|
|
Joined: Mar 2014
Posts: 563
Campfire Regular
|
OP
Campfire Regular
Joined: Mar 2014
Posts: 563 |
I got the itch for a lighter weight, short action hunting rifle. Not the lightest weight possible, but lighter than my long action, fiberglass stocked, magnum contour 700's. I snagged a Kimber 84M in 308 on Black Friday. I put a Zeiss Victory 1.5-6x42 on it. Aesthetically, it looks a bit big on the rifle. It also feels a bit top heavy. Optically, these are my favorite scopes on the planet (I have two others), but I don't think it is the right scope for this rifle. I have a Leupold VX-3 1.75-6x32 that is a good size and weight, but the image quality doesn't meet my expectations. What can I put on this rifle? The max size/weight I want is about that of the Swarovski Z3 3-9x36, but that is way more magnification than I want. Low dispersion glass is a must. I primarily hunt mesic and pine forests and most of the deer move before sunrise and after sunset. Suggestions? Guidance? The current configuration: ![[Linked Image]](http://www.brusabass.com/images/generic/kimber.jpg)
Last edited by whitebread; 12/12/14.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 4,742
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 4,742 |
Leupold 2.5-8x36
Whitebread I sent you a PRivate. Message
"Every record has been destroyed or falsified, every book rewritten, every picture has been repainted, every statue and street building has been renamed, every date has been altered."
― George Orwell, 1984
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 47,945
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 47,945 |
I also suggest the 2.5-8x36 or Swaro 3-9x36. Either in leupold DD's or talley lightweights.....Those talley steels just add to the overall big look and increase weight, making it more top heavy.
I try to stick with the basics, they do so well. Nothing fancy mind you, just plain jane will get it done with style. You want to see an animal drop right now? Shoot him in the ear hole. BSA MAGA
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 29,383
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 29,383 |
I also suggest the 2.5-8x36 or Swaro 3-9x36. Either in leupold DD's or talley lightweights.....Those talley steels just add to the overall big look and increase weight, making it more top heavy. Perfect scopes for that purpose If you can find a Kahles 3-9x42 or 2-7x33 CL another great option
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2013
Posts: 3,601
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Oct 2013
Posts: 3,601 |
"I have a Leupold VX-3 1.75-6x32 that is a good size and weight, but the image quality doesn't meet my expectations. "
If that's the case, I doubt the 2.5-8, is any different.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 10,972
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 10,972 |
Kahles 2-7X36 is my favorite but I could be equally happy with a Leupold VX3 2.5-8X36 or a VX2 2-7. Here is the Kahles on mine. ![[Linked Image]](http://i961.photobucket.com/albums/ae96/RHClark/P1000886_zps70bcdb82.jpg)
Last edited by R_H_Clark; 12/12/14.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 5,735
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 5,735 |
Low dispersion glass is a must. I primarily hunt mesic and pine forests and most of the deer move before sunrise and after sunset. Suggestions? Guidance? The current cnfiguration: I think your last two sentences say it for you. You have the best scope for that job on the rifle. Better low light performance brings with it additional size and weight. Smaller and lighter get's you penalized in the low light situations. I have a few of those scopes, and I can say for certain that Swaro and S&B offerings are not lighter. Meopta is a little lighter, but not appreciably smaller. Pick your must haves and compromises and then compare to see if it's worth the trouble to mess up what you have.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 17,491
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 17,491 |
Sometimes, the air you 'let in'matters less than the air you 'let out'.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 14,807
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 14,807 |
The Kahles 2-7 is a favorite of mine.
The Swarovski's 3X is too much magnification?
A Leupold 2.5-8 is a good scope.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,939
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,939 |
The truth angers those whom it does not convince
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 30,257
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 30,257 |
I'm limited what I've put on my Kimber 84M's... three scopes only. 2-7x33, 2.5-8x36, 6x36... would be happy with any of those three, though I prefer the latter two over the 2-7x33.
“Perfection is Achieved Not When There Is Nothing More to Add, But When There Is Nothing Left to Take Away” Antoine de Saint-Exupery
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2014
Posts: 563
Campfire Regular
|
|
OP
Campfire Regular
Joined: Mar 2014
Posts: 563 |
Thanks for the input, guys. To test out the Swarovski Z3 3-9x36, I took my wife's rifle hunting today instead of mine...a CZ 550 in 30-06 with said scope mounted on it. I didn't shoot anything but I did see a doe and young buck trotting through a section of birch trees at about 40 yards. I put the scope on them and it wasn't as bad as I expected, but I would certainly welcome more FOV. I may just run the Zeiss (as MILES458 suggested) and see how it does and go to the Z3 if it balances/shoots really weird.
To the 2.5-8x36 crowd, is the low light definition significantly better than the 1.75-6x32?
Is the Kahles 2-7x36 still sold? I don't see it listed any where but it looks intriguing.
I used the steel rings because I had a set alloys crack on me years back. I only trust steel rings now. YMMV.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 12,153
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 12,153 |
The 1.75x6-32 is brighter than the 2.5-8x36 leupold. I have both. Probably your best bet for light & bright is the Swarovski 3-9x36 you mentioned. I can't see wanting less magnification than that but you're not me.
Tiny/light scopes & low light performance generally don't go together, specifically ones with small objective lens.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2014
Posts: 563
Campfire Regular
|
|
OP
Campfire Regular
Joined: Mar 2014
Posts: 563 |
Crow hunter, you did it. I will swap scopes with my wife. This isn't going to be my main gun for anything...so why not. I doubt she will even notice I changed it.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 3,996
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 3,996 |
Crow hunter, you did it. I will swap scopes with my wife. This isn't going to be my main gun for anything...so why not. I doubt she will even notice I changed it. Tell her you upgraded her optics.
I am continually astounded at how quickly people make up their minds on little evidence or none at all.
Jack O'Connor
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 22,884
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 22,884 |
A fixed power scope would get you the brightness and the lightness that you long for.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 47,945
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 47,945 |
Crow hunter, you did it. I will swap scopes with my wife. This isn't going to be my main gun for anything...so why not. I doubt she will even notice I changed it. I sure hope the Swaro 3-9x36 isn't as bad as you make it out to be. I just bought one and have pretty high hopes for it.. 
I try to stick with the basics, they do so well. Nothing fancy mind you, just plain jane will get it done with style. You want to see an animal drop right now? Shoot him in the ear hole. BSA MAGA
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2014
Posts: 563
Campfire Regular
|
|
OP
Campfire Regular
Joined: Mar 2014
Posts: 563 |
I sure hope the Swaro 3-9x36 isn't as bad as you make it out to be. I just bought one and have pretty high hopes for it.. It isn't bad by any means! ...just more magnification than I want, which has a lot to do with the type of vegetation on my land.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2013
Posts: 189
Campfire Member
|
|
Campfire Member
Joined: Dec 2013
Posts: 189 |
Kahles 2-7
also believe it or not the Swaro 3-10x42 is very light
and has quite a wide field of view at low power.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 748
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 748 |
I got the itch for a lighter weight, short action hunting rifle. Not the lightest weight possible, but lighter than my long action, fiberglass stocked, magnum contour 700's. I snagged a Kimber 84M in 308 on Black Friday. I put a Zeiss Victory 1.5-6x42 on it. Aesthetically, it looks a bit big on the rifle. It also feels a bit top heavy. Optically, these are my favorite scopes on the planet (I have two others), but I don't think it is the right scope for this rifle. I have a Leupold VX-3 1.75-6x32 that is a good size and weight, but the image quality doesn't meet my expectations. What can I put on this rifle? The max size/weight I want is about that of the Swarovski Z3 3-9x36, but that is way more magnification than I want. Low dispersion glass is a must. I primarily hunt mesic and pine forests and most of the deer move before sunrise and after sunset. Suggestions? Guidance? The current configuration: I would be looking more at the reticule that you use than the scope. You will do much better with a thick heavy #4 for example than you would with a thin duplex, and if you can find the reticule in the light compact scope that you want all the better.
Canada by choice, British by Blood
People think there's a rigid class system here, but dukes have been known to marry chorus girls. Some have even married Americans.
HRH Prince Phillip
|
|
|
|
|
397 members (10gaugemag, 260Remguy, 17CalFan, 264mag, 10gaugeman, 204guy, 35 invisible),
2,486
guests, and
1,206
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums81
Topics1,190,598
Posts18,454,430
Members73,908
| |
Most Online11,491
Jul 7th, 2023
|
|
|
|
![[Linked Image]](http://s961.photobucket.com/user/RHClark/media/P1000886_zps70bcdb82.jpg.html)
