SmallCaliberCentral

I'm sure this question has been answered numerous times so my apologies for asking it again. I couldn't find a dedicated thread to look up an answer so here it goes. I'm starting to save my pennies for a new scope. I have a model 700 .223 remington in my safe without glass on it.

My main purpose with my rifles as of now is basically punching paper. With hopes of teaching skippy to fly sooner or later when time allows me to do so. I'm wondering what the maximum power should be on a target rifle with a shooting range inside 300 yards? I was thinking about a leupold VX-3 6.5-20x40 with the VH reticle. Would that be overkill? I've also read great things about Vortex optics.

Savageboy
I run the 6.5-20 and 8.5-24 leupolds. I shoot paper and prairie dogs out to 600 yds and I rarely use more than 20x. You will be very happy with your choice for what you want to do with it. I prefer the 50mm objective but some say its not necessary and raises the optic to high.
Bob

I use Leupold 8.5-25 on all my "little" guns. Not so much for the 50 mm objective as for the extra magnification at the range. That additional 5x seems to really make a difference to my old eyes compared to 20x. Most of our shooting is paper but when we take our squeak shootin trips, we rarely use more than 15-18x and more often 12-14x.
If you use the right rings, the 50mm centerline is only about 0.2 inches higher than the 40mm centerline.

savageboy23 wrote:I was thinking about a leupold VX-3 6.5-20x40 with the VH reticle. Would that be overkill?

"Overkill", no way!
That is exactly the scope I have on my 20VT, and I love it. My main shooting is at "Skippy". The only time I use 20 power is when I am working up loads, or to check zero. Most of the time when shooting skippy, I tend to use 14x until the temps begin to rise, then I turn down to 12x, because the heat waves are too much for me. I am not a youngster any more, 62, but I am still able to get a good view of skippy out past 600yds, and still able to get kills. No brag, just facts! I know RIO has the same scope on a few of his varmint rifles, and I believe he will agree with me.

Also, my choice would be the Leupold. Get the best glass you can!

I have the Leupold 6.5-20X40 and a Vortex Viper 6.5-20X44. IMO, clarity is a push. However, I like Leupold's lens caps a lot. The eye relief is also a bit less forgiving on the Vortex. Not enough to be a problem but, enough to be worth mentioning. Never had a lick of trouble with either one. Feel confident that Vortex would take care of me but have ZERO concerns about L's customer service. The choice would be an easy one if they were at the same price point. Figure in the price difference and the decision gets a bit more complicated. Best of luck!

Thanks for the responses guys. I guess it looks like my pennies will be saved and spent fearlessly on a leupold 6.5-20. I'm sure I'll fall in love with it and have to purchase 2 more 1 for my 700 .204 and 1 for my 223 ar.

All of this is god advice. I had that same scope on my 20VT until just recently when I replaced it with a Zeiss 6.5-20x50 because I prefer that reticle over the the one in my Leupold.

Like futuretrades, I only use the MAX magnification when load testing and in the rat field, significantly less. On the target range I use all the magnification I can get as long as the mirage is cooperating, then I back it back down.

In any event, the first priority is to get the best glass you can afford because when you have to look through it all day long, you don't want eye fatigue. My high magnification scopes are Zeiss, Swarovski and Leupold. Earlier in the year I spent five good (and long) days in the rat patch with futuretrades and some of the other members here and I never once suffered eye fatigue until I picked up one of my lesser quality scoped rimfire rifles.

One thing to keep in mind when planning for long-range is the scope tube diameter. A 30mm scope has more internal knob adjustments than a 1" tube, so check those ballistic tables before shelling out the dough. Leupold makes the 6.5-20x40 in both 1" and 30mm and offers a host of reticle and knob choices along with ability to have them switched out.

HTH,

I have several 6.5-20X44 and 6-24X50 scopes on my 20 calibers for sage rats and prairie dogs. It is NOT overkill. I am at the upper end of the magnification when making long shots on critters. We found that shooting prairie dogs at 300 to400 yards is the best as they stay up and do not run under ground like they do at shorter distances. Leupold makes fine scopes and has better glass on their upper end scopes than Vortex. I think Leupold is a bit over priced / Vortex a better value for what you get. I enjoy my Viper scopes. My last one is my favorite, Viper HS LR with a Christmas tree type FFP reticle. Clear glass with good eye relief. They are on sale now at Bear Basin for $900. You cannot go wrong with either one. We sell more Vortex scopes than Leupold at the gun counter I work at, for what it is worth.

savageboy23 wrote:Thanks for the responses guys. I guess it looks like my pennies will be saved and spent fearlessly on a leupold 6.5-20. I'm sure I'll fall in love with it and have to purchase 2 more 1 for my 700 .204 and 1 for my 223 ar.

I don't think you can go wrong with the VX3, Savageboy, and I too think there's no such thing as too much magnification (you can always turn it down - that's why it's called variable power ; also, those SF Leupolds actually run about 1X under their stated magnification, anyway.
I recently bought my first VX3 in 6-20/30mm/VH reticle and, while it's the first Leupold that has glass that I really like, there's one major caveat regarding the side-focus Leupolds: make absolutely sure you understand the issue of lash in the parallax adjustment of these scopes. Getting parallax removed and having a sharply-focused image at the same time is not always obtainable; turning the SF knob to infinity and then slowly turning it down is the best way, but not perfect. There's info out there if you Google or look through other shooting websites. I'm just now getting this issue figured out and had heard about it before I bought, but frankly this is a (rare) screw-up on Leupold's part and it should be resolved, as other scope builders with less-noble reputations have it figured out. I'll probably look at Zeiss (assembled here now, I believe) next time.

I had heard of that SF problem with the VARI-X-III scopes but not the VX-3.

This from Benchrest board. Those who frequent SH know that many of us have been frustrated with the Side Focus (SF) Leupold LRT Scopes. In particular the near impossibility, at some distances to have zero parallax and maximum target sharpness. This posting, from a professional optics tester helps explain why, and tells you how to get properly use the "side focus adjustment".

Read carefully, I know I learned a thing or two--that Leupold didn't even tell me when I called their tech support more than once.

Quote:
The author is a man named Paul Coburn and his job is evaluating optics for a living. He is highly regarded in the field and does testing for some major companies. So no if's, and's or but's regardless of if you agree or disagree with the writting style he is giving the straight poop on the subject. Here it goes...

Thread link: http://www.benchrest.com/forums/showthread.php?t=15138

I've answered questions about scope parallax about 300 times, and it's always a long drawn out thing, going several e-mails, and a few phone calls. It doesn't seem to make any difference how long the guy has been shooting, this one always keep screwing guys up.
OK... here goes (Whew, this is gonna be a long one).
There are several things that go on inside a scope, and in the eyes at the same time. Some of them workie against each other.
But some terminology first... and we'll leave out lenses that are there to correct some optical or color errors, but don't have anything to do with image forming.
We'll start at the front of it all, and work back.
1 - The "Object"... the thing that you are looking (shooting) at.
2 - The "Objective". The front lens is called the "Objective"... it forms the first image of the "object" we are looking at (that why they call it the Objective
It is the lens that "captures" all the light, that is solely responsible for the image quality of the scope... if it is poor, you can't fix the poor image later.
This lens is usually made of two different types of glasses (called "elements") sandwiched together, and is called an "Achromat".
The Achromat is fully color corrected for blue and green. The red wavelengths are partially corrected, but have what is called "residual color errors".
This is the normal type of objective used in shooting and spotting scopes. In quality, they can vary from badd, through sorta OK, to pretty darn good.
If one of the elements is made of an "ED" glass, or a "Fluorite" (CaF) glass, the two element lens can be very good to friggin' outstanding.
In some instances, objective lenses are made of three elements, and all three colors (blue, green, and red) are completely corrected. This type of lens is called an "Apochromat", and this is the finest lens that can be bought. The best of these can also have "ED" glass, or Fluorite as one of the elements.
3 - The "First image plane". The Objective focuses the light to make an image of the subject, just like a camera lens. This image is upside down, and right/left reversed. This is the first image plane, but NOT the "First image plane" that is talked about when shooters talk about reticles.
4 - The "Erector lens"... (if it is a group of lenses, it is called the "Erector cell"). Because the first image is upside down/wrong way around, we (as shooters) can't use it... so we flip it around with a simple optical group called the "erector cell". This cell gives us a new image that is right way around, called the second image plane. Moving this cell causes this second image plane to move... so micrometer spindles are put against the cell, to get elevation and windage adjustments.
5 - The "Second image plane". This is the second real image plane in the scope, and this is the image plane that shooters call the "First image plane" when talking about reticles. In a fixed power scope, or in a variable with a "First image plane reticle", the reticle would be placed in this image plane.
This is where Premier Reticle puts those magical "Gen II" reticles.
6 - The "Zoom group". In a variable scope with standard (non-magnifying) reticle, the zoom group of optics would follow #5. This group of lenses can change the size of the image plane in #5 and then form a new (third) image plane behind it.
7 - The "Third image plane" In variable power scopes, this is the plane that the reticle is placed in. By being here, it allows the image to change sizes, but the reticle to stay the same size. In the context of reticles, this is the image plane that is referred to as the "second image plane"
8 - The "Eyepiece". This optical group is like a jewelers loupe. Is is (or should be) a super fine magnifier. It's only job in the whole world, is to focus on the reticle.
Let me repeat that for those that live in Rio Linda...
THE ONLY JOB FOR THE EYEPIECE IS TO FOCUS YOUR EYE ON THE RETICLE!!!!
It CANNOT adjust, or compensate for, or do anything else when things look bad in the scope, or when you can't hit the target... and you CANNOT use the eyepiece to try to correct for parallax. That is sheer folly at best, and raw stupidity at worst.
If you expect it to do anything else, then stop wasting your time with long-range shooting, cuz you are never gonna make it past mediocre... and take up golf!!
OK... now that you know what the insides are like... lets move on. We'll use the zoom scope for our examples. cuz if you can understand the zoom scope, then the fixed scope is a walk in the park.
In the scope that is set for infinity range, the object forms an image behind the objective (the first image plane)... the erector cell "sees" that image, and flips it over and makes it right way around in a NEW image plane (the Second image plane). The zoom group adjusts the size of this image plane, and makes a NEW image plane (the Third image plane) that is the desired size. There is a reticle placed in this last image plane, and the eyepiece focuses on the reticle AND the image at the same time.
When things are good, that's how the scope workie!
---
But... now the booger falls into the soup... IF the third image plane and the reticle are not exactly, (and I mean EX-ACT-LY) in the same place, then your eye cannot see them LOCKED together as one picture.
It sees them as two separate pictures, and the eye will look at each separately, and the eye can also look AROUND one to see the other.
---
Lenses are measured in metrics (aka Millimeters). Not because the Europeans wanted the metric system 20 years ago, but because optical strings and chains of lenses (like scopes) are really a string of numbers.
There are constant ratios of "this divided by that's" that give image sizes, "F-ratios", and image locations. It's so darn easy to do the engineering using a 10 based system that the optical guys were using the metric system way back in the 1800's.
The objective has a "Focal length"... this is the distance behind the lens that the first image plane falls when making an image if a subject that is at infinity (or very darn far away).
If the objective has a focal length of 100mm, then the image of that 1000 yd target is 100mm behind the lense.
But the problem with geometric optics (which is what we are dealing with here), is that they follow the laws of geometry... and optics make triangles like rabbits make babies.
AND... in an optical chain, when you change one thing, one angle, one ANYTHING, everything else follows along and changes BASED on the ratios involved at THAT stage.
If we take that same target, and move it to 100 yds, the image in the scope moves BACKWARDS, going further into the scope. Not by much, but it doesn't take much, cuz we're dealing with very small distances inside the scope, and very high magnifications.
How far the image moves back, and what it's new position is, is predictable by the mathematical ratios of the angles formed by the subject and the first image... OR (for us dummies that lost our slip sticks) by the ratio of the distances to the Target and the focal length, multiplied by the focal length. then ADDED to the focal length.
The target is at 100 yds (91440mm), the focal length of the objective is 100, so the displacement is 1/914 x 100, which means that the first image is now at ~100.1mm. Hmmm only .1mm, that doesn't seem like much.
Read the following paragraph twice...
In a 1x scope, 0.1mm would mean nothing... but this displacement is repeated throughout the chain, AND if any of the optical groups change the image ratio (aka image size), then the displacement (aka ERROR) is changed in direct proportion to the increase in magnification. So in a 3x scope, it would be .3mm, and in a 10x scope, it would be 1mm, and in a 30 power scope, the image would be 3mm behind the reticle.
Now, you should have seen a pattern in this last paragraph.
READ THIS TWICE!!
With the same error in the objective (scope focused at 1000, and target at 100), the parallax INCREASES WITH MAGNIFICATION... got it?
If not, READ IT TWO MORE TIMES!!
OK... now, if we do the same math for closer distances, like 50 yds, and 25 yds we will see that the error gets really big, so that with a target at 50 yards, and the scope set at 35 or 65 yds, the parallax makes the combination un-usable.
---
Parallax is... when the image of the target, and the reticle, are NOT in exactly the same plane, and by moving the eye up and down... or side to side, either the target OR the reticle appears to move in relation to the other.
You might see the target move and the reticle stay still, or you might see the target stay still and the reticle move over it... both are exactly the same, and which you see, is only a matter of your OWN perception.
It is NOT possible to have parallax while moving up and down, but not have it when you are moving side to side.
If you think that is what you have, you have other problems... either you are moving the rifle, or you have eye problems.
---
HOW TO SET UP A SCOPE!
This is the only way to do it...
First, screw the eyepiece out (CCW) all the way, until it stops.
If you wear glasses, put them on.
Hold the scope up and look OVER the scope at the sky, and relax your eyes. Then move the scope in front of your eye.
The reticle should look fuzzy
Turn the eyepiece in 1/2 turn, and do the same thing again. You will have to do for a while before the reticle starts to look better. When you start getting close, then turn the eyepiece 1/4 turn each time.
Do this until the reticle is fully sharp and fully BLACK immediately when you look through the scope.
Than back off one turn and do it again to make sure you are in the same place.
Then LOCK the ring on the eyepiece, and leave it alone forever!
Second.
Set the scope down on something sold, where it can see something at a long distance... half a mile of longer is good.
It can be on the rifle, and rested in sand bags at the range... but pick something at least 1000 yds away... even further if possible.
If the scope has an "AO" Adjustable objective, then set it for infinity, and look at the distant object, and move your head from one side to the other, or up and down if you prefer.
If the reticle seems to move, there is parallax.
Change the distance setting and try again... if you are very careful, you can move your eye, and adjust the distance at the same time, seeing which direction gets better.
With front objective adjustments, you can turn them either way without worry... BUT with side adjustment scopes, like the MK4-M3, the M3-LR, or the other LR family of scopes, the adjustment must ALWAYS be made from the infinity end of the dial. Turn the adjustment all the way until it stops (past infinity), and then start turning it in a little at a time, until there is no parallax. If you "overshoot" the proper setting, you can't just turn back a little, you must go back to stop at the end of the dial, and start over again.
While "AO"s dials are locked in place, and if the indicated distance doesn't match the real distance, there's nothing you can do about it... the side focus dials are not locked in place.
Once you have found the setting for infinity on the side focus models, then (CAREFULLY) loosen the screws, and set the dial so that little sideways infinity symbol is lined up with the hash mark, so it is calibrated. You can also make little marks or put on a paper tape for other ranges instead of using the round dots that don't match any range.
Now you can set it to infinity, but remember that you MUST turn the dial all the way past infinity to the stop, EVERY TIME before going from a close range to a longer range.
If you are set for 500 yds, you can go directly to 100 yds, but if you are set for 100 and want to set it to 500, you MUST go all the way back to the stop, and then go to 500
This is because there is a fair amount of backlash (aka SLOP) in this wheel linkage to the focusing cell, so you can set it only from one direction to make sure the slop is always on one side. The other problem with it is, even if you decided that you wanted to calibrate from the other end... the recoil will push the cell back. SO you must ALWAYS set these dials from the infinity end of their scales.
To make it easy to not have to remember... I always start from the end stop, when I change range, no matter which direction I'm going in... it adds about 0.023 seconds!
---
Now... you gots a friend that says to set up a scope a different way???... he don't know doodly-squat about scopes.
The guy at the range said to do it a different way... he don't know either.
You know some guy who's in the Marines says to use your eyepiece to correct parallax... he doesn't know about optics either.
You got a friend that shoots benchrest and says something different... he don't know crapola!
This is the way, the only way, there is no other way.
... as Rushbo would say... this is from GOD-da .
You gots questions, just e-mail me.
You wanna "debate it", then go play golf, cuz you're wasting my time!
'lito (gettin' grumpy in my old age!)

That is good information on setting parallax, some I have not read before. Thanks for posting it.

Wow!!! I had to go fix a large mixed drink after reading this three times. Very well done. I didn't know that I was that stupid concerning scopes. Thank you for the great information. JD Southeast Texas