I would have to agree with Mike on this. I have a PST, and the optics at longer ranges are just not up to par with any NF. I own both a 4-16x50 PST and a NF ATACR, and side by side there is no comparison. At 300 yards I can see my bullet holes with the ATACR, and with my PST the thin lines on the home made targets I print out don't show up all that clearly, and not a chance to see the bullet holes. In the SHV I would definitely go with the new 5x20 option over the 4x14. Same goes with a PST for a long range rifle, I would rather have a 6-24x50 over the 4-16x50.
However, the trade off is weight... the SHV is going to be quite a bit heavier than the PST, about a 1/2 pound if I remember correctly. I've shot animals beyond 600 yards with my PST and it definitely gets the job done. So if weight is a factor, it's something to think about. If weight is not a factor, then definitely go SHV if those are the two scopes you are considering. Also, if you have a muzzle brake and want to spot your shots when shooting steel or on a game animal, the better optics are going to give you better clarity to see the impact. Definitely a tradeoff and really comes down with your personal style of hunting and shooting.
Have you considered something like the Leupold VX6 3-18x50mm with CDS? You can get a custom CDS dial and it is also about 3 ounces lighter than the PST. I have looked through the VX6 and I thought the optics were much better than my PST. I am actually considering this VX6 for one of my hunting rifles.