Calguns.net  

Home My iTrader Join the NRA Donate to CGSSA Sponsors CGN Google Search
CA Semiauto Ban(AW)ID Flowchart CA Handgun Ban ID Flowchart CA Shotgun Ban ID Flowchart
Go Back   Calguns.net > FIREARMS DISCUSSIONS > Optics, Mounts, Rails and Sights
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

Optics, Mounts, Rails and Sights If it aims your firearm, post about it here.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 08-09-2015, 4:03 PM
Rothenfield Rothenfield is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Monterey Bay Area
Posts: 53
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default >22LR…200Yds…Magnification?<

I’m not posing the typical “which scope should I buy” question (unless you have some suggestions), I was actually confused about the appropriate magnification of a scope for a .22LR at 200 Yds. I’ve shot mostly handguns so I have little to NO experience with optics. Most of my understanding has come from the rimfirecentral intro to scopes.

http://www.rimfirecentral.com/forums....php?p=1522944

I’ve become interested in long-range shooting but feel that high caliber shooting impractical and expensive. My local range has targets at 50, 100, & 200 yds. So I’m looking at bolt action .22’s as a learning tool starting at 50 yds but potentially moving out to 200. I’ve seen that several companies are making rimfire specific scopes which I assume mean that they are parallax free at around 50 yds. However, all the ones that I’ve seen have objectives at about 32 which the article suggests is too small for 100 yds. I assume I will require a scope with adjustable objective so that I can dial in the parallax. She suggests a minimum of 16x40 for 100 yds. But what if I eventually work my way out to 200 yds, would a 16x40 work?

As far as scope brands, I don’t feel a .22 warrants going crazy, nor could I afford to, so I’ll probably draw the line at $300 which is roughly what I will be spending on the rifle. I’ve seen several that would seem to fit the bill made by Mueller, Weaver, Nikon, etc.

I'd love reading your thoughts.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 08-09-2015, 4:20 PM
stephewc's Avatar
stephewc stephewc is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: San Gabriel Valley
Posts: 1,048
iTrader: 56 / 100%
Default

I'm actually thinking about changing scopes on my 22LR for longer distances soon too. Right now it has a cheapo 4-16x power that has crappy turrets. I find that I set it at 12x power most of the time. Even for my centerfire bolt rifle with a 6-24x power scope, I find I prefer the field of view at 12x and leave it there most of the time.

I plan to pick up a SWFA 12x fixed scope for my 22LR rifle since it offers decent glass, good turrets and great warranty for $300.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 08-09-2015, 5:39 PM
Rothenfield Rothenfield is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Monterey Bay Area
Posts: 53
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

How far out have you shot with 16x and what objective size? Not like I'm going out tomorrow and shooting at targets at 200 yds, but if that is the ambition, I want a scope that can do it.

Also, can anyone recommend a good primer book about scope optics?
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 08-10-2015, 12:38 AM
JMP's Avatar
JMP JMP is offline
Internet Warrior
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Pacific Southwest
Posts: 17,047
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

At $300, the SWFA fixed are hard to beat as they come in 6, 10, 12, 16, and 20x (I believe).
http://swfa.com/Classic-C12502.aspx

A big part of the equation is the quality of the glass. The resolution and perception of the target with good glass at low magnfication can do better than high magnification in poorer quality scopes.

Keep in mind, that with 22, you probably want a scope that can focus from 10m to 200m. Full size scopes often do not have the parallax adjustment to get you to 25m or inside.

For pure target shooting on paper, a higher magnification is good. If you shoot in the field, you will want lower magnification with a larger FOV. However, recoil is not an issue with 22lr so it helps.

Therefore, get an acceptable level of quality for the glass, then make sure it can focus at CLOSE distances. Standard centerfire long range scopes (56mm objectives typically can't focus at 25m or in). If you are only going to 200m, then you can get away with a smaller objective lens. The objective lens limits you in that small objective lenses cannot provide a large enough exit pupil at high magnifications and this results in poor eye relief and darkening of the image, but at 200 yards, it isn't as bad as one might think.

I am in a similar situation as you as I am looking to eventually get a better rimfire scope. Right now, I am using a fixed 12x on my bolt action target rifle, and I am using a 1-6x on my semiauto .22lr. I need to get more experience with precision .22 before formulating my opinion on what is needed for my bolt action target scope. It have on a fixed 12x as I have extra 6-24 or 5-20 that I could have used, but they have issues inside of 25m.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 08-10-2015, 2:38 PM
Rothenfield Rothenfield is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Monterey Bay Area
Posts: 53
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JMP View Post
At $300, the SWFA fixed are hard to beat as they come in 6, 10, 12, 16, and 20x (I believe).
http://swfa.com/Classic-C12502.aspx

A big part of the equation is the quality of the glass.
I getting a little more familiar with the nomenclature of optics and I believe I have somewhat of an understanding of your thoughtful comments, but one question I would have is how do you determine the "quality of the glass"?

Some of the economical scopes have there glass made in Europe and then are assembled in China to cut costs. Is it just a matter of where the glass was made?

Also, in my little pea brain I'm thinking that pushing the little .22 to it's ballastic limits is comparable to high calibers at much longer distances. I read somewhere that shooting a 308 at 1000 yds was equivalent to shooting a .22 at 167 yds, another said that is was more like a half or third say 300-400 yds. If this is true, should a scope meant for high calibers at much farther targets work for small calibers pushed past there typical limits?
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 08-10-2015, 4:02 PM
JMP's Avatar
JMP JMP is offline
Internet Warrior
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Pacific Southwest
Posts: 17,047
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rothenfield View Post
I getting a little more familiar with the nomenclature of optics and I believe I have somewhat of an understanding of your thoughtful comments, but one question I would have is how do you determine the "quality of the glass"?

Some of the economical scopes have there glass made in Europe and then are assembled in China to cut costs. Is it just a matter of where the glass was made?

Also, in my little pea brain I'm thinking that pushing the little .22 to it's ballastic limits is comparable to high calibers at much longer distances. I read somewhere that shooting a 308 at 1000 yds was equivalent to shooting a .22 at 167 yds, another said that is was more like a half or third say 300-400 yds. If this is true, should a scope meant for high calibers at much farther targets work for small calibers pushed past there typical limits?
Unfortunately, you can only assess glass quality with your own eyes. It will generally be proportional to price. It isn't just the glass quality, it is the tolerances at which the material is cut and laid. I'd avoid anything that was anywhere near China or a third world country. Generally, when it comes to origin, most of the good glass will be from Germany, Austria, or Japan. Then, the assembly will be US, German, or Austrian. That's a generality as it differs from case to case. You just have to try out different scopes.

You are right that practicing with a .22lr at 200 yards is quite difficult. However, a lot depends on the ammo. The most accurate 22 shooting is done with bolt action rifles and the projectile has a muzzle velocity of about 1,000 fps. For accuracy, you will want to shoot subsonic ammunition, and the quality of your barrel and the ammo will play a huge factor. For 200 yards and out, you will actually be better off using a lower quality supersonic ammo to make up for the difference. The most accurate 22 stays below the speed of sound to completely avoid the transonic velocity that results in some destabilization.

Thus, it depends on what you want, absolute distance/power/killing ability or pure accuracy. For pure accuracy, you will generally find that your rifle will like a certain type (and lot if you are really into it), which will generally be of Eley, Lapua, SK, RWS, etc. and other higher end makes that cost about $0.20-$0.45/round. You can't get great accuracy with bulk, supersonic 22lr. But, sometimes, the bulk packages are good enough for people that just want to practice, hunt, or casually shoot. If you are shooting a semiautomatic rifle, then obviously, it probably isn't worth it to use Eley Tenex given the cost as the rifle will not be that accurate.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 08-10-2015, 4:26 PM
Junkie's Avatar
Junkie Junkie is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 4,874
iTrader: 22 / 100%
Default

I have a Nikon 3-9x40 Rimfire on my Savage MkII. The trigger on the gun is ok but fairly heavy, pre-accutrigger. I'm not a great shot but can get around 1.25" 10rd groups at 100yd using CCI SV, MiniMags are a little bigger. Both are dropping like a rock past 150 but the SVs are significantly worse. If you were closer I'd offer to let you look through the scope to see if you think it's adequate for your needs.
__________________
I will never buy another Spikes Tactical item, as I have a 5.45 marked barrel from them with a 5.56 bore that keyholed at 25 yards, and they wouldn't replace it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CSACANNONEER View Post
A real live woman is more expensive than a fleshlight. Which would you rather have?
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 08-10-2015, 5:02 PM
Kestryll's Avatar
Kestryll Kestryll is offline
Head Janitor
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Occupied Reseda, PRK
Posts: 21,011
iTrader: 22 / 100%
Blog Entries: 3
Default

I have the Nikon Monarch 3-12x42 Side Focus on my Ruger American Rimfire.
The side focus lets be dial down to 10-15 yards and out to infinity.
It's very bright and clear and 12x should be enough for 200 yards.
Mine came with two extra sets of turrets and a sunshade.

__________________
NRA Benefactor Life Member / CRPA Life Member / SAF Life Member
Calguns.net an incorported entity - President.
The Calguns Shooting Sports Assoc. - Vice President.
The California Rifle & Pistol Assoc. - Director.
DONATE TO NRA-ILA, CGSSA, AND CRPAF NOW!
Opinions posted in this account are my own and unless specifically stated as such are not the approved position of Calguns.net, CGSSA or CRPA.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 08-10-2015, 5:17 PM
Rothenfield Rothenfield is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Monterey Bay Area
Posts: 53
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Thanks JMP, I don’t know if all this optics talk is starting to sink in or I’m just being delusional, but what you’ve just stated makes sense to me. You seem very knowledgeable on the subject and I appreciate you responding to my questions, as amateurish as they are.

I came across a similar thread on rimfirecentral and it seems that the majority of the long-distance rimfire shooters there prefer something like 6x24 AO with a 42 or better objective.
http://www.rimfirecentral.com/forums...d.php?t=510723

I’ll have to research individual scopes to find out what the lower range limit is because it would be nice to be able to start out at 25 yds, but 50 would be OK I guess.

As far as glass quality; I’ll try to heed your advice but like most I have a budget and the question becomes do you spend more for the rifle or scope. I think I’ll end up spending more on the scope. I have my eye on a Savage MKII BV at around 300 with the ability to upgrade the trigger and barrel potentially then spend around 400 on optics.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 08-10-2015, 5:56 PM
Rothenfield Rothenfield is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Monterey Bay Area
Posts: 53
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Junkie View Post
I have a Nikon 3-9x40 Rimfire on my Savage MkII. The trigger on the gun is ok but fairly heavy, pre-accutrigger. I'm not a great shot but can get around 1.25" 10rd groups at 100yd using CCI SV, MiniMags are a little bigger. Both are dropping like a rock past 150 but the SVs are significantly worse. If you were closer I'd offer to let you look through the scope to see if you think it's adequate for your needs.
That’s a good idea Junkie, I might try going to the range and watch the long-range shooters and see if I can pick their brains about their rigs. Maybe they would let me look through their scopes and I could also get a sense of the type of reticule I might prefer.

Maybe I’m looking at this the wrong way, maybe I should get an economical scope adequate for 100 yds and if I really enjoy it at 100 and want the challenge of pushing it to 200, I’ll look to upgrade the scope at that point if needed.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 08-10-2015, 6:01 PM
Rothenfield Rothenfield is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Monterey Bay Area
Posts: 53
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Thanks Kestryll, Nikon is still definitely on my short list. Can you describe what 12x looks like at 200 yds. on a target? I forgot to mention that it occurs to me that with enough magnification it eliminates the need to purchase a spotting scope. Do you use one?
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 08-12-2015, 3:46 PM
Rothenfield Rothenfield is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Monterey Bay Area
Posts: 53
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

I just learned a new term of concern for a scope used for long range rimfire, the scope needs enough “internal elevation”. Is this the same as the scopes range of Objective Adjustment?

I also found a ballastics chart for .22 that shows a drop of 55” at 200 yds. Wow! 250 has a 97” drop. No wonder some are putting a shim under the rear scope base so that the barrel angle can be lifted like a mortar to lob the projectile to longer ranges. This only seems practical if all you were shooting was extreme long range.

http://www.6mmbr.com/rimfiretactical.html
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 08-12-2015, 4:51 PM
Khromo Khromo is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 742
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Several of the semi-serious .22 target shooters I know use the Weaver T-36, or the Sightron II fixed 36 power scopes. They focus down to about 10 meters, and perform pretty well for about $400, maybe a few bucks more.

The SWFA fixed 20 power scope for about $300 is a very good deal, as are the Nikon Monarchs if you get them on sale. Check Natchez for blems and open boxes.

When the .22 guys get competitive, I've noticed they tend to use really small targets, and they want high magnification for the ranges they shoot. I would look for 16-20 power as a floor, if I wanted to hang around with them.

They all have stories about their searches for the right ammo. They all seem to have tried a lot of different rounds before they settled on their most accurate round.
__________________
"Self defense is not a fashion show. A defensive handgun is not a little black dress, or a purse."
Remember, the overwhelming majority of anti-gun thinkers are not stupid enough to be "afraid of guns." They are afraid of stupid/immature/crazy psycho people with guns.
And as always, being friendly, courteous, and respectful is the easiest way to bend people to your will.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 1:52 PM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Proudly hosted by GeoVario the Premier 2A host.
Calguns.net, the 'Calguns' name and all associated variants and logos are ® Trademark and © Copyright 2002-2018, Calguns.net an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.
Calguns.net and The Calguns Foundation have no affiliation and are in no way related to each other.
All opinions, statements and remarks made by Calguns.net on this web site and elsewhere are solely attributable to Calguns.net.