Best .17 hmr bullet drop compensating scope

[sk8804]

Since the search function is horrible and comes up with anything that has the word scope in it, but not what Im looking for i have a question about .17 scopes. I would like to have the bullet drop feature and no less than 10x magnification. BSA seems out to me because of their mixed reviews on quality, but what do you guys think? Whats the cal guns crowd running on their .17's?

[damon1272]

As someone that has shot over 10k rnds of .17, you don't need a bullet drop for .17 on anything that you intend to kill with it. I say this in that the most you can really go out to is about 150 yards and still have a humane kill, anything past that and you are making the animal suffer. If sighted in at 100 yards there is very little drop to be compensated for at 150.

If you are still looking for a scope I would bypass BSA and look at nikon. They have a new line of rimfire scopes that are compensated for bullet drop.

[Izzy43]

Since the search function is horrible and comes up with anything that has the word scope in it, but not what Im looking for i have a question about .17 scopes. I would like to have the bullet drop feature and no less than 10x magnification. BSA seems out to me because of their mixed reviews on quality, but what do you guys think? Whats the cal guns crowd running on their .17's?

OK, I may get some flak from this but I'll voice my opinion on these bullet drop compensating scopes. I think its mostly a marketing gimmick and given the effective range of the 17HMR and its ballistics characteristics a scope that is zeroed @ 100yds does not require any adjustment from muzzle out to 125yds in a hunting situation. Target shooting is a different story. Below is some bullet drop data to show the inherent flat trajectory of the .17HMR.



Hornady 17 gr.
17 HMR MV=2550 Hornady 17 gr.
Click Size 0.125

Yard Drop Click
100 0.0 0
125 0.9 7
150 2.6 14
175 5.1 24
200 8.5 35
225 13.1 47
250 18.8 61
275 26.6 78
300 35.7 96
325 46.7 115
350 59.7 137
375 74.3 159
400 91.4 183

Click Size 0.250

Yard Drop Click
100 0.0 0
125 0.9 4
150 2.6 7
175 5.1 12
200 8.5 18
225 13.1 24
250 18.8 31
275 26.6 39
300 35.7 48
325 46.7 58
350 59.7 69
375 74.3 80
400 91.4 92

I think a better choice is a scope with 1/8" elevation/windage adjustments and the reticle of your choice. For hunting I would use a 4-16X for target work I would use at least 6-24X while I prefer 8-32x (for my old eyes). I am gonna go out on a limb here and say that I'll bet those bullet drop compensating scopes are not all that accurate anyway and you will still have to figure out how many clicks up/down for what range, anyway. Best to start with the best glass you can afford with the reticle for your major use of the firearm. Just my opinion and its your $$$$

Afterthought: Note that the 17gr bullet drops 35" @ 300 yds from a 100yd zero. To adequately zero a scope out to 300 yds with the POI and POA the same you would need at least 75" of internal adjustment in elevation. Not a lot of scopes around that have that much adjustment internally so gotta figure out what is the max range you want to shoot and then find the scope and scope base that will get you there.

[sk8804]

Thanks for the responses guys, basically i would not try to make a kill shot past 150yds so the drop reticle would simply come in handy for making my buddies mad that i could tag that rock out at 200yds with a quick adjustment that i wouldnt have to memorize trajectory clicks for. I plan on spending less than $200 so i will look into nikon and see what they have in rimfire options.

As for the marketing gimmick, i disagree only because I have a nikon buckmaster bdc 4-14 on my .243 and when zeroed at 200yds i was able to use the reticles 300, 400, and 500 yd dots to put my 80 grain bullets within a paper plate sized area. Without them i would have never been able to do that. especially as quickly as i made the shots, no adjustment time other than pulling the bolt, moving the crosshairs to the next target, and squeezing. It is not dead on accurate mind you, but it is definitely good enough to drop a coyote at that range (not that I would take a 500yd shot on one with a .243).

[Izzy43]

Thanks for the responses guys, basically i would not try to make a kill shot past 150yds so the drop reticle would simply come in handy for making my buddies mad that i could tag that rock out at 200yds with a quick adjustment that i wouldnt have to memorize trajectory clicks for. I plan on spending less than $200 so i will look into nikon and see what they have in rimfire options.

As for the marketing gimmick, i disagree only because I have a nikon buckmaster bdc 4-14 on my .243 and when zeroed at 200yds i was able to use the reticles 300, 400, and 500 yd dots to put my 80 grain bullets within a paper plate sized area. Without them i would have never been able to do that. especially as quickly as i made the shots, no adjustment time other than pulling the bolt, moving the crosshairs to the next target, and squeezing. It is not dead on accurate mind you, but it is definitely good enough to drop a coyote at that range (not that I would take a 500yd shot on one with a .243).

The Nikon Buckmaster and the BSA are light years apart in quality and I would believe that the Nikon performs just as you describe but I have my doubts about the cheap BSA and Barksa scopes performing, especially long term after lots of elevation adjustments. But hey, I could be wrong. Good luck with your choice.

[sk8804]

The Nikon Buckmaster and the BSA are light years apart in quality and I would believe that the Nikon performs just as you describe but I have my doubts about the cheap BSA and Barksa scopes performing, especially long term after lots of elevation adjustments. But hey, I could be wrong. Good luck with your choice.

I totally agree, In my original post i figured that the bsa was out because of quality issues. I just dont trust a cheap scope and never will. If it comes down to it i will skip the whole bdc idea for .17 and just go with a good quality rig.

[sk8804]

Ok so one more question guys, since the bullet drop is out of the question now, do you see any advantage to the mill dot for a .17 or would you go with a plain fine hair reticle. I understand that if the mildots are too obtrusive in the sight picture they will cause problems but with a .17s tragectory do they aid in holdover at all or are they useless? Sorry to keep bugging but i appreciate all feedback.

[JAGACIDA]

Mil dots just obscure the sight picture, especially a small varmint at extended ranges. Great for deer or elk or as intended human targets. Truplex type reticles work for me.

[damon1272]

You are talking about a .17. Long range is 200 yards, real long range is 300. Save your money and just buy a standard duplex after a few hundred rnds you will be decent with Kentucky windage.

[sk8804]

ok thanks again guys.