[jimreed1948]

I'll be using a 17 WSM for ground squirrels and curious what GS hunters currently use. Right now I have a Sightron 10-50x60 which I know is over kill, but that's what I have available right now.

Is there a power range for scopes that GS hunters prefer?

 

[jimreed1948]

Also, is first focal plane have a better advantage?

 

[George Foster]

I have always thought a 4-12x or 4-16x scope was ideal for an all around varmint scope. I feel higher powers than those are all right off the bench but if you are shooting off a bipod with a walk around rifle the lower power is better.

 

[Kentucky Fisherman]

I have always thought a 4-12x or 4-16x scope was ideal for an all around varmint scope. I feel higher powers than those are all right off the bench but if you are shooting off a bipod with a walk around rifle the lower power is better.

I agree with George, especially since you're shooting a .17. I'm a big fan of Bushnell scopes and Natchez periodically runs sales and has demo units in the 3x10 or 4x12 range. Look at the 3200 and 4200 models.

Greyfox is quite fond of PD walkabouts and could offer good advice, although his .22 caliber centerfires have much more range than your .17.

 

[Paul Workman]

Also, is first focal plane have a better advantage?

First focal plane (F1) I find is very useful IF you have correction tables or graphs in MOA (or MIL) as the stadia (etc) references remain accurate regardless of what power (a variable) scope is set at.

Otherwise an F2 scope's reticule references varies w/ magnification setting. So, to overcome that you either have to "dial" the E/W knobs for the appropriate off-set (assuming you have off-set charts or tables calibrated in (INCHES) AND your scope tracks reliably...and many DO NOT), OR just "SWAG" the hold-off. NOTE: One can use the reticule on F2 scopes for accurate hold-off, but only AFTER MOA has been correlated to the reticule at the various ranges. That way a reticule, e.g., a duplex, can very accurately be used to establish exact hold-off (important if no followup shot is likely available).

One of the disadvantages of the F1 reticule is the thickness of the crosshairs "blooms" with the power setting. This can be problematic at the higher magnification settings, which can handicap the shooter if the crosshairs obscure the target - especially small varmints and long range.

My SHV Nightforce (F1) scope's (MOAR) reticule is sufficient for small varmints to the relatively modest 14x max power setting. And that scope (or another F1 scope) might be just the right combination of modest magnification and limited range of a 17 caliber. That's my theory, and I'm sticking toit!

PS:

That said, for my long range varmint/target AR upper, I have a fine duplex reticule in the Nikon Monarch F2 5x25x50 BECAUSE really discriminating target work at long range won't tolerate "blooming" crosshairs.

Summary (IMO): Modest ranges = F1 as long as target is NOT obscured significantly (some scopes are better than others). F2 for very fine/small targets at long range and high power settings.

.

.

 

[Catfish]

You do not need much power for squirrel hunting. I killed a lot of them with a 22 High Standard with handgun and a 2x scope. In fact I killed quite a few with that gun before I scoped it. I fact anything over 4x is to much in my opinion, as it becomes harder to find the squirrels due to the smaller field of view.

 

[T.D.C.]

VX2 6-18 is a favorite of mine.

After reading Paul W's explanation I don't understand how I ever hit anything. Gonna re- read that a few times.

 

[Hector]

Vxii

I am like TDC, I have 5 Leupold 6X18 on 2 HMRs. 2 223's, and 1 22-250 and they seem to work great for me.

 

[Paul Workman]

VX2 6-18 is a favorite of mine.

After reading Paul W's explanation I don't understand how I ever hit anything. Gonna re- read that a few times.

Well, that's cuz mebby I didn't 'splain it very well.

I used F2 scopes all my life. It wasn't until I got into "one shot, one kill" as a preferred style that I started using the combination of accurate ballistics tables/graphs printed out for the exact conditions for that location and day, and then applying the data to the reticule graduated with (MOA or MIL) references.

The reticules (F2) of the Leupold Vari-X III, etc., just got to be too much figgerin', and required too much guess work. So, for me, the switch to the F1 scope ended all the BS conversions after changing magnification. With the F1, no matter what the magnification power setting was, the (MOA) reticule remained true, far as hold-off values were concerned.

Edit:

In short, if you want precise hold-off, with the "standard" F2 scopes just crank the off-set onto the knobs*. A quality scope will track reliably and you can take the shot with confidence.

But, if you're using an F1 scope, you have the option to crank the knobs, or touch nothing and just reference the off-set directly to the reticule for precise point of aim.

*A DUPLEX scope reticule can be used effectively for precise off-sets if the shooter knows how many (MOA/MIL) there is from the crosshair intersection to where the crosshairs thicken. For example: A Leupold Vari-X III set on 20X magnification is 1-1/2 MOA (6 clicks) from the crosshair intersection to where the lines (of the DUPLEX reticule) thicken.​

Nightforce SHV F1 MOAR reticule


.