How much power in a scope

R

rebs

New member
I shoot mainly at a club range where the yardage is 50 to 300 yes. I would like to ask what power do you guys recommend? 3-9, 4-12, 4.5-18 ? I think I have figured out that 12power and up need an adjustable objective lose, right or wrong ?
I tried a Nikon 4.5-18 and a Nikon 4-12 and at 100 yes everything was fine, but at any other power either the cross hairs were clear and the target blurred or the cross hairs were blurred and the target clear. A Nikon 4.5-18 I tried when I changed the power the POI changed also. Whatever power you zeroed at you had to leave it on that power or sight it in again at the new power setting. What could I have been doing wrong or is this just the way it is ?
Thank you guys for any help you can give me.
 
At a 100 yard shooting range, I like 40X.

I can hunt deer to 400 yards with 2X. But every deer at 500 yards was 7X ~ 10X.

I have been shooting coons, crows, squirrels, and rats with 1X, but that 1X is focussed, and not a red dot. The Leupold Prismatic is 1X red dot that is focussed, but that is unusual.
 
If you are ONLY bench shooting the higher power the better at any range, but if you are going to hunt with it low power scopes are better. In my opinion the 3 x 9 Leupold is the best all round hunting scope, but there are time when a lower power scope would be better and other time a higher power scope would do better. When setting up for coyotes I often have a 224 TTH with an 8 1/2 x 24X setting on a tripod while holding an AR with a 3 x 9X, set on 3X. I shot the AR to about 250 yards and switch to the 224 TTH beyond that. That scope is set on 8 1/2 X and turned up if I feel I need more.
 
If the rifle is one you are going to hunt with and shoot paper, a 4-16 would do just fine. If you are just going to shoot paper out to 300, then 6 power on the low end won't be a problem, so I'd go with a 6-24. That should do it.

My coyote gun in 220 Swift has a 6.5-20x50 on it, and that's all the scope I need for well out past 300 yards. The 223 has a VX2 in 6-18. The 260 has a 4-16. That's just what I use and those work for hunting, but more power is better if you want to shoot tiny groups at 300.
 
The simple rule of thumb is : the lowest magnification at which you can achieve the desired accuracy, at whatever distance used....is the best.

Magnification magnifies "the shakes", which we all have. The higher the magnification, the harder it is to hold steady on target and the more small movements become disruptive to good accuracy.

Obviously, the more stable the platform from which one is shooting, the better. Higher magnification is far more usable, if the rifle is fired from a stable rest. Off hand, or from an improvised rest, higher than minimal magnification is often counterproductive.

So, if you can achieve "benchrest" competition accuracy at 1000 yards with 2X, then that is what you should use. Obviously, few of us (or none) could ever do that. By the same logic, shooting off hand at 100 yards, using 12X is probably not going to work at all.

Everyone has got to figure out what works for himself/ herself, in this regard. The rule I use for myself is just enough magnification to produce a 50 yard APPARENT viewing distance. In other words, for 50 yards.... 1X. For 100 yards....2X. 200 yards.....4X. 300 yards.....6X, etc. etc. Of course, compromises must be made, based on the magnification range available.

So, if I were to suggest a single scope type for 0 to 300 yard shooting, with the flexibility to use the same scope for hunting as well as target shooting.... I'd go with something like 2 - 7X, or perhaps 3 - 9X. Frankly, 18X, even at 300 yards, is a bit counterproductive, in my opinion. Others may disagree - and that is fine.

As for zero point changing with changing magnification, that is a function of TWO issues. One, the QUALITY of the optic. Two, the overall magnification range of the optic. It is very difficult to engineer a scope that has a magnification range of 4.5 - 24X to NOT have enough optical error built in so that zero won't change with magnification change. This issue is less difficult with a range of 2 - 7X, however. The result is that high-powered scopes, if of any real quality, will be expensive. So, if you decide on a high magnification scope with a really wide magnification range, you'd better plan on spending A LOT. Adjustable objectives are useful for long range shooting, not so much for only a couple of hundred yards. AO allows parallax to be adjusted. Most non- AO scopes have parallax set for 100 yards, which is good enough for shooting from 0 - 300 yards.

Anyway, the choice is yours. Whatever you choose, I do recommend buying the best quality optic you can, which is not necessarily the most expensive. But, if you spend only $100, as regards optics, you'll only get junk. Don't scrimp on scope bases and rings, either.
 
Last edited:
For me, I like a 4-12x50 Leupold. Now some people will say that a lower power and smaller opjective can do just as well. I'll beg to differ on that one. Set up a 3-9x40 and 3-9x50 from same company of good quality in really low light, I'm talking borderline dark, and see who can still see. For that reason, I like bigger objective lens. For up to 300yds, a x12 will be fine. Just because it can go to x12 doesn't mean you have to use it there. Mine mostly stay around 5-8. But to have that extra magnification on standby is a comforting feeling for me.
 
I tried a Nikon 4.5-18 and a Nikon 4-12 and at 100 yes everything was fine, but at any other power either the cross hairs were clear and the target blurred or the cross hairs were blurred and the target clear.
Click to expand...

I have had the same issue unless the scopes have a side focus or adjustable AO.

I love shooting 22lr but find that even with a side focus, I cannot get everything clear at 50 yards. I have a Leupold VXIII 8.5-25. I have enough magnification to shoot 100yards and can approach target focus from either direction. I still cannot use full magnification at 50 yards and at best must limit magnification to about 12X. I can get the cross hair clear but the side focus will get me to a point where it bottoms out at 50 yards and what clarity you have is what you have. I can only achieve focus from infinity to the hardstop. At one hundred yards I can approach target focus from both directions. Can't do it at 50 yards.

I would love to be able to use more magnification at 50 yards and see just how good the Annie MPR64 is. I have tried other scopes like the Nikon P22 2-7. Nice scopes and preset parallax but I really need more magnification at 50 yards and it seems the only way to get there is with a center fire scope that has some sort of side focus. The adjustables with no side focus are preset to 100 yards and you are SOL at 50 yards unless there is something I am missing.

HTH
 
too much scope????

I'm inclined to state that as a general rule, we tend to "overscope" these days and mount our rifles with optics that approach the Palomar Telescope in size and capability. Knew a guy who had a 50mm lensed scope, of about 4-12x, on a Rem Model 7, as an example. REversed all the engineering that Remington had put into the carbine to make it practical and tidy.

Back in the day, I thought a fixed 12X was a LOT of magnification on my varmint rifle, and any groundhog within the cartridges effective range was in some danger. The biggest hindrance on hitting that pig was wind and range estimation, seeing the critter and obtaining a good sight picture was not an issue.

Likewise, when I dabbled in F-T/R, till I got to the point where I felt I couldn't afford the overall cost, I took that same fixed 12X back to 600 yards on the NRA F-T/R target, (different rifle) and had no trouble holding on the 10-ring (6 inches) The trick to good scores was me as a shooter/reloader, and the wind, again. My goal at those shoots was not to finish last, I was no threat to any accomplished shooter.

I don't think more X-power would have helped my hit ratio or scores in either instance. Sure a benchrester/match shooter can use plenty of Xpower, so to an F-class shooter going to 1000 yds or more. (bought a 6-24x when I shot a bit at 1000), but I can't fathom needing more than 10x on any big game rifle, and 16X for an open country varminter.
 
Thank you guys for all the replies, I appreciate it.
I returned the Nikon 4.5 - 18 x 40 and bought a Nikon 3.5 - 14 x 40 with side focus. The BDC reticle is much finer and it states in the owners manual that the cross hair holds constant zero at any magnification and only the BDC circles change when the magnification is changed. I'll post more after I get to the range with it.
 
I just remembered... with a Burris 8.5x32x44 I could see my 223 holes in the target at 200 yards.

My friend hunting in WA state needed 3 point bucks. He had to have 14x to see the little eye guard horns.
 
I used to be happy with 9x for bench shooting, now I really hate it with anything under 18. You'll find out quick that the smaller you aim the smaller you group. I would run a 200 power scope if I could. Ideally I hope to afford something over 24x or higher in the future, but scopes are really pricey, a lot will depend on your budget.
 
I got the new scope mounted and tried it out, I like it. Its a Nikon 3.5-14x40 with BDC. The BDC is finer than the 18x was. With the side focus everything is clear and sharp. This one seems to be a keeper
 
Rule of small-mid game hunting-thumb (for me) is 4X base-lined at 100.

After that:

Code: 
100Yd	4	
200Yd	8	
300Yd	12	
400Yd	16	
500Yd	20
 
I Taylor the scope to the rifle, ilimkts of the cartridge, and its intended purpose...

Tilka T3 .308 - Hunting Rifle - 4-12x40 Leupold with duplex reticle.
CZ 527 7.62x39 - Carbine brush gun - 1.25-4x24 Leupold with firedot German #4 reticle
Savage 10 .308 - 18" barrel target rifle - 6.5-20x44 Vortex with mildot reticle
Savage 12 LRP 6.5 Creedmoor - long range target rifle - 6-24x50 Mil illuminated reticle
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top