Scope advice for .223 at 200m distances

[Gomanly!!!]

Hi everyone I've recently purchased a cz 457 American .22lr with a leupold 3.5-10x40 scope im loving it!! I'm heading in end of this week to get a .223 was looking at lithgow 102 crossover people telling me go the tikka tx3 hunter.would love to get other opinions on these 2 rifles or other options and what scope to suit shooting out around the 200m mark give or take..
Cheers

[Blackened]

They Leopold you've already got isn't a bad option.

I imagine you were just doing 50m range with your 22lr, did you do a holdover with the scope at any greater distances though? See what you think looking at 200m at 10x with your 22lr scope.

Remember the way that scope magnification works... Looking at 200m at 10x, is the same as looking at 20m with your naked eye.

If you want a little more magnification you could look at their 4-12x options.

Personal preference, but you definitely don't "need" a 30x scope or anything like that for shooting 200m-250m

[Oldbloke]

That's good advice. Consider 3-9×40 if it's mainly hunting tho. Leupold are nice.

[bigpete]

Nothing wrong with what you've got

[deye243]

4.5-14X50 leupold and out of those 2 rifles I would go a tikka .

[Lorgar]

Ditto on all the above.

I don't get out shooting as much as I used to, but used to have a benchrest 22lr, .243 sporter, .308, 300WM with a range of scopes for different purposes.

I've since whittled my collection down to a single all purpose rifle now, a 7mm-08 fluted Tikka with the Bushnell Elite 6500 4.5-30x50.

For stalking (which is my main activity), 50-150m metres, I never have it at anything other than 4.5x.

You don't need higher, it's pointless/a hindrence having it higher, in fact. You're too zoomed in and looking through the moving scope just becomes a turbulent blur and you can't find your target.

It's been a fair while since I've been to the range, actually, but from memory I'd say I put it at 10x for 200-300m stationary targets. Something like that, anyway.

The only time I ever have it at 30x is doing 500m gongs at Little River, or out to a out 800m on a property I have access to. But that's purely for fun, not serious performance or competition.

I'm not winning any medals at 800m, I can tell you

[Bello]

Hi Mate

My advice on the two rifles you mentioned would be the Tikka. (personal preference)
If you get a rifle with 1 in 12 Twist, you may be limited to 55gr projectile, out to 200 meters you will have no issue with this twist rate. (Even a little further out)
The ADI loaded ammo in 55gr is quite accurate. (ADI loaded with the 55gr Sierra blitzking)
They aslo do the 69gr HPBT Match king for the 223, I would suggest this ammo in a rifle with the 1 in 8 twist.
BUT, if you want to shoot at a greater distance than 200 meters, I would suggest the 1 in 8 twist.
The 1 in 8 twist rate allows you to (Stabilize) heavier projectile, with a better sectional density. Do your research on twist rate prior to purchasing a rifle.

Scopes, this will open a can of worms. I always suggest you buy the best you can afford, you won't regret a good quality scope.
I have higher magnification scopes on some of my rifles. Why I hear you ask . Well this is MY logic, when I am at the range, I can wind the zoom right up to see my shots on the target out to 200 meters, so I don't need a spotting scope. When I use the rifle for hunting, I wind the magnification to the lowest setting to give me a wider field of view.

My 2 cents

[Gomanly!!!]

Thanks heaps fellas for the feedback so far.
Could you guys also throw at me some other brand rifles in .223 and some other brand scopes ie burris meopta optika vortex???

[Gomanly!!!]

Hi everyone
Looking for more feedback please the local gun shop was steering me away from tikka tx3 hunter towards the browning x bolt sr camo ovix in .223???
Cheers

[Oldbloke]

Thanks heaps fellas for the feedback so far.
Could you guys also throw at me some other brand rifles in .223 and some other brand scopes ie burris meopta optika vortex???

If your looking to save, Vortex seem to have a good rep, very good guarantee too. Much the same as leupold.


I have a Vortex monocular and optics are very good. But all leupolds on the rifles now.


Re, Tikka, try another LGS. Shop around.

[bladeracer]

Thanks heaps fellas for the feedback so far.
Could you guys also throw at me some other brand rifles in .223 and some other brand scopes ie burris meopta optika vortex???

Have you had a look at the Ruger American Predator? That's my favourite in .223.

[in2anity]

Hi everyone
Looking for more feedback please the local gun shop was steering me away from tikka tx3 hunter towards the browning x bolt sr camo ovix in .223???
Cheers

Why were they steering you away from tikka? Tikka barrels and triggers are the bomb; rarely do you see a lemon. Seems to me like there might be an incentive there...

[Oldbloke]

Hi everyone
Looking for more feedback please the local gun shop was steering me away from tikka tx3 hunter towards the browning x bolt sr camo ovix in .223???
Cheers

Why were they steering you away from tikka? Tikka barrels and triggers are the bomb; rarely do you see a lemon. Seems to me like there might be an incentive there...

I thought that was obvious.

[Jorlcrin]

My preference is for a Tikka.
The Browning your LGS is pushing looks a tad too 'Blingey' for me.
Kinda like a Gangsta-Rapper wanted to get into target shooting..

I have a T3 Hunter Stainless Fluted(7mm-08), and a Stainless CTR in .223.
Aside from a few tiny niggles, I cant fault the Tikkas.

Other brands I'd look at are (as previously suggested) a Ruger American; either the standard, or the Ranch model.
I'd also look at the Howa 1500 or the Howa Mini-Action, as they make great value-for-money rifles that shoot well.

As far as scopes go, the Leupolds are good scopes, but expensive.
200 metres isnt overlly far for a .223, so most scopes will do that; find one that you like.
Personally, I'd go a 30mm tube, to get a bit more low-light flexibility.
Nightforce tend to be somewhat similar as far as expense, but I (personally) like them a bit more than Leupold.
Other (affordable) brands I'd look at are Zero-Tech, Meopta, and Vortex.
[Not all Vortex models are great; not happy with my Vortex Crossfire II, as the Parallax adjust is on the objective, and not a side-turret, which makes it fiddly.]

My 'daily driver' rifle is a Stainless/Synthetic Tikka T3x CTR(Compact Tactical Rifle) in .223, with a 20" semi-varmint barrel and 1:8" twist.
Scope is a Zero-Tech 'Thrive' 3-12x44, and about my only niggle is the reticle is just a plain duplex(prefer some more holdover info for distance shots).
90% of my shots are 100 metres or under, but not uncommon to stretch shots on pigs out to ~200 or so.
Working my way through a tin of ADI 69gn BTHP Matchkings, and find it's reliable, predictable, and 200 metres is well within what it can nail with authority.
You didnt mention intended use(target or hunting); mine is solely used for hunting/pest control, and it works really well.
Most of the time, my scope sits on around 4-5 zoom, and I find that works well.

But that Browning aint doing anything for me..

My 2 cents.

[SCJ429]

I have a Tikka Supervarmint in 223, I would get another one or recommend it to anyone. Why not get a secondhand T3 varmint or do you have to get a new one?

[shoot2eat]

I have t3x hunter in .223 with leupold 3.5-10x40 illuminated firedot.
Beautiful rifle and scope, however the action is nowhere near as smooth as I was expecting. It is quite rough when cycling empty, but not something I notice when actually chambering a round. Also the supplied magazine is garbage. Couldn't fit the 4th round in and it scrapes metal off the brass when loading. I found a sako branded 6 round mag in the bargain bin that works well.

As for the scope, personally I would take the scope off your 22 and use it on the 223. Then buy a rimfire scope for your 22. Main reason being the internal paralax setting would be more appropriate set up. I suggest you watch this video for a very clear explanation https://youtu.be/L-kryu7qons?si=7yIxWcdDnn0hXk7z

[Oldbloke]

I have t3x hunter in .223 with leupold 3.5-10x40 illuminated firedot.
Beautiful rifle and scope, however the action is nowhere near as smooth as I was expecting. It is quite rough when cycling empty, but not something I notice when actually chambering a round. Also the supplied magazine is garbage. Couldn't fit the 4th round in and it scrapes metal off the brass when loading. I found a sako branded 6 round mag in the bargain bin that works well.

As for the scope, personally I would take the scope off your 22 and use it on the 223. Then buy a rimfire scope for your 22. Main reason being the internal paralax setting would be more appropriate set up. I suggest you watch this video for a very clear explanation https://youtu.be/L-kryu7qons?si=7yIxWcdDnn0hXk7z

Good point. Perfect for the 223

[Fester]

First decision for me would be the weight of the rifle for what you use it for.
A Tikka hunter is a light carry rifle but would get warm if you shot 10 rounds at targets.
Lithgows would be more a medium weight and the stock is a good shape for bench shooting.

I run a Weatherby Vanguard that is also heavy for a sporter but makes a great range rifle for cheap shooting.
24" barrel and a tack driver that can shoot about 10 rounds without getting too hot.

Choose the weight for use, then a rifle to suit.

As mine is more for range and varminting type use, I have a 6-18 Meopta Meopro scope.
Best clear scope at a budget price that I have, not light like my mountain rifle wears, but can see 22 cal holes at 200yds if weather is good. These were back on sale at Horsley if you are quick.

Generally, I can't see holes at 300m but on the best of days, I have made out the group on the light blue paper target.

[Wapiti]

4.5-14X50 leupold and out of those 2 rifles I would go a tikka .

Ther 4.5-14x VX3i or HD is as high as you'd want to go for a field-use 223, and probably the best and most under-rated scope out there if you can afford it.
Anything bigger for field use is going to be (and is) a hindrance to hunting because of the unavoidable drop in useability that higher magnification scopes have. Finnicky eyeboxes (makes your head/eye position really critical) which really slows you down taking hunting shots.

If you shoot at the range mostly a bigger scope might be better, not sure why, but in the bush is way down the list as experienced bush shooters will all agree.

And the Tikka T3x is the best rifle if you are willing to pay the extra money over a Ruger etc, incredible Finnish quality and very accurate hammer forged barrels. On mates on farms that have them out here after having other brands and who use rifles hard, they all say they wished they'd bought one first, and these guys are what I'd call very experienced shooters in all conditions. None would dream of a bigger scope in the country than a 14x upper limit either for the reasons I've described above.

But hey, one person's experience is different to another's, where you fit in is your choice.

[in2anity]

Ther 4.5-14x VX3i or HD is as high as you'd want to go for a field-use 223, and probably the best and most under-rated scope out there if you can afford it.
Anything bigger for field use is going to be (and is) a hindrance to hunting because of the unavoidable drop in useability that higher magnification scopes have. Finnicky eyeboxes (makes your head/eye position really critical) which really slows you down taking hunting shots.

If you shoot at the range mostly a bigger scope might be better, not sure why, but in the bush is way down the list as experienced bush shooters will all agree.

And the Tikka T3x is the best rifle if you are willing to pay the extra money over a Ruger etc, incredible Finnish quality and very accurate hammer forged barrels. On mates on farms that have them out here after having other brands and who use rifles hard, they all say they wished they'd bought one first, and these guys are what I'd call very experienced shooters in all conditions. None would dream of a bigger scope in the country than a 14x upper limit either for the reasons I've described above.

But hey, one person's experience is different to another's, where you fit in is your choice.

Agree with all of this.

Under the MRCA, we run scoped matches roughly once a month, out to 400m. At the random discretion of the marker, a half torso sized target on a stick appears randomly, within a 6ft region, for 4 seconds, then dissappears again for 4secs, rinse repeat. So some quick reorientation is required. aka snap shooting.

The rule of thumb advice, given to learners, is to not go over x14 power on the scope; as over-magnification for snap shooting is certainly detrimental to the fast target aquisition.

Shooting stationary targets, with unlimited time, a-la Eric Cortina, COMPLETELY different story.

[zbenga]

have you looked at the SAUER 100 CLASSIC (not the 101) ? they are around $1500 and are better than bother Lithgow and Tikka to be honest

I think the LA102 is an awesome rifle, I run the LA105 (same action) and find the trigger (once adjusted) better than the tikka, I like single stage triggers, the Sauer is several levels above both

If you don't shoot past 200m then look at at 1.5-10 or so scope with non hunting elevation turret

[in2anity]

have you looked at the SAUER 100 CLASSIC (not the 101) ? they are around $1500 and are better than bother Lithgow and Tikka to be honest

I think the LA102 is an awesome rifle, I run the LA105 (same action) and find the trigger (once adjusted) better than the tikka, I like single stage triggers, the Sauer is several levels above both

If you don't shoot past 200m then look at at 1.5-10 or so scope with non hunting elevation turret

I can't really comment on the new Lithgow centerfires, having not spent much time behind them, but I don't think you can claim a Sauer is "better" than a Tikka. Both have anecdotally high quality, hammer forgered, german made barrels. I would guess both would shoot equally as well, in like-for-like profiles. Both function equally as nicely; similar fit and finish. Sauer is a little cheaper, guess that's a perk.

Accuracy overwhelmingly stems from the quality and profile of a barrel; that's the real area of concern here. And heck maybe the Aussie barrels are just as good - but they have a bit of a hangover after that cracking recall a few years back. My guess is they'd all shoot tiny clusters, with the right load. Just make sure you go varmint profile, if you want to marvel over tiny clusters of holes through paper. Otherwise just get a sporter.

[deye243]

I would be cautious about buying lithgow anything as there are rumblings in the industry that thailes are getting out of Civilian firearms manufacturing.

[Wapiti]

We had some friends look after our place when we finally had a holiday earlier this year, and this couple had just started shooting and old-mate had just picked up a brand new T3X varmint 223. I leant him an older VX3 (not VX3i) 4.5-14x40 with a saddle focus (you MUST get the parallax adjustment 3rd turret model if you want to shoot the best with this magnification scope- I reckon on anything over 12x) and his rifle was a CRACKER...
He had all this cheap ammo he'd got when on a Bne airport trip to pick up family, and it shot these cheap 55gn Win FMJ's and PMC Bronze, some 62gn soft points etc.in these tiny groups, the bugger still hasn't got his own scope. He picked it up with a 20MOA rail because it was a varmint rifle, no way would I want that set-up (low Ringmounts for me on a hunting T3x in the integral grooves everytime) because I demand my scopes are as low as possible but then I don't shoot long range. I have no desire to own a Tikka or Lithgowfor a few reasons, but I was amazed by it's accuracy. I can't help but think how it would shoot with careful handloads, man it's a cracker!
Anyway he brought out a Lithgow LA105 factory-chassis 10-shot 308 his copper mate leant him as well and started out quite excited because he nearly bought an LA102 instead of the Tikka, and well, either this one was a fussy dud or, well, lets' just say I won't say anymore. It had a Nightforce NXS 8-32X on it too, it was horrible to look through from about 20x up, and was on superhigh mounts that couldn't get a good "cheekweld". I even tried it with some 168 Matchking handloads of my own from guns I have. Not really fair, I know, on a sample of one.
Goes to show one person's likes, expectations, and experience is completely different from anothers.

[deye243]

Well a few points ...... the nx8 has a few documented problems and it's the reason I stayed with the NXS range .
And I find your comment on the la105 and the high scope mount a bit puzzling as they have an ajustable cheek piece so it shouldn't really matter.

[Wapiti]

Well a few points ...... the nx8 has a few documented problems and it's the reason I stayed with the NXS range .
And I find your comment on the la105 and the high scope mount a bit puzzling as they have an ajustable cheek piece so it shouldn't really matter.

Yes, but the mounts were higher than anything I'd seen used before on the rail, and the scope sat so high that to shoot it made it so that we had to sit your chin on the cheekpiece with a real upright position that was impossible to do apart from in brief periods. No matter if the cheekpiece was on the upper limit. Tiring for prone shooting and was very awkward. Now, that is a set-up issue and not the rifle's fault and is common with these high "20MOA" rails everyone seems to need nowadays and it was a 56mm objective but still could've been way lower.

He mentioned he couldn't get a result on the target from this rifle and all I will do is upset people going over it any more. The guy that lent it to him for the week was really trying to push him to buy the whole set-up from him, maybe why?

And it wasn't an NX8, as I mentioned it was an NXS. The NXS 5.5-22x50 is a dream to look through compared to the 8-32, my point probably wasn't clear enough that as the magnification upper limit goes up, the finniky nature of the eyebox goes through the roof and the need to have the scope nice and low with your face in a comfortable spot is critical, but will never be as comfortable of flexible as a lesser powered scope IMHO. I did have an 8-32 NXS myself a few years ago, I fell for the "bigger makes you shoot better" BS and was lucky enough to be able to trade it at a gunshop for an 8.5-25x MK4 and it is incredibly nicer to use in all ways by comparison. And the older, now discontinued Leupold Mk4's are way nicer to stare through for long periods that the NF's ever are, current ones included.

Just a reply to correct the misunderstandings and I'll drop this contentious issue now and bow out, because one man's experience isn't necessarily another's agreement.

[Gomanly!!!]

Hi guys thx for ur input I've ordered a .223 ruger american gen 2 standard..was wondering if anyone can send me thoughts on this particular rifle it arrives in 3 weeks on back order..
Cheers

[safeshot]

If you are getting another scope consider getting, whatever, but with a 50mm objective. The square mm area of a 50 mm lens is a lot more than a 40 mm. 50mm ? better light gathering.
cheers

[Coxy383]

The one thing I have realised since starting hunting/shooting a year ago and posting here myself is that this is really a passion and we all love it. Theses response take time and thought. Good job guys pretty good community going on here.

[Coxy383]

The one thing I have realised since starting hunting/shooting a year ago and posting here myself is that this is really a passion and we all love it. Theses response take time and thought. Good job guys pretty good community going on here. PS. I just got my.first arken.seems.good for the price