Has the rules of what scope is enough been changed?????

Certainly quality can never be understated. Everyone's quality range is usually what they were exposed to and what evolution of the optics they owned. That said, all things being equal, you use to have to pick between a long range scope or a stalking scope because of the field of view and magnification. I think now you can have one scope to do both now that 3x18 is a reality. This will help us big woods hunters that occasionally get to a power line or vista for longer shots. I think its cool.:cool:
 
I started with 4 power, and after a few years went to 3x9 but the scope died. I replaced it with a 6 power and used that on my 270 for 5 or 6 years. Then I stepped up to a 4.5-14 and that's where I think I'll stay. You don't need 14 power for hunting, but it comes in handy when I'm punching paper at 100 yards and when I see a coyote or pig way out there. So that power range, or 4-16 work just fine for my hunting needs, but might not work for others. I've thought about maybe getting a 5-25, but that just isn't something that's going to improve what I do in any way. A 3-18 would be a nice range for me, but it isn't markedly better than what I'm using now.

It's all about what works best for you.
 
It's all about what works best for you.
Click to expand...

Exactly^^^

Where I hunt, I cannot see farther than 100-150 yards most times. I've been using the same Weaver 2-10x scope for 20 years. I don't think I've ever used more than 4x while hunting.
 
While hunting I always kept the power ring on 3x or 4x so I would have a reasonable field of view with some magnification. But the 9x is handy for sighting in new handloads loads at the range.

I've never tried one but I think a 2-7x28 might be pretty handy and plenty of scope for hunting and range while being more lightweight and compact than the 3-9x40mm. I might try that or a 4x20mm on my next rifle. Less weight is always good in the woods.
 
With 2x7 scope on 2X on a 270, I shot deer between 400 and 500 yards.
With 2x7 scope on 7X on a 270, I shot deer between 400 and 500 yards.
I ranged the animals.
I either used hold over or adjusted the elevation turret.
I was prone with a bipod.
I just aimed at the front 1/3 of the animal.
To kill the deer it did not matter 2X or 7X, but I am told that in states where 3 points or better is required on bucks, lots of scope power is needed to see the eye guard spike.
The nice thing about low power it that the exit pupil is large for shooting in dim light. The best hunting for me is before dawn.
 
I will tell you 2 very nice feature of fixed power scope

1) light weight... I recently mounted a leupold fixed power 2.5x20mm scope on a 30-30, and the combined weight of the scope, rings, and bases was 9.5 ounces. A couple of years ago I mounted a Nikon 1-4X20mm scope on an AR-15, and the combined weight was 15 oz. Both scopes are similar in size with a 20 mm objective lens.

2) optical quality for the price. A $200 fixed power scope with have the optical quality of a more expensive variable power... probably equivalent to a $350 scope.
 
I believe there are no standard rifle/scope combo's...

Boomer58cal said:
My dad was always a big fan of 4 power scopes and I'd have to agree 4 power is plenty for 90 percent of hunting.
Click to expand...
Your dad must have sounded just like my dad, except instead of 4 power mine said "no one needs more than a K4". Weavers were THE scope around here at the time....LOL

To respond to the OP's question, I believe that it is not so much that the standard has changed but that there no longer is a standard. Our rifles are specialized & what we hunt, where we hunt & how we hunt is something that has expanded for most of us. Different rifles, different scopes & a variable just adds a bit more flexibility.

As a kid I'd read Outdoor life & Remchester was always advertising their latest bolt gun & the gun writers were pushing a .30-06 with a nice 3x-9x Redfield for the ultimate hunting rig. The dream they painted was that you spent the weekend shooting prairie dogs (at 9x of course) then jumped on a plane & flew to the Northpole & shoot your polar bear with a big fat 220gr corelok (at 3x of course). You being such an astute rifleman bought the one perfect gun & scope for everything!....LOL

Most hunters would scoff at my ideal whitetail rifle at 10lbs+ but it has proven itself to be perfect for what, where & how I hunt. If someone wants to take me on a mountain sheep hunt, I'll probably go out & buy a new feather weight to add to my arsenal!!! To each his own.:)

...bug
 
Bumble Bug, you sound like me. The rifle I hunt whitetails with most of the time is a heavyweight Coyotee with a Bushnell 6500 4.5-30 X 50 Mil Dot.
 
Most of my deer hunting these days is on private Texas ranches. As a guest & friend I'm usually hunting "culls". I have to be exact on the deer I target as to age & horn configurations. I also shoot a few non-trophy axis deer which have a body mass similar to a big muley so I need a "for-sure" deer cartridge. Seldom do I shoot over 150 yds.

My ideal rifle for this is a Hart heavy-barreled Rem 700 .270 Win with a 6x-20x Leupold. Some call this type of rig a "Bean-field Rifle" or "Sendero rifle". I haven't weighted it, but I wouldn't want to carry it around all day! I use the big scope to really study the deer. Of course I use binoculars, but the Leupold really is helpful & a joy to watch game through.

The last buck I shot was a 7 point, 6 year old with no brow tines. He was standing between two young 140+ class bucks!

...bug
 
I am a big believer in being able to see as clearly as is reasonably possible. So a bigger scope with more light gathering capability and better magnification or better zoom is a real plus in my book for many (not all applications). I find it much easier to aim at a specific spot on an animal if the magnification is sufficient that the crosshairs aren't actually covering several square inches.

Using a rifle scope as primary optic observation tool results in pointing yourrifle at targetsthat have not been identified.(Sometimes this is why folks like big scopes)
Click to expand...

This sort of reminds me of the comment that if you put a light on your gun that everything illuminated by the light is something you are pointing AT when that just isn't true.

A competent person can look through a scope at a distant object without actually pointing a rifle AT that object.

For example, at 3:14 in this video...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DyU1p4uM0xM
...the shooter is aiming at a specific target, and yet as you can see, you can see several other targets in the FOV at which the shooter is not pointing his rifle. The image is the scope view (via a digital DVR jacked into the scope) from the soon-to-be released Sightmark Photon digital day/night 5x scope.

Just because you can see something in the scope does not mean your rifle is pointed at that object unless you point your rifle at that object.
 
Toney said:
Ain't no amount of power will make you a better shot.
Click to expand...

Unless I am at a bench, higher magnification makes me a worse shot in that I indulge the reflex to make small corrections and time the sear break. Off hand, I am better with low magnification.
 
trends

Yeah, there is definitely a trend to higher magnification and big tubes, big objectives. And a definite push in the hunting media towards "long range" hunting.

I hunt with some youger fellows who have never heard of a fixed 6x!!!!!!!
 
As I've gotten older, I can truly appreciate the newer clearer, brighter optics & magnification... & for my everyday shooting at targets, I really like turrets that re-set to zero... but for hunting deer around here ( shotgun zone :mad: ) a 1-4X is plenty... I can however use a handgun during shotgun season in those zones... I hunt with Contenders... I started out with 2-7X handgun scopes, & they were fine for some areas, but then I started hunting on my wife's cousins property, which has public hunting ground on 3 sides, & the deer move too quickly through the thick woods... I switched to a 1-4X, & then the following year went to fiber optic open sights...

so while I can really appreciate the new scopes, as my eyes age... I've gone back to deer hunting with fiber optic open sights... of course Varmint hunting, those high power scopes are nice...

... so it really depends on what you are hunting, how & where you hunt... often the higher power scopes don't help... but other times in different conditions, they are great...
 
I think what it comes down to is most scopes aren't bought for hunting anymore. People are putting together more and more rifles with the intent to shoot a static target at long ranges. I have a 3-9X and I rarely put it over 4 or 5 X in the field. Even that is usually to watch an approaching/crossing target beyond my comfort range.

I can use the 9X on a paper target at 100 yards off a bench though.
 
I don't know. I know that I would rather have a decent 3x9 hunting scope with good clear picture than a crappy barska 6-24x "sniper scope" with illuminated reticules and parallax turret.

I've als heard more times than I can count that the general rule of thumb is 1 zoom for every 100 yards... well I don't know about you but I could not imagine trying to make a 400 yard kill shot on a buffalo, no less a deer or god forbid, a person with a 4x scope...

my own take on the matter is 3X to every 100 yards. I feel perfectly capable of a 400 yard shot if I've got a 12X scope or 300 with a 9x but I would seriously like to see some of the goobers that claim 1X for every 100 yards try to make a 1000 yard shot with a 10x scope, no matter the quality.
 
1X at 100 is going to give you a sight picture roughly equivalent to irons at 100, correct? Irons at 100 seems about right to me. 2x wouldn't be too bad, but more than that and I think it would get more difficult for me personally. For starters, the more magnification the more absurd even the tiniest movement appears. It is easier for me to center the cross-hairs on a target they nearly cover than get past it bouncing around with-in the target.
 
So ,are you saying it is OK for you to point your rifle at me because it is unloaded?
Click to expand...

I'm saying if I was using my scope for spotting purposes and I saw a human I would do the same thing you would do if you put your scope on an animal and noticed a person or object behind it. Move the rifle away from it immediately. I would never put my cross hairs on a human intentionally unless of course he was doing the same to me.

Are you saying it's not safe to look through your scope? How do you use your scope without looking through it? There is always a chance of something being out there. That's why you ID your target and what's behind it before you pull the trigger.

That is the primary reason I choose magnified optics over red dots and open sights for most hunting. The magnification allows you to better ID your target and what's behind it.

Boomer
 
Last edited:
Like it or not, using a scope mounted on a gun to glass the side of a hill has been done since the invention of the scope. Last thing, and I mean, last thing you need is to be looking at the government for more laws regulating what you can do with a firearm. If the gun is unloaded, then its as safe as using binoculars. Common sense has to dictate some practical reasoning here and not feed irrational fears.. Everyone's safety comfort zone is different but you have to be carful about that. Pushing your safty threshold might be viewed as hyper sensitive safety hysteria being bullied by one sportsman onto another and we dont need anymore of that these days. You should never point a loaded gun at anyone but anyone that carries a pistol in a shoulder rig is constantly sweeping people with a loaded gun. We must infer some logic that guns dont just go off and not feed the hysteria of the irrational fears. Knowingly pointing a unloaded gun at another person is more disrespectful than it is unsafe and should always be avoided if you see another hunter in the field of view of the scope.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top