High-end scope for ultralight hunting rifle?

[Twentyguns]

If you are hunting with this rifle, I can't see how you could think about a NX8, when you should be leaning towards a lower power like the NXS 3.5X15X50. Even though you are looking at 30 ounces, with their Velocity reticule, you would have a great marriage of scope and rifle for hunting purposes.
Shooting at distances you want to shoot could be done however, I would not recommend you take shots beyond 600-700 yards with such a lightweight rifle as, it is extremely difficult to control movement of your rifle to effectively and consistently make shots of longer ranges. I don't care how many times a person practices shots of ranges you are looking at shooting, it becomes another piece of the process to make a shot in the heat of the moment. This results in potential wounding of animals and I feel is irresponsible and unethical to take shots of this kind by using a firearm that cannot be anchored by the shooter.
Good luck with your choice.

I get it respectfully. And always move closer when i can. I leave the ethics calls up to individual capability and self control. Killed animals from 300 out to 780 but only in the conditions that presented itself where stalking closer was not an option and i was confident in the one shot. With few exceptions... to maybe a couple ive shot with a sako hunter, my 7mm Titanium 700 with a 20 rail and either the IOR Flee or the Vortex have been the ticket to fill the freezer at those ranges. Ive got confidence in the rifle. Long range shots are not the norm... im a bow hunter, muzzy hunter, and prefer the closer work, but this is a long range hunting site. And in fact my biggest buck, a 34" 8x9 was shot jumping from a bed at 25 yards. I hear you and concur but police myself and know my own limits.

 

[jarnold37]

If I was presented with a 1200 + yard shot, I would sacrifice "light weight" for a more substantial rig. I think that long range shots should not be done in a hurry after being out of breath from carrying a rifle 2-3 lbs heavier. I would not be comfortable using hold over marks, as at that distance I would want to dia and hold on. If there is not enough time for that I would not take the shot. I have many long range scopes but my favorite one is a NXS 12-40 crosshair with a dot. No other distractions in the sight picture. A buck at 800 yards is easier to inspect at 35-40 power than at 15-18 power. I also use the illuminated reticle which works good with the crosshair. Yes there are pros and cons, but sometimes I think some may sacrifice the wrong things.

 

[Twentyguns]

I get it respectfully. And always move closer when i can. I leave the call up to individual capability and self control. Killed animals from 300 out to 780 but only in the conditions that presented itself where stalking closer was not an option and i was confident in the one shot. With few exceptions... to maybe a couple ive shot with a sako hunter, my 7mm Titanium 700 with a 20 rail and either the IOR Flee or the Vortex have been the ticket to fill the freezer at those ranges. Ive got confidence in the rifle. Long range shots are not the norm... im a bow hunter, muzzy hunter, and prefer the closer work, but this is a long range hunting site. And in fact my biggest buck, a 34" 8x9 was shot jumping from a bed at 25 yards. I hear you and concur but police myself and know my own limits.

Auto spell check made some errors in the post but hope you understand.

 

[Paper boy]

If I was presented with a 1200 + yard shot, I would sacrifice "light weight" for a more substantial rig. I think that long range shots should not be done in a hurry after being out of breath from carrying a rifle 2-3 lbs heavier. I would not be comfortable using hold over marks, as at that distance I would want to dia and hold on. If there is not enough time for that I would not take the shot. I have many long range scopes but my favorite one is a NXS 12-40 crosshair with a dot. No other distractions in the sight picture. A buck at 800 yards is easier to inspect at 35-40 power than at 15-18 power. I also use the illuminated reticle which works good with the crosshair. Yes there are pros and cons, but sometimes I think some may sacrifice the wrong things.

You nailed it!

 

[DJ Fergus]

I think the debate for lower power scopes vs higer power can be argued on both sides. I have both. Do you need higher power to make the shots? No. And it will save some weight. In my case, I want a good look at what I'm shooting, I don't want to kill something that's smaller than what I already have hanging on the wall. I don't want to pack a spotting scope either. This is why some of my rifles carry higher power scopes. As I said, I see the convenience of both options.

 

[antelopedundee]

Joel Russo 6 1/2#, 6.5 prcView attachment 188333

How do you measure group size when bullets keyhole?

 

[arch408]

I like ultra light scopes on my ultra light rifles. They are for carrying, not shooting long range. I'm not independently wealthy so like the Leupold ultra lightt with a Boone and Crocket reticle on my Rem 700 TI .300 SAUM. A range finder and an app on your phone like Strelok works for me. I put a Sig Sauer BDX combo on a TC Compass last year to loan to a friend last year and it was was impressively accurate at all ranges.

 

[ILVTOHT]

This is what happens when social distancing brings on cabin fever! I've got money coming from sale of truck - no stimulus checks for me. Part of the truck cash will go for new scope for my 6 lb. 7mm. Need to be able to ping targets to beyond 1200-1400 yards and have enough elevation to get there with a 20 degree rail if needed.

While I thought the choice might be a Leopold HD5 3-18, I've got mixed feelings about the 35mm tube. I'm not a big fan of the illuminated reticle choice for their mil model either (TMR). That appears to be the best glass in a light package from Lup.

Second consideration was a NF NX8 but again, I've got one shot to do this right, pun intended, and want the highest quality glass I can buy. I've heard mixed reviews on the NX8 glass and light transmission capabilities.

I would probably get a ZComp if it wasn't such a tank... and may still do that but need to look through one. Clarity and low light performance found in the top tear glass are important to me though... so that factors into what i'll end up buying... I've considered Minox, Kahles, S&B, Zeiss, and Swaro in the same lineup... even a Valdada IOR, a new one they just came up with, the TX Raider Compact (but then 2 lbs too, and back to 35mm tube.)

The IOR MP8 is the only FFP reticle I've had any time behind and was usable at its lowest power...so that's another decision factor with this new scope, given most are FFP will it be usable for short range, dark timber or low light conditions. Some FFPs I've looked through would be near invisible without illumination - so unless you can see it like an MP8 at low magnification. I'll have to have that. I'm using a range finder so most of the time, FFP isn't a requirement but most of the top end glass seems to comes in FFP...

I'm sure there are plenty of varying opinions out there, but what would you do if faced with a single opportunity to buy one high end scope for your lightweight hunting rifle. I've got a budget that can do $3500 but I'm not apposed to applying some $ to deer/elk tags if I find the right scope. Ultimate resolution, repeat-ability, low light performance, elevation, in a mil scope that can reach out and get the job done with the above criteria. Thoughts? Other options?

I have a Leupold vx5hd 3-15 44mm windplex on my 6.5 wildcat. I run 129 accubond long range at 3250fps. ( it's "like" a Sherman) works very well on prairie dogs out to 600yds. And can ring steel out to 1450 with the CDS dial. Great light weight hunting rifle a little over 7# scoped! Love my Leupold!

 

[sp6x6]

Hmmm, Been in shooting sports.A shots a shot.Seen guys shoot a perfect 300 archery and on last arrow shoot the wrong target.If a guys in a match and bullet hits mark its scored, you say it keyholed? Hard to tell on plate.But it is know for sure that long time poster her Joel can shoot,he had a signed witness 4 shot ,3.8 '' @ 1680.He regular shot a 1 mile fun match, not bad for a average Joel. If they hit plate sidways at KO2, probably not count it.

 

[Arkansasdad]

Joel Russo 6 1/2#, 6.5 prcView attachment 188333

Great shooting. Do you know the velocity and energy at this range? Thanks

 

[Twentyguns]

I think the debate for lower power scopes vs higer power can be argued on both sides. I have both. Do you need higher power to make the shots? No. And it will save some weight. I'm my case, I want a good look at what I'm shooting, I don't want to kill something that's smaller than what I already have hanging on the wall. I don't want to pack a spotting scope either. This is why some of my rifles carry higher power scopes. As I said, I see the convenience of both options.

Agreed. I continue to carry a spotting scope now to evaluate animals at range. I guess if i chose the clearest scope.. then if i forgot my spot i could use the scope in a pinch... or leave the spot behind all together. I use my Leica binos to spot anyway and only the spot scope to make sure the stalk is worth it. A super clear 15 or 20 top power is probably fine for my needs. 95% of the time I carry and shoot in the field at 6 power. I dont think ive ever shot long range at an animal over 12 power ever and since i do shoot close rather than far more often, like a 3 or 5 power low end would be best. I'll be looking at what i can get in the Tangent, ZCO, and a couple others before i drop the hammer which should mean that the spotter will be come more of an option.

 

[sp6x6]

That group with with another post here by joel on rifle they had going out to customer,had 3 @1''+ at 800yrd.Try search?

 

[300grains]

Zeiss or Swarovski and no regrets.

 

[docmark]

Another vote for March scopes however I do not get caught up on the "glass". I use a scope for aiming and am more interested in quality of crosshair and tracking. I use binoculars/spotting scope for "looking".