Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles How much scope do you need on a hunting rifle

Reading another thread the poster was talking about a lightweighthunting rifle that could be used to 600 yds. A response was that at such ranges a lot more scope would be needed. It made me think and I would have to disagree for big game. I don't think there are many instances big game hunting that a good variable in the std 2-7 or 3-9 power range would not really be sufficient out to 600 yds. If you take the rule of thumb that a 4x scope would make a deer 600 yes away appear to be at 150 yds and a variable set at 9x would appear as if at 70 yds. or so I can't see the need for a much larger scope myself. Of course I am prone to use a couple of trusty old 4x scopes on my rifles and can't help but chuckle to myself when I see a light weight rifle with 2 lbs of scope and rings strapped on top. I've shot numerous ground hogs with my old 22-250 and 243 at 200-500 ydswith an old k10 and 3-9 bushnell on top.

Recently put a fixed 4x Swarovski on top of a Kimber Ascent. Read your post, and took the rifle to back door. Have a white plastic corrugated sign board, roughly 14"x18" nailed to a tree on the other side of the pond, 392 yards. No problem seeing/discerning the target. BIG problem trying to hold steady on the target offhand with just a "lean" against the door frame. More "X's" would just make the wobble worse.

I have one 4x12 VXR scope on one rifle. Everything else is fixed 3x, 4x, 6x, or, variable 1x4 up to 3x10. Even when I have a larger variable mounted, around here, I find myself dialing it up to no more than around 6x when I take the shot. Really liking the 2.5x8 Leupolds and the straight 6x Leupolds.

Not knocking the guys that use bigger scopes to hunt long range, and the varmint hunters. Just not necessary for my style of hunting.

Regarding your fixed 4x Swarovski, how's the eye relief? What model is it and could you post a picture of or mounted on your Kimber?

Thanks

This, plus where can I get one?


Okie John

There's all kinds of hunting and all kinds of hunters. Some folks seem to think that the more X's on their scope the better and some like to snipe away at animals in the next county. My personal comfort zone is not much over 300 yards so 9-10 power on the top end is more than enough.

bangeye,

It's not about need. It's about want. Some can see deer antlers at 600 yards. I hunted with two guys like that. Others have trouble finding the deer. On my two light weight Mark V six lug Weatherbys are Bushnell 6500 4 1/2-30X50s. After I find game with binoculars and I want to take a good look at it I can.

There is only one person I want to impress and that is me. I am constantly post sold on my scopes.

As far as drawing a bead goes I could do fine with 6x. Practice at distance and an accurate means of trajectory compensation come ahead of more magnification for me.

Some people simply prefer more magnification. They are more comfortable with the target looking larger, so that's why they "need" it.

I'm able to more quickly and easily relax behind the rifle when I don't see my wiggles and heartbeat greatly magnified by the scope. So that's why I "need" less.

For the type of shooting where I need more magnification to draw a bead on a little target I'm typically using a heavier and steadier rifle, rather than a lightweight hunting rig. On these rifles 20x is great.

I've shot plenty of varmints and other critters at long range with the old 3x9 Leupy's on a couple of my rifles, but as I get older I find my eyes aren't as good as they used to be so I compensate with a bit more horsepower in the optics.
A couple other things I've taken into consideration. For varmint hunting, many times the vermin like to hide and just peek out a little bit at a time to see if the coast is clear. I like enough power to see those little bits of target to be able to draw a good bead on. My 223AI and 22-250 wear 6.5 x 20 Leupy and 6 x 24 B&L Elite respectively and I really like having the extra power when rock chucks are hiding in the rocks waaaayyyy out there. Even my 22's get 4 x 16's for this reason for ground squirrels and other critters.

Same thing with my big game rifles. I usually hunt with a 2.5 x 10 B&L or 3.5 x 10 Leupy's, but will move up a bit this year with a 4.5 x 14. Many times the game likes to hide or walk though brush or trees. Being able to see an opening big enough to shoot through when game is feeding through can make a difference between having a shot and not. Not everyone gets broadside 250 yard shots at game or unobstructed targets every time. Have to make the best of what is offered.

Bob

Well I guess my real point was the diminishing returns that come into play, especially if you are concerned about weight. Like I said a 7x scope makes a deer at 600 appear to be about 80-90 yds which is pretty close. A 12x looks to be about 50 yds and 16 x looks to be maybe 40 yds. So how close do you have to be. To me once the image appears within say 100 yds. the real benefit of a scope is the single sighting plane afforded by the reticle. Again I'm talking about big game ,shooting prairie dogs at 600 yds. is a different ball game and I don't want a lightweight rifle for that anyway.

If I have a good rest then I like to use higher magnifications regardless of distance. This is for shots where you have time. I find the 3-18x44's I use to be wonderful but they are on 3x 98% of the time. Only turn it up once I've spotted a target and have time. I have used 18x at 75 yards to make sure a deer didn't have knobs on its head (in tall grass and can't see most of the body). As for weight, Leupys and Swaros are light anyway. When you consider a 2.5-8x36 vs a 3-18x44 you're getting a LOT more scope for less than half a pound. The 3-18 is just so versatile in my opinion.

That said, I do have a couple of 2-7x33's I love and am itching for a rifle to put a 2.5-8x36 on.

Pictures below. Eye relief, with that scope, on that rifle, with the Talley Ex-Lows, just right for me. Close my eyes, mount the rifle, open my eyes, and I have a clear sight picture surrounded by solid black circle. It is a .270. So, not concerned about getting "scope bit". I did chamfer the front scope base to be able to slide the scope a little further to the rear. Titanium bolt knob already had a small scallop to clear the ocular bell on a Leupold 6x. Was sufficient for the Swarovski in the Ex-Lows as well. 6.00 lbs as shown.


I lucked into this scope, used. Either here on the 'Fire, or AR, or eBay. Can't remember. Can't seem to find them commercially NIB. Casually keeping my eyes open for another one, either 4x or 6x with German #4. ... A Left Hand version of this rifle would be a "forever" rifle for me.

I really like Leupolds 2.5-8 VX-3. While hunting in So. Africa, every animal I shot was on 2.5 power. None were 200 yards. But I have the option if I ever feel I need it.

CJ I too generally have my variables on their lowest setting . The beauty of variables is for load development and I'll admit to cranking mine to the top power when at the bench. I often joke I don't need a 3 to 9 variable but instead a 3 or 9 variable with a simple switch lever instead of an adjustment ring. Orion that's a pretty sweet zeiss.

I could live the rest of my life with nothing but 6x scopes. Close or far.

I'm definitely a 4x guy.

I was trying to find a Leupold FX-3 6x42 for my new 270 but they seem to be rarer than hens teeth up around here. Had to settle on a VX-2 3-9x40...

what sheister said😂

3x9 is pretty Elmer Fudd and gets more done than most will admit.

Straight 6x or 2-7x are just about all I look at anymore. I have a 2.5-8x VX3 on my Tikka 7-08 but don't find it appreciably better than my VXII 2-7x on my Kimber Bob.

For ranges at which I hunt regularly the LRD works just fine.