Scopes for 1000 yds
Good day folks
I'm looking for a scope that i can use for 1000 yds. Any suggestions would be
greatly appreciated. Oh ya guys im new at this so dont be too technical.
March 20x50-60,Nightforce 12x42x56 Leupold 8x25x50 any of the three would be good for 1000yd shooting.
If you can pop over $2,000 for a scope then the high powered March or Schmidt & Bender variables would top the list. Otherwise for around $1,000 the Nightforce 12X42 BR model is very good and offers a lot of recticule choices. I own a couple of the NFs and have been very satisfied with their performance. In the under $1,000 range the new Sightron has good glass although they don't have a rectiicule yet that I'd like.
Leupold is missing the boat by not offering an equivalent scope for long range competition, especially with the passing of Dick Thomas who performed wonderful power boosts on Leupold scopes. I've got to wonder at their market research and product developement management.
And I own a bunch of Leupold scopes too so I'm not just "bashing" Leupold, I'd just as soon have a suitable of decent quality -45X range variable Leupold so I'm irritated that they are ignoring my market segment. And have for many years.
I know it's older than dirt... but does anyone still use the Unertls ??? I have a 20X I'd like to put on "vintage gun"... maybe not compete, but shoot at up to 1200 yards recreationally ???
If you can afford it the March 20x60 is the top pick. I made the mistake of looking through 2 of them at the NBRSA Nationals they definately are the ticket, and everything they are bragged up to be as far as glass goes.
Once mirage is up March is not any better than the NF.
I had the privilege of comparing the NF against all the March scopes at the same time this past weekend. As far as glass goes, yeah, they are tops. But you can almost 2 for 1 them if you go NF.
If there is no mirage you could probably pick up .30 cal bullet holes on brite white paper at 1000, for sure at 600 and 800.
The March has an attachment for the scope that greatly helps with mirage.
Really? I wasn't aware of that. link?
I spent 3 days in the pits with Mr. Kelby when we weren't shooting. He never mentioned the mirage accessory. I learned numerous things about optics.
If I could find a way to justify the price, I'd own one.
In a conversation with Mr. Murdica he said he's relatively sure he saw .30 cal bullet holes on his targets during the morning relays.
Waiting for a Bushnell Elite 4200 6-24x50 scope to come to my door, now i just have to order a base and rings
The mirage accessory for the March scopes is called a “Modifier Disk” and screws into the objective housing. The thin disk has an ID of 35 mm. When in place the Modifier Disk reduce the clear aperture from the normal 52 mm to 35 mm and therefore reduces the resolution by 33% which will decrease the fine scale features like shimmer and glint common with heavy mirage. This does reduce the ability to asses bullet hole patterns (resolution reduction) but does allow for use of higher magnification in heavy mirage which will help detect true target position and improve aiming precision. Note that use of the Modifier Disk also reduces the available light gathering by as much as 55% but since heavy mirage almost always occurs in high brightness conditions this is usually not a problem.
With all due respect to Lou Murdica, even without the Modifier Disk the 52 mm objective will limit the resolution to 0.037 MOA which is 0.308 inch at 790 yards. In my own testing of my 60x and 50x march scopes I have found that resolution - slightly beats calculated Dawes Limit on AF resolution target, easily resolves 6mm and .224 bullet holes on both white and blue portions of IBS target at 600 yards (even with light mirage), will resolve 50% overlap pair of 6mm and 30% overlap pair of .224 holes at 600 yards with no to low mirage.
Even with the quality of the March scopes and their lenses, seeing bullet holes at 1000 yards will require larger objective lenses – 66 mm to resolve 0.308 inch holes and 83 mm to resolve 0.243 inch holes at 1000yards.
Which proves that gun nuts are the smartest athletes alive!
Good job Mr. Bohl
A lot of people are talking like seeing bullet holes in the white on a 1000yd target is something new to March scopes.
I can tell you it is not. Myself and many others have done it for years. I have personally seen 30 calibers holes in the white at 1000yd on more than one occassion using my NF scope. It all depends on the condititons. The last time I witnessed this was over Labor Day weekend in Ohio. I called my 2nd HG target before they called cease-fire. Which meant that my score wasn't very good!
Also for the attachements you can go to a camera store and buy adaptors to fit many different types of filters onto your scope if the objective bell is threaded from the facotry.
I'm colored blind and have a hard time seeing the orange clay birds against dirt banks in high intense sunlight and sometimes at Quantico in seeing the 3" orange spotter when it's against a white background. Charles E showed me how to use filters using std camera lens adaptors from a local camera store for my Weaver T24 LG scope. Hadn't messed with it on my NightForce scope of my HG yet.
But these adaptors are available for other scopes and seeing bullet holes on paper is nothing new at 1/2 the price.
Resolving bullet holes versus "seeing" bullet holes
I was not trying to start a semantic battle here but I should have defined my terms better in my last post. As Steve Shelp says many of us have "seen" bullet holes in a target at 1000 yards with fairly modest scopes (the Weaver T-36s I have used before going to March 50x and 60x for example).
As I use the terms: "seeing a bullet hole" includes being able to detect a blurred dark spot on a light background as probably being a bullet hole; were as "resolving bullet holes" means being able to detect that two bullet holes that overlap 50% are in fact two bullet holes.
The above description for resolution coincides with the diffraction limit of resolution which is directly proportional to the clear objective lens diameter for virtually all telescope designs. Note that in spite of much advertising hype, the “quality” of the lenses has less than 5% impact on the diffraction resolution limit.
If you are interested, there is a more complete discussion in this article:
Steve is also correct about the potential offered by informed use of filters both for those with some color blindness and those with normal color perception. For those interested in the basics, you may find the following article useful: