If you could buy a nightforce or have

About the only "con" I would say, would be the weight, NF's are a bit heavy. I do see that the SHV is a touch lighter, other than that, worth every penny!!
 
I have been looking into this and with some long range shooting in mind as well.

I have personally come to the conclusion that i would prefer the MOA sight, illuminated and a bigger than 30mm out front..

I also like what i have seen from the mating of the scope to a Rangefinder. It's one thing to see it, it's another to see it, and range it, have the adjustments for incline, and get the range call to assist you putting lead on target.

If you are going to spend the money, get the sighting system that is going to all work together to make every shot count.
one example of this is the guys at Gunworks. Not saying their system, but something like that.
 
On the Nightforce, do it. I have Nightforce, S&B, Leupold scopes and the Nightforce is the most bang for buck. Go illuminated and no matter which reticle, make sure the turrets match!! MOA/MOA or MIL/MIL, it does not matter. I would also recommend first focal plane unless using on low power and then I'd consider second focal plane. You can't go wrong with a Nightforce.
 
Originally Posted By: Tbone-AZ
If you are going to spend the money, get the sighting system that is going to all work together to make every shot count.
one example of this is the guys at Gunworks. Not saying their system, but something like that.

If I'm going to spend big money on a scope it's going to be a "stand alone" deal.
I don't think tying up a bunch of money in a "system" that depends on making a rangefinder, a rifle, and a reticle all work together every time is a good idea.
 
There was a time when i thought that scopes were nice, but not really needed.. Especially after time in the Marines where we shot open sights at 500yrds with a m16 shooting 5.56
If i can hit a man size target very consistently, what do i need a scope for?

I then went to a marksmanship course, where we fired 308s with scopes and we were pinging plate targets at 1000yrds. I was impressed with what a scope could aide me in doing and quickly changed my mind about them.

I then, years later, had the chance to shoot a Barret. In Combat, at Khandahar. When i used the sighting system with rangefinder and optics computer. I was blown away at the difference.
A system that would take Altitude, barometeric pressure, wind at barrel and target and inflight, and distance.. So on and on.. Now it was nothing to take that 1600yrd shot. As long as i put the cross hairs on target, and did my part on the posture, trigger squeeze, and breathing, i could put rounds on target farther than i thought i would ever be able to do so. The only challenge was timing the target, since it's moving and not going to be in the same place a couple of seconds after you send it. It really puts shooting into another world (IMO) when you have to account for a sitting targets movements over the next 2 seconds.

I buy a scope for a specific weapon. I know people that move scopes so much i swear they do it for a reason to just go shoot.
When i have the money, i plan to buy a shooting system to really take advantage of the advances in technology. It may take the challenge out of being able to spot and call distances, but i think that i will get over it with the grinning idiot pics i will take with the fur on the tailgate. I can't imagine I am the only person on here that hasn't seen a coyote out on a rise at more than 600+ yrds and taken that shot, just missed and thought it would be nice to have connected.
I would love to be able to pull up that same shot and connect when they are sitting there howling at me and not coming in consistently. The technology is available and i plan to take advantage of it.
 
Back
Top