And shots out west can be short.

Just for grins, at 500 yards, a 180 grain bullet from a .30-06 drops somewhere along the line of 52-54 inches (4.3 FEET!). I think Leupold's now offering something along the line of Burris' "Ballistic Mil-Dot" reticle, but if your scope doesn't have that, where's the 52" mark on your reticle? Or, would you have to guess like I do? Might one man's guess be better than another's? Shots in Wyoming are famous for wind, too. How hard is the wind blowing? Unless I carry a wind meter, wouldn't I have to guess at that, too? How many inches will that bullet drift with a crosswind?

Now, I think most of us couldguess prettyclose to the 4 feet holdover, even at 500 yards. Most of us are probably considerably less able to accurately gauge wind speed without a meter. That wind could mean the difference between a lung shot or agut-shot, though. Or a miss.

My point? Magnification makes sighting at long range easier, but it doesn't compensate for the other variables that bullet will endure on its way to the target. Yes, there are guys practiced enough and with more specialized equipment than most of us are willing tospend money onwho can make shotsbeyond even 500 yards on game (where's RidgeRunner?) but for the averageJoe.... Magnification doesn't necessarily make things easier to hit. I shoot prairie dogs with rifles topped by4.5-14x and 6.5-20x scopes, and at 500-600 yards, there's little difference between the two. Most of the screwed-up shots are a fault of my shooting, not on how much magnification I have.

So, if you expect 500-yard shots on elk, you'd better start setting your targets 500 yards out, regardless of which scope you choose.