Scopes and Mounts

[RU shooter]

I'm sure modern higher priced scopes are of great quality and clarity but is it really needed for the majority of most of our hunting needs . For example my families hunting rifles that have been bought mostly in the early 60's all wear low power fixed weavers in weaver rings on weaver bases , dad and grandpap liked weaver ! But anyways all of those scopes are still a good today as when mounted all have taken a spill or two .been in the cold and the wet , Yes in our hunting situations a 200 yard shot is long range . My point is would a 300-1000 dollar top of the line optic and the best mounts and rings I could get make that rifle or hunter any better or kill better . I say no . For me I've never had the extra to buy top shelf but I've never once felt I was handicapped or missed that deer just because I was using a 60 year old 2.5X scope with what's considered by many cheap rings and bases .

Texas by God is that and old weaver 10X we have one very similar to it believe the one we have is an older model

[HangFireW8]

Favorite topic.

I often do load development on a new rifle with a higher power scope, then switch to something in the 1 to 3x range for hunting. Rarely do I ever switch back.

Mainly I am looking for a wide field of view, quick target acquisition, longer eye relief, and something small and sturdy. Going low/fixed power I can also get a better scope for the money. Yes I have paid $3-500 for low power scopes but the high power in the same lineups are $7-900.

My big objection to typical modern 3-9 and 3.5-10x and up scopes is the ocular width no longer clears the bolt. Scopes used to be 1.5" at the rear, then 1.6" and now up to 2" wide, often plus a knobby on the focus or power adjustment. My older rifle bolt handles just don't clear that width. I guess they work fine on top of tacticool rifle.

Variables like 3-9x may seem to be a good compromise, but most at 3x don't have the wide field of view of a fixed 3x or even 4x.

Target shooting at low power is no problem. I put an orange dot on the bullseye and squeeze when it disappears or is quartered under the crosshair.

[Texas by God]

I agree, RU and Hangfire. Yes, that's a 60's model K10. If you get the parallax right it's quite clear. I have a K6 from the 50's that's a little dim and the crosshairs move for zero. The clearest, most precise scope I've ever owned was a Weaver T10. I have modern scopes, too. But I can shoot sub moa groups with 2 different K4 Weavers.
Large ocular bells with instant(easily unfocused) focus rings perturb me. The most expensive scope I own is either a 4x12 Redfield/Oregon or a Burris 6x Fullfield- I can't remember which. So yeah, I get by fine with the cheap stuff.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

[charlie b]

Have you considered a long eye relief scope? I had a TC pistol scope (left over from my Contender days) that my father-in-law mounted on his M1 Garand for the same reason. He could not manage the peep sights anymore. It worked really well. 3x, easy to use with both eyes open, good field of view and it was durable.

You might also consider a red dot, with or without multiplier scope. I have found them to work really well and they are durable. I put a Burris Fastfire III on the slide of my 1911. Even after a lot of battering it worked great. It also survived about 500 rounds on my Python.

[northmn]

I agree, RU and Hangfire. Yes, that's a 60's model K10. If you get the parallax right it's quite clear. I have a K6 from the 50's that's a little dim and the crosshairs move for zero. The clearest, most precise scope I've ever owned was a Weaver T10. I have modern scopes, too. But I can shoot sub moa groups with 2 different K4 Weavers.
Large ocular bells with instant(easily unfocused) focus rings perturb me. The most expensive scope I own is either a 4x12 Redfield/Oregon or a Burris 6x Fullfield- I can't remember which. So yeah, I get by fine with the cheap stuff.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

I forgot about the older scopes with the off center crosshairs if the mount was not installed as straight as it should be. Those old scopes still got us by very well. Sometimes, if one can get one, they complement rifles of the period like the old 99 Savages.

DEP

[Texas by God]

This completely Weaver set up is low as I can go on this SR sporter. It holds zero but I wouldn't use it on a money hunt It's a K6 made before the 40mm obj. came about.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

[white eagle]

good scope are just that good scopes
you can buy a 50.00 scope and put it on your rifle if you want but
I have always bought the best quality scope I could afford at the time
yes good scope do make you a better shot
when you mount a quality glass on your rifle and bring it to your shoulder
and you see the image fill the eye piece and not seem like your looking
through a paper towel tube you appreciate good scopes
been using scopes for years and years won't ever use iron sight on a rifle
with all the competition in scope manufacturer's there are some good deals
on mid priced quality optics
bases and rings I have used picitinny rails lately they seem to get you on zero faster
I like the z-rings as well just mounted a Leupold 1 piece base and their 1"rings on my 06

[northmn]

I like the Picatinny rails better also. They give better adjustment for eye relief. Something I am a bit of a fanatic over. When I shoulder the rifle I don't like to have to adjust for the view, when the rifle is shouldered an my cheek placed the scope should be there and I should not have to slide forward or back to see through it. I removed a recoil pad and replaced it with a butt plate this year to accomplish that.

DEP

[bdicki]

This completely Weaver set up is low as I can go on this SR sporter. It holds zero but I wouldn't use it on a money hunt It's a K6 made before the 40mm obj. came about.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

Even though the two scopes you pictured have plenty of tube they both appear to be pushed as far forward as possible, not a criticism just an observation that the location of the turret is a consideration. This scope mounting has the opposite problem and could stand to move rearward a little bit. Talley one piece base and rings. A picatinny rail would give more adjustment and solve this problem I believe.

[Traffer]

I am budget restricted to the very cheap. I bought a H&R Handi recently in 45/70 for cheap money. It came with a Bushnell red dot trs 25. It looked like it was dirty and when I stated cleaning it (the scope), the paint started coming off showing a camo underneath. The camo came off with just a little rubbing also. So I "stripped" the paint with some acetone. I did a hurry job (thinking it was a $20 scope) and put some scratches in the lens coating. I can't tell when using it but it looks unsightly for if I ever sell it. So I thought about putting a powered scope on it. (I can't see worth a darn anymore) But I really know nothing about scopes...Just figured a cheap scope would probably not hold up the the recoil of the cannon. But I will probably end up finding something for like $30 to put on there. I would suppose I could get some advise here...AGAIN severley budget restricted. Won't pay even $40 for a 3 to 9.

[dverna]

Last year I missed a 275 yard shot on a doe shooting from a decent rest out of an elevated blind. When I later checked the rifle, it was shooting 6" off at 100 yards. During that hunt I had dropped the gun and did not check it as I did not want to screw up the hunt for the other camp members. The scope was a Nikon Buckmasters 4.5-14X.

Lesson learned. My new hunting scope is a Vortex Viper HS 2.5-10X.

Generally more expensive scopes are built better. They will have more mass, better lenses, the lenses will be anchored better, more reliable reticule adjustments, will be more impact resistant, have larger tubes and larger objective lenses. I hunt in northern MI and most of my shots will be under 150 yds so 4X or 1.5-5X would work, but I also hunt power lines where we get longer shots. Our camp has an 8 pt or bigger restriction, so I need more magnification to size up a buck at longer range. Add in that typically we get most of our action on the food plots when the light levels are low.... so having a 30mm tube and large objective is a plus...both will add cost over a basic scope. I will pay for greater clarity, light gathering, reliability and toughness for a hunting scope that I can depend on when it matters. But my varmint and "fun" guns do not need to meet that same standard. Missing a coyote is not the same as missing a 10pt.

BTW, one of the camps close to us fines members/guests $1000 if they shoot a buck that is less than an 8pt unless it has undesirable genetics and needs to be culled!!! Would anyone really want to use a low powered scope with cheap optics in that environment? And at the other end, we have meat hunters that shoot at less than 100 yards, kill whatever crosses their path, wound a few deer along the way, and use Wally World scopes, or iron sights and put deer in their freezers. My point being, everyone has different needs.

Almost every scope comes with a "lifetime warrantee" but that means squat if the POI shifts during an important hunt. Nice to have after the scope has failed.

When buying a scope, decide what YOUR needs are. When asking for advice, be specific and disregard advice from people who have different needs than yours.

Based on your needs, I would get a variable in the $200-300 price range. Something like this below. I just bought one for my son.

https://www.opticsplanet.com/vortex-...dbk-m-01p.html

[Texas by God]

Even though the two scopes you pictured have plenty of tube they both appear to be pushed as far forward as possible, not a criticism just an observation that the location of the turret is a consideration. This scope mounting has the opposite problem and could stand to move rearward a little bit. Talley one piece base and rings. A picatinny rail would give more adjustment and solve this problem I believe.

I posted those photos of the old Weaver Scopes to illustrate how tube length has shortened over the years. I normally move scopes far forward because I have a long neck and I lean into the rifle.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

[bdicki]

I posted those photos of the old Weaver Scopes to illustrate how tube length has shortened over the years. I normally move scopes far forward because I have a long neck and I lean into the rifle.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

I understand and was not being critical, but I've had a problem of not being able to move the scope far enough forward and have come to believe that the picatinny rail offers a better option.

[HangFireW8]

I have that old Simmons shotgun scope. It dates from the 90's and was made in Korea. It has survived countless large caliber high recoil shots.

Then Simmons moved production around and quality went up and down. All the best were discontinued like the Whitetail Expedition. Now the brand is just one of many under one umbrella with no new product introductions in over 3 years and most of their sales are cheap 3-9's in blister packs.

Redfield, or at least the name, had at least 2 owners after the Golden CO original closed before Leupold took them over.

None of this knowledge helps me find a new scope with an ocular under 1.6" that will clear any of my sporterized Mauser rifle bolts, or a main tube long enough for a long action Savage bolt w/o extension rings. Most scope manufacturers don't even publish a full useful set of dimensions, Leupold is the most affordable one that does.

I just bought a Weaver based on published dimensions, but they were a) wrong and b) didn't include the knob on the power adjustment.

I'm guessing 8 straight years of being able to sell any **** that will bolt onto an AR, followed by a general gun market crash, is the reason for this pathetic state of affairs.

[atr]

I have old eyes too...71 yrs...so yes a scope is my best option for accurate shooting.
I tend to match vintage scopes with vintage rifles, but not always. If the rifle itself is capable of sub-MOA, and especially long range shooting then I go for a very high quality scope. I like fixed power scopes with a long eye relief.
I do think the even with old eyes a guy should sometimes practice with open or peep sights.
atr

[Drm50]

I sold about 1/2 my hunting rifles in last 4 or 5 years. I took the scopes and mounts off all them before selling. They were all fixed powers from 21/2x to 16x. I'm glad I kept them. I have several
#3 Rugers that I have picked up since and because of short distance and location of bases/rings a
lot of new scopes won't allow you to position scope for eye relief. Lucky I had older Weavers with
long tubes. I would like to see someone write up a book on the scopes on market now. I have no
doubt of quality of top name brands but am leery of some of new brands. There are a lot of scopes
that a junk at any price. They can fool you just looking through them they are very clear but don't
hold up in the field. I will hunt with irons before I would hunt with cheap scopes.

[northmn]

I would suggest for heavy recoil firearms and a budget price one might consider a shotgun scope. That's what I have on my Marlin 35 R and it has stood up. 4 power was a very common power before variables got popular and 6 power was about tops for longer range big game hunting. 2 1/2 was not unheard of as a "brush scope" so I think some get a bit carried away. I like my 2X7 for deer hunting.

Saying that, Dverna made some good points. After last season I decided to keep my 2X7 on my Savage and shorten the stock a bit. The scope took a couple of falls on "one of those days" and stayed zeroed. I also had it mounted with the Picatinny mounts. Any scope that could keep its zero after what it went through was worth keeping on a rifle. Normally when I transport a scoped rifle I do so in a padded hard case and baby them. Still will, but there's a to be said for durability.


DEP

[Texas by God]

I installed the long old K10 on my Oviedo 30-30 yesterday. Got it dialed in for 150gr Nosler BT to use them up. With those 1.5" high @ 100, my CB loads are dead on. THEN my BFF(big fat foot) snagged it as it was leaning against my loading bench, it fell 90° to land on the ocular bell and the walnut stock. Mad, I put it up.
I tried it out this morning and it was 10 inches to the left at a hundred yards; clicked right over and back in buisiness.
A rubber butt pad is in order.
.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

[robg]

Put a Nikon 2-7x32 shotgun scope on my marlin slb nice and clear parallax 75 yards suits me just fine.

[FergusonTO35]

I finally scratched an itch I have had for a long time and bought a real good scope for my Marlin Glenfield 30. This rifle is cheap but shoots like a decent bolt action and just fits me perfectly. It is also more slim and trim than most, with it's rather skinny barrel and half mag tube. When I first got the rifle I put a Swift 1.5-4.5x20 in a Burris one piece base and rings on it. The scope has served me well and always holds zero. Thing is, at twilight there is some fogging on the edges of the image. I don't remember it doing that before, maybe I just wasn't paying attention.

I thought about just moving up to a scope with a 32mm objective to let in more light, but I think this time around I am going to get what I really want and cry once. So, I pulled the trigger on a new Leupold VX-3i 1-5x20 for about $355.00 shipped to my door. Yes, a near-$400.00 scope for a $200.00 rifle! A compact scope with no objective bell is just perfect for this rifle and stalking through the dense woods where I hunt, with plenty of magnification for my meager abilities. I may end up getting an FX-II 2.5x20 for my 336 Texan also.