Rifle Scopes Optics choice for my situation

[Ranger413]

If you were me, what would you do?

Lets assume that you're using your SCAR 17 to shoot matches from 100-600 yards (all prone for now). You want to keep the rifle relatively lightweight so you've added a Harris Bipod (looking to get an Atlas in the future), you're not adding a rail extension, and no huge glass. You're selling off your SWFA 1-6x scope to help offset the cost of a new optic. You're considering a few different scopes and lets assume that price is not a factor between them. The scopes are as follows:

Nightforce NXS 2.5-10x32 (SFP) / Mil turrets with Mil-R reticle
Nightforce NXS 2.5-10x42 (SFP) / Mil turrets with Mil-R reticle
Leupold Mark 6 3-18x44 (FFP) / Mil turrents with TMR reticle

What I've considered the pos and cons of each:

2.5-10x32:

I like the compactness of this scope. Almost seems to be a natural fit on the SCAR 17 from the pics I've seen. I've read several reviews and they are overwhelmingly positive. There may be some dislikes about the smaller objective and less light transmission, but most reviewers said that the glass quality kinda made up for that. The reticle and 10x should be just fine for my needs. One con, I guess would be that the scope is SFP. Some have mentioned that up to 10x or so FFP is not necessary. Right now, we don't shoot unknow distance at our range so determining range with the reticle is not an issue. Plus, I've used a Leupold Mark 4 SFP scope during a class where we did range with the reticle and ranging at 10x only didn't seem like a handicap.

2.5-10x42:

This scope is almost as compact as the 32mm version but adds some features that would seem to benifit the match shooter. The parallax adjustment would be nice, but I feel I might be able to get by without it out to 600. The larger objective would allow more light transmission but since the scope has the parallax adjustment and that additional lens, maybe the 42mm and 32mm are pretty close in the brightness factor. I guess the only downside to this scope that I can see would be a little increased width due to the parallax adjustment and larger objective.

Mark 6 3-18x44:

The obvious pros of this scope are the higher magnification range and FFP. The extra 8x of magnification would be nice, but some reviewers have reported that the scope gets dim from 12x on. The FFP feature would be nice should we do any unknown distance shooting. That would open up the ability to range targets at any magnification range. I would imagine that the more you could zoom in the more accurate your measurements with the reticle would be. On the flip side, I see the negatives of this scope being the taller turrets, making the scope a bit bulkier, and the reticle. While the TMR reticle looks nice, it lacks any numbering like the Nightforce MIL-R.

 

[davebl]

2.5-10x32:

I like the compactness of this scope. Almost seems to be a natural fit on the SCAR 17 from the pics I've seen. I've read several reviews and they are overwhelmingly positive. There may be some dislikes about the smaller objective and less light transmission, but most reviewers said that the glass quality kinda made up for that. The reticle and 10x should be just fine for my needs. One con, I guess would be that the scope is SFP. Some have mentioned that up to 10x or so FFP is not necessary. Right now, we don't shoot unknow distance at our range so determining range with the reticle is not an issue. Plus, I've used a Leupold Mark 4 SFP scope during a class where we did range with the reticle and ranging at 10x only didn't seem like a handicap.

I own two of these: one on a mk12 with the velocity reticle (which works very, very well if you have a proven load and one on a JP LRP-07 308 with the MOAR reticle. I can't say enough good things about them, great glass, built right, lightweight. They are true performers in their class of scopes, what I consider to be a hunting or non bench rest application. I can hit paper targets accurately from 100 - 200 yards, 300 yards is too far for anything non-hunting (for me at least). I use these rifles primarily for hunting, so that field of view from at 2.5x and even at 10x is what I was after.

2.5-10x42:

This scope is almost as compact as the 32mm version but adds some features that would seem to benifit the match shooter. The parallax adjustment would be nice, but I feel I might be able to get by without it out to 600. The larger objective would allow more light transmission but since the scope has the parallax adjustment and that additional lens, maybe the 42mm and 32mm are pretty close in the brightness factor. I guess the only downside to this scope that I can see would be a little increased width due to the parallax adjustment and larger objective.

This was the optic I originally was going to put on my LRP-07 until I got a great deal on the 2.5 - 10 x 32 MOAR and honestly, the more I read about it, the more I didn't think the extra coin for those features such as a digilum and parallax adjustment were a deal breaker for my needs, although I would like to have the parallax adjustment for 500yd shots. I don't know if the larger objective allow much more light than the 32mm objective does.

I can't comment on the final scope, but I can add this:

I have a Vortex 6-24 HS that is FFP, and having the ranging feature at any magnification is wonderful, however it is very rare I can't use a range finder or am shooting at an unknown range. The problem is that if you're not using the FFP reticle to range frequently (read: practice), I don't know how quickly or easily you could just pick it up and make it work.

 

[samnev]

My choice would be the NF 2.5-10X42. Even thought it costs more than the X32 I feel the added features are worth it. I have a USO ST10 on my POF P-308 and the 10x for 600 yards (I only shoot 600 yards occasionally) is fine.