First optic on hunting rifle. Let me know your opinion on these choices

S

Silveragent

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
EE Expired
Rating - 100%
22   0   0
Location
Vancouver
I'm new to hunting. My budget is 300ish, I'm wanting to mount this onto a Tikka T3 Lite for big game and want to keep things fairly light overall. I have not settled on a calibre yet but will stick with either .308, 30-06 or .270. So far I'm not much of a long range shooter so I would say I would keep things below 100yds. My only other experience with scopes is with a Leupold I have on my AR and I like it fine.

so I've been looking at the following:

Redfield Revolution 3-9x50mm Accurange Ret -- 250ish -?260ish
Redfield Revolution 3-9x40mm Accurange Ret -- 300ish
Leupold VX-1 3-9x40mm (various models) -- 300ish
Redfield Revenge 3-9x52mm Riflescopes 4-Plex - 250ish
Nikon Buckmaster 3-9X40 BDC - 260ish


In your opinion, is the better light gathering of a 50mm vs lower worth the extra weight? Is there much difference in weight? I noticed in some threads people saying they were doing well with x33 even. For keeping it under 100yds should I still seek reticles with BDC?
 
No, get somethign with a 36mm objective and save the cash. There is very little practical advantage to having a 50mm scope on a hunting rifle and you'd be better served in buying a better quality Leupold scope to take advantage of the better lens coatings available on the higher end models. You're going to scope a rifle that was purpose designed to be lightweight, so why slap a heavy scope on it? Better to buy a higher quality scope without unnecessary frills like 30mm main tubes, 50mm objectives and BDC reticles. If you're really strapped and can't afford to upgrade then I recommend checking the EE and seeing if you can scare up a used VX3 Laupold in 2.5-8x or go with a fixed 4x or 6x. The fixed scopes have the bonus of beign less money, very rugged and lightweight. There are often used 4x Leupolds on the EE for a very reasonable price.

For shooting at 100 yards you have no need of a BDC reticle. Indeed, I would say that for most hunters shooting 300 yards and under you don't have need of a BDC reticle at all.

If you're in Van City you'd be well served to head down to Fraser Street and see Messrs Matheson at Reliable Gun & Tackle (is there still tackle there. I wonder). 3 generation family business that I've done business with for years and my dad even longer. I can't say enough good about them. Tell them what you want, what your budget is and squint through some glass. Heck, you could buy the whole rig there and who knows how they'd shake it out for you.
 
BigUgly, I actually do most of my shopping at Reliable and that is where my Tikka is coming from, actually. Thank you very much for your tips and I will keep that in mind when I'm demoing the optics they have.

I understand what you are saying about avoiding the frills. I just wanted to be sure I covered all the bases on the "buy once, cry once" axiom.
 
Solid advice above. I would suggest 308 for calibre. The other two offer near zero advantage over 308 for an increase in recoil and cost of ammo.

Tdc
 
You'll do fine with any of the choices you listed. Another thing to consider with a 50mm objective is the added height. I prefer my scopes mounted as low as possible on the rifle. I've got a bdc reticle on one rifle, but for deer sized game it's fairly useless until you get out past 300. IMO spend the extra cash on better glass instead of fancy reticles and bigger lenses. Oh yeah, all three calibers are fine choices. I'd say 308 for the situation you're describing. 270 if you want to work your way up to flat tragectory reach out and touch em shots.
 
Kennymo, thank you for the tip on the optic quality vs reticles. The Leupold I already have is just a simple crosshair so I'm okay with that. And good thoughts on the added height. I just want to keep things simple.

TDC, thanks for the vote on the .308
 
Welcome to the ranks of hunters. I'm an old guide, and I train guides; so I've had a good cross-section of experience...but what I'm saying is simply my opinion.... First, get a rifle that fits you; not too heavy to carry, and feels right. Any good calibre will work, but the old standbys are beneficial in both cost and availability...Having said that .308 is a great start; likewise 30-06. No animal will be able to tell the difference; shot placement is the governing factor. My wife has killed 8 or 9 moose, African game, Red Stag, and numerous deer...all with her .243. Nothing gets away, since she confidently puts the shot where it counts.

As for glass....don't go overpowered...no need. If you can see it with your naked eye, why would you need huge power? I like a 2 x 7...and keep it on 2. I've used that on everything from muskox to bison, and a lot in between. Buy quality glass; a used Leupold is a bargain, and will last a lifetime. Good hunting to you from this old-timer.
 
All solid advice here to be sure. I'd second the 2-7 power range as well - I'm a big fan of it for big game hunting. I also seem to just leave it on 2 power and have taken game out to 125 and closer with it. Leupold VX2 in 2-7 gets my vote and is not too far out of your price range really - you won't be unhappy you spent the extra.
 
If you can stretch your ish a little to say just below the $400.00 mark you open up you options dramatically.

I have always promoted the Zeiss Conquest line of scopes.

You can find 3-9x40 which is the most used size of scope out there and be just under the $400 mark.

I do believe they have a 2-7 in their new line up as well.

These are by far the best bang for your buck, are way above the others you list for optical quality.

Many here would strongly recommend these if you can stretch that budget a hair.
 
Kelly Timoffee said:
If you can stretch your ish a little to say just below the $400.00 mark you open up you options dramatically.

I have always promoted the Zeiss Conquest line of scopes.

You can find 3-9x40 which is the most used size of scope out there and be just under the $400 mark.

I do believe they have a 2-7 in their new line up as well.

These are by far the best bang for your buck, are way above the others you list for optical quality.

Many here would strongly recommend these if you can stretch that budget a hair.
Click to expand...

Agreed.

Unfortunitly you missed the boat on the Conquest sales... They have now transitioned their entry level scopes to something inferior.
I bought a 3x9x40 Conquest brand new for $399 at my LGS. If you can get one for around that price it's the deal you've been looking for.
It's head and tails better then the scopes you listed and only marginally more expensive. Check out EE or call around to LGS's and maybe you'll find one.
I compared all the sub $400 scopes and this one was night and day better. Worth the wait if you ask me.
 
Silveragent said:
I'm new to hunting. My budget is 300ish, I'm wanting to mount this onto a Tikka T3 Lite for big game and want to keep things fairly light overall. I have not settled on a calibre yet but will stick with either .308, 30-06 or .270. So far I'm not much of a long range shooter so I would say I would keep things below 100yds. My only other experience with scopes is with a Leupold I have on my AR and I like it fine.

so I've been looking at the following:

Redfield Revolution 3-9x50mm Accurange Ret -- 250ish -?260ish
Redfield Revolution 3-9x40mm Accurange Ret -- 300ish
Leupold VX-1 3-9x40mm (various models) -- 300ish
Redfield Revenge 3-9x52mm Riflescopes 4-Plex - 250ish
Nikon Buckmaster 3-9X40 BDC - 260ish


In your opinion, is the better light gathering of a 50mm vs lower worth the extra weight? Is there much difference in weight? I noticed in some threads people saying they were doing well with x33 even. For keeping it under 100yds should I still seek reticles with BDC?
Click to expand...

Only your eyes are the deciding factor on this. I find it easier to find the target center with a 50mm objective lens.
And more than a 4X works better for me as well.
Use what is comfortable for you.
The rest are suggestions that work well for the replies.
 
I have two of the 3x9x40mm and one of the 4x12x40mm Redfield Revolution scopes, and for the price I've found them to be just fine. I prefer the standard reticle to the accurange reticle (I find the accurange too "busy") - but I have one of each in the 3x9's and they both work well. They hold their zero, track well, they're rugged, and they have the Leupold lifetime warranty. I bought all three used on the EE for around $200 - $240 each.
 
My favorite optic right now is Leupold's VX-II 1-4x20mm. If you want to keep it light, and under 200M, give it a look. It's fantastic, and plenty bright in any light you have business shooting in.
 
Under stand that a 3x 9 might be of some interest
but this type of scope is old school deer / elk moose
shoots could be 100-350 and beyond . 3x9 just don't cut it
this is we're the 6x 18 step in
now at 300 you can see what your shooting at .
If light is what your looking at try a 6x 18 with a 25 mm tube
Nikon buck master 6x18
you can dial it down if need be

Years of hunting pulled all the 3x9 s
cant see good after 300
 
Tikkam65 said:
Under stand that a 3x 9 might be of some interest
but this type of scope is old school deer / elk moose
shoots could be 100-350 and beyond . 3x9 just don't cut it
this is we're the 6x 18 step in
now at 300 you can see what your shooting at .
If light is what your looking at try a 6x 18 with a 25 mm tube
Nikon buck master 6x18
you can dial it down if need be

Years of hunting pulled all the 3x9 s
cant see good after 300
Click to expand...

OP is looking at 100 yard shots. And I don't like shooting up close with any more than 4x. :)
 
Yea, maybe later if I prove to be a super shooter I'll think of longer distance shots. I would rather be conservative and get a good shot away.

Good discussion.
 
Nine said:
My favorite optic right now is Leupold's VX-II 1-4x20mm. If you want to keep it light, and under 200M, give it a look. It's fantastic, and plenty bright in any light you have business shooting in.
Click to expand...

That's been your favourite optic for at least 5 years now!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom