Thread: What Scope to use?!?

So I just invested in a R-25 (ar10 .308) and im trying to figure out what scope I should use... I feel like all I really need is a 3x9x50 but im also thinking what if I want to shoot over 400 yrds... Somone Push me over the edge and give me your feedback of what you think would be good so I can stop overthinking and just pick one. haha THANKS GUYS!

Maybe something along these lines?.... Nikon Prostaff Scope 3-9x50 Mossy Oak Treestand BDC 2011-2012 Not Refurbished | eBay

Trijicon accupoint 3x9x40

Leupold VX 2 3x9x40

The 3-9 is tried and true for sure.

I end up running most of my guns at 10x since it is where mil marks actually work. This means going to something like a 3-12 or a 4-14. While I dont turn the power down often it is nice to have the ability to so I dont go with fixed 10x.

So let me put it this way and get a majority vote. If it was your gun what would you put on it. I will probably go with a 3x9 but am still curious

4x12 for the longer shots

This is my "goto" scope, 4-14x50 30mm SF Tactical Scope Standard MP-8 Dot Reticule. I have 2 exactly like this now and very happy. I am a huge fan of the MP8 Dot reticle. I had a 6-24x on an old rifle I sold and have plans for another on a .300 WM I have.

Ok. Now I have to find a scope and brand that fits my needs. Performance and budget

I understand. It seems like I have really good glass on the guns that get used most and for serious use. Or really cheep ~$150 on everything else. Trust me if I could afford it I would have glass like this on everything because it DOES make a difference. The scope in the pic replaced a ~$200 scope that was on it for several years. It was hard the first time I spent that much money on a scope but once you have you will know the difference.

Yea I'm 23 and single with a son. I dont have that much money for a scope :P I wish I did because its true you get what you pay for. Im gonna look into leupold and Nikon.

Didnt mean that to sound snooty if it did. I was just commenting in general.

Oh no. Not at all. If I could afford one I would be all over it I do appreciate the feedback

what is your budget?

bushnell has pretty good glass in there elite line.

Check out Opticsplanet.com, enter your price range and cruise. There is some great glass out there. Burris, Nikon, and Vortex (among others) give you a lot for your money. Burris has some interesting new products.

Originally Posted by varmintman

Maybe something along these lines?.... Nikon Prostaff Scope 3-9x50 Mossy Oak Treestand BDC 2011-2012 Not Refurbished | eBay

At least it will match your rifle

Doubt if you can tell any difference in a quality scope between 50 and 40mm objective lenses with a 1in tube. Only so much light can get thru....Advantages: alot more compact, lower rings required =better cheek 'weld', less reflection from the front, when you may not want to be seen. 30 mm tube, another story.

Originally Posted by varmintman

Yea I'm 23 and single with a son. I dont have that much money for a scope :P I wish I did because its true you get what you pay for. Im gonna look into leupold and Nikon.

For the .308/7.62 AR platform, 400 yd shooting is really just mid range. These platforms, no matter what brand, tend to be tack drivers out to 800yds with little custom work done.

I have used a few of the $400-600 Nikons and was not that impressed. Comparing them to the Mueller 3-10X44 TAC II I have been using on my M1A for several years, they had zero improvement in clarity, in fact the $400 model was not as clear as the Mueller that cost me $270, ($310 list)

SWFA Mueller Riflescopes Mueller Tac II Riflescopes


Another really good medium cost scope is the Vortex Viper 6.5-20x50 PA. I have been using one for about six months now and it's the best $400 I have spent on a scope. You can get the Vortex Viper 6.5-20x44 PA for even less.

Vortex Optics - Viper 6.5-20x50 PA Dead-Hold BDC

Originally Posted by motoman98

Doubt if you can tell any difference in a quality scope between 50 and 40mm objective lenses with a 1in tube. Only so much light can get thru....Advantages: alot more compact, lower rings required =better cheek 'weld', less reflection from the front, when you may not want to be seen. 30 mm tube, another story.

if i'm not mistaken the tube size does very little for light transmission. zeiss and leica scopes have an amazing amount of light transmission with 1" tubes and have for years. the objective size does more for light transmission than the tube size.

I will look at all of these! I was looking anywhere from 300 to 500 within reason. I have heard good things from Vortex.