Scope Upgrades

[Happy Antelope]

Polite counter argument, if I may…

If only shooting 3-400, why bother dialing?

A NF NXS 2-10 weighs 21 oz, a 3-15 weighs 30. That gets you near bombproof durability. No 17”lbs, 25! and enough to hold. $16-1700 new. Found used for a few hundo less.

Split the difference and that Triji CHX 2.5-15 is bomber too and weighs 23 oz. $8-900.

All have better glass than you’ll ever need. All have brass turrets, not cheap plastic. None are $2-3k and 2 lbs.

All that said, if the Z5 blows your skirt up, have at it amigo.

That's what he said he was likely shooting, it's still worth dialing 6 or 7 clicks at 300 and 24 at 400 yards.

I like the Trijicon a lot also! Built like a tank and used every day in Africa.

I don't disagree with you one bit about metal parts in a scope. It does matter you are correct. Just saying that not everybody needs A-bomb proof scope and highlight about that Z5 is the weight. There are hundreds of Cooper 92s running around with a Z5 on them right now. I think for an older guy that's not gonna beat his rifle up climbing the mountain he'd be pleasantly happy with it as well as 100 other options.

 

[SDHNTR]

Nightforce tells you to use the ring manufacturer's Spec (page 4) https://www.nightforceoptics.com/download/#flipbook-df_20006/4/.

I guess if the ring manufacturer recommends 17 inch lbs (Talley) it's because Nightforce has flimsy tubes, right?

Seems more likely Swaro got tired of people overtorquing rings and came out with a spec on the low side of the ring industry standard so that people wouldn't just grab an Allen key and go to town.

If you want to be able to drop your rifle onto your scope a lot, I probably wouldn't recommend a Z5 because the turret's externals are polymer. If you can hold onto your gun and want a high mag scope primarily inside 500 yds, the higher mag Z5s do that well.

If you want a dialing distance scope with Swaro glass in it get a Kahles, but that's not going to be $1500. (Or 16 oz)

Correct, and NF rings say 25”lbs. To my knowledge Swaro is the only scope manu that recommends a max, instead of deferring to the rings. They actually list 15-17. To me, that’s telling. They don’t necessarily want you doing what the ring manufacturer says. They had an issue with the erector getting bound up on the Z series. Was that over torque? Or was that thin tubes? Chicken or the egg?

The Z5’s turret INTERNALS, are plastic. Not the externals. The main center post that holds the darn thing into the tube is plastic.

Let’s stay civil please. Your points are valid and so are mine. Let the OP decide which side he’s on.

 

[SDHNTR]

That's what he said he was likely shooting, it's still worth dialing 6 or 7 clicks at 300 and 24 at 400 yards.

I like the Trijicon a lot also! Built like a tank and used every day in Africa.

I don't disagree with you one bit about metal parts in a scope. It does matter you are correct. Just saying that not everybody needs A-bomb proof scope and highlight about that Z5 is the weight. There are hundreds of Cooper 92s running around with a Z5 on them right now. I think for an older guy that's not gonna beat his rifle up climbing the mountain he'd be pleasantly happy with it as well as 100 other options.

Fair point.

Again, OP, consider yourself informed now. Mission accomplished. You can now make a solid choice based on your needs.

FWIW, my first dialed, 500+ yd shot on game was made successfully using a Z5. It was my first foray into LR and I didn’t understand that weight in a scope meant durability. I just thought weight was bad. Z5’s work until they don’t. Before I knew more, I thought that sucker was a dialing whiz bang of a scope and boy I loved that glass. Then it happened.

 

[SomeJackassOnAForum]

Correct, and NF rings say 25”lbs. To my knowledge Swaro is the only scope manu that recommends a max, instead of deferring to the rings. To me, that’s telling. They don’t necessarily want you doing what the ring manufacturer says. They had an issue with the erector getting bound up on the Z series. Was that over torque? Or was that thin tubes? Chicken or the egg?

The Z5’s turret INTERNALS, are plastic. Not the externals. The main center post that holds the darn thing into the tube is plastic.

Let’s stay civil please. Your points are valid and so are mine. Let the OP decide which side he’s on.

Kahles has a max, I believe it's 20.1. S&B lists 2.8NM which is 24.75.

Vortex has the following in their manuals: "We typically suggest 15-18 in.lbs of torque on the ring screws. If the mount/ring manufacturer suggests more or less, contact the Vortex® Technical Department for best instructions."

Tangent recommends 15 in-lbs: https://armament.com/scope-mounting-instructions/

Every ring manufacturer has a range, seems like Swaro (and some others) want customers on the lower side.

You are absolutely correct about how far down the polymer goes, it's down to the first section that goes inside the scope. I always thought of that as an external piece but that's semantics.

If you're buying Nightforce rings and scopes only it's a non-issue. Not sure about the other forum favorite because I can't find a manual for the SWFA Scopes.

 

[Formidilosus]

Kahles has a max, I believe it's 20.1. S&B lists 2.8NM which is 24.75.

Vortex has the following in their manuals: "We typically suggest 15-18 in.lbs of torque on the ring screws. If the mount/ring manufacturer suggests more or less, contact the Vortex® Technical Department for best instructions."

Tangent recommends 15 in-lbs: https://armament.com/scope-mounting-instructions/

Every ring manufacturer has a range, seems like Swaro (and some others) want customers on the lower side.

You are absolutely correct about how far down the polymer goes, it's down to the first section that goes inside the scope. I always thought of that as an external piece but that's semantics.

If you're buying Nightforce rings and scopes only it's a non-issue. Not sure about the other forum favorite because I can't find a manual for the SWFA Scopes.

Scope manufacturers stating what ring torque screws should be set to is complete nonsense. The amount of pressure applied into the scope tube by the rings isn’t “equal”. The screw size and thread drastically changes it- “17in-lbs” is not the same force when using different rings. Of course even most ring manufacturers don’t know what torque setting for their screws match what actual pressure is being applied to the tube.

I have rings I am using right now that to achieve the same clamp force as NF Ultralight rings at 15 in-lbs, 28 in-lbs must be used. 18 in-lbs equals 34 in-lbs in the new rings.

 

[Sweetroels]

Guess, I'll be going back to the store to review trijicon, they appear to be getting a lot of love here. I do like that Z5 glass though. Sorry to be be such a neophyte but the BT looks like a simple crosshair reticle. So you just set the range (via the required clicks) on a turret and shoot? Of course after many practice rounds. I will be talking to folks at a few of the local shops to get a better understanding. I appreciate all the responses

 

[TOLeary]

C

Scope manufacturers stating what ring torque screws should be set to is complete nonsense. The amount of pressure applied into the scope tube by the rings isn’t “equal”. The screw size and thread drastically changes it- “17in-lbs” is not the same force when using different rings. Of course even most ring manufacturers don’t know what torque setting for their screws match what actual pressure is being applied to the tube.

I have rings I am using right now that to achieve the same clamp force as NF Ultralight rings at 15 in-lbs, 28 in-lbs must be used. 18 in-lbs equals 34 in-lbs in the new rings.

how are you determining the amount of in-lbs in each scenario, that is certain rings with certain scopes?