Hey guys what fixed scope do you use? My brother just bought a Winchester 70 Featherweight in 308 and wanted a light compact scope on it. We looked at the Leupy's, but my brother wanted something really good. He's dead sold on the S&B Fixed 4x but we wanted to look for more options.

I imagine the optics forum is where you would get the most ideas and arguments.
I feel like a fixed 4 or 6 from Leupold will let me kill anything I want to hunt.

stumpy

I prefer a fixed in 6x. The M-8 version by Leupold.

If he is sold on a S&B 4x36 all I can say is why look elsewhere? He won't find better. This from a die hard 6x user too.

Leupy FX-II 6x36 here (well, technically back home--here i just use irons )

Yep. 6x42 with heavy duplex. Good quality, tough as nails, reasonably priced, great light gathering and enough magnification to shoot game as far as you can shoot.

A 4x S&B at 14 oz, is not exactly a light weight or compact scope. If your bro doesn`t mind spending a grand or a little more for the S&B, then go for it. It`s his money!

The eye relief for the 4x S&B lists at 3.31" which on a .308 might not matter too much.

However, for just about any if not all hunting situations he`ll encounter, a fixed 4x Leupold at 9 oz, with an eye relief of 4" for under $275 will be fine at 4 times less the cost.

In comparison to the price, the glass quality of the S&B is not 4 times better than the Leupy. From a percentage standpoint, the price always exceeds by a much wider margin any marginal increase of optical quality. In other words, the Leupy might give 90-95% (estimating) of what the S&B offers, but you pay 4 times the price for the S&B.

If possible, if he can compare them together side by side at the same time, that would be best. If his eyes can justify the additional $700-$750 for the S&B, then buy it.

If he can afford a S&B, then the world's his oyster!

I was impressed enough with my 1st Zeiss Conquest 4x32 that I just ordered another. I checked out the Leupold and Sightron 4x scopes, but they were too short in tube length to go on a long action rifle ('06 and Whelen) without extension rings.

However, since you're talking about a .308, I'd definitely consider either one of those scopes. I'm not sure how your friend could get all of these different scopes in one place to see what he likes best, but that would certainly be the best way to go about it.

FC

The Schmidt & Bender 4x is indeed an excellent scope, but the eye relief is a bit short. That is likely acceptable in a .308 Win, but even then a prone shot uphill will likely give you a good eyebrow bump!

I would look at the Zeiss Conquest 4x if I were you (or your brother!) I did, and the optic quality is on a par with the Schmidt & Bender (to my surprise!) -- and the price is WAY less. A store let me take both home, and I compared both until way after dark. The S & B may be tougher -- that is indeed part of their reputation, but the Zeiss Conquest scopes are getting a very good reputation for toughness so do not overlook them.

Best of all, the Zeiss Conquest 4x has 0.8 inches more eye relief than the S & B 4x. Also, the long tube of the Conquest makes it easy to position in the rings (to further avoid "Weatherby eye").

The Zeiss Conquest 4x witha 4a reticle is a real bargain! About $299 or less.

Having said all that, neither the S & B 4x nor the Zeiss Conquest 4x are really light weight. If light weight is more important than image quality, get thyself a Leupold 4x. The image quality is OK, and only noticeably inferior in very poor light (i.e. later than you can shoot in the US legally, unlike here in Sweden where we can shoot by moonlight (or no moon!) and where the extra optical performance of the S & B and Zeiss do mean something). In the US and Canada (I have lived both places), the optical performance in the dark is really just a theoretical advantage. Still, it is satisfying to have the best<!

John

I like the Leo 6x36 with LR dotz in it and I like the present day Weaver K6 (a whoppin $119). Both are incredibly good to my way of going about business.

Dober

any decent 4x scope would do just fine on a 308. s&b's are great, as would be a leupy, or a weaver.

I called him so we can go check out some more scopes and buy some cleaning stuff for me, turned out he was in the middle of mounting on that S&B. I'll have to compare it to my swaro's.

Can't go wrong with Schmidt&Bender - best scope out there in my opinion!!

That just so sounds like brothers. Best of luck with the scope. Pics please after the successfull family hunts to come.

I have to respectfully disagree about the Weaver scopes, gents.
Within the past 3 years, I purchased one of their Grand Slam scopes and found it very lacking in optical quality. I found that only the central third of the view thru the lens was crisp and clear. Perhaps it was the individual scope I had but I couldn't believe it after all the good hype I'd read about it so I dumped it for another Leupold.

Propably just an example of one bad one.

Too many guys here who use alot of different brands up to really high $$$ glass and know their stuff think the Weavers are alot of bang for the buck.

Bill

+1, FX-II 6x36mm.

Cabela's has the Zeiss Conquest 4X Riflescope for $299.00. I have no idea why someone would choose fixed power scope for a .308 but the Zeiss Conquest for that price is worth a look.

I'm sure you don't

They make sense on a short range gun in calibers of 375H&H and up. The .308 isn't a short range rifle, and the variables lack for nothing.

Nor does a 6x. Hitting [bleep] far ain't a trick with lower magnification.

I've got fixed 6x on my favorite rifles, and I hunt in some of the most open, long range country that their is. Never felt handicapped. Can't fathom how having only 6x could be a handicap.
And just what advantage does a variable offer? Maybe if your rifle was too light a variable could help. Or maybe you just enjoy extra complication?
I have quite a few variables, and they are fine, but a fixed 6 does all I need.

4x and 6x power scopes have served me well for a long time on several diferent 30-06's. Longest kill to date was 550+ yards with a Ruger #1 30-06 with a fixed 4x Weaver.. Luck? Maybe but dead as hell first shot..

I never had trouble killing groundhogs way out there with 4X and never feel handicapped by using a 4X on my 308 now.

I'd also take a fixed 4x or 6x scope at dusk and dawn anyday over a variable.

I know they're a big target but...



4X Leupold, 365 meters (399 yards), 30-06

I can't imagine why so many people seem to like unnecessarily Hubble-like optics on their rifles, but, thankfully we have the choice. And I know what works - for me.

And with a SB, if you run out of ammo you can beat the critter to death with it, no problem.

Even sheep.......

Better than a rock....

or a .25 acp.

That still cracks me up

It's horrible to contemplate.

Reminds me of a story I'll tell you one day that I just remembered.

I can so see myself in that situation.

It's horrible to contemplate.

Common misconception. For practical purposes, the .375 H & H has the same trajectory as a .308 Win -- it is not a short-range rifle either.

Now, I will admit that shooting a ,.375 H & H prone in cold blood takes a bit more practice than doing the same with a .308 Win! I had to gradually work up to this myself...

John

Me and two pards are out on a leisure hunt, I have a shotgun in case we come across some geese.

We see a little buck facing us at @125 yards. Pard #1 fires a shot with his 7Mag and misses. Buck still standing there, second shot is right on the money, hair flies everywhere and buck drops.

When we get to him he's still kicking, Pard #2 says he will finish him off with his 357. He shoots but somehow misses the bucks brain pan but shoots one of his antlers off. Buck decides he doesn't like this and starts to come back to life, begins kicking (he's on the side of a 20' slide) and Pard #2 grabs the remaining attached horn and goes down the 20' slide with the buck.

They skid to a halt and Pard #2 realizes that the 357 is no longer with him and the buck is still no happier. Laughing I yell down, 'Get the [bleep] out of the way' and then throw a load of BB's from the shotgun into the deer's head, ending the fun.

You had to be there.

All that in less than 8 seconds...

Dober

Anybody we know? Sounds pretty classic.

No, it was from an earlier time in AK, but you could have just as easily thrown in a few of the 'knowns'.

Yep, amazing how much [bleep] can happen in just a few seconds.

Yeah I can relate to the rodeo's as well. Be a fun thread to start if no one repeated what was said on it...grin

Been ripping any lips lately? It'll be a while for me as the rivers are blown out right now, but come July I'll be all over it. Spent 4 days in Minne last month visiting fam (Dad's been sick) and I fly fished the heck out of the crappies/sunnies/bass and one really nice pike)

Dober

Between traveling for work and the new lady things have been a bit slow there but I'm planning a trip this weekend.

Why he chose the 4x is becuase where he hunts, it's thick old pine, cluttered black oaks and waist high ferns. He still-hunts blacktail most of the time. Out of all 3 of us brothers, he's the better hunter. All his shots are less than 50 yards and he would not hunt with any other kind of rifle besides bolt actions. My younger brother on the other hand, is a lazy SOB who sits on a ridge all day glassing the clear cuts and when any buck presents itself, will plunge out his 10 lb. 257 roy with a champagne bottle scope knocked all the way to 24 power and squeeze away a 110 grain bullet 800 yards away and cleany miss the deer and blame it on the trigger.

.........I agree with ya! Hubble like optics or "overscopingitus" for hunting purposes are very abundant! Many seem addicted to over magnification, thinking that somehow they`ll take game better, or group their shots better during target work, while maybe forgetting or not considering how their rifles will be used, hunting distances and in what type of terrain they`ll be hunting in.

Now that is a great pic, take a kid hunting and you won't have to hunt for them later on in life.

Thx for taking the lad on the hunt!

Dober

Looking back at my records, I dropped a deer with a PF FWT in 7/08, had to shoot by my weak side/left hand about 80 yds, used a 4x32 Bausch and Lomb Compact/Balfor scope. Damned optics I swear rivaled Zeiss.....so it seemed (very dark light/bright view thru scope). None the less the fine Plex Crosshair and Dusk light made me want just a tad more.....so off it came and on went an M8 6x36 duplex. A VERY subtle marginal improvement.......and so it was the next deer dropped at only 30 yds from that rifle. Last year a 6x42 took my deer at 250 yds. My shortest using a 6x42 was 15 yds. Very versatile those fixed x's.....more often in 6 power persuasion in my experience.

Money no issue, an S&B would be the cat's meow I'd imagine, and the old Swarovski 4x32s now discontinued likely nice, but a plain old 4x33 FX-II (preferably with a custom shop installed #4 or #1 German Reticle for ME) would be very adequate, as would a Conquest 4x. A 4x will take game far away, though a 6x might allow a better 'look' not to be confused with better hitting.

FYI, that B&L 4x later wound up on another PF M70, a Syn/matte 20" carbine in 7/08.......yep, dropped a running deer around 115 yds IIRC, so it still had value as a hunting scope! Oh, did I mention the running deer I dropped at 200 paces using a 7mm BR rifle, and a Nikon 4x32 Pro-Staff? I had enough time to get a sight pic and sqeeze as that deer almost cleared the field and disappeared into a thicket when it went down. I NEVER thought about the Scope Brand or the Magnification - Interesting

Now can SOMEONE please just make a quality 5x35 Fixed with a #4 and/or #1 reticle and lest us be DONE with this 4x vs 6x dilema? LOL.

Make that a 5x38 with a 1" dot and we'll really have something now won't we...gack gack gack

And don't forget to keep it @ 10 oz or less.

Dober

How about a 2.5x fixed for the woods (not a scout scope)? In thick woods, I think that would be a neat option. Iron sights work great in that venue except at the edges of legal shooting light on the high side of 100 yards. Then a scope makes some shots possible that are too sketchy with irons.

LMAO Dober! Can we make that a 1MOA Yellow Dot for the woods?

My eyes are not so hot on the red/green eye chart/tests for color blind folks! Lol. The Lit reticles via Schmidt/Bender and Nightforce really got my attention at the SHOT show, but I err on back to K.I.S.S. on my eyes and pocketbook, no batteries to worry with, etc.

Awww, nice, what's with the extra 3mm Dober? A 7.6 vs 7 exit pupil? Your eyes must dilate more than mine? My 40 something eyes likely emulate what the books say, those other than the blessed youth do well so they say to get 5.5 actual vs. max of 7 theoretical but not knowing what some are smoking out there.......Ha, just kidding.

You know, I won't discount that, a 1 MOA dot might just be quick, akin to a Flash Dot?

Btw, I think Weaver was onto something, a 4.75 Grand Slam.....

Gringo, my 2.5x FX on a 357 did well on a doe at last light last fall, but the Coon that came afterwards to steal corn the landowner scattered, well, he was lucky I was not using a 6x42 with German #4 or #1 Just a matter of a dark colored animal, in a dark shadow, in last shooting light in timber. High respect for those itsy bitsy 2.5s.

Likely all any moose or bear hunter needs, let alone a lot of deer killing. FWIW, I knocked off a few tree squirrels to 55 yds or so using a 22 LR Marlin Model 70 HC, clip fed carbine. No complaints.

I don't have any, but I like those German #4 and #1 reticles. Did you fry any of the squirrels? Been a long time since my Marlin 39 has done any squirrel play time.

I have fried a few, but they do better slow cooked IMHO as rabbit.....the latter just falls off the bone....and by sheer size more satisfying! Those cat squirrels (grey's) are really tough fried, course an old boar fox squirrel is not much better.

Knocked off a rabbit w a borrowed 39 Golden, but my 9422 took a few fox squirrels via the buckhorn irons.....what fun!

That 39 is calling, but my brothers BL22 has given me an itch all these years.....now there is the newer nickel classic Grade II....purty! Octagon 24" model even more so.

That was two falls ago when he was six. Now, two years later, he has grown well - perhaps due in part to a diet rich in fish, seal, and, well....moose. And as much as I'm looking forward to the day when he punches my ticket for me, perhaps prior to when he will be able to buy his own - (but I'm not pushing him; that's for him to decide when) I very much look forward to the time when he will throw one of those super-size drumsticks over his shoulder and begin paying off the grocery bills!
I'm not sure where the "energy of youth" went, but it seems to be a bit weaker these days, and shorter in supply ??!?

They sure were, and so, it got discontinued.

Klikitarik

I agree, that is a great picture. Thanks for sharing.

As far as fixed power scopes, a few rifles in my safe have the following on them.
3 - Weaver 2.5X
2 - Weaver 3X
1 - Leupold 3X
4 - Leupold 4X
1 - Weaver 4.75X
2 - Leupold 6X

That is funny.....

If by "really good" you mean light weight,tough,waterproof,able to withstand recoil forces from about anything rationale,maintain constant POI,and reliable dependability,with optics sufficient for most hunting, you are hard pressed to find anything better than a 4X Leupold.

You can shade it optically if you want,by a slight margin,but you'll spend a LOT more to do so.And when it comes to slapping reticles on BG animals,I doubt the others will do a whole bunch better (yes,I've owned about all of them).

+2. 4X is only inadequate on the Internet.

Well written with a double entente as well.
=============================================================

When I started out our favored brand was Lyman and they did not make a variable. Thus for big game I used the 4X All American. It was fine for the woods and small fields in VT. It could have been a lot more fun at the range to have more magnification where I shoot the most.

Since the late 60's I have got ten or so variable Leupolds. Many said that they were the 'best' and at least the magnification could be turned up. A Leupold never fogged up either but they could have crosshairs that don't fade and sharper definition. I got by. These days I have bought some Conquests and other Zeiss.

Nine of these Lyman 4X All American's are still in service here.

Did you say ALL SHOTS ARE UNDER 50 YARDS? That is what I bought a 44mag lever action for - no scope. Seriously, for fifty yards - or likley less, I find a scope more of a hindrence then a benefit. If the gun comes with iron sights I would suggest using them.

I use the Leupold 4X scopes, either the new FXII, which is fully multicoated or the older M8, which is single coated.
The things that make the euros different, and some say better, is their short eye relief and super fast focusing system.
That short eye relief also allows the scope to better reolve the image to some degree. Many insist that this is proof of "better optics," which they insist means that the glass and coatings are significantly better.
I don't believe it. The single coated Leupold I have can be focused to show me .30 caliber bullet holes at 100 yds. The fully multicoated FXII might be able to show me 7mm bullet holes, but not always. On the other hand, my old B&L Balfor 4X can show me .25 caliber bullet holes at the same distance.
If a difference like that is worth it to you, fine. However, that short eye relief comes with a much smaller eye box. That's the fore and aft leeway one has when trying to acquire the image. The "better" B&L, for instance, has something like 1/4 - 1/3 the eye box of either of my Leupolds.
The other thing is the euro's very fast focusing system. Good if you need to refocus your scope from time to time, say because your eyue sight isn't the best, but bad as they don't have a locking ring for the adjustment. Rub that thing against you body and you can move it. Doesn't take much to move it pretty far out of focus. Not for me.
Leupold's 4X scopes have the rep of being as tough a scope as made by anyone. They put up with heavy recoil as well as anything does save the little 2.5X Ultralight Leupold. And they take all sorts of heavy impacts w/o changing zero. That I can personally attest to.
The FXII with a German #1 reticle works on the very darkest nights. Another thing I can personally attest to.
That's another point. You can customize them with things like special reticles. Lots of good things about them. E

Define usage or purpose for your fixed powers as I have everything from a 1x to a 46x from old Unertl and Lyman external adjustment long tubes to short bush scopes to modern BR scopes...

I like a 1 to 3x for bush, 4x for general big game hunting, 6x for my rimfires for squirrels and rabbits, 10x for long range guns, 12 to 24x for varmint shooting, 30 to 46x for bench rest and of course some crossover with the 4/6 controversy...

Pssst, it's 2009. You can have your cake and eat it too.

Low powered fixed scopes offer nothing you can't get in a variable. The variable on the other hand offers a huge advantage over the low powered fixed scopes. It's not the 1950s anymore.

1950 or 2009... features like lighter, brighter, tougher, and simpler don't go out of style. A little more magnification may make it easier to shoot little groups from the bench... but when it comes to running holes through critters in the field, a fixed 6x rarely sucks hind tit.

What might that huge advantage be?

Dead is dead. Never missed a thing cause I couldn't turn my scope up.

It just has to be his shoes.



P.S. I'm still laughing over you scope pic. Funny stuff.

I have variables, quite a few of them but a fixed power is in almost all cases shorter in body length, lighter (especially when trying to get under a weight limit in BR), stronger, less temperamental and with far less that can go wrong and here's the real clincher a Hell of a lot cheaper...

Eremicus, that post wasn't directed at you, didn't know how to get the advanced reply box...

In all fairness, that "alternatively mounted" scope was a 3x9 VXII.

With dotz, no less.

So I do see a place for variables.

Of course variables are good....far better than they used to be;and useful,too....sometimes,when you need to turn them up,which is not often in much BG hunting,unless you want to.

With lots of moving parts,in a variable, there is just more to go wrong.It really IS possible to hunt,and kill stuff(some of it far away)with a fixed power scope.

Well, shiver my timbers. Just checked. I, on my personal rifles, have only fixed scopes left.

Weaver K2 2,5x
Leupold M8 2,5x28 (Scout)
Weaver GS 4,75x40
Aimpoint Micro H1

Ghost&Post on the 9,3x64 and the .45-70s.

Pawned of to Students:

Leupold Vari X II 3-9x50
Leupold VX I 3-9x40
Leupold VX II 2-7x36
Zeiss 2,5-10x48

All good scopes - just not for me.

I think, in good time I will upgrade my fixed scopes to:

2,5x20 UL Leupold
4x36 Leupold
6x42 Leupold

cmg: How'd that happen?

Be careful.....you might not ever hit anything again

CMG - that Weaver 4.75 always intrigued me and I was kicking myself for not needing it bad enough to buy it. I have only heard from one guy here regarding it and his review was surprsingly unflattering.

Have quite a few variables and fixed in QR rings. Really enjoy using the Leupold 1.5-5x when going between thick and open. However, can't think of any other situation where the variables would or have served me better than a fixed 4x or 6x. Most are afraid to give the medium power fixed an honest go and thus will probably never see the advantages they have.

Except for groundhogs and bench my variables have little use for hunting BG. The LR people have a different situation, however Bob and I know how few go there.

Me too, and the older I get, the less I like moving parts.

Just my humble opinion but I believe that some people just don't have good enough eye sight to get by with the fixed power scopes up to 6x for hunting. You've GOT TO use what works for you and some people simply do better with higher powered scopes for hunting.
I've got a 4.75x GS and the only negative about it to me is it's short tube length for mounting. Minor but still there.

I may be wrong on this, so if the eye experts will chime in it would be appreciated.

The way I see it is that if your eyes are not normal, the the only thing the higher powers do is give you a bigger blurry out of focus picture. Extra power or more xxxx's will not correct your vision and in fact may make things worse with a reduced fov making it harder to find stuff when you need to do so quickly. Combine that with the harder to hold steady disadvantage of high xxx's and again I don't see the advantage.

I have no issues with anyone using whatever gear works best for them. If you like high power, by all means use it. If you may occasionally need to dial it down, by all means use a variable.
But deciding to use a fixed scope is an equally valid choice, and not merely a throwback to an earlier time, as some have suggested.

battue,
I'm not meaning "don't have good enough eye sight" as in not having normal vision. Bad choice of words I reckin. I'm meaning some people just "see" better and therefore shoot better with higher x scopes. Maybe someone who experiences this can explain it better but I do know hunters who simply shoot better having they say "a better view" of game with higher x scopes. Hey,it works for them.

Gotcha. Problem with talking long distance is that ones meaning often falls between the cracks. I "see" now what you meant.

To suggest that variables are some way vastly (or even less than vastly) superior to fixed powers is kind of like saying a 300 RUM is somehow vastly superior to a 30-06 in terms of what can be accomplished among our choices of quarry. In many cases both address the question that doesn't often get asked: "what if," except in one's mind.

Now, I will admit that I enjoy using the certain niche items which sometimes seem best suited for specific "what ifs," but from my early years in the midwest as well as better than a quarter century of living and hunting in Alaska, I'm having a hard time trying to think of a situation where I would have been somehow cheated of an opportunity had I been using "only" a bolt 30-06 loaded with 180 Partitions and topped with a quality (M-8 would work) 4X scope. If anything, it has been the use of niche items: an interesting "ideal for certain situations" caliber, an interesting "let's see how this works" bullet/load combo, or a "good for anything, perfect for nothing" scope which have interfered with my intent.

I will venture to say that many folks would be perfectly well scoped with either a relatively light, compact fixed-power scope, either in 3X or 9X - since either of those powers are where I surmise most variables are set mostly (and since the majority of variables seem to be sold in that power range.) And logically, that should eliminate much of the demand for variables. However, "what if?" is a tremendously powerful (if not even magical) sales feature. I suspect it will continue to sustain the variable market even as the arm chairs of America sustain the "what ifs" which haunt the minds of the masses, many of whom spend more time dreaming "it" than doing "it".

Variables have their place. Fixed powers, in spite of their lack of razzle-dazzle, do also. Popularity is not the same as value in terms of utility. One is not intrinsically better than the other. Use what you will. Only you are responsible for your hits and misses.

Well stated. Unfortunately a lot of people consider high powered variables a replacement for binoculars and spotting scopes. In the field, I don't care much for this practice.

I'm runnin' for cover ... how long has it been since we've had this debate (might be due again) ... usually good for a chit storm

FTR ... I agree.

Bobin,

I am holding my breath. We have a big celebration coming and want to serve wild boar. So far I still have it in the fresh box (the woods). Can you picture me telling the crowd, I missed because I only had a fixed? I think, I better borrow a real rifle from a serous hunter...

Kenjs,

that Weaver intrigued me to for a long time. Picked it up here at the fire this spring. Has all ready acounted for a couple hogs. Best thing, after lots of use, I still am intrigued.
Sits on a 6mm Rem. (Kermit) that I finally found brass for. It and some TSX are due next week.

The variables are no more likely to fail than the fixed. The advantages are that you have a bunch of different fixed power scopes in one.

It's 2009......wake up!

Pretty funny considering your avatar.

LOL

You have the wrong guy friend - I made no comment about the reliability of variables. Must be someone else. That aside, after this weekends use of my only variable I am more convinced than ever I don't want one -least for any hunting I do. Any benefit I might pull out of a scope from its ability to change magnification has been far outstripped by the repeatability and constantness of a fixed. The one point I voiced earlier was, and remains, this- the longest shots of the original poster was said to be under 50 yds so I don't understand the need for any scope at all. Kind of think the entire thread is full of info that really doesn't apply to the circumstance. Enjoyable, but not germane. (with respect)

I have a bunch of varaibles. They are all perfectly repeatable and constant. I can't imagine hunting with a rifle without a scope. Of course I'm 52.

I have both and think they're both great. The only reason I hunt primarily with a fixed scope is ME, not the scope. There is little worse than to miss the "shot of a lifetime" as that big buck crosses an opening 20 yards away, all because I left my scope on a high power of magnification. A 4X scope is plenty to hunt any animal in North America to 400 yards or better. That is a fact that can not be denied (sucessfully).

Another fact is that more moving parts equals more breakdowns, whether it be optics, or submarines.

I have variables, and like them. I just don't need them.

I have fixed power scopes, but I don't need them.

They offer no advantages other than perhaps an oz. or 2 of weight savings. An older fixed power is a lot more likely to fail than a modern variable.

An older variable is a lot more likely to fail than a modern variable.

The pearls just keep on coming.

Your wearing them.

Older variables weren't so good. You guys are still stuck in the 1970s. New variables are just as good as it gets. The fixed power offers nothing. Old wives tales die hard.

So is this:


Can't imagine using either WITH a scope...The 45 in the back has shot at least a dozen head of hogs/deer....it never knew it wasn't a rifle I guess...The one up close has drawn blood once..

Kind of like muskets and buckskin?

Leave it alone... Like my man Walter Sopcheck says "you're out of your element Donny!"

Less moving parts is always more reliable than more moving parts... and slightly larger lenses will always give the fixed scopes a brightness advantage. The only people who have trouble shooting schitt with fixed scopes... are people who haven't shot much schitt.

Damn, you've tripled your post count in the past two days........grin

Do you guys get paid to be a$sholes, or do you do it for free? You clearly know nothing. I'm use to that. I deal with it all day long.

I don't think I said anything particularily assholish, but yes, they both have their advantages. As far as Steelhead knowing nothing, that is not true, he knows a lot. But he is a sensitive fellow and if you insult his intelligence the hurt will come out.

So you have severe agoraphobia.......

I don't think I could insult his intelligence.

Trying to catch up with Jeff... it's hard to get in 412.6 posts per day though.

Bite me <grin>...

I like variables. I do have a couple fixed powers.

I went into the gunshop to buy a fixed 4x for my .358 BLR a few years ago... and after a direct comparo, found that the Leupold 2.5x8 was a superior optic, set at 4x, compared to the Leupold 4x I was comparing it to! Better eye box, eye relief, field of view, just a more comfortable scope to be behind- for ME.

That was a head scratcher, but I just believed what I was seeing and bought yet another 2.5x8. I mostly keep them set somewhere around 2.5-4x, and just turn them up if I need to, which is rare. Sometimes turning them up has "put horns" on a deer I couldn't suss out at 3x (or whatever). Sometimes it's helped me see through the brush and find a shooting lane better.

I could, I think, do just fine with a fixed 4x but I choose not to.

BobinNH, my recent experience with my 1.8-5.5 Zeiss has me that much more interested in a Conquest 4x. Are you still liking the ones you bought?

You boys will give me credit one of these days. Sniffed Jeff out from the get go and caught lots of grief for it.


Ain't good at much but I can read sign.

I have a sign you could read, but I'm not sure how to post it.

Posting pics should be easy for a 2009 kinda guy.

See, just like this

Never were an ass kisser, surprises me none from you.

Klik: Excellent post and well stated!Insecurity sells a lot of gear

I have nothing against variables and use them myself.But I have serious doubts when someone tells me that variables are absolutely essential for success,and a guy is living in the dim past if he does not use one.Hunters with any experience know that is just pure BS........

Nobody said that variables are absolutely essential for success. The facts are that they are just as good as fixed, cheaper than fixed, and provide more versatility.

They aren't your daddy's variables.

Guess that's ONE way to describe getting your butt kicked fair and square in several Internet pissin' match that YOU started...

However. Gotta give credit where due, you do hold a mean grudge, and good faith has no meaning to you, which lets you distort what folks say and otherwise act in disreputable ways that do make you a real PITA to rassle with. You are pretty good at being bad.

GRIN

The wheels on the bus go round and round.......

Whatever advances have been made in the arena of variables... are also applicable to fixed glass. And, resolution trumps magnification all day long... just cause it's 9x, doesn't mean you can see schitt better than another scope at 6x.

These ain't your daddy's muskets.

It would appear JO is officially delusional and is now living in a fantasy world. Actually nothing new. Holy smokes.

Precisely why they are used in BR events when having to make weight limits for your class...



Who said they were new scopes...I still have and use scopes that I bought new in the late 1960s and 70s and they weren't old wives tales but actual fact, they didn't hold their zero, clicks were hard and not very precise, I've had end glass fall out of scopes and interior glass fall partially over, fogging and a whole slew of other events...

Oh, and fixed power scopes of the same lens opening and tube diameter are usually brighter then variables of comparable price/make!

Thanks for the advice....I'll try to remember this. I appreciate it

By "just as good", I assume you mean just as rugged and dependable?Have you ever broken one by shooting the rifle under it?

Just out of idle curiosity,have you ever killed a big game animal with a variable by turning the power ring to make a shot that you would have been unable to make with a fixed power? Have you used any fixed powers for any hunting?

Just wondering.....

Some like to fiddle with the proverbial controls...

I own fixed X scopes by leupold, s&b and swarovski. for the s&b, I bought the 6x42 'cause it was $500 less than the variable and figured that most of my shots are going to be at 6x or close anyway. if he needs a 4x scope, not sure if the s&b is worth all the money for close range shooting. almost any 4x would be fine. if you go to the s&b 6x42, now you are talkin'!

I have a 8x56 swarovski PH, again, bought the 8x cause it was $400 less than the variable and it works just fine as a fixed-stand set up. it sits atop a 240 wby mag

I really dont see how you could go wrong with a leupy 6x42 FXII, I have a couple and that scope would be my second choice if I could only hunt with one scope, no matter where. my first choice would be the s&b 6x42, a really nice scope. I have one on a 300 wsm and a 25-06 and dont feel "under scoped" when I tread outdoors.

I have never had a variable break from shooting.

I have changed the magnification on scopes frequently while hunting and in particular for up close woods shooting.

I started with fixed powers. My first centerfire was scoped with a Lyman 6X Wolverine. I still have that scope. Of the scopes in the drawer here not in use most are fixed magnifications in 6X.

Those 6X scopes have too much power for finding a moving deer at woods ranges. I don't need that much magnification.

I'm imagining the FX-II 2.5 UL as the shizzle for a trim rig, good for most MPBR medium game cartridges. I've just about talked myself out of the 2-7x33. If Ruger would only make light weight rings.

I would buy a bunch of LW rings...

Somewhere along the line this thread has lost all meaning...


There are excellent arguements for both the varibles and the fixed models, even in 2009.....

I believe that the less working parts involved then the more dependable the scope will be..therefore I believe the fixed powers are more dependable and that is an exceptable trade off for many out there, for others the advantages of a varible are more important.

the manufacturers have told me the fixed scopes come in for less repair than the varibles even when you take into account the much higher number of varibles that are sold..

It would stand to reason.

The "less moving parts (moving)" argument is one I've made myself in defense of a reticle over a turret for a general-purpose hunting rig. Simple is good. Less to go wrong.

So I'm not being argumentative. That said, in 2009 you can buy a car that will likely go 250k or more miles. In terms of reliability, precision, and so on, it seems to me that the manufacturers of high-quality objects, have come a long ways in the last few decades...

But again, the one, simple reason I don't own a Leupold 4x is that when I spent some time directly comparing one to a 2.5x8 set at 4x, to my eye the variable was the better optic. I went in to buy the 4x, but walked out with the 2.5x8 based strictly on what I saw- and would have much preferred, at the time, to have spent less $$$....

I don't buy fixed because they are tougher- I buy them because they work better for me and, of those I have owned and used, are consistently brighter than the variables. I believe the word "variable" to be the exact opposite of "constant" and find the word "fixed" a synonym to it. In my admittedly average experience I find I throw up a fixed - get a more automatic sight picture, ample magnification, little or no bodily adjustment and absolutely no mechanical adjustment. Swamp- as for the open sights - have you ever tried ghost rings or those fluorescent looking ones? My eyes are starting fade a bit but the ghost rings work great on the sks. I can still use semi buck horns and did this weekend on my model 92 lever but if\when that becomes impossible I might try some sort of Hi-viz thing in the future. For 20 to 40 yd shots mentioned, I think while maybe not ALL, dang near most everybody just doesn't need a scope - and might benefit from not using one.

I have two rifles currently set up with a ghost ring and fiber optic front bead, a 44 mag carbine and a M1a Bush rifle. I've had two more set up that way, that I no longer own.

It works very well... way better than buckhorns, for me. I am prone to shooting high with buckhorns in the heat of the moment.

Depends on what and where one intends to pursue things. A few more details?? Prairie dogs on the plains or moose in Alaska????

Which fixed scope are you looking at that is more expensive than a variable of the same make? I aint found one yet.

I have found exactly the same thing when hunting in the thick rainforests of the PNW. If I were to used a fixed-power scope up here, it would be a 2.5x at the very most.

I've passsed up a shot on a big bull elk at 30 yards because I just couldn't discern enough elk through the 6x scope I was using at the time. Just saw too many tree branches, ferns, bushes, alders, etc. I can't say for sure if I'd had my trusty 2-7x variable (which would have certainly been set on 2x in such terrain) if I would have been able to make a shot or not. If so, that certainly means I could have made the shot with lower power fixed like a 2.5x. But on that day, a 6x fixed was a handicap (not because it was a fixed power scope, but because it was a 6x) which caused me to pass up a shot at the bull of a lifetime.

If I were to ever purcahse another fixed-power scope, I'd go with a 4x for sure for the type of hunting I do.

OK, I have fixed and variable scopes but I also have Red Dot/Holo, ghost ring, target receiver and tang and regular run of the mill open sights...each has a purpose, use or niche--some dependent upon the sport and I'll admit that the optics do have crossover potential when you use yours as a search device--especially variables as a spotting scope or binoculars...

I would much prefer scanning the bush or plains with a 10, 12 oz bino then a 7.5 lb rifle but that's just me...Does it justify leaving the bino at home? I really don't know...Would it be more pronounced if I only had a 4x scope on my rifle, would I have to bring binos/spotting scope then?

With dense bush like that in the PNW I�ve also found that you also have those damn glades, barren of trees that might be 100+ yards across or clear cut logging areas�The 2.5x is great for the bush part but they lack a little in the 150 yard capacity and there a 1.5/1.75 to 4x would be ideal�

Shoot the 6x with both eyes open... and all these problems go away. I too hunt the jungles of Western WA... and have no problems shooting stuff at close range in the schitt with fixed 6 glass. But, I learned long ago to shoot with both eyes open... the way God wants us to.

So there ya go, now your more confused than ever..Isn't the internet a wonderful tool!

Don't know about the internet... or wonderful... but Swampman is definately a tool...

Would that not assume he is useful???

Dogshooter makes a good point - no not about Swampman - but about keeping both eyes open. I only started to seriously practice that a short while back and it really improved my speed on target.

I'm into simplification these days and things that produce results without fuss. No doubt I'll be using more fixed scopes in the future and took steps along those lines yesterday by ordering a Leupy 6x42 FX-3 from Rick Bin.

On the matter of shooting with both eyes open, gotta agree with Dogshooter. Both eyes open is the only way to go.

Okay, I'll give you credit for having a good sniffer.

Seattle: I hunt jungles, too...in Maine,and New Brunswick. I agree that 6X is too much(at least for me) in any kind of heavy cover.The solution has been simple and I mostly use a 4X....but have used 2.5 and 3X as well.

I use the same rifle when I hop on a plane for my western mule deer hunts;since I have killed large mule deer running at 15-20 yards with a fixed 4X,and used the same scope a handful of times between 350 and 500 yards to kill elk,antelope and deer.I really have very little use for a variable in heavy cover.

When I want a BIG scope,I buy a 2.5-8 or a 6X....

When I read,as I did this morning on another thread,that a 6X is no good past 150 yards,I really wonder how much actual hunting the guy making the statement has actually done......


In any event way too much is made of this scope business IMO.It is really no big deal.BG animals are large forgiving targets and the overwhelming majority are taken under 300 yards,unless you sit over bean fields.

Yep, and I've been guilty in the past myself of making too big a deal of it.

Not long ago I was watching some hunting show and this one guy shot a deer at about 300 yards with I believe a .300 RUM and his scope set at 14 power according to him. He went on to make the statement that that shot was more or less possible only because of the flat shooting cartridge and 14 power scope. What a crock of cow dung.

Delta: Yes, Udder BS

After bouncing around the west for 30-40 years,knocking off various animals with a 4X, I have been surprised to learn recently that I couldn't do it.

I showed up at my buddy's ranch in Wyoming a few years back with a 2.5-8 on my 270.Bill looked at me and said,"What are you doing?You know you don't need that thing......"

Wow, I must have dreamed easily ringing a 6" gong at 300 yards with my mighty 300 Savage by using a little Kentucky elevation and a 6x scope.

FYI for those who may not know it...300 yards - 6x scope is like looking at the gong at 50 yards with just your own peepers--natural eyesight and at 75 yards with a 4x scope or 3 yards with a 10x!

???

Not sure of your point .... but I agree