Help me choose between these scopes.

[chrisC]

I have a .280 Remington, that i plan to hunt coues whitetail with out here in Arizona. In the near future I plan to convert this rifle to a .280 ackley. The scopes i was thinking about were:

-LEU55265 Leupold 4.5-14x40 VX-III 30mm LR with a B&C reticle
-LEU56130 Leupold 4.5-14x40 Mark 4 LR/T 30mm Riflescope with a MD reticle
-5214559943 Zeiss 4.5-14x44 Conquest Rifle Scope w/a MD reticle

I also want to buy one of these scopes for my .17 Remington.

If there are any other scopes out there that you would recommend please do so.

 

[sscoyote]

If you're gonna get a Zeiss i'd take a good look at the Rapid-Z reticles. They'll give u the best system for reticle applications, IMO.

 

[lerch]

just going off of what we sell and have experience with i would tell you to go with the leup. they have one of the best names in the business and they're a American company with a amazing warrenty. if you are just doing hunting and general shooting i would say go with the leupold 4.5-14x40mm LR BC reticle. it should serve you good on hunting and if you wanna do more varminting do the same thing but with the varmint reticle and you will have finer holding points

have a good un
steve

 

[Ridgerunner665]

I'd say get the VX-III if its going to be primarily a hunting rig.

And IMO...all 3 of those are too much scope for a 17 Remington...but of your choices, I'd put the VX-III on it also.

The reason I say that is this...the 17 Rem. is a very flat shooter within its useful range and it does not have harsh recoil...you can get a good 1 inch tube scope much cheaper than a 30mm...you will not need the extra adjustment range of the 30mm on the 17 Rem.


If I were looking for a scope for a 17 Remington...I'd be looking at the VX-II's.

 

[Pdvdh]

Get the Zeiss Conquest with the Mil-dot. It will transmit more light than the Leupolds and have better resolution also. I have one and compared it directly against my Leupold VXIII. No more Leupolds for me.

 

[rtv900]

I have a Remington AWR in 280 and I love it. I have a VXIII 4.5-14x40 LR with the BDC on it. It is a wonderful combination. Ziess makes nice stuff but I have had such great luck with Leupolds that I cannot switch. I think that VXIII long range with the BDC will serve you well. It has certainly served me well and I cannot think of a better scope to put on top of that 280.

 

[CS T]

Here is what I would recommend.

Custom Shop Mark 4 4.5-14x40mm LR/T M1 TMR or MIL-Dot.

We are out of stock but we have more on order.

 

[cowboy]

I shoot a 280AI and had a 4.5-14x40 Leupold with B&C reticle on it for two years. There was nothing at all wrong with the Leu but the field of view on 14 power in that 4-500 yd range was a problem for me. I am now using a 3-10 power on that same rifle and find that it is more user friendly out to 7-800 yds and that is as far as I push my 280AI. My current scope is a 3-10 Swarovski with their BR reticle and after making some minor adjustments to what their computer generated chart shows it is now nuts on. If you haven't ever used a Leu in 4-14 power I would try and borrow one and take it out and see if you can live with their FOV on 14 power - then look at a 10 power and make your decision.

 

[chrisC]

Do you fellas feel that I need any target/tactical turrents on my scope. For those of you that are using the specialty reticles such as the B&C, BR or BDC reticle, are you dialing up on your scope or just using the reticle.

Just wanted to know the easier method of use for long range application.

 

[CS T]

If your are going to use the reticle for holdovers and your ok with a center mass hit not a precision hit then use the reticle will be just fine. I like to be able to use the reticle and dial in for the fine-tune shot. Will you need Tactical Turrets for that? No not really they are just nice to have if you like to dial in the distance.

Mike @ CSGW

 

[Pdvdh]

Do you fellas feel that I need any target/tactical turrents on my scope. For those of you that are using the specialty reticles such as the B&C, BR or BDC reticle, are you dialing up on your scope or just using the reticle.

Just wanted to know the easier method of use for long range application.

Reticle only. A mil-dot, or even better, some of the reticles with even smaller divisions (1/2 mil) are good for holdovers out to 1000 yds. And you don't have to worry about the repeatability and accuracy of cranking the turrets. The majority who turn turrets seem to agree that the advantage comes into play at 1000 + yd ranges. I don't have much of a problem out to ~1000 yds simply using the hash mark divisions on my reticles for hold over and hold under. This topic has received quite a bit of coverage on this forum and if you do a search of prior threads you'll probably find quite a bit of good information. Good luck to you in your scope research and selection process.

 

[alexkeyser]

I would consider the mark 4, but with the tmr reticle. I have a 6.5-20x50 with the tmr and find it much better for precise aiming. it seems to me that it covers less of the target and is easier to hold level at long range bcause of the right angle the intersecting hash marks make with the main crosshairs. jmho. for the .17 I would look at the burris tactical II 4.5-14x42. It has a really nice ballistic plex reticle for hold over as well as turrets under the caps which you can zero once sighted in and are marked in moa or actually 1/4" clicks at 100yrds. but it is nice for dialing for a precise shot or just holding over in a quick instance. and the best part is the price tag( around $450). also it is pretty light at 18oz. I believe. I just got one for my 257 weatherby ultralight and absolutly love it!

 

[sscoyote]

I am really into the effciency and accuracy aspects of reticle applications for downrange zeroing and rangefinding. I have and use mil-dot, Burris Ballistic Plex and BMD, PFI Rapid Reticle, Leupold TMR, Varmint Hunter, and several T.K. Lee dot systems. Of all these i prefer the Rapid Reticle (very similar to Rapid-Z) for hunting due to their more accurate system of reticle windage reference mostly.

Once i verify ballistics program stadia subtension zeros at the range i recalculate my zeros in 50-yd. intervals only, and put this info in a Butler Creek scope cap cover, always there at the ready with a simple glance up to my reticle dope without having to get out of position (especially when game is constantly changing position, which happens often when hunting). Often i may not even know what a particular stadia is actually zeroed for while hunting since my system is based on 50 yd. intervals only for economy of information. IMO, stadia points are only needed to calculate and establish the interpolative system of reference (guessing between stadia points), and for rangefinding. An entry will look like this--

450-2.4-0.8

...obviously range, vertical reference and windage reference in that order ONLY with no headers needed. An article will be posted here shortly that describes my system where i recald. a 22 Long Rifle PFI reticle for an AR-15 load. If i were going to have a tgt. turret installed it would be for elevation only (reticle for windage).