• Watch Out for Scammers!

    We've now added a color code for all accounts. Orange accounts are new members, Blue are full members, and Green are Supporters. If you get a message about a sale from an orange account, make sure you pay attention before sending any money!

Rifle Scopes Steiner M7Xi 4-28x56

I actually do have an ERATAC block mount on my Tikka along with the Steiner M7Xi.

ERATAC has a new bubble level out, I´m thorn which one I want to mount as well.

How do you like your version?

(y)
They have a new bubble level? I haven't seen it, do you have a link by chance? I like the integration of the ERA-TAC bubble level and ACI and how it doesn't take up anymore room on your scope than the ring itself, but I do wish it protruded a little more for easier visibility when mounted at the forward ring location, it can be blocked some by the parallax/illumination controls of some scopes. I also don't like that it cannot be adjusted slightly for the angle of the reticle - I'm one who prefers to mount my scopes based on my natural hold which is slightly canted, but this bubble won't allow for that; however, if you use a stock with an adjustable butt plate that can be canted you can correct for this with the adjustable butt plate and mounting your scope perpendicular to the action making this a moot point.
 
Now that the Spuhr 4002 arrived and I have mine mounted I think I'm seeing a little bit of tunneling as mag approaches 4x (5x and below, actually). Anyone else notice it...?
 
Now that the Spuhr 4002 arrived and I have mine mounted I think I'm seeing a little bit of tunneling as mag approaches 4x (5x and below, actually). Anyone else notice it...?

Ever so slightly on the very low end. But not enough where it actually tunnels bad like some other optics. Just ever so slightly.
 
The first time I picked up and looked through it I did not notice the tunneling. Upon further viewing I did notice a slight tunneling from 4x-5x like you mention. Not significant enough that it makes 4x feel completely useless like other optics though. The eyebox, FOV, and edge to edge clarity from the bottom end to the top end magnification are all quite impressive. I will definitely keep the slight tunneling at 4x for what this optic offers above that.
 
Thanks, guys... confirms what I thought I was seeing. Agreed its not much and only below 5x. With a 7x erector I figured some degree of optical compromise had to creep in somewhere.
 
If so I do think this scope isn´t meant to be used on 4x.

Just my 2 cents.
 
If so I do think this scope isn´t meant to be used on 4x.

Just my 2 cents.
Yeah... kinda my thoughts as well. This scope checks allot of boxes and I have no purchase regrets, particularly in light of what I paid, but I've always thought the manufacturers should just be honest when publishing specs. If its really a 5-27x (isn't that what a scope that starts at 4x but tunnels < 5x is...?) just say so. Can't speak for others, but I would still have purchased if listed as being 5-27.
 
How easy is the the zero setup? I ask cuz I’m looking for an easy zero reset scope to go on a switch barrel rifle, so simplistic reset to zero is important. Something like the TT would be perfect, but $4k for a scope isn’t in the cards right now. I was looking at a B25 or a Heritage. They have very simple zero reset.
I haven’t seen anything on the M7 yet.
Thoughts?
 
How easy is the the zero setup? I ask cuz I’m looking for an easy zero reset scope to go on a switch barrel rifle, so simplistic reset to zero is important. Something like the TT would be perfect, but $4k for a scope isn’t in the cards right now. I was looking at a B25 or a Heritage. They have very simple zero reset.
I haven’t seen anything on the M7 yet.
Thoughts?

The same as with the M5 series of Steiners. 2 setscrews and you rotate the turrets to zero (you don't want to lift them completely off).
 
Finally got some range time in today and zeroed the new M7 and got some actual trigger time on it. Glass is very good, resolution made spotting my own bullet holes very easy and the MSR2 is beautiful. Compared with a M5 and the turrets are a little more tactile as well. Overall a nice step up from the M5 scopes which have been a rock solid perfomer. Hard to beat this scope for the money.
 
I suspect the market that the M7Xi is geared toward is far more likely to use 28x than they are to use 4x. The slight amount of tunneling the M7Xi exhibits below 5x will rarely be noticed if at all in a practical scenario. I chose it with the intention of hard use on magnum rifles for ELR work. It definitely has not left me wanting anything else nor wishing anything was different about them. When I’m using any of my other variable power scopes that are 16x-27x on the top end, I find myself rarely going below 10x and never using minimum mag., except when comparing to other optics, storage, or hunting. With the M7Xi MSR2, I have noticed that I can use 6x-8x effectively where before, with my Razor 4.5-27 EBR-2c, I would need to use 10x-12x during the same situations. Edge to edge resolution and contrast with the M7Xi is absolutely brilliant from 5x-25x throughout the entire elevation adjustment range up to 27mrad. This was a real eye opener (no pun intended) because the same cannot be said about the Razor Gen II or many other scopes costing similarly in my experience. Regarding image quality at ELR with elevation at either end of its maximum mechanical limit, the M7Xi at 28x blows the Razor at 27x out of the water. This alone definitely puts the M7Xi in a different league and makes the price difference completely reasonable IMO.
 
I suspect the market that the M7Xi is geared toward is far more likely to use 28x than they are to use 4x. The slight amount of tunneling the M7Xi exhibits below 5x will rarely be noticed if at all in a practical scenario. I chose it with the intention of hard use on magnum rifles for ELR work. It definitely has not left me wanting anything else nor wishing anything was different about them. When I’m using any of my other variable power scopes that are 16x-27x on the top end, I find myself rarely going below 10x and never using minimum mag., except when comparing to other optics, storage, or hunting. With the M7Xi MSR2, I have noticed that I can use 6x-8x effectively where before, with my Razor 4.5-27 EBR-2c, I would need to use 10x-12x during the same situations. Edge to edge resolution and contrast with the M7Xi is absolutely brilliant from 5x-25x throughout the entire elevation adjustment range up to 27mrad. This was a real eye opener (no pun intended) because the same cannot be said about the Razor Gen II or many other scopes costing similarly in my experience. Regarding image quality at ELR with elevation at either end of its maximum mechanical limit, the M7Xi at 28x blows the Razor at 27x out of the water. This alone definitely puts the M7Xi in a different league and makes the price difference completely reasonable IMO.


Very Nice.
How would you say the resolution is at 28 compared to 25?
Does it drop off a bit so to speak?
Thanks.
 
I suspect the market that the M7Xi is geared toward is far more likely to use 28x than they are to use 4x. The slight amount of tunneling the M7Xi exhibits below 5x will rarely be noticed if at all in a practical scenario. I chose it with the intention of hard use on magnum rifles for ELR work. It definitely has not left me wanting anything else nor wishing anything was different about them. When I’m using any of my other variable power scopes that are 16x-27x on the top end, I find myself rarely going below 10x and never using minimum mag., except when comparing to other optics, storage, or hunting. With the M7Xi MSR2, I have noticed that I can use 6x-8x effectively where before, with my Razor 4.5-27 EBR-2c, I would need to use 10x-12x during the same situations. Edge to edge resolution and contrast with the M7Xi is absolutely brilliant from 5x-25x throughout the entire elevation adjustment range up to 27mrad. This was a real eye opener (no pun intended) because the same cannot be said about the Razor Gen II or many other scopes costing similarly in my experience. Regarding image quality at ELR with elevation at either end of its maximum mechanical limit, the M7Xi at 28x blows the Razor at 27x out of the water. This alone definitely puts the M7Xi in a different league and makes the price difference completely reasonable IMO.
The Gen II Razor has a very good track record so your comparison is encouraging. The new Burris XTR III scopes are almost out and what's interesting is that they use a 7x erector assembly but decided to limit the mag range to just 5.45x; however, Steiner is also using 7x but allowing the mag range to take full advantage. Two different design strategies and I'm not saying one is better than the other; however, I would be curious how the market would respond - is it better to allow the mag range to take full advantage of the erector with a degradation in IQ at the extremes (low and high end) sounds like the sweet spot for the M7Xi is the 5-25x range which is very competitive but also allows the user to drop to 4x or go up to 28x if they'd like/need to. Since these extremes are rarely used I think arguments could go either way, for me personally, it's nice to know I could "go there" if I needed to realizing that I will give up a little with regard to IQ, but I can see arguments going the other way as well, I would be curious if limiting the mag range will effectively help the DOF or other areas. I think Burris had some help with the XTR III and they definitely have a market they are aiming for with this one, as well as Steiner with the M7Xi. I'm in the middle of purchasing another home right now and once all the finances get back to normal, the M7Xi may be near the top of my list...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Greg0326
Why would there be a degradation in IQ?

Ilya
With almost any variable magnification optic you have a sweet spot and it tends to be the extremes that suffer, look at a lot of 70-200 f/2.8 lenses for DSLR's and you'll see that each lens has its strengths and weaknesses throughout the magnification range, some may show their strength in the middle, others towards the end and so forth but none of them truly shine at the extremes (with maybe the Nikon FL being an exception). In a similar fashion rifle scopes are also magnified optics that show their strengths in different areas. This is more apparent with higher magnification optics and is an area where the M7Xi has also been noted to struggle as compared to other scopes. Of scopes I've personally observed, the highest magnification optic I've used has been the March 3-24 series of scopes, at 3x the March showed pretty high field curvature (almost like a fisheye lens) which distorted the image and comes across as degraded IQ, likewise at the top end above 20x I also noticed the March also struggle a bit as compared to other scopes. This is what I'm referring to with regard to "degradation in IQ" in high magnification optics and my statement isn't necessarily meant to infer that you are going to get degraded IQ from a high magnification optic, but specifically with the M7Xi some owners have noted that other 5-25's have performed "better" above 20x than the Steiner does and I'm wondering how shooters will respond - will they be okay with a scope that has slighted degraded IQ as compared to other 5-25 designs in order to have the advantage of having 4x or 28x, etc. or will they respond by preferring a scope with less magnification but better IQ throughout the entire range.

I suppose in the end this is a futile argument because it is largely based on personal preference and perceived needs. If someone is absolutely obsessed with getting the utmost IQ out of a scope, then you'll probably gravitate toward a TT or ZP5 but if someone were more concerned about a higher magnification range they might lean toward the S&B 3-27 or Steiner M7Xi and similar. For me personally, as long as the degraded IQ wasn't bad (which is what it sounds like with the M7Xi) then I tend to lean towards more flexibility (e.g. higher magnification). When comparing the S&B Ultra Short 3-20 to the Kahles K318i the Schmidt did come up slightly less IQ at 18x vs. the Kahles in my testing, was it terrible - not by any means as it was still better than other short scopes I've compared; however, in the end it was the turrets that turned me off towards the S&B, had the Schmidt had better turrets I would have kept the Ultra Short and sold the Kahles, but instead I still have the Kahles until something better (better being a relative term for my personal needs with this particular scope). Right now I do not have a need for an Ultra Short so the M7Xi is sounding intriguing to me right now.
 
Got it.

This does not necessarily hold. Now, I have not yet seen M7Xi, so I can't comment on that. In the case of Burris XTR 3, the reason they did not use the entire range of the erector system is not the image quality, but rather available real estate. I fully expect that they will use make some other XTR 3 scope at some point that uses the entire range of the erector system (probably a lower magnification model).

The basic assumption you are making is that for a variable focal length system, the sweetspot is in the center of the range. That is often the case, but it does not have to be the case. It is really a matter of design philosophy. For example, S&B 5-25x56 is really well optimized at the top of the magnification range, so 25x is excellent. It is less well optimized toward the lower end of the magnification.

Steiner M-series scope I have seen in the past were really well optimized in the low and mid range of the magnification, but were a little worse at the top end.

ILya
 
Got it.

This does not necessarily hold. Now, I have not yet seen M7Xi, so I can't comment on that. In the case of Burris XTR 3, the reason they did not use the entire range of the erector system is not the image quality, but rather available real estate. I fully expect that they will use make some other XTR 3 scope at some point that uses the entire range of the erector system (probably a lower magnification model).

The basic assumption you are making is that for a variable focal length system, the sweetspot is in the center of the range. That is often the case, but it does not have to be the case. It is really a matter of design philosophy. For example, S&B 5-25x56 is really well optimized at the top of the magnification range, so 25x is excellent. It is less well optimized toward the lower end of the magnification.

Steiner M-series scope I have seen in the past were really well optimized in the low and mid range of the magnification, but were a little worse at the top end.

ILya
Thank you ILya, can you explain a little more by what you mean when you say "rather available real estate"? Are you inferring FOV? If so that makes sense but would love to see a video from you on the relationship between the erector and FOV at some point.

I didn't intend to infer the sweet spot is the center of the range, as I mentioned the Nikon FL actually has a sweet spot near the 200mm point rather than the 135mm point. I assume it would be based on design parameters and cost?

It sounds like the new M7Xi may follow with the previous design philosophy of the M series for Steiner as early reviews seem to indicate the M7Xi's weakness is at the higher end of the magnification range, but it does not sound like it is enough of a detriment to deter shooters from using that if they need it. Similar maybe to the Kahles K525i and some shooters mentioning they can see a falloff of IQ above 20x as compared to the Schmidt, ZP5 and some others, but again not enough that it's going to stop them from effectively using the optic.

I fear that the choices of superb optics have gotten us to a place where we are all experts at splitting hairs - meaning if brand X doesn't compare "as good as or better than" brand Y at this magnification or with this reticle or with that turret (you name it) then brand X is not worth the money. In the world of optics there will always be some compromise and there will always be arguments over which brand or model is the best or at least "better than" and we'll get responses that run the gamut of "best ever" to "worst ever" - all one needs to do is go over to dpreview or another photography site and look at the umptillion posts based on "which is better - Canon or Nikon". The fact of the matter is this, both Canon and Nikon make superb equipment that help professionals sell their work and we can argue nuances til the cows come home but at the end of the day, what we have on the market today (in the tier 1 or alpha class category) is truly superb and will be an asset to any shooter who's willing to spend the time to get to know the equipment.

Now, having said that, let's see if I can heed my own advise and stop splitting hairs between my next scope purchase o_O
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bravo6
Thank you ILya, can you explain a little more by what you mean when you say "rather available real estate"? Are you inferring FOV? If so that makes sense but would love to see a video from you on the relationship between the erector and FOV at some point.

I think I talked about that at some point. It is matter of maintaining erector travel and FOV without tunneling. I should make a couple of diagrams and put something together.

[QUOTE="wjm308]
I didn't intend to infer the sweet spot is the center of the range, as I mentioned the Nikon FL actually has a sweet spot near the 200mm point rather than the 135mm point. I assume it would be based on design parameters and cost?
[/QUOTE]

In this case, it is more design parameters than cost, but I could be wrong.

[QUOTE="wjm308]
Now, having said that, let's see if I can heed my own advise and stop splitting hairs between my next scope purchase o_O
[/QUOTE]

Not a chance.

ILya
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Glassaholic
Sold my pm2 3-20US and ordered a Steiner M7xi. I can get a pm2 3-27x56 used for the same price, am I going wrong with the M7 instead?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Can't speak to plusses/minuses of the Schmitt, so I'll comment on the M7Xi only: to my eye the Steiner is usable across the full mag range and appears to be really excellent between 5 - 25x. My only complaint thus far is the slight tunneling exhibited between 4-5x (emphasize: slight) which does not materially detract from my use.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bernt Lundby
Sold my pm2 3-20US and ordered a Steiner M7xi. I can get a pm2 3-27x56 used for the same price, am I going wrong with the M7 instead?
I have the M7xi since 6 month and I am very satisfied. I would buy it again. I also have a Kahles and S&B and the Steiner would be my first choice in regards of the mechanical and optic performance.
 
Does the M7xi have a second rev indicator?

The T5xi has the best second rev indicator in industry IMO. Followed by the M5xi.
 
Yes, it does, on top of the elevation knob.

It pops out on second rev.
 
I can get the k624i for 600$ and k5-25 for 300$ less than the m7ix4-28. Would you still prefer the M7?
 
Over the k624i, every day and twice on Sunday.

Between the M7 and k525, it’s a wash. Pick the reticle/ergos you prefer and shoot it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: alfmoonspace
Thank you ILya, can you explain a little more by what you mean when you say "rather available real estate"? Are you inferring FOV? If so that makes sense but would love to see a video from you on the relationship between the erector and FOV at some point.

I didn't intend to infer the sweet spot is the center of the range, as I mentioned the Nikon FL actually has a sweet spot near the 200mm point rather than the 135mm point. I assume it would be based on design parameters and cost?

It sounds like the new M7Xi may follow with the previous design philosophy of the M series for Steiner as early reviews seem to indicate the M7Xi's weakness is at the higher end of the magnification range, but it does not sound like it is enough of a detriment to deter shooters from using that if they need it. Similar maybe to the Kahles K525i and some shooters mentioning they can see a falloff of IQ above 20x as compared to the Schmidt, ZP5 and some others, but again not enough that it's going to stop them from effectively using the optic.

I fear that the choices of superb optics have gotten us to a place where we are all experts at splitting hairs - meaning if brand X doesn't compare "as good as or better than" brand Y at this magnification or with this reticle or with that turret (you name it) then brand X is not worth the money. In the world of optics there will always be some compromise and there will always be arguments over which brand or model is the best or at least "better than" and we'll get responses that run the gamut of "best ever" to "worst ever" - all one needs to do is go over to dpreview or another photography site and look at the umptillion posts based on "which is better - Canon or Nikon". The fact of the matter is this, both Canon and Nikon make superb equipment that help professionals sell their work and we can argue nuances til the cows come home but at the end of the day, what we have on the market today (in the tier 1 or alpha class category) is truly superb and will be an asset to any shooter who's willing to spend the time to get to know the equipment.

Now, having said that, let's see if I can heed my own advise and stop splitting hairs between my next scope purchase o_O

Haha well said. I’m in that debate right now.

Did you go with a m7x?
 
Very Nice.
How would you say the resolution is at 28 compared to 25?
Does it drop off a bit so to speak?
Thanks.

Take this for what it’s worth because they are just my personal observations/opinions. I am not an optical engineer nor am I an expert in optics. I do not have the resolution charts to test optics nor do I really care to use them. I’d rather take the optics out into practical scenarios and see how they perform. I feel that I have a good eye for noticing subtle differences while being extremely thorough and unbiased in my testing. Rifles and scopes are tools for me so I don’t have an emotional attachment to the money I spend on them. They get used hard and if they don’t live up to the calling, they get sent down the road or used for another purpose.

Unfortunately, the first few times I looked through the M7Xi were crudely executed. I began by free handing the scope while making the adjustments on a day with high mirage. Due to this, my initial impressions were that it lost more IQ than it actually does. The parallax was a little finicky when I was free handing the scope and this led to most of the IQ degradation I was seeing initially. A result of an unsteady sight picture. Since then, I have come up with a temporary solution for securing both M7Xi’s a little better until the mounts arrive.

After more time spent getting the diopter and parallax adjustment set properly while being more steady behind it, I’m not seeing the same drop off in IQ North of 22x that I had before. I see maybe a 5% degradation in edge to edge resolution going from 25x-28x but at this time of year in central Texas it could mostly be from mirage distortion the times I’ve been behind it. I’ll need more time with it mounted to confirm this. The M7Xi’s ability to handle mirage is excellent and the image does not get cloudy or darken at all (that I have noticed) as you approach max magnification like the Razor Gen II does between 20x-27x or how the M5Xi becomes slightly dark and hazy from 20x-25x. The more that I compare these M7Xi’s side by side against the other scopes I currently own or what I remember of the scopes I have used in the past, the more impressed I become.

Up until the M7Xi, the most impressive scope that I have ever spent time with is a S&B PMII 5-25 MSR several months ago. I was blown away by the optical performance to the point that I began to feel that maybe I had made a mistake by taking the plunge on the two M7Xi’s. After the first few moments with the M7Xi’s, I knew no mistakes were made and I wouldn’t be wanting a PMII anytime in the forseeable future.

For testing purposes, I bottomed out the erector. I cranked the elevation on each scope to the max allowed after setting zero as well as using 20x-Max magnification.

Location: Central Texas
Date/Time: 4/15/19 @ 16:50
Distance: 5,200 yards
Atmosphere: Sunny, 75°F, 60% RH, 1900ft elev., 16mph SE wind(right to left from my position), decent mirage present.

•M7Xi dialed to 27mrad
•M5Xi dialed to 23mrad
•Razor dialed to 24mrad

Edge- Edge Resolution as my eye sees it;

•M7Xi @ 28x = 15% > M5Xi @ 25x
•M7Xi @ 25x = 20% > M5Xi @ 25x
•M7Xi @ 20x = 20% > M5Xi @ 20x

•M7Xi @ 28x = 40% > Razor @ 27x
•M7Xi @ 20x = 30% > Razor @ 20x

* These values are subject to change as I spend more time with them.

I used man made structures, vehicles, and vegetation between 3,000-5,200 yards as the test bed for these scopes. I understand the majority of shooters will never venture out this far but I feel this distance significantly increases the chances of finding optical flaws without much time needed behind each scope. At a distance of 5,200 yards, parallax was easily removed from both M7Xi’s and the M5Xi. With the Razor Gen II, I could not remove parallax until below 19mrad @ 27x. The M7Xi’s ability to resolve fine detail from edge to edge at 5,200 yards is quite impressive next to the M5Xi and utterly staggering next to Razor Gen II.

When I have a rock house at 5,200 yards in the center, there is another house at the edge of the FOV at 5 o’clock. With the M7Xi at 28x and 27mrad, I can easily distinguish the sections of corrugated tin on the roof of this house. At 25X it’s only a touch better. With the M5Xi at 25x and 23mrad, I can barely tell the same roof is corrugated. It’s not as defined as the M7Xi until that particular house is moved a little closer to center of the M5Xi’s FOV. With the Razor at 27x and 24mrad, I could barely tell that it was even a house no matter where in the glass I put it.

The M7Xi does not lose much, if any optical quality at the extremes of erector travel while at max magnification that I can discern. This is the area in which I noticed the other scope’s IQ suffer next to the M7Xi. The M5Xi holds it’s own up to about 18x-20x but then falls behind the M7Xi quite a bit, but is still useable. The Razor does well as long as I don’t use more than 20mrad of dialed elevation above 22x. Once I’m above these adjustments, edge to edge clarity falls off to embarrassing levels compared to the M7Xi.

I’m sure people will disagree and that’s fine. For those that will say that you give up nothing going with a Razor 4.5-27 over something like the M7Xi, I say there’s a 100% chance they haven’t played with a scope like the M7Xi next to the Razor. The only thing I can see being given up would be the ability to lock the turrets and I’ve come to really appreciate the stiffer, non-locking turrets of the M7Xi- no slop. Hell, I used to think the same, that there was no reason to spend the extra money after looking through an M5Xi MSR years ago next to the Razor. The M5Xi looked only slightly better on 25x than the Razor did at 27x. I thought the price difference wasn’t worth it. The caveat with this is that I didn’t crank either erector to its limits at the time and compare so I didn’t realize difference in optical performance toward extremes of adjustments between the two designs. I need to add that the M5Xi 5-25 MSR2 that I have and used for this comparison must’ve been built by someone who really wanted to be at work assembling M5Xi’s that day. It is absolutely amazing compared to the older M5Xi that I looked through years ago. The only CA that I notice is when I get off axis more than what is naturally comfortable. Other than this, the IQ is extremely good and I would not hesitate to pick up another M5Xi over the Gen II Razor.

In conclusion, being able to make complete use of an optical system at either extreme end of erector travel while using max magnification definitely warrants the price difference in my eyes. I’ve learned that in a lot of instances, you get what you pay for and if you don’t apply adequate research beforehand, there’s a good chance you might get shit on. (It’s happened to me plenty of times in the past) Rifles and optics are investments as tools for me so if I find something that makes my job and life easier, I make the investment. If it turns out to not be what I need, I won’t try to make it work and I’ll pass it on to the next person who has use for it. The M7Xi has not disappointed to say the least.
 
Thanks Psychosniper.

Optical engineer you may not be but that was a comprehensive and well written review.
I had heard the glass was a step on the M5XI, seems Steiner has made a really nice scope.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bravo6
The M7Xi’s optical package is at minimum, a full step above the M5Xi. Steiner knocked it out of the park with this one. Not only is resolution excellent from edge to edge, contrast, color, and depth of field across the entire field of view are quite impressive aswell. The only time I’ve seen any CA is on an extremely bright, sunny day looking at extremely white targets or other bright white objects with dark backgrounds while my head is off axis more than what would ever feel natural. It is certainly not enough to be distracting. I think the only time I’d ever notice it is in an alternate position where I can’t get my head right and even then, it’s not M5Xi level CA.
 
The more I investigate the high end optics available, the more I like the M7xi. A few of my friends have Kahles 624 and 525, along with razor gen 2, and ATACR 5-25, so I'm thinking the M7xi would be a great optic to setup side by side comparisons of the others we have when we get out long range shooting. Anybody on here have any experience with the M7xi next to a zco5-27, NF ATACR 7-35, or TT 5-25?
 
The more I investigate the high end optics available, the more I like the M7xi. A few of my friends have Kahles 624 and 525, along with razor gen 2, and ATACR 5-25, so I'm thinking the M7xi would be a great optic to setup side by side comparisons of the others we have when we get out long range shooting. Anybody on here have any experience with the M7xi next to a zco5-27, NF ATACR 7-35, or TT 5-25?

Ive compared it with all but the ZCO. Mine was the MSR2. I truly loved everything about the optic but saw a lot of CA on bright targets. Lit up like a Kahles to my eyes. Some dont see it which is great but I did. Other than that it was dang impressive, every feature category was my favorite when compared to the TT and NF. The mag ring is the smoothest Ive felt on any scope super fine reticle, illumination was solid. IF it wasnt for my eyes seeing the CA Ild still own it but I think my eyes are just sensitive. (I also saw it on a 7-35 ATACR too). Overall great optic for the price point, FOV was excellent with 7x range.
 
I love the M7xi and when you put the MSR2 into it its a great scope that absolutely gets the job done.. In my opinion there is nothing wrong with the scope, BUT the TT has the best turrets and glass on the market.
 
I love the M7xi and when you put the MSR2 into it its a great scope that absolutely gets the job done.. In my opinion there is nothing wrong with the scope, BUT the TT has the best turrets and glass on the market.

And the best price.:oops:
 
...

Summarize:

Glass, colors, contrast, CA Minox
Eyebox Steiner
FOV Steiner
Elevation Turret Minox (my preference but the Steiner is really good with no complaints)
Windage Turret Steiner because it's the same as elevation. Minox feels different between the two.
Parallax adjustment Minox
Size Steiner
Illumination Tie
Reticles.. Both are great and completely different

The overall package of the Steiner is no slouch. Not at all. Hope to get to the range this weekend and get some trigger time behind them.

Glass, colors, contrast, CA Minox
Eyebox Steiner
FOV Steiner
Elevation Turret Steiner
Windage Turret Steiner
Parallax adjustment Steiner smoother but stiffer.
Size Steiner shorter
Illumination Tie
Reticles.. Both are great and completely different (MSR2 and MR4) but I really like the MSR2



I found out a con IN MY OPINION.

...

That hope didn´t work out.
The reticle is extremly thin, I would say you can aim with it around an 8x magnification, but the illumination doesn´t work as advertised.
...

Just the center illums up and can seem very dull until in low light/dark when you actually need it then less is def more. Bright lit up retc are not ideal for night precision work.


Overall a great scope cant wait to get some more time on it. Optically a small step under my Minox and S&B. Mechanically/feel more solid than any scope Ive ever owned...


Regards,
DT
 
Been shooting a little lately with my M7 vs some other optics and it holds its own VERY well. Plus with the MSR2 it is my favorite reticle to date that I've used.

Only downside to date is the CA on very white or bright images. It's not enough of an issue to stop me from getting another identical scope someday.
 
Mine is on order with the MSR 2 , really looking forward to it . Post your findings with it once you get it
 
Hey guys,

What do y'all know about compatibility with the Spuhr SP-4601......The turrets looks kinda fat and chunky on this bad boy and I wanna make sure they'll clear the rings before I purchase.....Thanks guys...
 
Hey guys,

What do y'all know about compatibility with the Spuhr SP-4601......The turrets looks kinda fat and chunky on this bad boy and I wanna make sure they'll clear the rings before I purchase.....Thanks guys...
Plenty of room. I included a picture from passion_for_rifles on Instagram also known as @viking78 On here.
 

Attachments

  • 8C08CD33-77EB-4FBA-B738-3801AF4DAA69.png
    8C08CD33-77EB-4FBA-B738-3801AF4DAA69.png
    4.7 MB · Views: 113
Hey guys,

What do y'all know about compatibility with the Spuhr SP-4601......The turrets looks kinda fat and chunky on this bad boy and I wanna make sure they'll clear the rings before I purchase.....Thanks guys...
Only thing I know of that will be an issue is the leveling wedge. If you decide to use it to level the M7, the wedge will need to be modified to clear the parallax knob and maybe the windage knob. Using the wedge to level mine in the SP-4302 I had to modify both ends to clear and sit flush with bottom of turret housing.
image.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: plong
I hang a rock from a rope at 100 yards to level my scopes. You can put a level somewhere flat on your rifle and then level the reticle.

Small levels are cheap at homes depot. Or anywhere else.
 
Only thing I know of that will be an issue is the leveling wedge. If you decide to use it to level the M7, the wedge will need to be modified to clear the parallax knob and maybe the windage knob. Using the wedge to level mine in the SP-4302 I had to modify both ends to clear and sit flush with bottom of turret housing.
View attachment 7382378
Yup... 2nd that, 😉. Your “modifications” look allot better than mine, though. Glad I have several extra Spuhr wedges laying around 😳
 
  • Like
Reactions: psychosniper