How did you decide on your scope?

[tdhanses]

I like the 8x option. As said earlier I think with the 4-32 range I can "grow" into it while getting comfortable with taking long range shots.

I have the 2.5-20 nx8, id highly recommend it over the 32x if your hunting, if your going to make it a range gun then i could see going 32x

 

[cfdjay]

I have the 2.5-20 nx8, id highly recommend it over the 32x if your hunting, if your going to make it a range gun then i could see going 32x

Interested in hearing your reasoning. (Again I'm new to this stuff)

 

[tdhanses]

Interested in hearing your reasoning. (Again I'm new to this stuff)

For hunting 20x to me is even high, i have zero issue shooting out to 1000 with a 15-20x top end. The 2.5x is much better if in the timber then a 4x for close shots. I just don’t see the need for a 4-32 for hunting but that is my view, many others will see the need and pick one up.

 

[cfdjay]

For hunting 20x to me is even high, i have zero issue shooting out to 1000 with a 15-20x top end. The 2.5x is much better if in the timber then a 4x for close shots. I just don’t see the need for a 4-32 for hunting but that is my view, many others will see the need and pick one up.

Appreciate your thoughts. Thanks!

 

[Axlrod]

This is what I'm leaning towards. Thoughts?

NX8 - 4-32x50mm F1 - ZeroStop™ - .250 MOA - DigIllum - PTL - MOAR™​

I have the NX8 4-32 F2 MOAR CF2D. Used it for a year. On 32x it is not very clear so I typically use it between 20-25. Not my favorite reticle and when you turn on the lights there are too many for me. Don't use the lighted much though and I have left it on a few times, so the battery is dead most of the time.
So when I received my new custom rifle a few weeks ago I got an ATACR in 5-25 F2 MOAR-T. Much better for what I want. I did put the NX8 on my CZ 457 .22 with factory Manners stock.

 

[Hoytboy247]

I have the NX8 4-32 F2 MOAR CF2D. Used it for a year. On 32x it is not very clear so I typically use it between 20-25. Not my favorite reticle and when you turn on the lights there are too many for me. Don't use the lighted much though and I have left it on a few times, so the battery is dead most of the time.
So when I received my new custom rifle a few weeks ago I got an ATACR in 5-25 F2 MOAR-T. Much better for what I want. I did put the NX8 on my CZ 457 .22 with factory Manners stock.

I bet that .22 feels powerful now


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Axlrod]

I bet that .22 feels powerful now


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

For sure! We have a offhand soot at our range 2x/month in the winter that I use this gun for. We shoot at 25 yards with the NRA target. I run it between 12x-15x and the added scope weight helps me hold steady.

 

[freddyG]

Out of those three brands you mentioned, there is only 1 choice in my opinion, if you plan on using your elevation turret. You just need to do a little research on tracking issues.


the money spent on an NF scope that will last a life time isn’t that much in the big picture. Think of the value after the years spending money on apps, taken the time off work and drove miles to hunt. Having a scope you can rely on is worth every penny and an extra $1000 isn’t sh**.

Banging your head at the range isn’t fun either when your shots are all over the place and you are trying to trouble shoot the issue.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I agree. My last scope that puked cost me a few animals and countless ammo before I figured out it was the scope. It was a non dialer, that had erratic POI shift some of the time.

From then on it has been strictly NF scopes for me, and surprise, no more issues. I do shoot a lot, so that may have something to do with constant scope failures. All of the money you will spend on ammo, wasted trips etc., will more than make up the difference of a NF scope.

 

[F0steology]

+1

A scope is an aiming device and should function as such. If it won't, it does me no good. I want a scope that will hold zero, return to zero, and track appropriately. I also want my scope to be reasonably durable so that a slip/fall doesn't ruin my hunt due to scope failure. I no longer care about "glass quality" (I used to and that bit me with a scope failure on a deer). I also don't wory much about weight. Uber lightweight scopes will not tolerate light impacts well and will have a higher failure rate. For me, I look to Nightforce amd SWFA scopes depending on budget/application. Trijicons and a few others have decent tract records too, but when you really get into it there aren't that many scopes out there with a high reliability rate. Reliability should be the number 1 deciding factor, but for many it isn't it seems.

 

[mxgsfmdpx]

You’re new to rifle hunting. Get comfortable with shooting before worrying about the “perfect” scope.

When I used to teach shooting I’d purposely pull out an affordable savage (which shot amazing btw) with one of the cheapest scopes I owned at the time mounted onto it. I’d kill a couple ground squirrels at 300 yards to show guys they don’t need anything fancy to kill.

You can get a head start by recommendations and shooting classes, but it all comes down to field time and experience like anything else. Gotta learn for yourself what works for you. The “perfect” scope will come in due time. You don’t know what you’re looking for yet.

 

[amassi]

I like the 8x option. As said earlier I think with the 4-32 range I can "grow" into it while getting comfortable with taking long range shots.

You might want to look through one first. That 8x eye box is pretty squirly. Also super short mounting surface that will limit you ring base options. Magnification you won't need et el.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

 

[Mountainrancher]

I put a bushnell lrhs 2 on my browning in 6.8 western and I have not regretted it at all.

Bushnell LRHS-2 4.5-18 x 44 G2H reticle

<p>BACK IN STOCK!!</p>

www.gaprecision.net

 

[Glockster26]

I put a bushnell lrhs 2 on my browning in 6.8 western and I have not regretted it at all.

Bushnell LRHS-2 4.5-18 x 44 G2H reticle

<p>BACK IN STOCK!!</p>

www.gaprecision.net

I thought Bushnell quit making those?

 

[Formidilosus]

This is what I'm leaning towards. Thoughts?

NX8 - 4-32x50mm F1 - ZeroStop™ - .250 MOA - DigIllum - PTL - MOAR™​

The NX8 4-32x is a more usable scope than the 2.5-20x, however they both have significant drawbacks for general hunting use even at distance. 20x and 32x are both hindrances, not advantages, for killing living things. MOA lacks some advantages that mils have in both a consistent and logical drop scale and wind holds. I’ve used every scope mentioned quite a bit and a 4-32x NX8 in MOA is about the last choice of any decent choice. All high magnification does is shrink your FOV, make it impossible or highly unlikely that you will not spot your own impacts/misses, make it probable that you will lose the animal if it moves before or after that shot, make it significantly harder and take longer to reacquire the animal after the shot, and make follow up shots harder. High magnification is range and visual comfort thing, not an advantage for most shooting.

So let’s say you get a decent magnum rifle and high mag scope. You line up on a deer at 643 yards, prone, the buck bedded on a hillside with mixed in brush and trees on the opposite ride, across a draw. It feels like there is no wind. You dial up your magnification to 15-32x and shoot. You lose the deer during recoil, you catch movement going into a small tree stand and can see half a deers body standing there, but not it’s head. You aren’t positive that there weren’t other deer in the cover that you didn’t see. After a bit, the deer walks through the tress and over the ridge tail slightly flicking. There isn’t snow. What do you do now? How confident are you to find this deer? What do you do next?


These are the things that people don’t talk about. There are very few people that have a legitimate high first or second round hit rates past mid ranges in mountainous conditions, even though everyone believes they are one of the few. How they get that idea without shooting in mountainous conditions constantly and in less than ideal situations and logging the data I can’t fathom.
A person that does not have someone skilled spotting their shots for them while hunting is going to have a relatively high mishap rate on live animals past the 400-500 yard range, unless they are extremely experienced with shooting under stress and from imperfect positions; as well as extremely experienced with animal behavior, tracking, and killing. Even still the success rate will be lower than most think and way lower than if that person has a skilled spotter.

All of this leads to legitimate ranges for people that are truly shooting and practicing correctly constantly being much shorter and/or limiting than people believe.


Let’s say someone is going to get a rifle and scope setup that is solid and capable past MPBR. They will learn to shoot in the field correctly, take a good class (if there were any), and start competing in LR shooting with their actual hunting rifles and not 28lb 6mm Dashers. They’re going to learn factual terminal ballistics, and on demand performance. They’ll shoot 1,500-3,000 rounds this year before season from those hunting rifles away from the bench and from alternate positions until under time constraints and some stress they are on demand 2 moa hitters. So on deer they are mechanically capable of grouping on deer/antelopes to about 600 yards, and elk to past 1,000y (ignoring external factors).

Now this example is already way, way beyond what almost anyone does. The issue left is how is that person going to gain any experience shooting in mountain/broken terrain if they do not live in the mountain west? Let’s say they do live in the mountains and they do all the above things to prepare- there still is the issue of killing experience. Its a thing. Killing is a skill like every other, and there are not enough tags available in the west for someone to gain experience in even a decade of hunting and filling every tag available that they can get their hands on. Varmints help, but it is not the same animal reactions, factors, or behaviors that medium and large game exhibit. AND that behavior is different when shot at long range.
Missing and wounding is a fact at all ranges including “long range”. If someone wants to say they haven’t missed or wounded and animal at long range (any range) then they haven’t killed enough- no condition or scenario is a 100% hit rate. Following up, finding, and recovering wounded animals is a whole other skill. How are you gaining that experience?



A 9x scope is plenty of magnification for sub 700’ish yards on big game, and that is about the farthest that even practiced and prepared individuals will have a high 1st or 2nd round hit rate. Past that, you need a spotter. If you have a spotter, then you don’t need high magnification to aim. This season I had people line up on elk at 910y at 9x and 994y with 6x with no issue at all quartering the vitals. One of those was a clean kill, one was a miss and the miss had zero to do with magnification and everything to do with incorrect data.
Personally my last few deer and elk I’ve killed have been at 676y on 8 or 9x, 801y at 11x IIRC, 457y at 6x, 644y at about 10x, 532y at 11x, 606 at 12x IIRC, 666y at 9x, 732y at 7x, etc, etc. Now there were quite a few animals at sub 400 yards in there, all of those would have been 6x or below. For those I’ve been spotting for just between last season and this one, 735y at 7x, 620 at between 10x and 20’ish x and the only true scenario that caused issues (there’s a clue), multiple between 400-600 with magnifications between 6x and 9x, and lots of sub 400 with all 6x or below.



The question of how to choose a scope that will be used past close ranges is easy- one that maintains zero regardless of handling or abuse, FFP and mil, usable magnification of 6x to 15’ish X, with a consistent spaced and visible reticle in low and high powers. That narrows it down to a very few options.

 

[cfdjay]

The NX8 4-32x is a more usable scope than the 2.5-20x, however they both have significant drawbacks for general hunting use even at distance. 20x and 32x are both hindrances, not advantages, for killing living things. MOA lacks some advantages that mils have in both a consistent and logical drop scale and wind holds. I’ve used every scope mentioned quite a bit and a 4-32x NX8 in MOA is about the last choice of any decent choice. All high magnification does is shrink your FOV, make it impossible or highly unlikely that you will not spot your own impacts/misses, make it probable that you will lose the animal if it moves before or after that shot, make it significantly harder and take longer to reacquire the animal after the shot, and make follow up shots harder. High magnification is range and visual comfort thing, not an advantage for most shooting.

So let’s say you get a decent magnum rifle and high mag scope. You line up on a deer at 643 yards, prone, the buck bedded on a hillside with mixed in brush and trees on the opposite ride, across a draw. It feels like there is no wind. You dial up your magnification to 15-32x and shoot. You lose the deer during recoil, you catch movement going into a small tree stand and can see half a deers body standing there, but not it’s head. You aren’t positive that there weren’t other deer in the cover that you didn’t see. After a bit, the deer walks through the tress and over the ridge tail slightly flicking. There isn’t snow. What do you do now? How confident are you to find this deer? What do you do next?


These are the things that people don’t talk about. There are very few people that have a legitimate high first or second round hit rates past mid ranges in mountainous conditions, even though everyone believes they are one of the few. How they get that idea without shooting in mountainous conditions constantly and in less than ideal situations and logging the data I can’t fathom.
A person that does not have someone skilled spotting their shots for them while hunting is going to have a relatively high mishap rate on live animals past the 400-500 yard range, unless they are extremely experienced with shooting under stress and from imperfect positions; as well as extremely experienced with animal behavior, tracking, and killing. Even still the success rate will be lower than most think and way lower than if that person has a skilled spotter.

All of this leads to legitimate ranges for people that are truly shooting and practicing correctly constantly being much shorter and/or limiting than people believe.


Let’s say someone is going to get a rifle and scope setup that is solid and capable past MPBR. They will learn to shoot in the field correctly, take a good class (if there were any), and start competing in LR shooting with their actual hunting rifles and not 28lb 6mm Dashers. They’re going to learn factual terminal ballistics, and on demand performance. They’ll shoot 1,500-3,000 rounds this year before season from those hunting rifles away from the bench and from alternate positions until under time constraints and some stress they are on demand 2 moa hitters. So on deer they are mechanically capable of grouping on deer/antelopes to about 600 yards, and elk to past 1,000y (ignoring external factors).

Now this example is already way, way beyond what almost anyone does. The issue left is how is that person going to gain any experience shooting in mountain/broken terrain if they do not live in the mountain west? Let’s say they do live in the mountains and they do all the above things to prepare- there still is the issue of killing experience. Its a thing. Killing is a skill like every other, and there are not enough tags available in the west for someone to gain experience in even a decade of hunting and filling every tag available that they can get their hands on. Varmints help, but it is not the same animal reactions, factors, or behaviors that medium and large game exhibit. AND that behavior is different when shot at long range.
Missing and wounding is a fact at all ranges including “long range”. If someone wants to say they haven’t missed or wounded and animal at long range (any range) then they haven’t killed enough- no condition or scenario is a 100% hit rate. Following up, finding, and recovering wounded animals is a whole other skill. How are you gaining that experience?



A 9x scope is plenty of magnification for sub 700’ish yards on big game, and that is about the farthest that even practiced and prepared individuals will have a high 1st or 2nd round hit rate. Past that, you need a spotter. If you have a spotter, then you don’t need high magnification to aim. This season I had people line up on elk at 910y at 9x and 994y with 6x with no issue at all quartering the vitals. One of those was a clean kill, one was a miss and the miss had zero to do with magnification and everything to do with incorrect data.
Personally my last few deer and elk I’ve killed have been at 676y on 8 or 9x, 801y at 11x IIRC, 457y at 6x, 644y at about 10x, 532y at 11x, 606 at 12x IIRC, 666y at 9x, 732y at 7x, etc, etc. Now there were quite a few animals at sub 400 yards in there, all of those would have been 6x or below. For those I’ve been spotting for just between last season and this one, 735y at 7x, 620 at between 10x and 20’ish x and the only true scenario that caused issues (there’s a clue), multiple between 400-600 with magnifications between 6x and 9x, and lots of sub 400 with all 6x or below.



The question of how to choose a scope that will be used past close ranges is easy- one that maintains zero regardless of handling or abuse, FFP and mil, usable magnification of 6x to 15’ish X, with a consistent spaced and visible reticle in low and high powers. That narrows it down to a very few options.

Man alive brother. I appreciate the insightful reply and you taking the time to give it. I will take all that into consideration

 

[Mountainrancher]

I thought Bushnell quit making those?

From what I understand this is an updated version of the original lrhs scopes and is an exclusive only available from GA precision

 

[kipper09]

The NX8 4-32x is a more usable scope than the 2.5-20x, however they both have significant drawbacks for general hunting use even at distance. 20x and 32x are both hindrances, not advantages, for killing living things. MOA lacks some advantages that mils have in both a consistent and logical drop scale and wind holds. I’ve used every scope mentioned quite a bit and a 4-32x NX8 in MOA is about the last choice of any decent choice. All high magnification does is shrink your FOV, make it impossible or highly unlikely that you will not spot your own impacts/misses, make it probable that you will lose the animal if it moves before or after that shot, make it significantly harder and take longer to reacquire the animal after the shot, and make follow up shots harder. High magnification is range and visual comfort thing, not an advantage for most shooting.

So let’s say you get a decent magnum rifle and high mag scope. You line up on a deer at 643 yards, prone, the buck bedded on a hillside with mixed in brush and trees on the opposite ride, across a draw. It feels like there is no wind. You dial up your magnification to 15-32x and shoot. You lose the deer during recoil, you catch movement going into a small tree stand and can see half a deers body standing there, but not it’s head. You aren’t positive that there weren’t other deer in the cover that you didn’t see. After a bit, the deer walks through the tress and over the ridge tail slightly flicking. There isn’t snow. What do you do now? How confident are you to find this deer? What do you do next?


These are the things that people don’t talk about. There are very few people that have a legitimate high first or second round hit rates past mid ranges in mountainous conditions, even though everyone believes they are one of the few. How they get that idea without shooting in mountainous conditions constantly and in less than ideal situations and logging the data I can’t fathom.
A person that does not have someone skilled spotting their shots for them while hunting is going to have a relatively high mishap rate on live animals past the 400-500 yard range, unless they are extremely experienced with shooting under stress and from imperfect positions; as well as extremely experienced with animal behavior, tracking, and killing. Even still the success rate will be lower than most think and way lower than if that person has a skilled spotter.

All of this leads to legitimate ranges for people that are truly shooting and practicing correctly constantly being much shorter and/or limiting than people believe.


Let’s say someone is going to get a rifle and scope setup that is solid and capable past MPBR. They will learn to shoot in the field correctly, take a good class (if there were any), and start competing in LR shooting with their actual hunting rifles and not 28lb 6mm Dashers. They’re going to learn factual terminal ballistics, and on demand performance. They’ll shoot 1,500-3,000 rounds this year before season from those hunting rifles away from the bench and from alternate positions until under time constraints and some stress they are on demand 2 moa hitters. So on deer they are mechanically capable of grouping on deer/antelopes to about 600 yards, and elk to past 1,000y (ignoring external factors).

Now this example is already way, way beyond what almost anyone does. The issue left is how is that person going to gain any experience shooting in mountain/broken terrain if they do not live in the mountain west? Let’s say they do live in the mountains and they do all the above things to prepare- there still is the issue of killing experience. Its a thing. Killing is a skill like every other, and there are not enough tags available in the west for someone to gain experience in even a decade of hunting and filling every tag available that they can get their hands on. Varmints help, but it is not the same animal reactions, factors, or behaviors that medium and large game exhibit. AND that behavior is different when shot at long range.
Missing and wounding is a fact at all ranges including “long range”. If someone wants to say they haven’t missed or wounded and animal at long range (any range) then they haven’t killed enough- no condition or scenario is a 100% hit rate. Following up, finding, and recovering wounded animals is a whole other skill. How are you gaining that experience?



A 9x scope is plenty of magnification for sub 700’ish yards on big game, and that is about the farthest that even practiced and prepared individuals will have a high 1st or 2nd round hit rate. Past that, you need a spotter. If you have a spotter, then you don’t need high magnification to aim. This season I had people line up on elk at 910y at 9x and 994y with 6x with no issue at all quartering the vitals. One of those was a clean kill, one was a miss and the miss had zero to do with magnification and everything to do with incorrect data.
Personally my last few deer and elk I’ve killed have been at 676y on 8 or 9x, 801y at 11x IIRC, 457y at 6x, 644y at about 10x, 532y at 11x, 606 at 12x IIRC, 666y at 9x, 732y at 7x, etc, etc. Now there were quite a few animals at sub 400 yards in there, all of those would have been 6x or below. For those I’ve been spotting for just between last season and this one, 735y at 7x, 620 at between 10x and 20’ish x and the only true scenario that caused issues (there’s a clue), multiple between 400-600 with magnifications between 6x and 9x, and lots of sub 400 with all 6x or below.



The question of how to choose a scope that will be used past close ranges is easy- one that maintains zero regardless of handling or abuse, FFP and mil, usable magnification of 6x to 15’ish X, with a consistent spaced and visible reticle in low and high powers. That narrows it down to a very few options.

Yeah that’s an in depth post and I appreciate it. I guess the question I have here is what do you feel is the best all around scope for a lightweight mountain hunting type rifle? Say 5-600 yard max with good durability and checks the boxes for most of us on this forum?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Formidilosus]

Yeah that’s an in depth post and I appreciate it. I guess the question I have here is what do you feel is the best all around scope for a lightweight mountain hunting type rifle? Say 5-600 yard max with good durability and checks the boxes for most of us on this forum?

SWFA SS 3-9x42mm or fixed 6x42mm with MQ reticle, and second place isn’t even close.

 

[cfdjay]

I'll be honest here because I'm a couple glasses of bourbon deep but I'm leaning towards to Vortex Razor now. I just can't wrap my head around spending this kind of money and not having assurances it's covered no matter what. The weight penalty is what it is. I hope others are getting some useful info out of this thread. I can't thank everyone enough. Let's keep it going!

 

[kipper09]

SWFA SS 3-9x42mm or fixed 6x42mm with MQ reticle, and second place isn’t even close.

Fair enough. All the press on those two scopes are about as good as it can be.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk