i have an ar15 spr with a 16" barrel in .223/5.56 that i am building. i am driving myself crazy deciding on an optic zoom range for this rifle. i have decided for sure i want the vortex pst ffp. and i have narrowed it down to the 2.5-10x32 or the 4-16x50 ffp models. i can get the 4-16 now. i am on a waiting list for the 2.5-10 (i dont mind waiting). this gun will be used for bench shooting and varmints from 0 yards to as far as my gun will let me shoot. just a do everything rifle. please give me some insight. i am going bat shit crazy trying to decide what zoom range is appropriate.
Rifle Scopes i am driving myself crazy
- Thread starter Rockhopper
- Start date
I tend to lean towards lower mag range for ARs. If you think you might be shooting up close very often, the fov difference from 2.5x to 4x is helpful. If shooting steel, 10x is enough for the supersonic range of .556, IMO. If shooting for groups on paper over 300 yards or at small varmints, the 16x will be a noticeable help, but of course with a smaller fov. The PSTs are good scopes, with the 2.5-10x32 seeming like the gem of the bunch optically. I like the 32mm objective form factor for ARs a lot. I'm running the discontinued Viper 2-7x32 on one of my spr's and love the compactness and I shoot fine with both eyes open with the 2x. Don't know if I helped anything on the decision, either would be great... Just a question of if you'll be spending more time at longer ranges or shorter. 2.5-10x does both pretty well in my book.
Last edited:
I have a 4-14 scope (not vortex) that I shoot on my 16in AR. I end up shooting mostly at 10x -12x due to optical quality and mirage, and I don't feel limited at all. I've shot out to 670yds on 10x ('bout a 12in target) and it worked great.
Personally I wouldn't do 4-16 unless I was using a longer bbl shooting the heavier bullets at longer ranges. I would, however, really enjoy a lower low end mag. My vote is the 2.5-10.
Plus, it's lighter, and you don't have a massive scope on your handy AR.
Personally I wouldn't do 4-16 unless I was using a longer bbl shooting the heavier bullets at longer ranges. I would, however, really enjoy a lower low end mag. My vote is the 2.5-10.
Plus, it's lighter, and you don't have a massive scope on your handy AR.
for bench shooting and varmints, a little extra magnification doesn't hurt, I'd probably opt for the 4-16 given the criteria, if I was packing the rifle, or wanted more general purpose, 2.5-10, but for shooting off the bench and small targets, why not have a little extra magnification
I've wished for less magnification more often than I've wished for more magnification. I have a Vortex Viper PST 2.5-10x32 FFP, and I'm pretty excited about it.
Mark H,
Mark H,
thanks guys that insight actually helps alot! couple of points were made that i did not even think about.
ffp and illumination in that extra cost.
only you can answer if ffp is right for you or not. depends solely on your needs and use of scope. are you hunting? bench shooting? needing to range? dial to make corrections?
Definitely the PST 2.5-10X and spring for the extra $250 for FFP and illumination, so you'll never wanting.
I'm hunting pigs and small game at fairly close range. But will have plenty of opportunity to reach out past 300 yards. And I have "over 40 eyes" so I'll gladly take a little extra mag.
Still having a hard time justifying the extra $$ for FFP. ESpecially for 300 BLK
Still having a hard time justifying the extra $$ for FFP. ESpecially for 300 BLK
Yes. There is enough adjustment for it to be visible in daylight, but I can't personally see the need.
That is exactly the way I feel.
