Home
It seems like in times of yore I remember being able to pick up a quality FIXED power scope very inexpensively. Leupold M-8's, Burris had a model, Zeiss did too. What happend to fixed powers? They were small scopes, and looked elegant atop particularly our single shots. Those that I did buy are still functioning flawlessly today.

Now, it seems as though one has to buy something with illuminated crosshairs, circles, triangles or other whizzbangs that fuzz up the sight picture so that I can shoot at extanded ranges; multiplying my chance of wounding and/or losing game; big bells front side to shoot beyond my posted legal shooting hours; or scopes that just have too much weight, heft, or other bells and whistles one really doesn't need. Now you can choose what color camo on some models...it's entirely insane, and prices to match!

Does anyone else out there mesh with my sentiments...or is it just me?
Very similar, I hate looking at scopes only to find that the one I wanted only comes in Matte or silver.. It's hard to find a gloss scope without going through the 'custom shop' or the used market (which is where I've scoped a majority of my No. 1's to date).

Matte black is in vogue... Hopefully the market will turn and we'll see some more gloss scopes in all the lines with each manufacturer...
I agree. Its hard to find a scope that looks "right" on a Browning Low Wall in .223. Its such a small rifle it is hard to find a that looks good. I think an old Weaver K6 might work.
I'm with you, but we seem to be in the minority. Maybe in a few years the trends will swing back the other way. I also wish the matte black metal work would go away as well. I miss the gloss blued look, like 1885boomstick said.
Scope makers make what they can sell.

Retailers carry what they can sell.

Most people think they "need" a variable (and a huge one to boot) and so that is what most stores carry. This is especially big box stores where volume is everything - if it doesn't move quickly it isn't there. Probably the manager at your local Wal-Mart (or Bass-Pro or Academy or Sportsman's Warehouse) doesn't even have the option to order in a fixed power.

When I tell people I use fixed power scopes I almost always get this uncomprehending look - why, because they don't comprehend. They may listen to my reasons, but wind up with a variable. It's just outside their paradigm.

If you want a small, gloss fixed power, they aren't hard to come by, if you are willing to buy a Leupold and order it from one of the online retailers. Heck I'll bet Rick here at the 'fire would be happy to get you one.
What the heck - "hunters" are even buying scopes with built-in rangefinders, cameras and/or camcorders.

It seems there's an awful many folks out there that think the equipment is the only key to success.



.
Personally I suspect there is a lot more fiddling with gadgets going on than actual hunting with those huge, battery-powered THINGS. People talk about them, dream about them, save for them, then actually buy them, show them off, learn all the bells and whistles, then get bored and sell them off or put them in the safe. Everything, in short, but hunting with them.

OK, so I'm an old crustacean. Don't like scopes, just need them because my formerly excellent vision has gone to crap. I have a few, all on hunting guns: Nikon 4X Rimfire Special, Redfield 2 3/4X (two of them), Unertl 6X "Small Game," Leupold 3X (I replaced a Weaver V3 with that; the variable was just too confusing with my bifocals!). For me, ANY scope comes under the category "necessary evil."

Halloween is coming; now I have to go out and practice my "You damn' kids get off my lawn" cackle.....
Mesa,

I have the Weaver V3 and I often wondered how it compared to the Leupold 3x. How would you rate the resolution between the two?
I hate to say it, but the V3 is a newer design and the Leupold is oldish; the Weaver was at least as bright as the Leupie. My problem was that the V3 didn't work well with my bifocals except on 1X or 1.5X for some reason.

The gun I had it on was a combination gun with a shotgun barrel as well as a .308 barrel and I'd planned to use it on 1x for shooting shot in the shotgun barrel, then switch to 3X for the .308. Didn't work out. Now I just keep a buckshot shell in the shotgun barrel for "close encounters of the 'way too-close kind" and use the .308 barrel for normal hunting.
I was in the scope business for many years, and believe me it's the buying public determines what's available in the long run. Most manufacturers offered fixed pow scopes long after they quit selling at the retail level. There is something called the economy of volume, and it applies to all mass produced goods. At one time, variables were considerably more expensive and somewhat less reliable than fixed powers. As variables got better they became more popular, especially on rifles chambered for cartridges suitable for varmints and big game. As variables became more popular, the prices came down relative to fixed powers and it wasn't long before a 3-9x was about the same price as a fixed 4x, 6x, or 8x of the same quality. It got to the point where I was selling about twenty variables to one fixed. There is such a thing as perceived value, and most people are not willing to pay the same or more a fixed power than for a variable.
Originally Posted by timbo762
There is such a thing as perceived value, and most people are not willing to pay the same or more a fixed power than for a variable.


And indeed, why should one pay more for a fixed power scope than a variable? They're no better in any way, resale value is worse and the magnification isn't flexible. There are times when 10X magnification is useful and times when 2.5X magnification is more useful.

By the way, I could buy probably a dozen different gloss rifle scopes on MidwayUSA right now. In addition, with just a little shopping I'm quite sure you can find many gloss scopes on the used market right now.
Why buy a scope at all?
Originally Posted by BrentD
Why buy a scope at all?


You know, that's a unique idea.

I believe many hunters would be absolutely lost if they had to use iron sights on their rifle in this day and age.
Irons still work. They are always my first choice. And that doesn't mean just barrel sights either.

Rifles w/o scopes carry a lot easier, cost less (sometimes) and look a lot better. All of that is pretty obvious. But what has been lost on most folks these days is that they shoot really really well. Just about as well as scopes in most situations.
I feel your pain. I have always liked compact scopes. Got a fixed 2X compact Leupold on a Ruger #1 and a Weaver K-2 on a 30-30. Never cared for huge scopes except on a varmit or target rifle. Seems like some people mount their rifles onto the scope rather than the other way around.
Originally Posted by BrentD
Irons still work. They are always my first choice. And that doesn't mean just barrel sights either.

Rifles w/o scopes carry a lot easier, cost less (sometimes) and look a lot better. All of that is pretty obvious. But what has been lost on most folks these days is that they shoot really really well. Just about as well as scopes in most situations.


I'm beginning to think you are right. I'm starting to re-think the aperture sight again.
Originally Posted by BrentD
Why buy a scope at all?
The advantages of optical sights has been well known since the 18th century, but so were the disadvantages. The main advantage is having the sight and the target in the same optical plane so the eye doesn't have to try to focus on two or three distances at the same time. Even a 1x scope is better than "irons" when it comes to precision, regardless of distance. This contributes more to sighting accuracy than all other scope features combined. Secondly, but not quite as important, is magnification. The advantage of magnification is it allows you to better see what your shooting at and becomes more important as the target distance increases. This is not to say a scope is necessary to shoot well and will not make a bad shooter a good shooter or make up for poor hunting/field skills. However, a scope will make any shooter a better shooter. Target match shooting proves this. At any given range, scores shot with an optical sight are generally higher than those shot with metallic sights. I do agree that a scope adds nothing to the "looks" of a firearm and a Lyman Alaskan looks better mounted than the most expensive European variable with a 56mm objective.
An interesting observation for whatever it's worth.

I'm far sighted. When I was young I used aperture sights on my rifles and open sights on my handguns. As my eyes aged I went to scopes and thought that was the cat's meow. Now that my eyes have cataracts and have changed yet again aperture sights are starting to look like a better sight for me. When my cataracts are replaced and if all goes well I should have my long distance sight restored not that that sight is all that bad right now.

I've noticed that I can't adjust the scopes to a level of fineness I once did which also includes my spotting scope. Scopes can help a person to see better somewhat but can't make up for poor eyesight. Maybe an aperture sight can't either. Time will tell.
Perhaps it's just a knee jerk reaction, but the purchase of a new rifle also immediately has me thinking of a new scope. I can identify with iron sights for some, nothing wrong with them in certain instances. Too much magnification has been a problem at times, particularly when the scope was left on high power from the target range, and the next thing you know I'm looking at fleas in deer hair....not good. I believe what I enjoy most with the fixed powers are the durability and size. They just look cleaner on a mannlicher, No. 1. A, or any smaller rifle. That's not for everyone either. Seems there was the rage (now thankfully over) for everyone to have the largest bell out front they could. Heck was it Leupold who even designed a non round objective so the scope could be mounted lower? Then came along all the other crap that just befuddles. Give me a smaller fixed 4x on any of my rifles and I'd be content, however ranges are short where I hunt, I could understand a bit more power out West or in open areas. Derby Dude, good luck on the cataracts, I've had the surgery; it's a piece of cake.
Thanks. Doc says not yet but hopefully before the government won't allow the cataracts to be done. I've got money set aside to pay out of pocket if necessary.
Today I almost new condition Burris 6x mini on an 1885 Low Wall. Great eye relief, and it looks pretty good sitting on the Leupold mounts (although it looked even better in the Conetrol mounts and rings that came with it). It is a shame the market won't support the production of that scope. Its a jewel.
Tweny or so years ago, I was at a gun shop when a guy traded two Like new Zeiss 4X for 3-9, or somewhere in that range. They were like new, mounted but never hunted. I bought both. I foolishly let one of them go to seal the deal on a rifle that I wanted to move. The one I still have is on a small ring Browning Safari .308. I would like to run into another half dozen at the deal I got on those two. I still use lots of vntage 3X and 4X scopes from Burris, Weaver, Leupold, and Lyman. Yes, there are scopes made now that are more refined than some of them, but I just aim the rifles with them. I use something else to look at the planets. jack
And all the BDC from Nikon, to find just simple cross is next to impossible.
I'm in the same camp although all my hunting rifles, save one, are mounted with either open sights or iron sights. But I admit I am such a throwback that the thought of one of those huge objective, variable, lighted crosshair, rangefinding scopes is anathama to me.

Retailers have to stock what sells and manufacturers make what sells. Profit is not an option if one is to stay in business. I do believe that a lot of big scope craze is fostered, as has been stated already, by the belief that equipment can make up for ability and knowledge. Such has never ben the case nor will it ever be. All the high tech stuff available today mostly, not always, allows one to wound or miss at greater ranges. High tech equipment and super camo clothing does not a hunter make.

It's ironic that I would see this thread today as I was thinking this very thing this morning.
I have to agree on the scopes and people buying the last fad.

I have found that some of the big bell scopes don't matter with age and than throw in cataracts and it really doesn't matter. One can't use all the light anyway and sometimes it's to much light for old eyes.
Well to be honest, I didn't think my little grumble would turn into comments for three pages. Obviously, like those gunmakers that waged there WAS a market out there for single shots and were correct; perhaps some scope manufacturers should take a like stance.

Nice to know I was not the only one.
Maybe Leupold (who already offers too many models) will listen to the "public" and stick there toe in the water again. A number of years ago and with much fanfare in the press, they came out with the "Alaskan" series of fixed power scopes. Three fixed power models in 2.5x, 4x, and 6x. All were blued with 7/8" tubes and moderately sized objectives on the 4x and 6x. Great looks, nice glass, and universally loved buy gun writers of the era. A return to sanity in hunting scopes. Winchester had reintroduced the Model 70 Super Grade with CRF and I bought one in 30-06. I mounted one of the new Leopold Alaskan scopes on it and it was like stepping back in time. Finally a scope that looked as if it really belonged on a hunting rifle. Leupold's reward for this bold move backwards was the worst sales flop in their history and soon they were available at close out prices. Well being an "old hand", I knew that once discontinued they would reach "exalted" status with the shooting public and their value would sky rocket. So I bought a few, held them a year, and tripled my money. Maybe if enough of you badger Leupold, they'll take another chance on something everybody wants but hardly any buys. That is however, until it's discontinued. BTW, I saw one of those Alaskans go for almost $500.00 awhile back.
Like a previous poster stated, Manufacturers make what sells. It seems todays hunters are not really hunters.... But success oriented. IOW, If they go on a hunt, they want to be successful, and if they are successful, they want bragging rights of the biggest possible rack. Thus: If they can buy an advantage, they will. I knew a hunter once, who took a trip to Wy and shot a Mulie buck that ran down in gully... He went down and found the deer easily enough, but couldn't figure a way to get it out... So: he just cut off the head and brought it back to MI. (I guess you know, I told him what I thought of him...)

Another acquaintance just returned from a Co. Elk hunt. He said he shot a cow with a .30/378 Wby. (At about 70 yds, no less...) But he couldn't find it, and even couldn't find any blood... frown If he had been hunting with a .30/06 and a fixed 4x scope, he'd likely have brought meat home. But I'd guess he thinks he's a lot better shot than he actually is...

I have many scopes. Many of them are fixed power. Some are variables. Most are Leupold and most were purchased used. I can only think of 1 or 2 deer I have taken with a variable scope. Any of my variable scopes get turned up to the highest power for load work-up and sighting in. Once I'm done with that, they get turned down to 5x or 6x and left there... Every deer I've shot with a varible scope has been set at 6x... Why? Because I'm an old target shooter and I like the clarity and target acquistion. Last year I took two bucks... A trophy 10 pt'er with a 6x Leupold on a Ruger #1, and a 7 pt with a 9x57 Mauser and a receiver sight. I've been hunting since I was 18 yrs old, and I'm 61, now. That is the 1st game animal I've ever taken with iron sights... I'm more proud of that buck than any I've ever taken before. (Including the one who will soon grace the wall of my den!)

It seems in this day of multitasking, hunters merely want to go out see a buck; twiddle with the adjustments and take a pot-shot... At whatever range the target presents itself. (And, of course, hit the target...) The idea that one could actually hunt for subsistence, is beyond their comprehension. frown

They just want to WIN! And then move on to the next thing... And chalk up another win. The score is the only thing that's important... frown

And we wonder why our numbers are dwindling...

How I take a game animal is far more important to me than IF I get one at all... Perhaps that is merely part of the wisdom of age... But I do know it's something that is very hard to convey to much of the younger generation...

I'm stepping down from the soapbox now... blush

GH
There's no need for fixed power scopes or anything other than a duplex reticle. These are the good old days.
https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbth...24359/all/How_many_scope_returns_for_rep

Variables break with greater regularity SM700.
And one scope type might satsfy your needs but it will not fit all occasions.

Duplexes are Ok for average use but give way to special reticles in dim light. German 4as are much more useful then and, hell, they even had posts and crosshairs in the bad old days. Illuminatred reticles -- Trijicon and others -- also have their place.

The scope makers who ignore the demand for fixed power and low light glass just concede that market to the few who have offerings --however imperfect.

1B
I own but two scopes, an old refurbished Weaver K2.5 and Lyman Alaskan 2�X. They both live in G&H QD side mounts and are rotated around a few Mauser sporters. For the most part they stay in their leather carrying tubes when afield as I deem them backups to the receiver sights. If one learns how to maximize the efficiency of their equipment there is no need to abandon the 'old' methods, and also no need to follow the herd of 'high tech is better tech' ill informed scope purchasers. For my sighting purposes I follow the 'KISS' principle (Keep It Simple, Stupid).
You're scopes are horrible compared to modern scopes. I've tried both of them.
Originally Posted by gnoahhh
I own but two scopes, an old refurbished Weaver K2.5 and Lyman Alaskan 2�X. They both live in G&H QD side mounts and are rotated around a few Mauser sporters. For the most part they stay in their leather carrying tubes when afield as I deem them backups to the receiver sights. If one learns how to maximize the efficiency of their equipment there is no need to abandon the 'old' methods, and also no need to follow the herd of 'high tech is better tech' ill informed scope purchasers. For my sighting purposes I follow the 'KISS' principle (Keep It Simple, Stupid).
This guy is a REAL HUNTER !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I like using an out house vs an indoor toilet also.
Amen Brother!

Here is a picture of the camp outhouse. It sits a bit high for several reasons: Keep the rodents out (metal on lower side is to keep porcupines from chewing), and to let odor waft away leaving the natural scent of pine needles flowing through the window, which overlooks my pond. Great place to contemplate.

[Linked Image]

[Linked Image]
I use fixed 4's or 6's on most of my huntign rifles , except for my Brwoing 1885 thata is chammbered in 6.5WSM- that one has an 8-32X, 34mm tubed IOR on it , for long range shooting.
The rest of my single shots are hunting rifles that are equipped with either express sights or receiver sights, and the scopes are in QD mounts.
hardly use them, have found no need for one with a 200 yard or closer shot uisng irons.
Cat
I prefer the fixed 4x & 6x scopes.
I've had fixed 12x & 24x on my target / varmint rifles.
I'm down to 3 variables, all 3-9x.
They will be gone one day, replaced by fixed power scopes, as soon as I can find someone to trade with.
The rifles that don't have scopes will have apeture sights.
An old 2x7 Leupold shook apart inside from being on a home made cantilever scope mount.

Leupold sent me a new VX1 2x7 variable scope, but the power ring was very hard to turn, especially when cold.
I put a Stoney Point elevation turret on it.
In 2008 I shot 4 deer between 400 and 500 yards with the scope left on 2X.
In 2009 I shot 5 deer between 400 and 500 yards with the scope left on 7X.

In 2010 I killed 3 deer with a vari-x-iii 1.75x6.5 between 50 and 400 yards.
I got them all on 6.5X.
I put a Stoney Point elevation turret on it.

In 2012 I shot 4 deer with an old Vari-X ii 2x7.
I put a Stoney Point elevation turret on it.
The deer at 300 and 400 yards were on 7X.
The deer at 50 and 100 yards were on 2X.

Scopes I am considering getting for being:
cheap
light
clear
reliable
elevation turret adjustable for range

Leupold 3-9x33 Mark AR Rimfire E.F.R. Riflescope $439.95
http://swfa.com/Leupold-3-9x33-Mark-AR-Rimfire-EFR-Riflescope-P50860.aspx

Leupold 2-7x33 VX-2 Riflescope $349.95
http://swfa.com/Leupold-2-7x33-VX-2-Riflescope-P51794.aspx

Leupold 2-12x42 VX-6 30mm Riflescope $899.95
http://swfa.com/Leupold-2-12x42-VX-6-30mm-Riflescope-P49437.aspx

Leupold 4-12x40 VX-2 Riflescope $499.95
http://swfa.com/Leupold-4-12x40-VX-2-Riflescope-P51811.aspx

Leupold 3.5-10x40 VX-3 Riflescope $529.95
http://swfa.com/Leupold-35-10x40-VX-3-Riflescope-P12651.aspx

Leupold 4.5-14x40 VX-3 30mm Riflescope $729.95
http://swfa.com/Leupold-45-14x40-VX-3-30mm-Riflescope-P51787.aspx


Leupold 4.5-14x40 VX-3 Riflescope $649.95
http://swfa.com/Leupold-45-14x40-VX-3-Riflescope-P51786.aspx


Leupold 2-12x42 VX-6 30mm Riflescope $899.95
http://swfa.com/Leupold-2-12x42-VX-6-30mm-Riflescope-P49437.aspx


Leupold 3-18x44 VX-6 30mm Riflescope $1,099.95
http://swfa.com/Leupold-3-18x44-VX-6-30mm-Riflescope-P52966.aspx

Sightron 3.5-10x44 SIII 30mm Riflescope $1,051.95
http://swfa.com/Sightron-35-10x44-SIII-30mm-Riflescope-P48417.aspx
© 24hourcampfire