Rifle vs scope balance

new normal

The old standby 3x9x40mm is now probably overshadowed by the 4x12x40mm. The 4x12 family is likely the new normal.

If one can use the extra magnification, why not? As long as the objective bell does not get on the overly large size, the 4x12x40's I've looked at seem OK.

I'm not so sure that most of us need 30mm or larger tubes, or objective bells much larger than 42-44MM. And in my mind, an AO just adds more weight and bulk on a hunting scope, used to distances around 300 -400 yds, and requires a higher set of rings to boot. I'm of the same opinion on target/varmint turrets too. Avoiding all that hardware, and keeping the objective bell a reasonable size, will go a long way to keep scope weight and bulk down.

Note I am referring to a big game scope and not a target, varmint, tactical rig.
 
My youth compact Weatherby Vanguard 2 in 7mm08 wears a Leupold VX2 2-7x33 compact scope, and my lighter Kimber 84M wears a Zeiss 3-9x36 which is a little heavier scope. I started out the other way around and weight wise, this now seems to feel more suitable to both rifles. Good luck with your choice. I have a short LOP and like also to keep a scope as low on the rifle as practical.
 
If I was going to add weight to a rifle/scope package, it would go into the barrel not the scope. Plenty of small(er) scopes capable of handling the needs of a lightweight hunting rifle.
 
Back
Top