Rifle Scopes Top tier scope recommendation

Honest question because I have almost zero experience even eyeballing them, let alone shooting with them, but has ZCO finally surpassed TT for top dog Alpha scope?

I have a couple S&B scopes and LOVE them, as well as a couple mid-tier Nightforce, one Swarovski and one Zeiss scope, plus quite a few Leupolds for comparison, but finally looking for new glass for my 280AI. I’m leaning towards another S&B (probably a 6-36), but wondering about current thoughts on the latest offerings from ZCO and TT.
small world, I'm thinking about a scope for my 280AI this season myself. what load are you shooting? mine likes the factory 160 gr nosler partitions, but i might work up a load with the Barnes TTSX, i keep hearing the 140 gr is the sweet spot for the 280ai. I'm still on the fence about the scope I want to put on there. I'm hunting big whitetail and hopefully elk in the near future. I'm looking at more of a mid range scope, my shots are 200-600 yards, and low light is always a factor. I'll post a couple i've been thinking about below. As for Schmidt and Bender, I have a 1.5-8x42 on my 30.06 browning blr, and I like it, schmidt has some awesome glass, but things are kind of in flux for them right now from my perspective, so personally i'm going to wait and see what happens before i invest in another schmidt. to my eye, i like the zco better than the TT, but different strokes.



in no real order, I like to shoot moa scopes when i'm hunting and mil if i'm taking a class or if i get lucky and am able to shoot a match, I can use either system well enough to speak to it.


https://cstactical.com/swarovski-z8i-3-5-28x50-4w-i-68406/

I have a 3-18x50 z6i on my 300 win mag, and I feel it's a great all around rifle/scope, sure 300 wm is large for some applications, but I've become very proficient with it, and I have a custom ballistic turret so it's a no brainer when it comes to distance shots. I like the reticle, I had a tiny bit of input when it was being developed, and it matches the custom ballistic turret. I feel this is the next iteration of that scope, the weight is good and it has enough adjustment to do what i need to with it. only drawback is it's second focal, but I personally don't mind it for hunting applications. it's got a 30mm tube and is one of the lighter scopes of the one's I'm thinking about, which could become a larger factor to consider if I start hunting in tougher terrain and in mountains.


Optically this scope is top tier and i like everything about it. playing with one in low light I was very impressed. the 36mm tube is a little large, but the optical performance alone makes this a big contender for me. close range I feel you could get on target and i felt I could do well if i had to make a quick shot with the scope on low magnification. I like the way the turrets felt, the parallax, and viewing at distance was a no brainer


I shot an nxs 5.5-22x56 moar for a long time, really enjoyed it, shot it a lot and killed a few deer with it. this is a step way up from that scope, and gives better performance on the low end in case there is a close shot and better optical performance. I've always been impressed with these scopes, ever since I saw the first one years ago. could get a custom turret for it, I'm familiar and comfortable with these scopes, and I like the reticle having used it a good bit already.


I'm trying to get my hands on one of these, I had an older victory diavari 3-12x56 on a rifle I sold a few years ago out of necessity and I really like it, i'd be interested to see one of these new scopes in action and looking at specifications alone, seems like it could be a really interesting option.


for my purposes, i also looked at the lht https://cstactical.com/vortex-razor-lht-4-5-22x50-ffp-xlr-2-moa-rzr-42201/ I've got several buddies and customer's using the lht scopes, and I have one on a 270, I've been very pleased with mine. haven't killed anything with it yet, but that's my fault, not the rifles.
 
Discourse about scopes is polluted by people seeking confirmation on their $5k+ purchases. A lot of petty and asinine comments when it comes to this subject.

Also, $5k+ for a scope these days is crazy. Law of diminishing returns is incredibly applicable here.
Yep.
They all think a 6000 scope is a requirement. I mean true, 6000 scopes have incredible pictures, but they break too. Not as often but they do. What people confuse is whether or not they're a requirement in doing what they do. The answer is obviously not, or there wouldnt be people out there making 1300 meter shots with lower end scopes, or winning PRS matches with something other than a zco or tangent.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kthomas
Yep.
They all think a 6000 scope is a requirement. I mean true, 6000 scopes have incredible pictures, but they break too. Not as often but they do. What people confuse is whether or not they're a requirement in doing what they do. The answer is obviously not, or there wouldnt be people out there making 1300 meter shots with lower end scopes, or winning PRS matches with something other than a zco or tangent.
There is a point of diminishing returns, but you pay for the additional performance at the margins. In my experience people aren't spending that kind of money for ego, generally if you are going to that level of optics, there is a very specific reason for it and it wasn't met until the end user got to that level. years ago scopes with a consistent zero stop started at 2k, so to get that you had to invest at least that much. things have certainly changed and move forward for the better.

all that said, you'll only know what you need or best suits your application and your eyes by getting behind the optic. I've always said different eyes see and perceive things differently.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Basic user
There is a point of diminishing returns, but you pay for the additional performance at the margins. In my experience people aren't spending that kind of money for ego, generally if you are going to that level of optics, there is a very specific reason for it and it wasn't met until the end user got to that level. years ago scopes with a consistent zero stop started at 2k, so to get that you had to invest at least that much. things have certainly changed and move forward for the better.

all that said, you'll only know what you need or best suits your application and your eyes by getting behind the optic. I've always said different eyes see and perceive things differently.
Yea, you do have to get behind the optic and glass field to make a good judge if it suits your needs. ALTHOUGH, (of course each person's experiences very) I find most people with 6000 dollar scopes dont really need them. They buy them because they can. No different than all the ferrari and vette drivers on my local cruise strip. NONE of them race. Defeating the ENTIRE POINT of spending all that money for horsepower they'll never use. 98% of difficult shots in competitions can be made with a 2500 dollar scope. That extra 2500 dollars is for nothing but that last little shot that's super hard to see due to resolution in the mirage or limited light conditions. That's fine; if you have the money ya mind as well spend it on something fun lol.
 
Honest question because I have almost zero experience even eyeballing them, let alone shooting with them, but has ZCO finally surpassed TT for top dog Alpha scope?

I have a couple S&B scopes and LOVE them, as well as a couple mid-tier Nightforce, one Swarovski and one Zeiss scope, plus quite a few Leupolds for comparison, but finally looking for new glass for my 280AI. I’m leaning towards another S&B (probably a 6-36), but wondering about current thoughts on the latest offerings from ZCO and TT.
You're going to get many different answers to that question. Ultimately they are so close that really it comes down to the individuals eyes and what features guys prioritize. For me my eyes prefer the colors /coatings on the tt more but the zco aren't holding anything back, just personal preference. Alot of guys the two are splitting hairs but zco being cheaper, especially on the used market, you're seeing more guys lean that way....doesn't hurt that they have better reticles (had to throw in a bit of personal bias 😂)
 

small world, I'm thinking about a scope for my 280AI this season myself. what load are you shooting? mine likes the factory 160 gr nosler partitions, but i might work up a load with the Barnes TTSX, i keep hearing the 140 gr is the sweet spot for the 280ai. I'm still on the fence about the scope I want to put on there. I'm hunting big whitetail and hopefully elk in the near future. I'm looking at more of a mid range scope, my shots are 200-600 yards, and low light is always a factor. I'll post a couple i've been thinking about below. As for Schmidt and Bender, I have a 1.5-8x42 on my 30.06 browning blr, and I like it, schmidt has some awesome glass, but things are kind of in flux for them right now from my perspective, so personally i'm going to wait and see what happens before i invest in another schmidt. to my eye, i like the zco better than the TT, but different strokes.



in no real order, I like to shoot moa scopes when i'm hunting and mil if i'm taking a class or if i get lucky and am able to shoot a match, I can use either system well enough to speak to it.


https://cstactical.com/swarovski-z8i-3-5-28x50-4w-i-68406/

I have a 3-18x50 z6i on my 300 win mag, and I feel it's a great all around rifle/scope, sure 300 wm is large for some applications, but I've become very proficient with it, and I have a custom ballistic turret so it's a no brainer when it comes to distance shots. I like the reticle, I had a tiny bit of input when it was being developed, and it matches the custom ballistic turret. I feel this is the next iteration of that scope, the weight is good and it has enough adjustment to do what i need to with it. only drawback is it's second focal, but I personally don't mind it for hunting applications. it's got a 30mm tube and is one of the lighter scopes of the one's I'm thinking about, which could become a larger factor to consider if I start hunting in tougher terrain and in mountains.


Optically this scope is top tier and i like everything about it. playing with one in low light I was very impressed. the 36mm tube is a little large, but the optical performance alone makes this a big contender for me. close range I feel you could get on target and i felt I could do well if i had to make a quick shot with the scope on low magnification. I like the way the turrets felt, the parallax, and viewing at distance was a no brainer


I shot an nxs 5.5-22x56 moar for a long time, really enjoyed it, shot it a lot and killed a few deer with it. this is a step way up from that scope, and gives better performance on the low end in case there is a close shot and better optical performance. I've always been impressed with these scopes, ever since I saw the first one years ago. could get a custom turret for it, I'm familiar and comfortable with these scopes, and I like the reticle having used it a good bit already.


I'm trying to get my hands on one of these, I had an older victory diavari 3-12x56 on a rifle I sold a few years ago out of necessity and I really like it, i'd be interested to see one of these new scopes in action and looking at specifications alone, seems like it could be a really interesting option.


for my purposes, i also looked at the lht https://cstactical.com/vortex-razor-lht-4-5-22x50-ffp-xlr-2-moa-rzr-42201/ I've got several buddies and customer's using the lht scopes, and I have one on a 270, I've been very pleased with mine. haven't killed anything with it yet, but that's my fault, not the rifles.
Same, factory 160s (or whatever that white-tipped ammo is) is the only ammo I’ve shot anything other than paper with (several pigs and a couple deer), but looking at other bullets to work up some loads as soon as I can find some time.

Edit: I am looking forward to trying out these 168 Bergers though…wondering how it’ll perform compared vs. my favorite 168gr load in .308

i-H7j84fL-X4.jpg


i-BNT7sW4-X4.jpg



Ran an older Leupy that was on this receiver when it had its original 30-06 barrel for awhile, but currently have a Zeiss 5-25 on there:

i-QTPhGbp-X4.jpg


I also prefer MOA for hunting.

5-25(ish) is honestly plenty for my needs, but this rifle is capable of much longer shots than I typically take and it’d be nice to have the right glass to stretch its legs…and my eyes ain’t what they used to be either, so I’ll take all the help I can get! LoL
 
Last edited:
I don’t think everyone is looking for confirmation on them buying a fancy scope (and just saying things to make themselves feel better about it)… sometimes one just has to spend what it takes if they see the thing they want.

I’d argue that the most expensive thing we burn in this sport is our time. No matter how wealthy guys are, none of us is getting the time we put into this shit back, and time is running out on us all, so it’s all precious and valuable. So in a way, I’d argue it’d be kind of dumb to not shoot whatever scope floats your boat (if you can afford to). YOLO!

Spending a couple more bucks (or a couple thousand) to get exactly what you want isn’t just some flex, it’s just choosing to get what you want rather than settling for what you have. The same thing applies whether it’s scopes, guitars, or cars/trucks. The whole “diminishing returns” argument isn’t even relevant when it comes to this kind of stuff IMHO.

This shit is supposed to be fun, buy whatever you want.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: BurtG