Scope for 1000+

[WildRose]

What about this one?
Bushnell - LRHS 4.5-18x 44mm

No way I'd spend that kind of money on a scope with a 44mm Obj.

For that kind of money you could have a Night Force, IOR, VX6 or Mark IV Leupold.

The only Bushnell's I've looked at in the last 20 years or more that impressed me were these:

Bushnell Elite Tactical Riflescope 3 5 21x50 34mm G2DMR 029757352255 | eBay

 

[Marble]

So does Leupold make a turret that is only MOA adjustment? I don't want a dial that is set to a particular drop or cartridge.

 

[WildRose]

So does Leupold make a turret that is only MOA adjustment? I don't want a dial that is set to a particular drop or cartridge.

Yes.

 

[RonS]

There was great variability in the optical quality of the glass and coatings used from one scope line/brand for the last several decades and there continues to be.

I don't know quite what they've been doing differently throughout my lifetime but as a rule the German/European glass has always been superior to American made scopes for low light work. Even when you get into the more high end American made scopes until the last decade or so the Europeans were just much better.

That was true 10 years ago but not today. Schott glass (Zeiss and IOR Valdada) is still some of the best glass in the world. The glass coming out of Hungry (Schmidt & Bender) is considered just as good as is the glass coming out of Austria (Kahles and Swarovski). Quality glass or fluorite with precision surface grinding resulting in few aberrations, very good edge to edge sharpness, excellent resolving power and quality coatings have been and still are their hallmarks. These days the Japanese are the equal or in some cases better however. The fluorite lenses in the current line of Kowa scopes bests those of the finest European brands in all reviews. I've looked though Zeiss, Leica and Kowa. The Kowa's are difficult to beat. The Japanese make the glass used in Nightforce, some Leica products and the higher end Leupold, Nikon, Sightron and Vortex scopes. The Korean's make the glass for the scopes in the next lower price range and some of it is very good. The Chinese make the glass for the cheapest scopes. The US does not really make optical glass. Rumor has it that Corning was making some Leica glass but that is difficult to ferret out.


Yes, I'm a glass snob.

 

[WildRose]

That was true 10 years ago but not today. Schott glass (Zeiss and IOR Valdada) is still some of the best glass in the world. The glass coming out of Hungry (Schmidt & Bender) is considered just as good as is the glass coming out of Austria (Kahles and Swarovski). Quality glass or fluorite with precision surface grinding resulting in few aberrations, very good edge to edge sharpness, excellent resolving power and quality coatings have been and still are their hallmarks. These days the Japanese are the equal or in some cases better however. The fluorite lenses in the current line of Kowa scopes bests those of the finest European brands in all reviews. I've looked though Zeiss, Leica and Kowa. The Kowa's are difficult to beat. The Japanese make the glass used in Nightforce, some Leica products and the higher end Leupold, Nikon, Sightron and Vortex scopes. The Korean's make the glass for the scopes in the next lower price range and some of it is very good. The Chinese make the glass for the cheapest scopes. The US does not really make optical glass. Rumor has it that Corning was making some Leica glass but that is difficult to ferret out.


Yes, I'm a glass snob.

Yes, as I said...

... .Even when you get into the more high end American made scopes until the last decade or so the Europeans were just much better.

I have a Nikon ED spotting scope and it has amazing glass and it's not even the best the Japanese can produce.

 

[Clever]

Nightforce NXS 5.5X22X50 or56mm NPR 2

 

[ohiohunter]

RonS, I'd like to hear your comparasin of glass between vortex viper and sightron sii big sky (i believe same glass as SIII).

Here is where I am at. The vortex 6-24 is marginally bigger than the 4-16, but I feel I shouldn't need that much mag as long as the glass is clear. The SII big sky is lightweight so I don't mind the extra mag on it. Plus the covered turrets, I do not think the 1" tube will hinder my elevation but it will hinder light gathering. Are there any scopes I should be looking at also?

I may also consider a huskamaw BD 4-16x.

Weight and cost are a concern. I'd like to keep it <22oz and <$1k.

I do not want to turn this hunting rig into a tactical turd.

 

[RonS]

RonS, I'd like to hear your comparasin of glass between vortex viper and sightron sii big sky (i believe same glass as SIII).

Here is where I am at. The vortex 6-24 is marginally bigger than the 4-16, but I feel I shouldn't need that much mag as long as the glass is clear. The SII big sky is lightweight so I don't mind the extra mag on it. Plus the covered turrets, I do not think the 1" tube will hinder my elevation but it will hinder light gathering. Are there any scopes I should be looking at also?

I may also consider a huskamaw BD 4-16x.

Weight and cost are a concern. I'd like to keep it <22oz and <$1k.

I do not want to turn this hunting rig into a tactical turd.

Difficult to compare as it's really an apples to oranges comparison and my knowledge gap on the products is great but I'll try. And remember that my preferences will differ from yours given the different applications. That said, here goes:


I have not used or even handled the SII, only the SIII. I would question as to whether the glass is the same. The SII's seem to have an adjustable objective where the SIII's are side focus. That fact alone would imply that the objective lenses are different or at least the arrangement and/or mounting of the lenses is different. I am also less familiar with Sightron but if it is like Vortex or other brands, you would potentially lose a couple of things in stepping down to the next lower level scope in the line from the SIII. Things like an etched reticle may be lost. The mechanical operating components may change which may affect the quality of the tracking. A smaller objective lens and perhaps a 1 inch tube instead of a 30mm, both of which would affect the light gathering potential. The construction of the tube may also differ making it less durable. And lastly, where the glass is sourced and how it is coated may change. Still, I have not heard anything bad about the Sightrons. They seem to offer a quality product. The people I know who run the SIII's in F Class love them. I'm sure the SII's are a good product as well. I've used the SIII's since we swap guns and I really like their LRMOA reticle.


I have read about the Huskamaw but I have never seen or handled one. They seem to have some respect from those who appear to be in the know. My problem with them is the same problem I have with all BDC reticles and turrets. Some allow you to order custom turrets but the likelihood of them matching your load is minimal. Take a .308 for example. The load can vary from 155 to 190 grain bullets (or even more depending on the barrel twist) with varying powder charges and velocities from 2500 fps to over 3000 fps. That's a massive difference in trajectories. A BDC might get you within a stones throw at 200 yards but as you cross 300 and approach 1000 yards you won't even be in the neighborhood. The alternative is a free app for your cell phone. I run Strelok. I have all the data entered for a given load in a given caliber like the caliber, the bullet weight, the bullet BC, the velocity, the zero yardage and the altitude it was zeroed at as well as the altitude I'm shooting at. You need to chrono your loads to get the data but chrono's are cheap these days. When I select the load I'm shooting I pull it up, punch in the yardage and the wind estimate and wala, I get both the MOA elevation and windage offsets (I don't use MIL dot). Dial in the dope and I'm ready to rock. I've got several different loads in each caliber loaded in the app and I find that it puts me very close on the first shot. Close enough that using the MOA reticle's for offset is doable if I don't feel like dialing in the difference. Another alternative is something like the Burris Eliminator 3 4-16. I had one and I liked it. Dial in your load data and when you push the button you get both laser range finding and elevation offset. The tree gives you windage offsets based on a 10 mph wind. Those scopes are heavy though and you can only have one load loaded into the scope at any point in time.


When it comes to power, my opinion is that the only reasonable limit is the resolving power of the scope. If you can have more power you should get it. You don't have to use it but I'm running 6x24's on my F Class rifles at 300-1000 yards and only once have I turned the power down. That was when the mirage was so bad that you needed lower power to cut down on the target jumping around and resolve the lines. I find myself wanting more power. Much more. I may get one of the 10-50 60 Sightron SIII's that people are picking up. There are guys who are running the 80 power March scopes as well. 3-9 is low power these days. 4-16 is not much better. 6-24 seems to be an entry point in long range these days and most are running 8-32 or 10-50 or higher.


As I said, the above comes from a perspective of target. I'm running heavy scopes on heavy rifles and I'm not packing them up ridge lines, down valleys or way out into the bush. If I were, I'd go with a very light rifle and a big heavy powerful scope of the best quality I could afford. In your price point there are a lot of options and I doubt that you'd be disappointed in any of them.

 

[jrock]

Ziess Conquest HD5 5x25x50 is my vote. If you dial, get the varmint reticle as it is thinner.

 

[ohiohunter]

Ziess Conquest HD5 5x25x50 is my vote. If you dial, get the varmint reticle as it is thinner.

Too heavy, too much power IMO. Nice scope I'm sure but na.

 

[the shotty]

Just for clarification sake the first Gen razors were in the 1900 range but can be had between $1350-1650 currently depending on reticle. I much prefer the vortex for reticle and features and I feel the illumination is needed for how thin the reticle is. I have used vx1, vx2, vx3 and a ffp mk4 and I haven't cared for any of them. The most recent vx3 6.5-20 that I just got rid of I felt like it was very close to a pst 6-24 in terms of glass but the features of the pst pushed it ahead imo. I picked up a new 4-16 pst on sale for $499 and I feel like for that price it just can't be beat. I'm not trying to bash leupys but I just don't feel they are worth the money with some of the other players. The only leupold I would even consider at this point would be the mk6 3-18 due to weight but even then at ~$2k there's better options imo. Also if a ffp scopeople is what your after I think the bushnell lrhs 4-18 that was already posted is worth the look. Street price should be ~$1k from what I've been hearing, though like the rest of their offerings it may take a few months to a year for prices to come down otherwise just shop around and make some phone calls.

 

[ohiohunter]

The bush lrhs is suppose to have awesome glass. I did look through one (I think) it was nice, but it comes w/ the weight. The more and more I read the better off I think I am w/ the SII big sky though it is only 1" tube I know I can get to about 1300-1400 with it after a 20moa base and 60" total travel of the scope.

I had a very similar SII big sky on a 308 and after a 100yd zero I only had about 12 moa until I topped out on the short side, so I had roughly 45" of travel left. If it works out close to the same I'll be close to 1400yds, even if it doesn't quite make that I 'll still have a good reticle to use.

 

[RonS]

The bush lrhs is suppose to have awesome glass. I did look through one (I think) it was nice, but it comes w/ the weight. The more and more I read the better off I think I am w/ the SII big sky though it is only 1" tube I know I can get to about 1300-1400 with it after a 20moa base and 60" total travel of the scope.

I had a very similar SII big sky on a 308 and after a 100yd zero I only had about 12 moa until I topped out on the short side, so I had roughly 45" of travel left. If it works out close to the same I'll be close to 1400yds, even if it doesn't quite make that I 'll still have a good reticle to use.

When you look through the scopes at the shops, make sure that you adjust the reticle to your eyes before you start evaluating the scope. I find them all over the place but mostly turned all the way in. I pick up the scope and look through it and it looks like crap. You have to wonder what the person who look through it before you thought of the quality of the glass because it would have been way out of adjustment for anyone.

 

[the shotty]

The bush lrhs is suppose to have awesome glass. I did look through one (I think) it was nice, but it comes w/ the weight. The more and more I read the better off I think I am w/ the SII big sky though it is only 1" tube I know I can get to about 1300-1400 with it after a 20moa base and 60" total travel of the scope.

I had a very similar SII big sky on a 308 and after a 100yd zero I only had about 12 moa until I topped out on the short side, so I had roughly 45" of travel left. If it works out close to the same I'll be close to 1400yds, even if it doesn't quite make that I 'll still have a good reticle to use.

Yea it's a little heavier than the 22oz but will you really notice 4oz? The gold standard on this site since I started lurking has been the NF at ~32oz To me you could potentially change barrel profile or even the stock and save more weight. I'm not very picky about weight though. My backpack gun last year was 13.5lb and my current build will be 14-15lb.