Long range X vs clarity

For shooting a 1000 yards with precision is exceptional 20x glass good enough? As in a 4-20 ZCO. Or can we say the 527 is necessary? Serious thoughts. The other option is the TT 525. After doing the research the Kahles 525 although the same price doesn’t seem to be in the same class.

I would say good clear glass over magnification any day. 20x is plenty. I easily ran to 1000 with a 3-15 swfa. For me a finer reticle is important which is one reason I’m not a big fan of ffp.

#1 priority for me is repeatability and durability. Glass clarity is important, but not the most important. I've shot out to 800 and 1000 yards on 4x. But magnification is good, but most shooters get too much. A good 4-16, 4-20, or 5-20 or 5-22 is plenty. As you go up in magnification, your clarity goes down. And your mirage gets worse on the hot days with more magnification. I find a good top end is about 15x to 22x.

I've seen multiple shooters go for a Swarovski for long range shooting, only to realize the scope internals can't handle the dialing and repeatability. But the glass was clear!

Mechanics is my #1 priority hence my list. I just want my cake and eat it too. Great glass too. It’s a big investment for me but one I’m ready to make. The Mk 5 while having good glass did not dial as reliably as I like.

You can’t go wrong with either 3 you mentioned. TT is the top of the 3. ZCO doesn’t lag behind much at all. Khales would have the highest step off when compared to the other two. I own the ZCO 5-27. I would definitely own a TT also. Zero complaints here. Insane magnification isn’t necessary for 1000yd targets.

I’m pretty sure I’ve narrowed it down to the ZCO the consideration is the the 4x low end at 28’ fov vs the 5x low end at 21’. I don’t know which will make me happier, the 4x fov or the 27x magnification.

There is no absolute rule in magnification vs clarity. I'd normally say clarity is more important, but I'd rather have 9/10 clarity at 25x than 10/10 clarity at 15x if I'm trying to shoot 1000 yards.

Chad is right that repeatability and durability are more important than either mag or clarity, but with the 3 scopes you've mentioned those should all be good.

I really like the Kahles design. In terms of bang for the buck, a Kahles k525i used for under $2k is clearly the best value. In terms of overall performance, the TT and ZCO is splitting hairs. Are you hunting also? If so the decision gets a little more difficult. If not then go with the TT 525 or ZCO 5-27. If for nothing other than resale, I'd go 5-27. These are target scopes and the only buyers willing to buy a 315 or 4-20 is if they're getting a discount. The higher mag will hold value much better.

The difference in 4-5x is much much smaller to me than the difference in 20x vs 27x. When I'm shooting prone, 20x would feel like an enormous handicap. My Delta Stryker goes to 29x and I'm constantly between 25x and 29x when I'm prone or on the bench. I can't imagine spending zco money and being tied to 20x

Splitting hairs.


1.Tracking/ return to zero
2. Glass clarity
3. Magnification available

How big of targets at 1k?
I think glass trumps magnification..
years ago I had a USO 3-17x44 and was shooting at 1k and got a Kahles 3-12x50, it was an eye opener (bad pun intended) at how much easier it was with the better glass.

Too much magnification is not good either, you lose your field of view and it is harder to watch for impact due to muzzle jump.

5-25 is good for a dedicated LR gun.. 3-15 or 18 is also good, a bit lighter and more compact for a dual use LR and hunting gun

I settled on the Kahles 3-18 as it has great glass, I like the reticle (a whole different discussion), tracks right and is compact and light for what it is, I also really like the way they did the adjustments

What patriot07 said are very valid points when trying to decide between the two mags. My 5-27 sits on a 300 Norma AI. The measly 3 ounces of weight savings for the 4-20 meant nothing to me when compared to the other advantages of he 5-27 for the rifle I use it on. I do hunt with my 300 Norma. It’s not a pig when it comes to weight but isn’t a lightweight either. She sits around 10lbs fully dressed.

This is a few years old but I found it very interesting. https://precisionrifleblog.com/2020/09/05/best-elr-scope-and-scope-mount-and-rings/

I read that a couple of days ago, it’s a good article. ZCO was only two years old, it has a much larger following now.

They did that post several years, I wish they would continue. That’s the last one.

I am not really friends with the author and creator of that website but I know and have met him. He is a very busy man. For what it is worth the scope he uses is a 7-35 ATACR and he has several of them. Nothing at all wrong with TT, ZCO, or Kahles but any particular reason why Nightforce isn't on your list? The 7-35 ATACR seems to be the gold standard for long range shooting. I don't doubt at all that the TT, ZCO and maybe even Kahles have slightly better glass but there is a huge price jump and I wonder if the difference is really that significant. Nightforce tracking and reliability is second to none.

I concur.

Actually according to that writer NF is second only to Kahles in tracking. Not try to be argumentative though. NF is a great scope by all counts.


I do not want a NF for the same reason I do not want a 6.5 Creedmoor. They are both great tool to be sure. It’s mostly because I’m hard headed and childish and do not want to be like everyone else. Terrible answer but honest.

Not to worry though, at the rate I’m going I’ll be mounting the scope on a longbow.

"That thing over there works. So I do not want it."

So you do understand.

For the record I’m not looking at things that don’t also work.

Well… anymore. I was think the Mk5 5-25 would be a hit and I took a reliable SS 5-20 off to do it. It sure is nice glass but pretty is as pretty does.

I’m going to have a heck of a time selling that Leupold if I keep bad mouthing it.

I seen em fail to track also.

If memory serves, we told you that was a possibility.

Way to go, Buzz II.

Idk, I think I bought that in a spastic moment with no research. I tend to do that.

And I have had it a couple of years and actually do shoot it, so maybe it’s Buzz 2.0.

I think right now the next tier down from the ZCO and TT is the Vortex Razor GenIII
I have all the scopes mentioned above except ZCO which I have played with but not owned. My TT was a great scope with amazing turrets that has such tiny numbers and closely spaced clicks made it hard for me to use with 68 year old eyes. I have the big ATACR as well but I find myself using my Zeiss S3 and the Burris Pro more because of better FOV and I just don’t like the way the magnification ring the whole eyepiece turns.

Also have Kahles and it is a very high quality feeling scope and love the parallax adjustment but CA is very apparent compared to other even cheaper scopes.

I shot my first 1000 yard match with a 3-15x and never thought about needing more at that time.

We shot Jason's range out to 800 with a G1 PST 2.5-10 on a .308. That scope isn't known for it's amazing glass and 10x isn't much mag at that distance.

I often wonder how much 'clarity' is actually a focus issue between shooter and scope, and not a glass issue.

Three things on clarity.

1.Glass quality
2. Focus setting
3. Mirage

Mirage is one of the several reasons I like first focal plane. There's not a scope out there that can beat Mirage 100% of the time. Get a hot, clear day, and it can be rough past 500 yards. Even my NF ATACR 5-25X is not immune. There's times I can't use 25X, and I back it down to 18X, give or take.

And maximum magnification is not going to be maximum clarity, almost always. Back down from maximum just a bit, and things often get more clear. But, generally that is for scopes over 15X maximum.

At everyone suggestion I just laid hands on a 7-35 NF. It’s on sale at that. I didn’t buy but I gotta say I don’t have any negatives.

Big and heavy is the only bad about it.

Some rifles, that doesn't matter.

I've hit a mile and a quarter with the 7-35X (2180 yards)

I was able to get behind a ZCO 8-40 yesterday at 500 yards. Even with the cold temps in the 30-40s with the bright sun there was significant mirage on the high side. I may not be giving it a fair shake because the parallax was set for the owner and I didn’t want to mess with it. The magnification ring was excellent without a throw lever. I really wanted to twist the knobs but didn’t want to get smacked in the back of the head.

Overall that experience showed me I don’t need the high magnification. In truth a 7-08 just won’t shoot far enough for it to be relevant with good glass. I did put it on 25-27 and the view was excellent.

TT is out. Too many reliability complaints.

High magnification is out. I don’t need it.


The list goes

ZCO 527
Kahles 525
ATACR 5-25
ZCO 420


Another SS 5-20, retrax bed cover, whiskey and cocaine with the balance.

Even though I have no need or plan to buy a scope of this quality, I do still appreciate you sharing what have learned.

I’ve ran my 3-15x50 premier heritage (tangent before it was tangent) out to a mile without any hesitation. That being said it’s no longer on my fully dedicated lr rig as those wear NF 7-35’s and a S&B 5-25. While the magnification isn’t always useable I’d rather have for those times it is.

More info if your so inclined

https://www.snipershide.com/shootin...iew-tt-zco-schmidt-march-vortex.7148097/

Long read but an excellent review. This helps solidify the top of my list. Thanks

The author didn't include Nightforce which is the #1 Long Range Scope in the review, what happened here?

Good question I guess he didn’t have one to review or as someone said if I need to use my scope to beat someone to death I would choose Nightforce otherwise there are better options that are cheaper.

Curious as to what options you feel are better and cheaper? I’ve been behind a lot of glass and they are tough to beat especially cheaper as those options usually only hold their own under good conditions.

"Better options that are cheaper"

I'm wondering what those are.

The someone wasn’t me….
but I believe they were referring to the Vortex Razor GenIII/Minox ZP5/ Zeiss S series

I know the Minox is good and I’m surprised at the feedback on the Razor.

Minox is good but problem is if you have to send it off, it's months and months of waiting to get it back. Sometimes it's fixed and sometimes it's not

I wouldn't own any of those.

I've been telling y'all the Razor line isn't the Diamondback line but few people will listen. The AMD scope is even USA made (gasp).

When it comes to clarity...you hear very few folks brag on the NF clarity (if you do it's typically the Competition model and for good reason)...but if you need to use your scope to drive a nail or for those that can destroy an anvil they are awesome.

On the list...March is the one, but I pay way more attention to weight than most of the guys posting here. I've got zero desire to carry a 15+ lb rifle to the truck more less to hunt with...benchrest rifles excluded.

The problem with Vortex is they are more expensive. You've got to buy two of then, so when one breaks down you can get back in service quickly.

Minox and the gen 3 razor had known turret issues. The glass quality control on the new razor is said to be better than gen 2’s we’re.

As far as the clarity of NF my atacr are on pretty much on par with my Schmidt pmii and barely behind a tangent. This is strictly speaking of the 7-35 variant nf. The only thing I will say is to me the nf is a bit more exact on the parallax in comparison to the S&B and tangent. By that I mean that I catch myself adjusting or checking it more often than I do with the others.

I think your original list was best. TT doesn't have a quality reputation issue and deserves to be in the discussion with ZCO. ZCO is king of the mountain at the moment but is absolutely splitting hairs with the TT and even the 7-35 ATACR. Kahles is a very nice option with no quality concerns, good turrets, good reticles, but noticeable CA compared to TT & ZCO, at a considerably lower price point. I have hesitation with putting NF in there purely because the 7-35 ATACR is their cream of the crop and the OP is already struggling to decide between the 4x bottom end vs 5x bottom end. 7x is a noticeable drop in FOV. And their 7-35 ATACR is noticeably sharper than the 5-25. I've used every scope I've mentioned above except the ZCO.

I have used the gen 2 razor and the AMG, and I just didn't care for the AMG at all. gen 2 razor was a really nice optic I thought that has a good spot in the value discussion but probably right behind Kahles. AMG is only for weight savings but the optical compromises for me weren't insignificant enough to justify the weight reduction.

ETA: I guess if I'm putting Kahles in as a value pick, you have to include the 5-25 ATACR. It's probably my favorite scope around $2.5k. It's not at the same level as TT or ZCO or 7-35 ATACR, but it's definitely better than the Kahles at not much more money. It's easy to look through, has a great reticle, good turrets, super solid reliability, good FOV, flexible eye relief, limited CA, etc. It's just a 9.5/10 on glass instead of the 9.99 that ZCO and TT are or the 9.95 that the 7-35 ATACR is. As a matter of fact, I'd probably 100% rather have $1500-$2k towards other stuff plus a 5-25 ATACR than either the TT or ZCO personally. But I've been known to be a cheapskate at times...

I know there is lots of love for that NF 7-35 and the one I handled was on sale for $3300 in tan. I wish I would have had one in the field next to the ZCO 8-40.

I do know one thing. I will be buying today.

As far as being cheap I play it a little different. I do not have multiple nice things. I try for one very nice thing. If I end up with 10k in a rig it’s not really any different than someone having 10k in 2-5 set-ups.


I really like the Kahles ergonomics and repeatable mechanics.

The absolute only negative I can see to the ZCO is the 36mm tube when I’ve got a perfectly good pair of 34mm NF rings doing nothing. The 6001 Spuhr for the ZCO is a billion dollars.


Despite my buy once attitude I think the the TT price is hurting my feelings. Then again I wouldn’t have to buy rings!

Just looked again. The heck with the Kahles at $3850. I’ll buy the NF all day for $3300 over that.

Kahles used are under $2k last I looked.

Well said and 100% agree. And unless you want the Spuhr rings there are other options available. My only complaint is the matte finish on the ZCO. It does scuff up easily.

I only have one really expensive scope myself. Still means you have to decide if the tiny, tiny differences in the high end scopes will make thousands of dollars of difference to you. I have a Delta Stryker that was under $2k new and I'd be shocked if you could tell a difference between it and the ZCO if I put some tape over the brand name. It goes all the way from 4.5x on the bottom end to 29x on the top end, has a great reticle, fantastic eye relief, and really nice turrets. I tried everything you're looking at and ended up with this.

I would sell my Nightforce 7-35 ATACR as I never use it ….I used to grab the TT instead but sold it as I just didn’t see the glass being that much better than the Gen III Vortex although the turrets and setting zero stop are best I have used so far.
I have the Kahles 6-24 as well and it’s a super nice scope but not close the the Gen III in the glass dept. I really like the design features of the Burris Pro especially the wide FOV and have a couple of those

Well a day of searching found zero ZCO 527s with the impct1 reticle in stock. The best I can do is 3-6 weeks out or get the 420 now.

I dont know anything about any of this stuff but I would say "dont settle". Wait for what you want.

Sending you a pm with a link for one in stock.

Those are some nice people. I spoke with them yesterday, they just haven’t updated their website, they sold it Wednesday or Thursday.


Thanks for taking the time and looking.

There is a reason the 420 is more available…

Yep, I was able to get a used one in excellent condition last night. Saved a few dollars and considering their warranty I don’t have any issues with buying used.

I meant that it was less desirable than the 527 is why it's more available.

Smart move buying used. Makes it where you can switch later if you don't like it without taking a huge $ hit

I understood what you were saying. I did buy the 527 not the 420. I want to grow up and shoot for groups at a 1000 one day, not just hit the steel. For me that’s a lofty goal the 27x should be a benefit right there.


For the naysayers, look into who started NF and then went to run Kahles US. That is the man who owns and started ZCO. Hell I’m optimistic.

Your next investment should be in a set of wind flags.

I didn’t see you at the last match but obviously you saw me.

I could use some wind flags. My understanding is good but my judgement is poor.

Ha! No, I just know I've been around the world's best sniper trainer up in the TX Panhandle several times while he and his "students" are working. The wind is always doing something up there. If you can imagine a wagon wheel laying on the ground.......the hub is a shooting station, and the spokes go out to 1500 meters and they're all lined with wind flags. His "students" can shoot in every conceivable wind situation from a single point, and those flags are doing crazy things up and down those lanes and it is quite eye opening.

Accuracy 1st? Todd Hodnett?

Yessir. It's very enlightening watching these guys.

No flags on my range. There's no flags when hunting or shooting matches. Just what nature provides.

According to his bio and site, impressive, very impressive training set up and instruction. Shooting 360° in panhandle wind is hard to beat for someone that will need to put the training to real work. The biggest surprise about what I read on his site, it's only like $1500.00 for three days. If I ever decide to extend my max range that's where I'd go.

You and me both. I'm just a bystander when I get to go. Keep my mouth shut and listen/watch. The ranch foreman on the place we've been whitetail hunting is one of his good buddies. The most fun is getting to watch them shoot prarie dogs at 800M on their days off. They love it. As TH says, they don't make cold bore, first round hits every time, but don't let them shoot twice. Elevation is way easy to these guys, but wind is voodoo even to the best shooters in the world. David Tubb lives there too, and will tell you the same thing.

I'm at 500 yards on deer, we have plenty of dried grass, brush, trees, etc. for wind calls. There's only been a few times I was shooting a distance and there was enough wind for me to have to take it into consideration.

I saw Accuracy 1st, Todd Hodnett's range. Other than mirage I don't know how they would call wind without flags. Since the people he trains won't have the benefit of flags and have to make shots that mean a whole lot more than hitting a deer I bet it's part of the 3 day curriculum, or covered in other courses. Still, $1500.00 for three days, just getting to shoot that much on a range like that is worth the price.

If I took a class like that I would want to see flags. I like visual aid and there is absolutely no reason not to have the reference

Wind flags are for puzzies.

And world champions.

I can see that. In nature, neither are there targets of a known size with the yardage marked on them. When I shot at 475 yards, the range was marked, I knew the dimensions of the steel and the wind was easy to estimate. I was 4 for 4 as I recall. Had there been nothing but bare ground and rocks between me and the target, flags required for me. No doubt about it, the shooters that go to Accuracy 1st will know how to get it done without flags when they have to.

What I like is when you have a disturbance in the terrain and the wind is blowing in opposite directions depending on which side of it you’re on. That’s a thing, I didn’t know it was a thing until a couple of years ago, but it’s a thing. I’m sure more experienced shooters see it all the time.

It's a thing, that's for sure. Along with Hodnett, this fella named Tubb lives up there too. He has won 11 National long range titles at Camp Perry, and 7 National long range titles, arguably the best and most accomplished long range shooter in history. I'd take his opinion on wind flags over anyone elses.......

You should try gettin some

He shot a PRS match just east of his home. The Heatstroke Open, in Camargo, OK. His squad immediately ahead of mine.

No flags out there. And not much time to get shots off, in all shooting positions. He had a hard time and did not come back the next year. Ft.Sill active duty Army Snipers have done well, but had a hard time there as well.

"World Champion" depends on what discipline.

Trees, grass, mirage, sound is all that's needed.

I'm betting JG taught Tubb everything he knows.

If you want to learn wind not using flags this course is very good and the Blue Steel ranch has some tough winds as well. My Kestrel hit mid 50mph winds out there.

https://www.cprifle.com/about-us

That was my squad. My razor was going tits up that match and he kept trying to sell me one of his luepy mk8 with his voodoo reticle that doesn’t require dialing. It’s odd and based off of time of flight but works. Oddly him and Todd don’t care for each other last I heard despite both being Canadians. From what I understood David was messing with the tof stuff early on and Todd pirated the idea and then the wind dot tremor reticle was born and sold to the military wholesale like.

If memory serves, both of us outscored Tubb.

I didn’t as my mighty vortex got progressively worse.

When you trust a Vortex, it will tell you why that was a mistake.

Those two definitely aren't best buddies, that's for sure. I don't see Tubb much anymore, but sometimes he's very friendly, sometimes not so much. Like him or not, claim to have outshot him, or whatever else a guy can come up with, fact is nobody has the hardware he does, period.

Copy, congrats!

This started with wind flags, then your "world champion" words.

Then him shooting a match without flags gave him a hard time.

Now, he's got more hardware than everyone else.

Got it.

What year did this heat stroke open take place?

The "Napoleon complex", known informally as small man syndrome, is a syndrome normally attributed to people of short stature. It is characterized by overly-aggressive or domineering social behavior, and carries the implication that such behavior is compensatory for the subject's physical or social shortcomings.

I got a base hit off of Roger Clemens one time. That doesn't make me Ted Williams. Glad you finally got it, as there's a time to talk, and a time to take notes. When Tubb or Hodnett talk about what works, it's time for you to take notes.

It’s been several years. That match hasn’t happened in some years. He would sometimes shoot another match called shoot for the green. The year I shot it he did pretty good but it was a majority prone match with long par times so it was in his wheelhouse. He was fun to be squadded with as we chatted a ton about shooting in general.

Great description of yourself.

Go take classes from them, then. Clearly they are your idols.

I'm 6'2" 235, guessing by your ego you're 5'6" 150. We all know who Napoleon is around here as you remind us quite often with pearls like "If memory serves, both of us outscored Tubb." You eventually woke up from that dream I assume.