So I'm looking at getting a Nikon Prostaff w/BDC reticle to top a 30-06 I'm getting on Saturday. What's the big difference between 3x9x40, 3x9x50 and 4x12x40? Obviously the 4x12 has more zoom, but is that extra bit really worth it? Regardless, the furthest I'd be comfortable shooting at this point is only going to be about 200 yards. Does one give better eye relief than the other? Are there any other better/equal scopes in the $200 range? I'll probably be going to a Cabela's this week to put my hands on some, but just wanted some outside opinions. Thanks.
-
-
The 50 is bigger at the end but it allows for more light to see through the scope in low light situations. If u hunt in an open field u can go with 40 but if your shooting down a lane in the woods get the 50. -
The 50 requires a higher mounting set up, which may complicate cheek weld and some other ergonomics of shooting. Tube diameter affects light transmission more than objective diameter. A 30mm tube, with the same glass and objective dia. will transmit more light than a 1in. tube. Lens quality is more important than tube or objective diameter in the overall picture though. Peep through a few scopes, in real world settings. It is startling how much difference there is between makes and models of scopes.Comment
-
The exit pupil is the amount of light actually exiting the ocular lenses. The size of the exit pupil is the objective lens size in millimeters divided by the magnification. At the top magnification, 40/12=3.33mm, 40/9=4.44mm, and 50/9=5.55mm. But as others have noted quality of the glass is very important as well. If you're not shooting over 200 yards, 9x is plenty unless you just want more.
LWDComment
-
Originally posted by LWD View Post
Yes the is correct. Tube diameter makes absolutely no difference in light transmission. It's about exit pupil diameter and quality of glass and coatings.
On lower priced scopes I would stay lower in the magnification range. Higher magnification really shows the flaws that are present.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk ProComment
-
Scope
Mike and lwd are right on with their comments. A Nikon PROSTAFF 4-12 will do very nicely on your 30-06. If you choose a BDC reticle make sure you dial in your rifle scope and ammo using Nikon's Spot On Ballistic Program.
Since you doubt you will be shooting past 200 yards perhaps choose a 150 yard zero. You can do that using Spot On quite easily. Enter scope,cal and ammo, then choose your target distance ( I like to sight in at 50 yards, saves time and ammo) and your zero. The program will tell you where you need to impact on the target for a 150 yard zero.
Comment
-
I have never found a need for a 50mm objective scope. They look too big to me and from what I have read somewhere, it is not only the size of the exit pupil on the scope that lets the light out that is the key thing, but the size of your eye's pupil which varies with ambient light conditions.
Bottom line--don't spend the extra money on a 50 mm, spend the extra money on an upgrade scope with better glass.Comment
-
I have a Nikon on my AR and used that spot on website. It's a great tool. Part of why I want another Nikon. Thanks everyone.
Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkComment
-
Pretty much all scope companies have a similar ballistics app on their website. They are only as accurate as the info put into them. If you don't have a way to chronograph your load as well as know the ballistic profile of the bullet, they are only marginally accurate.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk ProComment
-
The 50mm will gather more light than the 40mm An asset when getting late or real early in the day.Comment
-
Very true. Inside 200 yards with a 30-06 though, it's irrelevant. Even with my slowish 308 running 168gr bullets and a 100yd zero, aiming at the upper part of the shoulder on any deer within 250 yards is a bang-flop dead deer. It's only a 7.5" drop at 250 yards. 30-06 should be even less drop, they just don't drop that much in the first 200 yards or so.Originally posted by Mike D View Post
300+ on the other hand, is a very different story, and my opinion is, if you're using Nikon software and the BDC reticle for those 300+ shots, you're just guessing really and you really need a dope chart or ballistic calculator....which again requires practice, data collection, accurate muzzle velocity, ballistic coefficient etc.
Sorry for the hijack, I just think those companies putting 500 yard BDC reticles in their 3-9 power, second focal plane, $200 ish scope lines....I feel like they are sending the wrong message to guys who really believe it's that simple. I know people who really think they can go buy any rifle of any caliber, throw on some BDC scope, zero at 100 yards and magically they can hold over and make a 500+ yard shot.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using TapatalkComment
-
I agree fireguy. That 200 yards is my personal limit for right now. If I decide to shoot farther than that I'd have to spend a lot more time at the range and probably upgrade my scope. I'm not a fan of wounding animals or missing completely. I'm going on a drawn hunt I won for February, and they said most shots are within 100 yards anyway.
Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkComment
-
Yeah, that wasn't really directed at you, but I'm glad you understand what you're working with. The Nikon's aren't bad, and the software makes them better, because you can identify which lines mean exactly how many yards. We have a p-300 on my wife's blackout and it works fine and I made shots at 250 on steel with it, but I wouldn't take that shot at a deer. With my 308, I wouldn't even think twice about 250. For ranges much further than that, I think you need a scope with repeatable adjustments and bigger turrets so you can dial your drop in.Originally posted by jmw View Post
One option that Chuck Hawks talks a lot about for longer range hunting is the "Maximum Point Blank Range" principle. The idea is that you can zero the rifle at some distance beyond 100 yards so that you can aim at the vitals at any range between the muzzle and somewhere around 300ish (different for different cartridges) and ninety never goes more than 3" above or below the line of sight, giving you a hit on a 6" vital zone anywhere between the muzzle and that MPBR range for that cartridge.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using TapatalkComment
-
I've read up a lot on Chuck Hawks' and the MPBR. I'm one that looks at specs on paper, and tries to beat those specs based on changes like ammo and such. His website showed me a lot about what my ammo may do that the factory says otherwise.Originally posted by txfireguy2003 View Post
Good stuff.Comment
-
Some glass is better than others a high end 40 gathers better than a low end 50 but same exact scope if there is an option I always buy bigger if it's for hunting...nothing sucks more then being able to see a deer outline with your naked eye and your scope can't.
For paper it doesn't matter to me. I'd rather have good clear class that gathers light in a 2-7,3x9 etc then one that doesn't in a much higher power I don't shoot a whole lot of animals at noon in the middle of a field. The light gathering is what's important to me, gets dark quick under tree coverComment
Comment