Variable Power $650 Budget

I've got a Rock River Varmint 20" with NM 2-stage trigger and PRS stock, and am looking for a scope for it.   This rifle will be mostly used on the bench for target ranges from 100-400 yards, with the possibility of also trying farther distances. 

I'm looking to purchase a variable power scope that would be flexible enough at these distances, but still come within my budget of $600 (more or less).  I need enough power to be able to shoot for as much accuracy as I can.

My initial choices are:
- Bushnell 6-24x50 Elite 4200 30mm (with exposed turrets) $570
- Millet LRS-1 (6-24x56 35mm) $450-500

I really like the reputation and quality of the Super Sniper scopes, so I may consider a 16x.  When is their variable coming out?  It may be a no-brainer for me.

What would you recommend and why?

The two choices you have are both very good and should work well for you.

Generally, I seldom use magnifications above 16x or so, even from the bench, so I would suggest looking at some 4-16x scopes or similar:

Nikon Monarch 4-16x50 or 5-20x50
Bushnell Elite 4200 4-16x50
Sightron S2 Big Sky 4.5-14x44SS or 4-16x42AO or 6.5-20x50SS or 6-24x42
Vortex Viper 6.5-20x44 or 6.5-20x50

Since you are shooting from the becnh and AR rifles are pretty friendly to large objective lenses, I would probably recommend going with a 50mm or greater objective lens in one of the configurations above.

ILya

Does anyone think I should just go with the SS 16x42 and be done with it?  Or am I limiting myself here without the flexibility a variable scope offers?

Dolphin wrote: I would go with the variable.  Your choice of the Bushnell up to 24x is not a bad choice if you want to shoot beyond 400 yards.  It is a quality scope and the optical quality at 24x should be good, even though I have never had the opportunity to look through that particular scope.  One thing to remember, it is better to have more magnification with your initial purchase than less, if that is important, as you will find yourself wanting another scope in the future if you feel you are short changed.

This is my logic as well, though I have to keep in mind that one scope can't do it all.
I like the Millet LRS-1 on paper, but I wonder where it would fare on the recent chart Chris put up.  If it has the optics of LX-III or 4200, and is built like a SS, then I'd consider it.  But who wouldn't?

I would stick with the Elite 4200 over any Millet product.

Ior 4-14x50

Second Amend wrote: Dolphin wrote: I would stick with the Elite 4200 over any Millet product. It may be the obvious choice, but what are your reasons?

Urimaginaryfrnd wrote: Ior 4-14x50

For under $650? Link?

One of my range buddies swears by IOR.

I'm looking at the 4-14x50 Tactical 30mm scope that sells for around $1K.  I can probably stretch my budget a little if I think it's worth the extra money over the 4200.

What do you think of Mil-dot vs MP-8?
Exposed turrets vs non-exposed?

Great choices you guy are providing.

My budget is now $1K, since it'll be  4-6 weeks before my rifle is ready.
I'm seriously considering the Zeiss Conquest 6.5-20x50.

superstool73 wrote: I would go with the IOR, the MP8 blows away the mildot reticle.

How so?

The IOR is a contender.

But all that being said if all you are ever are going to do is shoot on a range at known distances the mildot or MP8 will serve no practical purpose other than maybe hold over.  

Its not cluttered, they work great. 

Exposed are good if you plan on making adjustments all the time for different ranges and windage.  If you don't plan on that no need to have them.

Lit reticles perform best in low light, at dark they are pretty much over powering even on the lower setting.  If your target is lit up pretty well, they may benefit you some but in darkness they are pretty hard to use as it becomes very hard to make out your target with the bright red light in the scope.