Whats the proper scope magnification for the gun Im building

[Elkwonder]

I am in the process of building a 6.5X284 for mule deer and elk. This gun will be used for medium range work The farthest would be 700 to 800 yards. My question is if I go with the vortex viper pst..... would I be better off with the
4-16x50 or should I go with the 6-26x50. Which would you go with and why? I was thinking the 4x16 may be better because it will probably be plenty of magnification at 800 and the lower power should be better for light and close shots if they present themselves.

 

[Hornhunter32]

Definitely the 4-16X50, especially if it's a lighter rifle.

 

[bruce_ventura]

Between those two scopes, the 4-16x50 is the better choice. Both scopes have below average glare performance, but the glare in the 6-24x50 can be quite noticeable above 20X in some sighting conditions. There's no need for more than 14X unless you have vision problems or don't use a spotting scope.

 

[Sako7STW]

A 6.5x284 for elk at 800 yards? I hope this is one of those times when "I told ya so" will not have to be said but dont call me when you are out trying to find your wounded elk.

 

[Elkwonder]

A 6.5x284 for elk at 800 yards? I hope this is one of those times when "I told ya so" will not have to be said but dont call me when you are out trying to find your wounded elk.

Let me go ahead and be VERY SPECIFIC for those that like to get in ****ing matches with people they no NOTHING about. I DONT need a lecture from you Sako. I asked a question about optics not a question about being an *** to someone you dont know. Maybe I should have been more clear. I like to punch paper at much longer distances than I like to shoot at animals.
I know I am somewhat new to these boards, but I am a guy that tries to contribute places and ask questions to learn. Im not into being an internet cowboy togh guy! If you feel the need to lecture me in the future, please pm me and I will give you my contact information so that you may confront me to my face instead on on a public forum. THANK YOU AND HAVE A GREAT DAY!!!

 

[Elkwonder]

BTW....thank you to all that have helped, I appreciate it. Also it was mentioned earlier that the viper has the glare issue. This is not the first time I have read this, along with so so glass. I guess another consideration I am having is the sightron sIII. Is the glass and over all quality better with them than the vortex? Also does it bother most people that the sightron has no zero stop? is there a custon shop out there than is capable of installing them on the sightrons? Thanks for the help.....

 

[Sully2]

Buy A Zeiss Conquest and forget the Vortex. 4.5-14 should work fine.

 

[Sako7STW]

I am in the process of building a 6.5X284 for mule deer and elk. This gun will be used for medium range work The farthest would be 700 to 800 yards.

Read what you wrote. The name of the forum is Long Range HUNTING. Can you see where I derived you fully intended to shoot Elk @ 800? I apologize...As for punching paper @ 800 you can't do no better hardly.

So now that is said and done. I was recently surprised by a scope I bought my son. I got him a Nikon Monarch 4-16x42 for his 7WSM. Take a look at one if you get the chance. I have looked through the Vortex and I can tell you first hand the Nikon is superior to it. Been a long time since I have looked through a Sightron but they have a very good name around here so I doubt you would go wrong by buying one.

 

[Sako7STW]

Buy A Zeiss Conquest and forget the Vortex. 4.5-14 should work fine.

If you got the $$....ya what he said!

 

[Outlaw6.0]

I ran a couple Nikon Monarch's (6.5-20's) for a few years. The glass is REALLY good for the money. On the other hand, the eye relief flat out sucks. 16x will do pretty well up to 1k. After that I would be looking for a little more umph. As for the Vortex vs Sightron, I can't help there, I haven't used either.

The comment about the Zeiss is also pretty sound. VERY good glass & good eye relief, I also have one of those. Down side is, I really don't like the Rapid-Z reticles.


t

 

[Sully2]

I ran a couple Nikon Monarch's (6.5-20's) for a few years. The glass is REALLY good for the money. On the other hand, the eye relief flat out sucks. 16x will do pretty well up to 1k. After that I would be looking for a little more umph. As for the Vortex vs Sightron, I can't help there, I haven't used either.

The comment about the Zeiss is also pretty sound. VERY good glass & good eye relief, I also have one of those. Down side is, I really don't like the Rapid-Z reticles.


t

I dont care for their Z1000. Too dammed many lines form into a blur for me. The 600 and I get along fine

 

[Sully2]

If you got the $$....ya what he said!

They arent that expensive...and besides you'll only ever buy just ONE..!!!

 

[winmagman]

...and besides you'll only ever buy just ONE..!!!

BULL!!!! I bought just one, then another, and another, and another one after that. I'd buy some more too if I could swing it, hard to beat them in the "bang for the buck" department.

Chris

 

[Greyfox]

I think 16x on the top is OK for 700-800 yards, surely on elk. For deer at these ranges I moved up to a 20-22x on the high end. It's not so much the size of the deer that is the issue, it's the usual brush or other aspects of the habitat that I find the higher power will be a benefit. The greater magnification combined with the superb accuracy of the 6.5-284 has made a difference with quite a few whitetail, mule deer, and antelope in tight spots I have taken over the last few years. I have 5x20 Huskemaws on both my 6.5x284's. They have performed very well for me.