Alright fellas, I'm looking for input from the optics aficionados here. I've been on the lookout for a 3-9x with non-capped turrets. I'd feel comfortable spending between $300-$500 bucks. Any recommendations?
I'm only looking for variable's between the 2x-10x range, since I've been told that the higher you go with variable magnification, the worse/fragile/lower quality it might be, since a $300 scope that goes up to 14x might not be the nicest thing to put on a .308 slinger. Looking for input on this as well.
I've been looking around, checking what reviews I can find, but so far i've only found a few Nikons, a Vortex I think, and some Blackhawk scope.
Vortex PST 2.5-10x44 for about 600 is your best bet despite being slightly beyond your price range.
>>29771908
forgot to mention
Give Sightron scopes a look. They are sort of the "Vortex before Vortex was Vortex" as in, """""""American"""""" company that rebrands asian glass, but has good QC contracts, good features, and excellent warranty. It even used to be a cross counter warranty, not sure if it still is. One of my coworkers has one that he loves, and this is the kind of guy who buys Trijicon, Aimpoint, swaro, etc. along with everything from HK MR556 to Tikkas and Savage, usually gives pretty objective opinions imo
Loves his sightron
>>29771908
Yikes damn, yeah even 500 is pushing it for me, since I am also picking up a stock and sending my rifle in for some work. Thanks for the rec though.
>>29771981
Ill check em out for sure. Thanks.
Ok, I actually just found this Leupold: though the name AR MOD 1 leads me to believe this scope isn't suited for use with a PTR-91. Anyone have anything to say about that? Is the reticule going to be all fucked up with .308?
First time glass buyer, if that wasn't obvious already, so I'm not entirely sure how to use MOA/mil measurements, what features I should be on the lookout for, etc. Could I get away with using this scope on a battle rifle?
>>29772099
I forgot the link, naturally.
http://swfa.com/Leupold-3-9x40-Mark-AR-MOD-1-Riflescope-P60888.aspx
What range would a 3-9x be best for with an ar in 5.56? I'm only shooting at 100 yards so I was just gonna get a 1-4x
>>29772137
You can ring steel out to 500 yards with a 1-4. You should be set. Luckily the 1-4x market is filled with options.
>>29771819
Swfa 3-9 HD ffp
$599 lifetime warranty better glass than the vortex.
Bomb proof
>>29772266
Shit I really like that reticule. Hope it goes on sale or something
>>29772334
usually on black friday.
their facebook page sometimes says when they will have sales. but they also take used equipment in for credit.... so if you have some old scopes or shit they may give you somethin for them
>>29772099
dont get mixed reticule and knobs. sick with moa/moa or mil/mil
why you ask, because then the correction you see marked in the scope is the same correction you dial in, no math in between.
also, first focal plane if you can, ( the swfa is ffp)
why? so that the markings in the scope are correct regardless of selected magnification level.
on a second focal plane scope, the markings are only correct measurements on one setting, usually the highest.
>>29772723
If OP isn't shooting long range matches, and actually doing alot of "ranging" of his targets, SFP will serve him better in everyday shooting. With FFP's, even nice ones, low magnification is more or less good for nothing, and unless shooting at very long ranges, high magnification is equally useless if you are just shooting on high power at a 300m target because its fun to see holes right away
SFP superior if you don't actually need to range your target (which, out to 600m with anything between 2600-3200 fps you dont, your POI/POA difference will be less than 10 inches, those are holdovers you don't need fucking subtensions for)
>>29772099
I have one on my savage hog hunter .308
I would recommend it. it's an etched reticle so you don't need to worry about shooting it out.
the mark AR series is made on the old mark 2 machinery, which was a popular hunting optic suited for many full power cartridges though I might be hesitant to throw one on a magnum.
>>29772800
*the reticle being what is useless at low magnification, and equally useless and in fact annoying at high magnification for closer-ish targets you just wanna look at with high power
>>29772800
I'd add to this saying that if you are using less than 9x power as OP has stated, your target is probably much closer than you would need to range them.
9x and 10x is adequate for some long shots with good eyes and good shooting, so there is nothing against using mil dots on a SFP scope unless you have like a 4-16 or more and the power at which the subtensions become accurate is inconvenient or situational
>>29771819
If you want the most durable scope for your dollar checkout the SWFA SS 10x.
It's a fixed 10x at the $300 mark but they do make a 3-9 for slightly more.
>.50bmg rated
>military considered
> fantastic reputation
www.SWFA.com
simple solution.
dual focal plane scope
>>29772929
Do elaborate on this simple solution.
>>29772929
yeah, i'm sure that'll be within the $500 budget OP was talking about
>>29772948
Aren't most of those out of his price range at around $1000?
Basically allows the reticle to adjust size while the center (usually the center) stays constant.
>>29772137
At 9x, assuming it isn't dogshit-tier glass, you're looking at the ability to put rounds in a torso all the way to ~750 yards assuming you can read wind.
Competition shooters used fixed 10x scopes for 1000m rifle matches for decades on things like .308 and .300wm. They were high end fixed-10x (S&B, Unertl, Swaro, Zeiss, Steiner, etc) and were orders of magnitude better than something like, say, a Nikon Monarch 3, but unless you're doing something where aiming error becomes a major factor they're "good enough".
>>29772976
I believe redfield makes one for fairly cheap, but I don't know how useful it is
>>29772948
>elaborate
3 optics ever made, one Russian that never saw mass production because the glass SUCKED and it contained asbestos (in the late 90's), the others all over $3000 USD with 36 month plus lead times.
>>29773012
The Redfield one isn't actually dual focal plane.
Also "fairly cheap" is still $850. And they were recalled.
out side op price range yes.
3000$ no.
burris xtr 2 has a 1-8 dfp for $800
>>29773038
http://www.midwayusa.com/product/592619/redfield-revenge-rifle-scope-4-12x-42mm-accu-ranger-varmint-reticle-matte
Looks fairly cheap to me, but I know they aren't actually dual focal plane, they just have that little ranging bar that adjusts
