Scope Question.

7mmlefty said:
We bad asses in Ontario know what you need in Manitoba too... a good ass whoopin.:D

I still find a scope set at 4.5 power in the prairies does just fine.:cheers:
Click to expand...

Well then here's the question everyone is dying to ask, but won't:

If a 3x9 can be set for 3 for bush and 4/4.5/5 for open area shooting AND give the shooter the added benefit of a bit more magnification for say, oh, I don't know, say target shooting, then why limit yourself? A 3x9 is the same size physically than the lesser magnification scopes, so what are you losing with a 3x9 set at 3-5?
 
joe-nwt said:
Well then here's the question everyone is dying to ask, but won't:

If a 3x9 can be set for 3 for bush and 4/4.5/5 for open area shooting AND give the shooter the added benefit of a bit more magnification for say, oh, I don't know, say target shooting, then why limit yourself? A 3x9 is the same size physically than the lesser magnification scopes, so what are you losing with a 3x9 set at 3-5?
Click to expand...

Nothing wrong with a 3x9... its just better to hunt on lower magnification on moving game.
Lower to mid range power (4.5 or 5) still gives you a clear image of youre target but also gives a clear image of the targets surroundings like trees and for me,.. gives a good idea on lead I should give on the fast moving target.

Sometimes I have to aim into Saskatchewan to hit a deer in Manitoba with the 45-70.Laugh2.
 
7mmlefty said:
nothing wrong with a 3x9... Its just better to hunt on lower magnification on moving game.
Lower to mid range power (4.5 or 5) still gives you a clear image of youre target but also gives a clear image of the targets surroundings like trees and for me,.. Gives a good idea on lead i should give on the fast moving target.

sometimes i have to aim into saskatchewan to hit a deer in manitoba with the 45-70.laugh2.
Click to expand...

lol!
 
unlike most folks here, i belong to the "higher" magnification club, but i have another reason- most of the folks here are still blessed with reasonably good( if not corrected) eyesight- i'm not so lucky- too many years of various tiny repair jobs ( lenses and transistors) have robbed me of my "distance "vision- but if you look at a 3x9x40, and i mean EVERYTHING about it, also consider the 4x12x40- ever so slightly longer, just a bit heavier, but you spend most of your time at at least 4x anyway, and yet still have the legs for those really long shots- i also like to see what's BEYOND my target; i.e. the background, and that's where the 12x comes in handy
i have an 6x18x40 mounted on a 10/22 and anything above12 you can SEE THE CROSSHAIRS MOVE with your heartbeats if you look close enough, - in other words, you can never "settle" down enough - the first shot will be lined up properly, but the second will be "somewhere in the rings" and that's properly benched, bagged fore and aft, and sitting down- you don't get those conditions in the bush unless you make them
 
Tired eyes.

t-star said:
unlike most folks here, i belong to the "higher" magnification club, but i have another reason- most of the folks here are still blessed with reasonably good( if not corrected) eyesight- i'm not so lucky- too many years of various tiny repair jobs ( lenses and transistors) have robbed me of my "distance "vision- but if you look at a 3x9x40, and i mean EVERYTHING about it, also consider the 4x12x40- ever so slightly longer, just a bit heavier, but you spend most of your time at at least 4x anyway, and yet still have the legs for those really long shots- i also like to see what's BEYOND my target; i.e. the background, and that's where the 12x comes in handy
i have an 6x18x40 mounted on a 10/22 and anything above12 you can SEE THE CROSSHAIRS MOVE with your heartbeats if you look close enough, - in other words, you can never "settle" down enough - the first shot will be lined up properly, but the second will be "somewhere in the rings" and that's properly benched, bagged fore and aft, and sitting down- you don't get those conditions in the bush unless you make them
Click to expand...
I belong to the same club...
 
I have a 6-18 Leupold on a 223 ... for varmints only.

I use a 1-4 Leupold on a 257, a 2-7 on a 25-06 and a 1-4 on a 35 Whelen.

If I can't hit with the 25-06 set on 7, a bigger bulkier scope set on 9 isn't going
to help much. The field of view of the 1-4's set on 1 is supposedly 75 feet at 100
yards ... in practice, shooting with both eyes open, it is IMHO, just about perfect
for hunting in the thick stuff. Eve the 25-06 set on 2 is quite adaptable for the bush.
 
Most posts have valid reasons why they hunt, with what they hunt with.Different conditions ,different scopes,but as stated,3x9 covers them all...
 
Basically you'd have to look at your lowest magnification, it's the only important factor. 6x is too high as a starting point for general big game hunting, IMO. There are a few other factors to consider as well. The higher the magnification, the less perceived light transmission, in other words a darker view at low light. However, many of the low power variables also have poor low light performance due to the small objective lens. Best all around for Manitoba is a 3-9 or a 2.5-10 with a minimum 40mm objective, IMO.
 
A Bushnell Elite 3200, in 1.5 to 4.5 magnicication.
For bush and close up hunting I don't see how you could improve on the very wide field of view and brightness of it set at 1.5 power.
4.5 power is considered enough magnicication, by many experienced hunters and shooters, for hunting big game at any range.
 
H4831 said:
A Bushnell Elite 3200, in 1.5 to 4.5 magnicication.
For bush and close up hunting I don't see how you could improve on the very wide field of view and brightness of it set at 1.5 power.
4.5 power is considered enough magnicication, by many experienced hunters and shooters, for hunting big game at any range.
Click to expand...

A few issues with your selection:
A 32mm objective is too small for last light hunting. 4.5x is not enough power for any range, you can argue that til you're blue in the face. I think you'll find most hunters will keep their variable scope on 5 or 6 x, with the option to go higher or lower as is possible with a 3-9 or 2.5-10. This includes those with as much experience as you. ;)
 
I would invite H4831 to try something in the 3-9x40 with a 30mm tube.possibly a vx-r or something a little better quality,clarity,sharpness,and brightness...
 
I don't have a lot of faith on all this advice about low power scopes being better for hunting...I followed this belief when I first started hunting, fixed 4x, variable 2-7, variable 3x9, etc. BUT every time I went up in magifaction I didn't notice any of the problems I was lead to believe there would be...a 4-12 or a 4-16 set on 4 power is still a 4 power scope but commonly a 4-16 will have a larger objective lens than a fixed 4x so it is better in low light conditions. Also I found that I very rarely hunting with the scope set to the lower powers unless at dusk or dawn or in thick bush. As far a target acquisition with a 4, 6, 9, 12, or 16 power I also found that when i shoulder the gun I'm 99% of the time x-hairs right on target or with in a few inches of what I'm aiming at so I don't see a problem with field of view on higer magnification...anyways, I'm just saying that the higher power scopes certainly work better for me. It's something that you will have to work out for yourself and also shot placement is always better when you can see more of the target.
Happy hunting
 
7mmlefty said:
Nothing wrong with a 3x9... its just better to hunt on lower magnification on moving game.
Click to expand...

This is what I do. I've shot a lot of game on the lowest power because time doesn't allow for me to crank it up. I do really appreciate a little higher power when they're out there though. My main hunting guns are scoped as follows:

Browning A-bolt medallion 270, Bushnell elite 3200 3-9
Ruger M77 338 win mag, Leupold VX1 3-9
Beretta Pintail slug gun, Weaver Scopechief 2.5-8
Savage 210 slug warrior, Bushnell Trophy DOA 3-9
Remington 760 in 244 Rem, Lyman All-American 4X (I can't believe that 4831 has one too LOL)
Savage MLII, Bushnell Banner Dusk & Dawn 3-9

All of those are on their lowest settings until I'm ready to shoot and that pintail has accounted for a ton of deer on a dead run at 2.5 X
 
H4831 said:
A Bushnell Elite 3200, in 1.5 to 4.5 magnicication.
For bush and close up hunting I don't see how you could improve on the very wide field of view and brightness of it set at 1.5 power.
4.5 power is considered enough magnicication, by many experienced hunters and shooters, for hunting big game at any range.
Click to expand...

This is great advice. A 2-7 might be something to look into as well, and 3-9 if you are planning on taking long shots. Your biggest factor should be your average shooting distance. You have to find the best balance. In other words, you want to be covered at 25 yards and at 250 yards. I don't know if I'd want my minimum magnification to be 3x in close-up bush situations. Then again, I don't wan't my maximum to be 4.5x at 250 yards. 2-7 is probably your best bet, but again, only you know your average shot distance.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom