scope opinions

[bestill]

Im getting ready to purchase a new scope for new build. I have a weaver super slam that i like very well. Im looking at a vortex HST 4-16x50 or weaver super slam euro 4-20x50 or weaver tactical 4-20x50 or Nikon monarch X 4-16x50
This will be range scope mostly. I like basic cross hair setup and adjust elevation and windage. I like weaver turrets well but eye box seems picky or tight?
Need advice. Thanks

[jims]

I do like the Weaver line and Natchez has some at big discounts now as I recall. I felt the clarity was a bit better than the Nikons and my Weavers have held up well except for one illuminated dial but they fixed it for free and quickly so no issue there either.

[7mmfreak]

The only one of those I have any experience with is Vortex. I have only used the Vortex PST line and while I have used a number of them they were all 4-16x and 6-24x. I know MTJ555 has one he is wanting to sell because he is wanting to switch over to MRAD. In general I have found the Vortex line (I also used a pair of their Viper 6x35mm binos for 2 years since they are one of two companies that make 6x binos) to be very good quality. I would look at demo models of the Viper PST in either FFP or SFP depending on your preference. Call and talk to Doug or Joel at Camera Land NY. I have done a lot of business with them over the past few years. They are stand up dudes with good prices and great customer service.

I haven't used a Nikon in a number of years (2007) and it was a Nikon Monarch Tactical. A guy I was partnered with a few years ago bought one at my recommendation and was very happy with it. They generally have generous and non-critical eye-relief.

I have no experience with the newer Weavers.

[deadeye]

I have sent bestill a few pm's regarding scopes_ if he wishes he is more than welcome to share my opinions/pm's here for reference.

since he is competition shooting in a nutshell I would go for clarity,retical & durability at the top of my list.

I have a vortex pst a great scope but imo is lacking in glass for serious benchwork especially @ 200yds or more but my scope I got at cameraland is approx. 3 yrs old-have they upgraded their glass since then? something to consider. jmho

[jims]

I cannot speak for him but I thought Jeff Hanksins was disappointed in some of the Nikon line but he just may have gotten a bad one. That can happen with any manufacturer/model.

[jims]

I

[7mmfreak]

I know Sightron has some scopes that do well in some competiton circles. I believe it is the SIII models and if you are going to dial all data and use it for matches you might want SFP.

[bestill]

Well ive been studying and this where im at . Main goal for scope is target clarity and scope adjust and return to zero and obviously durability.
I have no problem adjusting elevation per relay im shooting and distance. I definitely want a moa reticle for windage how over as things change will preparing to get shot off . We use a spotter and flags. Guess comes down to this. ffp scope moa stay same but crosshair size increases also. Sfp scope crosshair gets finer at distance but moa values change.
Which scope tend to hold poi better say at 200 yd zero as magnification is changed or does matter ffp or sfp

[7mmfreak]

FFP will hold a more consistent POI across the power range in my experience. I also find parallax easier to fix and less critical in FFP. The downside is the reticle appears thicker at high magnification (even though it is constant) where as increased magnification allows for your reticle to become finer in relation to your target with SFP. If I were shooting a "for score" (BR, F-Class, XC any-sight, etct) match I would likely shoot SFP. I would be very tempted to use a BR type scope for what you do in matches and swap it between guns and have a second scope for hunting. If not, I still think the FFP Sightron SIII with a center dot that is .25 MOA would cover all bases but I don't know exactly what your match targets look like.

I would get hold of Earnhardt and see what he has to say about Sightron as I think he is a devotee.

[kralik4jr]

I have a Viper PST 4-16X50 and I love it but, the clarity starts going away at 12X. I don't think you'll be happy with it. I have a 6-30X56 Weaver Tactical and there is no comparison in clarity. Weaver is hands down clearer. My next scope will be a super slam euro.
I will speak for Earnhardt on the Sightrons. He loves them. I had one and really liked it but I wanted a lighted reticle and the only one they offered I didn't like but the clarity was excellent. Very good glass.
Good luck.

[bestill]

Well im following a lead on a used vortex pst .
But ive narrowed my search to a weaver tactical4-20x50 ffp mildot
Vortex HST6-24x50 vmr-1 moa
? Decisions Decisions

[7mmfreak]

Which ever route you go I would keep my units the same. I mention it because I see you can get the Weaver with either MOA or MRAD adjustments but Mil-Dot reticle. You can certainly do mixed units, I did for years. Life is easier when you keep them the same so that last minute wind calls are always given in a consistent language and where no math is needed for conversion.

[Deleted]

I have a Vortex Viper HS 4-16X50, and a couple Weaver Super Slam Euro's in 4-20x50, IMO there is no comparison, the Weaver SSE is hands down an easy winner in every aspect. The Vortex Viper HS IMO is more on par with the Weaver Classic Extreme line. Not sure if all the Viper lines have the same glass, but I would assume they do, with just different reticles, if that is the case, I would be buying the SSE at the price Natchez is selling them for, without a second thought.
I also have a couple Weaver Classic Extremes, one of them being 4-16x50, and personally, I like it a little better than the 4-16x50 Viper HS.
I know everyone's eyes and opinions are different, this is just mine.
Good luck, choosing a scope is a tough job.