My new Forbes 20 B in 308 is in the mail. I have three possible fixed power scopes in my stable. A mini Burris 4x, a mini Burris 6x and a small fixed 4x Leupold. All have stood the test of time and proven stable even on some hard kickers. The mini-Burris 4x is about 2 oz lighter than the other two(wrong)Which would you go with and why?

Oops....just got out my scale and the 28mm 4x Leupold is longer but weighs 7.5 oz. The 4x Burris though only 20mm and much shorter weighs a surprisingly chunky 9 oz. The 6x Burris weighs 10.25 oz and is virtually the same size as the Leupold.

So let me change the question. For sheep and caribou in open country 4x or 6x with a 2.75 oz penalty?

Lucky you, mine was a few from being built when they ran out of SS 308 barrels! Looks like a May delivery now. I'd think all your scopes would work well but I would lean towards the 6x because of the open country you're in. The rifle is light enough I'm not letting ounces effect my scope decision. Mine will have a VX-6 1-6.

IMO, 2.75oz is absolutely inconsequential.

Personally I wouldn't run a 'mini' anything, the couple of compact scopes that I've owned, both Leupolds, were pretty average optically. I'd be screwing a FX11 6x36 down on that rifle.

Interestingly the 6x36 Leupold is 10 oz according to their web site. This again is lighter than the physically smaller Burris mini-6.

i also have a leupold 4x 33 size which weighs in at less than 10.5 oz with scope covers. What to do?

I know I will get blasted but on my Rem Ti and Kimber Montana I have a Leupold VX2 3-9 with LR Duplex and think it is about perfect in size, weight, and function. At 11.2 oz I think the 1.2 oz penalty is worth it for the 40mm objective.

I have had a mini 4X PA for a lot of years. I originally bought it for an airgun and it served me well. It is now on a nice Wasp waisted Browning semi auto .22. Works well enough there. It has proven tough, but it does not let enough light through to bet a sheep hunt on it. Never had a mini 6x. I would be tempted to look at the FX-2 3-9, either the Ultralight (mine has lots of miles and rounds under it's belt) or the regular 40mm version. There is nothing wrong with the Leupold fixed 4 or 6 either. I have killed stuff way too far with both a 2.5 and a 4.

Best wishes,

Jack

I am highly underwhelmed by my 2-7x burris, and REALLY impressed with the 6x36 FX2 leupold. it'd be a no-brainer for me.

Of your choices I would likely pick the Leupold 4x as the compact Burris I have looked through had critical eye relief and a less forgiving eyebox. If I thought I could swing it I would likely put on a Leupold 6x36 or 2-7x33; or look slightly bigger yet at a 6x42 or 3-9x40. I have nothing against Burris scopes but the newer Leupolds just seem substantially brighter and more forgiving to me.

I don't have experience with the 2 Burris scopes you mentioned so I'd go with the 4x Leo out of the listed choices.

If making my own choice the following scopes would be on the list (in this order):
FX3 6x42
FX2 6x36
VX2 2-7x32

Regardless of the one chosen, I'd go LRD or M1. The weight on any of these are acceptable to me and I much prefer the extra couple of oz's with ease of use to a mini-scope that's a challenge to get lined up on.

After spending some time looking through them all, I am leaning towards the full size Leupold 4x. Sans scope covers it's 9.5 oz or so only 2 oz heavier than the compact Leupold and hardly any heavier than the Burris Mini though it is much longer....the longer size also allows for more options in mounting. The Forbes isn't in my hands yet it is in transit. Must be one of the first 308's with stainless barrel in Canada.

With the Canadian dollar down I need to go with a scope already in my inventory as I am pretty much spent out on the rifle!

I ran a FX 11 6X36 on a Nula Model 20 and thought it was perfect. Just my opinion though.

LOP on the Forbes 24B I have is 14 1/4" so I ended up using a scope with a longer tube.A Nikon 4.5X14X40.

good to know. Mine will be here Tuesday with any luck and I will be able to scale things out.

Your 308 20B has been mailed from Prophet River already? That must have been one they made in December?

I thought the 7mm-08's were coming in January, but looks like they are a couple months behind.

4x33
6x33
6x36

In that order, nothing more, nothing less, no variable needed nor wanted on a lightweight short action. CDS or M1 if so inclined, my 6x33 has an M1.......

Ordered from Forbes in September..mailed from Prophet River on Thursday. Should be here Tuesday.

One of the new Zeiss terra scopes might work well on that rifle..

I went with a 2.5x8 VX3 on my Montana 7 mm08 and really like the balance. I shot 3 deer with it set on 6x this year. I keep thinking hard about ordering a 6x myself but having a hard time convincing myself to spend the money.

If you sell the VX3, you would not be out any $$$ for a 6x. Both work well.

I have become a Zeiss "Junkie" in the last few years, as I find their Conquest line to fit my taste just perfect. However, I recently checked out their new "Terra" line, and for me they leave a lot to be desired in their overall Clarity. Certainly not what one normally associates with the name Zeiss.

A scope is not the place to cut corners since it determines a good portion of the rifle's functionality. A leupold VX3 3.5-10x40 weighs 12.6 oz. and is a many times nicer scope than any the OP mentioned. For a few ozs. weight savings it doesn't make sense to put up with marginal scopes. Put good glass on there and put up with the extra few ounces.

Timely topic as mine just arrived at the local FFL. I have 4x33 and 2.5-8 Lupys, and a Redfield Revolution 2-7 in my unmounted scope lineup. I am leaning towards the Redfield. I can't imagine anything bigger than a 6x or 2-7 on the 20B, but that's just me. I have a Lupy 6x42 on a 24B, and it looks perfect.

Glad to see more talk on the forbes rifles. I know it's not the same rifle, but I have a forbes 24b in 30-06 that I recently received. I opted for a zeiss conquest 3-9x40. At 6.5 lbs with a scope, I can't see needing to shave of much more weight and having a bit more magnification can't hurt. I hope you enjoy yours. I dig mine more and more every time I put my hands on it. Btw, I tried a couple factory loads(didn't have time to start load development) and was floored when I tried the federal fusion 165 gr.. It stacked the first 3 shots on top of each other and after making a slight wind age adjustment I had to turn my spotter all the way up to distinguish the next 2 shot. Oh yeah, all that was at 200yds. Hopefully yours shoots equally well. Let us all know the results from the range.

I haven't been paying much attention to Optics development over the last 20 years! I use to slap a Burris mini on a light rifle and call myself good to go. Very surprised at the low weight of Leupolds. My 4x33 is practically the same weight as the mini 4X Burris and way better optically. A good small variable is in the same weight class. Might need to sell my last generation scopes and upgrade.

ok.. I am going to start with either the Leupold mini-4x28 (7.5 oz)
or the Leupold 4x33 (9.75 oz or so) which-ever fits the gun better.
I am going to sell some of my ancient scopes and pick up a 2-7 VX-2 with LR reticle. Might be time for a general optics upgrade!

Puttin a z3 3x9x36 weight of 12 ozs on my forbes, great glass

I've got one being made and after agonizing over it a bit, I just took the easy way out and got a VX-2 2x7. There are more glamorous scopes, but for weight, optics quality, and price, that one seems to be hard to beat.

I agree. I have also made some nice shots at 7x and for big game can't remember needing more. This was only 180 yards but I have made some nice 425 yard caribou kills with my 6.5 Rem mag and an old Redfield 2-7x with the Accutrack feature. Upgrading to the Ballistic Reticle and lighter weight of the Leupold should be a no brainer.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fHIp3M8j68U&list=PLs47Tr0OabKwHbQ2yjoSfgT-pY7FggKK2

That's a great choice for a 20B. I have this scope on a Montana in 243 and it's perfect.

I'd go with a full size Leupold 4x or 6x or a VX3 2.5-8x36 which is what I run on about everything.

Under 6 pounds with the 4x33 mounted. I guess I am good to go!

Can only say positive things about the Leupold 2-7x33. It is my favorite all-around big game hunting scope, and weighs just 10.5oz. I don't own a 20B yet but it has to be about ideal for such a rifle.

Agree with the others that report noticeably reduced optical performance from the "lightweight" model scopes with smaller lenses. Have personally tested many of the lightweights against the 2-7x33 and always chose the 2-7x33.

Gotta believe the 6x36 would be a good one too, though I don't own one, preferring the versatility of the variables.

6 = 1/2doz.

Having said all this, I admit a few of my rifles wear 3-9x40 scopes. This larger scope influences rifle balance and appearance to a greater degree than the 2-7x33, but some rifles can handle the added weight and mounting height better than others. I have this scope on my Weatherby 30-06 and Forbes 24B 270, and 3.5-10x40 (much heavier scope) on the Mauser '06. Wife also likes her 3-9x40 on her Win M70 Classic Compact 308, though I personally would have gone 2-7x33 on that rifle.

Some long-action rifles won't take the 2-7x33 without extension rings. I hate extension rings and do whatever I can to avoid them. Different mounts place the rings in different places, some closer together to accomodate shorter scopes like the 2-7x33. Also, some rings are narrower than others, and the narrower rings have made a difference in scope choice for me more than once. Burris Z rings are narrower than just about any other Weaver/picatinny-style ring I've tried. It seems many don't like the looks of Weaver-style systems, but they afford maximum flexibility in ring placement and scope choice. If a ring needs to be moved on an aluminum Weaver rail, a new cross-slot can be added with a small square file and about 20-30 minutes of hand work. A vertical milling machine is more precise than a file, but it takes longer and costs more.

Here is a 20B with an M8 4X. I think it fits pretty well, although there is slightly more space under the front bell than I'd prefer.

The rifle weighed in quite a bit heavier than the stated weight. Published weight is 4 3/4 lbs, or 4 lbs 12 oz, however my 308 came in at 5 lbs 2 oz.

I hope to shoot it this weekend......

That is an M8 4X? I could swear mine is longer. Yours must be a newer vintage?

Congratulations on a beautiful rifle, by the way.

If the Kimber Mountain Ascent would shoot anywhere near as well as a Forbes, I would mortgage my house to own one. Love me some CRF!

I want to say that the scope is at least 6 or 7 years old, but I can't remember. It came in the older darker Leupold box.

In order to maintain domestic tranquility, I had to sell some stuff off to get this, but I'm really excited to shoot it.

Although I'm a little disappointed that Forbes was so far off on the advertised weight, this and the standard Montana are about as light as I want to go. The quality is better on this one than on my earlier 24B. The barrel finish isn't as rough, the stock looks better (the safety cutout is cleaner), and the action cycles more smoothly (the 24B took a bit to break in). We'll see how the shooting goes.