Viper PST 6-24X50 FFP Vs SIII Tactical 8-32X56

[Prieto9000]

Already have the FFP PST, so i decided to give the sightron a try. I Bought the 8-32X56LRMOA which i don't love, but was the only appealing SIII I could find @ my dealer. It looks ok, but I think it really needs some kind of zero stop. I also feel the turrets turn pretty easy for uncapped turrets. Haven't mounted it, so I can't give a hard opinion, but this are my concerns right out of the box.

Which rings and bases you guys think are better for mounting it on an X-Bolt??
1.- Warne Maxima QD
2.- DNZ

 

[hunterbud]

Hello,

I'm new to this site and find the information very usefull. I'm not sure how to jump in with a question, so here goes:

I'm interested in a scope for an armalite ar 10 .308. I currently use a 7mm with a 2 x 7 Leupold and shot my last deer at 400 plus yards. As I'm aging, I find my eyesight needs assitance, hence a bump up in optics.

I like to target shoot and hunt so I'm looking for a scope that reachs out from 200 yards to 800 plus. I was looking at the Vortex 6-24X50 FFP PST Fi-M. I tried to order, but apparently this has a backlog. Are there better choices under $1100.00 and do suppliers sell display models and is this the way to go?

Thanks

 

[Prieto9000]

I finally mounted it on my rifle. I was looking at a construction site @ about 1800 yds and found out that i didn't need to put the focus turret @ the infinite mark. This was really annoying. With the PST anything past 600 yds goes on the infinite mark. With the SIII you need to look through the scope and start moving the wheel until you have a clear view of your target which is not optimal for shooting. Also the wheel is very hard to turn which makes it even worse to do both things at the same time. It makes the rifle move a lot and you loose your target some times.
The PST looks definitely better to my eyes. Better picture definition @ 1800yds. I know 1800 yds is pretty far away, and I'm almost sure I'll never shoot anything at that distance, but it just makes it easier to compare the optics on the 2 Scopes. It points out strengths and weaknesses.
I also noticed that the power ring for the SIII has very little travel and the markers are very close to each other. That makes me think the SFP reticle is less than reliable given the fact that it's designed to work @24x. A little over/under adjustment will result in inaccurate reticle ranging.

So far if I had to make the choice again, I would definitely go for another PST. Let's see if I change my opinion once I start using it.


I really want to like the SIII, but so far I just can't find a reason.

 

[57jl]

+1 for S111

 

[calling4life]

I run the Sightron SIII 8-32x56 moa and have a buddy that has a 6-24 PST FFP on his new hunting rig.

I spotted for him sitting behind that PST one day and messed around with it quite a bit, I wouldn't touch it for long range anything, that reticle was way too thick for me at 24x, he didn't care for that either, but Elk aren't small...

For features, the PST obviously has more and wins, for glass I have to go with my Sightron, and one thing; you can't compare the sightron on 32x to the PST at 24x, make sure if you guys are comparing these scopes or any scopes, you are doing so on the same power settings for a fair assessment.

Sightron's Customer Service is absolutely fantastic.

As for the parallax, it is precise, but I like that, I want that, your mileage may vary.

Overall, I've owned three SIII's and don't see me going elsewhere unless I step up a grand or more. I definitely don't need FFP but if I did I would go with a new Bushnell Tactical 6-24 with the Gap reticle.

 

[ZSteinle]

my parallax has loosed up substantially, much smoother. Mine was very stiff at first.