I have built a savage bolt action in .308 win that I will strickly use for recreational target shooting. I will not use this rifle for hunting as I have others for that purpose. I would like to use this rifle for 500 yards plus. I had an swfa 5-20x50 on this rig but being ffp, the reticle grows too large for target work at higher powers. I like the fact that with ffp you can "correct" your shots by measuring at any power, but how useful is that really for targets? Would I be better off with a simple cross hair or dot reticle and just dial the shots? I looked through a sightron siii 8-32x56 yesterday and was quite impressed the glass at all powers. It had the fine cross hair with 1/8 dot. Im thinking I would need the dot as my eyes aren't what they used to be (38years). Im on the fence with the sightron moa2 reticle because the hashes are spaced 2 moa apart. I can live with using the retical at 24x only to measure, I just wish they were closer together at 1 moa. I do like the glass quality for $1000. Will the siiI 8-32x56 with 1/8 dot work for my purpose, or are there better options? Im not opposed to a fixed power, just feel like a variable is a lot more useful. Please help!
-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Rifle Scopes scope recommendation for target shooting
- Thread starter jdpenterprises
- Start date
I have a Sightron 6x24x50 moa on a Rem 700 custom 6.5 cm. I'm shooting paper targets for score at known distances 100-600 so far. I leave it on 24x and works well. I dial for elevation and usually hold for wind from ~400 or less. The 6x24 has 100 minutes of travel and the clicks are .25. The 8x32x56 has 70 minutes and depending on which dot (the target dot is 1/8 minute with 1/8 clicks, the other one is .25). You're going to need a 20moa base to increase distances beyond ? using the 8x32x56 due to less travel adjustment. I prefer the moa reticle. But pick what works for you. Sightron's are good sfp scopes.
The Sightron SIIIs are excellent in thier price range and very tough to beat. For a little more, I'd consider the Nightforce BR models for a target gun:
8-32X56 Precision Benchrest | Nightforce Optics, Inc.
That would be my pick
8-32X56 Precision Benchrest | Nightforce Optics, Inc.
That would be my pick
Im pretty sure i will be shooting known distances. It usually goes like "hey lets set up some targets at 500 yards today". It will be informal shooting on private land. One place can be set up for 1000 yards easily (not that a 308 would be ideal). This is why I think spf would be best.
Lawman: Do you find that 24x is enough power? I have read that 10x is enough for 1000 yards. That's just not the case for me, even though ill never shoot 1000 with a 308. I would like to have more optics power than that. I like to shoot no further than 300-400 yards with 10x. I have also wondered about the turret click value and was leaning toward 1/8 for longer target work, but I need to pick the reticle first then see what is available for turrets. Too bad sightron doesnt have mil reticles, as I am starting to prefer them over moa. I do have a 20 moa base installed. Im not opposed to the 6-24 especially since the moa reticle is set for 24x. Im guessing the exit pupil is better on the 6-24, it is pretty poor on the 8-32. I just felt like for the price difference why not go higher power.
Crosshair: I have considered the nightforce. How does the benchrest glass compare to the nxs? My buddy has the NXS 3-15? on a 338 lapua, and although it is a badass scope, Im not sure the glass is as good as my swfa 5-20. I read that sightron glass is very good for the money and am thinking i would rather have quality glass over features I probably wouldnt use. In this case simpler would be better maybe?
Thanks.
Lawman: Do you find that 24x is enough power? I have read that 10x is enough for 1000 yards. That's just not the case for me, even though ill never shoot 1000 with a 308. I would like to have more optics power than that. I like to shoot no further than 300-400 yards with 10x. I have also wondered about the turret click value and was leaning toward 1/8 for longer target work, but I need to pick the reticle first then see what is available for turrets. Too bad sightron doesnt have mil reticles, as I am starting to prefer them over moa. I do have a 20 moa base installed. Im not opposed to the 6-24 especially since the moa reticle is set for 24x. Im guessing the exit pupil is better on the 6-24, it is pretty poor on the 8-32. I just felt like for the price difference why not go higher power.
Crosshair: I have considered the nightforce. How does the benchrest glass compare to the nxs? My buddy has the NXS 3-15? on a 338 lapua, and although it is a badass scope, Im not sure the glass is as good as my swfa 5-20. I read that sightron glass is very good for the money and am thinking i would rather have quality glass over features I probably wouldnt use. In this case simpler would be better maybe?
Thanks.
jd,
The 24x has been plenty for me. I'm usually shooting off a bench with a front rest and bag and use 24x from 100 yards on out. I have not shot past 600 so can't say whether I'd like more power than that at 1000. You will read on some posts for the guys that are shooting bench rest or fclass at longer distances they recommend in some cases more power and the 1/8 clicks for fine tuning (For the tactical group shooting steel that appears not to be the case-totally different competition, with different criteria and demands for a scope). The difference at a thousand would be 1/8 click is 1.25 inches and 1/4 click would be 2.5 inches. At 500 it would be .625 vs 1.25; the question is are you and your gun going to be able to perform good enough that it makes a difference? For some the answer is yes, for others it's no. Here's an example I shoot a 10 shot group at 1000 yards the center of it that appears to be 1.25 inches high, with 1/8 click the center now will be the center of the target, with a 1/4 click I'm now 1.25 inches low; am I that good??? Nope.
The 24x has been plenty for me. I'm usually shooting off a bench with a front rest and bag and use 24x from 100 yards on out. I have not shot past 600 so can't say whether I'd like more power than that at 1000. You will read on some posts for the guys that are shooting bench rest or fclass at longer distances they recommend in some cases more power and the 1/8 clicks for fine tuning (For the tactical group shooting steel that appears not to be the case-totally different competition, with different criteria and demands for a scope). The difference at a thousand would be 1/8 click is 1.25 inches and 1/4 click would be 2.5 inches. At 500 it would be .625 vs 1.25; the question is are you and your gun going to be able to perform good enough that it makes a difference? For some the answer is yes, for others it's no. Here's an example I shoot a 10 shot group at 1000 yards the center of it that appears to be 1.25 inches high, with 1/8 click the center now will be the center of the target, with a 1/4 click I'm now 1.25 inches low; am I that good??? Nope.
Thanks lawman for the perspective. I probably not good enough to realize the difference. Unless the nf is $300 better, ill probably get an siii if there are no better options near the $1000 mark. I have no doubt that nf makes great scopes, im not sure my gun or cal. Justifies one. Being a savage, I can easily change barrel down the road to something like a 260. This may be a good reason to go with the 8-32x56 and think the moa-2 may be my best choice. Ill swing back by swfa's store and take a look at one with the moa-2 reticle. Next upgrade needs to be a trigger. Thanks again all.
So far I have never had an optic that I really needed anything past 10x. I also hunt with my rifles and like the wider field of view for watching yotes coming in. I would say something in the 15x would do really well for what your looking for. Try the new SWFA 3-15x.
I have a straight 24x Leupold on a woodchuck rifle and sometimes I think its way overpowered... I'm shooting 300 yds and in...
I agree, Sightron makes a great scope for target shooting and has a great periphial FOV too. Very sharp image.
