Recommendations for around $12-1400

I recently purchased a new Fierce Rogue in 280ai. I plan on taking up to hunt in Colorado. Realistically we probably hike about 3 miles a hunt (morning and evening). 1/2 an ounce is not a huge concern as I am not carrying a 50lb sack on my back unless we tag out. The scopes I have be eyeing are the

Vortex RAZOR® HD LHT™ 4.5-22X50 FFP

Vortex VIPER® PST™ GEN II 5-25X50

Zeiss Conquest V4

FFP SFP is not huge for me as I can adapt. I do want MOA.

Thanks in advance

VX-5 3-15 or 4-20 would be on my short list.

I would not consider the Viper on your list. It falls well below the rest in image quality.

x2 on the VX-5 3-15 or 4-20 would be on my short list.

My first Leupold VX5 HD in 3-15 x 44 has been a fantastic hunting optic. 7 years of hard use, lots of dialing with flawless performance. I bought a second one 2 years ago, same results. Great clarity and really good in low light. I have one on a .308, the other on a 7mm Rem. Mag.

https://mavenbuilt.com/collections/riflescopes/products/rs1-2-2-5-15x44-ffp

Thank you for the replies thus far

Scopes are a tough selection, they all look good at the gun counter. I got lucky on the VX5 HD. I went on the lifetime of reliability I had from Leupold and the budget I had at the time I wanted to upgrade and the VX5HD was logical to me. I have not been disappointed at all. You can find one at the low end of your budget.

This or a trijicon

I may never need another scope but if I do, I'm going to see if I can do better than Leupold for the same $, starting with Trijicon.

its not hard. sorry Luppy and I cant seem to get along

@BOBO Maybe ya'll have dinner, talk it out?

Every luppy I buy fails. I about to send back the HD5 3-15 and then Im posting it for sale. Non US MFG’s are stomping Luppy on dependability. I dont expect them to win in Glass but they should in durability if Made in America

Trij cedo and tenmile are good scopes

I'll take my trijicon accupoint over my vx5hd.. I've had them side by side alot the past few months comparing optical clarity and prefer the trijicon accupoint for my eyes and hunting situations.

Go with Mil instead of MOA.

Primarily hunting, there's no good reason to go MOA. There's also not really a good reason to go SFP.

Lighter weight scopes, the Razor AMG was built for that, but it's not really the same type scope as what you're considering.

Burris XTR3 3.3-18 or 5.5-30 offer a ridiculously satisfying field of view experience, great reticles, great glass, and the smaller one is under 30 oz.

At my age, it would be very difficult for me to go MRADS as I've been MOA for a LONG time! And I don't remember things
like I used to. This is just my situation. Still going to JG's range and maybe he won't pull his hair out trying to get me on paper.

I used to say the same thing. I just couldn't wrap my head around it on paper. After a few minutes behind a MIL scope, the light bulb went on. I'm converted to FFP MIL. It's easy once you see it.

Personally I don't think you need more magnification than say 14 or so power on the upper end.
Seen way too many folks try to pick out an animal with their scope cranked up to far and not have a good field of view.
However, if it is your LR rifle for shoots etc then I get the upper end on magnification. I just don't think it is needed for hunting.

I carry around a 4-32X

It's set on 4X. Get my eye looking through the scope and turn it up until I'm happy with the image.

Better to have magnification and not need it, than to need it and not have it.

Find the biggest trijicon you can afford.... I wouldn't trade my 5-25 accupoint for anything around it in price,

Whether FFP or SFP, I'd take a look at Tract Optics.

Tract sells direct like Maven does---no middle man, and their products are superb. You get a lot for your money...excellent tracking and zero retention and outstanding glass. Their reticle options are a little more on the limited side, but I think they're pretty sensible, at least for the SFP crowd. I personally do not like FFP because the reticle can be either too small at minimum magnification or it can occlude too much at max magnification and I do not ever feel compelled to shoot at distances that would make FFP useful, so I can't really state an opinion on Tract's FFP reticle selection...but if you look at their site you may see a reticle that appeals to you. What I can positively say is that Tract gives you a lot for your money and offers a fairly wide selection. Customer service is outstanding as well...if you call them, it's not uncommon to end up speaking with one of the head honchos and they WILL take care of you.

I own two Tract scopes and I love everything about them (except I opted for a BDC type reticle on one of them and really don't care for it all that much and I'd choose the other option if I had it to do all over again, so that's my own fault).

Thanks everyone…made the decision to go with the mark V

I have these two which I like. One is more expensive than what you want to pay the other is way lower.

https://cameralandny.com/shop/brand...0137-06c2-00163e90e196?variation=1923279

https://cameralandny.com/shop/brand...0139-5b74-00163ecd2826?variation=3072532

I have the MIL version of the Sightron

“Primarily hunting, there's no good reason to go MOA. There's also not really a good reason to go SFP. “

Absolutely!…..Precision and ability to see the reticle have no place in hunting!

Of the choices you mentioned, I would vote the Ziess Conquest. We have one in 4.5-14x on my wife's 270. We've probably only shot about 125rds, both shooting and hunting, and have no issues.

However, beyond those choices I too an very much a Trijicon fanboy. I kinda really love my 2.5-10x trijicon scope.

I've shot SFP and FFP for years in both hunting and long range. Gave up SFP as the odds the subtensions are incorrect is infinitely higher than any minute difference in reticle visibility, especially if you buy a scope with good illumination.

What about MOA is more precise? If you're implying that the less than 1/8" difference in ability to exactly zero is relevant in a hunting scenario, then I just have to say thanks for the laugh. That's, as a said, not a valid reason to choose MOA over Mils. Outside of F-class shooters, I'd be willing to welcome anyone who normally shoots an MOA scope over to my house and we will precision shoot at any distance you want with my CTR/mils scope against your MOA rig and see how much more precise you are. Loser buys the beers

Several people on here have expressed difficulty in seeing FFP reticles at lower magnification. As for precision, you are correct that it makes no difference to most outside of the bench world, but why say “no good reason to go MOA”?…that would make even LESS good reason to go MILS. MOA and MIL scopes are equally appropriate in the hunting world.

That's 100% true if you take 75 yard shots to a feeder.

I explained this in person to a buddy the other day. He was dead set on MOA for his first long range scope for the precision reason you mentioned. I asked him to show me his most recent group and then explained how irrelevant that difference was. By the time the explanation was over, he realized the ease in quickly calculating wind hold changes for a .6 mil wind hold versus the difficulty with a 2.25 MOA wind hold if your wind value suddenly goes to 1.5 or 1.75 or .75. I don't doubt that you can make hits with MOA, but there are zero situations where it's superior to mils in the hunting world. There are lots of scenarios where mils is superior. This isn't even opinion - it's just math.

he already bought his scope fellas

Understand. I'm just trying to clarify inaccuracies in case a new shooter reads this thread down the road.

Hmmmm….wind holds. As long as both have MOA or MIL reticles there is little to no difference other than guessing between, 0 and 1 MIL vs 2 and 3 MOA. As far as precision is concerned, the shooter and/or gun may not be able to take advantage but it is still a fact that MOA is more precise. Your statement that there is no reason to go with MOA in a hunting situation is blatantly false.

All the 100y wind holders

FFP is the dumbest hunting idea for anyone over the age of 45. (see how stupid and biased that sounds?) You're stating a whole lot of opinions that are not just math facts as you indicate.

Here is a 100% fact...I cannot see a 5 times or 6 times FFP crosshair on low powers in low light. So again, tell me how great an FFP scope is if I cannot see the reticle?

A unit of wind measurement is a unit of wind measurement it doesn't matter if it's MOA or MIL, it's just a unit of measurement and you need to know it. I'd venture to say most hunting guys have either rarely held wind or never held wind. (read that again, it's an important fact of this audience) You're using an argument that for 95% (probably being generous giving 5% for this board) of this audience it's not applicable too. Thinking back, I've held wind one time and should've held it another in a hunting scenario...truth is I missed neither but it wasn't where I wanted to hit them.

I've used this example thousands of times...guide or buddy standing/sitting next to you....you shoot over the back or to the right of an animal, how will 99% of people communicate the unit of measurement? 'nuff said...I can convert their until of measurement much faster on an moa scope that I can any mil. If the guys I hunt with talked mils versus the American unit of measurement, I'd have a SFP mil scope to hunt with. The folks I hunt with, do not talk mils. Now, you put me in a operator world...I'll have a mil FFP scope but for none of the reasons you state. It's what they talk and use...matter of fact, I own one...it's not on a hunting rig.

A fact that really is just math...a .1 mil is .33" a 1/4 moa is .25" so a MOA scopes adjustments are more precise.

I try to stay out of the richard measuring stuff but in the spirit of clearing up inaccuracies in the case a new shooter reads this In short, they both have their place and one can be superior for different applications...but it's not a cut and dry answer and it appears the market's opinion agrees...otherwise, we'd just have one option.

6.5 Creedmoor 5 mph, 3 or 9 o'clock to the shot

MOA
200 yards, 1/2
300 yards, 3/4
400 yards, 1
500 yards, 1 1/4
600 yards, 1 1/2

Mil
200 yards .1
300 yards .2
400 yards .3
500 yards .4
600 yards .5

Now is a 2-3 mph wind, mutiply your values by .5

Now it's a 7-8 mph wind, mutiply your values by 1.5

Now it's a 10 mph wind, mutiply your values by 2

Now it's a 12-13 mph wind, mutiply your values by 2.5

Which one is easier to remember and mutiply by?

15 inches to the left

Both are easy, this is grade school 101, do it in your head, math.

6 CM, 105 Match Burner, 3000fps, 5 mph full value wind. MOA

100 - .3
200 - .6
300 - .9
400 - 1.2

At 400 yards…..full value wind

4 mph - 1.0
8 mph - 2.0
12 mph - 3.0
16 mph- 4.0

MILS or MOA, find the right wind, yardage, speed combination and you can come up with easy to remember numbers. Unfortunately Mother Nature rarely has the same idea.

Best post ever!

NX8 2.5 x 20 Nightforce.

It is over your budget but it would be a perfect optic for such a nice rifle.

I definitely wouldnt put a vortex on a very nice custom rifle like yours.

Just my 2 cents