Newest Threads

DarinCraft · 01-08-2011, 05:38 AM

Ok, I got my 16" bull barreled AR back and I want to turn it into a 300 meter paper/coyote/and whatever is pissing me off gun. I am at the stage of looking for a scope.

First, I will be shooting factory ammo and will be perfectly happy with 2" groups (Even though there is a member here who has the same upper and shoots .5" at 300 with no problem).

Second, I know that I should buy a high dollar scope, but I just can't justify $400 on a scope let alone $1000 especially when I am such a amateur shooter. So I think I can get what I want for somewhere near $250-300.

Since there are so many scopes out there, I thought I would break it down into several smaller decisions.

What power should I be looking at? I thought a 3x9 would be perfect, but I am seeing a lot of AR's with max power being 12x.

Thanks guys
Darin

**fpdsniper** · 01-08-2011, 07:27 AM

3-9 will work, but I think I'd bump it up to around 4-16 for 300 meters. No real drawbacks to go that route.

willfully armed · 01-08-2011, 09:36 AM

I dislike 3-9 for 100 yard+ shooting. I like to see my holes in the target, without using a spotting scope. Both of my precision guns have leupold 6-18x40 VX-II on them. Even my Marlin model 60 has a Bushnell 4-12x40.

I have a 3-9x50 Nikon on my 7mag sporter. Really all I need for a hunting rifle that will not see any target shooting.

High magnification for targets, lower for hunting.

My .02

kenhesr · 01-08-2011, 04:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by willfully armed

I dislike 3-9 for 100 yard+ shooting. I like to see my holes in the target, without using a spotting scope. Both of my precision guns have leupold 6-18x40 VX-II on them. Even my Marlin model 60 has a Bushnell 4-12x40.

I have a 3-9x50 Nikon on my 7mag sporter. Really all I need for a hunting rifle that will not see any target shooting.

High magnification for targets, lower for hunting.

My .02

* and I'm American, so I shoot in feet and yards. Not sure what 300 metres is........

Yep! me too. For 300 yds I'll take all the magnification I can get. If you buy a variable power, you can always turn it down for moving targets. JMHO, Ken

Dillinger · 01-08-2011, 04:44 PM

I would have to agree that I prefer a scope with power to see, tightly and precisely, what I am shooting for paper.

For moving, humanoid or animals( I have honestly only ever shot coyote, wild hog and went Elk hunting to get skunked ), I prefer a lower magnification to allow a better field of view.

I would agree with something along the lines of a 4.5 x 14 or 4 x 16 ( depends on the brand ).

Good luck in your research. If you wait about two weeks, the SHOT show reports will be hitting the wire and press and there might be some new gems out there.

I would be happy to evaluate some scopes for you in this power level while I am there with Scubie.

DarinCraft · 01-08-2011, 04:45 PM

WillfullyArmed, I'm gonna let your comment slide this time because I seriously don't think you meant that how it sounded. But the next time you challenge me as an American even though I am a medically retired cop who gave up most of the nerves in my right foot to protect a$$hats like you we are going to have a MAJOR problem.

BTW , the range I go to is in meters so if the only thing you can do is take below the belt shots at people like that, stay the eff away from me.

**JonM** · 01-08-2011, 05:35 PM

the us armed forces measures everything in metrics. why?? because its faster than translating yards and lends itself better to map use. less confusion and time wasted.

i always thought it was weird talking meters and then switching to miles. i still think in yards feet inches cups ounces etc. but calling for fire and setting up range charts it was meters. when i was using the designated marksmen rifle it was yards hehehe.

its very american to adopt the best of what works.