Best Lightweight Scope for LR

cross

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 30, 2007
Messages
350
OK guys,

I'm struggling a bit with this. I'm having my new LR sheep, deer, and elk rifle built this spring. Model 70 CRPF short action 7 WSM, #4 fluted Hart, McMillan M70 Hunter with Edge fill and I'll probably go with Leupold DD rings and bases. I'm thinking my max effective range will be somewhere around 800 yds. My problem is the scope.

I've been looking long and hard at the Nightforce 2.5-10 x 24 NXS with the NP-R2 reticle. What I like about the scope is the NP-R2 reticle, it's light (not heavy), short, rugged, compact, and low profile. I take a trip or 2 per year where I'm trying to fit my rifle in a scabbard on a horse and it would be very nice to have a scope that would fit down inside a standard leather rifle scabbard.

My problem is that I'm having a hard time coming to the conclusion that 10x is enough x's. My eyes are OK but not great and I've been enjoying 14x for 10+ years now. I guess I'm just worried that I'm going to miss those extra 4x's. Does someone else make a top notch lightweight scope that will get me out where I want to be? What do you suggest?

Thanks,

Cross
 
OK guys,

...and I'll probably go with Leupold DD rings and bases. I'm thinking my max effective range will be somewhere around 800 yds. My problem is the scope.

If you're planning on that range and using the DD bases, think hard about using Burris Signature rings with those DD bases. You'll be able to use the inserts to dial in a bit of adjustment for the elevation and give yourself a lot more when you need to add MOA for long range. My last two builds I used a +20 in the rear and a -10 in the front to get my POI and POA to match before I ever put one round through the rifle.

I put the DD on a rifle this year and not only added elevation to the rear (and brought down the front) but also had to add a bit of windage adjustment to keep the scope in line with the barrel.

Just an observation based on personal experience.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 15 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.
Top