U.S. optics LR-17 Claim

[Slide Rule]

Went out shooting with a friend who put on a U.S. optics LR-17 on his new AR10 build. I've never really gotten into rifles but after shooting his I think I've been bitten by the bug.
Anyhow, we didn't engage targets farther than 500 yards, he just wanted to see if everything operated ok. He had that H-59 reticle and at first it was confusing, but then after seeing a few vids on it I understand the concept.

Question
I went to the U.S. optics website and they say that using that lr17 scope it's possible to reach out to 1,500 yards. Being a skeptic, I'm not sure if I believe it.
Anyone here has an lr-17 that can verify that claim? Not looking to get into a brag-fest but I've always taken website claims and promises with a grain of salt.
Thanks

The Slide

[J-cat]

It can reach out to 1500 with the right mount.

[Merc1138]

As long as you have the right mount(enough cant built in) and a cartridge that can actually get out that far, sure.

I can say that without having to have owned a us optics lr-17, because I understand how optics actually work. Honestly, it's a little weird that us optics would make that claim since there is a lot more involved that the scope itself.

[Slide Rule]

Again, not being a rifle guy please forgive my question. Can you explain how the mount also affects the range? Are you talking about the mount height?

The Slide

[Merc1138]

No, we're talking about the cant, and it doesn't really affect range of anything... it affects how much usable elevation adjustment you have.

Imagine it this way.

Every scope has a maximum elevation travel, right? Let's say a scope has... 30 MOA of travel. If your zero is dead center, that means you can only come up another 15 MOA for shooting at a further distance before you run out of adjustment in your elevation turret. If you get a 10 MOA base, and the same zero, you'll have 25 MOA of elevation to adjust with before running out since the scope is now tilted slightly.

In addition to that, there are some other things to consider. First, the erector assembly(the moving part inside the scope that lets you actually adjust windage and elevation) is basically a tube within a tube. If you get closer to the extreme end on the top or bottom of that tube(elevation), you lose space to move that tube left and right(windage). Using a canted base helps deal with that. Second, yes you could hold over using the reticle, but not every scope is going to be as clear toward the edge as they are in the center, using a canted base helps avoid having to do that(because you have more room to adjust, you can actually just use the center of the reticle instead).

Make sense so far? The scope itself with regards to glass quality, assuming it can focus that far out(no reason to think it can't) to eliminate(minimize) parallax(look up scope parallax if you don't understand what I'm talking about), is going to affect image resolution(not pixels, actually resolving the image). Crap scopes with crap glass tend to have problems like chromatic abberation(look it up) and generally just piss poor clarity overall).

The US Optics LR-17 is probably a decent scope. However I would suggest you do a lot of research to get yourself familiar with the options and features of higher end optics before dropping $2500+ on a scope. I'm not saying to go buy some $300 budget scope instead, just make sure you know what you're getting into and that it's actually what you want(or try to find one used, save some cash, and you should be able to re-sell it for as much as you paid if you do end up wanting something different). You're correct in thinking that US Optics 1,500 yard claim sounds odd(because it really does sound odd), but make sure you do enough research about optics to understand why.

[Harley]

Yes, it can at 1500 yds, clear as day at 1000 yards yesterday. Also spotted targets at 1500 and beyond.......Taliban cave is 1938yds at the Ranch and I could see it through my USO....

The MOA in the mount gives you more elevation...

At the Ranch with the USO's and LT....

[J-cat]

Slide,

The way a mount works is it cants the scope down in relation to the barrel so the barrel points up in relation to the scope. The amout of cant in the mount adds elevation to whatever the scope has. Roughly speaking, the LR17 has 23 mils of elevation available. If you mount it on a zero cant mount you end up with half of 23 mils, say 11. Now, if you mount that scope on a 20 MOA mount you will add 6 mils to the 11 you have in the scope for a total of 17. Or you can get other amounts of cant like 30 or 40. Of course whether you can get to 1500 depends on the cartridge you're shooting as well. A 300 Mag shooting a 210 grain bullet at 3000 FPS will drop less at 1500 than a 308 shooting a 175 at 2600 FPS.

[Hairball]

They are holding at the 1500+ claim more on the power of the optic than the ability of the optic to reach out to 1500+ yards. At 17 power that is a good range; however, shooting out to 2k and beyond would benefit from a 20-25 power optic.

[J-cat]

No, not the power of the optic, but the amount of internal elevation adjustnent available. There are plenty of scopes with 17x that have less than half the elevation of the LR17. They can't be used for long range.

[Hairball]

Agreed but internal adjustment is not much of an issue for USO. As the OP is running a H-59 reticle, unknown if they are even using the turrets once they set their 100m zero. Depending upon the rifle setup and caliber, the 17x could theoretically be setup to dial out to 3000+ yards but that does not make it a good choice when there are better options and optics with more clarity at longer ranges through higher magnification.

[Slide Rule]

Now it makes sense, thank you.
The Slide

[JMP]

Of course it can, but it is dependent on the rifle and cartridge used. It does, however, seem to be more geared to shorter ranges as it has small tubes and lenses. It would depend on your application. The long range guys like the clearest picture you can get with the most possible elevation you can get and that usually comes with big tubes and big lenses. In ideal conditions, the long range guys will dial to the maximum magnification that is supported by the environment (keeping the target clear with mirage that isn't too thick) so long as it allows enough FOV to spot the hit.

For an AR-10, that scope is more than plenty capable.

At this price point, you don't really have to be concerned with the optic failing to hold a repeatable zero, which is common among the Made in China scopes.

[rero360]

Yes, it can at 1500 yds, clear as day at 1000 yards yesterday. Also spotted targets at 1500 and beyond.......Taliban cave is 1938yds at the Ranch and I could see it through my USO....

The MOA in the mount gives you more elevation...

At the Ranch with the USO's and LT....

That was a great day... To the OP, it was blazing hot that day and there definitely was some mirage to deal with, but I was able to see the targets at 1000 with both my Vortex Viper Gen 2 1-6 at 6, and my USO 1.7-10 at 10, was getting some consistent hit on them with the USO on my 18" MATEN once I got the wind dialed in (even the slightest of breezes plays havoc on the round at those distances)

Sometimes, especially when the mirage is really bad, too much magnification can be a bad thing. The previous time I attempted 1K I was using my USO 5-25 TPAL, I had to dial down to around 17 in order to get a clear enough picture of the target (which I never did hit because the wind was wicked that day and I wasn't as experienced dealing with it then)

[Slide Rule]

Ok, while we are talking about scopes and long range...
My buddy was shooting an AR-10. Supposedly they can do a .308 round and also a 7.62mm round.
In terms of long range shooting, which is suited best? Aren't they the same? I don't recall what my friend was shooting, he told me but I don't remember what it was.

The Slide

[Merc1138]

Ok, while we are talking about scopes and long range...
My buddy was shooting an AR-10. Supposedly they can do a .308 round and also a 7.62mm round.
In terms of long range shooting, which is suited best? Aren't they the same? I don't recall what my friend was shooting, he told me but I don't remember what it was.

The Slide

You mean .308 winchester and 7.62x51 NATO? They're different(slightly. It's kinda like the whole .223 remington and 5.56x45 NATO thing, you can look that up), but the capabilities are roughly the same, it's going to come down to what projectile you use and what you're doing with powder that are going to be determining your velocity which for the most part is how you get a bullet further.