Zeiss Conquest HD5

[Moreland]

Finally got a new scope on my Sako 85 Finnlight in .300 Win Mag. Went with a Zeiss Conquest HD5 3-15x45 with the Rapid-Z 600 reticle, what an awesome scope. The HD glass is very clear. Can't wait to get out to the range and see what I can do with it. Really like the Zeiss ballistics calculator they have on their website, you can input your information for the bullets you use and your sight in distance and they let you know where your gun should be shooting. Overall very happy with my purchase, now hopefully I draw an Elk tag this year!!

[elkhunter11]

The HD5 is an excellent scope, but the Rapid Z 800 would be more suitable for the 300winmag.

[Maxwell78]

I now own two 3-15's and a 5-25. they are a great investment.

[Moreland]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

The HD5 is an excellent scope, but the Rapid Z 800 would be more suitable for the 300winmag.

I didn't want that much going on in the sight glass and I would never take shot that far on a game animal. On the ballistics calculator the range lines are all within 5 yards of the hundred. I guess now I will just have to take it out to the range and see how well the scope (or how well I) perform haha

[elkhunter11]

On the ballistics calculator the range lines are all within 5 yards of the hundred.

What bullet are you using, and what does your chronograph read with that load?

[benamen]

Looks like it would work well with Federal ammo using 180 grain Accubonds at 15x.

[baptiste_moose]

I have the z-800 on my conquest. I have all the numbers imputed properly and my zoom set accordingly and am still not impressed with it. I can estimate hold over no problem at 300 yds and anything outside of that I will be using clicks. It's waaaay more accurate

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by baptiste_moose

I have the z-800 on my conquest. I have all the numbers imputed properly and my zoom set accordingly and am still not impressed with it. I can estimate hold over no problem at 300 yds and anything outside of that I will be using clicks. It's waaaay more accurate

Did you have the exact B.C. for the bullet being used, and did you chronograph the load in your rifle? Most importantly, did you verify the trajectory, by shooting the load in your rifle, at 300 yards, 400 yards, 500 yards, etc.?

[baptiste_moose]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

Did you have the exact B.C. for the bullet being used, and did you chronograph the load in your rifle? Most importantly, did you verify the trajectory, by shooting the load in your rifle, at 300 yards, 400 yards, 500 yards, etc.?

I'm way ahead of ya man. I wouldn't say I didn't care for it unless I'd put it through the ringer. I went off the G7 as well which is more accurate then the G1

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by baptiste_moose

I'm way ahead of ya man. I wouldn't say I didn't care for it unless I'd put it through the ringer. I went off the G7 as well which is more accurate then the G1

Did you test the trajectory to 500 or 600 yards; and fine tune with the magnification adjustment? Did you try to compensate by adjusting the zero at 200 yards ? Which bullet, were you using? What was the velocity in your rifle?

[Moreland]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

What bullet are you using, and what does your chronograph read with that load?

I have a box of Remington 180gr Core-Lokt Ultras that I will be using first, but I am always up for trying some different ammo to see what works best in the gun. I haven't chronied it yet but will be doing that some weekend here soon.

I would really like to try the 180gr Accubonds in it. They seem like one of the best.