Fixed power scope
- Thread starter Stewie333
- Start date
BigUglyMan
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- New Scotland
No, but 42mm is an awfully large objective for 6x. Much larger than is needed which means that it will be excessively heavy and high.
The scope will still sit in the same medium rings as a 40mm and weighs 13 oz, about the same as a 40mm VX-3 and lighter than most 3-9x40s of the market. My conquest is 16 oz with a 40mm obj.
6x42 also gives a 7mm exit pupil, which is ideal for the young to middle aged human eye.
Jordan Smith
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Calgary, AB
Yeah, it's awesome. Optically superb. Mine weighs 11.5oz.
- Location
- AB foothills
I have owned a few and after the last one I bought I came to the realization that I like the FX-II 6X36 more. Light weight, compact and clear.
The FX-3 comes in at 13.6oz and the FX-II is 10oz's. I haven't weighed the ones I have in quite some time but I am pretty sure Leupolds numbers are not far off.
I have both, and agree completely. Have one 6x42 left and seriously thinking of selling it. The three light ones are more than adequate for any hunting rifles I will be using.
Ted
Jordan Smith
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Calgary, AB
Over on 24hour everybody that weighed theirs seemed to come in at 11.5-12oz for the newest gen FX3 6x42. Mine is 11.5oz with M1 ele, and 12oz if I add a B&C Blizzard cap on the front.
I'm gonna try the 6x36 on the next rifle and see how I like it.
gunrunner8
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Kamloops, B.C.
A $1000 for a 4x or 6x scope is quite a lot of money. There is Swarovski 6x62mm in EE right now for $600 or so IIRC that would be the best quality you can get for the money. I have two newest made in Japan Weavers 6x38 weighting 10oz (not for sale) just like Leupold 6x36 ones just as good optically if not better for half the expense. Consider Weaver and spend extra bucks for other goods like better; ammo, reloading equipment or better barrel that will give you better results on target.
Thanks for all the feedback, I actually ended up with a variable power Zeiss Diavari. I am uncomfortable buying something that I can't hold and have a look through. Locally Leupold and Zeiss are the main options in my price range. Glass can be extremely subjective, and my eyes aren't getting any better with age!
- Location
- big sky country
For what?
A 4x is a very versatile power. I shoot 0-500 metres with my ACOG.
A 4x is a very versatile power. I shoot 0-500 metres with my ACOG.
For a guy who says he prefers the 6X42, I own four 6X36 matte LRs and just sold my last 6X42. I have them on a 22LR, a 223, 270 and a 30-06.
The optics in the new FX-II are great, it is plenty bright enough, and the longer tube as compared to the 6X42 makes the X36 easier to mount on a lot of rifles.
The optics in the new FX-II are great, it is plenty bright enough, and the longer tube as compared to the 6X42 makes the X36 easier to mount on a lot of rifles.
How are the optics in the 36mm? I've found lower end Leupolds to have a bunch of field curvature, but I havent looked through either of these scopes.
Went and bought the 36mm:
I like it, nice and bright, simple, light and impressive eye relief. Good optics, but not quite up to par to the Conquest with a slight bit of field curvature. In this application, at this price point I very much like this scope.
I like it, nice and bright, simple, light and impressive eye relief. Good optics, but not quite up to par to the Conquest with a slight bit of field curvature. In this application, at this price point I very much like this scope.
