I use an 8x32x50. It works well for me. I am 65 and eyes are not that great.

 

+ 1 Muller 8-32- 44 perfect for my old eyes

 

If you can't see a 0.10 inch dot at the center of the target bull, you have the wrong scope.

Minimum of 24x with quality glass from my experiences.

 

jaia. Not seen you in a while. I am drunkard, always hanging at the Watering Hole, not getting out as much as I should. We have exchanged a few PMs, and laughs, and you know I have respect for your pursuit. And, while not to exclude OP or anyone else, I want to pose this:

My favorite rifle for groups is a CZ Carbine in .223, OEM, discharging Australian Outback .223 using Sierra BlitzKings, factory ammo.

I am able to regularly find .8", .9", three round groups at 100 yards unless I am having a terrible day or I let the rifle get too dirty. I need to just swab it out with some HOPPE'S every 21 rounds or so.

My glass is Leupold VX-2 4-12x 40 mm AO. I set mag on 5.25 to 6.

I am shooting at a 4" target on an 8.5" x 11" background, POA is the intersection of the x, y, vertices, with Intended POI .5" high.

This is well within the accuracy I need, coyotes, other varmints; watermelon at 190 yards...

I always thought that I was shooting OK, but some you guise do much better. CAn't afford better glass, high magnification makes the rifle appear to wobble, my "bench" is an old persons walker and a rolling chair. Both hands on the rifle, no bags.

I don't want to change anything. Should I? I want to emulate field conditions but I can't take the walker and chair to the field. Since it well suits my purpose and I can tap it for subMOA at 100, is my shooting OK? I just has doubt.

That Aussie Outback .223 is fine stuff, it doesn't shoot quite so well in my CZ Varmint .223 but the Varmint will give almost as good a result as the Carbine using Hornady Soft Points; Same glass, same mag. Am I on the right track?

Thanks in advance,
Ock

This not trolling, I am not rolling.

 

SWFA 20X with an m.o.a. reticle. Has a tiny dot at the center and small has-marks radiating out.

 

Assuming you're talking about shooting paper targets at 100 yards, an absolute minimum of 20X, with 24X to 32X much better. Just think about what power scope you'd like to have for precision shooting paper at 50 yards and double it. Just my 2¢.

Doug

 

This. The End.

😁

 

I think much of it is just your personal preference and more of it is the accuracy of the rifle too. I dont see the distance as a factor. I feel reasonably comfortable shooting 1/2 moa with a 6-18x scope. At 18x all the time. That can be 50 yard 22LR 1/4 inch (lucky)or 300 yards with a 223, 1.5 inch. I dont care 1000 yards if I had the facility and ballistics, 1/2 moa is 1/2 moa 18x seems enough for that. I might like little more or make do with less.

Having said that, I have scopes from fixed 12x to 36x for target shooting. All have a place. If you have a 10x now, I think a little more would be better. you might try something that tops out or fixed at 18 to 24x. Keep in mind a GOOD 18x scope will be better than a lower grade 24x. I have no idea what a truly good 6-24x might cost. Mine is over 50 years old. You have no excuse as far as optics for anything cz has to offer in that neighborhood. Going to the extreme hi magnification has some down side too. You might be lucky if you see one at a range and try it. Things get hairy critical. I would shy away from an 8-32 and go straight to a fixed 40. I had an 8-32 for about a week. I am sure makers vary, this was from Japan - FWIW. And just my limited experience with one.

All just option that is ever evolving on the subject. Even as I type, mind is changing. ....

 

I have a Leupold VX3 3.5-10x. Great scope, but I don't think it is enough for 100 yards. It is perfect for 50 yards for me.

 

Athlon Argos 8-34X50

Sent from my SM-T377V using Tapatalk

 

I shoot mostly at 100 yards and the majority of it is done using either a Weaver Grand Slam 5-20×, V-24, and Leupold VX-2 6-18×. The 18× works but is stretching a little bit to get the best accuracy. The 20× and 24× have always been enough for me but I suppose more magnification couldn't hurt....

 

Like said above, it's a personal preference. I shoot a 10X Lyman Targetspot in smallbore silhouette that is out to 100 yards. Shoot several old target Mossbergs at 100 yds with old 6X Weavers. You don't have to be able to see the paper fibers in the target to shoot good groups. But more power does make it a little easier and more fun, perhaps. The idea is you "must have 24x minimum" is bunk. I shoot 100 yard groups with 0X (open sights), as did generations of shooters before me.

 

Eyes checked out 20/20 with no astigmatism, cataracts, etc.?

You don't have to be able to see the paper fibers in the target to shoot good groups. But more power does make it a little easier and more fun, perhaps.

Yeah that, with a fine duplex that is comfortable to shoot in good glass.

 

As said before: personal preference but it's also physically personal: some scopes may "work" for you but not for others.

I used to have a Nikko Stirling Nighteater 10-50x56 that was sold to me by a friend who complained of getting headaches looking through it during longer sessions. No problem for me in that respect.

 

If I cannot see each hole that is a major handicap. As the light fades it gets hard to see them all with 20x, so I consider that minimum.

 

Not being weaver pushy but since your newer with low post I thought you might not follow the scope threads. There is a weaver v 24 (6-24x42) ballistic x from natchez that after 30.00 mail in rebate and 10% off should put you around 215.00 plus shipping. 10% off ends today. Great scope for that price for 100 yrds. Think the dual x is a hair cheaper but depends on reticle preference.

Anyways I don't shoot 100 yrds as often as I like but if I did I have that scope that I would use.

 

Not being weaver pushy but since your newer with low post I thought you might not follow the scope threads. There is a weaver v 24 (6-24x42) ballistic x from natchez that after 30.00 mail in rebate and 10% off should put you around 215.00 plus shipping. 10% off ends today. Great scope for that price for 100 yrds. Think the dual x is a hair cheaper but depends on reticle preference.

Anyways I don't shoot 100 yrds as often as I like but if I did I have that scope that I would use.

Thanks. I'm not in the market for a scope at this point. I would like to test my 455 at 100 yards, but realistically, one hole groups at 50 would be more than good for me. At 50 yards, my 10x scope performs great. Crystal clear. Leupold knows how to make a quality scope.

 

My experience with scopes has been that quality is better than quantity, within reason. I use a 6-18 Leupold VX-2 on my .22 for 100 yds, same on my long range rifle for 800m. Fine duplex reticle, as I don't like dots cluttering my view of the target. What you'll be shooting at often dictates the power you need. A quarter inch X-ring is still at the center of a larger bulls-eye, but if you're shooting at thumb tacks you need to be able to see them to hit them.
Seeing bullet holes through the scope is a real plus, you don't need a spotting scope. I have no trouble seeing bullet holes with 18X, any less will give me problems.
I have a VX3i 6.5-20 EFR on order, I need to be able to focus at 20 yds to shoot indoor during the winter, the VX2 goes down to about 22 yards as luck would have it..
Neither scope is over endowed with magnification, but both are clear and sharp, as you know from your experience with the VX3.
I won't consider less than 18X, but clarity trumps magnification in my house.
If money were no object, I'd look at a Nightforce or high end Sightron. The cheaper Sightron S1 and S2 haven't impressed me at all. IMO you need to start at the S2 Big Sky (discontinued now) if you go that way.

 

I should have added that AO or some sort of parallax correction is pretty much a must for target work. When the crosshairs move half an inch if you shift your head around, that's an issue for precision shooting.

 

Yes, to be PRECISE at 100 yards, 24X minimum.
Yes, you will also need a scope with adjustable parallax (on the objective or on the side) for best precision.

As for adjusting the parallax/focus... Do NOT trust the yardage numbers on the dial/objective. Also, do not assume proper parallax is found when the focus is sharpest. With the gun resting on bags, adjust the parallax until the crosshairs do not move when you move your head side to side. If it's not optimally focused at this point, you can often use the eyepiece to help dial in the focus.

Good Luck!

 

I have 70 yr old eyes so for me the Muller 8-32-44 target scope with fine crosshairs and side focus adjustment is perfect at 100yds and for around $250 it didnt break the bank.

 

When weight is not an issue, I am using Nightforce Benchrest 8x32 power scopes for 100 yard target shooting. When I need to make a lighter weight, then it is the 42 Nightforce fixed power or a 36x.

Bob

 

Tiger, as long as we're at the watering hole, I see no problem using a hunting scope for target work.
The idea being practice what you do. For critter gittin' a lower power scope with a wider field of vision is necessary.
Can't drop 'em if you can't find 'em. For paper punching under ideal conditions, not hunting,
pushing my OCD as far as it'll go, if I can't see that little tiny dot on paper, how can I split it?
So use that hunting scope with my approval f'er as long as ya' like, eh?

 

36X fixed power here on my 223 @ 100 yds. (Prior was a 4-16X Monarch 3)
Only caveat for my usage is magnification of that magnitude a bit prone to mirage,,, Otherwise, I doubt I'll ever go back.
I have a 6-24X 'on it's way' for my 455 in 22lr, (mostly used @ 50 yds)
As always, YMMV,,,,,,,,,

 

I haven't yet shot 100 yards with my 455 yet but I hunt with a .270 win with a 2-7 redfield and have no issues keeping it well under one MOA at 100 yards from the bench with my handloads. I agree with most that it is preference. Now don't get me wrong it would be a whole lot easier to do that with a bigger scope but for my application it works fine, I was just throwing it out there that you don't need extreme magnification to make it work.

 

Need and want are seldom the same,,,

At first, (with my 223), I started with 3X @ 100 yds Then 3 X 9,,, then 4 X 12,,, then 4 X 16,,,

Decided my baby steps were baby steps, and went with a fixed 36X,,,

I remember mounting/dialing it in @ 50 yds,,,,

OLE CHIT!!!!!! My 1 inch target was as big as a stop sign! LOL!!!!

Been hooked ever since,,,

 

If the OP is determined or decided to get a higher power scope, once having a Leupold some of the alternatives will be a big disappointment.

I like to pimp it up big time for the 6-18x VX II Leupold with AO.

 

Since the original poster asked about shooting "Groups" at 100 yards, so I assume he is looking at Bench Rest or other Target shooting. Although under MOA is fine for 100 yard hunting, a bench wants the under MOA to be actually under 1/4 minute of angle, hard to get that precise with a low power scope IMO.

Bob

 

Finally read this thread and found the perfect answer on the first page.

Couldn't have said it any better, Doug...

Bob

 

I have just started shooting some casual 100yd targets having previously spent many years hunting with a rimfire. Always used variable mag scopes in the 4-16 range which is ideal for my hunting purposes.

I have perfect vision, no glasses and fairly young eyes and I can tell you that 100yd with 16 power is possible but in no way advisable if you want to really see what you are aiming at, hold consistent aim and therefore eek as much as possible from your kit.

I would say 24 is the minimum you want but really I can see no harm in 30+. You also want a SFP scope so the reticule does not increase in size with mag, or a fixed mag scope if you are just shooting a certain range. Thin ret has to be disirable. At 16mag on my Vortex, it pretty much covers the bull. You kind of have to aim "approximately" if that makes sense.

 

Lets see, I use a 36X at 50 yards, so I would need 72X at 100.