338 WM with cheapo 3-9x40? Tough enough?

MackForce

MackForce

Regular
Rating - 100%
151   0   0
Location
West Coast
I just picked up a 338 WM for some select hunts. I decided I only need a 3-9 magnification for the range Ill be using it.
I do have one of those cheap 3-9x40 bushnell package scopes kicking around... Will that thing hold from the kick of the 338? Ive only used them on a 223 and it worked fine.
Trying to save for another rifle and not really trying to spend money on this rifle right now.

Anyone trust these on a large calibre?

I will get some nice glass later but will this do in a pinch?


Thanks
 
Sure it'll perform perfectly until you shoot it ☺. Seriously with ammo costing 2.00 a shot why bother? Cheap scopes and hard kicking guns often don't pay well together. Then you have a resight with more expensive ammo.. Save a few hundred dollars extra and get something better. That package scope belongs on a .22
 
In your situation, trying to be easy on the wallet, Go with a vortex over a bushnell. I wouldn't be buying more if I cant finish the current project. You can always try the cheap scope, in the end all you will lose is a cheap scope, but then you have 2 rifles with no scope. Theres plenty of great scopes that pop up for sale on teh EE as well. Some nice Leupolds for instance, for a huge savings. Do it right the 1st time and never have to worry about it. Especially if you are trying to ethically put an animal down.
 
yeah.. enough said. Just wondering if anyone had used these on anything decent.
Ill pull a Nikon off one of my other rifles for the time being. Vortex is appealing, minus all the warranty talk on these threads...

Thanks guys.. Ill chalk this question up to being tired and reaching.

I knew better
 
It would probably work fine until your 500 miles from home and thousands of dollars into the hunt of a lifetime with the biggest animal you've ever seen standing broadside at 75 yards. Your cost savings will be evaporated quite briskly.

Buy a Leupold Vari-X III 2.5 x 8 with Leopold steel rings and bases. If you can't afford that, save up until you can.
 
haha yeah yeah....

Ive got iron sights on it as it sits. Those will do for now.

Ive been checking eye relief while shopping, its tough to find any more than 4". I would like to get out to around 6 if I could.
 
It will cost you in the long run. Once its sighted in with 60$ a box ammo it will crap out and you will be back to shooting again. I learned my lesson years ago with cheap scopes on slug guns. 5 dollars a shot and they don't sight in easy. Pulled my scope up in the middle of a beautiful night and the seals had let go. Couldn't see a thing. Ruined the week and cost me again to buy more ammo. Never really did hold zero properly either. There are great scopes under 200 bucks such as elite 3-9x40 that hold up great.
 
There are many solid used as well as new scopes out there that won't break the bank. I have learned the hard way over the years that the one thing you want to be sure of is the scope. Better a good scope on a crappy rifle than the other way around.

Imagine you just bought a great new sports car but decided to put an old used engine from an AMC pacer in it. The car will move but when you get to the line and stomp the pedal things start flying apart.
 
I recently picked up a Weaver Classic in 4X from here.
A Zeiss Conquest in 3-9x40 also showed up shortly after.
Put both on 4X and did a side by side comparison.
I jest 'bout chit me pantalones................................:runaway:

Then my buddy showed up and I gave him both scopes to have a looky-see.
I dint say nadda.
He smiled, wow, hard to beleaf.

The Weaver Classic was to both our eyes more clear.
No chit.

Not sure how it would stand up to recoil on the OP's rifle, but
I'm sure impressed with the clarity.
Need to do a night comparison fer chits & giggles.

Weavers.......one of life's wee mysteries.

Surprised there aren't more of them being used.

Edit:........ the x-hairs on the Weaver are more flavourful to me eyes too.
A bit wider on the center X and the bigg'un arms a tad thinner.
 
When I had a 338 it wore 3 different scopes. The B & L 2.5-8 had too fine a cross hair.
The Leupold VX III 2.5 - 8 was very good but when I had the chance at a B & L 1.5 - 6 the Leupold was retired to a 270 Winchester.
3 - 9 will be fine but do not go cheap.
Cheap may mean half the value of the rifle to some but twice the value of the rifle may not suit your needs either.
Since you are into a variable power scope check out, check out a number of different situations, aiming at difference ranges through the range of powers.
After shooting a moose at 8X, I should have turned the power down to 2.5 when approaching the downed animal. So if you are on 9X you should know what you will see at 20 yards . . . probably nothing.
 
My Tikka T3 in 338WM has actually broken the scope rings off from the recoil, the front one cracked right where the bottom of the ring attaches to the base pillar. They were replaced with Talleys.

I have had a Burris Fullfield and Leupold VX2 on mine, both have stood up to the recoil fine. The ring incident above dented the Burris tube so it was retired to my 243. The Leupold is a used one I got off the EE for $200. So you don't have to break the bank for glass on a 338.
 
My 338 Rifle wears a Leupold 6x42.

Long eye relief, tough as nails, and great optical quality to boot.

Need extension rings to mount it, but worth the effort.

Regards, Dave.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom