Going to buy a Vortex PST FFP scope in either 4-16x50 or 6-24x50 for my Sako Tecomate in 300WSM. Figuring this gun will be good to about the 7-800 yard mark. I have Leupolds on other rifles including a 4.5-14 and a couple of 6.5-20s on varmint rifles. Having trouble deciding which one would fit best. Gun will primarily be a hunting piece but I will be shooting gongs and jugs as far out as possible for fun and practice. Looking for help deciding on how big to go. Thanks in advance.
Buying a Vortex PST...4-16 or 6-24??
- Thread starter HUNTNMT
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
emn83
Well-Known Member
your min range will tell a lot about what you need. If you think you are going to be seeing close in shots, the 4-16 is better, and 16x can get you a long way. However, if close in is not something you expect, having 24X on the top end is awesome.
I ended up with the 6-24 in SFP myself and have no problems with it, target acquisition is a little slow close in, but really, as close as 50 yards, and maybe a little closer, it's not a big dwal.
I ended up with the 6-24 in SFP myself and have no problems with it, target acquisition is a little slow close in, but really, as close as 50 yards, and maybe a little closer, it's not a big dwal.
jeff 300
Well-Known Member
look at it like this with the 6x24 you r only loosing 2x on the low end but gain 6x on the high end over the 4x16 and on the 4x16 you r loosing magnification all the way around. i have never had a problem with 6 x at a 100 yards even 50 the only benefit to a low power scope for me is hunting at night.
Hell most people buy a scope say 3x9 and never take it off 6 x to start out with. so to me a good starting point is 6x you don't have to have it on 24 but it is sure nice to if you need it. I have the 6x24 it a nice scope a lot of scope for the money.
Hell most people buy a scope say 3x9 and never take it off 6 x to start out with. so to me a good starting point is 6x you don't have to have it on 24 but it is sure nice to if you need it. I have the 6x24 it a nice scope a lot of scope for the money.
Why did you pick the SFP over the FFP?? I think that the FFP is perfect for a hunting rig. All my Leupolds are SFP and this will be my first FFP scope but it just seems like a great idea for a guy who may not have time to dial or is set on low power and has game make a sudden move where hold over is required. Am I wrong in my thinking??
brentc
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2009
- Messages
- 2,635
Personally, I think you'd be better off getting an SFP and putting the extra money towards a good rangefinder. SFPs can be very effective when used to estimate range and holdover.
wyomingblizzard
Well-Known Member
I have a 4/16 on my 308 win & a 6/24 on my 340weatherby. I like the 6/24 ffp the best. 4/16 is enough but it is nice to have the extra power when you need it. I would not hesitate to buy another 6/24ffp.
cornchuck
Well-Known Member
I have both a 4-16 and a 6-24 scopes that are in SFP. And I really like them. I got the 4-16 last. After looking through it, i noticed that it is alittle clearer than the 6-24. I see the black shadow in the 6-24 when I'm not exactly centered in the scope with my eye. I have no problem with 4-16. Think I will call Vortex and see what they say about it. But then again, when I don't see the shadow my eye is right on center with the cross hairs.
Still would not trade them for anything.
Jason
Still would not trade them for anything.
Jason
SidecarFlip
Well-Known Member
The higher the magnification, the more critical the eye relief becomes. If the scope is rated at 4", lower magnification will be real forgiving but crank it up and 4" is it. I notice that the Vortex PST's are really tight on the high end, have a couple myself.
I'd trade them all for a March or S&B even up......
Completely agree. Plus the FFP retical will cover up more of your target compared to the really fine SFP retical when at full zoom. And if you are needing to range something far enough away to make scope adjustment, you are going to be at full zoom anyway and you could then use your SFP retical for ranging if you needed to.
SidecarFlip
Well-Known Member
This is my 4-16 PST BTW.
You can range, but it's cumbersome and not all that accurate. I used mine in NM in the fall on a Mule deer hunt and it works (only at maximum magnification because the subtension is aligned) but it is cumbersome especially when holding the rifle against a tree. Might work better on a bi-pod or shooting stick.
I compared the reading obtained to my laser rangefinder and it was close, within 25 yards give or take....
Also, keep in mind that because you must use maximum magnification, the eye box becomes critical as well. It takes a bit of concentration along with a steady hand on the turret so it's not the ideal tool.
IMO, it's nice if you forget the rangefinder or for some reason the rangefinder is inoperative but it certainly don't replace a rangefinder and the FFP scope ranges at all magnifications because the subtensions stay aligned, not so with the SFP.
Cost wise, not that much difference really. I prefer conventional lens placement myself and MOA versus MIL.
The 6-24 will be even more critical concerning the eye box at maximum magnification.....
You can range, but it's cumbersome and not all that accurate. I used mine in NM in the fall on a Mule deer hunt and it works (only at maximum magnification because the subtension is aligned) but it is cumbersome especially when holding the rifle against a tree. Might work better on a bi-pod or shooting stick.
I compared the reading obtained to my laser rangefinder and it was close, within 25 yards give or take....
Also, keep in mind that because you must use maximum magnification, the eye box becomes critical as well. It takes a bit of concentration along with a steady hand on the turret so it's not the ideal tool.
IMO, it's nice if you forget the rangefinder or for some reason the rangefinder is inoperative but it certainly don't replace a rangefinder and the FFP scope ranges at all magnifications because the subtensions stay aligned, not so with the SFP.
Cost wise, not that much difference really. I prefer conventional lens placement myself and MOA versus MIL.
The 6-24 will be even more critical concerning the eye box at maximum magnification.....
