Changing Times With ULR Scopes - Ret Analysis

[Discogodfather]

As time changes and new stuff pops up in the ELR / ULR world I find myself drawn to different scopes for my application. Over the years precise and robust adjust ability range (more elevation) was always the standard. Even them, the scopes with the most elevation still needed to be canted quite a bit to shoot at +3000 yards.

Since the intro of the Charlie Tarac (have had a chance to play with a friend's extensively and am about to order one myself) the extreme adjustment elevation requirements seem to have fallen off a little. I just don't think you need to go crazy with clicks and extreme angles anymore. Besides, staring through the edge of your glass at the tip of your muzzle brake or the entire barrel in your sight picture is pretty lame. The rifle also looks pretty lame.

Ultimately the new scope I am looking for is for a .375 ultra long range rifle that I shoot at 3000 yards. Have been doing so much research that it hurts my head, lol. Currently I use a 10-50 Sightron SIII with a SFP reticle, and honestly it's a damn good scope for what I need. Just need more adjustment and would like to get alpha level glass.

My list for ELR and my ideal scope for the type of ranges I shoot is far different from what many advocate. Just me preference I guess, but my list is unique:

1) Reticle thickness cannot obstruct a 36" target at 3000 yards
2) Prefer thin (fine) FFP reticles as long as they can meet #1
3) Need at least 70 minutes. The setup I use is with a Charlie Tarac, so mondo insane adjust ability is not required. Planning on running a zero degree base.
4) SFP reticles for ELR have one huge disadvantage (it's not ranging at certain mags, that's the small disadvantage). The reticle changes sizes (not in relation to the shooter but to the target) at all different mags, so if you have a center floating dot on a SFP (like my sightron) that measures .6" at 10x and .125" at 50x, you are staring at a constantly changing obstruction level of that center dot relative to your tiny little target (sometimes it covers the target completely, other times it is only around 25% of the target's mass). The variable shift in relative size sucks for me, I can't stand it.
5) As a rule of thumb, I find that the stadia lines of the cross hairs on a reticle, if either in SFP or FFP, cannot be more than .125" thick when shooting ELR at a smaller target. Anything thicker and you are obscuring the target (this also changes based on mag with SFP). Reticle CAD drawings are produced by many optical companies and I have been observing that most cross hair stadias run .25" thick, which is not great.

The requirements for 3-4k shooting (for me) are pretty alien to most shooters. People don't realize that when looking at a 36" white target at 3000 yards it's like looking at a 1" dot at 100 yards (yes, the math works out like that and it's shocking). The reticle in my Steiner FFP 5-25 almost totally obscures the target.

Another bizarre thing I hear all the time when asking people about using FFP vs SFP for this kind of shooting is that SFP is sometimes preferred because it's a "finer reticle". That might be a good rule of thumb, but there are very nice "fine" reticles produced for FFP. Schmidt is the best example with the P4F. Some companies produce finer FFP reticles than others do in SFP. If the only advantage to SFP is a finer ret, then I think this is basically not worth buying anymore, as FFP is awesome in ELR for spotting hits and ranging holdovers.

Check out this analysis I did off of some of the major contenders I have been considering. I placed a thin white dot approximating a 30" target at 3000 yards. This is an ambitious target for sure, but due to the constraints I have in lugging my target out when I shoot (I can't drive it over) I need to be able to consider a small target.

I think it shows that fine reticles are a must, and the magnification is also extremely nice to have if the optical quality is good enough to use at those him mags and if mirage doesn't kill the image. This is pretty contrary to most opinions out there.

[Discogodfather]

Another look at the most popular tactical scope right now, the Razor HD II. Not great even at 27x with that fairly fat FFP reticle:



Or the Kahles 624i, similar issues.......

[Discogodfather]

This was also getting silly - at 220 minutes:

[CSTactical]

It's a good idea to see what scopes and equipment the Pro's are using at ELR type matches like the KO2M (King of 2 Mile) which are typically using Nightforce scopes though it's not on your list.

https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=825601074275450&id=412443098924585

More info on the match here: https://cuttingedgebullets.com/blog/...-2-miles-2017/
Derek Rodgers the winner



EQUIPMENT LIST
This is the unedited list as received from the shooters. We are lacking some shooters BUT I am sure most ELR will find it worth checkin anyway.
FIRST PLACE
DEREK RODGERS 2017 King Of 2 Miles winner (Applied Ballistics Team) gear used at Ko2M
RIFLE COMPONENTS
Stock: McMillan ELR Beast
Action: Barnard Model P-Chey
Trigger: Barnard Two-Stage
Barrel: Bartlein, 36″ length
Brake: Piercision 5-Port Muscle Brake
Optic: Nightforce 7-35x56mm ATACR F1 MOARScope: Nightforce ATACR (Tremor 3)
Scope Level: Accuracy 1st
Bipod: Phoenix Precision
Ammo: Barrett loaded 472 grain MTAC
Projectile: Cutting Edge Bullets .416 cal. 472 grain MTAC
Brass: Barrett .416 Barrett
Powder: Reloader 50
Primer: CCI 35
Rear Bag: Armageddon Gear
Ballistics Program: AB Elite Geo
Laser Rangefinder: Vectronix PLRF 15C w/ DRS Bluetooth dongle
THIRD POSITION
WALTER WILKINSON
3rd Place Team Gunsite
Rifle: Off the shelf Steyr HS-50 w/ Canyon Hills Tactical rear wedge
Scope: NF ATACR 5-25X SFP w/ Mil-R reticle and Mil Turrets
Scope attachment for Finals : TACOMHQ Charlie TARAC 20 mil
Mount: Spuhr 18 Mil
Level: SendiT electronic, mounted on Spuhr RAPTAR mount
Bullet: Thunder Ammo 802 gr MB
Case: RWS
Primer: RWS
Powder: 248gr RL-50
Rear Bag: Protektor
Spotting Scope: Leupold Mk 4 Tactical 20-60X w/ TMR reticle
Tripod: Manfrotto w/ Junior Geared Head mount
Ballistic Computer: Trimble NOMAD
Ballistic Software: Field Firing Solutions Delta V
Laser rangefinder: NA
Weather Station: Kestrel 3500
Shooting Jacket: US Army ACU mod by Canyon Hills Tactical
FOURTH POSITION
N/A
FIFTH POSITION
N/A
SIXTH PLACE
DAN POHLABEL
AND IAN KLEMM ( SAME CONFIG)
TEAM. VORTEX
Mine and Ian's ate exactly alike. •McMillan A5-Supermag adjustable cheek
•XTSP Stainless 338 single shot action W/Model 22 Trigger and special 60 moa rail

http://www.x-tremeshooting.com/index.php?page=cgxtrememod22

•Bartlein .330-.338 barrel, 1.45" dia. x 8", taper to 1.20" at 34" long.
•Piercision 5 port Muscle brake
•Vortex 5-20 HD Razor Gen 1 scope 125 moa turret
•338LM Improved, reamer by Dave Manson, 40 degree shoulder
•VV 570 powder, Berger 300 Hybrid bullets w/HBN coating long throat, .125" bullet shank engagement
•3,075 fps at 80F
•load testing group at 1000 yards attached
SEVENTH PLACE
Paul Phillips - (Applied Ballistics Team) gear used at Ko2M
RIFLE COMPONENTS
Stock: McMillan ELR Beast
Action: Bat 50 cal action with 375 bolt face 2 inch round
Trigger: Bix n Andy
Barrel: Bartlein, 38 inch length
Brake: Lethal precision arms
Optic: Nightforce 7-35x56mm ATACR F1 MOAR
Bipod: Phoenix Precision
Level: Holland’s Shooting
CARTRIDGE and LOAD
Cartridge: 375 Lethal Mag
Brass: Lethal precision arms
Powder: Hodgdon H50BMG
Bullet: Cutting Edge 400 gr Lazer MAX @ 3250fps
Primer: FED 215
Rear Bag: Edgewood Leather
Ballistics Program: Applied Ballistics App
Watch: Garmin Foretrex 701 w/ AB analytics
Wind Meter: Kestrel Elite w/ AB analytics
Rangefinder: Sig Kilo 2400 w/ AB analytics
EIGHTH PLACE
DAVID GRIFFITH
Team MK416 - David Griffith, Barry Hamilton, Robert Brantley.
Rifle; ALS made by Advanced Longrange Systems. Al's stock
Barrel; Lilja 1/12”
Brake: Advanced Longrange Systems.
Scope; Nightforce NSX 5.5-22x
Caliber .416 Barrett. Case; Barrett
Bullet Cutting Edge 472 MTAC
Powder/Primer H50BMG CCI primer
Gunsmith, Martin List
Scope Base; Custom Design by David Griffith 0/45/90 MOA adjustments.
Bipod: ALS
Hat; Boonie/Issue

[Discogodfather]

Your right Mike, the Nightforce 7-35 seems to be a really popular scope for the KO2M guys, I noticed that. Also Mark Elsie in Australia (Mark and Sam) use it too.

Nightforce sponsors them, and Mark is a long time Nightforce guy. So that might have something to do with the scope choice, but it's a fine scope no doubt. The 7-35 is FFP and I have heard it's fine, like the SB P4F. I think that's the future, not sure why SFP is still around if you can get a fine enough FFP. It does kill some of the ability to see the ret at lower mags because it's so thin but hey, we are almost always at the mid to higher mags.

[CSTactical]

Your right Mike, the Nightforce 7-35 seems to be a really popular scope for the KO2M guys, I noticed that. Also Mark Elsie in Australia (Mark and Sam) use it too.

Nightforce sponsors them, and Mark is a long time Nightforce guy. So that might have something to do with the scope choice, but it's a fine scope no doubt. The 7-35 is FFP and I have heard it's fine, like the SB P4F. I think that's the future, not sure why SFP is still around if you can get a fine enough FFP. It does kill some of the ability to see the ret at lower mags because it's so thin but hey, we are almost always at the mid to higher mags.

Nightforce sponsors very few people, their scopes are extremely rugged, track true, have tons of elevation, are improving their reticles and the 7-35x has optical quality as good as the best out there. No joke and no sales pitch but you'll see the 7-35 Nightforce in more PRS and ELR matches than you'd expect. The only negatives are the price and size.

Here's one of the guys we sponsor for PRS matches with his 7-35x


And he uses 35x for the cold bore shots at 200 yards and have one it a few times this year:

[CSTactical]

Here's also a review on the 7-35x Nightforce from Gunsamerica which was a surprisingly good review which I did not expect from them haha

https://www.gunsamerica.com/blog/best-rifle-scope-ever-built-nightforce-atacr-7-35x/

[Discogodfather]

Have you had a chance to evaluate the reticle size on the 7-35 Mike? How does it compare to the SB P4 fine reticles? Is it fine enough to not obscure a 1" target at 100 or a 30" target at 3000?

Looking at their reticle data sheets on NF's website it says that they have a .04 mil cross hair thickness, which is very nice as it translates to .14" (at 100). That is almost as fine as the P4F which is the finest at .125".

Mark did a video recently when NF gave him a scope, he does mention he would prefer SFP (I am assuming it's because he would like it to be finer, I can email and ask him what he meant).

[CSTactical]

Have you had a chance to evaluate the reticle size on the 7-35 Mike? How does it compare to the SB P4 fine reticles? Is it fine enough to not obscure a 1" target at 100 or a 30" target at 3000?

Looking at their reticle data sheets on NF's website it says that they have a .04 mil cross hair thickness, which is very nice as it translates to .14" (at 100). That is almost as fine as the P4F which is the finest at .125".

Mark did a video recently when NF gave him a scope, he does mention he would prefer SFP (I am assuming it's because he would like it to be finer, I can email and ask him what he meant).

We have not personally been able to use one of the 7-35's as they don't sit on the shelf very long but we have six guys we sponsor who get to pick what scopes that they prefer to use and two of them pick the 7-35's which do well for them. That Cold Bore Shot at 200 yards I posted above on a small target would be difficult to do consistently if the reticle was too thick.

[JMP]

The only scope that I like beyond 2,000 yards is the Hensoldt 3.5-26FF. It'll take a 100 yard zero and allow 45mil+ of upward elevation dial on a 70 MOA base (specs say 36.5mil, but that's just the double turn; there is an easily re-settable zero stop that lets you take a third turn without losing your zero). The reticle is thinner than the P4F, and the shallow depth of field gives it much higher resolution and clarity at very long distances compared to any other scope I have seen. The only downside is that you must use CW turrets. (It's actually a lousy scope for <1,000 yards because the focus is too fine.) If I was not willing to use CW turrets or didn't want to pay the money, I would sacrifice and go with an NF ATACR.

[Discogodfather]

The only scope that I like beyond 2,000 yards is the Hensoldt 3.5-26FF. It'll take a 100 yard zero and allow 45mil+ of upward elevation dial on a 70 MOA base (specs say 36.5mil, but that's just the double turn; there is an easily re-settable zero stop that lets you take a third turn without losing your zero). The reticle is thinner than the P4F, and the shallow depth of field gives it much higher resolution and clarity at very long distances compared to any other scope I have seen. The only downside is that you must use CW turrets. (It's actually a lousy scope for <1,000 yards because the focus is too fine.) If I was not willing to use CW turrets or didn't want to pay the money, I would sacrifice and go with an NF ATACR.

I agree, the Hensoldt is pretty amazing, you don't even need the tarac at that point. Do you see any optical problems or degradation of image quality when staring through non-center glass at all (at the limit of elevation)?

It's interesting to note that the PRS blog super scope test they did in 2014 showed that, if you discount the subjective categories of "advanced features" and "ergonomics" the Hensoldt did the best optical + mechanical score.

The price is just so outlandish, I did see one recently on Euroopitc for $5000 though, which isn't that bad I guess. Which reticle are you using JMP?

[JMP]

I agree, the Hensoldt is pretty amazing, you don't even need the tarac at that point. Do you see any optical problems or degradation of image quality when staring through non-center glass at all (at the limit of elevation)?

It's interesting to note that the PRS blog super scope test they did in 2014 showed that, if you discount the subjective categories of "advanced features" and "ergonomics" the Hensoldt did the best optical + mechanical score.

The price is just so outlandish, I did see one recently on Euroopitc for $5000 though, which isn't that bad I guess. Which reticle are you using JMP?

To be honest, I have not yet reach the limits of elevation. I can get to 3,000 yards and still have plenty left. In a PRS review, I would rate the scope poorly. It's 3lbs, and if you are shooting at closer distances (inside 1000), you will simply want to leave it in low magnification. The parallax and diopter settings are so fine that you will never find a perfect focus so it's a big nuisance having to change the focus at each 100 yard increment. Where "optical performance" is tested at the ranges in the double blind tests, it is nothing special. To me, a Schmidt Bender is a better scope if you aren't taking to extremely far ranges. I got the Hensoldt when it came out on the civilian market because it coincided with my purchase of a 375 CheyTac. I was shooting long range in environment along with some other scopes. I went back to a Schmidt Bender 5-25x56, and I couldn't figure out why the picture was a bit blurry, and the same thing with my other scopes. It turns out that the way the lenses are geared, it provides a significantly better image than all the $4,000 level scopes. At first, when I was shooting it at 600 yards, it seemed like a good scope, but nothing extraordinary. Past 1,000 yards, the performance gap keeps widening. I felt that it was such a good scope for even the price tag, I purchased an additional scope. I use a Spotter 60 for my spotting scope, and at 20x power, there is no difference in optical quality between the spotting scope and rifle scope.

There is only one design with one reticle. It's a very thin, simple reticle. Actually, it's so thin that you will find yourself adjusting the diopter more so than any other scope to keep the cross hair nice and clear. It will not obstruct a 36" target at 3,000 yards. There's very little literature on the scope since it wasn't designed for the civilian market so many of the specs are poorly translated from German. I'd say it is a horrible PRS scope, but it's the best ELR scope. There's also an additional $450 charge because the don't make a lot of 36mm mounts. The Recknagel mount is the best since it provides 70 MOA and puts you right where you want to be. No fussing with elaborate canting bases, just set a 100 yard zero on a good cant, and you can dial straight up to two miles with the target right in your cross hair.

It's no frills (no optional features except color), but I've learned there are so some cool tactical features. You do not need to use any wrenches or screwdrivers. The knob caps have just one screw, and they are circular. This is designed so that the zero stop can be set in the field with the base of a large rifle cartridge rather than a tool. It's my understanding that they bought the license of the design from the US Optics turret and improved it a bit. One other thing about the scope that isn't that practical for most is that it works fantastically with the low 3.5x power in conjunction with night vision.

It has a huge eyepiece with the most forgiving eye-relief you have seen. It's definitely tops in long distance optics, elevation travel, and mechanically solid. I think it's relatively cheap compared to the new generation of $6,000 Schmidts. It's in a completely different league from all the other "top tier" scopes for the application of extended long range shooting. I use one for my 338, 375, 416, and 50. The other scopes would need to come a very long way for me to consider using something different.

I do not pay attention to the scopes and gear that people use in competitions or internet reviews. Many of the top competitors are sponsored so they get their equipment for free, and they have a vested financial interest the products they use. I am often criticized for recommending very expensive gear, but it just so happens that most of the really good products come at high price points. It's much like rangefinders, I stick with Vectronix. I've never seen a civilian marketed rangefinder provide acceptable results for ELR shooting.

[uparmor]

Went to the 50bmg 1k match in Central Cali. The ONLY scope and I do mean ONLY scope being used on every rifle (over 50 rifles) was Nightforce. When I asked why they said it was the only one to take repeat 50bmg recoil and best no hassle warranty in case one did fail.

The guys there had tons of cash and could buy any scope made. They all owned NF's

[Discogodfather]

I think FFP is critical for ELR, made even more apparent by my discussions with F class people. Basically, all SFP scopes display POI shifts across their zoom range. This is something the guys that shoot variable power know in F class and why they never mess with the zoom once they start a string.

Most European gun magazines talk about this, I know the German mags routinely test for it. It seems totally unknown in America outside of F-Class. Since most F class guys shoot fixed high mag scopes, only those that shoot variable seem to know. March knew about the problem and designed a series of EP zoom scopes that took the magnifying out of the erector and placed in in the eyepiece to compensate for the phenomenon, but the scope is a 40-60x which is very weird. A lot of work just to retain an SFP.

On my Sightron S3 10-50 x60 in SFP, the center dot will throw a .75" POI shift at 100. The best scopes in the world I have seen can manage only a .25" shift, bad scopes can be 5". Not going to work the way I use my ELR, zooming in and out all the time trying to find the right balance of field of view, wind reading, target size, and mirage.

So why does anyone want SFP anymore? I know you can range more easily in the sense that the entire reticle can always be seen, but that is moot in ELR. Since there are many fine FFP rets around, why waste time with SFP?

[JMP]

I think FFP is critical for ELR, made even more apparent by my discussions with F class people. Basically, all SFP scopes display POI shifts across their zoom range. This is something the guys that shoot variable power know in F class and why they never mess with the zoom once they start a string.

Most European gun magazines talk about this, I know the German mags routinely test for it. It seems totally unknown in America outside of F-Class. Since most F class guys shoot fixed high mag scopes, only those that shoot variable seem to know. March knew about the problem and designed a series of EP zoom scopes that took the magnifying out of the erector and placed in in the eyepiece to compensate for the phenomenon, but the scope is a 40-60x which is very weird. A lot of work just to retain an SFP.

On my Sightron S3 10-50 x60 in SFP, the center dot will throw a .75" POI shift at 100. The best scopes in the world I have seen can manage only a .25" shift, bad scopes can be 5". Not going to work the way I use my ELR, zooming in and out all the time trying to find the right balance of field of view, wind reading, target size, and mirage.

So why does anyone want SFP anymore? I know you can range more easily in the sense that the entire reticle can always be seen, but that is moot in ELR. Since there are many fine FFP rets around, why waste time with SFP?

There are two schools of thought. Some people prefer and believe that SFP is an advantage in ELR shooting because the reticle stays small and doesn't have the obstruction issues. The European folks are still on the FFP side, but the best European reticles are quite thin compared to the thick reticles seen in lower end FFP scopes.

It's again, why the Hensoldt scores very poorly on special features as they only make one model, FFP, no choice in reticle or turrets. The only choice you have is color.

Ranging is relatively unimportant in ELR shooting as a rangefinder is the only way of practically determining your target's distance. Once their shots are close enough, having FFP vs. SFP doesn't matter that much, especially if they can keep it on high magnification. The BR and target shooting guys tend to like their high magnification SFP scopes, and the tactical guys prefer their variable FFP scopes.