Reading a lot about scopes but.........

[crbutler]

Ed,

I have not used sightron. I looked at one in a shop, and was not that impressed with the optical clarity, but you've heard what my standards of comparison are. (mostly higher end euro stuff). That said, they have a lifetime warranty and will work fine for what you are talking about.

That said, again, while I did it, 32X is probably more than you need on a .308.

A 56 mm objective will have you using high rings. They stick a long way up to clear the barrel. The positive thing with the extra magnification is that you will be able to learn on the equipment. Note that the usual sightron does not have the mil dot reticle in it- you won't be able to adjust on the fly or range find with it. Midway is selling them for around $800

Unastamus listed 3 good scopes in that price range for a .308.

I don't quite agree with his comment about parallax. I have several older scopes that are 3-9X (Leupolds) that have the bell (objective) parallax adjustment.

It used to be something used more for target shooting or varminting, as that was really the only place that the fractions of an inch were worrisome. Now with the increased precision gun games that are played at varying distances, you need the setting at your fingertips and you will see them like that on the long range tactical scopes (and the new technology caused by all the spending on military developments over the last 20 or so years is why they are now ubiquitous.) It makes a considerable difference once you get to higher magnification and greater distance (which is what he implied), but it is measurable in any scope. The big thing is so many people want to look like "operators" that they have these doo-dads that they don't even know why they are there. I like that I have it, and I use it with the .308, and it is useful for learning, but again, its doubtful it helps much on 90% of my shooting.

That said, my current hunting scopes don't have parallax adjustment. Most of mine top out at around 12X.

[JJ]

I'm putting together a rifle with similar intentions as the OP- longer range target shooting; going with a different rifle- CZ 550 Hbar in .308. I'm curious if you have any experience or opinions regarding Sightron scopes. I'm pondering one of the SIII 8-32 x56 models. Like many things, they get good internet reviews, and I'm not sure I want to make the jump into something like Nightforce at this time.
Thanks,
ED

IMO, unless you are just shooting paper, 32x is way more magnification than you will need. High magnification is horrible about picking up mirage. As well the higher the magnification gets higher, exit pupil gets smaller, the optics struggles to pick up good light, and chromatic aberration gets worse.

We do a lot of shooting in the 3-600yd range, and even my 20x scopes pick up too much mirage during the summer. 3-15x is about perfect for most shooters.

[xd ED]

Thanks for the responses.
This will be primarily a paper puncher.

I'm gathering info, and opinions about optics at this point. It's good to get some 'close-to-home' opinions.
I'm always concerned about stuff I read on some of the national forums, which I don't doubt are filled with fanboys and shills.

Ideally I'll get to actually look through whatever I choose before buying.

[Erud]

Ed, I've got a 8-32 SIII that I bought for load development a couple of years ago and it's a lot of scope for the money. Resolution is very good, but not as good as the top-tier brands. It also has some noticeable chromatic abberation at the edges of the field of view. That said, it has decent eye relief, holds zero, tracks straight and is useable through the whole magnification range. In the $800-ish price range, it will be tough to beat.

I've had a lot of higher-end scopes from Leupold, Nightforce, Premier Reticles and US Optics(still have 3 USO's) over the last 10 years or so, and I understand the value of good glass. I find myself shooting scoped rifles less and less as time goes on, and I hardly ever shoot them at all now. For what I need it for, the SIII works great. If at some point I decide to shoot Any Sight prone matches, I would not hesitate to slap it on top of one of my prone rifles.

I also have a Vortex Viper PST 4-16 on a .308 AR that I'd rate about the same. I had a 6-24 PST on another rifle but I did not like the eye relief and ended up selling it. I do like that Vortex is making MOA/MOA scopes. Since almost all of my shooting is done with sights with MOA adjustments on MOA-scaled targets, I have no interest in using MIL/MIL for the 1% of the time I shoot with a scope. Your needs may vary.

Good luck,
Erik


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[xd ED]

Erik,
Thanks for the reply.

Your experiences are pretty much what I've been reading:
The SIII series offers good bang for the buck, with a pretty big price step to the next level of quality.

While I have limited experience, I'm drawn to a MOA/ MOA setup; which begs a question:
What is the purpose/ value of the MIL/MOA setups where the reticle is calibrated to one system, and the click value of the the turrets the other? Most scope makes seem to offer this, but it seems like a bit of needless math to me, but as I say, I'm pretty new to this.
Regards,
ED

[Erud]

Yeah, MIL/MOA is sort of a leftover from days gone by. It's needlessly complicated, and with the MOA/MOA and MIL/MIL offerings out there, it's getting a lot easier to avoid them.

That said, it's a pretty small percentage of shooters that actually use their reticles for holdovers and ranging anyways. If you aren't, the reticle won't make a lot if difference. MOA/MOA and MIL/MIL is just a personal preference, both work just fine.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JustinPo]

Since were on the subject of mil's and moa's, what the heck is the difference between a mil/mil scope and a mrad/mrad scope, is mrad just the new cool version of mils?

[Erud]

Same thing. Both are just different ways of abbreviating the word milliradian. MRAD does sound cool, though.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[t140]

Yep. Milliradian is the full word.

[UnaStamus]

I've read a lot of good reviews about the SIII. Reliable scopes, consistent tracking, and decent optical quality.

As stated by others, 32x is a LOT of magnification, and it's likely a lot more than you need. There is a law of diminishing returns with scope magnification, and the quality of the scope plays heavily into that. Unless you're spending a lot of money on the scope and buying high quality glass like Nightforce or S&B, there's going to be a more restrictive limit for your magnification having acceptable optical quality. When you're in the ~$500-$1200 range, the drop-off is generally going to be beyond 20x. Leupold Mark4 scopes were "the standard" for over a decade for tactical rifle scopes due to durability and optical quality. I've spent considerable amount of time behind all models of the Mark 4 LR/T, from the 3.5-10x40 on up to the 8.5-25x50. The 6.5-20x50 model is the highest magnification model I'd ever recommend. The 8.5-25x50 model gets pretty dark beyond 20x and is pretty much worthless in all but direct daylight at max magnification. This just demonstrates how even quality companies have difficulty with higher magnification.

[mzdadoc]

Went to Ahlman's with my wife yesterday and looked at a number of 308's. Still leaning towards Remington but I do like the Savage. They had quite a few scopes to look at also which was nice. I still have plenty of time to keep learning before I buy...

[JJ]

There have been some great responses here for you to ponder. But this is a relatively small sample size.

Check the optics forum over at snipershide. There are some guys on there that really know their chit.

[Erud]

There have been some great responses here for you to ponder. But this is a relatively small sample size.

Check the optics forum over at snipershide. There are some guys on there that really know their chit.

Just watch out for the 95% that don't know anything, but keep right on typing as if they did.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JJ]

There have been some great responses here for you to ponder. But this is a relatively small sample size.

Check the optics forum over at snipershide. There are some guys on there that really know their chit.

Just watch out for the 95% that don't know anything, but keep right on typing as if they did.

Yeeeeeep. Wheat and chaff....

[loose]

Parallax is typically only visible at 12x or higher magnification. You typically won't see parallax adjustment on scopes that top out at 9x or 10x because the magnification is not high enough for parallax to be present at closer ranges, or problematic at extended ranges.

With a budget of $700, here's what I'd recommend for scopes:

1. Weaver Tactical 3-15x50 EMDR FFP mil/mil - $765 (worth the extra money)
2. SWFA SS 3-15x42 FFP mil/mil - $699
3. Vortex Viper PST 4-16x50 SFP mil/mil - $699

My brother put the swfa 3-15 on his 7mm and it is nice.

I'm gonna say its clearer then the two 10x ss I have, which is also a great scope for the money.