# Reticle and power choices of scopes



## Bigdrowdy1 (Jan 29, 2010)

Was wondering what type of reticle you prefer and power of scope for your hunting. The majority of my scopes are 3x9x40. I went with the coyote special with the circle reticules for my ar-15 223 and remain undecided on it at this time. I have a Leupold 3x9x50 on my 25-06 that I love and have shot for over 20 years now. I have been thing about moving it over to my varmit rifle for it light gathering abilities and the simple single cross hair. I have a couple of the nikon bdc scopes with the primary being your standard crosshairs ,circles being your compensated elevation. With all the choices available today I thought this might be a good topic. This could also include the new red dot style scopes.


----------



## bar-d (Feb 3, 2010)

I have a variety of variable power scopes including 3-9x40, 2.5-10x42, 4-12x40, 6-24x44 etc. All this means is I obviously have no particular favorite. They all work fine for me. Because I am building my AR primarily for hunting at night with a red lights, I opted for a Bushnell Banner Dusk/Dawn in 6-18x50 for better light gathering capabilities.


----------



## TexAgBQ81 (Mar 4, 2010)

I am a mil-dot fan myself. On the 6.5x284 i use a sightron 6-24 but use it mostly for paper and groundhogs when i go to ohio, their dots are a little big though. i have not really liked the circles but that is just me i know several guys that love them. i also use an old tasco mil-dot on my hornet (that i love). have a few straight 4s or 6s and only a few 3x9s. My old eyes need all of the assistance they can get with the bigger magnifications so i have a tendency to go to the ?x14 or ?x16s


----------



## youngdon (Mar 10, 2010)

I keep thinking that one of these days I will buy a mil-dot scope but just have not gotten to it (always something else to spend my meager change on) all of the scopes I have on rifles and handguns are just your straight duplex. As for power I have a variety of them from a straight 4 on a 30-30 to a 6-18on my .300mag. hand guns have 1.5-4x32, a 3-9x40, and a straight 4x. I try to get enough power to see at the usable range of the gun it is to be mounted on but not add a lot of bulk to the gun.


----------



## ebbs (Feb 7, 2010)

I think a lot of reticle choice comes down to preference. Here are some questions I consider when picking out any of mine...

*1. How fast do I want to be? *

Are you looking for something you can acquire the target with more quickly or something that's easier to take your time and be precise with. I like the circles on Nikon's BDC system, but the triangle post on Trijicon's are insanely fast and easy to settle on your target with. PLUS, they're not battery powered like other red dots are. I always want something that will help me look past the crosshairs to the target so it's the focus and not the reticle.

*2. How far will I be shooting and how big is the game I'm taking?*

The bigger magnification you want the harder that is to do with a bargain scope. I really like my Tasco Varmint scope in 2.5-10x, but my dad got the same scope in 6-20 or 24x I think and the higher powers are much more hazy. It's a quality scope that holds zero well but the glass isn't the quality that you'll find in those even a bit more expensive like Bushnell or Nikon, which are still nothing IMO compared to Leupold, then Swarovski and Zeiss (none of which I own). So think, do you want a higher power because you're on a power trip or because you're really gonna be shooting a long way.

*3. Am I looking for precision or "close enough?"*

Similar to #1, how fast do you want to be. Does your target have a massive kill zone where you don't need fine lines on a crosshair or does a accu-range crosshair like the new Redfield's have seem good even though it obstructs some of the target. Same with a 30-30 reticle that has thick bars, then towards the center finer crosshairs. If you're shooting at an elk, it's going to fill your lens more, if you're gunning for prairie dogs or ground squirrels, the thinner the better, IMO. Which is why I love the mil-dot reticle in my Tasco varmint, but at the same time all those dots where I'm trying to see are frustrating too.

*4. Do I want something with range finding capabilities?*

That coyote special has different sized circles to help you know how big the critter will be at different distances thus telling you how far it is. The 30-30 reticle does the same as it says a whitetail buck's chest should fill the fine crosshair section of the reticle at 100 yards but at 200 the deer's whole body will fill it (I might be a little off, but that's the basic principle). Mil-Dot reticles have some capabilities like that when you learn to use them correctly, but I never can seem to remember that in a pinch even though I've read the guide and practiced it half a dozen times.

*5. What's my recoil like? Will something that doesn't need to withstand magnum type shock do?*

For a lot of heavy recoiling guns, the cheap stuff just won't do. That said, I know plenty of guys who have shot BSAs and Tascos on their 7mm Mags and 300 Win Mags for years and years and they've never failed once.

*6. What about light gathering? The bigger the bell on the objective, the more light it's going to take in (more often than not that's true)?*

Also the more you can see. This can come in awful hand if you either don't have or have the time for a spotting scope. There's a wider field of view in those 44s, 50s and 56s. Lots more to see and as I said above, more opportunity for light to get in thus expanding your shooting day.

*7. How much am I willing to spend? Does cost always equate reliability?*

For me even dropping a couple hundred bucks on a scope represents a significant investment. The Nikon Coyote Special I'm waiting on is a scope I'm really excited about and lands at about the $300 mark, but before that to date the most expensive scope I own is a Burris Fullfield II with the ballistic plex reticle. It's also the only scope I own who won't reliably zero in on my target at the advertised 1/4 MOA adjustments. I live in the same town as Burris Optics and have had the scope at their warranty center 2x because of a failure to adjust properly and they've told me there's nothing wrong. Maybe I just got a lemon, but the point is I'd choose my $80 Tasco Varmint with the mil-dot reticle any day over that Burris, even though the optics aren't quite as bright.

*8. How important is eye relief? Higher recoil calls for longer eye-relief. *

My Nikon Omega for my Encore Muzzleloader has 5 inches of eye relief! Because of the stock system it has the recoil is very manageable but with a really hot load I never have to worry about getting bit by the scope! Chris Miller and I have gently chided each other about the eye relief on AR-15s being different depending on the shooter. He swears an AR hunting setup requires a forward mounted riser/base setup while I am more of the school that says a straight riser works just fine. Some of it depends on the gun and load, and some depends on the shooter.

Hope some of these thoughts help. It all seems to comedown to what makes you most comfortable and what you prefer. Whatever helps YOU (the shooter) perform better, then THAT's the one you should go with.


----------



## wvcoyote (Mar 14, 2010)

well put ebbs


----------



## youngdon (Mar 10, 2010)

Great post ebbs!


----------



## knapper (Feb 5, 2010)

On my 6.5x284 that I put a Leupold with mil-dot, so I could use the dots for range find with it. I got the mk4 for long range, it is 4x16 50 mm objective. It is the clearest scope I have ever used. I use it for mid range matches (NRA) type. shooting F-class in witch the 10 ring is 6" at 600 yards while the regular 10 ring is 12". I love to shoot that class.


----------



## bar-d (Feb 3, 2010)

Very informative


----------



## ebbs (Feb 7, 2010)

> On my 6.5x284 that I put a Leupold with mil-dot


Knapper I'd like to hear a bit more about that 6.5x284 that you have. I had a 6.5x55 Swede for a while and was blown away by the accuracy of that round. Did some reading about the higher ballistic coefficient that the 6.5 has along with the deep penetration that round gets because of the high sectional density. I don't have that barrel anymore but I definitely don't think I'm done with the 6.5s forever.


----------



## autumnrider (Feb 2, 2010)

ebbs---you have put together an awsome article-----thanks


----------



## ebbs (Feb 7, 2010)

autumnrider said:


> ebbs---you have put together an awsome article-----thanks


I appreciate the thanks. Hope it's helpful to all.


----------



## michael (May 21, 2010)

I don't know how far ur shooting but with a hot round in about any caliber u can zero ur rifle 1.5-2 inches high at 100 be dead on at 200 and not have to hold over the top of the back at 300 and that gives u the simplicity of a plain crosshairs sight. But u may want to shoot alot further. idk.


----------



## knapper (Feb 5, 2010)

I have a 6.5X55 Swede that is a model 96 that is a long barrel model. The barrel is 29.5" long, it shoots good but, too long to carry in the woods so it is in the gun safe and I use a 260 Rem. or what ever is better suited for the animals I am hunting. I am a die hard 6.5 fan and have been for many years. The 6.5-284 that I shoot in a match last Sunday got me a score of 192 at 300,178 at 500, and 168 at 600. That was the first time that I had shot a full match with it in F class. In the afternoon the wind was mixed and marige was pretty bad and I was happy with my results. If it was easy everybody would do it. I have a good starting point.


----------



## headhunter25 (Feb 21, 2010)

I use a 1x4 Burris XTR. My eyes are still good enough for 300 yard shots on 4x. The ballistic reticle is really nice too.

Chris C.


----------



## ebbs (Feb 7, 2010)

Speaking of range, and hopefully this applies... no matter what I'm hunting I like to get the rangefinder out and range some landmarks to help me distinguish the distances in a pinch. I'm not naive enough to believe that the coyote or any other animal for that matter will give me time to get the range then get the rifle and shoot. The method of using point blank range and doping your zero so you can just hold dead on to a certain distance seems to be the most effective. Thanks for the reminder, Michael.


----------



## ebbs (Feb 7, 2010)

hassell said:


> Right on ebbs, the range finder is another toy I've looked at and probably would make a good thread, Your article you put in was very good , must have reread it 6 times and looked at it differently each time.


Great idea, Rick. Your wish is my command







Just click HERE


----------



## bar-d (Feb 3, 2010)

I carry my rangefinder for coyote or deer hunting. Like you ebbs, I range a variety of landmarks, fencelines, trees, rocks, etc. That not only gives me my dead on poa but I also can quickly calculate my holdover for the outer ranges or the knowledge not to try the shot.


----------



## RoughNeck (Mar 16, 2010)

I also try to range certain markings on set ups, it helps alot at night also, well put ebbs


----------



## ebbs (Feb 7, 2010)

RoughNeck said:


> I also try to range certain markings on set ups, it helps alot at night also, well put ebbs


Very cool, I never thought about using one at night. It is a laser after all, LOL.


----------

