Question on an Osprey International scope

[PhilaShooter]

Hey everyone. I am trying to get more into long range shooting. The bulk of my experience has been at 100 yards as of right now, some scope use and a lot of iron sights. I purchased an Osprey International 10-40x 50mm red/green illumination scope a while back for a Saiga in .308. I used it a dozen or so times and it seemed to work just fine. My question is, is this something a serious LR shooter would use ? I know it's not the best quality or manufacturer out there but is it efficent enough to use for some serious long range shooting once I get there. Here's a link to the actual one I have.

http://www.sportsmansguide.com/net/cb/cb.aspx?a=453841

Please be brutally honest lol I have a few rifles so if it's at least a decnt scope then I could throw it on my AR-15 or other rifle. If it's totally junk then I'll just use it until I save up and get something of better quality.

Also if this Osprey is in fact no good can anyone offer any suggestions as to another scope, preferably a MIL dot scope as I would like to eventually get MIL dot's for any rifle I have with a scope equipped.

Thank you in advance for your opinions and suggestions.

[Guns & Glass]

You asked for 'brutal honesty', and you'd get honesty anyway, but this won't be pretty.

Owner of Osprey import business sold me a 6-24x50 Tactical Illuminated at his landed cost of $112 for evaluation because he wanted me to sell them. Just what do you think you get for that???

Listened to pure BS about incorrect scope adjustment, glass type (same as Leupold), reliability, manufacturing techniques, etc, etc.

Out of box:
W & E were sloppy and back lash easily felt.

Occular eyepiece had 'stick points' when turning. Not smooth & even.

Side Focus similar to above.

Tube assembly had internal glare which means it will ghost and reduce contrast in bright light.

Poor O ring set up on battery cap.

Objective lens simply inserted into what is a cheap cell, and held in place w/simple spanner ring. Under vibration edges subject to cracking/chipping and axial misalignment.

Objective lens observation showed ALOT of reflected light. Easily could see my face & glasses. That's not good.

I stopped right there. Poor quality. Another Dealer big in BR & optics stopped to chat and asked to buy in. Told him what I found so far and yet he bought it. Told him I won't take it back. Said he has customers looking for inexpensive scopes. Next York show he came over a cussed me out for letting him buy it!!! He sold it, and his customer sold it because it wouldn't hold zero & track.

Recently had a really nice young discharged Army vet stop to have the exact same new scope mounted on a new Rem 700 PSS.

After installing I ran a quick quad test. Failed.

Ran a magnification track test. Zeroed @ 100 yds, butT as magnification reached 18X reticle started to drop. At 24x reticle dropped to almost 24" Low which means POI would 'print' 24 High.

Warranty read it very carefully. It's not very friendly...to the buyer.

Do a search on this Forum for others having poor experience.

PS: Your buddy steered your right. MOA is faster, easier then Mil -Dot, and more accurate at LR

[ReconLdr]

With the exception of the elevation and windage knobs, it looks an awful lot like my old A1 Optic. It has the same reticle, same rings and same dimensions.

I don't know if the companies merged or share parts/manufacturing etc... If it is the same company, I would stay away from them unless you are desperate to start shooting right away.

My A1 Optic, tracked reliably out to 600yds, beyond that it would not return to zero. Beyond 600, the scope would not track predictably.

Believe it or not, the fact the scope would not track is not why I wouldn't recommend them. It is the company/customer service... I called the company and asked if this would be covered under the "Limited Lifetime Warranty"

him: That scope was never meant to be cranked up and down like that
me: You put target knobs on the fucking thing
him: If you wanted a scope you could crank the knobs all day, you should have bought a leupold
me: WTF? are you serious?
him: Most "real" LR shooters never use those knobs anyway... they use hold over.

I hung up, and got a new scope:
http://forum.pafoa.org/optics-46/854...5x50-gmir.html

I haven't had the chance to really put it through the paces.. but it has been an excellent value so far.

[PhilaShooter]

You asked for 'brutal honesty', and you'd get honesty anyway, but this won't be pretty.

PS: Your buddy steered your right. MOA is faster, easier then Mil -Dot, and more accurate at LR

LMAO I know you guys wouldn't lie or anything I just really wanted the COLD hard truth...no matter how gut wrenching lol.

I appreciate your honesty and time to explain all of that in detail. I kind of had a feeling it wasn't going to be a great scope, only paid $90 for it. My hope now is to zero it at 100 yards and stay there until I am getting the best groups I can. Once I start getting to 200+ yards by then I will make sure to put some money aside and get one of top quality so I don't have to worry or mess around with it for more time then I am actually shooting.

Now I do have a Barska that the same buddy gave to me when I first got my AK47, it's a 3-9x 42mm red illumination scope. I know this one isn't top notch either but for learning purposes and for 100 yards what do you think ? On an AR-15 and also an AK74.

Also I recently purchased a Bushnell Trophy red/green T dot recticle 1x 32mm lens. Now this was the most recent purchase and I did do more research on the web about it, people seemed to speak highly of it and said it holds zero every time. Some concerns people had were the "T" dot was slightly canted but it did not affect accuracy or zero at all. I really like it a lot so I am hoping it was a good buy, any thoughts or experiences with this one ?

Again thank you for your help, it's much appreciated.

Also if anyone has any suggestions on what to buy for long range shooting, manufacturer's/models. I like that the Osprey was 40x because my eye sight far away isn't great, I don't know if it would be good to get a more precision scope for LR shooting like that though, does that matter, if I get a high magnification scope to see my target better ?

[PhilaShooter]

With the exception of the elevation and windage knobs, it looks an awful lot like my old A1 Optic. It has the same reticle, same rings and same dimensions.

I don't know if the companies merged or share parts/manufacturing etc... If it is the same company, I would stay away from them unless you are desperate to start shooting right away.

My A1 Optic, tracked reliably out to 600yds, beyond that it would not return to zero. Beyond 600, the scope would not track predictably.

Believe it or not, the fact the scope would not track is not why I wouldn't recommend them. It is the company/customer service... I called the company and asked if this would be covered under the "Limited Lifetime Warranty"

him: That scope was never meant to be cranked up and down like that
me: You put target knobs on the fucking thing
him: If you wanted a scope you could crank the knobs all day, you should have bought a leupold
me: WTF? are you serious?
him: Most "real" LR shooters never use those knobs anyway... they use hold over.

I hung up, and got a new scope:
http://forum.pafoa.org/optics-46/854...5x50-gmir.html

I haven't had the chance to really put it through the paces.. but it has been an excellent value so far.

First, I can't BELIEVE a customer service person would speak like that with someone about a product THEY sell. That is so apaling just from that I would NEVER buy one.

Second, your scope looks really nice. Almost like the one I have but I'm sure MUCH better. Is Apex a newer company as I read some were waiting to hear about them ? Also is the a MIL dot scope ? Looks like something like that would eventually be exactly what I want. First I would like to get out and really button down on hitting 1" MOA groups @ 100 yards. I am HOPING the Osprey will work at least for that. That will also give me the chance to get the money up as well, I'm sure it's more than worth it. Figure I already have had 2 scopes, one was just a red dot but the price for all them would be about one of those...luckily I only paid for the Osprey and Bushnell lol.

Thanks for the info ReconLdr, much appreciated.



EDIT: A bit off topic but I wanted to say this to you a few days ago but forgot. Those grips on your pistol in your avatar pic are AWESOME !! Did you buy them or design them yourself ? Is that a 1911 correct ? Unfortunatly I can only give you 1 rep, you deserve 1 for your post and at least 50 more for the hand grips !!

[Tomcat088]

Hey everyone. I am trying to get more into long range shooting. The bulk of my experience has been at 100 yards as of right now, some scope use and a lot of iron sights. I purchased an Osprey International 10-40x 50mm red/green illumination scope a while back for a Saiga in .308. I used it a dozen or so times and it seemed to work just fine. My question is, is this something a serious LR shooter would use ? I know it's not the best quality or manufacturer out there but is it efficent enough to use for some serious long range shooting once I get there. Here's a link to the actual one I have.

http://www.sportsmansguide.com/net/cb/cb.aspx?a=453841

Please be brutally honest lol I have a few rifles so if it's at least a decnt scope then I could throw it on my AR-15 or other rifle. If it's totally junk then I'll just use it until I save up and get something of better quality.

Also if this Osprey is in fact no good can anyone offer any suggestions as to another scope, preferably a MIL dot scope as I would like to eventually get MIL dot's for any rifle I have with a scope equipped.

Thank you in advance for your opinions and suggestions.

Thank you for starting a seperate thread to cover this scope. Also, you probably shouldn't say "get more into long range shooting"; you've never been into long range shooting and you're just starting to learn to get your start. Anyway, about the scope. . . . um, I'm trying to think where I should start. I'll spend the first part of this post talking about why this scope is not suitable for long range shooting in general. Later in the post, I'll get into specifics about the Osprey.

The scope is not acceptable for long range shooting, and definitely not any "serious long range shooting". There's lots of people that would debate whether it's even acceptable for anything more than "very casual" shooting. The first problem related to long range shooting has to do with the adjustments. Scopes that use 1/8 MOA adjustments are not even close to ideal for shooting any type of long range. It is a PAIN IN THE BUTT to have to dial 8 clicks for every 1 MOA that you want to dial up, other problems also arise from having to do this. You can only go up a few MOA per turn of the turret, so it takes you lots of turns to just travel a few MOA. Even with vertical hashes to help keep track of how many turns you've gone, it becomes difficult to keep track of which turn your on. If the scope doesn't even have turn counters, then it's pretty much impossible to dial it up and down. The other problem is related to how much travel you would have, and with 1/8 MOA turrets in a 30mm tube, you're just not gonna have enough to go all the way to 1,000 yards with a .308, much less a semi auto .308. Even 1/4 MOA scopes with 30mm tubes usually need 20MOA bases (or 30) to get to 1,000 yards and still have enough travel.

The focal range of the scope is also not one that most tactical shooters would choose. There are some BR guys that prefer very high magnification for shooting LR, but most LR guys don't like to go over 25x or so; some of them don't even like to go much over 16x. There's lots of reasons for this being the case, but even at 25x, in bad conditions the mirage will EAT YOUR LUNCH. I can see a 12"x12" target at 1,500 yards with my 25x scope. Honestly, there's just not much benefit to go over 25x, the scope picture just gets darker, more movement, more mirage, etc.

There are also a lot of problems that are related to the reticle in the scope. The reticle is not standard, and that can cause confusion, or a steeper learning curve. Was there something that came with the scope that gave all the subtensions of the reticle? I'm guessing that the scope is SFP (Second Focal Plane). So what magnification are the subtensions of the reticle actually accurate at? Lots of times companies will say it's accurate at one magnification, but when you actually check the subtensions, it's actually in a different place than what is marked. This means that you would need to EXACTLY have 100 yards marked out (not just kind of close), and then you would need to know EXACTLY (within .01") of what all the reticle lines up with. The fact of the matter is that most cheaper scopes do not put enough time and quality control on their reticles, magnification, etc, so that it's gonna be accurate and right. The other thing is that the magnification that the reticle subtends to accurately may be too high of a magnification for optimum use. The idea of the reticle is to mil the distance to the target, which means you have to be able to hold it VERY still (around .1 mil's), or you need to be able to hold it still enough for hold over/under. Second Focal Plane is already less than optimal, and it's why serious LR guys prefer FFP (First Focal Plane) scopes.

The other problem with cheaper scopes in general is related to how they dial. For LR shooting, the scope MUST track PERFECTLY, not kind of close, PERFECT. This means when you dial windage, there is NO vertical movement, and when you dial elevation, there is NO shift in windage. The scope also has to track consistently from click to click. This means that the spacing on the internals of the turrets has to be EXACTLY the same, so that every click is EXACTLY 1/4 MOA (or 1/8 MOA). If the adjustments are different in different places, the clicks will have different values, and not dial back and forth on target properly. There are almost not (few exceptions) scopes under $300 that will track properly all the time. There are plenty of scopes that cost over $350 that do not track properly, so even then people have to be picky. The parallax adjustment on the scope also has to work properly, and allow for the target to be in focus, and have 0 parallax error.

That's general problems with the scope, not even mentioning specific problems to the Osprey line. I have 0 hands on experience with these scopes, but I know reliably sources when I see one about these scopes. I also know enough about scope construction in general to know what can cause som eproblems. I'll get into the more specific problems with the Osprey scopes now, and there's quite a few. I will state again that I have NOT experienced these personally, but that just the general "knocks" against the scope do not make it acceptable for LR shooting. Since these comments on "heresay", you can take the ones after this for what you paid for them.

There have been major complaints from people about the turrets on the Osprey scopes. For some reason, lots of times the turrets will keep "popping off". The turrets are held on with allen screws, that sometimes even when users constantly tighten them down, they still get loose costantly, or pop off. The scopes just do NOT have all that good construction. Anytime a manufacturer lists "3M expoxies" as a main reason to buy the scope because of it's durable and quality construction, that should be a redflag. It doesn't help that the entire line is a knockoff of Aimshot. I've heard of o-rings hanging out of the "seam" in the objective lense. It's a problem that there's an o-ring hanging out, but it's also FAR from ideal that the maintube, and objective bell are two pieces. I've heard their "no BS lifetime warranty" isn't really all that "no BS". I've heard lots of stories of scopes coming with missing parts, including the allen screws that hold the turrets on.

Some of the main gripes that I've heard about the scopes are related to the turrets. As stated earlier, there's lots of reports of them coming off. The other problem is related to their amount of adjustment, and actual movement of the reticle. There's lots of people that were having problems zero'ing their Osprey at 25 yards, they were actually running out of adjustment. If this is the case, there's NO WAY that you can get the scope to even shoot 600 yards, even with 20-30 MOA bases. Other people have mentioned that when they move the turrets, the reticle doesn't move at all, or they have to "tap on the turret" after adjusting it to get it to move reliably. This is FAR from reliable for any range, and COMPLETELY unacceptable for shooting even 100 yards consistently. There's also some people that claimed that when they were adjusting the parallax, the crosshairs actually "moved"; I don't mean stopped moving because parallax was eliminated, but they actually shifted POI.

Now keep in mind that this could all be heresay, but either way, that's a LOT of heresay problems. That would lead me to believe that the scopes are like most other Chinese optics that try to pretend to be REAL tactical or LR scopes; they're much closer to the cheap junk side. I'm not trying to be an @$$hole, but most of the people I've seen that toot their horn were mall ninjas or LR wannabes. For up close stuff, where you don't have to dial the scope, and if it'll hold zero, it may be fine. For trying to shoot long range, where you need consistency and durability, NOT A CHANCE.

I would be happy to offer some suggestions about other optics for future endeavors, but I need MUCH more information. What is your price range? Do you want a fixed or variable power scope? If variable, what power range? If varible, do you want a FFP or SPF scope? Do you have a preference in reticle (mil-dot, Gen II mil-dot, TMR, etc)? If variable, do you want side focus or adjustable objective? You mention the scope having a reticle that subtends in MILs, but do you also want it to dial in MILs, or would you want a MIL reticle with MOA turrets? Or would you prefer an MOA reticle with MOA turret adjustments? Is illuminated reticle a must? The answers to these questions will GREATLY effect the price range that you're in, and what features may or may not be available. If you have a particular set budget, that will GREATLY limit what features you'll be able to have. Hope this helps, and hope it wasn't too "brutally honest" for you.

[PhilaShooter]

Forgive me if I say something that doesn't quite make sense or ask a stupid question lol I try and really understand what you guys are telling me, more like teaching me actually. I don't want to just sit here and do a blah blah blah kinda thing, as that would be disrespectful and a major waste of your guys time. I make sure to take in every bit of information and value it.

No problem Tomcat, thank you for going into detail like that and actually taking the time to explain everything. Yea your right about saying getting more into it, I only was saying that because I have always been a huge fan of shooting LR, watching the compitions, stuff on the Military channel and stuff like that. By far my LR shooting experience is non-existent lol, my furthest shooting has been IIRC like 250 to 300 yards roughly. Even at that I went with 2 guys that already had them set-up for that distance, they already had a lot of experience at that range since it's where they normaly go to shoot and all there equipment was zeroed in and everyting so all I had to do was a little focusing and pull the trigger. Was an awesome experience to shoot that far but not something I could repeat myself without help.

I've been trying to take some time and read websites about LR shooting, from people who are competetors and/or experienced as you guys are. There's SO much information and know-how to be able to become a decent LR shooter it's amazing. Just from information that you guys have given me it's like a whole nother world to shooting. I know it will take me a while to learn even half the stuff you guys know before I even step up to 300-400 yards so I am definetly going to master shooting @ 100 yards and also master the AR-15 I own first and foremost, while I learn as much as possible.

About the Osprey, thanks again for the detailed information, it was definelty not to brutally honest, was just what I needed to hear really, just like ReconLdr and Guns and Glass have said. Sometimes I can be hard headed and think maybe my scope will work better or those might have been "lemons" but just with some of the stuff you said about the actual construstion of the scope, the turrest, the parallax ect.. those things can not be "lemons" it seems that either a scope is built with quality or it's not. MAYBE for shooting @ 100 yards I could try and get it to hold zero and be consistent but from what you have said probably not, and it will probably just confuse me more since I'm not that experienced with scopes in the first place. I now think my BEST option is to sell it with FULL disclosure to someone who just wants to maybe see better at 50 or 100 yards for plinking. Even that I would not feel great about since it's such a low quality piece of junk, probably better off letting my son play with, he thinks they are telescopes LOL.

As for what kind of scope I would want and what I can afford....well, after reading your sticky and from the info. you and others have offered me this is what I am thinking would be good for me and at the same time good for LR shooting...

Scope prefrences

I do like red/green illumination because as I said my eye sight far away is not that great, and anything that can help improve that would be a plus. Now IIRC green is more for the day so really just a regular black recticle I think would do fine if it doesn't offer green. Having the red for night shooting or low-light shooting I think would be more important since my eye sight is bad I assume the red illumination at night would help improve target visability a lot more.

As far as magnification, the ONLY real reason I choose the Osprey in 10-40x was because at that higher magnification I can see targets way more clearly. That being said if it will negativly affect my shooting like you said, with more of a mirage, more movement and becoming darker, then being able to see the target that clear will be all it's worth, the equivlant to a spotting scope pretty much. A 25x scope would do just fine.

As far as variable power , recticle and adjustment knobs, something like a 12-25x maybe, if you think that will be effective at short and long range. After reading your sticky I REALLY like the way the MIL dot works, granted I have NO experience with it, IIRC the way you can compute the distance and height, find out your MOA and just use the correct dot seems like once you have the math part down it's a VERY efficent, accurate and reliable system to use. If that would be better to use, granted I will master how to use it before even trying to take it to the range, then I would like that. If you think it would be easier for me being inexperienced with scopes to use a MOA recticle with MOA turret then that would also be fine. I would prefer the scope being the same all around, i.e. MIL dot recticle and MIL turret or MOA recticle and MOA turret as for doing the math it would make it easier to stay the same.

For adjustment from what I have read it seems that a knob on the side would be better then an objective lens because you have to worry as much about knocking it or it moving while in a case, things like that.

Lastly the price, obviously $100-$200 would be GREAT....but with what you said about the price that's just unrealistic so I wouldn't even try. At the time I would not want or be able to afford $800-$1000. I am thinking between $400-$600 and trying to stay around $500, but in order to try and get what I want $600 would be the ABSOLUTE max and that would take some time. Also I can save the money while mastering 100 yards and learning some more, so by the time I'd be ready for a scope $400-$600 would be managable to have.

In short scope prefrences, 12-25x, red illumination for low-light would be much more prefered to help improve my visability, MIL dot I like a lot but if MOA would be easier for me being inexperienced that would be fine, would prefer the recticle and turret being the same either way, both MIL or both MOA as it would help with the math, if the knob is more reliable as far as the lens being more delicate or getting knocked around then the knob I would choose. Price, $400-$600 is managable for me.

Also I forgot the size of the lens, my thinking would be something around 40mm ??? If that's not to big to negativly affect LR shooting.

P.S. Sorry this is so long, I wanted to answer as best as possible.

[Tomcat088]

Forgive me if I say something that doesn't quite make sense or ask a stupid question lol I try and really understand what you guys are telling me, more like teaching me actually. I don't want to just sit here and do a blah blah blah kinda thing, as that would be disrespectful and a major waste of your guys time. I make sure to take in every bit of information and value it.

No problem Tomcat, thank you for going into detail like that and actually taking the time to explain everything. Yea your right about saying getting more into it, I only was saying that because I have always been a huge fan of shooting LR, watching the compitions, stuff on the Military channel and stuff like that. By far my LR shooting experience is non-existent lol, my furthest shooting has been IIRC like 250 to 300 yards roughly. Even at that I went with 2 guys that already had them set-up for that distance, they already had a lot of experience at that range since it's where they normaly go to shoot and all there equipment was zeroed in and everyting so all I had to do was a little focusing and pull the trigger. Was an awesome experience to shoot that far but not something I could repeat myself without help.

I've been trying to take some time and read websites about LR shooting, from people who are competetors and/or experienced as you guys are. There's SO much information and know-how to be able to become a decent LR shooter it's amazing. Just from information that you guys have given me it's like a whole nother world to shooting. I know it will take me a while to learn even half the stuff you guys know before I even step up to 300-400 yards so I am definetly going to master shooting @ 100 yards and also master the AR-15 I own first and foremost, while I learn as much as possible.

About the Osprey, thanks again for the detailed information, it was definelty not to brutally honest, was just what I needed to hear really, just like ReconLdr and Guns and Glass have said. Sometimes I can be hard headed and think maybe my scope will work better or those might have been "lemons" but just with some of the stuff you said about the actual construstion of the scope, the turrest, the parallax ect.. those things can not be "lemons" it seems that either a scope is built with quality or it's not. MAYBE for shooting @ 100 yards I could try and get it to hold zero and be consistent but from what you have said probably not, and it will probably just confuse me more since I'm not that experienced with scopes in the first place. I now think my BEST option is to sell it with FULL disclosure to someone who just wants to maybe see better at 50 or 100 yards for plinking. Even that I would not feel great about since it's such a low quality piece of junk, probably better off letting my son play with, he thinks they are telescopes LOL.

As for what kind of scope I would want and what I can afford....well, after reading your sticky and from the info. you and others have offered me this is what I am thinking would be good for me and at the same time good for LR shooting...

Scope prefrences

I do like red/green illumination because as I said my eye sight far away is not that great, and anything that can help improve that would be a plus. Now IIRC green is more for the day so really just a regular black recticle I think would do fine if it doesn't offer green. Having the red for night shooting or low-light shooting I think would be more important since my eye sight is bad I assume the red illumination at night would help improve target visability a lot more.

As far as magnification, the ONLY real reason I choose the Osprey in 10-40x was because at that higher magnification I can see targets way more clearly. That being said if it will negativly affect my shooting like you said, with more of a mirage, more movement and becoming darker, then being able to see the target that clear will be all it's worth, the equivlant to a spotting scope pretty much. A 25x scope would do just fine.

As far as variable power , recticle and adjustment knobs, something like a 12-25x maybe, if you think that will be effective at short and long range. After reading your sticky I REALLY like the way the MIL dot works, granted I have NO experience with it, IIRC the way you can compute the distance and height, find out your MOA and just use the correct dot seems like once you have the math part down it's a VERY efficent, accurate and reliable system to use. If that would be better to use, granted I will master how to use it before even trying to take it to the range, then I would like that. If you think it would be easier for me being inexperienced with scopes to use a MOA recticle with MOA turret then that would also be fine. I would prefer the scope being the same all around, i.e. MIL dot recticle and MIL turret or MOA recticle and MOA turret as for doing the math it would make it easier to stay the same.

For adjustment from what I have read it seems that a knob on the side would be better then an objective lens because you have to worry as much about knocking it or it moving while in a case, things like that.

Lastly the price, obviously $100-$200 would be GREAT....but with what you said about the price that's just unrealistic so I wouldn't even try. At the time I would not want or be able to afford $800-$1000. I am thinking between $400-$600 and trying to stay around $500, but in order to try and get what I want $600 would be the ABSOLUTE max and that would take some time. Also I can save the money while mastering 100 yards and learning some more, so by the time I'd be ready for a scope $400-$600 would be managable to have.

In short scope prefrences, 12-25x, red illumination for low-light would be much more prefered to help improve my visability, MIL dot I like a lot but if MOA would be easier for me being inexperienced that would be fine, would prefer the recticle and turret being the same either way, both MIL or both MOA as it would help with the math, if the knob is more reliable as far as the lens being more delicate or getting knocked around then the knob I would choose. Price, $400-$600 is managable for me.

Also I forgot the size of the lens, my thinking would be something around 40mm ??? If that's not to big to negativly affect LR shooting.

P.S. Sorry this is so long, I wanted to answer as best as possible.

OK, now we're finally getting somewhere, and I'm glad. There are great people here, and other places that are more than happy to teach you, help you, and even let you play with their rifles, but you gotta stop the BS and just start at the beginning. EVERY SINGLE PERSON I know that shoots LR, had someone that was patient and good enough to teach them, and had a pupil who was humble enough to start from the beginning. EVERYBODY is a fan of shooting targets from far away, because it's not something that many people can reliably do, and it's just plain cool. Either way, there's nothing wrong with learning to shoot LR, we all started short and stretched our way out. We all also have a LONG ways to go, I've never met a real LR guy that wasn't still learning constantly. The main thing about LR shooting is doing it right, and being persistent. The sad truth of the matter is that precision rifles end up costing a lot of money, BUT you don't have to do it all at one time. You also don't have to have the "best", but you need something that is at least a little better than you are, so there are no excuses for your misses. You'll soon learn that the main reason for your misses is the "nut behind the bolt," getting better gear only reinforces this. Just because your equipment can do one thing, doesn't mean that you can. My rifle will consistently shoot .25 MOA or better (I can't), but if you were behind it, it still wouldn't do that. Be ready to be humbled, CONSTANTLY, lol, because that's what long range is all about. Some days you're on and you "can't miss", other days you probably should just pack up your gear and go home, or just try to have some fun and not make bad habits. My advice to you is to stick with it, and remember that this is a journey that you will NEVER master in your whole life, but you'll get dang good, lol. Oh, and I promise you, nobody shoots quarter size groups at 1,000 yards, if you can put 5 bullets on a 12"x12" square all the time, YOU ARE THE MAN.

I will say that for 100 yard shooting, the Osprey may work for you, for now. You'll have to take it out, relax, focus on the fundamentals and just see. If it'll hold zero, and since you're not dialing anywhere, that's great, especially if it holds up until later. Just realize that you'll outgrow it very quick, and that's perfectly alright.

Realistically, at the price you're talking about (400-600), you CAN get some decent scopes that will track reliably and fit most of your needs. In that price point, you won't be able to get a FFP model (which is nice), but it's definitely not a "must", especially if you're just shooting at paper and known distance. First Focal Plane scopes come in most handy when you're changing magnification a lot, shooting at movers, and more in tactical matches, etc. They're awesome for other things, but they're not really "necessary", so don't get discouraged. The mil reticle isn't all that hard, but findin mil adjustments in this price range is the more limiting factor. There's only gonna be a few scopes in this price range that will have .1 mil adjustments, but they're still decent scopes. Most of the scope will be mil reticles, and have MOA adjustments, while it's a little bit of a pain, if you're not having to make quick adjustments, it's not the end of the world and what most people deal with. The reality is that mil/mil is more of a convenience as well, and it's really nice, but also not "necessary"; it won't make you a better shooter. MOA/MOA isn't really any easier to find, and the choices on quality besides some SUPER expensive scopes is pretty limiting, so start considering the idea of possibly just learning to deal with MIL/MOA for at least a little bit. In terms of MOA or MIL reticle, either will have about the same learning curve, they're not any harder than the other, just different. Myself and most tactical shooters prefer MIL, it just works well, it's base 10, so everything is even; it just works well and it's easy to find mil-dot reticles.

Don't worry too much about illumination, most tactical reticles are fairly easy to be seen during the day. How much night shooting do you honestly do right now? The red illumination does work at night (if it's not too bright), but it NEVER helps with target focus, it only helps with seeing the reticle, nothing else. One place where mil-dot reticles surpass TMR (tactical milling reticles) is low light conditions, they're thick and heavy enough that they can be seen reasonably well in lowlight conditions. Try not to worry too much about bad eyesight, the scope will do the work in terms of bringing it close (with magnification), so as long as you can focus on the reticle, you'll be fine. Magnification is nice (up to a point), but after a while it can get in the way. People many times have the misconception that a target has to be large in order to shoot it, this is NOT true. LOTS of guys (WWII and Vietnam snipers) made kills at 1,000 yards with 10x optics. As long as you can see the target, and quarter it (into 4 parts), you CAN make hits on it. When mirage is bad, or you're moving a bit, lower magnification makes you "feel" more steady, and you the image doesn't move on you. As you shoot more, you'll get more comfortable with smaller targets looking smaller; the key is that if you can see and quarter it, you can hit it.

The magnification range that you'll be seeing a fair bit will probably be around 4-16x and 6-25x, both are very good ranges for variable power. I personally like the 6-25x because I don't usually dial much below 6x and like the option to dial up to 25x. Keep in mind this is MY preference, and is NOT set in stone. There are plenty of guys that don't like to go much above 16x, and for them 4-16x is great. There are quite a few guys that like FIXED 10x scopes, and they're a STEAL if you can get used to not having ad much magnification. Of all the scopes I will mention for you, the fixed power scopes are the most economical and can have some of the features that you want, BUT they won't have variable magnification. The others will have variable magnification, but they may not adjust in mil's; so you'll have to consider everything, hopefully play with a few member's setups, and see what you like best and are willing to trade.

Of the "cheaper" (but fairly reliable) scopes that you want to check out will come from these manufacturers and lines (in no particular order): Bushnell Elite (3200 & 4200), Nikon (Buckmasters or Monarch), Super Sniper, Falcon, Millett (probably LRS, maybe TRS), Vortex (SOME viper not PST), etc. I may be missing a few and I'll be thinking of more. Right off hand, and I may be forgetting some, the only one I can think of that has the reticle, .1 mil adjustments, side focus, etc is the Millett LRS. This is the scope on my precision rifle right now, and while it's not the best, it is good glass, dials reliably, and does have a Gen II mil-dot (even better than mil-dot). I'm not being biased, any of the scope brands that I've mentioned will work, but they have slightly varying features, so it's a world of trade offs.

Don't worry too much about objective size. LOL, pretty much all LR scopes have large objectives; most of them are between 44-56mm, you'll see plenty of 44 and 50mm objectives. The larger objectives will have more light gathering ability and have higher resolution (able to see more details of objects), but they will be larger/heavier, and will have to sit higher off of the bore. This can effect your cheek weld, and may require you to get a cheek piece or stock that has a higher cheek piece. It's really a preference thing between the trade off of the two, and something you'll kind of have to feel out.

In terms of reticles, there are quite a few "styles" that do the same thing. TMR, Mil-dot, Gen II mil-dot, and others do the same thing, but they measure it slightly different. With all the reticles, one is able to range the size of the target AND use it for old over/under. Here's some photos to help you see the different reticles, and how one is still able to measure with them.

TMR Reticle (the top/bottom is .2 mil hashes, disregard the yardages)


Mil-dot Reticle (close up)


Gen II mil-dot (same as normal mil-dot but with half mil hash)


These will just give you some ideas of reticles that ALL work with the mil system, they just measure slightly differently. Not all the scopes come with particular reticles, so if you really favor one over another, it may limit your scope options. Some can range more accurately because they have finer gradations. Also if you want to see real pictures of the LRS and Gen II mil-dot, just search for Millett LRS, and I've posted up some through the scope pictures. The scope looks much better in real life, but it'll give you an idea. Hope this helps and gets you started.

[PhilaShooter]

OK, now we're finally getting somewhere, and I'm glad. There are great people here, and other places that are more than happy to teach you, help you, and even let you play with their rifles, but you gotta stop the BS and just start at the beginning. EVERY SINGLE PERSON I know that shoots LR, had someone that was patient and good enough to teach them, and had a pupil who was humble enough to start from the beginning. EVERYBODY is a fan of shooting targets from far away, because it's not something that many people can reliably do, and it's just plain cool. Either way, there's nothing wrong with learning to shoot LR, we all started short and stretched our way out. We all also have a LONG ways to go, I've never met a real LR guy that wasn't still learning constantly. The main thing about LR shooting is doing it right, and being persistent. The sad truth of the matter is that precision rifles end up costing a lot of money, BUT you don't have to do it all at one time. You also don't have to have the "best", but you need something that is at least a little better than you are, so there are no excuses for your misses. You'll soon learn that the main reason for your misses is the "nut behind the bolt," getting better gear only reinforces this. Just because your equipment can do one thing, doesn't mean that you can. My rifle will consistently shoot .25 MOA or better (I can't), but if you were behind it, it still wouldn't do that. Be ready to be humbled, CONSTANTLY, lol, because that's what long range is all about. Some days you're on and you "can't miss", other days you probably should just pack up your gear and go home, or just try to have some fun and not make bad habits. My advice to you is to stick with it, and remember that this is a journey that you will NEVER master in your whole life, but you'll get dang good, lol. Oh, and I promise you, nobody shoots quarter size groups at 1,000 yards, if you can put 5 bullets on a 12"x12" square all the time, YOU ARE THE MAN.

I will say that for 100 yard shooting, the Osprey may work for you, for now. You'll have to take it out, relax, focus on the fundamentals and just see. If it'll hold zero, and since you're not dialing anywhere, that's great, especially if it holds up until later. Just realize that you'll outgrow it very quick, and that's perfectly alright.

Realistically, at the price you're talking about (400-600), you CAN get some decent scopes that will track reliably and fit most of your needs. In that price point, you won't be able to get a FFP model (which is nice), but it's definitely not a "must", especially if you're just shooting at paper and known distance. First Focal Plane scopes come in most handy when you're changing magnification a lot, shooting at movers, and more in tactical matches, etc. They're awesome for other things, but they're not really "necessary", so don't get discouraged. The mil reticle isn't all that hard, but findin mil adjustments in this price range is the more limiting factor. There's only gonna be a few scopes in this price range that will have .1 mil adjustments, but they're still decent scopes. Most of the scope will be mil reticles, and have MOA adjustments, while it's a little bit of a pain, if you're not having to make quick adjustments, it's not the end of the world and what most people deal with. The reality is that mil/mil is more of a convenience as well, and it's really nice, but also not "necessary"; it won't make you a better shooter. MOA/MOA isn't really any easier to find, and the choices on quality besides some SUPER expensive scopes is pretty limiting, so start considering the idea of possibly just learning to deal with MIL/MOA for at least a little bit. In terms of MOA or MIL reticle, either will have about the same learning curve, they're not any harder than the other, just different. Myself and most tactical shooters prefer MIL, it just works well, it's base 10, so everything is even; it just works well and it's easy to find mil-dot reticles.

Don't worry too much about illumination, most tactical reticles are fairly easy to be seen during the day. How much night shooting do you honestly do right now? The red illumination does work at night (if it's not too bright), but it NEVER helps with target focus, it only helps with seeing the reticle, nothing else. One place where mil-dot reticles surpass TMR (tactical milling reticles) is low light conditions, they're thick and heavy enough that they can be seen reasonably well in lowlight conditions. Try not to worry too much about bad eyesight, the scope will do the work in terms of bringing it close (with magnification), so as long as you can focus on the reticle, you'll be fine. Magnification is nice (up to a point), but after a while it can get in the way. People many times have the misconception that a target has to be large in order to shoot it, this is NOT true. LOTS of guys (WWII and Vietnam snipers) made kills at 1,000 yards with 10x optics. As long as you can see the target, and quarter it (into 4 parts), you CAN make hits on it. When mirage is bad, or you're moving a bit, lower magnification makes you "feel" more steady, and you the image doesn't move on you. As you shoot more, you'll get more comfortable with smaller targets looking smaller; the key is that if you can see and quarter it, you can hit it.

The magnification range that you'll be seeing a fair bit will probably be around 4-16x and 6-25x, both are very good ranges for variable power. I personally like the 6-25x because I don't usually dial much below 6x and like the option to dial up to 25x. Keep in mind this is MY preference, and is NOT set in stone. There are plenty of guys that don't like to go much above 16x, and for them 4-16x is great. There are quite a few guys that like FIXED 10x scopes, and they're a STEAL if you can get used to not having ad much magnification. Of all the scopes I will mention for you, the fixed power scopes are the most economical and can have some of the features that you want, BUT they won't have variable magnification. The others will have variable magnification, but they may not adjust in mil's; so you'll have to consider everything, hopefully play with a few member's setups, and see what you like best and are willing to trade.

Of the "cheaper" (but fairly reliable) scopes that you want to check out will come from these manufacturers and lines (in no particular order): Bushnell Elite (3200 & 4200), Nikon (Buckmasters or Monarch), Super Sniper, Falcon, Millett (probably LRS, maybe TRS), Vortex (SOME viper not PST), etc. I may be missing a few and I'll be thinking of more. Right off hand, and I may be forgetting some, the only one I can think of that has the reticle, .1 mil adjustments, side focus, etc is the Millett LRS. This is the scope on my precision rifle right now, and while it's not the best, it is good glass, dials reliably, and does have a Gen II mil-dot (even better than mil-dot). I'm not being biased, any of the scope brands that I've mentioned will work, but they have slightly varying features, so it's a world of trade offs.

Don't worry too much about objective size. LOL, pretty much all LR scopes have large objectives; most of them are between 44-56mm, you'll see plenty of 44 and 50mm objectives. The larger objectives will have more light gathering ability and have higher resolution (able to see more details of objects), but they will be larger/heavier, and will have to sit higher off of the bore. This can effect your cheek weld, and may require you to get a cheek piece or stock that has a higher cheek piece. It's really a preference thing between the trade off of the two, and something you'll kind of have to feel out.

In terms of reticles, there are quite a few "styles" that do the same thing. TMR, Mil-dot, Gen II mil-dot, and others do the same thing, but they measure it slightly different. With all the reticles, one is able to range the size of the target AND use it for old over/under. Here's some photos to help you see the different reticles, and how one is still able to measure with them.

TMR Reticle (the top/bottom is .2 mil hashes, disregard the yardages)


Mil-dot Reticle (close up)


Gen II mil-dot (same as normal mil-dot but with half mil hash)


These will just give you some ideas of reticles that ALL work with the mil system, they just measure slightly differently. Not all the scopes come with particular reticles, so if you really favor one over another, it may limit your scope options. Some can range more accurately because they have finer gradations. Also if you want to see real pictures of the LRS and Gen II mil-dot, just search for Millett LRS, and I've posted up some through the scope pictures. The scope looks much better in real life, but it'll give you an idea. Hope this helps and gets you started.

It's actually funny you have that scope, when I was doing some research after my last post I came across that exact scope, the Millet LRS. At the time I was thinking it was a very nice scope, reasonably priced and reviews were good.

Now after I looked up your thread on the scope I can only say WOW !! I understand your pictures with a camera and some color distortions and what not BUT still @ roughly 250 yards away that scope has a beautiful, clear picture and plus through a camera. Being able to actually see the recticle, the exact way you described it, also helps understanding the hash marks.

I don't want to go jump on anything right away, as you said with the Osprey, for now I can see if it'll work @ 100 yards and jsut leave it there until I master that distance. Also allow myself time to just check out other scopes. I do think in the time I master 100 yards I will be ready for another, more precision scope as you said, something I can shoot @ 100 yards then go to 200 yards and not have to worry or waste time with something like the Osprey.

It's early mornin here lol, kids will be up in about 3 hours so I better get some shut eye before I unknowingly pull an all nighter....that's a NO NO with the kids lol, I'll be tormented for it !

Again Tomcat can't thank ya enough for the help. That Millet LRS has really caught my eye, especially with the Gen II mil-dot style, very nice. I'll be sure to check out the others as well, make sure I make a decision that best fits me. I also agree thinking on it that the illumination is nice, but really will not help see the target any more but could also make it harder to focus on the target, especially if it's really bright and doesn't have a brightness setting, kinda be getting in my own way because of it.