Low Recoil & Big Distance...?

[Rick in Oregon]

Depending on caliber, the Leupold VX3 LR will work at 1K. If not, it'll be close, and you can use some added MOA bases to easily center the scope's elevation travel and have the full range of elevation the scope can offer (which is quite substantial in all LR models).

As for the VX-L series, ask yourself if you really need a huge honkin' objective for your needs. You can mount a 40mm nice and low over the bore for a good cheek weld and minimize canting, plus a 40mm objective will transmit a full 7mm of exit pupil, all the human eye can effectively use. If you need more light for your shooting, then you must hunt in total darkness.

Do your homework, check features, warranties, after sale service, custom shop possibilities, reticles, and price, then decide for yourself. The choices will narrow down, and you'll be able to choose wisely for quality, workmanship, performance and longivity. Then buy the best you can afford; your eyes deserve it.

Here's another one, this one is all LR M1:



Good luck with the quest.

[Jim White]

For a 260 Remington using a 140 gr Nosler with a muzzle velocity of 2700 fps, it has a 36" drop @ 1000 yards w/a scope zeroed @ 100 yards. If your scope selection only has 40 MOA (typical for 1" scopes in the 6-24 power range) and you have to come up 10 MOA to zero the scope that leaves 30 MOA. To work you would need some sort of offset (bases, rings, shims). The problem with that and depending on severity, you may not be able to shoot the rifle @ 100 yards on target w/o having to hold under (because of the offset). If your scope has 80 MOA like my Leupold 30mm tube, that problem goes away. Regarding scopes, they're a mechanical device (well, most are) and while they will work with the elevation bottomed or topped out, it really is better if they are-not.

Another way to overcome that is to reload and I would encourage for the long-haul to look into that. Used reloading stuff is out there or you get a Hornady, Dillon or RCBS single stage kit for a few hundred dollars. You'll save over the long haul if you shoot a lot, especially these days.

The Leupold VX3 is a very good scope both optically & mechanically than the Nikon Monarch above 18x (on my 6-24x50). Below that it is equally as clear as my Swarovski...in the daylight (no comparison in the dark).

HTH,

[Racr350]

...which brings me back to the Millet LRS-1. After doing some more homework on optics. I learned that the Millet has a full 140 MOA of travel in it. Now i know you guys here don't have much experience with the brand, let alone the scope itself. But many other forums are blown away by the performance for such a "cheap" scope. Now dont think im ruling out Leupold because Im not! Im fully aware that theyre up there with the best. And i have family member that will buy nothing but them. But again..it all comes down to the might dollar. So thanks for everything guys. You've all been very helpful. And RIO..that rifle is beautifulllll. And im sure it shoots even better than it looks. Thanks again guys, all this help is why I always come here first.

[Jim White]

Anything I would say about Millet is 3rd hand info, but do a through search and see what pops up. I will say this, once you look thru premium glass, the flaws in the lower grades become visually obvious pretty quick (clarity, resolution, distortion, glare, color aberration, pin-cushioning, light transmission and so on...). Again research and buy what you can afford, the wait will be well worth it. If you're going to be using the scope on MAX power most scope optics will degrade, some, more than others, so keep that in mind. The better glass scopes are not likely to demonstrate that effect.

[TONK]

I have a 6.5/06 that I am sure would be a great choice for a long distance rifle, without excessive recoil to ones shoulder or upper torso area. The rifle is a walking type all purpose around the place gun and really handles the deer better than my 25/06 has over the years. It can double up too on groundhogs during the spring and summer months, if I should happen to be out with the rifle and come across one or two across the bean field. There is not much area for me to go and shoot the rifle at 1000 yards but I do believe it would be a very good caliber to try.

[WnMag]

I have Leupold scopes, Burris signature, and Zeiss. I had always thought highly of Leupold, until I bought a Zeiss. Not to upset anybody but you get better qulity from Zeiss. You pay more for the scope and Not the Name. I have had great luck with my Leupold, dont get me wrong, but for what I spent on it, I wish I would have bought a Zeiss instead.
On the 260, Yes its a great cal. I bought one for my wife . Well she use's it for Elk and Deer, and Im thinking it will have to pick up were the 204 leaves off. On that note there may be a Burris scope for sale and a Leupold , ( need a Ziess on the 260 and my .300win)

[Critter]

You birds crack me up some times. A thousand yards is quite away out there, but hitting varmints at that range tends to sharpen up your marksmanship.

The secret to reduced recoil is increasing the weight of the rifle. I would recommend against 6.5-06 and 6.5-.284 as in my experience the are marginally overbore.

My .260 M70 is an 18# gun. The recoil is insignificant. With a 100 grain varmint bullet at 3270, it's dead accurate to 700 yards when it runs out of gas.

On the other hand the 139 Scenar has good retention at longer range.

As mentioned previously, the .260AI is just about optimal.



Some 7mm VLD that I use with my long range gun, a 7WSM. .308 175 SIERRA on the right for comparison.



Here below is a development target for the 7 WSM. Suddenly it all came together at about 62 grains of varget. I got over confident and pulled the last shot on the lower right target.

[Jim White]

You birds crack me up some times. A thousand yards is quite away out there, but hitting varmints at that range tends to sharpen up your marksmanship.

I've come to believe with just about any circumstance there are three types of people;

- Those that make things happen;
- Those that watch things happen;
- And those who wondered what happen.

That said, I still remember my 1st time @ 1000 yards to this day. It was with a M1 (30.06) at a highpower rifle match and to say it was humbling is an understatement. Finally hitting the target was the highlight of that match. The second phase was much better b ut still room for improvements.

All-in-all, it was still fun.

[TONK]

Critter one thing is for sure, hitting targets at 1000 yards separates the wantta Bee's from the true rifleman! I built my model 70 Winchester featherweight for hunting small to medium size big game animals under 350 yards. It has been a featherweight 30-06 for many years! I decided to give my son the 25-06 I had been shooting for a dozen years of so and opted for something with a little more bullet weight. Great shooting by the way!!!

I agree if your going to strickley go for Long Range shooting targets, the .260 Rem caliber is a dandy no doubt especially in a heavier made rifle. I remember the article that Jim Carrmichel wrote about some 10 or 12 years ago, a very good read.

Rick I have been a Leupold scope hunter for many years but the last 5 rifles I have purchased are now wearing those Bushnell 4200 series and 3200 series Tactical scopes in the 5 x 15 power. I have tried them out at 200 yards on targets and they seem to do just fine for me (bad eyes and all) I did spend a whole week researching rifle scopes before those Bushnells came home to stay. I saved over $265 dollars verses what Leupold wanted for the same type of a rifle scope. I still have several rifles to make up loads for and it seems like everytime I start off for the rifle range, something like today happens........6 inches of frigging snow and winds blowing 12 mph.

[Wrangler John]

Do not buy a Nikon Monarch for a long range rifle, or any rifle when you want a clear high contrast sight picture. I have two of them, one an older 6-20 variable and the other a newer side focus model. The picture of the S.F. scope was so bad I sent it back for inspection - it came back the same way. When shooting the Nikon's beside a Leupold, Burris and especially the Bushnell 4200 Elites, the difference is so remarkable that I went home and ordered a new Bushnell Elite 4200. I would not recommend the Bushnell's for a long range rifle, they are my preference for average range varmint work and a compromise between cost, picture and mechanical quality. How much the recent disasters in Japan will effect the supply, or cost is another factor.

If you are going to shoot long range, spend the money on the best quality scope built for that purpose, even if you have to save up awhile first. Leupold or Nightforce comes to mind. A top quality scope should run $1,000 to $1,500 plus (I see the new Leupold CQB military scope runs north of $4,000) - and be designed for long range. Take some time to research the top brands, features and become knowledgeable. A high quality scope is a lifetime investment. I have Leupold scopes over 40 years old that still perform the same as the day they left the factory - they have been flawless all that time on many rifles that have come and gone. Choose wisely.

[ryutzy]

Wrangler John said it well. I also have the new Nikon Monarch 4X16X50 Side Focus with BDC Reticle. It is a decent scope, but the clarity especially at a distance does not touch any of my Leopolds. In fact my Uncles $200 Leopold has better clarity than the $500 Nikon! I have multiple Leopolds, but have never used a Nightforce scope yet, I do plan on buying the Nightforce NXS 5.5X22X50 with the illuminated reticle. I will go with the NP-RI or NP-R2 reticles.

[acloco]

Rules for scopes:

Fully Multi Coated Lenses (if these exact words are not stated, stay away from the scope). Both sides of both lenses are coated with multiple layers of various coatings to help you see what you are trying to sling lead-n-copper at.

Eye Relief - At least 3.5"...preferrably 4". Even in the store, hold the scope with your left hand, to your right eye. Focus on something. If you cannot place four fingers between your cheek and the eyepiece, keep looking for a scope. The amount of eye relief is determined by the quality of coatings and glass in the tube.

Adjustment. How much travel does the scope have? 50 moa (50 inches at 100 yards) is ok. 60-75 is better...and so on. Unfortunately, the Zeiss will not get 90% of the calibers to 1000 yards with a 100 yard zero. Conquest 6.5-20 has 45 MOA vertical adjustment and 3.5" eye relief. Zeiss DOES use an etched reticle in the glass and offers a varmint hunter type reticle as well.

I would dearly love to have scopes in the under $500 category that had fully multicoated glass, etched reticles, M1 turrets, varmint hunter reticle (or thin line MOA/MOA reticle), 4.5" of eye relief at 20 power, and 100 moa adjustment. Until you get into the $2500 and up scopes, I don't think one exists.

[Trent]

Rules for scopes:

The amount of eye relief is determined by the quality of coatings and glass in the tube.

I don't know about that one. I would venture to say that the amount of eye relief is determined by the physical orientation of the lenses. (ie, prescription and distance between lenses). Just my thoughts though.

[sixshooter]

For a 260 Remington using a 140 gr Nosler with a muzzle velocity of 2700 fps, it has a 36" drop @ 1000 yards w/a scope zeroed @ 100 yards

Can this be right. That is the flattest shooting gun on earth. My 7mm will drop about 35 inches at 500 yards zeroed at 200. My computer says this will be more like 1200 inces at 1000 yards. Did I push a bad button?

My son and I were shooting rock chucks with my .204 and he pulled out his 7mm. Said he had some rounds to burn and wanted to practice with it. 3 rock chucks later he said try my rifle. I did and I am not recoil shy but it really put it into perspective. All the rock chucks were postive kills at about 350 yards.

[Trent]

For a 260 Remington using a 140 gr Nosler with a muzzle velocity of 2700 fps, it has a 36" drop @ 1000 yards w/a scope zeroed @ 100 yards

Can this be right. That is the flattest shooting gun on earth. My 7mm will drop about 35 inches at 500 yards zeroed at 200. My computer says this will be more like 1200 inces at 1000 yards. Did I push a bad button?

My son and I were shooting rock chucks with my .204 and he pulled out his 7mm. Said he had some rounds to burn and wanted to practice with it. 3 rock chucks later he said try my rifle. I did and I am not recoil shy but it really put it into perspective. All the rock chucks were postive kills at about 350 yards.

I think Jim probably meant to say 36 MOA of drop at 1,000 yards, not 36 inches.