Rifle Scopes

Status
Not open for further replies.
Everyone gets to have their own preference.
A 340 Savage is a trim,no-nonsense 30-30 hunting rifle.
The OP gentleman has made it to his 70's using iron.
Light,simple,optically forgiving,low cost,rugged,and NEVER twisted to the wrong power,a good used Weaver,Leupold,or Redfield,or other good quality 2.5 to 4x fixed power scope makes sense.

Folks,I'm using a 2.5x Lyman Alaskan on my 1903A4 clone for antelope this year,post and crosshair reticle.

For at least 50 years,a Weaver K-4 has been perfectly adequate scope on a 30-06 elk rifle.

Please explain to me the practical application for 9x to 10x on a 30-30 deer hunting.

With reasonable quality optics,a 4x scope will see well enough to shoot prairie dogs at 200 yds,no problem.How would it be inadequate for deer at less than 200 yds?

I'm not saying "buy this scope",its just one of several options
http://www.ebay.com/itm/REDFIELD-FRONTIER-VINTAGE-4X-RIFLE-SCOPE-/190899754405?hash=item2c728315a5

Mount and ring option

http://www.midwayusa.com/product/14...tyle-scope-base-with-1-rings-savage-340-matte

Brand new lifetime warrantee Weaver k-4 Classic

http://www.midwayusa.com/product/17...ries-rifle-scope-4x-38mm-dual-x-reticle-matte
 
Last edited:
Let me reword that Reynolds. I meant a low power as apposed to a high power scope. 3-9 has been the go to for ????30 plus years. I would bet it is the most common scope power in history. Ranging any where from BB guns to 22, to high power deer rifles.
 
Everyone gets to have their own preference.
A 340 Savage is a trim,no-nonsense 30-30 hunting rifle.
The OP gentleman has made it to his 70's using iron.
Light,simple,optically forgiving,low cost,rugged,and NEVER twisted to the wrong power,a good used Weaver,Leupold,or Redfield,or other good quality 2.5 to 4x fixed power scope makes sense.

Folks,I'm using a 2.5x Lyman Alaskan on my 1903A4 clone for antelope this year,post and crosshair reticle.

For at least 50 years,a Weaver K-4 has been perfectly adequate scope on a 30-06 elk rifle.

Please explain to me the practical application for 9x to 10x on a 30-30 deer hunting.

With reasonable quality optics,a 4x scope will see well enough to shoot prairie dogs at 200 yds,no problem.How would it be inadequate for deer at less than 200 yds?
Click to expand...

Well stated my friend. I once witnessed a gentleman shoot a groundhog at a measured 600 yds with a 4x scope! Not saying he could repeat it again but the fact of the matter is he was aiming at it and hit it. That scope was a Weaver K4 and he could see the woodchuck through the scope and make the shot. This Hubble envy is out of control. More power doesn't make you shoot better. At a certain point, for hunting, it's not only useless, it's detrimental.
 
Well stated my friend. I once witnessed a gentleman shoot a groundhog at a measured 600 yds with a 4x scope! Not saying he could repeat it again but the fact of the matter is he was aiming at it and hit it. That scope was a Weaver K4 and he could see the woodchuck through the scope and make the shot

Ummm Ahhh. OK. This was a 4 power scope?. Could see the chuck at 600 yards?. Was aiming at it?. Umm- Not sure I can choke that one down. Must have been one BIG chuck out there. Crosshairs must have covered the whole thing.:eek:
Buy hey-Anything is possable i guess.:D
 
Last edited:
Well stated my friend. I once witnessed a gentleman shoot a groundhog at a measured 600 yds with a 4x scope! Not saying he could repeat it again but the fact of the matter is he was aiming at it and hit it. That scope was a Weaver K4 and he could see the woodchuck through the scope and make the shot

Ummm Ahhh. OK. This was a 4 power scope?. Could see the chuck at 600 yards?. Was aiming at it?. Umm- Not sure I can choke that one down. Must have been one BIG chuck out there. Crosshairs must have covered the whole thing.
Buy hey-Anything is possable i guess.
Click to expand...

You're believing it or not isn't a requirement as to whether or not it's true. There are competitors shooting open sights (Soule and Vernier) with single shot black powder rifles at 600 yds and getting six inch groups. You need to get out more or become better informed. Right now, your opinion is just that, your opinion.
 
Let's step back a bit, gentlemen.

It never ceases to amaze me how the silliest things end up personal.


Like the scope you like and explain why. If someone else disagrees, let them disagree. What the hell difference does it make to you?:rolleyes:
 
Take a pill buddy. Yes my opinion is just that. I did not say he did not do it either. I simply said I have a hard time choking it down. Read what I said not what you want to.:D
I have seen some amazing shots in my life also, So lets let it ride and enjoy the weather.
 
I know you can kill deer with a 4X scope. But, I like 9X or !0X myself if hunting open fields. You can tell a lot more about the quality of a buck.
And no I am not going to tote binoculars around, look all over the place or even at most deer through a scope, or mistake another hunter for a deer or elk.
 
Hit a chuck at 600y with a 4 power.

Any one can do that on a good day with the wind and wobble just right to correct the error of you aim. But doing it twice on the same day might a problem.

But then a chuck standing is about as big as a five gallon bucket so I might be able to hit that twice.

Buck
 
Yep, it's fashionable to use huge, heavy variable power rifle scopes, a fashion i have not fully bought into.

With the exception of some US sniper rifles with Unertl scopes; all the military sniper rifles of WWII used scopes of four power or less.
 
application for 9x to 10x on a 30-30 for deer hunting.

Agree a 4 power and even open sights on a 30-30 can make a clean shot with putting the bullet in the top side of a coffee cup size (or less) at 100 yards or so.

But the higher power can get the bullet closer and one can get a better look the deer to be sure it is the one you want.

My friend would make (re-load) a 30-30 bullet that was good for 200 yards.

We still use a 30-30 with the 4 power weaver and it gets deer.
 
I don't care for the 30 mm tube 56 mm objective scopes. I guess if you were trying to hunt by moonlight.....

The 40 or 42 mm 3X9's and 3.5 X10's aren't much bigger than a 4 X .
 
I personally like decent powered scopes. A 3-9 (2-10, whatever) isn't too big and still gives good options, especially for someone with aging eyes who might want a bit more power at times.

But, yeah, it really comes down to his shooting conditions and preference. If he keeps it within 100yds, a 4x is probably plenty for hunting. If he likes to go out farther or punch paper at the range, the option of 9 or 10x may come in handy while not costing too much more in weight. Needed? Of course not. Useless? Again, of course not.
 
I personally like decent powered scopes.
Click to expand...

As if a 4X was ........ indecent?

A 3-9 (2-10, whatever) isn't too big
Click to expand...

Too big is relative, and subjective.

A fast handling carbine loses much of it's fast handling and balance when you put a tall scope on it that may weigh 20% as much as the gun .....
 
Now you're purposely just getting into semantics. But you're right, it all is relative. I'd assume Perleyu isn't exactly going for a "fast handling" AR setup, so shaving a few ounces may or may not be that much of a factor. However, since he hasn't weighed back in while everyone's saying why everyone else's opinions are wrong, I guess no one really knows what aspects most suit his needs or what concessions he's willing to make.
 
I'd assume Perleyu isn't exactly going for a "fast handling" AR setup,
Click to expand...

You are showing your youth, Rika- I typed "carbine" and you immediately assumed "AR" .... Kids these days ...... but then I am showing my age, as I saw "30-30, and assumed "light levergun" ....

The OP has a Savage 340, if understand things .... those were designed with irons in mind, and have a lot of drop to the stock. They also have no bridge at the rear of the reciever ....... like a Mosin ...... putting a scope on it requires a goofy side mount ..... and a fairly high one, to allow the bolt to clear .... OR ..... a scout mount .... either way, he's going to need a comb raising dealy to see through his scope and still maintain a good cheek weld...
 
I have never owned or fired a Savage 340.Iirc,what is unique about them,the barrel and receiver are not separate.The details of the receiver are machined directly into the barrel.I do not think I have seen one in 30 years,I'm thinking they are like a Mannlicher,bolt handle ahead of the rear bridge,rear bridge is split for bolt pass through.

I agree,getting the scope low enough /comb high enough is probably an issue.

IF(big word,if) 7/8 rings were common,I have a pretty high opinion of that old Lyman Alaskan.They are expensive,old,and an irrational choice,but,IMO,about perfect for the application.
 
Optics planet have Bushnell 3-9x40 trophy for sale at $72 (after rebate). I now have high end European or Leupold scopes on all my rifles, but I originally used a Bushnell trophy scope for well over 10 years with no complaints.
 
I've killed literally hundreds of woodchucks in my life, probably over 1000. If I ever saw one that was 1/2 the size of a 5 gallon bucket I'd run the other way!

My thoughts also. The ones I see standing are maybe 5 inches wide and a foot tall.

But to the OP-- A low power scope is fine for deer hunting. What ever power you pick will work just fine.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top