Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Low light, deep woods scope for my .358

Yep the 6x42 is a great low light scope. Not my favorite when things get really tight, but if you are not in the thick stuff for extended periods of time they are hard to beat for all round use.

I use 2.5x8 Leupolds on my 358's

Spot

My current favorite setup is my Vanguard '06, a 6x42 Leupie in Talley lows. Thanks to Big Stick and other's glowing reports, time and again a few years back, I broke down and gave it a shot. Glad I did. As for the thick stuff, we have one or two trees close together here in PA. It works just peachy as long as I'm not in bayonet range.

Funny how that set-up works likewise wherever it's tried..... regardless of "thick schit".

Seem to recall you being one of the culprits back then...thanks!

The Kahles and Zeiss are both within your budget and are very good scopes. The Kahles to my eye is the top pick. However, both have a large ocular and sometimes bolt clearance can be an issue depending on mounts used.

Based on your budget, if it were me... I'd look at the FX-III 6x42 with either the Heavy Duplex or Post and Duplex reticle. Both my boys rifles are setup with low Talley LW rings and FXIII 6x42 HD. No issue with clearance, and they're both able to hunt well past sunset.

Regardless which route you take on your scope selection, go with a heavy reticle.

Hunting in the same conditions in the Santa Cruz Mountains, I never had a problem with my lowly $179 Elite 3200 at first or last light.

Mebbe I need to start smoking the cripple again.

VA, this M7 has a Pac-Nor barrel with a long "shank"; IE, it stays full diameter longer than a Remmie barrel does, doesn't start to taper as soon.

I'm virtually certain a 42mm won't fit. I'll dig up my metric ruler and verify, but there's no way there's 3mm clearance under my 36mm right now.

If you current scope isn't as good in low light as you need then I'd send it back to Leupold for a heavier reticle. Pretty tough to do much better than that scope in your price category - and there aren't many flies on the 2.5x8, good scope for the $.

Let me add, clearance aside, those 6x loopy's do sound very cool. And for Rancho- if you think the mountains around Sabta Cruz are like the coast range of central Oregon... Well... Maybe you did some permanent damage smoking that "cripple"... grin... and yeah I've been around SC; was hiking in those hills just 11 months ago.

I'd try to find a Kahles CL 2-7X36. If you look enough, you should be able to find one in your price range. I own two VXIII 2.5-8's and two VXIII 1.75-6's. I love them, but, the Kahles, IMO, has better glass, a larger field of view than either at bottom power, and set at 6X out performs them in poor light. If you're looking for a "noticeable" improvement over the Leupy, this is it. The next step up is a lot more money. (Zeiss Victory, Swarovski, Schmidt & Bender, etc.)

I love my 2.5x8's; I own 5 of them.

In very low, grey light the problem isn't seeing the (std duplex) reticle; it's being able to, well, SEE. To resolve details, like horns <g>.

I can go to my grave happy with the 2.5x8; there no PROBLEM here. But that very end or beginning of legal light is a magic time, and I'm a scope short anyway right now- gonna be buying a scope regardless- so just doing some research into whether there's something clearly better at that price point.

There might not be, and that's ok too.

Jeff,

I'll recommend the Simmons 2-7x32 Tru-Plex Prohunter Master Series... It's all you need. Natchez has them for 59.95.

View from where my Blacktail




Landed in 2007..





That's at noon. Yeah, it don't get dark and wet down there... How could anyone know what they're talking about besides you.

If that be the case Jeff, then I highly recommend the Kahles Helia CL 2-7x36mm in your price range. I personally would prefer the 4A reticle. However, if the standard duplex floats your boat, there's one currently listed in the Classifieds section.

Spotshooter, you'll get a kick out of this... With an elevation turret on my 2.5x8, and the ballistics program I bought for like 2 bucks fir my iPhone, and a camcorder to show my hits/misses.... I got my .358 all dialed in out to 400 yards yesterday in about 45 minutes! With the 225 partition.

FO, thank you. I've liked the kahles optics I've looked through- my local shop was pushing them pretty hard a few years ago. I DONT like that the company is now gone, tho!!

Finally, VAnimrod, you got me to check. The 6x42 Leupold MIGHT just fit; gonna be very close but it might. So you might be right, and that scope is definatly a contender.

A 42mm scope would have to be a Leupold, though. Their alumina covers don't add to the diameter of the objective. If I'm running Butler Creeks, I'd top out around 40mm.

"In very low, grey light the problem isn't seeing the (std duplex) reticle; it's being able to, well, SEE. To resolve details, like horns <g>."

A heavier reticle won't fix your problem. It seems a good binocular is needed more than a better scope. Two eyes see better and as you've stated, you can see to shoot.

That's a valid point, no doubt about it.

I carry Swaro 8x30's and use them extensively. Not the BEST low-light glass, but pretty good. At least some of the time there's simply no time to use binocs and transition to the rifle. Or it's too much movement.

But your point is a good one.

I was going by the 400 yard zero. I understand too much movement as it happens here (under 100 yards ). A 2.5 x8 with a post & duplex reticle would work well in aiding finding the reticle fast. IMHO you will most likely need to spend more than $600 to move up the resolution you desire. That is not saying the Conquest is not better, just may not be what you want.