Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Scope for Model 70 FWT 7mm08 - $1000-$1500ish Budget

Wow! Just when I was considering contributing to them. I will never contribute to a cause that is anti-gun, just as I refuse to patronize businesses that have an anti-gun stance.

The ironic thing is that I load around 750 rounds of '06, .308 and .243 for a few wounded warriors each year.

Of those listed; the Swaro 4-12x50 would be my choice. A rather svelt 50mm objective scope at only 14 ozs. I have an AV 4-12x50 with 4a on my Sako M75 and it has been rock solid for 10 years.

I ve got a swaro. a zeiss a leupy and some Nikons and by far the swaro is brighter n lighter than all of them.cqan stay out much longer with it!

Gee and here I thought the two ideal scopes on top a featherweight were a Leupold 3 x 9 or a Weaver V 9 Classic...

I'd go Leupold if I wanted a different reticle than the standard crosshair set up...

either one always seemed to accomplish what I ever needed to do, regardless of 30 yds or 300...

but that is just me...as that is pretty much what my 4 Featherweights have on top...

and I like the idea of the money being saved, being donated to the organization of your choice that supports our veterans...

Seafire, I tend to agree with you. I've over scoped a whole lotta rifles in the past few years. To be honest, one my favorite setups is my Merkel K1 in 7mm RM wearing a straight 6x42 with the LRD ret: absolutely dead simple and effective. At $400 it's a solid deal too. I've cleanly taken game from 30-300 yards and it's good enough to drop 3 into 1.5" at 200 yards.

That wasn't the question the question though. The OP was asking about very specific scopes with a very specific purpose.

To that end I'd still go with the VX6, probably #4 ret with an appropriate CDS.

The only real correct answer is what the OP decides on...

its he who has to tote it and use it...

I've noticed tho, practicing and range time....

a simple 4 power can cover a lot of distance out there, good field of view...bullet proof ( as shown by Cheap Tasco 4 Powers and Bushnells for a lot of guys)....

I've learned over the years from experiences in the field...

they say " use enough gun"....I've learned a well placed bullet doesn't have to be that big in bore diameter...

modifying that into "use enough scope".... well 4 power has served me well, even when it is a variable set to 4 power..

if fact, for some of the scopes I've had with ranges of 1 x 4 or 2 x 7, two or two and half power haven't handicapped me very much, if at all...

practice and trigger time ( and I gather scope time that goes with it) has proven "Enough" doesn't always mean bigger...

This^^^^

IMO SA Featherweight rifles just call for smaller scopes.

I know the OP is worried about light gathering and objective size. All I can say is with the 2.5-8X36 Leupold I've had crosshairs on game waiting for legal light to shoot, and watched game until legal light has passed waiting to see if something better is going to come out. I wouldn't worry much about a 36mm objective as long as you use quality glass.

Meopta 3-9x with a #4 reticle on a Win 70 Featherweight Supergrade. Talley low steel rings.
Bob

My question is, why would a veterans aid group even have a position on guns?

That's a beautiful rifle.

Any of the scopes that you are considering will be more than capable of the use that you describe. Take a good look through each of them if you can to see what looks best for you. I haven't looked through the Leica or the Meopta but have shot rifles with the Swarovski and I own the HD 5 3-15x50.

I just looked through that conquest on my cousin's rifle hit a 4" wide target at 490 yards with the first shot and decided that I had to have it when I found it for $699 at Euro Optic. It was such a good deal with the Z800 reticle that it made sense to me for my 300 Weatherby and the ridges and canyons where we hunt elk. I do prefer the sight picture and reticle over the Swarovski.