Best long range hunting scope?

I know it has been discussed on here before. What are the opinions on the best long range scope on the market? Best package, ie magnification, light gathering, clear, durable, tracks perfect, just all out the best. Cost not an option? Lets keep it in the over 20 power range.

MOst reports will say the best long range hunting scope will be a swarovski or better, and the best long range shooting scope will be a nightforce. Sorry if that doesn't help much, but that's about all I can give you anyway when it comes to scopes. Not my area of expertise...

Now some on the forum here know a good bit more than I do, give skylar a pm, he will steer you inthe right direction if you give him a little more detail of what you are wanting.

I use an SS 5-20 HD Mil/ Mil first foacl plane

Vortex Viper PST 6-24 Mil/ Mil first focal plane

Bushnell Elite Tactical 6-24 Mil/ Mil first focal plane

I like the clarity and functionality of the SS the best, and shoot it the most. The absolute only negative about it is the weight of the scope, it's the heaviest in the bunch. Its also built like a brick s**thouse.

What fireman uses are all good scopes.

I use a US Optics Sn3 3-17 power. Great glass and is indestructible. Also take a look at night force and bushnells new scopes coming out.

Walter

Walter is also right on the money. His other suggestions are all top quality. I'm a first focal plane proponent, so up until last year, the Night Force F-1 was the only scope I would consider in their offerings. If it didn't have a max of 15X I would have one. The new "Beast" intrigues me, but I want some other shooters to put it through its paces before I dive into one.

If price were not a issue then I would have to say Zeiss Hensoldt, Schmidt & Bender, US Optics, and Night Force. But I would take the Zeiss over the others first if it were the Hensoldt ZF 3.5-26x56 model, but 7000 is a lot for a scope or even the Hensoldt ZF 6-24x72 SAM but its 12000.

Fireman, funny you mentioned the Beast. I have been looking at that one as well as the ATACR 5X25. I know they all track great, and have good glass. I know they advertize the light gathering being 90% plus. Anyone have any info on this? Do they gather light better than most? Or is there a better suggection on the low light abilities. Being a hunting scope, there is nothing that I dislike more than a scope that lets me down 30 minutes early....

I can't speak on it. There may be reviews on Snipers Hide, bit I havn't read them.

I can tell you all of the scopes previously mentioned won't let you down in the last 20 minutes of legal light. I pay close attention to the daylight calendar when hunting, and push it to the last minute when in the field. Of course you know to back the magnification down the darker it gets outside. The 50mm objectives allow plenty of light to enter.

I have Zeizz, Nikon, Bushnell, Redfield, on rifles, but the rifle I always go back to is the one with my Nightforce. And when I can tell the difference is just prior to sunrise and just after sunset, when I always seem to shoot.

If money is no object, then a Shmidt & Bender or a Hensolt would be tops. If you want a great scope for the money, then a Nightforce is tops in my book.

there is some nice features on that scope, but at 2500.00 i can buy a brand new f1...duh...

There are lots of nice ones..
add to the list Kahles.

Agree! I run a Schmidt & Bender 5-25x56 on my 300 WM long range rig. It is absolutely phenomenal.

I love that USO, it's awesome, but I would never hunt with it, this and several of the other scopes mentioned are very heavy.

If hunting in a deer blind, you would most likely be ok, but if you are on a spot and stalk or hunting in the rockies, I would definetly re-evaluate my options and look into Swarovski.

There is nothing that can beat them optically and weight is not an issue.

Khales would be a distant second.

Completely agree. It is on a heavy lr rig and only use it at my place where I don't walk too far.

Walter

If you aren't using the scope to range with I wouldn't get a FFP and I wouldn't get MIL, I would opt for the MOA...talking just a hunting scope only.

I didn't see a bad scope listed above and it looks like we all have great tastes, hard to go wrong with any of those.

Can't go with you on that. Windage is in Mil, elevation is in Mil, and no matter what power setting I know what wind to hold. Every rifle I have that hunts with a scope is wearing a Mil/ Mil FFP.

Same here. I couldn't imagine going back to moa. Maybe sfp. Maybe.

Walter

My biggest concern is that the reticle matches the turrets. Other than that it's just simple math.

I was eyeing the new Nightforce BEAST scope. It looks freakin' awesome. NF changed up their glass for top clarity, and the reviews from a few shooters I know said it was on par with the S&B glass now. The only issue is I can but 2 NXS scopes for the price of 1 BEAST.

And a bit of a wait for the actual release of the beast.

I couldn't agree more Jason. I'm exactly the same way.

I think it's cause you guys can't do the math!
On a second focal scope, if you cut the power in half, your reticle size doubles. So, my .5 mil hash at 22x is now a 1 mil hash at 11x. And I'm either at 22x or 11x when I need to use either power setting. It's pretty easy!

I can do math. My problem is when I'm in speed mode, shooting a stage, points on the line, guys watching, I'm in my lower brain. I need no other factor involved. Maybe you just use more percentage of your brain than I do, Chad! When you train like you fight, fight like you train, I want the same scope I've practiced so much with to be the one I hunt with.

Jp- how far do you consider long range?

To explain my point, y'all are part of the 2%'ers ...meaning if you aren't shooting tactical matches no one ever talks MIL they talk inches aka MOA. If the guy never plans on shooting tactical matches (as I said a hunting scope only) there is no reason to learn the mil system.

I do agree with dee in that a moa/moa recticle is ideal but in most situations I would think you would hold over and not twist dials. Spin for elevation and hold for wind has almost always been what I hear everyone doing. For the clay games I will sight in to get a zero in the morning and then rarely will I spin for windage the rest of the day I'll hold. But I also have flags that help I know, I'm cheating.

I agree to appoint... But moa is not inches and that is what most hunters don't understand. Moa is a degree of an angle. Iphy is inches but not many scopes are listed as such. IMHO I think that if enough people understood that it would make the market for scopes much better.

Walter

What I find funny is when a scope is marked MOA but when checked is actually a IPHY adjustments. Most will never know if one is or not but I personally box test every scope I have to make sure they are correctly working.

If I am buying a scope to use for hunting purposes only, I will buy an MOA scope. I have 2 NF scopes in MOA that I like to use. they work the same as a mil scope, but have a finer adjustment, which is what I like.

Point made...I doubt very many people can distingish .047 of an inch

The real problem in my mind is the US doesn't teach or think it metric values while the rest fo the world does. If we all talked, thought and processed metric numbers my guess is the moa/iphy vs mil ratio would be considerably different.

I honestly don't think my mind would work in a mil way easily and would be much better @ US math Kinda the old dog new tricks deal. Plus, the MOA math is fairly simple if I remember correctly...isn't it: number of inches of target divided by number of MOA x 100 equals yards to target?

I only will use Mil/Mil/FFP scopes for "tactical" or long range use.
For hunting, I really don't care because _I_ am not shooting past 500 and most likely under that.
As such, a scope like the Swarovski with the ballistic turret and the 4w reticle with 2 M0A wind holds is fine.
If I need to take a long shot, I will have the extra .5 second to go to max power.
It has index marks that you can set, for me, with a 280 Ackley I run a 250 yard zero, first mark is 350, then 400, then 450, plus 4 for 500.
Simple sticker on the scope tells me my corresponding wind holds at 10 MPH

If hunting the same conditions all the time a custom turret with your range marks works for most hunters just fine.

Like I said, I like a "tactical" scope where I can dial in elevation and hold (or dial) for wind.
But most are heavier than I want on light bolt action.

all of this debate depends on what the op definition of long range is. for anything under 300-400 yards/meters, cross hairs will work fine. anything past that and you have to start thinking bout elevation holds and wind holds among many other things.

i dont hunt, i shoot strictly tactical style steel targets and such, but everybody i shoot with...with the exception of 1 person, speaks mils. all scopes and spotters have mil based reticles...except for that 1 guy... i learned on an moa/mil scope so i am very familiar with converting moa to mil, but most of the other peeps cant, so i usually end up spotting for him. point being, if your peeps speak mil, and you dont, you are gonna be at a disadvantage, and may miss an important shot because you are trying to math rather than just dialing on and shooting.

personally i cant see why moa is better for hunting anyway, they are both units of measurment, and both work just as well.

so to the op, get a scope with a system that your peeps and friends have and train with that, and you will be fine.

Kahles
March
Swavorski
Schmit and Bender
Zeis
Hensfoldt
Vortex Razor HD
SWFA SS HD
Nightforce

There are so many great options, but best is subjective...

Judd,

The only thing metric about Mils is the number of clicks between whole numbers.

A Mil is a yard at 1000 yards, it's an inch at 1000 inches, a centimeter at 1000 centimeter, a foot at 1000 feet. Angular, and that's it. At 500 yards it's half a yard, at 100 yards it's 1/10 of a yard. MOA is an angular measurement as well, but there are 4 quarters between whole numbers. If you're an MOA guy, fine, but you are in the minority by a wide margin. Will both work to shoot anything at distance? Yes. But more shooters are using Mils for engaging paper, steel, or hide, at distance, these days.

^^^^^^^good post...

I'll say okay...except for the bold part and we can agree to disagree on that. Way to many guys out there with $200 scopes that are not even recticle matching turrets to say that and we know neither of them are mil.

Also, for my game I have never seen a single person use MIL or even utter the word...for your game I realize it is true. So it might just be the people we hang with but I'd still say MOA scopes are sold 5:1 over MIL as an industry. Think of all the Leupy scopes on guns out there

I would say 90% of the hunters think in inches
8 % think in MOA
2 % think in MIl

Lots of good info been posted here.

Has the op been back yet. Or did this just make him more confused?

Walter

He was talking about <400 yards, found out he had to buy a NF, re-take calculus in metric, take a 700 dollar LR class, then another reloading class, and buy special bullet pointers for perfect BC

What do you think

Walter

Yes there are millions of hunters with $200 Leupies with 1/4" @ 100 knobs under caps and duplex reticles. Those guys also limit themselves to 200 yards give or take. There is no Mil or MOA, therefore no way to have a true wind hold, it's just a wild azz guess.

What's the game you play where MOA sells 5:1 to Mil? Benchrest? Palma?

OP asked about long range hunting scopes. The same scopes will be used by myself as well as many others that shoot in scenarios that are multiple distances, multiple posistions and under a very short clock, the same as hunting. MOA/ MOA or Mil/ Mil are both fine. I'm seeing Mil outrun MOA by several lengths at least in the scenario of precision coupled with speed.

Thank you for bringing your expertise to the table! On-lookers can see a calm, respectful, and educational debate, and hopefully take some good information away from it.

I bet you're right! I aim to change that.

Give or take 400 yards or less would be better statement which is 99% of shots taken on game in the US.

There is a difference between peoples thought of hunting long range and yours.

I get it you want to be that 1%. But that 1% answers and thoughts aren't the best for the other 99% of hunters.

Almost every mfg now offers a BDC turret, most 1" scopes have enough elevation to get you to 600 yards, with moa wind marks its pretty easy to get that far. Under 400 not hard to figure out 14" on an animal, stronger wind then that means easier to get closer. I have no idea how any one ever shot animals over a 100 yards before the LR push

Not saying you are wrong in your process, just have to remember not everyone going to put range time in to take advantage of specialize gear or care to learn it

I look at like, if I were asking several hot rod experts "how do I build a 10 second car?" I'd try to absorb what I'm told. Me- "but I want to do it with my 1979 F-250 4 x 4" I'd probably get a whoa! That is going to be very tough to accomplish.

If asked about a long range scope I'm going to answer based on experience. On steel and on hide. If the answers I give aren't popular, should I apologize? Yes "long range" may be a different definition from one guy to another. I'm answering based on my definition.

You toss in a 6.7 psd with special fuel rails.

No you shouldn't apologize, you are very good and very skilled at what you do. Im merely pointing out you can get three 15 second cars that will really accomplish what you want to do for the price of the 10 second car that your never going to get enough drive time to make it hit the 10 seconds mark.

Basically got to figure out if the 10 second or 15 second cars better option

Understood.

I'll throw this at you. If several people say they're staying 400 yards and in, my "large" 400 yard steel is 8" round, that's deer vitals sized. The wind hold at 400 yards, with the .260 Rem/ 140 gr A-max is .3 Mil per 5 mph at 90 degrees. Today was what? 15 mph-20 mph? That's .9 to 1.2 Mil wind hold (of course that's after dialing elevation) 1.5 to 1.8 equates to 13" to 17.3" of wind drift, at the target. Without having the Mil or MOA reticle the windage is a rough estimate.

Yes if a guy takes the time to measure his reticle at a 100 yard ruler then he will have a pretty good idea as to what the duplex means, but most don't take the time to find out. All I'm saying is there are better tools for the task. And one does not have to spend a fortune to get a pretty good tool, same as what you are saying.

Another vote for the swaro with ballistic turret. It's easy to understand and setup,crystal clear and it works. Maybe it's not the best for shooting matches but the OP is wanting a hunting scope. I shoot with a friend a few times a year that digs out rifles with nightforce nxs and S&Bs for the range, but carries a rifle with the swaro BT when hunting. Who wants to lug around a rifle with 2lbs of glass to the deer stand anyways? I personally have the 3.5-18x44 and Love it, will be buying another soon. Y'all are making this sound wayyyy to complicated for a hunting scope.

Deers vitals are bigger then 8". A Deer head from to nose to back of his head is roughly 13" same with antelope.
Next time you shot a deer measure from behind his head to top shoulder blade, then measure top of shoulder blade to last rib. Learn it its an interesting number


Knowing animal anatomy goes along way. Just like if I took away you retical or ability to dial, chances are your going to hit that 8" steel, using the steel its self as a measurement. Ya over 400 it gets pretty tough to do, but very do able at 400
I grew up with the wind,

I get it tools make it easier, counting fence posts suck for range and god bless vortex.

Just saying lots of other tools out there

Maybe I'm too tough on myself in the size of my desired bullet impact. Everybody touts shot placement, that's what I'm after as well.

Oh, and I have no doubt in your ability, as well as how you've adapted. But that came with decades of experience. If you send me an 18 year old that has never shot a rifle, I can get him hitting 2 MOA steel outside 1/4 mile, by lunch. That's one example of my reasoning.

You could get him shooting 2moa at 400 yards in 10 mins with out dialing.... and now he would be prepared for 99% of hunting situations

Yep. Could do that do. The dial number is the same as the hold number, 1.8 Mil. Dial it or hold it, you pick.

Your first paragraph is what I was trying to say and you said it better. The vast majority of those people put their feeder 100y or less from their box blind and call it a season. I have no problem with that for the record, hats of they are shooting within their abilities and comfort.

The 5:1 comment actually was for total scope sold, including the guys in the paragraph above.

Now as for what I shoot, I shoot benchrest at something reactive...steel, asprins, thumbtacks but the majority of the time it is clay targets to about 500m. In that game it is 100:1 MOA vs Mil turrets and there is 5:1 Nightforce Benchrest scopes to anything else...close 2nd would be a Sightron SIII. If you came and sighted in at one of those matches I would be shocked if there wasn't but a few guys that could tell spot for you in MIL's...everything is inches/feet.

No reason for this difference of opinion to be nothing but civil we can disagree without resulting in petty BS. I too appreciate it.

Moat F-Class guys run MOA as well.

And weirdos like you.

True enough. I bet a good bit of the shooters competing for the Wimbledon Cup are using MOA as well.

I bet that's right. They can dial in finer increments. They also have all the time in the world to make their shots, all at the same distance to target.

Finer increments......tote shot placement.......

In your original post you did not mention if you are hunting prairie dogs or elephants. Lots of different applications. If price is not an option look at the "March" line of scopes. All the way to 80 power if that's what you want. March is the best scope on the best match rifles of the top competitors in the country.

Bud of mine has a March, so far so good. And he's sent lead 1400 yards with the rifle it's mounted on.

Bobo, I already adressed shot placement.

One thing on the March scopes is they have a rep for being a bit unforgiving on eye position and the parallax setting.

One of our staff guys is testing the 3-24x42 FFP mil/mil right now.
I need to check it out over the weekend.

We have 3 Marches in testing
The 1-8 and the big high powered one.

If you send me an 18 year old that has never shot a rifle, I can get him hitting 2 MOA steel outside 1/4 mile, by lunch. That's one example of my reasoning. [/quote]


i keep hearing this...no disrespect intended...
this is not rocket science... to get a newbie shooting to 1k yrds in day. ive seen that many many times. but i guarantee you that newby would not be able to replicate that on his own, without your spotting and being there right next to him... without some serious practice and range time and training. it wont help him when he goes out on his own and goes hunting and tries to shoot long range.

so its really irrelevant to be able to get someone to shoot to 1k yrds in a day, if they cant go out and replicate that on their own.

now i do agree that the mil based system is superior to moa, but for different reasons. my reasoning is that no 2 moa scopes are alike. manufacturers havnt been able to get a same same system for moa throughout scopes like mil is same same. a mil on a vortex viper is a mil on a leupy or a nightforce, or even on a tapsco. but an moa doesnt work that way, manufactures dont have any regular standards throughout the scope world.

Schmidt and bender 5-25x56 PMII

period!

[/quote]

Please explain how MOA varies between manufacturers. The only variations I have ever seen are in the amount of adjustment in the turrets per click which is no different than MIL stuff.

this is well documented...its simple, an moa at one manufacturer isnt always the same moa at another manufacturer. this wont affect you hardly at all for short ranges but when you get out to long range and extreme long range, a spotter might make a wind call in moa, and if you dial on, you might not hit.

They are either MOA or IPHY (inch per hundred yards) it's fairly simple. Now I have seen a few low power non long range oriented scopes marked for one and be the other. Also Leupold has been known for this as well.

Spotting or calling hits only as difficult if it is made to be. Every one I shoot with shoots and spots with MOA scopes so a person that shoots in MIL will have a difficult time.

Nighteagle,

No he won't be able to replicate 1k on his own (never referred to 1k). But 500 and in, yes. Especially when I start explaining from the beginning. MV, BC, trajectory both vertical, and horizontal, translated to Mils, ect.

You know well, 500 and in isn't a big deal with a little schooling and the right optic.

I am in the same predicament. Just took delivery of a Larue PredatOBR in 762. Trying to find the best all around scope for the $$$. It's easy if you have unlimited funds but if you want the best bang for the $$$ what would you all buy? The gun would be used for paper targets and hunting. Most deer < 100yds. Varmint hunting < 400 yds.

I am looking intensely at:
1. Leupold VX6 3-18 x 50mm illumintaed SFP cost $1299 its SFP but with 200 yd zero should be good for any game <400 yds?
2. SWFA SS 3-15 x 42 FFP non-illuminated $700 bargain price
3. Bushnell 3.5-21 x50 Elite Tactical FFP $1449 cons very heavy

any other thoughts?

Those 3 are excellent scopes. The swfa might be lacking in the glass department compared to the other 2 if it is not an HD model.

I have the 3-18 vx6... Actually 2 of them.. Its a great scope and would be my pick,of those 3.

Swarovski z5 3.5-18x44 BT 4w would be the same price as the bushnell and a way better scope IMO.

Like with a standard duplex ret on a $200 Leupold with knobs under caps.

Sure, if you want to make it harder than it has to be. You 20-40 year veteran shooters had/ have the equipment available to you at the time, learned with it, practiced with it, pushed you distance farther, had failures and successes. You have hundreds and thousands of rounds of practice doing it the hard way and you don't want to let that go, fine. You earned it. All I'm saying is that we are blessed than common men can hit farther, and smaller that civilians could hope for 20 years ago. Once the information is taught the learning curve is not so harsh.

a minute of angle is constant, unless a manufacture can bend the space, time continuum then a spotting scope with a reticle and a rifle scope with a reticle do indeed work together. Now if there is a manufacturing defect and the hash marks are off or wong on one or the other then that's just poor QA and a poor or a bad product but a MOA is a MOA is a MOA

That's true, but junking up a reticle on a hunting set-up or needing a big scope to do it also makes things more difficult than it needs to be. It really doesn't take a genius since it's just simple linear math once the bullet leaves the barrel.

Lots of good opinions in this thread. IMO with enough practice 500 and in, dial scopes, range finders and such are not necessary but sure do make things a lot easier. I also will not trust a scope for using in a dial application without running through a box test, have seen more than one fail in repeatable settings.

30+ years ago several of us would get together for a little Sunday afternoon shoot at a bean field. targets would be set at unknown distance to the shooters usually between 300 and 600 yards. Each shooter would put $5 in the hat and have one shot at their target, closest to the bull took the $. this was shot with our hunting rifles with no scope larger than 3X9 being owned by any of us and was great practice under some pressure.

mil/mil or moa/moa doesn't really matter just learn the equipment of preference and how to use it, along with your limitations with it. the only way is to get out there and practice.

Sounds like the perfect Sunday.

Dangint! I have not been on here in a couple of weeks and this post blew up. Had many more replies than I expected with some great info. Sorry I have not been following lately. Had a couple of family emergencies and been away from comp..
I guess I did not make clear on a few topics. When I was talking long range, I was talking 800 - 1000 yd+. I do not concider anything inside of 500 as being far. On the point of needing to take a Trig, and Geometry class, PLEASE NO MORE!. I have a BS in Math and Grad work in it as well. I WANT NO MORE MATH! If I cant figure it in my head or toes and fingers then I dont want to do it....
I have to agree with kmon1 on not making a difference on mil/mil or moa/moa. As long as you know the conversion at distances then it will only be up to what you have taught yourself to use.
I have noticed that the Nikon scope has light gathering of 95%+ as well as the ATACR from Nightforce as well as Zeiss. Like I was saying before, clear glass and light gathering is the biggest factor in my decision. Is one of these, or another you may point towards, a better fit?

There is no math to worry about, nor is there any conversions to worry about. Input BC, MV, bullet weight, and caliber. Tell the calculator to give you trajectory in Mils, and it will give you a chart with trajectory and wind drift. Done, dial what it calculated.

700 yards 4.6 Mil

Dial the elevation turret around to number 4, and add 6 more clicks, you now have a 700 yard zero. Wind will be .6 Mil per 5 mph, 90 degree wind. Hold into the wind a half a Mil ( the little hash mark halfway between the first Mil dot, line, triangle), and add 1/10 more as best you can estimate. Pretty easy really.


Of what you just listed I'd go with Nightforce. Nikon has no business in the same sentence as NF and Zeiss.

That is what I was thinking on the Nikon. I was told from a friend that their new scopes were great. I was almost afraid to throw that name in their, but figured someone would give their opinions on them. Honestly I am steering towards the ATACR so far. Should be a great low light, long range scope.

Nixon scopes will be lacking in elevation travel as would the low end Zeiss scopes. The NF you listed will have more than enough travel but it is a very large scope even when compared to their NXS lineup.

I know what your saying but those being in the same paragraph just struck me as funny...no math but you need a calculator

Ha! Never thought of it that way.

Yeah, the online calculators are a tool I wish I had 20 years ago. It can all be figured with a real calculator, but who wants to pack one hunting with them?

The figuring is done once, then you use the data that was given to you. Two hours ago I dialed up to 3.6 Mils (from memory) lined up on the 600 yard steel, fired, ping, impacted 2 tenths left of center. Held two tenths right of the previous shot and center punched it.

The only math I did was witness impact .2 Mil left of center, and held .2 more to the right.

My 15 yr. old daughter decided she wanted to try to shoot a milk jug at 400 yds. Made her longest shot this year hunting, 152 yard neck shot. This day we had a 15 - 18 mph crosswind. The gun is a basic Sendero in 300 RUM with the NXS 5.5-22X56 and an 8oz. Jewell trigger and FACTORY ammo. We set the jug out at 400 a couple at 300 and 1 at 200. She shot the 200 yd. jug, the 300 yd. jug dialing 1.5 moa elevation and 1 moa wind. No problems. She dialed 2.5 moa elevation for 400 yds. and 2 moa for wind and barely missed. Adjusted .5 moa more of wind and second shot at 400 barely missed dead center. All she knew to do was hit it with Range Finder, dial moa according to range card, hold steady and squeeze the shot slowly. She had been hunting for 5-6 yrs. and shoots trap so she does have a little experience shooting. The NXS works for me but am interested in trying the Vortex scopes with the zero stop to see how they compare for 1/2 the money.

awesome!