What low power scope for 9.3x62?

H

hawk-i

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
9   0   0
Was looking at a Leupold FX-2 2.5×20 ultralite.
6.5 oz.
Is this enough magnification to put on a 9.3x62?
 
hawk-i said:
....
Is this enough magnification to put on a 9.3x62?
Click to expand...

Depends on what you are shooting at and how is your eyesight. Can read Jack O'connor shooting an elk at over 300 yards with a 2.5 power scope. Finn Airgaard's second 375 H&H had a 2.5 Weaver, for everything. I have a Leupold M8-3x on my 9.3x62. From sand bags and shooting table, I have fired many 3 and 5 shot groups 1" and less with a Weaver 3 power scope on another rifle - want a target shaped and sized to match the reticle. If you are shooting a moose with your 9.3x62, it has a kill zone maybe 12" to 15" in diameter, so a 2.5 or 3 power is lots of scope for a long, long way. If you are shooting at a gopher, not so much. Others will have to help advise about shooting at targets.
 
It depends on where and what you want to hunt. 1.5-4 power is a classic for the caliber. 2-7 is great too. You do not need more power. Make sure that whatever scope you choose it will be able to take the recoil of the 9.3x62. I use a Nikon Prostaff 2-7.
 
2.5-8x36 leupold is the answer. Way brighter than the fixed 2.5 and still very compact. Nice to have 8x sometimes too.
 
you have the choice:

what i used in the past and today:

1-4x20 nikon german 4
1.25-4x24 bushnell elite german 4
1.25-4x20 sb german 4
meopta 7x50 german 4
1.5-5x20 leupold german 4
2.5-8x36 leupold german 1

as you see there is a pattern i do think that the 2.5x20 or big bore 3x20 leupold are great and i owned them but no more.

good luck.
 
Guess if I don't like it on the 9.3x62 the 2.5x20 would make a nice little scope for the 1894 44 Mag or the 1895 444.
 
I had a buck show up at the edge of a dry beaver pond about 300 yds away. Brown deer against a brown background standing in brown grass. I couldn't see well enough through the 3x Leupold to get a decent aim. I think now that part of the problem was my damned progressive lenses, but the 3x went away and I replaced it with a 1.5-5x, for the little extra magnification and better glass.
 
I prefer 2 or 2.5 especially if there are iron sights on the gun and when the scope is mounted low.
The 3X is so popular because you don't see the iron sights in the scope above 2.5 but below 2, you will see it.
 
I have a Leupold 1.5-5x20 on mine and I would love to find a 1-6x24 with some kind of illumination thing would be the ideal I think but they are hard to find in a simple reticle style and less than $1000.... i use to have a 2.5-10x44 on a 30-06 and find it too heavy and bulky so I sold it! As for progressive eye glasses, that is one of the reason I have bifocals(old style with the “line”)!!
 
Slimbo said:
2.5-8x36 leupold is the answer. Way brighter than the fixed 2.5 and still very compact. Nice to have 8x sometimes too.
Click to expand...

x2
That is what I would use. I put one on my 35 Whelen and it has worked just fine resulting in a couple animals down to date. They are nice compact glass and stand up great to recoil.
 
I bought the FX-II 2.5x20 wide duplex, will give it a try later on after I play with the red dot first....They also had a CZ527 mini mauser 7.62x39 on sale, couldn't resist...the Ultralight will be awesome on this as well :)
 
In Golf, everyone is spending money and worried about driver distance, most.shots are 100 yds and in. Same holds true for hunting. Maybe your taking it to 1000 yrs.

It's.just.been my experience that once the big.rifles start to speak, most game goes deep/dark/nocturnal. Bayonet to 80 yards.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom