.22-250

[wildfowler.250]

the biggest issue is having to carry it on a stalking rifle

 

I've recently got a swaro 6-24x50 pv and initial thoughts are its a big improvement on the 8x56 at range

 

I'll look into that then, thanks! Whatever I get is going to hurt the wallet but if you buy cheap you definately buy twice

 

ps what does the pv stand for?

 

 

ATB!

Edited January 19, 2011 by CZ452

[Billy.]

I'm not buying it, because I don't have the money, but this will get you most the way:

 

£280 setup

[Vermincinerator]

there was me thinking the reason for a 22-250 so you didn't need a rangefinder

 

Out to the cartridges maximum point blank range you dont, want to stretch further you need to make scope adjustments

 

Ian

Edited January 19, 2011 by Vermincinerator

[Vermincinerator]

I am running a Leupold 6.5-20x50 on mine

 

Ian.

[Mr_Logic]

But I still think a 1:9 twist 223 is better as you can shoot a heavier bullet, 1:8 better still, but there we are.

 

Of my scopes, by far the best is my Nightforce, but Leupolds are consierably lighter. For a long range scope, you're not going to be able to go too cheap. My 222 has a Nikon 5-20x44 on it, which has proved a very good scope so I would recommend as well.

[wildfowler.250]

I thought about the nighforce...Are they better/as good as the swaro/schmidt/zeiss for low light shooting?

 

I would say if I could get something that was clear and good in low light and allowed me to shoot to at least around the 300 yard mark for vermin, then I would be very happy

[Vermincinerator]

You are never going to get as good low light performance with a big variable as you would with a low mag fixed power regardless of manufacturer.

If low light performance is your main goal then stay away from the big variables.

 

Ian.

[Mr_Logic]

My Nightforce was as good as my Schmidt 8x56, assuming the NF was also set to 8x mag, although the testing was not as massive ranges.

 

Certainly, I would take Zeiss glass over NF glass for low light shooting. However, you don't buy a Nightforce for low light shooting. You buy a Nightforce for reliability and long range work, where it really does beat a Zeiss. Leupold really aren't bad either though.

 

All depends on use and budget. For me, the key factors:

 

* Is it a carry rifle? I.e. do I care about weight?

 

* What is my budget?

 

* Will I dial in longer shots?

 

* Is it used in low light, or just the lamp and daylight/

 

If you're buying a Nightforce, they're very large and very heavy, so not the best for carrying. But they are great for dialling in the long range stuff. They are expensive.

 

If I'm saying No to dialling in and yes to low light, then it's the German stuff, no question. On a budget, then it's Nikon for me.

 

I like my Monarch a lot - it's light, the glass is good in low light and on the lamp and I can dial in as well.

[wildfowler.250]

I am running a Leupold 6.5-20x50 on mine

 

Ian.

 

I have the 6.5-20x40 on my HMR, nice glass but very fine reticule. which is ideal I guess for longer range work but not for deer in dark woods. I dare say I have conflicting uses planned

 

My Nightforce was as good as my Schmidt 8x56, assuming the NF was also set to 8x mag, although the testing was not as massive ranges.

 

Certainly, I would take Zeiss glass over NF glass for low light shooting. However, you don't buy a Nightforce for low light shooting. You buy a Nightforce for reliability and long range work, where it really does beat a Zeiss. Leupold really aren't bad either though.

 

All depends on use and budget. For me, the key factors:

 

* Is it a carry rifle? I.e. do I care about weight?

 

Yes but I'm not too worried about weight. I often prefer just to sit and wait :yp:

 

* What is my budget? I wouldnt want to spend much more than 800...maybe just a fraction over! What is the difference between a scope costing £1,000 and £2,000 anyway? Better ballistic turrets or something? The clarity on a S&B 8x56 is very good and they can be bought for £350-£400!

 

* Will I dial in longer shots?

Up to a point. I Don't reload/have a chronograph but for say a 350 yard shot it would be nice to be able to make a few clicks for elivation and then reset them after the shot,(just so that I can aim on rather than hold over).

 

* Is it used in low light, or just the lamp and daylight/

Most likely Low light, day light and then lamp,(all 3 but in order).

 

If you're buying a Nightforce, they're very large and very heavy, so not the best for carrying. But they are great for dialling in the long range stuff. They are expensive.

 

If I'm saying No to dialling in and yes to low light, then it's the German stuff, no question. On a budget, then it's Nikon for me.

 

I like my Monarch a lot - it's light, the glass is good in low light and on the lamp and I can dial in as well.

 

Thanks for all the pointers! I am strongly thinking about a swaro variable. 6-24x50 seems appealing,(thoughts? retail price s/h?).

 

 

Cheers for all the help!!

[wildfowler.250]

I meant to ask also what swaro reticules people would recommend? I was thinking along the lines of the 4 or 4A? Any thoughts?

 

 

ATB!

[Mr_Logic]

For a scope where you will dial in, stick with a plex or a mildot reticle.

 

Make sure it has target turrets, as in the field in the mud, the little fiddly ones mean you're aiming off. The Swaro PV 6-24 is £1300, so a way over your price range.

 

At that price point, Leupold VX-3 or Nikon realistically. The 8x56 is not anywhere near enough mag for longer shots, and the reason it gets expensive is to produce the high mag variables with good image quality really ain't cheap.

 

Nightforce is even more money, just checked their pricing now. I bought mine for £1100 IIRC, not getting anywhere near that now!

 

The other one you could consider is a Meopta 4-16x44. They have very good glass, nice mildot reticle (very fine, which I thought would be a problem but wasn't - only sold it as it didn't have enough adjustments for my use at that time) and the turrets are good for field use without being really tall like Leupold or Nikon.

 

Also, I have a Leupold VX-III 4.5-14x50 Long range which I have had M1 turrets added to, and has the varmint hunter reticle. That would be pretty good for your uses IMHO and I'm sure I can sort you out on price!

[wildfowler.250]

For a scope where you will dial in, stick with a plex or a mildot reticle.

 

Thanks, I was looking at a few with the duplex reticule so I will stick with that

 

Make sure it has target turrets, as in the field in the mud, the little fiddly ones mean you're aiming off. The Swaro PV 6-24 is £1300, so a way over your price range.

 

This is where I get a bit lost. I always assumed that you could just adjust the turret you use to initially zero the rifle and then click them back to their origional setting? Is this not possible without ballistic turrets? I was also unsure as to what the PV stands for?? there is one on the SD second hand just now for £850...I wont be buying new

 

Also, I have a Leupold VX-III 4.5-14x50 Long range which I have had M1 turrets added to, and has the varmint hunter reticle. That would be pretty good for your uses IMHO and I'm sure I can sort you out on price!

 

Thank you very much for the offer :good: Although I like the leupold I have, I would prefer a more thick reticuled european scope or similar

 

 

Thanks for all your help!

[coupe312]

I have a 22-250 and a 243.

 

for foxing the 22-250 i personal prefer.

 

each cal has its merrits, lovers and haters.

 

noise wises your splitting hairs moded and un moded all depends on loads been fired.

 

the old 22-250 barrel burners maybe, but i shot fast and slower loads on my old 22-250 with no problems. any barrel can be made to burn out with silly loads

 

same as any gun , clean it look after it few problems.