Rifle Scopes 10x42 or 20x42?

[jerrad]

Guys,
I'm looking at the SS and was wondering which one would fit my needs. I plan on shooting around 600 yards on a regular basis and up to 1000 yards on rare occasions. Which would you pick?
Thanks for the input.

 

[sobrbiker883]

Re: 10x42 or 20x42?

Neither, I recommend 16X42.

10 is a little low on power unless torso sized targets will be your usual, and 20X42 has a pretty unforgiving exit pupil (pickier on eyeball placement behind the scope).

 

[Michael]

Re: 10x42 or 20x42?

Wait about a month then look at the new HD model 10X. Doubtful you'd want to go with the 16x after seeing one.

 

[Ratbert]

Re: 10x42 or 20x42?

Definately the 10x42. Shoot on a warm day with the 20x42 and you're not going to be able to see shit through the mirage. 10x may not be the ideal for 1000yds, but it is definitely adequate.

A 1 MOA target @ 100 yds using a 10x looks to be the same size as a 1 MOA target @ 1000yds using a 10x scope (or a 1 MOA target @ 600yds using a 10x). It's the quality of a scope that makes the difference. A finely resolved small picture will do you a lot more good than a blurry picture twice the size.

Personally, I'd consider trying to find a 4-14 Falcon. You get the benefits of a bit more magnification (than the 10x), a variable objective, an enhanced Mil based reticle and matching Mil turrets all for about the same price as a super-chicken.

ETA: or the recommendation of the 16x (which appeared while I was typing this) if you're stuck on the super chicken.

 

[jerrad]

Re: 10x42 or 20x42?

Thanks for all the info guys.

I'm not set on a SS I just want to get the best for the buck and I have to spend less than $350.
Thanks again.
Jerrad

 

[sobrbiker883]

Re: 10x42 or 20x42?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Ratbert</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
A 1 MOA target @ 100 yds using a 10x looks to be the same size as a 1 MOA target @ 1000yds using a 10x scope </div></div>

Not to be contrary, but doesn't a 1moa target at 1000yds using a 10X scope appear the same as a 1moa target at 100yds using your naked eyeball??

I would have recommended a 4-14 Falcon, but I've not personally used one. I only recommend what I have used or owned. I've had a couple 16X and a few 10X Super Chickens. The 16X SS is only slightly bettered by my 16X Leupy MK4.......

 

[Ratbert]

Re: 10x42 or 20x42?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sobrbiker883</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Ratbert</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
A 1 MOA target @ 100 yds using a 10x looks to be the same size as a 1 MOA target @ 1000yds using a 10x scope </div></div>

Not to be contrary, but doesn't a 1moa target at 1000yds using a 10X scope appear the same as a 1moa target at 100yds using your naked eyeball??


</div></div>

Nope.

A 1 MOA target @ 1000yds is 10x farther away but it's also 10x bigger than a 1 MOA target @ 100yds. At any given fixed magnification, be it 1x, 10x, 20x, whatever,a 1 MOA target appears to be the same relative size regardless the distance. That's not to say it's as easy to see @ 1000yds because the light is diffused and interfered 10x as much but the relative SIZE of the target is the same. Think about how your reticle works... A Mil is a Mil is a Mil, at any distance. A 1 Mil target will fit between two dots @ 100yds and a 1 Mil target will fit between two dots @ 1000yds. Ergo, they are the same relative size and fill the same amount of FoV at the common magnification.

However a one INCH target @ 1000yds and 10x appears the same relative size as a one INCH target @ 100yds and the naked eye.

If the bloody thing just had mil turrets the 16x SS would be a very appealing low-cost option for me, even with the Falcon on the market. I've got several guns that are just for plinking at the range and don't justify budgeting a NXS or Heritage for, nor do I have any intention of trying to hit movers or anything like that which would make the variable more attractive. Maybe someday...

 

[TiroFijo]

Re: 10x42 or 20x42?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Michael</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Wait about a month then look at the new HD model 10X. Doubtful you'd want to go with the 16x after seeing one. </div></div>

Michael, please spill the beans

 

[Rancid Coolaid]

Re: 10x42 or 20x42?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Michael</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Wait about a month then look at the new HD model 10X. Doubtful you'd want to go with the 16x after seeing one. </div></div>

The 10X HD is a new scope coming out in July, it is not a re-tooled SS but a whole new scope, new mil-based turrets, much better glass, price will be $799.95.


If the 3-9SS is any indication, the 10xHD will be quite nice.

 

[Ratbert]

Re: 10x42 or 20x42?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Rancid Coolaid</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Michael</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Wait about a month then look at the new HD model 10X. Doubtful you'd want to go with the 16x after seeing one. </div></div>

The 10X HD is a new scope coming out in July, it is not a re-tooled SS but a whole new scope, new mil-based turrets, much better glass, price will be $799.95.


If the 3-9SS is any indication, the 10xHD will be quite nice.</div></div>

Did they improve the form-factor and/or feel of the turrets any?

 

[Rancid Coolaid]

Re: 10x42 or 20x42?

I hear the turrets on the new 10X HD will be new design, not old 10X turrets.


I can say the 3-9 turrets are not the old 10X turrets, they are new, they feel good to me (though I wasn't one to complain about the 10X turrets.) The new turrets have well defined clicks, audible and tactile, and the markings are quite clear.

And the reticle is mil, the turrets are mil, which is nice.

The 10X HD will also have mil turrets.

 

[RD3]

Re: 10x42 or 20x42?

I don't know about the new HD design, but I have a 16x that I'm more than happy with. It's clear and tracks very well too. Sometimes I wish I had gone with a 10x, but fear it wouldn't have been enough magnification for me.

 

[sobrbiker883]

Re: 10x42 or 20x42?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Ratbert</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sobrbiker883</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Ratbert</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
A 1 MOA target @ 100 yds using a 10x looks to be the same size as a 1 MOA target @ 1000yds using a 10x scope </div></div>

Not to be contrary, but doesn't a 1moa target at 1000yds using a 10X scope appear the same as a 1moa target at 100yds using your naked eyeball??


</div></div>

Nope.

A 1 MOA target @ 1000yds is 10x farther away but it's also 10x bigger than a 1 MOA target @ 100yds. At any given fixed magnification, be it 1x, 10x, 20x, whatever,a 1 MOA target appears to be the same relative size regardless the distance. </div></div>

And people have told me to never go full retard, but I still do every once in a while.
One moa is one moa and will appear one moa at whatever distance-you are correct. I wasn't thinking.
Your point about diffusion, etc being a bigger deal requiring better glass at long distance is spot on.

 

[Ratbert]

Re: 10x42 or 20x42?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sobrbiker883</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

And people have told me to never go full retard, but I still do every once in a while.


</div></div>

I know a brain fart when I smell one.

But it's best to make sure things are clarified for those still reading and learning.

 

[Urimaginaryfrnd]

Re: 10x42 or 20x42?

At less than $350 the choice between the different super sniper scopes is one where you really need to think about how you will use it. A 10x42 scope will have a 4.2mm exit eye pupil which is workable in lower ligh where 6x42 or 7mm exit eye pupil is considered BRIGHT. The 16x would have a 2.6 mm exit eye pupil and the 20x would have a 2.1 mm exit eye pupil. When you are talking seeing your target in lower light every little bit helps. With a variable you can dial down the power to brighten up the image with a fixed power you cant. The new Variable Super Sniper is a lot like my Leupold Mk4 FFP 3.5-10x40 but with better glass 1/10 mil clicks better marked knobs that feel better and work quite reliably. The Leu TMR reticle is preferable over a standard mil dot but for that matter IOR MP8 is a better design yet as is the GAP reticle on the U.S.Optics scopes. Bottom line --- with a $350 budget I'm thinking 10x SS what you get for that is one tough scope with adjustable parallax from 10 meters out and reliable tactical knobs. As fot the 10x HD it is going to have very limited availability as a one time production unless the military later orders another large quantity there will only be 200 total for the civilian market. As for the 20x I suspect it will fade away into history before long as the price is currently reduced. The variable is worth every cent three times over and likely destined to be quite popular in fact if anticipated military contracts come in civilian availability may take a while so if you want one dont delay.