Scope help please

E

Erich

New member
Anyone have opinions on these choices?
[Rifle is a Marlin 1895ss in .45/70; intended purpose is hunting mule deer (up to 200 yds) and elk (up to 150 yds).]

Choice 1:
2.5X fixed vs. 1.5-4.5X variable

Choice 2:
shotgun scope (parallax fixed at 50 yds) vs. regular scope

Choice 3:
Tasco vs. Simmons vs. Bushnell vs. BSA

thanks,
erich
 
Erich,
You're having trouble getting a response on this, eh? I saw you're post a while back and thought I'd leave it for more expert comment, but no go, so here goes.

Given your stated choices makes my choice very simple:
1) I would go with the variable. However, I would choose a 3-9X if your 200 yd. goal is accurate.

2) No choice here. Get a regular scope, again based on your 200 yd. statement. And, IMX, a reg. scope can usually take rifle recoil better than a shotgun scope.

3) In order of quality, not necessarily price (and these are only my opinion, I'm experienced with 3 of the 4 brands).
Bushnell
Simmons
Tasco
BSA

The difference between Bushnell and Simmons is small. Simmons may have moved ahead of Bushnell in recent years.

The bottom line is buy the best scope you can afford. It's not at all unusual to pay as much or more for a scope as for the rifle.


[This message has been edited by Mal H (edited August 12, 1999).]
 
Erich. Let's look at a few facts and crunch some numbers.
As far as scopes go, either the 2.5 or the variable is fine. Me? I'd take the 2.5.

Forget the shotgun scope.

As to the scopes you mentioned, if they were your only choice? Tasco, if Japanese made. It looks like most of the Tasco's are made in China now, and I don't know how well they will hold up. Spend the extra money if you can and get a Leupold. That's all I will buy anymore. Bushnell is, in my opinion, JUNK! I have two, and on any rifle with any kind of recoil, they will not stay in zero. The higher priced ones might be OK, but not the Sportviews.
Now we come to the real serious stuff. The 45-70 is not loaded to its full potential in factory ammo. To get what it will do in your rifle, you will have to reload. The 300 Gr. bullet can be loaded to a maximum of 2100 FPS according to the Hornady Manual. It is one hell of a hot load for the Marlin. Using 2000 FPS as a more realistic goal, you are 1.9" high at 100 yds. Dead on at 150 yds. -6.6" at 200. I don't feel the 300 gr. bullet is adequate for elk. For elk, you need a heavier bullet. I have never used the 350 gr. Hornady, but I have heard that the crimping groove (cannelure) is in the wrong place for the Marlin. This may have changed. You'll have to check that out. All I use in the 45-70 any more are a 330 gr. hollowpoint casst lead bullet and a 400 gr. cast lead bullet, both loaded as hot as I am comfortable with.
For the 400 gr. Speer, you would be 3.2" high at 100 yds, zeroed at 150 yds, and 8.1" low at 200 yds.
These numbers come from the latest Speer and Hornady loading manuals.
If you decide on the 300 gr. bullet for deer and then go for elk with the 400 gr. bullet, you will have to re-sight in as the points of impact will be radically different.
I have the first version of the "new model" 1895 Marlin and it's a real fun gun from the bench with that curved buttplate. I just use a peep sight on mine and sight in 3 inches high at 100 yard. I also limit my shots to 150 yards tops with that rifle. I could probably stretch that another 50 yards or so, but what the heck. I like to sneak up on them.
Hope I helped.
Paul B.
 
We're not going to start "scope wars" here :), but I have to take exception to Bushnell scopes being JUNK. The Sportview is their bottom of the line and probably won't hold up to anything more than 22 WRM at best. I have a Bushnell Banner that hasn't lost zero in over 25 yrs and over 1000 rounds of 22-250. That's certainly not a hard recoil round, but the scope hasn't proven to be junk and it was only their mid-level scope at the time. I think all scope mfgs have gone the way of little or no quality control, with several exceptions, Leupold, Swarovski, Nikon, etc. The four scope mfgs in the choices given are in the low QC set and therefore relatively low cost. However, if you buy the top of the line from any of them, you'll probably have a good scope.
 
Mal. I did not buy the Bushnells in question. They came on rifles I bought. In both cases, the owners were honest enough to say they were selling the rifles because they were not accurate. A change in scopes and a chance meeting at the range showed them the error of their ways.
I went looking for a few Tasco 4X scopes.( the cheapie models, as I have have very good luck with them. One is on a .375 H&H.) All the inexpensive Tascos, and even the one World Class 3x9 I found were all made in Red China. I will not buy anything I don't have to that comes from Red China, and the scopes did not seem to have the quality that the Japanese versions had.
At least Leupold is affordable, relatively speaking. Nikons can be found at price a bit above Leupold, here. Zeiss and Swarovski? Like most products from that part of the world, overpriced, over engineered, and overrated. I have compared a Nikon 4x to a Swarovski 4X. I bought the Nikon. It was just as clear and sharp as the higher priced spread, if you get my drift. It was also several ounces lighter in weight. Unfortunately, Nikon dropped it in favor of making more variables.
I agree with you that the Bushnells made say 20 to 30 years ago were pretty good scopes for the money. I had several of them, with no complaints. Seems like none of the local gun shops will carry any of the Bushnells, probably because of the bad rep the Sportview has given them. They will reluctantly order one for you, if you insist. That's good enough for me. I've had fairly good luck with Redfield too. It's too bad they went belly up. For inexpensive scopes, Weaver wasn't bad. I still have one of the first K-4's to come off the line. It was not as bright as some of the later ones, but the adjustments were quite good. 4 clicks moved it exactly one inch. All the Weavers (original, not the Japanese copy imported by Blount)were quite precise in their adjustments. BTW, Olin Corp. dropped Weaver, not because they were losing money, but because they felt they were not making enough. They dropped Winchester Rifles for the same reason. But then, that is the American way. make it as cheaply as possible (preferably in foreign countries with cheap labor at the expense of American workers jobs.) and sell it for as much as they can get away with. If you can't do that, get rid of it.
Sorry for the rant, off my soapbox.
Paul B.
 
Paul, I think your assessments are all right on the money. I still have to laugh when I look at Swarovski prices. They are, without question, fine scopes. But, if you (the public 'you') can't find one that is its optical and mechanical equal for 1/3 the price, then you haven't done your homework.
 
Thanks, guys. Sorry, I would have replied sooner, but I've been floored in bed with a cold since Friday. Much better now.

Well, it's funny Paul mentioned Weavers, because while out looking around at shops yesterday, I ran across a good old American (well, El Paseño . . .) Weaver steel fixed 4X scope, and I picked it up for $45. That's about $100 less than the Japanese "Weavers" are going for new, and there's no way they are the quality of this old gem.

Thanks for your perspectives and help, because I would have bought one of the cheaper Bushnells (and, that's all anyone tried to sell me at the local stores - I told them I was looking to keep it under $150).

cheers,
erich
 
Erich: As a believer in fixed power 'scopes for hunting rifles, I am pleased to see that you found an El Paso Weaver for your 1895. Hopefully it's one of the more recent Microtracs. I think these 'scopes are the sleeper sight bargain of the decade...Weaver doesn't have an enormous rep, so demand for used Microtracs is low...hence prices are very very reasonable. I have three of these on hunting rifles, and they are tough as nails. The only thing that might give you trouble with them is that the cement inside the compound lenses of the eyepiece crystallized on one of mine (the oldest, and one that had apparently been used hard and put away wet.) I think it's because Weaver cemented lens elements with the old style Canada balsam rather than some chemical-miracle goop. It looked like 'lens dandruff'. A trip to the repair service in El Paso, run by an old Weaver guy, straightened that out inexpensively. Weavers are good values, and excellent in overall quality. Heavier than recent scopes though...not the best choice for a featherweight mountain gun. slabsides

------------------
An armed man is a citizen; an unarmed man is a subject; a disarmed man is a slave.
 
Slabsides. I have a very early K-4. So early that the reticle really moves around. The objectives lens has opalized, and I have an early Mauser sporter I'd like to put it on. Do you still have the address of that Weaver repairman?
Thanks.
Paul B.
 
Paul: I sent my old US-made Weaver to:

Weaver Scope Repair Service
1121 Larry Mahan Drive
El Paso, TX 79925

The Phone # is 915-593-1005
If you have a T-series scope the repair place is different:
Optical Services Co.
PO Box 1174
Santa Teresa, NM 88008.
oscscope@aol.com

Hope these addresses help. I can't guarantee they are current...but they were good as recently as a year ago. slabsides

------------------
An armed man is a citizen; an unarmed man is a subject; a disarmed man is a slave.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top