Help deciding on high/low magnification range...

[CRS82]

I'm not looking for specific scope suggestions at this point, I'm more than happy to do my own research. I am however looking for some advice on what high and low range would be best suited for my particular application.

Rifle is a Remington 700 with a 16.5" .308 barrel which currently has a Weaver 3-10x42.

Hunting will consist of hogs, pronghorn, whitetail deer and mule deer at no more than 500 yards, but shots as short as 50 yards could be common as the majority of the forest around me is relatively dense.

Target shooting will consist of paper and steel from 100 to 300 yards.

On one hand I like my 3x low end on the current scope and would prefer to lose as little FOV as possible on the lowest setting. On the other hand I would prefer more zoom on the top end. How much magnification would I need to spot my .30 caliber holes at 300 yards? I use shoot-n-c targets so it's a bit easier to see them.

What would you guys suggest as a good low range? How about the high end? Right now I'm thinking 2x-4x on the low end and at least 15x on the high end. Would a decent quality 15x scope be able to see holes at 300 yards?

 

[Gord0]

Asking to see 30 cal holes at 300 is asking for a decent amount of magnification. I have a decent 3-9 that I can sometimes see 30 cal holes at 200m. That's what a spotting scope is for. I would go no higher than 3x on the low side and that will limit what you can get for the high side. I know you didn't ask for recommendations and this isn't one, it's just something to look at. Bushnell 6500 2.5-16x

 

[CRS82]

I'm not opposed to recommendations, I just don't want to come off as one of those people who's too lazy to do their own research. I feel like I have a pretty reasonable grasp on what I'm looking for, but figured some input from more experienced hunters/shooters could be beneficial. The scope at the top of my list right now is the Vortex PST Gen 2 3-15x44. The Leupold Mk6 3-18x44 and Nghtforce ATACR F1 4-16x42 are also on my short list. Just haven't decided if I really want to spend that much yet. I really like the Vortex Razor HD Gen II 3-18x50, but it's just too **** heavy for this rifle.

 

[CRS82]

I understand with a standard paper target im not likely to see the holes, but is it reasonable to expect to see them at 15x on shoot-n-c targets?

 

[ShtrRdy]

For what you want to use it, I would stick with the 3-10x. Then get a spotting scope to view bullet holes at 300 yds.

 

[CRS82]

Looking to replace the Weaver regardless. It was purchased from the beginning as a place holder until I had the funds to upgrade.

So is 3x the max low end you guys would go with for a setup like this? 3.5x? 4x? I've pretty much ruled out anything over 4x, but I still think even with higher quality glass I'd like at least 15x on the high end.

 

[HARPERC]

....Nghtforce ATACR F1 4-16x42 are also on my short list......

A lot of atmospheric variables to seeing .30 bullet holes @ 300 yards. With the target mentioned and mine on 16x I "think" the answer is generally yes in good conditions. It's also heavy, and for keeping weight down, and preserving bottom end. The VX6 3-18X is tough to beat. I haven't had mine mounted long enough to compare with the Nightforce.

 

[Dr. Vette]

There are many times it's hard to see a hit on a Shoot-N-See target at 200 yard with a spotting scope. This is especially true if you hit a ring. As such, asking a riflescope with 15-20x on the high end to do it may be asking a bit much.

My shooting partner's Swarovski spotting scope can do it, but Dad's Leupold can't. Occasionally, better scopes can do it (Zeiss).

If you want one to do it all, then don't be shy about spending $$$ on the scope. Otherwise the suggestion to buy a spotting scope for the range is a very good one.

 

[Rich Coyle]

I'm not looking for specific scope suggestions at this point, I'm more than happy to do my own research. I am however looking for some advice on what high and low range would be best suited for my particular application.

Rifle is a Remington 700 with a 16.5" .308 barrel which currently has a Weaver 3-10x42.

Hunting will consist of hogs, pronghorn, whitetail deer and mule deer at no more than 500 yards, but shots as short as 50 yards could be common as the majority of the forest around me is relatively dense.

Target shooting will consist of paper and steel from 100 to 300 yards.

On one hand I like my 3x low end on the current scope and would prefer to lose as little FOV as possible on the lowest setting. On the other hand I would prefer more zoom on the top end. How much magnification would I need to spot my .30 caliber holes at 300 yards? I use shoot-n-c targets so it's a bit easier to see them.

What would you guys suggest as a good low range? How about the high end? Right now I'm thinking 2x-4x on the low end and at least 15x on the high end. Would a decent quality 15x scope be able to see holes at 300 yards?

Second on the Bushnell 6500 2.5-16x

 

[Rich Coyle]

April 14, 2014 spotting scopes
This morning I took the Kowa 20-60X77 and a Bushnell Spacemaster 12-36X 60 to compare with a Sightron 6-24X42 AO, a Bushnell 6500 4 1/2-30X50 SF and a Swarovski z5 5-25X62 SF to the shooting range. There was a target at 200 yards with a few .22 caliber bullet holes so I decided to use it. After looking through the Kowa on its lowest setting of 20X I found a bullet hole at 12 o'clock about 2" from the "X" in the red part of the target and decided that would be the "target" detail.

When looking through the Sightron on 24X I just could not get it to resolve the bullet hole no matter how much I adjusted the scope. I could see holes in the white O.K. Then I got out the 6500 and found the hole with it set on 24X. I could not go down even 1X and still see the hole. After fooling with the z5 for a while trying to see in on a lower setting, I finally turned it up to 25X and could see the hole in the red. Thinking I was wasting time, but already had it with me, I took out the Bushnell Spacemaster. I set it on 20X and could easily see the hole at 12 o'clock so I turned it down to 12X. I could still see the hole!

I asked a fellow shooter if he didn't mind would he look through all the optics to see what he saw. He obliged; and even brought a Zeiss 3-15X42. He ended up on the same settings I did. Also he mentioned he just could not resolve the hole with the Sightron. When we looked though his Zeiss we could not see the hole.

Conclusion: Mediocre spotting scopes are definitely better than good rifle scopes for resolving detail.

 

[CRS82]

Went to the range this morning. Did some shooting and some thinking...gonna go to the gun shop and take a look at the PST Gen 2 3-15x44 and the Razor HD Gen 2 3-18x50. I'm sure the glass on the PST is sufficient, but the Razor has some other advantages like the locking turrets, fully illuminated reticle and extra 3x on the top end that have me thinking the additional weight and price of admission may be worth the extra couple months of allowance. The weight was the biggest turn off, but I'm very close to being done with my 12.5" 6.5 Grendel AR-15 which should cover me for shorter range work when I don't want to lug a 14lb rifle with me.