I am going to be in the market for a .22 WMR soon and I have my eye on the Ruger .22WMR (Model: 8352). The optic that i have been looking at is the Leupold VX-Freedom Rimfire 3x9x40 because I like the Rimfire MOA Reticle. My only concern is the parallax focus on the scope. The other option is Leupold VX-Freedom EFR 3x9x33 that can focus all the way down to 15 yard and all the way up to infinite but to get the EFR with the Rimfire MOA Reticle you have to have the custom shop put the Rimfire MOA Reticle in it for you which they can do. I know Nikon has a Prostaff 3x9x40 EFR that has good reviews but the they don't have the Rimfire MOA Reticle. Is 3x9x40 also enough power for a .22 WMR. So I am just looking to see what everyone has to say and if you can lead me into the right direction. This Rifle will be used for Hunting/Target.
Thoughts / Set Up on the Ruger American Rimfire .22WMR
1 - 13 of 13 Posts
Joined
·
1,114 Posts
I have a RAR 22" barrel mag with a Leupold VX Freedom EFR on it. I also have a RAR 22lr with a Redfield moa reticle on it. I will give you my opinion. I would rather have a mil dot reticle than a moa as for me the moa just has too many lines too close together. Now the EFR actually goes down to 10 yards or a little less. I have a VX2 and like it better. The glass in the Freedom is as good IMO but the ao adjusting ring rotates over 1 and 1/2 turns and you have to rotate it almost 360*to go from min to max while on the VX2 you only have to rotate the focus ring about 120* The duplex works better for me with my 68 year old eyes but that is just me. Another thing I noticed on the EFR Freedom is that the turrets are a little mushy. They actually have a small amount of slack when you reverse direction and the turret will stick and break loose and you feel a click but haven't moved the turret on the first click. The scope works well and I like it because neither of these issues are a problem I just wanted to mention in case you have a VX2 and expect it to operate the same. The Redfield I have on my 22lr has exposed turrets so I don't use the moa reticle.
For hunting & target, the 3-9 should be enough power; the 22MWR isn't really a "target" round anyway, so more power may be wasted on that. My RAR standard model (8321) has a Nikon 3-9x40 Target EfR scope on it, the discontinued version, that I picked up for $140 when Cabela's ran a sale. It works well for my purposes, which are informal target shooting and a bit of hunting & varmint control. I also have the new Leupold VX-Freedom 3-9x33 EFR scope on another gun. I like them both. I haven't shot them side by side, so I can't provide a direct comparison of their relative merits in that regard. But I've had no problems with the old Nikon, although the 1/4" at 50 yards turret adjustments are not great for finer target work, a problem the new version has corrected.
Two other significant differences: the Leupold is smaller and lighter, and the Nikon is about $100 cheaper. However, the Leupold 3-9x40 Rimfire MOA reticle version (non-AO) is about the same price as the Nikon EFR scope, but is less scope value in my opinion.
Two other significant differences: the Leupold is smaller and lighter, and the Nikon is about $100 cheaper. However, the Leupold 3-9x40 Rimfire MOA reticle version (non-AO) is about the same price as the Nikon EFR scope, but is less scope value in my opinion.
Joined
·
2,281 Posts
Yes, it is plenty for small game well beyond 100 yards and target within 100 yards. It's just that the WMR isn't really suitable for serious target shooting.
I've taken a small groundhog at 165 yards. I had no problem seeing good details at that range. Admittedly, it was a lucky shot though. I use the Nikon with a nikoplex reticle - a simple cross hair.
I’m not opposed to using the traditional crosshairs but wouldn’t it be easier to have a hold that you could quick reference to instead of guessing just in case you do have to make a 100 yard plus shot. Please let me know if it sounds like I’m over think it. I think I really am set on the leupold 3x9x33 EFR with the Rimfire Moa installed in it from there custom shop. On there website when you customize the efr to that reticle there is no charge to change to that reticle. If money becomes a big deal I will prolly go with the Nikon 3x9x40 EFR but you always give up something (weight/clarity/size).
Joined
·
2,281 Posts
At least for me, the only animal I'd attempt a shot at, in excess of 150 yards, would be a crop eating groundhog. I had a low expectation to make a hit. However, I had a lot of practice with my set up and with that particular CCI lot. Therefore, I also had the drop dialed in with Nikon's SpotOn app - spun the elevation to put the cross hairs on target. But, at that distance, wind moves a 40g round quite a bit, so ya never know.
At distances in excess of 100 yards I don't think there is such a thing as a "quick shot," because your stretching the WMRs capabilities. The cone of fire begins to really open up. This requires extra care and thinking.
At distances in excess of 100 yards I don't think there is such a thing as a "quick shot," because your stretching the WMRs capabilities. The cone of fire begins to really open up. This requires extra care and thinking.
Joined
·
2,281 Posts
BTW, if your not taking the time to also use a range finder, you will be "just guessing."
Joined
·
1,114 Posts
Not trying to change the subject here but did you consider the 17wsm? Zero at 50, a little over a half inch high at 100 and dead on again at 140 yards. And wind drift a fraction of the 22 mag. I have both and if I plan on varmint hunting at 100 yards plus I take the 17 wsm. I usually only use the 22 mag for hunting in the woods. Don't really need a moa reticle with the 17 wsm. Now if you get a 17 wsm you probably will want a little more magnification. Please understand I am in no way trying to talk you out of the 22 mag. I just want to point another option. I have both and they both have their purpose and would not want to give either of them up.
Joined
·
2,281 Posts
Actually, this is a really good point, if your needs stretch beyond 100 yards. The 17s trajectory is better suited than the .22. The ballistic coefficient of the 17 rimfire round is just better than a .22 rimfire round. I've seen the capability of the .17 to keep extraordinarily tight groups on a 200 yard range. A 22WMR can only dream of that kind of accuracy at that range.
Joined
·
12,885 Posts
Drakee18 sir I like a little more magnification on my 22mag rifles for those longer shots at game and targets. My favorite scope is the Weaver V-16 which I have a lot of. That scope has an Adjustable Objective that adjust down below 30 Feet not yards like other brands and they came in 5 different reticles. FCH, FCH Dot, Dual X, Ballistic X and 223 Ballistic X. For me 9x is just not enough...but there are members who love the 8-32x scopes...which is way too much on the lower end...in my opinion.
Anyway good luck on your quest :bthumb:
Signalman
Oh yeah I did say I have a few correct...if you like/want better glass then the Grand Slam in 4-16x is gaining ground on my Classic V series scopes.
Anyway good luck on your quest :bthumb:
Signalman
Oh yeah I did say I have a few correct...if you like/want better glass then the Grand Slam in 4-16x is gaining ground on my Classic V series scopes.
Joined
·
59,311 Posts
Nothing fancy at all in fact about the cheapest rig I own, topped with a $70 Barska airgun 3-12x scope it averages just over MOA at 50 yards and right at 1.5 MOA at 100 yards. More than adequate for Groundhogs and such out to 150 yards which is as far as I care to use the .22wmr. Put it together just to see how cheap a decent hunting Rimfire could be put together.
It's still a grab and go favorite for cruising farms looking for GH's, very handy getting in and out of vehicles.
Shows a slight preference for Hornady 30 gr. Vmax over the Rem. 33's, none of the 40 grain loads shoot any better and I like the quick kills I get with the Vmax's.
1 - 13 of 13 Posts
Join the discussion
