Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Tell me about a fixed 6x in the woods....

Bob,

Yep, the Summit is a quality scope all the way through. But there are real reasons I wouldn't run one on all my big game rifles:

1) Can't afford $1500 to scope every dang rifle. (Now, if I only owned 2-3 big game rifles, like a rational human being might, then...?)

2) They're a little big and heavy for some of my rifles.

3) Still haven't failed to kill any animal I've shot at with a fixed scope--or at least, the failure wasn't due to being unable to aim with the scope. That would also include quite a few variable scopes set on 6x and left there, my SOP.

Now, on a couple of rifles I have decided on a little more magnification. One is my custom 6.5-06, which has a fixed 10x, since it's a specialized rifle for long-range coyote, pronghorn, etc.

Well, mostly for financial reasons, I am narrowing the choice for my son's first "deer rifle" down to either the Burris 6x40 Fullfield II at $150 or a Vortex Viper 2-7x32 that I bought a few months ago on closeout from Cameraland (with this exact purpose in mind).

If one of these doesn't work, I will upgrade in a few years. Although there is almost a year between now and next rifle season, and so I'll probably change my mind a dozen times before then.

Well, I grabbed one on that recommendation. Will look forward to playing with it.

I grabbed one also.

I was desolate when I could not use the Leupold 6X42's any more. I was just about content with the Zeiss Conquest scopes as replacements. This thread ended my contentment with the variables.

Now I will see if the Burris Fullfield II 6X40 will work for me, probably as a back-up. It has the rear fast focus I need. I am not sure about eye relief and eye box.

GrimJim

JB: I agree.......for me the Summit is for when I need/want a bit "more".Completely agree on the cost thing too.

I need fewer rifles.

There is no way that one persons unfortunate experiences with variable power hunting scopes is going to change what I use. And if I did change for sure the variables replacements are not going to be fixed power 6X scopes.

This information goes against what I have heard in the past and what I know. Sure enough someone will try to tell me that my offhand technique and position is wrong now!

Mule Deer has a lot more experience with a lot more scopes than I do and I respect that. The experience that I do have drove my interest in the 6X42. I need to see detail in low light and I don't take running shots. The Leupold 6X42 was just about perfect for my needs. Now that I have a variable the higher power is nice at the range, a nice to have (I don't have to get up from the bench and go to the spotting scope on its tripod). The lower power is unused, an OK to have. So my decisions follow from my experience and that of those I respect. If there is a trade between the additional power range and reliability, it is one I would not care to make.

If you have different experience based on different shooting/hunting needs and you base your decisions entirely on your own experience, then you will make a different choice. I wish you happiness and satisfaction in your choice.

Cheers,

GrimJim

It probably is....

In other words you haven't tried it for yourself.

I believed, like you, a 6x was too much for woods hunting. I apparently have read all the Jack O'Connor et. al, you have. BUT, as I described on this thread, I decided to see for myself first-hand and not rely on anyone else's opinion or my own conjecture... I'm glad I did.

I have mentioned before but perhaps you missed it when I said my first CF rifle had a 6X scope on it. I just was in the basement where six extra scopes lay on a chair. One of them is that 6X Lyman Wolverine. There is also a 6X Lyman All American there unused.

Most of my deer hunting has been in the forests of Vermont. I would shoot at a running buck. Many times its the only shot you might get year after year. I ran running deer shoots and participated in them also. I am confident of my shooting.

Shoot when the buck is nears the top of his bound and never when his feet hit the ground.

A 4X scope is better than a 6X for that.

That goes back to 1953.

To add that your there in that sissy Montana weather! Here is our weather in CT. We need all around rifles for this and not fixed power!

Wind Speed: NW 23 G 30 MPH
Barometer: 29.73" (1006.9 mb)
Dewpoint: 18 �F (-8 �C)
Wind Chill: 17 �F (-8 �C)

Brad nailed it.

You can get so many opinions on things it will make your head swim.

I will avoid problematic equipment based on the opinions of others I trust when the overall concensus is overwhelming.

A 6X scope ain't one of 'em though.

Grab one and find out for yourself. Some may find they like it, others may not.

Point is, you can't have a truly valid opinion on anything unless you have tried it for yourself.

I have twin M77s in 257 Roberts and one has a Bausch & Lomb Balvar 8B 2 1/2 x 8 on it that got a little roughed up in a scabbard. Horse got too close to a tree.

My son has been reading this thread and I have it from a good source - Mrs. Claus that there could be a Burris 6x40 under the Christmas tree.

Never owned a fixed power over 4X. So will see what all the fuss is about.

"Burris finally elected to not cut quality, specifications, or quality control. They made duplicates of their tooling, clones of what resides in Greeley, Colorado, and began producing Fullfield II scopes with lower labor costs in the Philippines."

No way am I going to buy a scope made in the Philippines.

You need to race him for it RO!

Merry Christmas!

99,

You admitted to having Leupy's, there not made here either...

You sure are a comedian.

Merry Christmas right back at you.

Where is the last 6x42 Leupold you tried?

If my vision was poor I would use 6X for woods hunting.

There is a Leu. 6-36 on my M61. I use that sometimes for plinking.

It isn't 1953 and Pennsylvania isn't Vermont.

I envy you your confidence in running shots. I am not that confident. I do not mind a miss but I do mind a bad hit. I do mind a hit on an animal that I am not supposed to shoot. I do mind focusing on the target and not on the background where the bullet goes when I am not the only hunter in the woods.

Where I was hunting in western PA I was posted while deer were driven by me. Deer will move if you walk through the woods. They know the drivers are there. You just push them along.

The drivers where I hunted yelled and shouted and used various aids to make loud clanging noises. They wanted to move the deer and they sure did. The deer moved at warp speed.

So I am watching a logging road with thick cover on either side. There are other hunters posted up and down the road from me, out of my sight. I hear the banging and clanging. I hear the noise in the brush. Suddenly three shapes emerge from the brush, cross the road and disappear into the brush in less time than it takes to read this sentence. I have no idea what the deer are, let alone whether any of them is a buck with enough points to be legal in the game area I am in. Somewhere down the road past them is another hunter hidden from me but not necessarily safe from me. Your advice about shooting when the buck nears the top of his bound doesn't help much, does it? If you would take a shot under these circumstances, I would not care to hunt with you.

One opening day where we took post in the dark. When the dawn emerged there were other hunters not only near me but close-about 50-75 yards away. A nice legal buck emerged and ran between two of us. Shooting under those circumstances is now called collateral damage. I have no idea what it was called in 1953.

I saw one of these poor animals close up once. I was seated just off a trail. I heard the drivers then an animal crashing through the brush. I did not know there were elephants in Pennsylvania. At the top of the hill the animal emerged. It was a button buck, running for its life, eyes wide and bulging, tongue hanging out. It ran down the trail and stopped, stock-still, right behind me. I turned around and said, "Hi, there." Off it went on another headlong charge.

I went to a 6X after spotting a legal buck in a field with some does in Michigan about 40 years later than 1953. It was 10 minutes before the end of shooting time. The buck was obvious through the 7X42 Swarovski binoculars, but the 4X Zeiss T coated lenses only showed that there were deer out there. If you need to see which deer is a buck and count the points to make sure it is legal, at dawn, at dusk, in the shade of the trees near or across a clearing, you need the definition that 6X or above provides. I am hoping the 4X Zeiss Conquest will do, but I don't know yet. It is impressive at the range.

Enjoy your running shots at a nice buck with a 4x scope.

GrimJim

So you haven't tried a Leupold 6x42.