FT scope for Hunter Class recommendationsOctober 11 2017 at 8:40 AM
|Will Piatt (Login saddlemountaingunsmith)|
16X is the new rule for next season. What scopes should a very budget conscious entry level shooter be looking at to get started?
Will, I think the UTG would be a good choice if mildots are
|October 11 2017, 9:14 AM |
ok for the shooter. I like the 1/2 mildot like Hawke uses. Shoot me an e-mail and I can give you a like to buy Hawke scopes at a great price if they want to spend a little extra. Don
|October 11 2017, 9:15 AM |
Look for a true Mil-Dot scope with at least 1/2 mil-dot increments.
A lit-reticle is a good option to have.
I've had good luck with the Hawke scopes.
|October 12 2017, 4:17 PM |
As a new shooter, I have looked around at what people use and what's available in various price points and feature points.
The UTG 4-16x56 seems to be a pretty good choice for Hunter. It isn't the brightest scope, but it has side focus, an illuminated reticle (I find this a big help on dark lanes or dark targets), a rugged if large and heavy chassis, a mildot reticle and ranges decently considering its price, which is $200 or less.
That's pretty hard to beat.
I do know that Scott Hull advocates some of the wire reticle UTGs, which I think are or were even cheaper, but I couldn't quote a model and I don't know if they are even still made.
We ain't talkin' about
|October 12 2017, 5:50 PM |
How well a scope reads mirage.
Even if I WUZ shootin' at 12X, I'd want to see it.
I could see it at 12X in my old Bushy Elite 4200 at 12X.
How come you guys never talk about it?
Re: FT scope for Hunter Class recommendations
|October 12 2017, 7:56 PM |
I like the UTG scopes as a budget conscious solution. Actually, they are good Hunter Division scopes regardless of budget. I have a UTG 4-16x44 that I use on my 22lr silhouette rifle. I just moved it over to my Marauder rifle to try. I like the wire reticle configuration on UTG scopes as the mil-dots are closer to standard mil-dot dimensions.
After looking around, I decided to buy a Centerpoint 4-16x56 to try. The CP does has fewer mil-dots than the UTG scopes, but still more than a standard mil-dot scope. The etched glass reticle appears to be closer to standard than the the pseudo mil-dot etched UTG reticle. The CP reticle is not lighted, but I rarely use that feature. The 56mm is larger than the 44mm, so will likely requires high mounts.
I just ordered this one as it appeared to be a good price:
Most Center Points
|October 12 2017, 8:35 PM |
That I have handled, which isn't a huge number by any means, but 3 or 4, bear a lot of similarities (ie turrets, power mechanism, etc.) to UTG scopes. I would guess that UTG makes some or most of the Center Points, or they use a common Chinese manufacturer.
I'd be interested to see your review of that scope. The turrets, side focus and power "knob" all look pretty similar to the UTG 4-16x56, but the UTG has the illuminated reticle and the useless "lip" sunshade over the objective.
|This message has been edited by TwiceHorn on Oct 12, 2017 8:45 PM|
True, some CPs are very similar to UTG.
|October 13 2017, 12:02 AM |
I compared the UTG 4-16x56 with the CP 4-16x56. And you described a couple of differences. The reticles are also different. Both are etched glass, but I won't buy an etched glass UTG "mil-dot" scope.
|This message has been edited by Scotchmo1957 on Oct 13, 2017 12:03 AM|
Scott, Just wondering why .................
|October 13 2017, 6:52 AM |
You won't buy an etched glass UTG mildot scope? Not trying to show my ignorance but always ready to hear another point of view. Thanks, Bill
Re: Scott, Just wondering why .................
|October 13 2017, 7:11 PM |
The UTG etched glass reticle looks sort of like a 1/2 mil-dot reticle. But they are not. Where the first mil-dot should be in each quadrant, they use a hash mark, and skip every other mil-dot, replacing them with hash marks. That makes it more difficult to estimate the X.1, X.5, X.9 reference points. I'd rather not deal with that odd configuration when estimating holdovers and bracketing.
The UTG wire reticle uses full size dots at every location.
I have an informed guess
|October 13 2017, 7:16 PM |
Based on prior "discussion" of bracketing with Scott. UTG tends to use a "hash" for the first mildot and a dot for the second, alternating. Makes counting them somewhat easier, but also makes "dividing" the milliradian or 0.8 millradian (assuming true mils and 0.2 dia dots, which is a bad assumption) into tenths more difficult. The Center Point appears to have a true mildot reticle, with all dots (0.2 mil diameter), spanning the stadia.
Hahaha. Nevermind. But, at least Scott knows I was paying attention and learned something, even if I'm not good enough to do anything with the knowledge yet.
|This message has been edited by TwiceHorn on Oct 13, 2017 7:23 PM|
|Paul in Zhills|
Save your money and buy a Hawke
|October 14 2017, 5:10 PM |
A sidewinder 30 in 6-24X with the 20X 1/2 mildot reticle. A lot of scopes discussed here are ok, but you need a scope that will range the target accurately, and I think that will rule out most of them, including many more expensive scopes. Ranging is particularly critical between 40 and 55 yards, and if you try a lot of these scopes, you'll find they fail miserably. The other two scopes that I know from experience work well are the Sightron SIII 10-50X and the Millet TRS 4-16X. The Sightron has the best and clearest glass, while the Millet is great for ranging, but the glass is so-so.
CenterPoint 4-16x56 vs UTG 4-16x44
|October 17 2017, 8:15 PM |
The CenterPoint arrived today. I did not mount it, but after an optical comparison, I'm sending it back. The UTG, even withg the smaller 44mm objective, achieves a sharper focus at all distances. And the CenterPoint won't quite focus down to 10 yards. I've had UTG scopes that won't quite go to 10 yards.
The CenterPoint has a screw on sunshade, the UTG has only an angled bell. The UTG has a lit reticle, CenterPoint does not. The CenterPoint is a little shorter. The CenterPoint has an etched glass reticle with 7 spaces per quadrant. The UTG has a wire reticle with 10 spaces per quadrant. The CenterPoint reticle is a finer and the dots appear slightly undersized. I prefer the UTG wire reticle which is thicker but their dots appear to be slightly oversized. The CenterPoint has a small defect or speck just off the verticle near the first upper mil-dot. It would not affect it's use but would be enough for many (including me) to send it back.
The CenterPoint is OK for the price, but I'm sticking with my 4-16x44 UTG for Hunter next year.