Match my Tikka to a scope

W

Waterengineer

New member
OK, I just got a really nice Tikka T3 in .270. My expected uses are Mulies/Elk in open country upto about 225 yards (about my responsible distance limit) I with do some experimenting with cartriges but with my old .270 I was liking boattails in 150 and 180.

Please make recomendations for a scope. I'm will to go mid-range but not crazy money.

Thanks ahead of time - Craig
 
Are you talking about 130 and 150 grain bullets? I know Barnes used to make some 180 grain Orginals, but they have since dropped that grain of bullet. I know Hawk makes some custom 170's but I don't know of any 180's out there for the .270 Win any more. I'd stick to 130 grain for deer, but since you added elk to the mix then I'd use the 150 for both.

Leupold VX-II 4-12X40 if you want a little more top end power, a 2-7X33 or 3-9X33 Ultralight if you want to keep weight down. I don't know if that is your idea of a mid range scope or not but I'd consider those mine. I use an old Bushnell Sportview 3-12X40AO on my .270 Win. I keep saying I'm going to replace it when it quits working, but hasn't yet nor are there any signs of it ever failing on me.
 
I think that Leupold is a very good mid-range scope. Around $300, you get a good scope. I believe that I'd opt for a 4x12 over a 3x9 if I were taking long shots.

Best -
 
I'm gonna stay with my notion that field of view is a lot more important than magnification when deer hunting. And I know from experience that 3X worked just fine for me on a 350-yard buck, once upon a time.

Most any decent fixed 4X will meet NEED. You don't need a bunch of magnification to look that buck over to see if you want him. You've been making that judgement with your binoculars, right?

Don't misunderstand: I think folks oughta get whatever they think they want. No problem. But there's a ton of difference between "need" and "want". It's just that from my experience in messing with Bambi, these high-end, high-power scopes are like cocaine: God's way of telling you that you have too much money.

However, gotta give credit to Leupold, Nikon, et al, for making decent 3x9s in the $200 price range...
 
Taylor - yep your right

Taylor:

Yes you are right: 130/150 grain. Who knows what I was thinking about. I was spacing out, I guess!

Also, thanks to everyone for the ideas.

- Craig
 
I just got one of those new Winchester Featherweight M-70s in 270. I'm gonna put the luppy fixed 6 X on it. I like fixed powers for hunting guns.

But thats just me.
 
I have a 6X Burris on one T3 and a 3x9 Redfield on the other T3. I'm kinda partial to the 6X. Seriously for 200yd shots about anything in the 4X and up will work just great.
elkman06
 
I'm putting a Leupold VXII 3-9x33 ultralight on my T3 lite (30-06) to keep the weight down (it will be here any day), I don't have experience with this particular scope yet, but I will soon. I have a Leupold VXII 4-12x40 on my long range rifle and love it; my buddy has a Leupold VXII 3-9x40 on his T3 lite (300 wm) and really likes it. Sorry, I don't have experience with other brands of scope, bought a Leupold Rifleman once and have stuck to the brand since.
 
Art Eatman wrote:
I'm gonna stay with my notion that field of view is a lot more important than magnification when deer hunting.... (snip)
Most any decent fixed 4X will meet NEED.
Click to expand...

Exactly. And overall, optical quality (brightness, quality of lens coatings, how much of the field of view is actually sharp...) is more important than magnification. For a given amount of money, the optical quality of a fixed-magnification scope will likely be better than that of a variable-mag one -- the fixed-mag scope is mechanically simpler, so more of the value of the scope is in the quality of the lenses.

That said, I put a Leupold VX-I on my T3, and I'm very happy with it. It could be brighter in low-light conditions, but it more than does the job.
 
I put a Scheel's 3.5-10x42 on my Tikka T3 Hunter Stainless, and I love the scope. That being said, If I had been able to spend more than $200 on glass I would have opted for the Zeiss Conquest that was previously mentioned. Absolutely wonderful rifle scope. Very clear, and the light gathering ability of the scope is phenomenal.
 
Both my Sako hunting rifles have Leupold 3x9 x40 scopes. I have to admit the majority of game taken with either rifle has seen the scopes set on 4x. Occassionally when culling feral goats, I have to take cross canyon shots of up to 400 yards. This is where I like the option of dialling up 9x. I find any more power than 9x on a scope magnifys my inability to hold a rifle perfectly still. Scopes with higher power than 9x are also more prone to heat mirrage,& critical eye relief in my experience.
 
Last edited:
I vote for the Leupold 2.5-8X scope with 36mm objective. Perfect size and weight for this rifle. Not too big or too small. The perfect all around scope.
 
I don't like BIG scopes. I picked up a Busnell Elite 3200 Short Action with Rainguard. The standard length would work nice for you. I got the 3-10x40mm, but you could go with the 4-12 if needed.

The Nikon Pro Staffs are hard to beat too.
 
I've got a Bushnell elite 3200 3X9X40 and it's good. I have a Burris Fullfield 2 3X9X40 and I like the view through it better. I think the optics are a little better. I have a Leupold 4.5X14X40 VXIII but really can't compare it since it's a higher end scope. I will say it's excellent but so is the Fullfield. You can't beat the Leupold warranty but for the money I wouldn't hesitate to buy another Burris. It all comes down to how you like looking through it and how much money you have. I would definitely look through a Burris and see what you can get for a reasonable price. Nikon is great too and so is Pentax. If you want a scope that will last a lifetime buy a Leupold. In any case, 3X9 is plenty for longer shots than 225 yards on larger animals.

That said, more animals have probably been killed with 4X fixed scopes than any other.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top