Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics What's a RAR-esque Scope?

Parameters:
* Ruger American Rifle
* .308 Win.
* 53.715% / 46.285% split between offhand stalking shots, & stand shots
* 99.27431% of all shots < 200 yards.

A Nightforce is obviously out of place, given the price of the rifle.
A Hubble is equally out of place, given the dimensions of the rifle.
A blister-pack offering is out of place, given the expected accuracy of the rifle.
A turret-twister is out of place, given the purpose & platform of the rifle.

My only spare scopes at the moment are 3-9x40 Conquests and a M8 3X Leupold, and those just seem mismatched for this rifle.

I've got some notions, but what says the peanut gallery?

FC

Weaver K4.

2.5-8 would be perfect. Although i dont see why the Conquest wouldnt work. I have a 243 RAR and put a 4-12x40 on it. Works great

A Leupold VX1-2 or Redfield Revolution 2-7x33.
A Leupold or Weaver 4X.
The Conquest would be fine though...

My wife has a Ruger American Compact in 7-08

It's topped off with a V3 2.5x8 in Tally LW's

Just about perfect for that rifle.

You can hardly go wrong when you pick a Leupold 2-7x33 and you can pick how much you want to spend because they are made in the Rifleman, VX-1, and VX-2 lines.

leupold vx 1 or Redfield revolution 3-9

Burris FF II 3-9

weaver K6


any of those would serve you well enough

This statement makes no sense to me. When I thought Swarovski was really as good as everyone else thought they were I put a z5 5-25X52 on Savage I rebarreled with a $130 Midway barrel. I had the rifle I wanted and used the scope I wanted.

By the way my Ruger American has a Bushnell 4200 4-16X40.

Keep it cheap and reliable, just like the rifle


Burris FFII

+2

Cheap and ugly you mean. .....:= Nikon Prostaff...

Now +3

If I had a Conquest 3-9 laying around I'd use that.

I guess I must be in the minority here of guys who have had 2-3 Of the Phillipines Fullfield 2s fail. I still own 2 of the LRS versions, but don't plan on buying more......

I agree. What would replacing with a different 3-9x40 do?

For said requirements, I may like a 2-7x33 better, or a fixed 4X, but if I already had a Conquest 3-9x40 or 2, why not?

I was thinking of svelte-ness. While a Conquest on this rifle might not quite approach the, "Monkey ridin' a football" look, it'd be getting there. On the other hand, 2-7's in Leupold, Redfield, or Weaver V7 guise would be all sleek-lookin' atop this rifle. Then again, I've had to put Conquests on budget rifles before: the X7's shot far better than the cheap glass I tried to mate to them.

Really, I'm just looking to play with rifles & glass that I haven't before, and price of this rifle is allowing me to do so.

Keep the ideas comin'.

FC

6x36 Leupold or K6 Weaver... both are aweful tough, and pretty svelte...

For svelte-ness you can't beat a Leupy IMO.

Make it 4 they're great.

Leupold 2-7x33mm is great also.

I'll agree with that.

Of course, how you mount it has a lot to do with that too, and these RARs have the comb a little too low for me, so they need the scope mounted as low as possible.

I have a 20 moa base on mine that raised up the scope a little, but I can't get it any lower without machining the base. The factory rail sat a little lower. 3-9x40 Mark AR, basically a VX-2 with turrets. I'm pretty happy with it for a quality/budget rifle.