4-14x50 or 5-25x56 for Elk?

[Arminho]

I crossposted in Optics, but figured I'd ask here since I mainly hunt for elk nowadays.
I have a 28 Nosler and am between a S&B PMii 5-25x56 or a Nightforce SHV F1 4-14x50.
The S&B has been on my .308 rifle and have used it for my NM elk hunts, but it's overkill for most applications. Works great in West Texas and for plinking though.

Any thoughts or opinions? Obviously the S&B is much heavier lol

 

[wytx]

No need for a 50 mm objective, more weight and not enough benefit from it.
Good binos and no need for 25x either, do not glass with your rifle scope.
Nightforce I would say would work well for you.

 

[Arminho]

I have Swaro NL Pures 12x42s and a Vortex razor 22-60x80 spotter. Rarely take both with me. Wouldn’t use the riflescope for spotting.

Thx for the insight.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Marble]

I crossposted in Optics, but figured I'd ask here since I mainly hunt for elk nowadays.
I have a 28 Nosler and am between a S&B PMii 5-25x56 or a Nightforce SHV F1 4-14x50.
The S&B has been on my .308 rifle and have used it for my NM elk hunts, but it's overkill for most applications. Works great in West Texas and for plinking though.

Any thoughts or opinions? Obviously the S&B is much heavier lol

I think everyone I hunt with uses something in the 4x14 range. It checks all the boxes for short-range and hunting ranges.

I haven't looked through a S&B But would like to. I do have one scope, a NF NXS 5.5x22x56. It's awesome. Just great. I have no complaints. But i put that on a rifle meant to not be carried around a lot.



Sent from my SM-G986U using Tapatalk

 

[Marble]

No need for a 50 mm objective, more weight and not enough benefit from it.
Good binos and no need for 25x either, do not glass with your rifle scope.
Nightforce I would say would work well for you.

I think a lot of people will disagree. But to each their own. There are pluses and minuses for every objective size.

Sent from my SM-G986U using Tapatalk

 

[Indian Summer]

Depends on your purpose. How far do you want to shoot? In the area you hunt what are your furthest shot opportunities? What is your style of hunting? Big difference between a timber hunter and a semi open country hunt.


I prefer to bring a gun to a knife fight instead of showing up at a gunfight with a knife. They have nearly identical bottom end magnifications at 4 and 5. Top ends are worlds apart. Aim small miss small.

I consider the weight of all my gear. But not my optics. It’s more important to have the right tool for the job than to worry about carrying it. You can’t shoot what you can’t see. So for the additional magnification and the low light capability I’d go with the 5-25.

Again that’s just me. I shoot a big magnum in open country. The further I can shoot the better my chances of success. I carry a Leupold VX5 7-35x56. Love it. And…. I’ll never need to spend anymore money to upgrade that’s for sure.

 

[eaglemountainman]

Sorry, I can't help you out here. The largest scope on any of my hunting rifles is a 2.5-8X36.

 

[wannakillabigbull]

Those scopes are in pretty different price ranges. The SHV F1 has some design compromises that Nightforce needed to make to get down to that price compared to the S&B or NX8s or ATACRs. The SHV F1 has been reliable for me but apart from that I don’t love the scope. I’d buy the S&B or a more expensive Nightforce.

Any scope with a max mag around 14x or 16x has been fine for me on a hunting rig for shots further than I’d ever post to a public forum. I never turn my scope up past that mag on a shot because it cuts my FOV so low that it’s much harder to find the animal on a follow-up shot, if needed. YMMV.

 

[ChrisAU]

The two I've been a part of killing were taken with 3-9x42's, both around 400 yards. Elk are big, your scope doesn't have to be. I'll have a 2.5-10x42 NXS on my next elk hunt.

 

[Mule3006Elk]

S&B way too heavy IMO.
Don't need a big #*& scope to take any NA game animal.
I have a 4-16x50 which I think is a bit much.
One of my favorite hunting scopes is 2.5x10x44.
FWIW

 

[nobody]

1x magnification per 100 yards of desired distance for big game hunting. That Nightforce will get you to 1400 yards following that logic.

And it'll be bomb proof.

 

[rootacres]

Id go NF unless your plan is some ELR with the 28 NOS. For most of us a long poke on an elk would be +/- 700 yds. At that distance the NF is plenty. IMO

 

[Pacific_Fork]

Anything over a 44mm tube and 14x is overkill for Elk hunting, arguably for any western big game hunting. You don’t need a telescope to see a bulls vitals at any reasonable range. Stick to lighter but durable scopes in the 4-14x range IMO.

 

[Scottf270]

I run a 2-10x44 on my .338. Plenty for an elk.

 

[rkcdvm]

I would go with the smaller one. In my experience using high zoom just shows you how much the scope is moving from involuntary movements. Shooting with high magnification off of a bench at paper is significantly different than hunting situations where you can't get perfectly still and there are obstructions between you and the animal. I also don't feel the need to see the ticks on an elk. Even in target shooting situations I don't go past 8-10ish power unless im shooting past 1000yrds.

Both scopes will work great. It just depends on how much weight you want to lug around.

 

[Indian Summer]

1x magnification per 100 yards of desired distance for big game hunting. That Nightforce will get you to 1400 yards following that logic.

And it'll be bomb proof.

Where did that formula come from? 4x is great at 100 yards. At 500 a 20x is awesome! I don’t think about a follow up shot but if I would ever need one it’d only take a second to dial down.

At 600 yards you’re just thinking about hitting a 6 inch circle with a 10x. With 20 you’re thinking about where in that circle you want to hit. I had a Mark 4 6.5-20 before I went to my current 7-35. Obviously I saw an advantage. We all hunt under different circumstances. Sometimes I watch a bull for 3 days before I have a shot opportunity.

 

[nobody]

Where did that formula come from? 4x is great at 100 yards. At 500 a 20x is awesome! I don’t think about a follow up shot but if I would ever need one it’d only take a second to dial down.

At 600 yards you’re just thinking about hitting a 6 inch circle with a 10x. With 20 you’re thinking about where in that circle you want to hit. I had a Mark 4 6.5-20 before I went to my current 7-35. Obviously I saw an advantage. We all hunt under different circumstances. Sometimes I watch a bull for 3 days before I have a shot opportunity.

Long time ago, came from a military sniper trainer. I can't remember exactly where I read it, but over my life I've noticed it makes a ton of sense, especially when trying to keep track of an animal after a shot. I don't wanna have to shoot an elk at 700 on 3 power necessarily, but I also think a top end above about 16 power is pointless in field.

Yup, 20x is awesome when punching paper or shooting prone at plates. But it's worthless in field positions on animals that has the potential to move after you pull the trigger.

Glad to hear you found a solution that works for you. Hunting Mule Deer and Elk in Utah and Colorado where shots can be anywhere inside 1k, I see no reason for anything high mag. I actually got rid of my high mag optics this year, don't run anything that'll go over 14 currently, and I'll never go back on a hunting rifle. Match rifles are different, so I would probably do something different there. But not for a hunting rifle.

 

[jayhawk]

Neither of those will work. You need at LEAST a 300 win mag

 

[doc holiday13]

1x magnification per 100 yards of desired distance for big game hunting. That Nightforce will get you to 1400 yards following that logic.

And it'll be bomb proof.

Never heard that before.

Now if you're shooting targets.. Yeah I get that. 10x is all you need for shooting 1k yards because at 1k your target is the size of a car, not moving, and not in some random shaded angle.

20X max. . My current 20x scope is not great magnification at 20x. if the scope happens to be a 3x- or 4x- at the start but overall my preference for a scope ends in 14-18x max

 

[nobody]

Never heard that before.

Now if you're shooting targets.. Yeah I get that. 10x is all you need for shooting 1k yards because at 1k your target is the size of a car, not moving, and not in some random shaded angle.

20X max. if the scope happens to be a 3x- or 4x- at the start

Nope, less is more when shooting from field positions. If you can always get prone and your rifle never moves and the animal drops in place, sure, run the scope up to 20x.

Typically, guys get in trouble using too much mag. They want to pick out the hair on the elk they wanna hit. They pull the trigger, and there's a big event that occurs and they lose the elk. It's only moved 20 feet right, but because you're zoomed in on 20x for a 750 yard shot, you've lost him. You have to turn the mag down and then back up in order to find him. If they were prone, sure maybe they could've stayed on him. But it's usually pretty rare to find a place where you can easily get prone. In fact, if I think back from all my kills the past few years, I can't think of one instance where I (or anybody I hunt with) even had the option to go prone. The minute you get off your belly, all bets are off the table, and a wide FOV and modest magnification will gain you more than anything. When you're rested on shooting sticks in a seated position and the gun goes off, you move off target the same amount as when you were on 20x, but your FOV allows you to not lose the elk, but see that he's moved down and right that 20 feet because you're not zoomed in on hair number 5,486 on his left shoulder.

Just run a scope on a modest magnification, and realize you don't need to shoot "1/4 MOA all day long when you do your part" to hit an 18" kill zone on an elk. You're putting holes in vital organs, not shooting cloverleaves on the shoulder. If you can hit an 18" plate at a distance, that's all that matters for a practical elk hunting application. If it's mule deer, bump that down to 12"

If we were talking coues deer, then it's probably a little different, but I won't opine there since I've never hunted coues.