Optics for Elk?

V

V.Hunter

New member
I am just wondering what the preferred riflescope is for Elk. I am not worried about manufacturer, I know what I like, and all I am interested in is configuration.

The conditions I am considering a scope for would be anything from just 50 yards clear out to say 400 yards. I am leaning towards a simple 3-9x40. Let me know what you think and suggest.
 
3-9x or even 2-7x would be plenty. And as much quality as you can afford because it'd be a shame to have your scope fog or lose zero at the exact wrong time after a week in the mountains.
 
And as much quality as you can afford
Click to expand...

That is one of the reasons I am thinking of staying with the 3-9 as you can get a lot more for your money in that configuration.

Thanks for the advice.
 
I'd suggest fixed power, 4x or 6x.

Be a shame to mis-estimate the distance, or size of the critter, or bullet drop placement, because you thought you were on 3x of your 3-9x40 scope but really had it set to 4x.

The size of the intersection point of a fixed 4x scope's fine reticules is probably less than a half minute of angle. That shouldn't obscure the kill zone of an Elk until he's well outside your acceptable ammunition accuracy variation (with 2MOA ammo and an 8" kill zone, that's 400 yards assuming you know your trajectory). That scope crosshair only covers 2 inches of the elk's body at that distance.

Higher magnification just shows you how much your rifle is wobbling (that isn't as apparent at lower magnification) and makes you fuss your shot. Unless you are a super-shooter that can really and truly hold a rifle STILL.

IMO, anything beyond 6x magnification is for guys who can look at a target at 500 yards and not only can they hit an 8" target at that distance.... they can call out that they will hit a particular part of the target (like 12 o'clock on it, halfway up). At that distance, a half MOA reticle intersection will cover 2.5", but increasing magnification from 4x to 12x makes that intersection 1/3 the size, or just over 3/4". If you can't hold a sub-2.5" steady hold at 500 yards, it does no good (if your goal is that type of accuracy).
 
3-9x40. I prefer the smaller tube scope for a hunting rifle. I generally leave it at 3x though it's nice to have the extra power if needed.
 
What you will need is a good 2-7 or 3-9 power scope that works well in low light. As important as the scope is a the best set of Binoculars you can afford. I'd get those in a 8-10 power range and as light weight as you can get them without giving up much field of view. Hunting elk you will spend a lot of time looking through them.

Leupold, Nikon, Bushnell Elite, and Zeiss Conquest would be the scopes I'd look at. Same brands for binos as well. I'd skimp a little on the scope for a better pair of binos as well.
 
Last edited:
Thanks to all.

Taylorce1, I have a pair of Monarch 10x42's that I use for varmint hunting, I think they are a great bino, the best I have used anyway. I've used them for whitetail but find them a little high for some of the woods work that I do. They are more suited for open country, I have often wished that I had bought a smaller set but now I think they will fill the bill nicely for an elk trip.

As far as a scope goes I have a few Leupolds sitting around, 2 2-7's and a 2.5-8 but think I may look into getting a Conquest in a 3-9. The scope is going to be mounted on a Model 70 in 300 WM.

Thanks again guys.
 
Many years back I had my 3x9 set on 3X on the last hunt of the season, and spotted a buck at some 350 yards. One shot, DRT. It all seemed real easy at the time.

By and large, it seems to me that most folks get "over-scoped" as far as a hunting scope for deer and elk. The quality of the glass is probably more important than the magnification.

At age 16, my first '06 sported a Weaver K2.5. I killed a fair number of jackrabbits with it, although probably few beyond a hundred yards or so. I'm not saying I recommend a 2.5X, but it's an example of "need" vs. "want".

I, like many others, buy more scope than I need, just because I can. Doesn't really make me a better shooter, though.
 
Depends........

It doesn't take much power to site and hit an animal the size of an elk. You can almost always tell if it has horns or not if that matters. Depending on the rifle I was using, I've used fixed power 4's, 6's and a variable 2x7, and they all worked fine.

Until.......... I got old, along with my eyes. Hunting in the open spaces of Colorado where long shots were not uncommon and the area was restricted to four points or better I had a difficult time "counting" on a moving target. I know, I know, that's what a good set of binoculars are for. Well, when it's near zero degrees and you're dressed looking like the Pillsbury Doughboy sometimes you just don’t have time to fill your hands with binoculars.

I finally had to change from a 2x7 to a 3.5x10.
 
A quality loopy or nikon in 3x9 or 4x12 is all you will ever need IMO. I like the LR duplex recticule only because of my elevation and terrain. Sometimes I have to take longer shots and a couple of extra references on my recticule for range take the guessing game out.
 
Never hunted deer or elk with anything bigger than a 2.5 x 8 Leupold, the brand is good, but the power is all I need. If 8 power is not enough I need to get closer.
 
10x42 nikon monarches are oustanding with great eye relief you can glass for hours and not have eye strain and for the price they are a superb optic. Good luck be steady and shoot straight.
 
The 3x9 is a standard choice for all around shooting. I have a couple higher magnification scopes in 4.5x14 and a 4x12 but I always end up zooming them back to 6x. I have come to the conclusion that the higher power scopes are extra weight that isn't necesary if you are like me and always end up zooming them back down anyways. I wish I could go backwards and put Leupold FX3 fixed 6x on all of them and save myself the trouble.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top