Any experience with Shepherd Scopes

[KAL101]

I am looking for a nice long range hunting scope and have been looking at the Shepherd line and was wondering if any of you guys have had any good/bad luck with them. I love the reticle and like that certain models fit in inch rings. I have heard that they dont have the clearest view but if its a good tough scope its worth it to me. The price range is good, 599,699,799. Any other suggestions would also be appreciated.


http://www.shepherdscopes.com/

[Tomcat088]

I am looking for a nice long range hunting scope and have been looking at the Shepherd line and was wondering if any of you guys have had any good/bad luck with them. I love the reticle and like that certain models fit in inch rings. I have heard that they dont have the clearest view but if its a good tough scope its worth it to me. The price range is good, 599,699,799. Any other suggestions would also be appreciated.


http://www.shepherdscopes.com/

I personally have never been impressed with Shepherd scopes, but that's just my personal opinion. All they basically are is a FFP (First focal plane) reticle is a version of BDC. I've heard things contrary to them being "tough scopes", but I have no personal experience with them whatsoever, it's all heresay. So you have ot take that for what it's worth.

The idea in and of itself is "handy", but any scope that you have to rely on you placing one reticle back over the other in the center isn't quite as consistent or repeatable, there's a LOT of room for operator error. With just about any scope, you can zero it with a shot or two if you know what you're doing. You can place the crosshairs on the target and fire a round, then place the crosshairs back on the aiming point, and without moving the rifle, turn the turret until the crosshairs are on the bullet hole. It's pretty much exactly the same thing that Shepherd is talking about.

There is a LOT of hype and straight up BS about what you can do with this scope. I understand marketing, but out right lying is not something I appreciate. There is NO WAY that with a generally calibrated reticle that you will shoot even past 600 yards with a LOT of tweaking, either in making your load fit the reticle, etc. The ONLY way that you could even shoot to 800 yards with a BDC reticle is if it's tuned EXACTLY for your load (IE, bullet weight, BC, velocity, temperature, barometric pressure, etc). People can say all they like, but myself and a few others here shoot 800-1,000 yards regularly, and there is NO WAY that you'll do this with a general untuned ballistic reticle. Even if you could, you would DEFINITELY have to have some horizontal markings because you MUST account for wind. Even at 500 yards and further you have to account for wind. So while people like the idea of just holding the circle on the target, etc; if you want to hold the circle on the target then you're gonna be dialing wind corrections, or you won't be holding the circle on the target in order to get hits. The fact that they have to brag about a review in a shooting magazine from 1983 should tell you how they're a bit outdated.

I've never looked through one, but for as much as they cost they SHOULD have dang good glass. I do like the fact that they're first focal plane, it means that you can use the hold overs for any distance. There are quite a few first focal plane scopes in this range, although they have different reticles, but it's still not something special to only Shepherd scopes. It might have been something unique back in the 80's in America (not in Europe), but it's not anymore. I'm not quite sure what you like so much about 1" rings, unless you have a ton of really expensive 1" rings already. 1" = 25.4mm, and most other scopes these days have 30mm tubes. While the tube is slightly larger, you get a little more light down the tube, but you get a fair bit more travel in terms of MOA with witch to zero the scope or dial for longer ranges. The limiting factor on how low you can mount the scope has to do with the objective lense, which will be more than 30mm's in the first place, so I don't quite understand the fixation on 1" main body tubes.

There are other scopes out there that have similar reticles systems if that's what has you sold on these scopes. Most of them are not FFP, but there's also LOTS of people that don't like FFP scopes, and can't get used to them. Tactical shooters LOVE FFP scopes, so it just depends on preference; I'd definitely look through a first focal plane scope before I paid this much for one, to see if you like them or not. I would honestly consider Nikon's BDC, or Bushnell Elite's with the MOA system before I bought a shepherd. The Nikon BDC doesn't help you with the exact distance so much, but since it's quite a bit cheaper than the Shepherd, you could buy a decent laser range finder and know the EXACT distance to your target. That's what you really want, the exact distance, so you know which hold to use, not just a rough guestimate. The Bushnell MOA system does show you which to use based on the ears/antlers of the animal. Both of those scopes have VERY good glass, they're cheaper than what you have listed, they're bullet proof (and lifetime warranties), and they dial reliably as well.

I personally think it's ridiculous to pay $700 for a scope that doesn't have exceptional glass. I've never seen a Shepherd scope for less than $699, but you may have found one. Either way, the Nikon Buckmaster, Nikon Monarch, Bushnell Elite 3200, and Bushnell 4200 scopes ALL cost less, and ARE good glass, and cost less. When you talk about spending $800 or a little more for a scope, you might as well look at some Huskemaw hunting scopes. You give them your data and they'll calibrate the dials specifically for your rifle, load, etc, and then you just dial to the distance. The problem with that is that they're quite expensive scopes, and you'd still need a laser range finder to know the distance. The good thing is that they're EXACT, from what I hear bullet proof, and you really can shoot 1,000 yards with them. I would seriously consider the Nikon's and Bushnells before the Shepherd. If you're seriously interested in FFP scopes, or some other reticles besides the ones that I've mentioned, there's plenty of other scopes that can be mentioned.

I'm going to be pretty forward about this, and I hope you don't take it as disrespect. Most people have NO BUSINESS, NO BUSINESS trying to shoot at animals at 500 yards. I believe that people should make ethical (humane) quick kills on animals. When you are shooting at 300 yards and beyond, there's LOTS of things that can go wrong. Animals move all the time, and you pulling the shot even FRACTIONS of millimeters will result in you not getting hits on the vitals. Most people do not have the skill to properly read wind in the field for cold bore shots beyonds 300 yards. If you don't read the wind right, you WILL wound animals. Sure shooting animals at 500-600 yards sounds good to everybody, but realistically it's not something that people should be doing. It's not as easy as "hold the circle on the deer and pull the trigger", I'm sorry, but it's not. You can't flinch, move, or even have inconsistent amounts of air in your lungs, to make hits at those distances. Maybe you do possess the skills to make hits at those distances, but if you don't, you need to spend thousands of rounds to make sure that you can make cold bore hits on game animals at those distances. It's WAY different from shooting at paper or steel, you're talking about living animals that feel pain and could have to suffer because you did not know your limits. Please don't just sling lead at animals at these distances, it doesn't end well. I am something that has killed animals at 800+ yards with cold bore shots, and I'm asking you again, PLEASE know your limits. I hope this helps, and here's some links for Nikon and Bushnell to check out the systems I'm talking about (have videos too).

http://www.nikonhunting.com/riflesco...c-reticle.html
http://www.bushnell.com/products/scopes/riflescopes/

[KAL101]

Thank you very much sir, rep added. I want an inch tube because its going to be sitting on top of an armalite ar-10 and the rings that I have were $150 and I dont want to buy a set of 30mm if I dont have to. What do you think of this scope? I plan on shooting a couple of sniper matches with the rifle and humm uhh hunting uhhh cardboard, yes cardboard coyote targets with it hmmm *cough* humm. I have shot alot of "open unsanctioned" CMP style matches with the ar 10 and I just wanted to spruce it up alittle bit with a scope. I had a Tasco on it but that rifle deserves more than that. Thank you again. Oh and heres the URL to this scope I was looking at the the 4.5-14 Power one. It is really nice to hear another oppinion before I make my decision.


http://www.burrisoptics.com/fftactical1.html#45x14x

[Tomcat088]

Thank you very much sir, rep added. I want an inch tube because its going to be sitting on top of an armalite ar-10 and the rings that I have were $150 and I dont want to buy a set of 30mm if I dont have to. What do you think of this scope? I plan on shooting a couple of sniper matches with the rifle and humm uhh hunting uhhh cardboard, yes cardboard coyote targets with it hmmm *cough* humm. I have shot alot of "open unsanctioned" CMP style matches with the ar 10 and I just wanted to spruce it up alittle bit with a scope. I had a Tasco on it but that rifle deserves more than that. Thank you again. Oh and heres the URL to this scope I was looking at the the 4.5-14 Power one. It is really nice to hear another oppinion before I make my decision.


http://www.burrisoptics.com/fftactical1.html#45x14x

You're welcome, and thank you for the rep. I understand why you are interested in the 1" tube. Have you considered selling off the expensive rings that you have (probably for not much of a loss, they're quality), and purchasing some 30mm rings? What you're talking about sounds similar to tactical matches, or at least will have similar needs to tactical matches. When you start talking about tactical scopes, most of them will have 30mm main tubes. If you're not interested in doing that, it's fine, but it will limit your choices. I'm actually relieved to hear you'll be shooting at cardboard coyotes, NOTHING wrong with that. I just get a bit unsettled when I think people are talking about shooting at animals at those kinds of distances, and they're only wanting to do it with reticles, and don't have much experience with reading wind. If you've shot matches before, lol, you're familiar with doping wind. That's a decent scope, although in that price range, I think there's some that would give you more aiming points, have better glass, and more features. We also went from talking about scopes that cost $700 or more, to ~$350 scopes. Is there a particular price range that you expected or needed to stay within? I'm just curious, because there's one particular scope I'm thinking of that is made for varmint hunting, that has a reticle similar to what you've been looking at, but it's on the higher end, lol.

Are you interested in mil-dots, or do you have any experience with them? In this optics section there's a sticky that I've written, it's pretty detailed on the use of mil-dots for ranging, hold over/under, etc. People shooting "sniper" matches are typically using mil-dots, TMR, or similar reticles. I'll try to see what will fit your needs, from the answers to the questions.

[Guns & Glass]

Have extensive experience w/Shepherd...they simply do what is advertised.

Hakko built the 1st generation years ago...and their QC stank then, and stinks today. Hakko also built the later Springfield Armory scopes. They violated Shepherd Patents. Don't see those scopes anymore. Even Nikon's BDC is close to a violation. Japanese company that's been building the 2nd generation for years is the best the Pacific Rim has to offer even rivaling European makers.

Wish Dan would have added some models w/larger objectives, and 30mmtubes. However the Patent is/has run out, he's in his 70's, and he feels the development money spent would not be recovered.

Scope is a hybrid (one reason for the Patent) both a First Focal Plane (FFP) and a Second Focal Plane which is why there are 2 sets of adjustments.

They are very well designed, mechanically sound, use very good glass, and coatings. Easily rank w/Burris Signature, Leupold VX-III/3, Bushnell(Bausch&Lomb) Elite 4200.

Ballistically the cartridge specs must be matched to the reticle subtensions. Dan provides both a general fit up chart and also lists the Subtension values so you can compare your ballistics.

Design intent was for a hunting scope. This means immediated lethality, or shot placement in a vital zone resulting in a quick kill.

If looking for a LR scope that's has benchrest capability beyond 500 yards just look at the reticle and note NO horizontal lines. This is give the best target & range acquisition without obstruction at those distances. Things seem to get smaller the farther away they are. #1 Priority= hunting scope.

However, if you have the time when making a shot W & E Tic lines are available if needed (10X), but you still need to practice.

Addressing the reticle there are 3 basic sizes: 9", 18", and 24" which represent sizes. My next hunt is a 7 day Horse-Tent in Wyoming and the only one reticle I personally wouldn't use is the 24" for Elk.
I have learned how to range using different body parts because for some strange reason no game animal ever offered to provide and pose easy ranging much less an easy shot. T
he 18" easily covers Deer, Antelope, etc, and I can also use it for Prarie Dog/Groundhog. That being said, if taking a Elk hunt the money is well spent on the 24" if that is to be a dedicated Elk scope vs. the hunt cost and a missed trophy. Remind me to tell the story when in shop in Fairbanks, AK and two flown in sheep hunters w/Weatherby's had fogged Tasco scopes. Stupid!

Study Shepherd's web site. All things being in correct working order, and you miss....problem is with the guy in the mirror.

[arrrrgh15]

People shooting "sniper" matches are typically using mil-dots, TMR, or similar reticles. I'll try to see what will fit your needs, from the answers to the questions.

You will need a mil graduated reticle for hold over, leads, wind corrections, etc. Most of these matches are not of the bench rest variety where you have time to do scope adjustments prior to breaking the shot.

[KAL101]

You're welcome, and thank you for the rep. I understand why you are interested in the 1" tube. Have you considered selling off the expensive rings that you have (probably for not much of a loss, they're quality), and purchasing some 30mm rings? What you're talking about sounds similar to tactical matches, or at least will have similar needs to tactical matches. When you start talking about tactical scopes, most of them will have 30mm main tubes. If you're not interested in doing that, it's fine, but it will limit your choices. I'm actually relieved to hear you'll be shooting at cardboard coyotes, NOTHING wrong with that. I just get a bit unsettled when I think people are talking about shooting at animals at those kinds of distances, and they're only wanting to do it with reticles, and don't have much experience with reading wind. If you've shot matches before, lol, you're familiar with doping wind. That's a decent scope, although in that price range, I think there's some that would give you more aiming points, have better glass, and more features. We also went from talking about scopes that cost $700 or more, to ~$350 scopes. Is there a particular price range that you expected or needed to stay within? I'm just curious, because there's one particular scope I'm thinking of that is made for varmint hunting, that has a reticle similar to what you've been looking at, but it's on the higher end, lol.

Are you interested in mil-dots, or do you have any experience with them? In this optics section there's a sticky that I've written, it's pretty detailed on the use of mil-dots for ranging, hold over/under, etc. People shooting "sniper" matches are typically using mil-dots, TMR, or similar reticles. I'll try to see what will fit your needs, from the answers to the questions.

I could sell the rings, thats an idea. I might as well if it limits my choices. Sorry for jumping around in scope prices and qualities, I really dont know much about them haha. I love the mildot idea, your sticky of them needs some kind of award, its versitile and semi easy to use. I really dont have to have a BDC reticle, I have been shooting unertiles since I was born and their thin reticle never bothered me, I actually like it. Reticle is really not that big of an issue although I like the mildot. I just heard things about the shepherd's special reticle and got sucked in by marketing . Oh and I know my way around the wind, im out at perry every year I can get there. Im not dumb enough to rely just on reticle for longer shots without testing it out first. I would only test it on cardboard haha. Its pretty much just a reference point. IDK why I didnt think of these things before. I would not like to go over $800 but if you have a suggestion that is over that be more than welcome to say it. I can save more. Oh and again I really like the mildots, thats what I think I want now, also paralex adjustment would be good. Nobody has ever given me this much info on scopes, its always "well this is what I have, yeah it was like 2 grand but its good" and the other crowd is " I love my simmons or tasco". I want something thats on the high side of middle quality. Thanks.

Oh and Guns & Glass, thanks for more info on the shepherd, I actually have one of the Springfield Armory scopes. Im still looking at the shepherd, just for a different rifle.

I figured that I would just ask what scope Tomcat088 would put on the AR-10 personally. I dont care what the price is, you definetly know alot about today's scopes. Oh and I would NEVER take an unethical shot on an animal. I wanted the reticle to hit sillhouettes at different yardages. Now that I re thought it I dont want a BDC, I actually own a Nikon buckmasters BDC scope and its too much of a hunting scope for what I need. I want something with turrets, paralex adjustment, roughly 4.5-14 power, mil-dot and nice glass. Thanks again for the help.

[Guns & Glass]

Glad your having fun while learning. Forum should be for airing questions, problem solving, sharing ideas, and experiences. Shooters & hunters help others have fun, and Happy Bullet Holes.

Don't discount the Shepherd because of Nikon's BDC which like a good college foot ball player, Shepherd is a pro football player.
Also found the Nixon BDC to be 'clumsy' both in LD ranging, and 'cluttered' when dialing in. Had discussion at SHOT Show when intro'd, while not trying to be insulting asked Xxxxx Manager if he ever used it in LR. He got upset, and some 'listening in' Nikon reps laughed at his answer. Had another difficult discussion w/another this year w/a Product Manager who literally didn't know animal size values to range...much less even how to use almost any scopes magnifaction to adjust for BDC!
Too many of those guys don't have real knowledge and experience like Tomcat88 and other good poster here have to offer.

Noted Nikon's new 'Spot On' ballistics program for their BDC which goes to show BDC's can work...but they have always needed to be matched (tuned) to the load.

Burris intro'd the Ballistic Plex, and Ballistic Mil Dot one of the best designed, easy to use, and are verifiable. Then Leupold brought out some good BDC rect's and smartly fine tuned them helping them work better. Others scope companies started to scramble & play catchup to recover lost sales.

Swarovski finally straightend out theirs, Zeiss followed w/the good Rapid Z. But both brands initially in Metric (some models still are)...."Hello guys check w/your Marketing people this is America". Nikon, then Bushnell brought out the D.O.A. which still needs some work. Coinsiding some Tacticals like Barrett's, and then Horus which I call Christmas Trees were evolving.

Have alot of scopes and over the years my personal LR/ULR preferences slimmed down evolving to Night Force, and when I don't feel like saving or spending the money, or the application/rifle don't warrant the NF expense head straight for Burris. Stopped using the big "L" years ago and except for the great VX-7 design which evolved from the LPS which was a Leica Americanized only until 2009 did they really start to catch up, but the price to play catch is hurting them big time.

Since your in that exploratory mode have looked at the Mil Dot, and want more info overload...check out Mil Radian which really works, and if you haven't learned/experienced shooting the Mil style rect's take a look at Minute Of Angle (MOA).

As I'm getting younger, my brain's working better, and my eyes are getting sharper LOL, I've come to like MOA the best especially when benchresting where few Mil are used, & especially again when hunting. That way I learned and used only one type of shooting system for both the bench and hunting. KISS principle still works.

[KAL101]

Glad your having fun while learning. Forum should be for airing questions, problem solving, sharing ideas, and experiences. Shooters & hunters help others have fun, and Happy Bullet Holes.

Don't discount the Shepherd because of Nikon's BDC which like a good college foot ball player, Shepherd is a pro football player.
Also found the Nixon BDC to be 'clumsy' both in LD ranging, and 'cluttered' when dialing in. Had discussion at SHOT Show when intro'd, while not trying to be insulting asked Xxxxx Manager if he ever used it in LR. He got upset, and some 'listening in' Nikon reps laughed at his answer. Had another difficult discussion w/another this year w/a Product Manager who literally didn't know animal size values to range...much less even how to use almost any scopes magnifaction to adjust for BDC!
Too many of those guys don't have real knowledge and experience like Tomcat88 and other good poster here have to offer.

Noted Nikon's new 'Spot On' ballistics program for their BDC which goes to show BDC's can work...but they have always needed to be matched (tuned) to the load.

Burris intro'd the Ballistic Plex, and Ballistic Mil Dot one of the best designed, easy to use, and are verifiable. Then Leupold brought out some good BDC rect's and smartly fine tuned them helping them work better. Others scope companies started to scramble & play catchup to recover lost sales.

Swarovski finally straightend out theirs, Zeiss followed w/the good Rapid Z. But both brands initially in Metric (some models still are)...."Hello guys check w/your Marketing people this is America". Nikon, then Bushnell brought out the D.O.A. which still needs some work. Coinsiding some Tacticals like Barrett's, and then Horus which I call Christmas Trees were evolving.

Have alot of scopes and over the years my personal LR/ULR preferences slimmed down evolving to Night Force, and when I don't feel like saving or spending the money, or the application/rifle don't warrant the NF expense head straight for Burris. Stopped using the big "L" years ago and except for the great VX-7 design which evolved from the LPS which was a Leica Americanized only until 2009 did they really start to catch up, but the price to play catch is hurting them big time.

Since your in that exploratory mode have looked at the Mil Dot, and want more info overload...check out Mil Radian which really works, and if you haven't learned/experienced shooting the Mil style rect's take a look at Minute Of Angle (MOA).

As I'm getting younger, my brain's working better, and my eyes are getting sharper LOL, I've come to like MOA the best especially when benchresting where few Mil are used, & especially again when hunting. That way I learned and used only one type of shooting system for both the bench and hunting. KISS principle still works.

I LOVE Night Force scopes. Ive been throwing around the idea of just biting the bullet and throwing out a small fortune for something that I KNOW is good. You have tons of reticle options with NF and I love their adj. knobs. Uhhhh sooooo many decisions. Im not going to jump out right now and buy a scope, Im going to look around for a while. Again great info and advice, rep added. I want something that will be nice and I might as well go all the way with it. What NF products do you have and what NF scope would you put on an AR-10? I truly appreciate your help.

[Guns & Glass]

Varmint: Use the Bench Rest in NP-RR (Ranging Reticle). Like the side focus on NXS, but don't need a tactical built scope for Varmint and since has supposed to have same optical values for alot less money...I saved $400.

Does it all from accurate short to long Ranging, also having BDC values in MOA. Mostly use the reticle for shooting, and a little of the turrent.
Don't need to carry a Range Finder which is more weight, more clutter, more concern thinking about forgetting/losing it. 'KISS' principle applied.
ULR still torn between using a Double Dot & CH-2. Like Double Dot best because it's specifically designed to relax the eye, but dot is a bit too bit IF viewing at high power. That being said if it's a 85* plus day you can't use more that 16-20x due to mirage. If cool days or late afternoon/early evening CH-2 works great. Using turrents only on DD/CH-2.


Hunting: NP-R1. It's kind of a modified duplex w/alot of open white space. Learned to use (still do) the great German #4 style reticles. I look at the game in the center (not the crosshairs) letting my eye float w/out thinking about focusing. The thicker outer lines kinda nudge the eye towards the center. Then, I start looking at both the game & reticle....then deciding on taking/making the shot.

Also have the NP-R2 in 2 MOA. Getting much more comfortable w/it vs. the NP-R1 since it's newer to me, but it has more versatility and its more accurate at longer shots. When your so used to something it's still a learning curve even when something new or better comes along.

Also use a illuminated dot in German 3p-4 by Burris. Wish NF made a hunting reticle like that!!! Shooting format is mostly Maximun Point Blank Range.

AR's only in 223/5.56= Definately the Compact NXS 2.5-10 in FC-2. Does both short and medium range. Has Zero Stop, but wouldn't spend the money for it next time. Like the FC-2. Clean, simple. My style.
Had a Leupold CQB, but some guy stuck a XTR by Burris in my hands at a show and opened my eyes & brain. Eventually traded the Leupold on it. XTR simple to use as CQB @ 1x w/both eyes open yet quick bangs out to couple hundred yards @ 4x. Don't shoot the Olympic much so I'm well pleased w/the XTR. Think the Night Force is better but hard for me to justify the extra cost for such limited shooting. For $150 over the Leupold I could have bought the Compact. If I wouldn't have lost money on trading the Leupold for the Burris....I'd still had enough to buy the Night Force the first time. Don't kick me...I've already kicked my own a$$.