Bushnell Sportsman good for .17 HM2?

CyaN1de

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
89   0   0
Location
KTSA Regular
WSS has a decent deal on a Bushnell Sportsman 3-9x40 LL ($32 off). I was wondering if this would be a good scope for a Marlin 917HM2.

I am a newb to the firearm scene so any information on scope choice would be appreciated.

Thanks
Richard
 
The sportsman is ok. But you are better of with better optics. An example: Last weekend I was shooting gophers using a rimfire scope. It has a 50 yard parallax. That's where the reticle is supposed to be best focused for shooting with close range situations. But as I was watching some well past 300 yards through my scope, (And not even worth taking a pop shot in the wind) the overall sight picture was poor at longer ranges. On another .22, I have a Leupold 3-9 that is fantastic to look through, at any range. I'll admit, low light performance isn't high on my list of priorities on a .22, so that doesn't matter. My point is, spend as much as you can afford on a scope. That's one purchase you'll never regret.
 
I would probably want a scope with more power than 9 for a .17 caliber. I would look at a 6-18 or a 6-24. If you really want the lower power than get a 4-16.

Take a look at the Busnell banner 6-18x50 :)
 
I think I am definitely going with a higher magnification model. Now to find the one that makes me all warm and fuzzy

I spent an hour or so tonight looking for a site that explains all the in's and out's of scopes but to no avail.

Obviously the Magnification is straight forward but I would like know more about things like AO, what difference the Objective lens size makes, what the difference is going to be between say a 6-18x50 vs 6-24x40 etc.

If anyone knows of any links that has something like Scopes For Dummies (that's me :D) I would really appreciate it.

Richard
 
Last edited:
I have no links, but i'll try to help you ouy anyways. The 40mm compared to a 50 mm lens has one benifit. It can be mounted lower on your rifle. The 50mm will give you a wider field of view, compared to the 40 at the same magnifacation. The exit pupil on a 50mm set at 18 is 2.7mm. The exit pupil of a 40mm set at 18 is 2.2mm. Thats how much light is reaching your eye. So in theory, the 50mm will appear brighter in lower light. But if that's your primary reason for buying one, don't. Your not shooting your .22 in the middle of the night. I'm familier with both scopes your looking at, and I have owned the 6-18 Banner. It is a nice scope, but makes things a bit top heavy. For the money, the Tasco is still a good deal, complete with a mil-dot reticle, but I'd buy a banner if I were you. The adjustable objective works well on rimfires. You can dial it in to give you the best sight picture at various ranges. I even used mine as an impromtu range fnder. Buy dialing it out until my target and crosshairs came into alignment, it gave a pretty good reading in distance out to just over 200 paces. You'll probably like that. Good luck with your desicion.
 
I am not sure you would need to go to the big scopes for the 17m2 a 3-9 could work as long as it has fine enough cross hairs. I'd probably max out at 4-12 I had one of those on my hmr and it was just about enough, so it should be plenty for the 17m2.
 
Well I think I have (well, you guys have) made up my mind and I am going to go with the 6-24x40 Bushnell Banner.

I was also looking at a Barska 6-20x50 which I could pick up for $100 shipped, which I read some positive things about, but the Bushnell seems to have a good following with not a lot of people complaining about it.

I do appreciate everyones input on my newb questions
 
I'll second the 40mm over 50mm objective, I think what Pharaoh2 was eluding to was this... The closer the axis of your bore to the axis of the scope the flatter your trajectory will be. I don't know alot about the HM2 balistics but with HMR it is very flat to ~150m. So if your scope sit way high on your receiver then you are adding that much more arc to your trajectory than neccessary. I have even seen some scope go so far as having the objective with a "cutout" in it so the axis can be that much closer...

vx-l_page_icon.jpg
 
Back
Top Bottom