Rifle Scopes What will the ZCO get me that a TT won't as a Crossover Scope??

[WB300]

Usage is split between Range/PRS out to 700 yards (moa and larger steel) and hunting whitetail deer / hogs (and other critters of opportunity).

Stick is a 20" Rem LTR 308 spitting 155 Scenars at about 2700 fps.

I'd really like the ZCO 4-20x50, but do you think I will give up anything to the TT 3-15x50 besides 5x more power magnification on the top end, some weight and $$$ savings?

Let's assume the reticles are a wash. I'd really like to hear opinions on generous eye box, depth of field, and finicky-ness of parallax. Both optics will have great tracking, glass, and turrets... but most important to me after those are how finicky the eyebox and parallax (focus) are.

Does anyone think the TT 3-15x50 will be a stretch for moa steel at 700?

I've read alot of reviews both here and other forums, but few pertained to above.

Thank you in advance.

Will

 

[Covertnoob5]

Well first are you talking the 315M or 315P from TT? The ZCO will get you locking turrets which is nice for hunting. And for a comp scope, as someone who has competed with a 3-15 Premier and a ZCO 420, having the extra 5x on the top is nice. Having said that with my premier because the glass was so good I was able to get out to 1100yds no problem with a 6.5CM.

 

[st1650]

It’s not like 700 yards is that far on TT glass at 15x. Especially out of a 20in 308

 

[ma smith]

Tons of people have used NF ATACR 4-16 for both scenarios.

OP, I'd say each of these options is a higher class, but slightly more specialized.

So its all about managing tradeoffs...

 

[Secant]

The Tangents’s turrets are better IMO. Parallax is slightly more foregiving in the Tangent, but the ZCO is still great, and barely behind the Tangent. Tangent is about 1/2 pound lighter with rings compared to the ZCO. The 4-20 is comparatively harder to mount on a long action (depending on setup) due to the short length.

I prefer the ZCO reticles (I know you said reticles are a wash). Eyebox is better in the ZCO, and image is enormous. I prefer the ZCOs controls overall, numbers on turrets are nice and huge (I have 20/15 vision and I’m not a geezer, lol). Glass is basically a wash, but Tangent might be slightly barely better if I’m being nitpicky. As mentioned, ZCO has locking turrets, but I’m not worried one bit about tangents turrets accidentally moving.

That’s my quick 2 cents. Both are absolutely outstanding. Neither will be an issue at 700 yards. I shoot 1,000 yards pretty regular, and I’m usually on about 12x.

 

[Secant]

I’ll also say that I’ve had a 4-16 ATACR, and I wouldn’t call the ZCO or Tangent more specialized. In my experience/opinion, the ZCO and Tangent are both flat out superior as general use scopes.

 

[CSTactical]

I’ll also say that I’ve had a 4-16 ATACR, and I wouldn’t call the ZCO or Tangent more specialized. In my experience/opinion, the ZCO and Tangent are both flat out superior as general use scopes.

 

[CSTactical]

Usage is split between Range/PRS out to 700 yards (moa and larger steel) and hunting whitetail deer / hogs (and other critters of opportunity).

Stick is a 20" Rem LTR 308 spitting 155 Scenars at about 2700 fps.

I'd really like the ZCO 4-20x50, but do you think I will give up anything to the TT 3-15x50 besides 5x more power magnification on the top end, some weight and $$$ savings?

Let's assume the reticles are a wash. I'd really like to hear opinions on generous eye box, depth of field, and finicky-ness of parallax. Both optics will have great tracking, glass, and turrets... but most important to me after those are how finicky the eyebox and parallax (focus) are.

Does anyone think the TT 3-15x50 will be a stretch for moa steel at 700?

I've read alot of reviews both here and other forums, but few pertained to above.

Thank you in advance.

Will

Will, feel free to call us at 916-670-1103 and I can go over both those fantastic options with you

 

[Glassaholic]

I'd really like the ZCO 4-20x50, but do you think I will give up anything to the TT 3-15x50 besides 5x more power magnification on the top end, some weight and $$$ savings?

Besides the obvious? FOV on the TT is much wider at 3x than ZCO at 4x, TT will be slightly wider at 4x as well, but ZCO has razer thin periphery giving it the effect it is more magnified and less distracting, if the low end FOV doesn’t matter that much then I’d prefer a little more mag at the top, but it really comes down to your needs. TT has amazing turrets, ZCO’s are good but not TT good IMO, personal preference as both will get the job done. If you’re a western shooter the 4-20 may have no hindrance but if an eastern shooter the wider bottom end FOV may be a big benefit. With regard to the thin periphery I was just sharing this with another Hide’r, ILya has a great video talking about perceived FOV, check it out:

 

[BreisV]

The ZCO has variable daylight visible reticle illumination, whereas the illumination on the TT is night only. I have found this to be a very valuable feature in some shooting environments. In fact, I believe that this is the deciding factor between the two. As end users become accustomed to having this on an alpha scope, the other manufacturers will have to adopt this feature.