nikon monarch, zeiss Conquest, or Sightron SIII

[MikeMurf0505]

One-hole ten shot group at zero yards.

My rifles are not target rifles or even heavyweight dedicated long range rigs. Here's a link to a picture of one group I shot during load development last weekend from a lightweight, 28" pencil-tubed Brux barrel. Cartridge is 280 RCBS Improved. Rifle's weight without scope is maybe 7 - 7 1/4 lbs.

http://www.longrangehunting.com/forums/f28/0-008-off-versus-into-lands-162-amax-55730/

My rifle is a factory Remington 700 Sendero with a skim coated stock. No other modifications.
I'm not sure what the zero yard group is about, but I guess I got my answer on which scope (since you "own all three") groups the best.

 

[Pdvdh]

My rifle is a factory Remington 700 Sendero with a skim coated stock. No other modifications.
I'm not sure what the zero yard group is about, but I guess I got my answer on which scope (since you "own all three") groups the best.

The zero yard group means each and every rifle I own will consistently shoot 1-hole groups within a distance of 1 yard from the muzzle. A joke...

I've never considered it from the perspective that my scopes group better or worse than one another. That's a unique perspective. My scopes either shift point of impact under the forces of recoil if they're defective, or they may move in the bases or rings if they're not properly mounted and secured, but I can't quite get my arms around one scope shooting better or worse than the rest. Does your scope shoot as well when you place it on different rifles?

I shot a 3-shot 3 1/2 inch group at 1000 yds with my Zeiss Conquest 4.5-14x44mm. It was mounted on a completely factory 6 3/8 lb Tikka T3 in 7mm Rem Mag.

Your stock Sendero barrel has twice the mass of steel in it compared to my aftermarket Brux. My point being that heavier barrels, all other qualities being equal, will generally be easier to shoot more accurately with a good rest, and typically group a little better under changing barrel temperatures during a string of shots.

It's rather unfair to compare extended group sizes printed from a rifle with a 4lb barrel compared to an equally good 2lb barrel if both barrels are the same length.

My first SIII has better glass than my $1500 IOR. And IOR glass is pretty good glass. The glass in my 2nd SIII isn't quite up to par with my IOR glass.

 

[MikeMurf0505]

Well, I think the Zeiss is the overall best scope I have ever owned.
No joke.

 

[Pdvdh]

Well, I think the Zeiss is the overall best scope I have ever owned.
No joke.

Yeah, but you've never owned an SIII.

 

[LongBomber]

I don't own a Ziess, but I looked through one at the range the other day, 6-24x50 target turret. The picture was pretty clear, but not a huge step up over my VXIII 4.5-14x40AO. And I would rate my VX3 4.5-14LR as better, the color rendition in the VX3 was better. I had a monarch, but it was a noticeable step down from either Leupy and barely even with a bushy 4200.

The scope I looked though was a duplex reticle which seemed thick. It entirely covered the 1 inch target dot I was shooting at. Looking at 500 yards the cross hairs would entirely cover a gopher, and would be too thick for me at long range. Are all the Ziess reticle this thick?

 

[MikeMurf0505]

I shot a life sized wood chuck target at 600 two days ago and could see him very well in the reticle - I mean I could see his whole body.
I have the Rapid Z Varmint reticle.

The haze stopped me from shooting more than twice, but I center shot it once, and held left too much for wind and missed the second.

Still, the reticle lines are not too heavy to see a chuck at 600.
I totally assisinated him 7 for 10 at 400.

 

[JohnT]

I have a Zeiss 6.5 - 20 x 50 and a Sightron SIII 8-32 x 56 and for image quality no comparison Sightron far and away the best. The image quality is better than my Pentax spotting scope with a 65 objective. The edges of a target look clear and sharp whereas with the Zeiss they can get a bit fuzzy at higher magnifications. Click adjustment seem OK although have not checked about how repeatable. In fact I thought the Sightron glass was every bit the equal to my friends Nightforce NXS 5.5 - 22 x 56 at half the price. Don't know if they have been able to maintain the quality though as I had to wait about 3-4 months to get mine so the supply came in dribs & drabs. Possibly getting QC right was the reason production rate was so low in the beginning.


The Zeiss is good but the Sightron was exceptional. Not crazy with the target dot reticle though as it will be used for varminting and its a bit too fine for my liking. For target work excellent.

regards
JohnT

 

[bearhntr]

Thanks everyone I should have the sightron in a few days.

 

[MikeMurf0505]

Let us know how you like it.
Congrats on the new toy.