Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Good 300 yard Scope for Rem 700 22-250

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • dee
    replied
    NF is illuminated just not adjustable unless you access the battery to turn on just pull out on the side paralax knob. My leupy MK4 is also illuminated and variable like the vortex just wasn't as good in extreme low light as the NF so I put it on my dad's .25-06

    Leave a comment:


  • CJ
    replied
    Originally posted by dee View Post
    That's the way my NightForce is and suprisingly my Leupold MK4 isn't to far behind.
    A Vortex PST is no NF optically, but it matches in in adjustment and dependability/quality. The Vortex gathers the same light as my Leupold VXIII, on the tall end it has a little CA, but it's very easy to make out .223 impacts at 200 yards, no spotting scope required (and .223 impacts are small as shit). I also like the illuminated reticle (something neither NF and Leupold don't offer if I'm not mistaken).

    Leave a comment:


  • FunFordCobra
    replied
    I know. I'm just stating my experience with glare and all those scopes I've used. The leupolds are the only ones I've used that hadn't had a horrible glare at sunset hours while facing the sun. The others were 40 obj. The leupolds just happen to be 50 obj.

    Leave a comment:


  • dee
    replied
    Originally posted by 5.0_CJ View Post
    As dee stated the larger the final objective the more light it gathers. I can see pigs in pitch back with a new moon (ie: literally no light). Very helpful in hunting. i
    That's the way my NightForce is and suprisingly my Leupold MK4 isn't to far behind.

    Leave a comment:


  • CJ
    replied
    On your nicer scopes, especially with 50mm objectives and larger they are threaded for camera filters. You can see one on the end of my shade. This allows you to screw on polarizing filters, or UV filters to cut down glare, and get a sharper cleaner picture.

    Leave a comment:


  • CJ
    replied
    Originally posted by futant View Post
    CJ that barrel's too big for the magazine!
    beef it up a little!
    If I make the magazine bigger then the barrel gets even bigger!

    Leave a comment:


  • futant
    replied
    CJ that barrel's too big for the magazine!
    beef it up a little!

    Leave a comment:


  • bigmuskie
    replied
    Originally posted by 5.0_CJ View Post
    As dee stated the larger the final objective the more light it gathers. I can see pigs in pitch back with a new moon (ie: literally no light). Very helpful in hunting. I've never had to deal with glare or rings seeing as I use a sun shade.
    In the very near future, I too will have a rifle like that.

    Leave a comment:


  • CJ
    replied
    Originally posted by FunFordCobra View Post
    I went from BSA (haha) to a Nikon to two different bushnell buckmaster to bushnell elite to leupold rifleman to leupold vxIII.


    I don't do any real long range shooting. I could make 400-500 yards shots pretty easy with my 3-9x50 so I think the 4.5-14x50 will be pretty good. Also with the other 40 objective scopes, I would get horrible sunset glare/rings.. The 50 objectives don't get them. I tried buying sub 300 dollar glass for a 1500 dollar rifle and I know now that doesnt work lol..
    As dee stated the larger the final objective the more light it gathers. I can see pigs in pitch back with a new moon (ie: literally no light). Very helpful in hunting. I've never had to deal with glare or rings seeing as I use a sun shade.

    Leave a comment:


  • dee
    replied
    The objective lens diameter doesn't make a scope glare or not its more about coatings on the glass, now it does have some affect on how a scope gathers light.

    Leave a comment:


  • FunFordCobra
    replied
    Originally posted by dee View Post
    Huh, seems kinda odd that you would have 2 pretty decent scopes with the same problem, guess it's possible though.
    I went from BSA (haha) to a Nikon to two different bushnell buckmaster to bushnell elite to leupold rifleman to leupold vxIII.

    Originally posted by 5.0_CJ View Post
    That was the scope I sold for the vortex. Decent piece of glass, has some CA on the top end but overall it was decent. I needed better adjustments and internal distance. But for hunting it's great.
    I don't do any real long range shooting. I could make 400-500 yards shots pretty easy with my 3-9x50 so I think the 4.5-14x50 will be pretty good. Also with the other 40 objective scopes, I would get horrible sunset glare/rings.. The 50 objectives don't get them. I tried buying sub 300 dollar glass for a 1500 dollar rifle and I know now that doesnt work lol..

    Leave a comment:


  • BlackSnake
    replied
    Originally posted by 5.0_CJ View Post
    Yeah I'm pretty sure I've seen him out there before.
    One of the nicest guys you'll ever meet. We usually team up each year on a dove lease somewhere. He's pretty damn good at knocking down birds too.

    Leave a comment:


  • CJ
    replied
    Originally posted by FunFordCobra View Post
    I will always use Leupold! Just got a 4.5-14x50 VX III leupold and it's the only scope I've had that will hold zero on my AR10.
    That was the scope I sold for the vortex. Decent piece of glass, has some CA on the top end but overall it was decent. I needed better adjustments and internal distance. But for hunting it's great.

    Leave a comment:


  • dee
    replied
    Originally posted by FunFordCobra View Post
    Leupold rings.
    Huh, seems kinda odd that you would have 2 pretty decent scopes with the same problem, guess it's possible though.

    Leave a comment:


  • FunFordCobra
    replied
    Originally posted by dee View Post
    There's no reason they shouldn't hold zero on an AR of any type.Were quality rings used?
    Leupold rings.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X