Hand cannon Scope

[cainttype]

I have used numerous Leupolds on large handguns in calibers from 44 Mag and 35 Remington through 375 Winchester and 45-70. I have never had one fail, in any fashion.
I have had a Burris fail, just one (probably 15 years ago, or so). The model had been discontinued, so they replaced it with the new (at that time) version with a very fast turn-around.
Leupolds are extremely light... I prefer that.
I agree that a 2x would be my first choice unless I had a specific application that warranted higher magnification, and after many years that's just not anything that I've ever needed.
I occasionally use 4x for load developement, but my handguns generally wear 2x when they go into the field.

[ole 5 hole group]

a 2x leupold is as tough as it gets and is all any revolver needs for magnification.

Maybe, but definitely not for me. I can shoot a red dot as well as I can shoot a 2X scope but once I move up to 4X or more, I shoot tighter groups at 100 yards and beyond, which is important for me in load development. I really like the Leupold 2.5X8X32, which I normally use on 8X from the bench. The only problem with that scope is the 32mm bell, as even using Xtra tall rings you may not be able to clear the front sight on barrels less than 7.5" in length. No problems ever encountered relative to recoil and I've used it on 500 S&W, 500 JRH and 454 Casull along with other "smaller" calibers.

As far as a handgun hunting scope I think the 2X might be best for weight and compactness but then again, I've gone from scopes to micro red dots (heads-up display) on my hunting handguns and at less than an ounce for weight and one and a half inches in length - that's pretty hard to beat using a scope.

[waco]

I bought a Burris 2x7 for my 44 super 14.

[paul h]

Maybe, but definitely not for me. I can shoot a red dot as well as I can shoot a 2X scope but once I move up to 4X or more, I shoot tighter groups at 100 yards and beyond, which is important for me in load development. I really like the Leupold 2.5X8X32, which I normally use on 8X from the bench. The only problem with that scope is the 32mm bell, as even using Xtra tall rings you may not be able to clear the front sight on barrels less than 7.5" in length. No problems ever encountered relative to recoil and I've used it on 500 S&W, 500 JRH and 454 Casull along with other "smaller" calibers.

As far as a handgun hunting scope I think the 2X might be best for weight and compactness but then again, I've gone from scopes to micro red dots (heads-up display) on my hunting handguns and at less than an ounce for weight and one and a half inches in length - that's pretty hard to beat using a scope.

My experience as well. Even before my eyes hit middle age I found for shooting to my guns potential from a rest cranking the magnification up to 7X made a noticeable difference in how tight my groups were.

Also worth noting, the Leupold "2X" handgun scope has an actual magnification of ~1.4X.

[Tatume]

I'll never buy another Burris scope. When they work they're okay. When they break Burris customer service is horrible.

[cainttype]

Also worth noting, the Leupold "2X" handgun scope has an actual magnification of ~1.4X.

Exactly why it is the best choice for general field use, in my experience. The low magnification provides a larger field of view that allows fast target aquisition, IF a person is proficient with it's use.
Higher magnification definitely has it's place... load development off a rest, sitting in a box-blind with a rest, and "long-range handgunning" with a rest. It is a handicap for stalk-hunting in my 35+ years of scoped handgun experience.

Many, if not most, people have difficulty using a scope on a handgun (totally opposite of generalities with a rifle). The lower powers will help them a lot as they gain experience.
If you have experience, a 2x Leupold will rarely leave you wanting, either performance or reliability.

[Tatume]

My favorite handgun scope is the Leupold 4x. It is easy to use, gives sufficient magnification for precise shot placement at longer ranges, and has excellent eye relief (most pistol scopes have too much eye relief).

[BoolitSchuuter]

How do you like that 454 Casull. I've been eyeing the larger calibers for some reason lately. My BIL recently purchased an F.A. in 45/70, but that seems like overkill in a Hand gun.

[Tatume]

I've gotten rid of my Freedom Arms M83 in 454 Casull, but I'll keep my Ruger Super Redhawks forever. One of them is chambered in 454 Casull, and the other is a 44 Magnum. Both are superbly accurate, and built to be indestructible.

[Tatume]

How do you like that 454 Casull. I've been eyeing the larger calibers for some reason lately. My BIL recently purchased an F.A. in 45/70, but that seems like overkill in a Hand gun.

Is that the 2008 single shot handgun?

[jonp]

I had a Nikon Monarch 2x on my Super Blackhawk and it was superb in both clarity and light transmission. Unfortunately it is discontinued.

Try this one: http://www.nikonsportoptics.com/en/n...RatingsReviews

I wholeheartedly endorse Nikon products as one of the best pieces of glass for the money out there

[cainttype]

My experience with Nikon has all been positive, so far. I like them. They are light and bright... That's two very important things to seriously consider in a field gun, IMO.
I haven't abused, I mean USED, any Nikon nearly as much as the Leupolds I've tortured...so I can't make an honest assessment of their durability, in comparison.
I have no reservations about the Nikon line, as of yet, and wouldn't hesitate to grab one at a good deal.

[BoolitSchuuter]

Is that the 2008 single shot handgun?

No, the revolver.

[Tatume]

Then it is not a Freedom Arms. It is probably a BFR.

[Snyd]

Could use some advice on getting a scope for my Ruger SBH (44 mag). Not looking for the bestest big bucks gotta impress the range rats scope. Or the cheapest "workie good, last long time" piece of junk. Looking for clear glass, accurate, suitable for a 100yd shot given the opportunity. Reliability and ruggedness are key.

Weaver 2x28

[leadman]

I have a couple Burris 2X7, one Leupold 4X, and a couple of Weaver 2X that have absorbed many rounds with no issues. I also have an old 30mm Tasco that was on my Contender pistol in 444 Marlin for about 5,000 rounds and is now on a Mosin Nagant. Can't believe that scope stood up with no issues.
I have broken Simmons, 1" Tascos', 2X7 Chinese, and lower cost Bushnells over the years.
The least expensive scope I will buy now for a handgun is the Weavers.

[Tom W.]

I had a Burris 2x7 with the posi-loc and Burris bases and rings that have the rubber inserts ( I forgot the name of the rings.) This I mounted on my Encore .454 pistol. Ended up selling it after a year or so, as it was just too much for me. I had a Leupold 2x like the fellow in the above post has to offer on my Ruger SRH .480 Ruger. It was a problem and worry free. My SRH in 44 mag never had a scope mounted on it.

[Good Cheer]

All the good experience recounted... good for me 'cause I'm needing a higher magnification pistol scope for developing loads with a 38" muzzleloader barrel .52 caliber.
Got a compression mount to avoid marring the barrel.
Thanks for the info.