Rifle Scopes 1 Sweet scope for all, or 1 decent scope for each?

[firestorm1284]

Hey guys, I have an interesting question to ask. I have been watching the Magpul Dynamics videos on precision rifle shooting. The instructor suggested that instead of owning one decent scope for each rifle you own, buy one TOP quality scope in a high quality quick detach mount and use it on all of your rifles. The assumption is of course that you don't have the money to buy a top quality scope for EACH rifle you own.

This is certainly the case with me. I have 3 rifles I would consider precision rifles, and each of them is topped with a Bushnell Elite 6500 or 4200. I consider those to be pretty decent scopes, but of course there is a lot better. I have often thought about selling all of them and buying one awesome scope, but my question is this: How do you keep track of what the zero's for each rifle are? Does anyone else do this? Is it a good idea?

Input would be appreciated. Thanks!

 

[Hennig]

Re: 1 Sweet scope for all, or 1 decent scope for each?

I like the idea in theory, but I also like to be able to:

A. Just grab a rifle from the safe and go - no swapping or redialing zeros.
B. Often take mates to the range with me - so having 1 scope between multiple rifles doesnt really work there.
C. As dumb as it sounds, I like having a collection of "complete" rifles.

I just put a mid range scope on my favorite (Razor 5-20), and chucked PST's on the rest.

 

[VJJPunisher]

Re: 1 Sweet scope for all, or 1 decent scope for each?

Those silly little numbers on the knobs can come in handy if ever we invented some type of device that could scratch on a stone tablet

 

[firestorm1284]

Re: 1 Sweet scope for all, or 1 decent scope for each?

Thanks for the sarcasm VJJ - it is obvious that you would write down what the windage and elevation are for the zero on each gun. My question is more pertaining to how people like to keep track of it, and if they prefer to have one awesome scope to several medium quality scopes.

 

[Hennig]

Re: 1 Sweet scope for all, or 1 decent scope for each?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: VJJPunisher</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Those silly little numbers on the knobs can come in handy if ever we invented some type of device that could scratch on a stone tablet</div></div>

As above, I realize you can record zeros - Ive done the QD scope thing before

. I appreciate the sarcasm though

 

[sentry1]

Re: 1 Sweet scope for all, or 1 decent scope for each?

I watched that video, and got one of the Larue PSR scope mounts. BLEH. Hated it. The 20 MOA rail on my Remington 700 is not the same dimensions as the top rail on my AR15. So it's a pain to swap, because I have to get out the little f*%king wrench and make adjustments to the nut when I swap the scope over.

That's just a given with any mount, but after switching to an ADM mount, I can just use my fingernail to turn the screws 3/8s of a full turn, plus or minus, for swapping (that's what fits my rails). Much easier than with the Larue mount, assuming your various rails aren't all made to the same spec.

Also, I zeroed my scope for the bolt gun, and just made notes in my range notebook to keep track of the changes for my AR15. Time vs money, my time is cheap.

So in closing... great idea, but I preferred the ADM QD mount over the Larue.

 

[Captain Kirk]

Re: 1 Sweet scope for all, or 1 decent scope for each?

Get a good repeatable one piece ring setup (Badger, NF UniMount, Sphur, etc) and document each rifles zero. The Premier Heritage scope turrets are a snap to zero to multiple rifles and require no tools.

Kirk R

 

[tylerw02]

Re: 1 Sweet scope for all, or 1 decent scope for each?

I sold off a bunch of stuff I rarely used to buy my Bender. I ended up with about five rifles and one scope. It was a pain in the ass to constantly be changing them out. I also realized I had more rifles than I shot anyway, so I sold more rifles and bought a second scope. Now I have three precision rifles (and another on the way) and two scopes. I much prefer my current setups to what I had before. I have one rifle/scope/suppressor that stays pretty much as is and its my main rifle. I swap the other scope between the other rifles. I find that two rifles will cover most my shooting, no problems.

So I say sell them, and maybe sell the rifle you shoot the least. Put the best scope you can on the rifle you shoot most and save up for a copy of it for rifle number 2. You won't miss rifle number 3 in the end.

 

[CanPopper]

Re: 1 Sweet scope for all, or 1 decent scope for each?

My problem with the one scope idea is my different rifles works best with different kinds of scopes.

For example, my 6-24x72 Zeiss goes like peanut butter and jelly on my .300 Win Mag but it is completely inappropriate on my AR. For that one, I run a 1-10x24 March which is awesome; however, the March wouldn't go great on the Win Mag.

Then I got a DTA Covert coming. Both the March and Zeiss wouldn't be optimal for that one. The DTA would probably work best with the March F.

Also, what about my rimfires? A 72 Zeiss would be nuts. The March 1-10 could work but then the height of the rings would be all wrong since the AR works best with ultra high rings while the rimfires work best with low rings.

 

[firestorm1284]

Re: 1 Sweet scope for all, or 1 decent scope for each?

Thanks for the great input guys. I'm actually feeling pretty conflicted about this.

I completely agree with Sentry1 about the Larue mounts. I have owned them in the past, and didn't like them either. I wasn't using it for the application of moving one scope to different rifles, but simply to be able to detach a scope from one rifle. I found that the way the mount locks onto the rail damaged the underside of the picatinny rail after a few cycles attaching and detaching it. Maybe I had it too tight? Anyway, I found that the ADM was better in that respect also, the cams don't cam ON the rail, but on a separate piece of metal that is part of the mount. No damage to the rail.

Anyway, all of that aside - if I did get one "good" scope, I still wouldn't be able to afford a 3K Bender. If I sold my 3 Bushnell's I could probably come up with around $1300 or so. For that price, what would you guys recommend? I've heard a lot of good things about the SWFA 5-20, but I'd like to hear opinions/suggestions.

 

[BobD]

Re: 1 Sweet scope for all, or 1 decent scope for each?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: firestorm1284</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Thanks for the great input guys. I'm actually feeling pretty conflicted about this.

I completely agree with Sentry1 about the Larue mounts. I have owned them in the past, and didn't like them either. I wasn't using it for the application of moving one scope to different rifles, but simply to be able to detach a scope from one rifle. I found that the way the mount locks onto the rail damaged the underside of the picatinny rail after a few cycles attaching and detaching it. Maybe I had it too tight? Anyway, I found that the ADM was better in that respect also, the cams don't cam ON the rail, but on a separate piece of metal that is part of the mount. No damage to the rail.

Anyway, all of that aside - if I did get one "good" scope, I still wouldn't be able to afford a 3K Bender. If I sold my 3 Bushnell's I could probably come up with around $1300 or so. For that price, what would you guys recommend? I've heard a lot of good things about the SWFA 5-20, but I'd like to hear opinions/suggestions. </div></div>

If I were in your shoes debating parting with 3 good scopes...

I would make sure what I'm looking at not only does everything the current ones do (right magnification, size, reticle, illumination?) but offers something that all of the others are incapable of providing. I don't know exactly what your looking for in a new scope, but If you feel held back by their optical quality or tracking capability it's probably a great idea.

If I felt the scopes I was using were good enough and just wanted to go to another level, I would shoot for something much higher than what i was using, even if it meant saving a bit. Possibly something along the lines of a Vortex Razor, Swarovski etc... For me, to part with three scopes that seved purpose and worked well to be replaced by only one would have to be in a different league. The SWFA may fit that bill, I'm not familiar with it other than feedback on here. I'm sure it's a great scope, but personally I would have a hard time narrowing down to only one that suited me.

How far apart are the mounting height requirements between your rifles?

Good luck with your choices-

 

[turbo54]

Re: 1 Sweet scope for all, or 1 decent scope for each?

For casual shooting, this idea works fine.

For KD range use, it's fine.

For close(ish) range hunting out to say, 300-400 yards, it's fine.

For match shooting where you WILL get a chance to zero your rifle, it's fine.

It is NOT fine, however, if you need to count on connecting with a first round hit past 300-400 yards, where a couple tenths of an mrad make a difference.

 

[leadbullet]

Re: 1 Sweet scope for all, or 1 decent scope for each?

the one scope idea sounds like a PITA to me, a dedicated good scope per rifle per duty oriented makes much more sense.

 

[firestorm1284]

Re: 1 Sweet scope for all, or 1 decent scope for each?

I don't shoot competitions, but to be honest, it just sounds like a PITA all the way around. However, the instructor seems like an INCREDIBLY knowledgeable guy. I have always felt that the Bushnell Elite 4200 and 6500 scopes were great, but I have also owned a few Nightforce, USO, and Swarovski scopes (I never kept them, but got them in trade for a good price - turned around and sold them) and had a chance to look through them and get the feel for them. It is obvious that there is another notch of quality there. I can't even imagine the quality in the Bender, Premier, or other TOP of the line glass manufacturers since I've never even had the opportunity to fondle one. The question is whether it is worth all of this hassle...

 

[Downzero]

Re: 1 Sweet scope for all, or 1 decent scope for each?

It would never make sense to me to have one scope for everything because no two rifles really have the same use. I'm using the Bushnell Elite 6-24x50 FFP scope now, but ideally, I'd rather have a 4-16 on my .308 or even a 3-12 and have the higher power scope on a longer range, magnum rifle or something.

Now if I had a USO or something that offered 3-18, that's a pretty amazing range in that 3x is pretty fast for shooting closer and 18x is more than ample for long distances, but nothing I currently have with 3x on the bottom has 18x+ on the top.

I tend to think that the usefulness of a rifle is dependent on the bottom of the scope's magnification range, not the top, and so my carbine has 1-4, whereas the rifles I like to shoot at small things far away with have scopes that give up FOV for more power.

That said, if you wanted one that really did it all on precision rifles, it would have to be something that offered 2 or 3x on the bottom end.

Next year when I move out west and get more into precision shooting competitions, I may change my scope interest, but until then, it's hard to understand how a scope that would work on a .308 or .223 could be useful on a 7WSM, unless they're both being shot at similar distances, at which time I'd wonder why I have two rifles at all (and if I could afford two for the sake of having two, I'd buy a scope for the second as well).

Also, maybe it's just me, but if you can't afford the glass for the rifle, you probably really can't afford the rifle itself or ammo to feed it. I don't own very many guns that don't eat beyond their value in ammo nearly every single year. I have shot enough pistol ammo through a single pistol in a week to cover the entire cost of the pistol (and those are handloads, imagine what factory ammo would cost).

Even a $1000 rifle is going to eat $4-5k in ammo before it needs a rebarreling. Even if a good scope was $2k, it'd still be cheaper than the consumable portion of shooting (which scopes are not).