scope decisions

I am finally getting close to getting a new scope for my rifle.

the rifle is a sako 85 that is used for deer hunting (30-06) almost exclusively while in a stand or ground blind. 3 to 4 times a year at most right now since I really prefer hunting pigs with my AR but who knows that could change in the future. I plan on keeping this combo forever so it has to be a quality and long lasting set up

I have a nice scope on it now trijicon 3-9X40 but it just doesnt have enough magnification on it. I want to have enough magnification to be able to pick out and count points etc. I also want the best low light glass I can buy!!!

my 50 year old eyes need some help!

Budget is under or around $1500 to $1600 max

The 2 that I have picked out are the :

1. Swaro Z5 3.5-18X44 Ballistic Turret BT4w reticle

or

2. Leupold VX6 3-18X50 Firedot reticle (lil over budget)

I am leaniing towards the swaro because I think it may be a little better at low light than the leupold but not sure. It is also $400 cheaper and that is huge plus but I do see the leupold on sale at Midway for 1400 but it is the other reticle

I read a thread where the Swaro doesnt have very good turrets so that is a bit concerning since I do want the Ballistic turret model but may change my mind once I get some feedback from you guys. I do hunt in nasty conditions since I am not skeered to get a little wet

Obviously I would rather have a nightfore NXS or ATACR but I believe these to be to far out of my budget and I am not interested in the SHV

Will the 18 power be enough? or should I look at a 5-25?


Thanks for the input

I'd think 18x is way plenty of x's for what you're doing. One very, very underrated scope that has withstood many hard kickers on my rifle, and a few other guys that I know, is the Tract Toric HD 3-15x with plex reticle. It is very bright, crystal clear, and razor sharp.

Of the two you mentioned, I like the VX6 a whole lot. I've had one on my 7mag for a few years now and it's been great.

I’m going to say that glass quality trumps magnification every time. The VX-6HD in 2-12 with the fire dot would be within your budget and excellent in low light and clarity. With that said look at the 3-18, no need to leave any in the table. I do have the exact VX-6 you describe and I am very pleased with it. Actually no, mine is the 3-18x44 CDS-ZL2. Part # 171565.

Swarm is known for excellent glass but I don’t know that it’s better than the VX-6 until you get into the more expensive ones. Someone on here has said 5HD and 6HD seem to create light and I have to agree.

That’s something I overlooked. The VX-5 has the same great glass as the 6 and can still be had with the CDS-ZL2. Excellent scope, much cheaper than the 6, without all the bells and whistles that I find unnecessary on the 6 I have.

Lots of good answers out there I’m sure. The Leupold HD series is just the one I’m most familiar with and very happy with.

I think you are talking about this one and I am very tempted to snatch it up quickly

https://www.midwayusa.com/product/6...illuminated-tmoa-reticle-matte-blemished[url=https://www.midwayusa.com/product/688502/leupold-vx-6hd-rifle-scope-30mm-tube-3-18x-44mm-cds-zl2-side-focus-illuminated-tmoa-reticle-matte-blemished][/url]

The VX6 is not a FFP. should I be concerned about that? What will that mean at different magnifications?

If you like the reticle I’d say that’s a good deal. Mine is the standard plex.

It means the reticle will only be correct st one magnification. Most likely 18x. Mine being plex I haven’t put much thought into it. If I had any type of reticle for ranging I would want a FFP. Truth is I only use the dials, I’ve never held using the reticle in the ones I have that that’s an option. Everyone has different wants/needs in a reticle.

I would not worry about the ffp. I actually like sfp for hunting

The scope at midway is perfect for your needs, but I bet you can find a new one if you call certain places.

SO how do you use it on different powers? Or do you just use the low magnification to find your prey and then always switch to 18 to shoot?

Athlon Ares ETR, nuff said.

On that reticle it means your wind holds will only be on at 18X.

Everybody is different but I leave it on about 7x most the time. I crank it up for closer looks. The higher you turn it up the less light it takes in

It’s only relevant if you’re using the reticle for range corrections. I only use the dials and honestly on most of my hunting I don’t shoot that far. I did take a doe at 510 this year that I dialed for. In a hunting scenario I like a clean duplex reticle.

If you’re close enough to reduce power to find an animal you will not need to correct for elevation most likely.

Also it’s the subtensions that are incorrect. The center crosshairs are always the same at any magnification.

Thank you WP. That makes more sense. So I can always use the turrets and then i never have to worry about it.

Im guessing the 44 vs 50 is negligible from other threads I have read.

Does anyone think the Swaro is a better scope?

Buy once, cry once. I’d get the Leupold.

FFP reticles are really small at low magnification, and really large at max magnification. In a hunting situation, this means the reticle may be hard to see if you are shooting at something in low light conditions and low magnification. (which happens a lot.) This is only an issue if you DON'T have an illuminated reticle. The payoff with FFP is that the reticle subtensions are accurate at any magnification. Good for wind holds at longer distances if you do that kind of thing.

SFP reticles are usually thicker, and stay the same size no matter what magnification. Payoff is that it's easier to see in low light/low magnification situations. Trade-off is that your reticle subtensions will only be accurate at max magnification. Plus the thicker reticle doesn't have as fine an aiming point.

Last comment: I am not a fan of depending on scope magnification to ID animals. Sometimes it's nice to be able to look at things without having to point a gun at it.

Agree

Quitshoot--Dang man!!! "Buy once, cry once". I LOVE that quote. Has that been around a long time and ive been under a rock or is that from you? I haven't paid much attention to the thread cause its over my head but I assume its saying that Leupold(in this situation) is the better option and that it is more money. I am still trying to learn to live by this but in my early life I bought so much crap like RVs and trucks and tools and such cause I thought it was a good deal or didn't wanna take time to research/shop and invariably it would of been better to bite the bullet up front and "buy once, cry once." Thanks.

freerange, he came up with that saying himself but it was decades ago. If you ever get a chance to meet him, he's a good guy. I think he also came up with "In God we trust".

Thanks gary. Ive noticed his posts some and I like him and don't doubt hes a good guy. I also saw that he did real well in the THF Rifle shoot. I appreciated his pic depicting Firemans comments about sitting with a pack. And I love the apparent meaning of his screen name "Quitshootinyoungbucks."

Birds of a feather
If it ain't broke don't fix it
Don't put the cart before the horse

Just a few of my uncredited works...


One I really like given to me by Pac Hamblen: 'The bitterness of poor quality remains long after the sweetness of low price wears off'.

I agree with the buy once cry once. I have never ever regretted my decision to buy a sako or HK45C or spent $1800 on my AR or my Nightforce NX8.

All expensive and all totally worth it. The leupold on midway for $1370 looks like a good buy and I might pull the trigger tonight or tomorrow. I dont mind blemished at all. Love the price!!!

Just curious of what you guys think about 44mm vs 50 mm? My main objective is making sure that I have great glass for the lowest light conditions. I dont have any experience with either size but I have read on this site where it shouldnt make much difference

Still nobody recommends the swaro over the leupold?

With the 44 you start to lose maximum light draw after 6x. With the 50 it the number is 7x. For me it’s not worth the extra light gathering to raise the scope higher yet.

I’m sure this can be explained better by someone else but I’ll give it a shot.

The exit pupil of a young healthy eye is 7mm. That decreases as you age but optimum is 7. You divide the objective mm by 7 to give you maximum magnification before losing light gathering.

44/7 = 6.285

50/7 = 7.142

I just pulled everything except the math from memory so someone correct me if I’m wrong.

Also, has it been proven that a 50 is brighter than a 44 on say 5x?

Paging Skylar.

That also explains why you see some fixed 6x with 42mm objectives but 4x is always smaller.

Thanks WP you have been helpful!!

I bought the leupold!!! thanks guys for the info