Needing to buy a new scope for a custom 6mm Remington. It's a deer rifle and was wondering if I should pay extra for an adjustable objective. Thanks!

If it's over a 12X I'd want one. Had a 4.5x14 Leupold and it was danged near worthless without it.

No.

+ one on no

If all you intend to do is shoot deer size targets at 200 yards and under then no. Personally I always want parallax adjustment on any scope over 10X or anything intended to shoot tiny groups at very close or very long range.

If you don't twist dials or use mil-dots, probably not.

How much magnification do you intend to use?

I've had several Leupold 4.5-14 scopes with & without adjustable objectives. All my current ones DO NOT have AO!!!

I don't like AO for hunting, but I'm not using anything over 9x for that purpose either.

AO is just one more step away from simple.

I wouldn't go any higher than 12X. Right now I'm looking at a VXII 4-12x40.

No

I own a VXII 4-12 with AO. I've often used it on my deer rifles but it is primarily my rimfire scope. Anytime I bought a new centerfire and couldn't afford a new scope right away,I used that 4-12.

I see no reason not to have an adjustable objective on that scope. It's not like you have to constantly fool with it. If you don't need the AO just set it on 150 yards and leave it alone.On 150 yards it will be exactly the same as if you had bought the model without AO.It isn't going to move unless you want to move it. If however you ever decide to do some long range target shooting or even contemplate a long range shot on an animal,you have it. You might even want to use it on a very accurate rimfire at close range sometime. It just makes the scope more versatile with no drawbacks IMHO.

Weight, clutter, moving parts.

No thanks.

The same could be said for any variable scope. Use a fixed if you want to take that philosophy to the extreme. That may be your choice,just saying.

No

Doeslayer, It depends upon how far you shoot when hunting. If your starting at around 500 yards and going farther it can be of help! At extreme ranges, everything you can do optically, is to your advantage. And ethically speaking, you owe it to the animal! memtb

Invariably I can shoot tighter groups with A/O. It is not essential but I like as much accuracy as possible. A deer is a big target but you might want to shoot a crow or shoot against some braggart for money someday.

From Midway USA

Leupold VX-3i Rifle Scope 4.5-14x 40mm Custom Dial System Matte $549.99 free shipping

Leupold VX-3i Rifle Scope 4.5-14x 40mm Custom Dial System (CDS) Adjustable Objective Matte $599.99 free shipping

$50 extra

I bought my grandson #2

I think that I recall Mule Deer writing about a hunter who he was guiding some years ago who missed a trophy animal because the hunter was constantly adjusting the magnification and the AO.

I like AO scopes for shooting a longer ranges with CF rifles and at closer ranges with RF rifles. The AO feature does add a little bulk, a little weight, and a little complexity to the scope which could contribute to a greater possibility of failure under challenging conditions or due to rough handling.

I have about an equal number of 4-12x40 scope with and without the AO feature and don't feel that I am particularly advantaged or disadvantaged either way. That said, I am less likely to shoot a game animal that is over a quarter-mile away than I am when it is closer than a quarter-mile, so the AO feature may be less of an benefit in that scenario.

I won't get one without it. But then again I tend to be able to shoot further than the average Joe.

Average Joe answer, no.

My first deer hunt was with an "expert", and he admitted missing the only deer he saw that day because he "wanted his scope at 3 power!" While he was fiddling, the deer departed! Iirc, it was set about 7X.

I like my 3-9 and 2.5-7, but mostly, they remain set at ~ 6X, and I really like my 4x. Not an AO in the lot. I don't think it has stunted my growth.

Soo, technological advances can be a boon. But, if a person can set it where he thinks it will enhance his best performance, and not give in to the temptation to "fine tune" things, then it can be a plus; outside of the fact it's just one more level of complexity to go kerflooie at the worst time.

I'm always supportive of anything that enhances accuracy.

Yup--for hunting either a 4x or 6x works just fine to 400+ yards.

I agree, out to 500 yds AO isn't needed.

If your shooting past 500 yds there are scopes that will still work that are non AO. For example I've got a Zeiss Terra 3 with the Z6 reticle that has a 300 yd parralax setting and at 500 yds and further the parralax is pretty tight.

Scopes with a 100 yd parralax setting won't be as accurate at longer distance.

This doesn't necessarily mean you are only destined to buy scopes with a 300 yd parralax setting. Its pretty easy to take a non AO scope and reset the parralax yourself or some scope companies such a Leopold will adjust the parralax on there scopes for a small fee.

As mentioned if hunting beyond 500 yds regularly a scope with AO would be of benifit.




Trystan

^^^^+++++

Right on.

DoeSlayer: I prefer and use (almost exclusively!) scopes WITH adjustable objectives on my Rifles!
This is true for both my Varmint Hunting and Big Game Hunting Rifles!
Hold into the wind
VarmintGuy

I had a Zeiss HD 5 with the Rapid Zee 600 reticle. Parallax was set at 300 on that scope. It wasn't as clear as I thought it should have been shooting paper at 100 yards. It is a fine idea for hunting since you don't need ultimate resolution for hunting but I didn't like an $800 scope that wasn't clear so it went down the road. I likely would have kept it if it would have had a SF.


What it boils down to is that some folks apparently aren't smart enough to use an adjustable parallax,or rather smart enough to know when to leave it alone. Apparently some aren't even smart enough to use a variable scope. Maybe those folks would be better off with iron sights or even a shotgun.

There's those who are so utterly incompetent at hunting that they try to make up for their gross incompetence with gadgets.

Yea,who needs those newfangled gadgets? Nothing wrong with black powder ,a round ball and a patch.

I've killed a bunch of deer with black powder and patched round balls. I've also killed a shytload of woodchucks at 250-350 yards with scopes that don't have an adjustable objective. Head shot one on purpose {that's all that was above ground} just the other day at 280 with my .22-250 as a matter of fact.

clearlity maybe, accuracy no

For deer sized targets to 400 yds, AO is superfulous.

But I like to use my game rifles for other things between seasons. Parralax induced error will easily cause misses on golf ball sized targets at 300 to 400 yds.

And yes, when all you can see is the whistle pig's head, it is about the size of a golf ball.

All my rifles with more than 9x scopes have AO.

I'm not arguing your points...

All my 4-12s have AO except one. I set them at 200 yd and DONT touch them. (for hunting)

Most of the time my scope is set at 6, except when I'm in close timber. In open areas - IF - I need more I simply crank UP w/o looking at the scope or wasting time fiddling. I've been using this system many years. Works for me.

Jerry

Your question answers your question. If you were familiar with a variable scope and AO, you wouldn't even ask the question, you would buy the scope you want. If you don't know how to use a variable scope, you are better off with a fixed power.

Also, the myth that a good variable scope will break down on you, is just that, a myth. There are thousands out there that don't break down and I know plenty of people that have those kind of scopes and no problems.

Exactly. I keep all my variable scopes set at the lowest setting because where I hunt a close shot is more likely. I'll also keep the AO set to about 150 yards. I have no need to touch either unless a really long shot present's itself,in which case I have time to change it. If I didn't have time to change it,like an animal moving into a tree line,I wouldn't even try.

I settled on a Swarovski Z3 3-9x36. Thanks to all for your input and recommendations. Joe