Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Which 6x42 scope.

Thank you for the response GrimJim.

I've broken, and seen so many scopes fail that it's not even a blip on the radar anymore. . So few scopes actually work that when I see someone touting an optic with nothing but how they "feel" about it, I can't help but ask.


For comparison and what most apparently fail to understand is that one shouldn't judge a scope as being "good" until they have thousands of rounds on multiple examples to ascertain zero retention, tracking, usability, reticles, Etc.

This is but 600 rounds in a single afternoon flogging a new rifle and scope....








And was barely a start. That scope is nearing 10k rounds of 7.62, 5.56, and 300WM this year. And we have racks full of guns and scopes with significantly more than that.


This broke two scopes



And that just a puny 5.56.....



A couple hundred rounds (while admittedly way more than most) isn't "use", it's "new". It's the same as someone saying that they've had a certian truck for 15 years and never a problem..... Until you find out that they've only put 10k miles on it. I'm more interested in what the guy who puts 70k miles a year on it thinks.




While you may not use your stuff as much as some, you can be sure that if it works for those that actually shoot more than a whole lot, that'll work for you too. The reverse can not be said, and therein lies the rub.....

I have both a Leupold M8 6x42 and a Meopta Meopro 6x42. By far the better optics are the Meopta, although I don't have an FX3 to compare it to.

The Meopta is bigger and heavier, but also has a more forgiving tube length between the objective and ocular bells allowing more options with mounting.

?

Pray tell, what the difference in "optics" between them will effect their use?




Once again as long as people crow over "glass" and "optics" we'll continue to have scopes that don't hold zero, don't track, aren't durable, have compromised ergos, and generally suck. Good thing no one actually shoots anymore.

Stick's 6X Scope choice (I've been taking notes and applying same)

Leupold 6X FX3 <---My mistake from my previous post.

M1 Elevation Turret installed by Leupold
Parallax adjustment ring right in front of occular - same general place power adjustment rings are found on variable scopes.

If you're asking me, I haven't a clue.

Not on a Leupold FX3.

We are talking past eacy other. The 6x42 is a hunting scope and is sold as such. The Meopta has only been out a year and a half. It is a fine hunting scope.

I once had a 6x40 that met all your requirements. It was a Leupold Mk. IV. It had rugged construction, a turret with adjustments matched to ballistics, parallax adjustment, all the bells and whistles. The problem was I never used all that stuff in hunting. It did nothing that the M8 6x42 didn't do just as well.

I have seen a scope that meets all your requirements. It was on the rifle the USMC scout sniper team let me hold. Two things about that rifle made an impression. One was the amount of wear on the McMillan stock and on the Hart barrel. Clearly a rifle undergoing military use. The other was the scope, the only scope I have seen with turrets that looked like plumbing fixtures. It was a Unertl and a 10X. There's the rub. The sniper scope market went from 10x to variables. If I was going to ask all these things of a long range scope, I would go to 10X too.

The original poster just asked about 6x42's.

I was happy when Meopta came out with a 6X42 with a European eyepiece designed for a wide range of eyesights. I was turning the Leupold eyepiece out all the way and still not getting a clear focus with my new prescription. Both the Zeiss Conquest and the Meopta took care of that (and so have several Nikons.)



I originally had some comments in that don't really apply to you. I deleted them.

I am sorry to see this post. Alaska is not Pennsylvania.

Just because no one mentioned binoculars doesn't justify your conclusion. I regularly carry 7x42 binoculars with me but when they are moving in trees in shadow you occasionally need to see detail when you shoot. Once in Michigan I could make out the antlers on a buck among does ten minutes before shooting time ended with the binoculars but I could not with the 4x scope, which was a Zeiss.

The Leupold is a fine scope but it is the same basic design as the M8 6x42 I bought in 1992 with much better glass, coatings and tracking. It retains the focus by adjusting the entire objective. About five years ago I was turning the objective out until I was worried about it flopping around with each shot and still not in focus. Switching to scopes with the European style fast focus eyepiece took care of that.

You guys in Alaska seem pretty free with personal remarks about people you've never met.

Grim,

Kudos on taking Stupidity to places it's never been before!

A MK4 M3 6x with wrong wayzee BDC is something I've never heard of either.



You "hard chargers" really get after it and you can almost get a mornings worth of shooting done...in "only" a coupla years.

Funny schit!...................

Only fair to fuel your Imagination,so as to bolter your Pretend.

If only in fairness I've never seen a Leatherneck Retro Handle or a MK4 M1 10X(whatever that is)...let alone in the last week or so. Also certainly never whistled more rounds through it in a morning,than you do in years.

Laughing!



Who chews your food for you?................

Alaska is not PA, which is why I do not live in PA...

Basic Firearms safety says you do not point a gun at any target you cannot see, period.

I am thinking you might want to edit the obvious errors out of your post...

He's got several pics up of a Leupold 6X42 that show a parallax adjustment ring that butts up against the front of the ocular. He has to send it in to have it installed on the scope(s?).

Now, I know he's been shooting forever, and has several generations of the Leupold 6X42, so it just makes sense to me that if Leupold could do it on one of his older 6X42 scopes, they should be able to install the parallax adjustment on their latest model.

I know he has several pictures of Super Sniper 6x42 scopes that are built that way from the get go, but I truly don't recall ever seeing a picture of, or having been made aware of, such a Leupold 6x42.

Different handles, same name. Believe he has another handle as well (someone chime in). Varies his spelling and language up with his various handles slightly but he's one in the same.

Person really has to wonder why the dual or multiple handles and slight change in spelling & language between each handle?

I'd tend to believe Schizophrenia, maybe dual personalities, Bi-polar?

One in a hundred posts will actually be beneficial and knowledgeable. Those posts are actually worth reading. But at the end of the day it's a classic case of Little Dick Syndrome.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Little%20Dick%20Syndrome

Didn't mean to horn you up and I'll feign my "surprise" that you burn far more bandwidth on Cock Talk...than you do glass.

Congratulations?..................

Reupold 6x42's come in a goodly smattering of flavors. That includes both .25" and 1/8" adjustments,A/O and non-A/O.

The Comp 1/8" A/O being my least favorite,non-A/O .25" the favorite.

I have also heard of the 6x42 Fixed Fhuqcqer,in both MilDot and MilQuad. They may or may not be shown here.



6x42 .25" non-A/O M1,with 45MOA stabbed in the fray.




A rather famous 6x42 .25" Target Turret A/O...next to a 6x42 M1 non-A/O.



Don't take much to get these Clueless Whiners hitting the high note..................(grin)

Now if forced to suffer parallax adjustment,I'll take it on the ocular,as opposed to objective or side...if only because I've 6x's and 10x's so configured to extrapolate.




That not as a function to reach farrrrrrrr,but instead up close.

Hint...................

If only to coax another heartfelt Whine,out of yet another one of you Drooling Clueless Dumbphuqqs.

Let's kick some numbers around,while sneaking up on inherent abilities of a given glass in extrapolation,as per objective overview. Pun be intended(Google it).

Laughing!





I apologize up front,for the obscene round counts,scritches,scratches and perhaps even some of that new stuff they just invented,which they are calling "weather". Realizing of course,none of them things is "fair"...when using "all" that you "do" as a comparison.

My bad.

Laughing...................

Give me 300 yard fixed parallax please.

What do you think of the depth of field focus on the SS, which is the reason I dislike most adjustables. Wish I could spin it to 300 and leave it, but can't do it.

BTW, the scale pic looks WAY too sanitary. Must be the office.