Scope For 45-70 or Irons

D

-Doug-

CGN Regular
Rating - 100%
7   0   0
Debating on picking up a Marlin 45-70 (dark or trapper)
Hesitant on throwing a scope on it due to the added weight, would like to keep the gun lighter for walking around and pushing bush for deer.

What’s everyone’s thoughts on scopes on 45-70s?
Would you throw one on for shots 100 yards and less?
If so what scope?
 
Used to have a 1-4x 20mm Leupold on my Guide Gun in my avatar. Switched it for one of the original Skinner Ghost Ring sights. Much handier to carry, bit lighter, possibly a bit less accurate beyond 100 but can’t remember using it beyond that.

I feel it’s best with the ghost ring but if you prefer the glass, I think the 1-4x20mm is an appropriate piece of glass.
 
old ones scream for irons but a modern 45-70 or lever in general these days its worth putting on a low power scope option to get the most out of those low light , rainy or even thick scrub with small windows type hunting...
 
Eyesight comes in to play as you age, which makes the decision for you. I have no choice but to scope these days, so My Ruger No.1-S .45-70 has a Leupold VX-3 1.5-5X20 mounted.
 
I added a scope on my Sbl but have since taken it off,I prefer the lever rail with the xs sight ghost ring set up for this gun.Im shooting big game with it and can hit small steel silhouettes at 100 yards everytime ,So I dont see a need for a scope on it really.

It does make it bulky and not as quick to shoulder and shoot when the scope is on.I really like the ghost ring peep sight for woods walking ,I find its a great compromise.
 
My eye sight is still good so another vote for the XS Ghost Ring, easy adjustments, I like the model with wings, slides out of a case or scabbard nicely. I think the Skinners look better though.
 
Once upon a time, I'd have said peep sights are the only way to go on a lever gun. But now, the eyes just don't let them work at last light. There is no doubt however that scopes add to the considerable weight of a loaded lever gun in 45-70. Perhaps the aesthetically awful holosight is the way to go, but I do like the apparent light gathering ability of a low power scope at last light. I think if I were in your shoes, I'd look for a small, light low power scope. 1X4 perhaps.
 
Leupold FXII 2.5x fixed, only 6 ounces, mount it low, and use the rail to push the scope forward far enough to maximize the 5" of eye relief. Does not feel clunky at all

Screenshot 2020-12-22 074527.jpg
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot 2020-12-22 074527.jpg
    Screenshot 2020-12-22 074527.jpg
    48.8 KB · Views: 275
The choice of if or which scope to choose should be made on how and where the gun will be used rather than what the gun is. In dark timber, the light gathering qualities of a low power scope are beneficial, even though fiberoptic front sights are popular with some, they don't allow you to see the target any better. Perhaps a low power scope with an illuminated reticle is the best of both worlds. If you hunt or shoot where you can expect wet, foggy, rainy, or snowy conditions, you might find that scope lenses that are constantly obscured by moisture making it inferior to irons. If you anticipate shooting beyond 150 yards, depending on which reticle you choose, the scope can provide a better index of elevation for holding off for elevation or wind. If you anticipate very close range snap shooting, on small game for example, irons are mounted closer to the bore than the scope and don't require as much holdoff for the offset.
 
Boomer said:
The choice of if or which scope to choose should be made on how and where the gun will be used rather than what the gun is. In dark timber, the light gathering qualities of a low power scope are beneficial, even though fiberoptic front sights are popular with some, they don't allow you to see the target any better. Perhaps a low power scope with an illuminated reticle is the best of both worlds. If you hunt or shoot where you can expect wet, foggy, rainy, or snowy conditions, you might find that scope lenses that are constantly obscured by moisture making it inferior to irons. If you anticipate shooting beyond 150 yards, depending on which reticle you choose, the scope can provide a better index of elevation for holding off for elevation or wind. If you anticipate very close range snap shooting, on small game for example, irons are mounted closer to the bore than the scope and don't require as much holdoff for the offset.
Click to expand...

I zero my Ruger No.1-S .45-70 @ 150 yards. I can hold dead on from 0 - 180 yards and am only 5" low at 200... the load is 51.0 H4198 pushing the Speer Hot-Cor 350 FNSP.
 
Last edited:
First you mentioned either the trapper or dark....I was in the same boat a few months back. I went with dark. My reasons
Dark came with xs sights and rails so mounting a scope or red dot is viable in any configuration while keeping the ghost ring on.
The trapper comes with the Skinner ( man I love my Skinner sights) however with this set up the sights need to be removed and a rail added to accommodate a scope. Right off the get go.....
Just my thoughts

Back to scope issue.
On my dark I run a red dot right now but am looking at getting a scout style scope and QD rings so I can go from one to another quickly..
Low power scopes are the bomb for hunting IMO.
 
Lots of great posts here, all I can say is what works great for me. My 45/70 Trapper with Leupold 1-4x20 scope. Light and accurate, for me.
My brother has the Dark, just as great!
 
Last edited:
I’ve gone full circle, started off with irons and am back to irons.

First optic was Leupold 1-4 mounted as low as I could get; even removed the rear aperture to get it low, and it was too high for a cheekweld on the stock.

Then I used a Sig Romeo red dot; was better height wise, and could remount the aperture on the rail but it didn’t stay in there long.

Finally went back to the iron sights and couldn’t be happier. Accurate enough for me out to 100 with practice. I actually ended up removing the pic rail and just reinstalling the rear aperture by itself. It has slicked the rifle right up, a bit easier on the eyes and on the hand when carrying it by the receiver.
 
I have a Bushnell Elite 1.5-4.5X32 with Firefly Reticle on my Marlin. As fast as irons on low power and more than enough magnification to reach out when required.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom