This scope stuff is driving me crazy... Need scope advise for a 10T .308

Rifle in question: Savage 10T in .308.

Current scope: Old Bushnell Banner 3-9x? with crappy Warne rings

What am I doing with it: 100-600yds known distance currently, want to work out to 1000yds.

Budget: $1000'ish.

New to the Savage, learning how to shoot long distance. Obviously, the Bushnell isn't up to the task, once I get past 100yds it's over, at least with my eyes.

I'm confused about all the different reticles. If I'm shooting known distance, is all this MOA/MIL nonsense really necessary? Once I work up the dope for my load, it's largely a matter of cranking in some elevation and windage, right?

Is FFP necessary shooting at KD? Seems like I can save a few $ by going SFP... but I don't know the downsides. One of the scope reviews I read, with a FFP scope, he said at full magnification the reticle obscured the bull at distance.

As I understand it, Japanese glass is the best (minus the European makes in some respect) but I've not found a place where they tell you glass source. I don't like China and I don't want their crap, but I don't know how to tell unless it's spelled out in the specs.

Scope brand. I understand everyone has their favorites, here's what I've gathered, in general terms... Leupold is good but overpriced for what you get. Buddy of mine has one of the new SIG optics, but I haven't really read anything good or bad about them. Can't afford the high-dollar stuff... Swaro, NF, Trij, etc, and I don't want a Vortex (based on what I have read about constant warranty returns.) Here is what I'm considering...

Burris XTR II 4-20x50
Bushnell LRS 6-24x50

I've also seen Primary Arms and Sightron listed here a few times, and I acknowledge that I don't know anything about Nikon (except their camera stuff,) Redfield, and some of the others.

So... without being too brutal, let me know what you think and what I need to be looking for.

Since you referenced the Burris XTR 4-20x50 and the Bushnell 6-24x50, I'm going to suggest the Sightron SIII 6-24x50 as another option for you... The are available in FFP and SFP both. I went with the FFP version myself as I wanted to keep my subtensions the same no matter what magnification I am on. I have not found the floating center dot to be too large for "fine" work. The advantage of the SFP scope will be you'll most likely have more MOA or MIL available on your turrets... (FFP= 80 MOA SFP= 100 MOA) additionally you can dial your magnification down which will increase your subtensions which in turn gives you more room to shoot longer distances. The Sightron is Japanese glass and is on par with the Nightforce NXS as far as clarity. It does lack some of the features of the NXS (such as zero stop) but at half the price it's tough to beat.

AS far as MIL vs MOA get the reticle that you are familiar with using... I've always used MOA so I stayed with it. Do NOT get a scope that is both MIL and MOA (reticle and turrets need to be the same).

Lastly, the Primary Arms has had fantastic reviews and I've seen some demos It is a great place to "Start" if you don't want to break open the piggy bank just yet.

I have a Sightron 8-32×56 in Burris Xtreme rings on a 20moa rail on my model 10 FCP-K. Scope was <$700 dealer cost. I'm getting tired of swapping it back and forth between the model 10 and model 12FV.

A buddy bought one of the PA FFP scopes. When it arrived the number rings under the knobs were spinning free having never been glued down at the factory. He never got to give the scope a chance, just returned it for his money back and bought a Sightron like mine.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by holescreek

I have a Sightron 8-32×56 in Burris Xtreme rings on a 20moa rail on my model 10 FCP-K. Scope was <$700 dealer cost. I'm getting tired of swapping it back and forth between the model 10 and model 12FV
.

---

32x??? Good heavens. And clarity is decent even at full mag?

Leupold VX3i 6.5-20x50. Great glass, has turrets and reticles to choose from what other features do you need? Also well under the $1000 budget. My second choice would be the sightron.

Have you ever heard of anybody gathering up all their old 30 year old scopes and giving them away, so they could go buy some new ones?
No you haven't, and if you happen to know somebody owning them, they aren't even thinking about buying newer ones.
Not to say new ones aren't very good mind you, at least some of them.
If you look on Ebay you will find say a 6.5x20 Leupold for a fraction the cost of a new one, and it will be guaranteed forever.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Charlie98

Rifle in question: Savage 10T in .308.
What am I doing with it: 100-600yds known distance currently, want to work out to 1000yds.
Budget: $1000'ish.

1) I'm confused about all the different reticles. If I'm shooting known distance, is all this MOA/MIL nonsense really necessary?
2) Once I work up the dope for my load, it's largely a matter of cranking in some elevation and windage, right?
3) Is FFP necessary shooting at KD? Seems like I can save a few $ by going SFP... but I don't know the downsides.
4) One of the scope reviews I read, with a FFP scope, he said at full magnification the reticle obscured the bull at distance.
5) As I understand it, Japanese glass is the best (minus the European makes in some respect) but I've not found a place where they tell you glass source. I don't like China and I don't want their crap, but I don't know how to tell unless it's spelled out in the specs.

Burris XTR II 4-20x50
Bushnell LRS 6-24x50

I've also seen Primary Arms and Sightron listed here a few times, and I acknowledge that I don't know anything about Nikon (except their camera stuff,) Redfield, and some of the others.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SageRat Shooter

AS far as MIL vs MOA get the reticle that you are familiar with using... I've always used MOA so I stayed with it. Do NOT get a scope that is both MIL and MOA (reticle and turrets need to be the same).
Lastly, the Primary Arms has had fantastic reviews and I've seen some demos It is a great place to "Start" if you don't want to break open the piggy bank just yet.

---

SageRat's advice is SPOT-ON.

1) As was said, DO NOT, repeat that, DO NOT buy mixed turrets and reticles!! You will get lost in calculators and wheels, and stupidity. Pick a system, neither is better or worse. Is it necessary, unless you want to "guess" constantly, or just shoot a deer occasionally. People who use SFP ALWAYS get lost, and swear they missed by XX. A FFP scope in either system allows known adjustment at ANY distance.
2) No. IF: Powder lots, bullets, atmosphere, shooting location NEVER change, then your load never does. The instant something changes, so does your "drop" or windage. So if you are a 100 bullet guy with 1# of powder, you should be constantly re-working your loads; or accept that you will never be spot on.
3) The practicality is SFP is Cheaper to do, well. FFP allows your reticle and turrets to ALWAYS match exactly. Do you want that to be the case, or are you happy with "...ehhh, I think it was close. Maybe lug around a couple other gadgets and rangefinders to check"?
4) That's at best a poor review, if looking at the whole. For a given scope, fine. But I can find you a turd in a SFP also, so take it for what it is. A 32x scope at max, shooting to 200 yards is going to be an issue for reticle size. But unless you are a short-range bullseye shooter, that is a fabrication story to confuse you.
5) Swaro has had the Chinese making things for them, for a very long time. If you spec a turd, you get a turd; not exactly fair to claim it was the Chinese' fault when your favorite scope company asked for it. LOW which is "japanese" glass, has plants in the phillipeans and china, no one bats an eye at that.... Take a superstition for what it is.

Personally I have had several Pre-XTR-II Burris scopes and wasn't impressed. Can't tell you anything first hand about the SI scopes. I do have several of the Primary Arms 4-14x FFP mil/mil scopes, and have reviewed it here on this board. For the $230 they want for them, they flat embarased the SWFA 3-15 HD scope; not even close, and the SWFA is $750!!
So is the PA the second coming?? Of course not. A Weaver Tactical 3-15 (#800363) is notably better glass all around, and sells for about what the SWFA does. The trick with the PA is what you get for the money spent. MZ5, who posts little these days has shot a few of my PA's. He is cross-eyed and goofy to start off :p. But seriously, he doesn't like the quality of the image when we shoot at great distances. While I agree that it isn't stellar, it also isn't a hinderance to me. Yes I would like the quality of my Weaver, but it is acceptable to me, and cost a third as much. My first PA tracks consistently, but isn't exact; the second is. The minor amount that it is off, can easily be adjusted for, and isn't the only thing that would be the reason for a miss when you get to 1K or beyond. Unless you are the wind whisperer, the scope isn't the largest potential for error. My first PA has over 2,000 rounds of Creedmoor fired through it, a couple hundred rounds of 308, a tumble down a hill while strapped to a 4-wheeler, and several trips to AZ and back while rattling on the floorboards. Short of cosmetics, the scope is none the worse for wear.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Charlie98

32x??? Good heavens. And clarity is decent even at full mag?

---

Absolutely. My other "best" scope is a pretty old Leupold 24x fixed power scope I bought at a gun show for $350. It had a couple issues so I sent it back to Leupold and they replaced several parts and gave it a tune up for free. I actually bought the Leupold first, then after getting a taste of what a good optic was supposed to look like bought the sightron.

With the exception of shooting to 300M with a peep sighted M-16 when I was 19 and had good eyes, I am SuperNoob as far as scopes and LR shooting; I've not shot over 100yds in almost 30 years. The Bushnell on the Savage at the moment is about 25 years old and has glass as clear as a Coke bottle (well, maybe...) Once I scope this Savage, that's probably it... I don't obsess with everything new and improved, I like what works, and I don't really have any other rifle to swap scopes around on.

Based on comments above...

I buy reloading components in bulk... so 1-2K bullets, 8-16lb powder at a time. My handloads I fired this past weekend shot better than the FGMM I use as my benchmark.

I don't hunt, at least I won't be with this rifle.

I'm not against Leupold scopes, and now that I know how to compare them to other equivalent scopes, I see they are right in there, price-wise. Interesting. 442, I see the VX3i you are talking about...

I assumed there was a downside to SFP, I see that is the case. Ok, Ok... I'll make sure the turrets and the reticle match.

The particular review I read was on the Burris XTR, so I was sort of curious about it. As far as Burris scopes, a friend of mine has a XTR 1-4x24... decent enough scope, if not the brightest, but I blame that on the small lens. It sucks at 100yds.

My eyes are not the best, I have a very hard time with visual focus looking through a dim scope (my Bushnell) at a dim target... that's why I'm trying to find the best glass I can afford. Magnification helps... I put 3 rounds into 1/2" at 100yds with my friend's RPR with the SIG 24x scope with ease (I think I had it set at about 18x.)

Off to go research what I've learned so far... :cool:

Would the (professor) mind explaining why the reticle and turrets always need to match?
So If a person prefers a fine cross hair, or a single dot reticle, does that still apply?
Learning to use a dial is the real issue and not the type dial or reticle it is.
I can see where there would be an advantage if you are a competitor in some type events, especially when time is an issue.
But for most casual shooters who just want to dial up so they can hit something it dosent really matter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yobuck

Would the (professor) mind explaining why the reticle and turrets always need to match?
So If a person prefers a fine cross hair, or a single dot reticle, does that still apply?
Learning to use a dial is the real issue and not the type dial or reticle it is.
I can see where there would be an advantage if you are a competitor in some type events, especially when time is an issue.
But for most casual shooters who just want to dial up so they can hit something it dosent really matter.

---

It will be easier even for the casual shooter to make adjustments especially with spotted misses if they have a reticle that matches the turrets. There's no guessing. You can quickly see if you missed by .5 Mils or 2 MOA etc. It makes zeroing the scope easier as well. The problem is that shooters don't understand the reticle and how many ways it can be used beyond milling targets etc. I don't care what type of shooting I'm doing I want something that matches my scope turrets. If fine crosshairs is your preference there's plenty of scopes out there now that offer a solid reticle with measurements on it, but with a point dot in the center like the Kahles K624i with SKMR3 or open crosshairs like the vortex EBR2C reticle. Once you learn how to use these type of reticles you'll never go back to fine crosshairs etc. To much information and instant feedback is provided to the shooter with these type of set ups.

Well apparently the one shot zero method like many other things has become obsolete.

I would take a hard look at the new Leupold vx-3i LRP (long range precision) line up. I have a few PA 4-14's and for the price they can not be beat. I would recommend FFP with matching turrets/reticle, for all the reasons listed above. In the long run you will be glad you went this route. I have experience with PA , Leupold, Vortex, Nikon, and NF. I was saving for an XTR II when Leupold dropped the new LRP line. It has everything you need. FFP, TMR ( mil reticle), you can get MOA if you like, target turrets with zero stop. Great glass for the money. And it comes in at 10-12 oz lighter and a hundred bucks cheaper than the XTR II. You also get leupolds outstanding warranty and customer service.

Go with a Sightron and don't look back. You won't be disappointed.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk

At distance optics are everything. You can't hit what you can't see. Spend money on good quality optics and you'll never go wrong. Buy once. Cry once. Some of my scopes have sat on numerous rifles. Rifles have sold but the scopes remain.

As a F-Class shooter one of the more important things to me in a scope is elevation adjustment. If you run out of elevation at 1k all you have left is hold over which doesn't work well with me or go with a 20MOA base and forget shooting at 100.

Since my brain works best in inches I run MOA and SFP. It what I have always used and I really don't like the reticule to obscure my view at high magnifications.

I have a NF SHV 5-20x56 MOAR on my antelope rifle it has plenty of adjustment to run 1K. Also with the reticule hash marks I can easily do holdover or windage adjustment without dialing if the need arises. I like the zero set turret. Easy to dial down to 100yd zero without having to remember which hash mark to line up with.. The eye box is not as critical as the Benchrest models and easier to line up on. New they are at the high end of your budget. You can find them used on eBay in your budget.

For the money, I don't think you can beat the burris veracity. Ffp, zero stop, good glass, and built like a tank

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yobuck

Would the (professor) mind explaining why the reticle and turrets always need to match?
So If a person prefers a fine cross hair, or a single dot reticle, does that still apply?
Learning to use a dial is the real issue and not the type dial or reticle it is.
I can see where there would be an advantage if you are a competitor in some type events, especially when time is an issue.
But for most casual shooters who just want to dial up so they can hit something it dosent really matter.

---

Why, in God's holy name, would ANYONE purposely choose a scope whose reticle does not match the turrets? If that's all you have, and have come accustomed to a
n awkward, silly design, so be it. But why, pray tell, would you recommend someone purposely choose such a model?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by foxx

Why, in God's holy name, would ANYONE purposely choose a scope whose reticle does not match the turrets? If that's all you have, and have come accustomed to a
n awkward, silly design, so be it. But why, pray tell, would you recommend someone purposely choose such a model?

---

:amen:
Thinks it's a case of all he's ever known.
If someone here needs a reason to punch themselves in the face, I may have a few mis-matched dogs left. Been using them as targets in some videos and as a bullet test medium. Only fitting use for them I could find. :D

Well since the question is aimed directly at me, let me at least attempt to reply in a manner that can be understood, at least by those with unfixed curious minds.
Now that in and of itself is a tough call, due to so many who actually have never even used a scope to attain the results they talk about.
But this is the internet.
For example, on one of the post here it was said reaching 1000 yds might be an issue, but by using a 20 minit base on the gun, 100 yds might then also be an issue.
Meanwhile in the real world, my youngest son has a 40 minit base on a gun that is in fact zeroed for 100 yds.
Not saying that would always work, but without actually trying, you wont actually know, AND, that is the issue with much of this stuff.
Much of what is said and thought to be true, hasent been actually verified by those commenting.
Now I guess its best I repeat (AGAIN), that for certain type target shooting, it might be an advantage to have a reticle and turret match.
But the world of long range shooting, or any shooting, dosent just revolve around target shooters, much as some seem to think and attempt to convey that it does.
And frankly, that's always been the case with many target shooters, al least some of the very good ones ive spent time around.

First off, in some competition, it dosent matter where the bullets impact the target, so long as they hit the target.
Fact is the 1000 yd group record was held by the same guy for about 14 years with an old fixed power Leupold scope.
A big part of the issue today is that it is no longer good enough to just hit what your aiming at, where in past years that's all that mattered.
Its now become very important to have everything figured out (properly) before sending off a shot, and if by some off chance you might miss, with the proper equiptment setup the next shot will be a hit.
Does that sound about right?
QUESTION, Does anybody know what one shot zero means or is?
QUESTION, Does anybody know what to do with an older scope if by chance your shot hits 2' to the right at say 1200 yds?
I mean 2' is 2' wether you used a new model matching scope or an old one right?
For a shooter, it makes no freaking difference.
Got that? It makes no freaking difference.
Assuming you happen to be unfortunate enough to have an unmatching scope, and your just an average Joe, meaning not someone attempting to be the second coming of say David Tubbs, or maybe a Canadian sniper, while using your home brewed 260 Savage, there is at least some dim ray of hope.

True story from last fall deer season.
Due to some personal issues, I wasent at our camp for the first 3 days of the PA buck season last year. Only the second time in 69 seasons.
My oldest son now 54, with his 15 year old daughter was there however.
He has since age 12 only hunted long range, unless its a poor day for weather.
He cut his teeth so to speak, with a Unertle target scope because that's all there was at that time.

His gun is a 7x300 Weatherby on a 700 action, with a 9 twist 30" varmit weight Hart barrel, and a nice laminated thumbhole stock.
A 6.5X20 80s era Leupold scope still having shims under the rear base is on that gun.
First day one of our old lookouts produced nothing. Second day they were supposed to leave by late afternoon in order to have her home early enough to make school on Wed.
So that meant hunting at the camp, or at least close by.
About 2 hours at the camp glassing from the yard showed nothing.
So he decided to go to a nearby lookout a few miles away, but when he arrived there the lookout was occupied, so he continued up the road further and found another one unoccupied.
Problem was we had never hunted or fired a shot from that location.
But he carried the gun, the portable bench, and the 2 sets of large tripod glasses about 150' down the steep hill to the location.
About that time, he realized he hadn't brought a rangefinder from the camp.
But chances are we wont see anything to shoot at anyway, so lets just finish out the last day hunting for his daughter for that year.
BUT, after about 10 minits glassing, he found a legal buck laying alone on the farthest point away from their position.
Not a good, but also not a bad spot for a shot. So he got the gun set up on the bench, and GUESSED the yardage to the deer.
He figured it best to be wrong high, than wrong low, due to where the buck was laying. In other words there might not be a follow up shot if she splashed dirt on the deer.
He watched the bullet fly over the deer by a decent amount which caused it to jump to its feet, but not run off.
He got off his glasses, went to the gun and held on the deer and just spun the dial to about where he felt it should be, got back on his glasses and told her to shoot.
Second shot hit the deer high in the front leg just below the body, and he moved about 50' closer to them, then stopped.
He told her where to hold for the 3rd shot, and that was all it took.
Three shots, no rangefinder, 15 year old not very experienced shooter, who listened to what she was told to do, by a guy who knew what to do, because that's how he was taught.
And there my friends is the real issue here.
It turned out to be about an 850 yd shot, determined by counting the clicks when he went back to zero.
And no, she didn't make it home for school the next day. lol
In fact they were almost all of the next day getting the deer to the vehicle.
While I'm at it, there is one more little issue for all the chest thumpers who bristle when they hear the word bench being used.
Think whatever you wish, but you or no one else could have killed that buck from that location or most others we shoot from, without one.
Anytime anybody wants to challenge what I'm saying, you would be more than welcome to come make a liar out of me, or possibly even learn something.
There is a major difference between actual hunting long range, and taking pot shots at animals standing in a field and hoping one falls over.
In summation, I say buy whatever you like, but be ready for it to become obsolete before you get home.

^^^ You did not answer my question, Yobuck.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by foxx

^^^ You did not answer my question, Yobuck.

---

Actually I did, but since you don't understand due to your limited knowledge of the subject, you didn't realize it.
I don't mean that as a put down in any way, but it is non the less a fact and you know it.
Reread the part where I said it (makes no freaking difference), because for somebody (knowing) how to use
a scope it actually dosent.
(PREFERENCE) is an entirely different thing than (must have), and preference by the way is perfectly fine with me.
But the fact is many have chosen their (Preference) by reading about somebody elses (preference) on the internet, and then become convinced that if mine is different than theirs its because ive fallen short somewhere.
Weve got guys here who talk about shooting 308s with a cheap scope out to a mile on a regular bases and it dosent raise an eyebrow.
You know why? because he knows where he can and where he cant get away with saying things like that, and he dosent go to places he knows he cant.

Not having a scope with matching turret/reticle isn't even a slight obstacle for an experienced shooter for most situations he might encounter.
I don't know how else I can answer that in a way to satisfy you.

You STILL have not answered my question. LOL

I will rephrase it...

What ADVANTAGE does a scope with mismatched turrets have over one whose turrets match the reticle?

The fact your friends and relatives can just spin the turrets and find it's proper elevation by "feel" does not demonstrate that mismatching turrets are better, especially when there are so few hunters and shooters out there with your superior experience and keen sense of marksmanship.

BTW, I found your story and the hunter's willingness to attempt such a shot reprehensible.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by foxx

You STILL have not answered my question. LOL

I will rephrase it...

What ADVANTAGE does a scope with mismatched turrets have over one whose turrets match the reticle?

---

I don't recall saying there was an advantage of owning one without over one with.
But I did say it dosent matter assuming you know what your doing.
And ill say again, that's the major problem here.
But I will furnish names of 25 guys you can ask that question to.
Be prepared that some might still be killing with Unertles. lol

You ridiculed someone who advised against buying a scope with mismatched reticles. Given the fact scopes with matching reticles are a common place today, I have to agree with him. Scoffing the idea as a sign of poor shooting skills is childish and boorish. Just another opportunity to flex your muscles, pump up yourself up and say "a REAL man, like me, can shoot well without such conveniences. "

What a JOKE!

Don't make me pull this forum over and come back there!