Opinions on scope magnification and adjustment range

[Camshaft]

So i have decided that my next scope is going to be a Ziess Conquest. I was pretty set on a vortex viper pst, but just cant get past the tactical look of it. Its just not what I am looking for in a hunting scope. I decided on the conquest for its weight and compactness and appearance. I have looked through one and love the glass. My only decision now is do i order the 4.5-14x50 or 6.5-20x50. I obviously like the higher magnification but it comes with a trade off. The higher magnification model has only 45moa of elevation and is 1.5 inches longer than the other while the lower magnification model has 68moa. This scope will be going on my 300wsm. I want the higher power for long range shooting, but also realize that i need the elevation. I also plan on purchasing another one as soon as possible for my 300rum. With the added horsepower from my rum i realize that i don't need as much elevation but if for some reason i don't like the scope and don't want to purchase another, I don't want the longer heavier higher magnification on my carry rifle(300wsm) but don't want to deal with a scope i am not totally comfortable with on my extended range gun(300rum). I have shot so far out the 1100 yards with my 4-16 Nikon monarch on 16 power and really like that level of magnification. So the big question is for those of you with higher end optics. Will the better glass make up for the small loss in magnification if i go with the 4.5-14 or should I just bite the bullet and order the 6.5-20? Because right now I am leaning towards the 4.5-14.

 

[FEENIX]

I'd personally go with 6.5-20 (45 MOA) + 20 MOA base. Good luck!

Ed

 

[sp6x6]

Id go lower power on 300 wsm, or put nikon on it. Then 6-20 on the RUM.

 

[Camshaft]

I think I am going to go ahead and order the 6.5-20. Does anyone have any ideas on ring height for this scope?

 

[jwp475]

4.5X14 is the way I would go. No need what so ever for a 6X20 on a 300 WSM

 

[dig]

Have both, love the Zeiss but man are they big for a 1 inch tube. You are right on. The 6.5x20 is Loooong. I use the 4.5x14 on both a 270 WSM and 375 H&H and find the 14 is pleanty of power for big game/targets. The 20x is on a varmit gun and works great for punching paper at distance. I beleive the 4.5x14 would be more than enough glass.

 

[Camshaft]

Yea thats what i am afraid of. i dont want a real bulky scope on my rifle, now i am contemplating just getting the viper pst. I wish someone could compare the glass in them.

 

[dig]

The Luepy 4.5x14 is more compact and in the 30mm version with target or knobs it appears very compact with pleanty of adjustment, probably my favorite 45x14 in the M4 or VXIII. Just a great all around scope and lighter than Zeiss. Good luck.

 

[yobuck]

i guess im wondering whats wrong with the nikon monark? if youve taken that one to 1100 how far are you planning with the ultramag?

 

[RockZ]

My buddy has a 4.5-14 with the rapid z 800. I set it up for him on a 300win and developed a load that worked perfectly.
Using the retical for holdover he shot an antelope at 825yds,555yds, and a coyote at 400yds.
All one shot kills.
We just tweaked it with a couple of clicks of elevation depending on the conditions and the reticle worked out great.
I can recommend it.

 

[Camshaft]

i guess im wondering whats wrong with the nikon monark? if youve taken that one to 1100 how far are you planning with the ultramag?

Nothing is wrong with the monarch, the glass is just not up to snuff for those kinds of ranges, especially in our smog filled air in Bakersfield. It is hard to get a clean look at much beyond 1000yards. I have progressed in my shooting skills now that I am ready to use something a little higher up the ladder. I would like to take my ultra mag out to 12-1400 yards, and the monarch falls short in both glass quality and internal elevation adjustment range.