Time to buy. High(ish) dollar scopes?

[Schnyd112]

I have upgraded everything else but now it's time to upgrade my optics. Did a pretty good job saving this year so it's time to go all out. Will be for a mainly competition rifle so not super concerned about weight, 20x(+) max magnification, ffp, mil/mil is preferred and it will get shot a lot.

I have been dreaming of a kahles 624i SKMR 2 or 3 for going on two years. Just had a glance at the AMR reticle and I like that too.

Any reason to stay away from the Kahles? Any suggestions for something different? Not interested in a vortex razor. Would like to stay around or below $3000.

 

[KyCarl]

US Optics B-25..!

 

[Capt RB]

https://forum.snipershide.com/threads/k525-sucks-sb-pm2-5-25-vs-k525-vs-tt525p.6905928/

 

[Schnyd112]

https://forum.snipershide.com/threads/k525-sucks-sb-pm2-5-25-vs-k525-vs-tt525p.6905928/

Always going to find a hater. Those are not problems as far as I can tell, just somebody being picky. I am upgrading from never owning a scope costing more than $900.

Everybody that I know that has them (624i) is very satisfied, I have personally shot behind 3. One may have had issues but it is being inspected and so far CS has been very easy to deal with. It will be used for PRS as well as lots of prone and fun time practice. Maybe big game but I need to draw a tag first.

US Optics B-25..!

That is significantly more than I am looking to spend; I have never actually looked through one either. Nor have I ever been behind a Schmidt and bender. Just not in that financial position.

 

[Capt RB]

If you shop around you can find S&B pm II's for the same money. 7-35 Atcar's did very well against TT Minox S&B in side by side testing Kahles didn't make it to that grade to be tested. The reticle choice isn't the same though. The NF ATCAR 5-25 F1 is the same costwise
Good luck

 

[Farmerboy78]

check out the steiner. I'm a vortex guy, but a shooting buddy has 2 Steiner and they are outstanding

 

[Capt RB]

Last thing I'll add is look at the pics in that thread. You can see far less field of view along with the very shallow depth of field. In some of the prs events I've been to. Targets in deep shadows on multiple engagement stations are going to be more difficult with smaller fields of view with very shallow depths of field. To me it seems for that kind of money you can do better with what's available today.
Best of luck

 

[Schnyd112]

Last thing I'll add is look at the pics in that thread. You can see far less field of view along with the very shallow depth of field. In some of the prs events I've been to. Targets in deep shadows on multiple engagement stations are going to be more difficult with smaller fields of view with very shallow depths of field. To me it seems for that kind of money you can do better with what's available today.
Best of luck

But it's a picture, through a scope, it must be taken with a grain of salt. It adds the interaction of the camera which is not an eyeball by any means. I shoot similar range and have never seen something as bad as that kahles picture looks. It looks to me like the camera is aligned too far bottom left as well from the shading on the top right.

As I said, I have looked through several of the kahles, Various NF HD but I am not a fan of their reticles, Steiner, only one but it broke, twice, zeiss, swaro, which are both awesome but not what I want for a tactical scope, razor, which I have seen 4 go bad, mid match. Also a Minox but I am not sure what model. The glass was great but the standout to me has been the kahles.

Edit: smaller fields of view? I shoot a swfa 3-15x42 out to 1500 yards and very rarely wish I had more magnification. I wish I had a thinner reticle, but magnification has never been an issue. I am never going to run it at 25x, hence the ffp. Chances are it will live around 18x, occasionally get a little bigger on tough targets from stable positions.

 

[FEENIX]

But it's a picture, through a scope, it must be taken with a grain of salt. It adds the interaction of the camera which is not an eyeball by any means. I shoot similar range and have never seen something as bad as that kahles picture looks. It looks to me like the camera is aligned too far bottom left as well from the shading on the top right.

As I said, I have looked through several of the kahles, Various NF HD but I am not a fan of their reticles, Steiner, only one but it broke, twice, zeiss, swaro, which are both awesome but not what I want for a tactical scope, razor, which I have seen 4 go bad, mid match. Also a Minox but I am not sure what model. The glass was great but the standout to me has been the kahles.

At $3K you'll have excellent choices. Since Kahles has been a dream for you, I'd say go for it, and you'll be much happier too.

Another consideration is the IOR Valdada (http://www.valdada.com/tactical-scopes/?sort=featured&page=2), I have a couple of them and extremely please with the glass. Good luck.

 

[Sprucegoose]

But it's a picture, through a scope, it must be taken with a grain of salt. It adds the interaction of the camera which is not an eyeball by any means. I shoot similar range and have never seen something as bad as that kahles picture looks. It looks to me like the camera is aligned too far bottom left as well from the shading on the top right.

As I said, I have looked through several of the kahles, Various NF HD but I am not a fan of their reticles, Steiner, only one but it broke, twice, zeiss, swaro, which are both awesome but not what I want for a tactical scope, razor, which I have seen 4 go bad, mid match. Also a Minox but I am not sure what model. The glass was great but the standout to me has been the kahles.

Edit: smaller fields of view? I shoot a swfa 3-15x42 out to 1500 yards and very rarely wish I had more magnification. I wish I had a thinner reticle, but magnification has never been an issue. I am never going to run it at 25x, hence the ffp. Chances are it will live around 18x, occasionally get a little bigger on tough targets from stable positions.

Sound like you already know what you want. I've shot behind kahles, s&b, night force, and personally own a razor gen 2, I think they are all fine scopes. If you know what you want just buy it. Curious what "went bad in the vortex" mid match?

 

[ShtrRdy]

It sounds like you're sold on a Kahles. Just make sure it's a gen 3 and that should help.

 

[Schnyd112]

At $3K you'll have excellent choices. Since Kahles has been a dream for you, I'd say go for it, and you'll be much happier too.

Another consideration is the IOR Valdada (http://www.valdada.com/tactical-scopes/?sort=featured&page=2), I have a couple of them and extremely please with the glass. Good luck.

I have really liked the couple March scopes I have looked through but have not been able to see the one I would want. The ones I looked through were very high power at 1000 yard f-class and it was 2014 I think. They are really light compared to most of the others I am looking at, are there any durability issues?

I am careful, I don't kick the rifle over or drop it off of tables but shift happens moving in and out of barricades, props, positions, wind dust and then of course acts of god.

 

[KyCarl]

Feenix brought up a good idea those IOR Valdada scopes are pretty nice for the price!
I have 2 like this one..And it comes with a set of pretty good rings.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/IOR-Valdada-3-18x42-35mm-TACTICAL-FFP-MOA-MOA-ILLUMINATED-MP-8-XTREME-X1-SF/323297805981?ssPageName=STRK:MEBIDX:IT&_trksid=p2060353.m1438.l2649

 

[Danehunter]

I hear you on upgrading optics. My best scope currently is a Bushnell ERS 3.5 - 21 x 50 with an H59 reticle on my Ruger Precision Rifle. Very good but a "tier 2" scope compared to say an S&B.

But I'm going one step higher for my 6.5 CM Browning X-Bolt Pro mountain rifle with a MARCH 3 - 24 x 42 FFP, mil/mil W/illuminated reticle. Spendy but perfect for this rifle. Short, light, high quality and top line ED glass.

You may want to look closely at Meopta for high quality but very reasonable prices.

Eric B.