Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Handguns Handgun Scope

I have never owned a handgun that I considered mounting a scope on until now. I came across a 7.5" S&W PC 629 with the integrated weaver mounts in the barrel. Should I be looking at a fixed or variable scope? Anything to stay away from? Thinking about QD rings also in case I wanted to take the scope off and shoot with the stock sights.

Appreciate it!

Hunting or target shooting? If for hunting at 100 yards or less I'd go red dot, target aquisition has always been a problem for me with pistol scopes.

Probably a little of both. Definitely will get it in the deer woods this fall.

Straight 2X Leupold!

Slow but accurate. The magnification helps. Especially in the woods.

If you insist on a scope, I would recommend a fixed 2X. The Leupold is a good one but I'm liking the Burris even better as the clarity is better. I think a red dot is better for fast follow-up shots, however.

I had a Leupold 2x Extended Eye Relief scope on my Ruger 480 for about 10 years. It has it downfalls. It's really hard to see through. You have to have it perfectly lined up in order to see through it. It takes a lot of practice, but I got good with it. The other problem is that during the first 15 minutes of daylight, and the last 15 minutes of daylight, you can't use it. It's bad during low light situations. A couple of years ago, I took it off and got a 30mm Ultra Dot. That thing is the ticket. No magnification, but it's so much easier to acquire your target. My vote would be for a red dot.

Swag: I have had experience with "scoped" pistols and have owned/used them in powers from 2 to 10!
IF... you choose to go with one, you MUST dedicate yourself to it and use it and practice with it often and get used to the "small field of view" and aligning the rig to obtain the small field of view quickly (for Hunting situations!).
Of late I have not been buying "scopes" for my pistol uses (Varminting and Hunting) but have been buying the "red-dot" type,, non-magnifying "optics", for my uses.
Best of luck to you with whichever you choose.
Hold into the wind
VarmintGuy

I have a 2x Leupold on my .44 BHH.. I like it very much, but never used a red dot.. So far have only shot varmints and antelope with it..

This sums up my experience. I used to do really well with 2x scopes on revolvers but really struggle with them now for the reasons you mention. I still have a 2x Leupold that came on a Freedom Arms revolver but now use a red dot.

I like dot sights but prefer green. It isn't universally available yet. Some day I will be able to buy a 30MM Ultra Dot! I have a 2X Leupold on my Lone Eagle 358 Winchester. Be Well, Rustyzipper.

Red dot is the way to go, way better field of view, easier to find the dot, faster to make good hits.

Really appreciate all the feedback guys. Seems like the consensus is to get some kind of red dot scope. Going to look at an Ultradot...

I have seven scoped handguns, well.....one scoped revolver and six scoped T/C Contender barrels. All except one has 2-6x scopes. One has a 2x Leupold. I like the ability to crank the variable scopes up to 6x when at the range, but they are kept at 2x when hunting.

I do have a red dot on a Super Blackhawk because with aging eyes it was hard to clearly see the front sight. I also had a red dot die at the range due to battery failure. Luckily, it was at the range and not while hunting.

I don't care for red dot scopes, they don't allow the precision I try to achieve. With a couple of guns in my past I was able to scare the piss out of MOA from a rest with magnifying optics. I do not believe that is feasible with a dot.

There are two negatives, as I see it, to a handgun scope. One is speed, the other is weight and awkwardness. I generally work up loads with a scope, then switch back to iron sights for field use. That is one of the beauties of the R-series Rugers.

Tom

prefer the 2x scopes myself.....not had a Leupold but have done alot of deer hunting with a Burris on a Redhawk 44


once you get accustomed to the sight , it is not near as slow or fussy as some of the posters seem to think


have lowered the boom on several running whitetails over the years , and never had a big issue in poor light

I find anything over 2X to be worthless except off a bench.

I have a 2X20 mm Nikon Monarch on a Ruger SBH bisley hunter in 41 mag. It works very well.

I also have a Bushnell 2-6x32 mm handgun scope on a Savage Striker in 17 HMR. The Striker wears a bipod which gives enough stability over the hood of the truck or a fallen tree to make the scope usable at higher magnification.

2X for scoped hunting but I much prefer red dots to scopes. For load development I like 4X. Irons get the ticket for summer fun on steel.

If you take the time to learn a scoped hunting handgun you will find it much better in making precise shots on game in most situations. After 35+ years in the field I have yet to have one fail me when needed. Get the best you can buy... The discontinued Redfield LER was made in the USA and the make I learned with.. Leupold and Burris are about all that`s left and are top of the line...Photo of north Utah Shiras bull taken with FA`s 454 and Redfield 2-6X scope...I`ve used just about all the power levels made ( 2-3-4-5-2x6- 1.5x4- 2x7- 2x8- 3x9) and stay with a 2-8X with the power set to 2X and if more is needed I turn it up. Good luck

Conventional wisdom will tell your that red dots are imprecise. I couldn’t disagree more. It merely takes practice to achieve competence (like any sighting option). One area the red dot absolutely beats the scope is in rapid follow-up shooting. Keeping both eyes open helps in this respect. JMHO.

I am in the camp that prefers straight 2x. I have Leupold on 2 revolvers, currently 2 .41 magnums. Have used them on .44’s as well and killed deer with them. It takes practice. If you’re shooting revolvers enough to be sensibly hunting with one, you’ll have no problem. If you’re one of those “box of shells a year” guys, you should stick with a rifle.