What magnification range do you run on your scopes? Looking at scopes for 500+ yard shots. Thinking something like a 4-16x50 would probably do fine for that. But I'm curious what the max effective range of a 16x would roughly be? What do you guys who shoot 800+ yards prefer?

Whats the size of the intended target? 10x has been proven for a long time to be effective. Its more about the shooter , weather etc with the shooter being the number one factor.
I only use 9x out to 600 yds for deer the more magnification the harder it is for the shooter to keep steady unless you are completly stationary which in most hunting situations is hard to accomplish.
4-16 as you mentioned should suffice for most decent sized game.
I only use the minimum amount of zoom that is needed to hit the target.

A 4-16 would be fine. I use a 5.5-22, 3.5-15 and a 2.5-10 and have no problem seeing the target with a lower magnification scope even at 1000 yds. For me it's more important how good the glass is and how repeatable the scope is than the max magnification.

You are going to be fine with a 4-16. I like at least 12 power on the high end, and it's simply because I can instantly see the holes in the target at 100 yards. I rarely shoot at 16 power. Mostly I keep the scopes on 8 power when I'm edge hunting.

Thanks guys.

Well camera land just reduced the price on the crossfire II 6-24x50. So looks like I may go ahea and go bigger, even if I may not need it.

Better to have it and not need it than need it and not have it.

If you have a second focal plane scope I believe you are supposed to run it on the highest power to be accurate at all yardage.

That's only with Mil-Dot reticles using the mil-dots as a range finder. Scopes with mil-dot reticles in second focal plane, the dot is only a set number of milliradians at a certain power setting, allowing you to range the target with the scope, usually.

I have two 6.5 CMs. On one, my custom, I have a 5-40x56 and I use 25 and love it. The other my AR 6.5 CM I have a 6-24X50 and I like to shoot with it on 20....for hunting I always have them turned down tho to lowest power and turn up accordingly.



^^^^^^^^^^^^

Totally agree!

I think this rifle will possibly be a 6.5 creed more eventually.

I shoot a 3.2-17. And usually shot with it on 10-14 power. Too much magnification is just as bad as not enough. IMHO 6 is too much on the low end.

Walter

Right, but that's an extremely small percentage of using a Mil reticle.

You can hold elevation corrections in Mils, or hold windage correction in Mils, or correct both in Mils. The easiest way to shoot a Mil or MOA reticle is to dial elevation and hokd wind, all in Mil or MOA. With a second focal plane the only correctly subtend at one magnification setting, usually max magnification.

I have two 6-24X and one 5-20 X. I like the 5-20 X the best. You can do a fine job outside 600 yards with a 4-16X. Yes more magnification shows more shooter error, therefore it shows what you need to correct in your form. If stability, light, and mirage allows I will shoot the far shots at maximum magnification. If the conditions do not allow I will turn it down. But I only shoot FFP so a Mil is always a Mil.

I use a 4-16 FFP mil based scope currently usually its sitting on Approx. 10x which I have shot out to 1400yards on that power. I will be going to a 5-25 when I get enough money set aside for it.

Jesus, (Spanish pronunciation if offended) I feel like Forrest Gump reading this. Thank God my shots have been from 100 and in!!

Serious target practice I zoom to 30. I practice with is powered lowest point 8. Which is still a very strong magnification for hunting scenarios.

2.5X15 for mine, used for hunting and target. Like the lower magnification for hunting and 15 gets me a good view out as far as I shoot. The 6X24 on a 17 Remington rarely gets turned above 16 to 18 due to mirage or I am hunting with it and want more field of view than the higher magnification provides

MilRads or any other math only works when you know the approximate height/width of your target, even then it's a guesstimate. Plug in any firing order with all the variables except X, with "X" (unknown) being height/width for elevation/windage, and you can't make it a firing solution using mil-rads or any other scope feature with any accuracy. That's the rub. Everything has a rub.

That's exactly right if you are trying to range with your reticle. You have to know how tall or how wide something is to range it.

Size of the target in yards x 1000 divided by Mils= range to target in yards.

Or.....hit the button on the range finder and let it tell you how far it is. Then use the Mils for elevation correction and wind correction.

Dang metric system....

A yard is not metric.

Mils are not metric.... fyi

Judd knows. He's stirring the pot.

everyone knows there are 9.555 inches in a foot



but seriously folks, and this is purely my opinion. for really long range, way past 500yrds. I think more is better. BUT it also means MORE $$$, a cheap 25X scope is worthless, so if you are going to do this scratch the Vortex Crossfire. If its gotta be a Vortex, go to their higher end models. If you go cheap on optics, you will never be happy.

That's the tough pill about playing the long range game. It's expensive and will probably require a custom rifle and $2,000+ scope.

Back to the question, I had a Nightforce 8-32X56 on my long-range gun. If it was a bright, sunny, hot day, I could start around 10-15X. If it was cool and cloudy, I could jack it up to 32X. Hot Sunny, mirage will kill you at higher powers.

This is where the high dollar scopes separate themselves from the mid-lower dollar scopes.

I'm running a 5-25X50 now. I have shot it to 600 and it is perfect. Hope to streach it out soon.

Again , only my opinions, these guys here, know way more than me