Scope recommendation for coyotes

For years I used nothing but Leupold scopes. Then I decided to try a Burris Fulldield II, and I liked it so much I bought another one. JMR40 is right, in that it’s a lot of scope for the money.

And I bought a couple of Vortex Viper PST FFP scopes, and I like them just fine, but the next scope I buy will be a Leupold. It will be a VX5 3-15 CDS, with the variable intensity Illuminated dot. And for the record, the illuminated crosshairs on the Vortex Vipers are too bright even at lowest intensity and wash out the deer/coyote/hog.
 
You might take a look at this scope: Bushnell Custom Gold 1.5-6X32 Bushnell has a good warranty and Camera Land will stand behind every product they sell, so if you have issues you can get help from them as well. I have no experience with this optic, but Camera Land has always been great and I'll try just about anything they sell if I have a need for it.

I like low powered optics with illumination on AR rifles. If the target is inside 100 yards just put the dot on hand squeeze the trigger, no need to come off the lowest power setting. If the coyote hangs up out there a few 100 yards then dialing up to 6X is capable of handling that.

I use a SWFA SS 1-4 on my AR and really like it. However, I didn't know if you wanted to go that low of power. I usually wait until the Tax Day or Black Friday sales to buy SWFA optics.
 
Last edited:
I have mostly Leupold VX2 3-9x scopes on my rifles, but that model is being phased-out. You might still be able to find one at about $300 on-line.

Scope power has little to do with accuracy. Hard to believe, but the aiming error, apart from parallax, is nearly the same from 2X to 20X.

If you're not used to scopes, make sure to get one that has it's lower power at 2X or 3X. Upper power for general hunting can be 7 or 9X, but a 20X is not worth using for general hunting. It is also too much power for many weather conditions, especially heat waves. They're usually a lot bulkier and heavier.
 
Its your money, buy what makes you happy. Lower power is better for moving targets.

Since getting the Internet, I've read a lot of people saying "you should spend at least as much on the scope as you do on the rifle".

I think the guy who created that saying made scopes or made money from selling them.

Half a century of hunting, my "expensive" scopes were old steel Weavers, and if it cost 1/4 what the rifle did, it was "expensive".

I never missed any shot because of the scope.
 
Although it may seem odd i put a 3-9x PFI 22 Long Rifle Rapid Reticle on my AR (www.rapid reticle.com). I just recald. the reticle to the trajectory of my load. I'm shooting the JLK 65 Low Drag at about 3050 mv. IMO, it's one of the finest reticles/optics i've used in it's price range for intermediate-range shooting.
 
I'm in the market for a couple scopes myself and to say Im confused is putting it mildly. I
wish someone would do a book or at least a major article on the brand names now on the
market. Some of these are not worth the box they come in. What is the best mid priced
scopes and what brands to avoid altogether. I need 4 low powers for 44-375w & 45/70.
Staight powers are hard to come by in this class, they have been premoted to Safari scopes
with like price tag. I have been thinking about NIKON or Burris.
 
I'm as happy with my now-good-used Leupold Vari-X IIs as I was back when they were new, forty years ago. Even bought a used one, fifteen years back, for $150. Same for used Weaver K-4s.
 
The new Redfield scopes are worth a look. Put one on the grandson's new rifle over the weekend and it is very nice and clear.
 
I had a 2.5X Weaver on my first rifle, a Savage 30-06. The only deer that I shot with it was over 200 yards and running up a hill in a hay field. Shot a lot of woodchucks using that rifle/scope, from 15 to 500 yards.

Today, I only want 3-9x on my hunting rifles and they're all Leupold VX2. In the fields I carry the rifle with the scope usually set on 6X, 3X in the woods, and 9X on the range. If a deer is spotted in the woods and I don't have an Any-Deer Permit, I turn the scope power up to see antlers, if they're not visible at 3X.

JP
 
Last edited:
I don't believe you can go by CLEAR. I have over a dozen KWeavers that I removed from rifles the last couple years. Most of these Weaver had been on
same rifle since bought new in 60s. I have more rifles & shotguns with KWeavers
on them from same era. They were top shelf back then. I would not hesitate to
use one of these scopes today. The thing is because of advances in optics even
some of the Chinese junk is brighter than scopes from 60s.
 
I've been talking to a few of my buddies that do a lot of hunting in the same areas I will be, and they all have said that the vast majority of their kills are at 250+ yards, and it's not uncommon to be making kills at the 4-500yard range. I'll also be picking up a bipod, and we do a lot of calling to bring them in to us. That being said, I think I'm going to look for something with a wide range of adaptability to it.

I really like the idea of having the drop compensation of the leupold mark AR and the nikon coyote special have to them for the 5.56 load, although I don't know how accurate the compensation will be at longer distances.
I'm heavily considering the both of them (the mark AR in the 4-12, and the nikon in the 4.5-14) or a used VX3 in 4.5-14), and keep leaning to the mark AR.

Any experience with mounts/rings in the sub $60 range?
I just want something that won't move on me once I have it dialed in. I'm not planning on removing the scope once it's set.
 
I'm not at all saying "better", but Weaver mounts have never given me a problem on many rifles through quite a few decades. Very reliable, including several thousand rounds of .30-'06.
 
I’ve used Warne, Weaver and Bushnell rings and mounts. I’ve never had a problem with any of them, except odd coloring on a set of “silver” Warne.
 
I've had three Leupolds go belly up on me. Two at the range and one in the field. Sent them back and they were always repaired free of charge. The one that went out in the field almost cost me my elk. Shot was 350 yards laser measured by the guide. I knew where my rifle, a custom Mauser in .35 Whelen would hit at that distance and held accordingly. I shot and the elk went down. Imagine my surprise when what should have been a moderately high lung shot resulted in a broken neck literally at the base of the skull. Nonetheless I did get my elk. A few days after the hunt I took the rifle to the range as missing by that much bothered me. Well, there wasn't a group, just a pattern. I sent the scope back to Leupold and it came back repaired. The accompanying form said they literally had to replace all the windage and elevation parts.
The affected rifle now wears a Burris FF II as does my .280 Rem. Mauser. The one on the .35 Whelen has been in use for at least five years now. I like it.
Paul B.
 
I like mounts that use Weaver bases and if going on an expensive hunting trip, would zero two scopes, preferably Leupolds. If your backup scope is reliable and has similar characteristics, it may be okay to have a different make, but would be better for them to be the same.

It may also be a good idea to bring a bore sighter to determine whether that bump the rifle took has thrown the scope off.
 
Unless you're a struggling Fudley McGoo, with the eye-sight of your average nocturnal mole, you don't need more than a 2x-7x optic to hunt coyotes. :rolleyes:

East of the Mississippi, a 1x-6x would suffice for shooting most 'yotes drawn in by a FoxPro-type call.

Out west on longer shots, maybe a 3x-9x is appropriate, ... but that's really stretching the necessary magnification for 'yotes, and only if you're an old fart with eye issues. :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
“Suffice”, “need” and “necessary” aren’t always the determining factors. Some of us simply like more magnification. I’ve got a 5-25 on my deer rifle... and most shots are within bow range. Only a few are ever 100 yards.
 
Last edited:
Magnification and light

As the magnification goes up, the light goes down. I thus like my 9 X scopes to be at least 44 mm objective.
3 X 9 X 44 works well for me. I also like the made in Japan Bushnell's.

The rainguard coating is a godsend here in the PNW.
 
I'm in the market for a couple scopes myself and to say I'm confused is putting it mildly. I wish someone would do a book or at least a major article on the brand names now on the market.
Click to expand...

Yeah, each manufacturer has so many different product lines, it makes it hard to know if you're comparing one maker's entry level cheapie vs. another maker's top tier line. I found this article very helpful when I dug into this subject:
https://www.chuckhawks.com/recommended_riflescopes.htm
 
"...any decent 3-9X40 scope will do..." So will any other scope. The size of the objective lens only matters in low light.
"...other than weight..." Higher magnification variables just tend to be heavier and bigger.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top