• If you are being asked to change your password, and unsure how to do it, follow these instructions. Click here

Need for "tactical" scopes

Re: Need for \"tactical\" scopes

What about a Nikon Tactical??
A little cheaper, 30mm tube, and should be a tad lighter than a NXS, I would think..sakofan..
 
Re: Need for \"tactical\" scopes

I have used about a dozen Nikon tacticals and they work perfectly. Tough, bright, sharp, accurate and repeatable turrets - you cannot go wrong with a Nikon.
 
Re: Need for \"tactical\" scopes

I hate to keep dragging this post on, but do you think the Nikon Tactical 4-16x50 offers enough adjustment range to get out to 1000yds? At TOZ, the info Jon provides only shows a max adjustment of 50 (MOA I'm guessing?). Is this enough? Most others seem to offer much more. I'm really leaning toward the Nikon, but I don't want to buy it and then find out later that I can't adjust it enough.
 
Re: Need for \"tactical\" scopes

50 is incorrect, even tho Nikon has published it. No problem getting to 1000, particularly if you have a 20 moa sloped base. We shoot that scope a lot and no problem getting to 1000 with a .308 Win. I think true value is around 65 or 70 moa for adjustments.
 
Re: Need for \"tactical\" scopes

Two questions I would appreciate input on. All my shooting is field shooting .223 match barrel at varmints (to 450 paces) or .308 for anything else

1. A question for all but particularly shadowman who has grappled with the same issues as I am facing. For a stalking varming rifle - can you put a 30 oz scope on it with out becoming unwieldy unless it is down on a bipod?

I am thinking of NF NXS 3.5-15X50 or possibly equivalent Nikon.

2. I will probably upgrade my VXIII 4.5-14X50 to the TMR reticule as a backup. I have already put after market target turrets on it. Is it worth having them upgraded to the Leupold low profile turrets at the same time
 
Re: Need for \"tactical\" scopes

[ QUOTE ]
1. A question for all but particularly shadowman who has grappled with the same issues as I am facing. For a stalking varming rifle - can you put a 30 oz scope on it with out becoming unwieldy unless it is down on a bipod?

[/ QUOTE ]

Your hunitng varmints, quick little animals, they dont normally stick around for even the most wieldy of rifles. I think youll be fine with any weight scope as your shooting 450 paces I suppose thats around 375 to 475 yards or so give or take 50 yards. Weight for a rifle may make them unweildy but the advantage is it also makes them more stable of a platform to shoot from. I like my rifles heavy and dont mind walking with them they are more stable and if you need to take an off hand shot light guns are harder to control.

[ QUOTE ]
2. I will probably upgrade my VXIII 4.5-14X50 to the TMR reticule as a backup. I have already put after market target turrets on it. Is it worth having them upgraded to the Leupold low profile turrets at the same time

[/ QUOTE ]

I think your ok now, no need to change the turrets but the reticle is totally a personal choice and if you like it get it, course you could also do that with the turrets.
JM2C
Dave
 
Re: Need for \"tactical\" scopes

40, let's answer your question directly. Is a $800 scope give you twice the value of a $400 scope? Not if you don't value the features of the $800 scope.

Break down the problem. you want to shoot LR. 1000yds is on the long side for you. You shoot something flatter then the 308. The 308 will go from 100yds to 1000yds with under 40min of elevation (usually 35min). so just about everything else needs less elevation.

The last time I went out with my 6.5-06 to 800yds, I used a grand total of 15.5 min of elevation.

When a scope is set up properly (Burris inserts and/or MOA base), most 1" scopes will get you to 1000yds. I have used an elite 4200 with 25min of elevation to work when shooting magnums. I don't have a problem with my 100yd zero at full down elevation. None of the scopes I use show any distortion or optical quality loss.

do you need a 30mm tube, fancy reticles, supreme glass? No but they are nice. What you must have is optics clear enough to engage target at the max range and lighting you will hunt/shoot at, mechanical sound enough so that you can trust the adjustments.

So if on a budget, the best entry level is the Elite 3200 10X for under $200. Optics are above average and mechanically wonderful. Lots of elevation and a very nice mil dot reticle which can come in handy for hold offs. Barret Industries considers it tactical enough.

Next up, Tasco Super Sniper. Lots of elevation, very useable optics, a true entry level 'tactical' scope.

For variables and top notch optics, 1" scopes include the Bushnell Elite 4200 4X16, 6X24, and Nikon Monarch 4.5X14, and 6X20. All have excellent mechnicals, some mildots, may not survive being run over by a humvee but certainly anything a normal hunter experiences.

From there, its bring money, fancy features, and some different benefits. Without knowing what you need or want, this may be not the best way to spend money at this time.

I have become quite an optics snob. I will not tolerate poor optical quality, unreliable mechanicals, and poor workmanship. Size and weight also matter during my hunts.

Used to be that you had to spend a lot of money to get the these qualities. Nowadays, there are several brands and models for dirt cheap that would give the exotics of yesterday a run for the money. In fact, one of the main name brands have inferior quality products for up to 3 times the cost.

Nikon and Bushnell are driving ahead with fantastic scopes for dirt cheap (great glass and mechanicals for well around $400). If you decide to start here, you will not be disappointed.

If you have the budget to step in with a more expensive scope with benefits YOU feel are important, it will also not disappoint. After you use something you enjoy, cost rarely becomes important.

Jerry

PS been playing with a new Nikon porro prism binos. The specs reads like a who who or whats what. Optically quality is really good. Clear and very wide field of view (12X50), light weight and compact for this mag and style of bino. Very precise focus and easy to use with glasses. Sharp enough to resolve grass at 800yds and brush/branches at 2km. Colour is quite true and low light performance has been quite good.

Perfect, nope. Better then the best Europe has to offer, nope. But for viewing game on the short side of 1km, enough for my needs.

I just picked them up for $145 delivered. Nikon Extreme EX. Scary, they really are that good.
 
Re: Need for \"tactical\" scopes

Davesok

Thanks - good points.

I would like to explain my need and my conclusions (to which some here have already contributed); as I think others here must have adressed similar issues in their hunting needs - and throw myself open for advice. It seems reasonably within the purpose of this thread

I like walk around shooting mostly at rabbits form 15 hopefully to 500 yards with .223, though I have other gadgets and shoot other things from time to time

I currently use a remmington 700 vs .223 26 inch which as far as I can tell is more accurate than I - and even with premium factory ammuntion seems to be dead on at any range. However as I cannot judge the distance 450 paces is my furthest hit on a rabbit. It is a great rig but unweildy when trying to shoot the bunnies 15m away that just look at you when you walk around a bush ... particularly with the bipod firmly attached - the rig is very nose heavy. The overall weight is not really an issue

So I have ordered a Blaser R93 profesional with a fluted match .223 26 inch. This will lower the weight (a pound or so ) and shorten the rifle ( a couple of inches) due to the unusual action that will improve balance a lot - even with a bipod attached

Hence for a scope I want a relatively adaptable scope that is also good in low light and while can do off hand shots quickly can do longer range shots without too much delay - as feeding rabbits often move around and annoyingly behind cover.

Hence looking at somethin like 4-15X50 tactical. From lots of advice as
- even for small animals larger magnification than 15 is not needed in the field
- the low end magnification should be fine for the off hand shots (and good if I use it on the .308 barrell for larger game)
- 50 mm is good for low light - but I gather 55 starts to challenge getting good cheek weld
- tactical reticules allow for quick holdoffs if there is not time to dial in - especially the new 2nd generation like Leupold's TMR, NF's NPR2 or 1/2 mil reticule. The range finding component is not particularly useful on small animals at distance due to the ease of estimation error. Will need to get a laser rangefinder

My favourites are Nightforce NXS 3.5-15X50 at 30 oz - over Leupolds similar MK 4 tactical at 22 oz or the S&B 4-16 at 30 oz.


The question is with the NF and S&B would the weight of the scope overwhelm a standard sporting rifle (especially when say I have the .308 standard profile barrel on it)- The answer I get is no it won't - it will be fine

Anyone agree or dispute the "thread" of logic
 
Re: Need for \"tactical\" scopes

S&B PM2 4-16x50 would be my choice everytime out of the two scopes you have come down to. Have/had one (exchanging it for the S&B PM2 5-25x56).

As far as the Blaser goes, had one of them also then I exchanged it for a rifle.

David.
 
Re: Need for \"tactical\" scopes

Blaser, did some one say Blaser? the questions asked about scopes should also have been asked about rifles before you ordered. I refuse to sell Blaser, if some one wants a Blaser, i send em some where else. The Blaser R93 is just the opposite of tactical milspec reliable. its a pile of junk rifle backed up by oneof the best advertising campagnes in firearms history. If Blaser had spent half of what they did on advertising on development of the rifle, they might have something. The R93's are all accurate. But are not dependable.
Tactical scopes and kit.. i use only S&B PMII. i like mil spec kit as you can usualy rely on it (but that isn't a given as the military also buy crap from time to time)
A lot of it is the Guchi factor i must admit. I was long since bitten by themil spec tactical bug. i go hunting dressed and carrying kit other folks would go of to war with, matt mil spec finnishes on rifles turn me on, as does a cammo stock. but then i have DPM cammo curtains and bed sheets. Heck i even had a girlfriend once who i got to wear my repirator and my load bearing equipment(webbing for us brits) during sex..
what i'm trying to say is that one can overdo it in the tactical direction and some times i do. The thing to know is what and when to buy mil spec tactical and when not. Forums like this are great for passing on ideas and asking such questions. Hope i haven't peed on anyones bon fire with my loathing of the Blaser R93.
Pete
 
Re: Need for \"tactical\" scopes

Come on guys, i was only having a laugh

I certainly don't like the Blaser,, and yes one can take the tactical thing to far, but mil spec kit usualy is tough. The danger is when we call something to do with weapons mil spec, we are in danger of the anti's trying to ban it.
Pete
 
Re: Need for \"tactical\" scopes

Blaser R93 huh. Well then stick as expensive scope as you can on it since the Blaser runs oh around 5k (USD) another 1500 to 2500 for Night Force or US Optics isnt going to make much difference.
You could have opted for a Christenson Arms (not sure if I spellt that right) carbon fiber barrel and changed your weight and balence of the rifle for a lot cheaper than the Blaser. They are nice rifles but you sure went from one extreme to another LOL. I guess if I could afford the Blaser I'd get one too.
I did send a guy an email about a Walther WA2000, 35k new, 30k used, one can dream cant he /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif
Good luck with your new rifle and let us know how the bunny bustin comes out.
Dave
 
Re: Need for \"tactical\" scopes

Thanks

It is a very significant purchase and I have spent a fair amount of time considering it. Part of the advantage is the extra features - takedown for traveleing with the family and swap barrels. Its a do it once and do it right type approach. I asked for advice on a number of forums about the blaser - seems people love it or hate it but all agree that it is accurate.

same for the scope - also I expect scopes are a little more sensitive than the rifle and so going for the robsutness of milspec for when the rifle does fall over or bangs on that rock .... In general though it will be a well looked after hunting rifle

Why the S&B versus nightforce?
 
Re: Need for \"tactical\" scopes

I could organise you a far better system than the Blaser R93 http://www.roedaleprecision.com/sws2000rifles.html . have a look at the pics. but not that it be said that i'm trying to sell what i have. You'd be better off with a Sig SHR970, it also is is take down, or the Sauer 202 (or 3000)than the R93. The R93 has potential. but needs developing.
Why S&B over NightForce. better optics and for me ergonomics. However, the NXS does provide advantages for pure match shooting.(which will be encroached on by the new 5-25x56 S&B)
Pete
 
Warning! This thread is more than 20 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.
Top