Howdy howdy,

I am looking into getting into some long range hunting / learning to do some more long range target shooting.

Is this a viable scope at this price point or are there better options out there? It is $400 off right now so total would be $900.

https://www.superioroutfitters.com/leupold-vx-5HD-172368?omnisendContactID=66b66ffe3574ce6667c5d906

I keep reading about Athlon and Maven as a cheaper but good option too.

Depends on your definition of "long range".

That particular scope is 15x max magnification, which isn't horrible - but when you are looking at 500+ yards, 15x starts to get pretty weak. Can you use it? Absolutely, and it's a damn good scope to boot. Especially for target shooting where you, at least theoretically, are looking for ultra small groups. That's a great scope for hunting or shooting steel even at 500,600 yards or more but not for what I think most would call target shooting.

Look for something in the 25x or higher range, assuming you are looking at 500-1000+ yard F class style shooting.

Thanks for the reply Schmellba, really enjoy your perspective on this stuff.

I have not really done much long range stuff and wanted to start between 100-500 to get a feel for it. My longest animal kill shot was 332 yards with a .270, never did anything past that.

I feel like I'm a decent shot and confident with what I have in hand now, but to buy a new .308 and start from there I'd like to work my way up to those longer shots. Mostly because I'll be doing this on my own and trying to figure things out as I go.

I should probably see if there are any ranges here in CO that are 500+

Where in CO? There are 2 public ranges in thinking of that offer 600yds.

Probably wouldn't do .308 for a LR setup

what caliber would you consider?

Email me at for some range recommendations.

Depends on what exactly your plans are, but 6.5 or 6 creed will both give better results in wind with less recoil than 308

Thanks! Email sent

Gave you the info.

I'll say here so people can disagree with me/tell me I'm and idiot: for hunting, I think you would be doing yourself a huge disservice getting a scope that is not first focal plane (the reticle appears to get larger/smaller as you zoom in or out, but stays the same size in relation to the target so any markings in the reticle are usable at all magnifications) with mil based adjustments and reticle. It is so much easier to remember the adjustments needed for wind and remember quick drop information for your gun than an MOA based system, and you will often be at less than max magnification for a shot, but still need to make some sort of wind or elevation hold for your shot. A FFP scope makes this much simpler.

EDIT: going to the range is probably not in the cards for me with a 2nd baby due any time now, but you could borrow one of my guns with a scope as described above and take it to the range to see how you like that type of setup.

Yeah, will disagree on the focal plane.

I suppose that is purely a personal preference, but I have no desire for my reticle to change size as magnification increases or decreases, mostly because I don't want the reticle obscuring the scope picture. I can see some types of hunting where a 2FP may be beneficial, but generally speaking - not really. At least for me anyway.

MOA/Mil - I'm a MOA guy, because that's how my brain thinks. I think in inches/feet versus millradians and can do the math and Kentucky windage in my head way faster than trying to remember to multiply/divide everything by 3.66.

Millradians a better system if you do things in meters, but I don't and frankly most of us on this side of the world don't either (except Log, but that dude is weird AF and spends his day huffing chemicals and what not so it's expected). For competitions where most things are in meters and you have the time to do things, 100% can say that mil is a better system.

TheMemeGuy said:

---

Thanks for the reply Schmellba, really enjoy your perspective on this stuff.

I have not really done much long range stuff and wanted to start between 100-500 to get a feel for it. My longest animal kill shot was 332 yards with a .270, never did anything past that.

I feel like I'm a decent shot and confident with what I have in hand now, but to buy a new .308 and start from there I'd like to work my way up to those longer shots. Mostly because I'll be doing this on my own and trying to figure things out as I go.

I should probably see if there are any ranges here in CO that are 500+

---

For out to 500 or so, 15x is a great magnification IMO, but again it depends on to what degree you are looking at getting in terms of precision and accuracy. I tend to think "target" as being much more precise and accurate chasing than hunting, where generally speaking being sub-MOA is far more than good enough.

Agree with the comment about not going .30 cal and going with a 6.5mm or even a 6mm cal. Better BC's, massive bullet selection, rifle choices out the ying-yang right now and easier on the shoulder. To be purely transparent though, I've become somewhat of a 6.5mm homer when it comes to rifles though. It's just the sweet spot IMO in terms of overall capabilities and there isn't really a bad 6.5 chamber out there.

6mm has come a long way recently as well as being the "not 6.5" caliber.

schmellba99 said:

---

Yeah, will disagree on the focal plane.

I suppose that is purely a personal preference, but I have no desire for my reticle to change size as magnification increases or decreases, mostly because I don't want the reticle obscuring the scope picture. I can see some types of hunting where a 2FP may be beneficial, but generally speaking - not really. At least for me anyway.

MOA/Mil - I'm a MOA guy, because that's how my brain thinks. I think in inches/feet versus millradians and can do the math and Kentucky windage in my head way faster than trying to remember to multiply/divide everything by 3.66.

Millradians a better system if you do things in meters, but I don't and frankly most of us on this side of the world don't either (except Log, but that dude is weird AF and spends his day huffing chemicals and what not so it's expected). For competitions where most things are in meters and you have the time to do things, 100% can say that mil is a better system.

---

So how are you using your reticle to inform holds if its size in relation to the target is constantly changing? Always at max magnification if needing to use the reticle markings?

I don't think in inches or feet, I think in mils for shooting and I have a ruler attached to my rifle due to the mil reticle in my scope. With my 6.5-284 at normal hunting elevations, a 6mph value wind at 600 yds is a .4 mil hold. No conversions, easy peasy. It's a 9mph gun, meaning the elevations I typically hunt deer or elk a 9pmh wind value gives .1mil drift every 100 yds.

My setup drops about .2mil per 25 yds from 300-600, so if I dial for a distance and an animal moves about 25 yds further, come up .2mil and go.

You do not need to use meters to do everything in mils.

EDIT: This is a very good guide to how you use mils. The scope in the post is a fixed 6x, but it all applies to FFP scopes too.

Quote from the linked post:

"Don't get freaked out by mils- it's just a measuring tape. We will not be thinking in inches at all and instead will use the reticle as a ruler."

2nd edit since I realized the linked guide doesn't cover wind brackets, here's an explanation from the same author:

A wind bracket is a certain full value speed of wind in MPH that drifts the bullet .1 mil per 100 yards.

For example-
Wind holds for a 338 Lapua with 300gr Berger-
100- .1

200- .2
300- .3
400- .4
500- .5
600- .6
Etc.

Wind holds for a 223 with 77gr TMK-
100- .1

200- .2
300- .3
400- .4
500- .5
600- .6
Etc.

Those are the base number, and they do not change for any chambering. The difference is that the
223 drifts that much with a 4mph full value wind, the 338 drifts that much in an 8 mph full value
wind. This allows one to have the exact same wind call/wind process with every chambering and rifle,
the only difference is what wind speed causes the drift.

For normal chamberings with MV's between 2,400'ish and 2,900'ish FPS, and BC's between .3-.7 G1,
the first number of your bullets G1 BC is the MPH that for that gun. You can round up or down.
For instance, a G1 BC of .612 with a MV of 2,750fps, has a wind bracket of 6 miles per hour. So a full
value (straight right to left, or left to right wind) will drift this gun/bullet .1 mils per hundred yards.

I prefer mils over moa. It's a lot easier when you have o double or half wind holds.

Budget about $900 I am guessing based on the link you posted? I would look for a used SFWA 5-20 scope. I have a nightforce that's twice as much but the SWFA is my favorite scope. Reticle is super easy to use. I shoot out to about 700 yards at our land and can see pretty clearly

I prefer FFP and Mils on my longer distance stuff. Regarding the holdover, it is absolutely advantageous on the FFP vs the SFP, but with a well equipped scope, I'm making the adjustments via turret and not shooting via holdover, unless I absolutely have to.

There is an argument, I'm sure you and others will make about learning to effectively shoot via holdover and not making adjustments. Sure it's cool to run a calculation based off target measurements in your scope to get your yardage or do a holdover because you have the reticle for it, and there is a place and time for that - especially competitive shooting.

However, if I am finding myself in a situation where I have a shot at 500+ yards, I have the time to range the animal, make elevation and wind adjustments, and proceed with the shot before that animal runs off probably 99% of the time.

Again, I'm a hunter that shoots longer range to get better at hunting. I'm not competing where I have 3 targets from 300-700 yards at unknown distance and have to calculate my range = (size of target x 1000) / mils

I agree with your magnification levels. I'm all about having the ability to zoom in as much as needed/comfortable. 3-15, 4.5-20, 6.5-20, are all solid in my opinion

Also agree with 6.5 cartridges. I'm a really big fan of 6.5 Creedmoor and its performance on all things Texas. Incredibly low recoil, especially running suppressed, and fun to shoot. I'd love to add a PRC to the rotation and probably will before too long.

We're on the same page. I dial elevation and hold wind. I do think it's a useful skill to have a quick method of adjusting and sending another round, say you have a second shot on a wounded animal still standing that moved.

Don't disagree about it being a useful skill. Ideally you perfect it without all the tools, as you suggested, and then enjoy being spoiled in most real life hunting situations. I just don't spend THAT much time at the range to do both.