US though my preference is for something a fair bit lower.

    Another point to note, I live in Australia. Buying scopes locally is ludicrously expensive for Nightforce and Trijicon (read $3-5K AUD) and no US store (that I know of) will export either of these brands to Australia, so that pretty much rules them out. Come to think of it, ludicrously expensive sums up all the options here, so I want to capitalise on the currently good exchange rate and buy from the US.

    Ideally I would like the scope and reticle to the same (or atleast very similar) on both rifles (otherwise its not really a trainer is it...).

    Heres some of the features that I think I'm chasing:

    Relatively low bottom end magnfication (4x to 6x at the most).
    The best possible optical clarity in my price range.
    Decent light gathering properties.
    A ranging/holdover type reticle (so mildot or milrad etc).
    FFP (though not essential).
    Adjustable parallax.
    Adjustable focus.
    Easy to use turrets/controls.
    Decent durability.
    Significant range of internal travel (minimum ~70 MOA for elevation).
    Lifetime manufacturer warranty (preferable).

    So far based on a lot of interweb reading and trawling I've decided that in my price range, my best bets in terms of brands are Sightron, Vortex and Bushnell.

    The Sightrons seem to be regarded as having excellent optics but possibly lower durability. The Vortex seems to be considered as almost equal in optics but with more features. Both apparently have excellent warranties. The Bushnell seems to be less well regarded with poorer optics but seems decent otherwise.

    Of these I'm thinking about:

    Sightron:
    SIII SS 6-24x50 LR MD
    SIIB SS 4.5-14x44 MD
    SIIB 4-16x42 MD
    SIIB 6-24x42 MD
    SIIB SS 6.5-20x50 MD

    Vortex:
    Viper PST 6-24x50 FFP (EBR-1 MRad)
    Viper PST 4-16X50 FFP (EBR-1 MRad)
    Razor HD 5-20x50 (with EBR-2 or EBR-3)

    Bushnell:
    Elite 6500 2.5-16x42 Tactical
    Elite 6500 4.5-30x50 Tactical
    Elite 4200 6-24x50 Tactical

    If you can, use this place for pricing as I know they sell all these and ship to Australia (unless you know of somewhere better/cheaper):

    Rifle Scopes Sale FREE UPS - Discount Riflescopes by Leupold, Swarovski, Nikon, Bushnell, Zeiss, Simmons, Burris, Trijicon, NightForce & Other Scopes

    Some questions:
    1. Is the 6500 worth buying over the 4200 in terms of optics? (i.e. brightness or clarity etc)
    2. How do the Bushnell optics compare to the Sightrons?
    3. How do the Vortex optics compare to the Sightrons?

    Cheers for any help or experiences.
     
  2. No Style

    No Style Member

    Messages:
    16
    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2010

  3. topbrass

    topbrass Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    192
    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2010
  4. No Style

    No Style Member

    Messages:
    16
    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2010
    Apparently they were quite good those XOTIC scopes, but I can't seem to find them anyway.

    I noticed that the Vortex scopes are advertised as being coated only on Air-to-Glass surfaces, not sure if thats worth being worried about or not.
     
  5. Scott_at_Vortex

    Scott_at_Vortex Member

    Messages:
    21
    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2010


    All of Vortex's scopes are fully multi-coated.





    Scott
     
  6. topbrass

    topbrass Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    192
    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2010
    Its not worth worrying about. Air to glass surfaces means all surfaces that do not touch another piece of glass, ie. erector lens sets and collimators are generally glass lenses that stack on one another. Some surfaces may be glued together.
     
  7. No Style

    No Style Member

    Messages:
    16
    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2010
    Cheers Scott. Not sure whether you care, but you may want to edit your website. When you hover the mouse over the XR symbol it only mentiones air-to-glass:

    Vortex Tactical - Razor HD 5-20x50 EBR-2 MRAD Reticle

    No biggie though. I think I'll be going with the Vortex stuff.
     
  8. Scott_at_Vortex

    Scott_at_Vortex Member

    Messages:
    21
    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2010

    That is actually correct. Air to glass are the only surfaces that can be coated. Doublets and triplets are cemented together and can not have coatings on the sides that are cemented together. I guess someone could mistake "air to glass" to mean only the outside air, but when we say air to glass we are talking about every glass lens surface inside the scope that you would be able to touch if the scope were to be taken all the way apart.

    Hope this helps.




    Thank you
    Scott
     
  9. No Style

    No Style Member

    Messages:
    16
    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2010
    Yep I see what you mean, its just expressed differently to most other manufacturers. Infact your description is more accurate :).