Scopes --- Magnification Vs. Moa Elevation -- Catch 22?

I prefer lots of magnification in my scopes. I currently use 6 - 24 x 50 scopes. I was looking at the 8-34 x 56 scopes but am running into elevation range issues in the scopes. The higher the magnification, the scopes seem to have lower built in elevation ranges. My Vortex Diamondback Tactical has 65 total MOA adjustment. The Athlon Argus BTR (8-34 x 56) has 45 MOA of total elevation adjustment. This seems like a catch 22. I can get a bigger target picture but not enough elevation for long distance shooting. If I add a 20 MOA scope base to mount for the Athlon, I will have additional elevation, but I run the risk of insufficient elevation built into the scope to compensate. Any suggestion?

 

Just a quick bump start. Sort of like popping the clutch for us old timers.

 

I checked the Nightforce scopes to reply correctly. The 5.5 -25 x 50 scope has 100 MOA of adjustment. The Nightforce 8-32 x 56 has 65 MOA of adjustment. So yes you can install a 20 or 30 MOA rail on the 5.5 -25 scope but you could be in trouble if you installed a 30 MOA on the 8-32 scope. The last 10% (top or bottom) of any scopes elevation adjustment is unreliable. As you can see, my point is still valid, the higher the magnification, the lower the amount of elevation available. I am not big fan of turret twisting either but you still have to be able to zero your rifle scope. Here is my real world problem. I want to purchase a Ruger Precision Rimfire Rifle. The rifle comes with a 30 MOA scope rail. So I would need a scope with a minimum of 65 MOA of total adjustment. For reliability a 70 MOA would be better. Here is the problem, to compete in base class of the NRL22 matches, the total cost of the rifle and scope, cannot exceed $1050. The Nightforce alone exceeds this amount. My Vortex Diamondback Tactical 6-25 x 50 has 65 MOA but that puts it into the questionable margin. Half of 65 MOA is 32.5 MOA. Now 3.25 MOA of the rang (up or down) is in a the very questionable area of the scope adjustment. So while my scope could work, is would be a crap shoot at the zero point. I have yet to find a $500 scope that has a magnification above 24 power, with enough built in elevation to deal with a 30 MOA base. There is a solution, remove the 30 MOA base and install a EGW 20 MOA base but I am still limited to 24 power. Why the need for more magnification, one of the steel targets is only 1/4" wide. I will need all the help I can get.

 

Finding scopes with hash lines is easy. Finding scopes with enough range of elevation to compensate for a 30 MOA rail is the hard part. Basically a 30 MOA scope mount cants (points) your scope line of sight down 30 MOA at 100 yards. So left un-adjusted (zeroed) you bullet would hit 30 inches, at 100 yards, above your point of aim. A scope would require a minimum of 35 to 40 MOA of up adjustment to compensate for the downward angle. Typically upward elevation is mostly wasted on a scope. How many times have you had to adjust your scope up for a close in shot? Betting never. The problem comes when the scope does not have enough upward elevation to compensated (match) the downward angle of the scope mount. Ex:--- 30 MOA rail and 50 MOA (25 upward) elevation. Theoretically, at 100 yards, your point of impact would be 5 MOA (inches) high, with no adjustment left. The gap could be worse because you are now into the unstable portion of the scope adjustment range. I could use the hash marks to compensate for not being properly adjusted but that would have to be done (remembered) for all the various ranges. I would have to remember to hold 5 MOA high at 100 yards but at 175 yards, what would be the hold over or at what range would the scope zero out at? Too complex for my tired old mind. I need to zero the scope and then simply hold over a fixed amount or dial the fixed amount.

The NRL22 rules are set on a national level and not open to negotiation at the local level. Rifle and scope (not counting mounts) combined MSRP total cost cannot exceed $1050 for base class. If you spend more, then you are moved into the open class and will be competing against 5 and 6 thousand dollar rigs. The lower cost / price tag is to keep it affordable to all. A Ruger 10-22 can compete with a CZ or Tika because the rifle price will force a lower tier scope purchase and the opposite for Ruger. There are no exceptions for the old guys eyes.

 

Snyper, the rail change was noted in my earlier post. The catch 22 is you can increase magnification but you lose elevation range. Bigger target picture but lose the elevation needed to hit it. CATCH 22 .

 

@Ystranc

You have presented the best option. I will change out the scope rail and replace it with a 20 MOA rail. That will allow me to zero a scope. I will use your suggestion of the FX adjustable rings to allow for longer distance shooting. While I plan to shoot the NEL22 matches, I also plan to shoot longer distance matches. Since I am prepper, I also plan to use subsonic 22 LR ammo and a suppressor in these matches. I will practice and shoot with the ammo I will use in a shtf situation to hunt with. As shown by snyper, subsonic bullets drop over 4 feet at 200 yards, that wipes out the elevation adjustment in most scopes and especially in high magnification scopes. Problem solved.

Ystranc, you got me researching adjustable scope mounts. There is a very expensive ($775) adjustable scope mount (RT200-MOA made by Ivey) that adjusts from 0 to 200 MOA, using a graduated dial. Very nice and would allow modern day center fire rifles to shoot out past 3,000 yards. If I win the lottery it will be on my buy list, along with a spotting scope that will let m see 3,000 yards. Thanks for the suggestions.

 

@Ystranc

I could see that there could be a little bit of work to make them perfect for my rifle but they would provide the ability for a 22 Lr to shoot out to and past 300 yards. Yes, the nice part about the NRL22 matches is the basic class does not count the cost of scope mounts or other basic accessories. I did find them for less than $70 ($69.99 LOL) and about $12.00 shipping. Good deal, works for me. Thanks for the pointer.

 

@Ystranc

Since I don't have the rifle yet (I am do the homework before spending my coins), I plan to buy several brands of sub-sonic ammo and see which brand the rifle likes. Once I find a good shooting ammo, I will stock up ( minimum 10,000 rounds) and then replace what I shoot up. I do want to thank you again for the reference to the FX adjustable rings. That solved my problem. I will remove the 30 MOA rail and install a zero MOA rail. I am currently looking at the Sight Mark Core 10-40 x 56 scope. It is very limited on elevation (40 MOA max) but that will handle the zero to 100 yard range and the FX rings will allow me to get adjustments for the longer range shots. Such an elegant solution. Turrets have usable 30 MOA, the reticle has 20 MOA of hold over. So If I make marks on the FX rings for shots at 150, 200, 250, 300, etc. , I can cover the complete range of a 22 lr. Due to the energy loss at 200 yards, that is the maximum range I would shoot, other than paper punching or ring the steel. With subsonic and a suppressor, the prairie dogs won't even know I am shooting at them. Ring the steel at longer ranges, just more marks on the FX rings.

Once I get the rifle and start into the testing of ammo, I will shoot you a PM. It is going to be a while before I can get the rifle and scope, there are a lot of financial issues on the horizon. No crisis but a big drain on the budget. For now, it is all research and wish list, until things get back to normal. Thanks again for the FX reference.