6-24, 8-32 or 10-50 for 600 yards?

[mattri]

Trying to decide between three scopes.

90% of shooting will be done at 600 yards off a bench. The rest will be split between longer range bench work (rare) and field use off a tripod or improvised rests at ranges from 300-1k.

Options are:

1) 6-24x42. Pros- duplex reticle- not perfect but quick and handy for field use, and the thinner, center reticle is the same subtension of the fine crosshair as the other scopes being considered, 1/8 moa clicks, max power probably more than enough for 600-1k use. Cons- glass quality slightly below the other two options. How much different, or how much of an affect it will actually have unknown.


2) 8-32x56. Pros- slightly better glass, more magnification. Cons- fine crosshair reticle. May not be an actual detriment but not ideal. Also, only available in 1/4 moa turrets. For an extra cost turrets can be changed to 1/8 moa so left with an 8-32 with fine crosshair with 1/8 moa turrets.

3) 10-50x60. Pros- highest magnification range, high glass quality, 1/8 moa turrets. Cons- fine crosshair reticle, could possibly be changed to duplex or other down the road.

Thoughts?

 

[Preacher]

It never hurts to have the extra horse power if and when it's needed...

 

[effendude]

It never hurts to have the extra horse power if and when it's needed...

What Preacher says...
Scott

 

[Nodak7mm]

It never hurts to have the extra horse power if and when it's needed...

What Preacher says...
Scott

Yup, what them guys say.... Better to have and not use all the time vs wish for and not have even once....

 

[NateHaler]

There are lots more pros and cons, and you don't list the specific scopes you are contemplating.

Like so many requests for opinions, you're probably over-thinking this. The good news is that a 4x scope is likely better (for you) than shooting 600y with irons. I'd be stoked to have a really good 10x or 16x scope for the task.

Lower magnification is BRIGHTER IMAGE. Lower mag is less perceived MIRAGE. Smaller objective means easier cheekweld and lighter overall rifle system weight.

There are WAY more reticle choices than you cite. Hard to beat a mildot or similar setup if range estimation or holdoff/holdover or intermediate aiming points are important. (They are to me...)

Here's the best advice you'll get, because it's mine: Start with a fixed 24x, like a Weaver. You can find these used for $300. Keep it, or sell it and then try a 36x Weaver. Same price. Heck, I'll sell you mine for that, and it include extra turrets, sunshade, lens caps, and the original box. Keep it, or sell it.

You're not going to use the variable power. 90%+ of shooters with variable scopes crank them to the highest mag and leave them there. Be realistic.

Many scopes will have enough "up" to get you to 600y, even on a flat mount using a .308. Most scopes won't get you to 1,000y unless you take your mount/rings and ballistics into account.

The perfect scope doesn't exist, and it won't make you a better shooter. If the chase is what floats your boat, then have at it. I totally get that. Me, I say get a Nightforce 5.5-22x50 or a Sightron SIII 6-24 if you gotta have a variable. 20x is PLENTY to shoot at 600y. It would be like shooting iron sights at 30y.

Good luck.

 

[mattri]

Many good points and a sense of humor to boot- well done.

The reticle choices are listed in relation to the scopes being considered. All are Sightrons. The 6-24 is a SII, the others are SIIIs. Yes, there are infinite choices when it comes to scopes: brands, reticles, magnification etc, but these are the ones being considered for this application.

I've been fortunate enough to own/use a number of scopes that would work well enough, including a Weaver T36, a Nightforce 8-32, and a couple of Leupolds and Vortexs. After doing some research I was able to look through some Sightrons and they completely sold me. They were brighter and clearer than any fixed power or higher end variable I've seen.

Of all of the higher mag variables I've owned I've never used one soley at its max power setting- kind of defeats the purpose doesn't it? While the majority of use will be off a bench, shooting various targets at ukds will be common as well, ruling out a fixed high power.

And while 600 yards will be the common range, 1k and beyond are in the mix as well. The point about no perfect scope is spot-on, this is an exercise in getting as close to that as possible for a gun that will be used for multiple disciplines at multiple ranges- everything costs something.

Thanks to all for the great replies, keep them coming. Bouncing ideas off the members off this board have solidified a lot of ideas in the past- don't let me down now.

 

[Switchbarrel]

Trying to decide between three scopes.

90% of shooting will be done at 600 yards off a bench. The rest will be split between longer range bench work (rare) and field use off a tripod or improvised rests at ranges from 300-1k.

The 10-50x60 SIII is a great scope if you're shooting at fixed targets, ie - not trying to scan around looking for game, varmints, etc. I've got 5 of them and the focus range is very narrow. I've been told the lower power models are not nearly as sensitive. My Nightforce 12-42 BR's are much better in this regard as well.

Options are:

2) 8-32x56. Pros- slightly better glass, more magnification. Cons- fine crosshair reticle. May not be an actual detriment but not ideal. Also, only available in 1/4 moa turrets. For an extra cost turrets can be changed to 1/8 moa so left with an 8-32 with fine crosshair with 1/8 moa turrets.

If these are scopes you already own, consider selling this one ^^^ and get one of the newer 8-32's with a different reticle and turrets. Cost difference would probably be very close to what you would spend modifying the one you may already own (if that's the case). Shop around, Hoover's in PA had very good prices when I ordered all of mine.

3) 10-50x60. Pros- highest magnification range, high glass quality, 1/8 moa turrets. Cons- fine crosshair reticle, could possibly be changed to duplex or other down the road.

Thoughts?

-Rick

 

[DOGCAPPER]

Get max power range..Fine crosshair..1/8 dot..LT

 

[NateHaler]

Many good points and a sense of humor to boot- well done.

The reticle choices are listed in relation to the scopes being considered. All are Sightrons. The 6-24 is a SII, the others are SIIIs. Yes, there are infinite choices when it comes to scopes: brands, reticles, magnification etc, but these are the ones being considered for this application.

I've been fortunate enough to own/use a number of scopes that would work well enough, including a Weaver T36, a Nightforce 8-32, and a couple of Leupolds and Vortexs. After doing some research I was able to look through some Sightrons and they completely sold me. They were brighter and clearer than any fixed power or higher end variable I've seen.

Always happy to help a fellow Sightron enthusiast. I've been on their bandwagon since '99 or thereabouts. And although my first SII didn't have glass the equal of the SIII line, I wouldn't sell it for $500 (and I think I paid $225 or so for it). I have absolute faith in that scope.

Given you actually use the variable power settings, then I'm going to give thumbs down to the 10-50. I'm not a believer in ultra-high magnification, unless the rig is strictly a BR gun. Image brightness, perceived tremble, and field of view will all be problematic except in BR shooting. I don't know why you've decided on an SII for the 6-24 vs. an SIII in the same mag range, because that's another apples to oranges variable (no pun intended), but I'm a big fan of the smaller objectives for a rifle that you will occasionally carry (say in a tactical match, or when zombies are afoot). The SII will cost quite a bit less than the SIII, but I'm going off the ballot choices you listed and voting for the SIII 6-24x50 with the MD milrad setup. It has 100 MOA of "up". The 8-32 has 70, and the 10-50 has 50.

Depending on your ballistics and distance, 50 MOA of total "up" could be problematic at 1,000y, unless you manage to get your short range zero well below the midway point of the adjustment range. 100 MOA just makes things easy in that regard. If you prefer a 56mm objective, then 8-32 is probably the best compromise. I would still get the MD milrad setup. I like the versatility. If you find the busier reticles too distracting, then YMMV.

 

[mattri]

The SII was the only 6-24 I saw listed with 1/8 MOA turrets- unless I missed it the SIIIs all have 1/4 clicks.

The mil dot/milrad reticle is very tempting but I wonder how it will do for bench work or F-class. The dodts seem a bit thick.

An 8-32 with 1/8 clicks and a duplex reticle would be ideal but they don't offer one, which led to the SII 6-24 being considered. The lower power and quality of glass are the obvious concerns with the SIII- no free lunch.

Will be using a 20 moa base as well.

 

[Preacher]

My Sightron 8x32 S111 has 1/8th inch clicks and a 1/8" dot..... It's a really sweet scope, and thats coming from a guy that favors NF....

 

[NateHaler]

FWIW, I think quality of the glass is the least important criteria, presuming said glass is at least good enough. If you're trying to hold on a fly, or a quarter of an x ring in an F-Class match, I can see how very best image might be important. Or, in a hunting context, discerning between deer in the brush at whatever range to see if one of them is actually a buck -- before you risk a totally ill-advised shot and end up in trouble with Fish and Game. DOE!!!

What's most important is reliability and repeatability and holding zero. And I think the SII is good enough in that regard, at least if my experience with them is typical. As to 1/8" adjustments, now I understand why you have the SII in the mix. The SII is clearly (pun intended) the least costly option, and thus I'm voting for it, provided you don't instantly think "Shite, I want more magnification".

Here's another bit of perspective maybe. Compared to the scopes shooters were using in the 80s and 90s (e.g. Leupold Vari-X III at the high end), all of the scopes you listed are better. Better lens coatings, better CNC manufacturing tolerances, etc. That crowd achieved shooting feats that are still impressive. So don't get too carried away with optics. Jerry Tierney will still beat most F-Class shooters if he's using iron sights.

8)

 

[brfun]

It sounds like you are real fan of the duplex recital but for target and varmint work i am a real fan of a small dot. if you haven't try to look through one for a bit and give it some real concentration. 1/8" dot at 32 to 50X is the best in my book. 1/4 dot at 32X works but tends to gt a little big at16X.
For long range I would drop the SII from your list as the glass in so much better i feel in the SIIIs. Don't get me wrong the SII is a fine scope and has its places and i do like the one i have. I also have 3 SIIIs 6-24, 8-32, 10-50. clarity and general usability since i am not good at reading mirage I feel the 8-32 is the best over all. I feel it would do everything you are looking for.
If you can get one to look at take a good look at the SIII SS 8-32X56 LR TD/TDT this has 1/8 dot at 32 and 1/8moa adjustments as i think you would like it and it would do what you want.
If you like the idea of the MOA recital remember the subtension listed on there site is at 24X so that would give you approx. .188 dot at 32X. this will be the next one I buy.

One thing i didn't ask you is what do you shoot in the field? targets? Varmints? big game? i ask because there is one place i don't like fine hairs and a dot and this is for big game. in marginal light its to easy for me to loose fine hairs against the animal.

Brian

 

[mattri]

I do really like the dupkex reticle- it works well in the field and off the bench. If this were just for a bench gun the fine crosshair would be fine, and if it were justa field rifle the mil dot or moa reticle would work.

The same could be said about magnification. If it were just for field use the 6-24 would be more than enough, but for ringing out that last fraction of a point at longer ranges the extra power would be nice.

This is the "everything costs something" part of the equation.

 

[Taildrag15X]

The SII was the only 6-24 I saw listed with 1/8 MOA turrets- unless I missed it the SIIIs all have 1/4 clicks.

The mil dot/milrad reticle is very tempting but I wonder how it will do for bench work or F-class. The dodts seem a bit thick.

An 8-32 with 1/8 clicks and a duplex reticle would be ideal but they don't offer one, which led to the SII 6-24 being considered. The lower power and quality of glass are the obvious concerns with the SIII- no free lunch.

Will be using a 20 moa base as well.

My Sightrons, all SIII 10-50x60mm are 1/8 moa click, I have 2-Long Range Target Dot, 1 each fine Crosshair & Mil Dot....all are excellent in my book!

 

[mattri]

How does the mil dot do for benchrest work? Is it fine enough or better suited to field-type work?

 

[Gman]

I have a Sightron SIII straight 20x - 42mm obj lens with the modified mil-dot on a live ground-hog rifle and it works well. But, if I'm shooting over 800 yards, the cross-hairs are a too thick for aiming at the earth-pigs head.

 

[MVW]

Since this seems to be sightron thread I figure I'll add my opinion to the mix. Some has already been said. I have a 6-24 SIII with a MOA reticle on my 223 and an 8-32 fine crosshair with .25 dot on my 308 for F-class. I ike them both, but the big scope with a 20 MOA rail ends up making it difficult to get a good cheek hold (as already mentioned). As long as it isn't too windy holding off is fine on fixed distance targets, but we now have an unknown distance range out to 1,200 yards and a ranging scope is important. I just switched my scopes out and I like the 24X on the 308. It seems adequate for the job. Will probably get anotherone at some point.

One thing on the 8-32 is in August when the heat an humidity are high I found myself dialing back the scope power to cut down on the mirage and for that reason I do like the variables. I think I was shooting 32X at 800 and 15X at 1K.

Mike

 

[mattri]

Interesting replies all. Decided on a 6-24 as it offered the duplex reticle and 1/8 moa adjustments I was looking for. Have been using it on a hunter until the lr barrel and stock come in. So far couldn't be happier with the optics, more posts when everything is together.